Watashi's Unofficial Official Disney Retrospective Extravaganza Thread (or something like that)

[Watashi]

http://images4.fanpop.com/image/photos/22100000/Disney-Logo-classic-disney-22116496-587-407.gif

For those who are unaware, in April I got a job at Disneyland working in the Tomorrowland Attractions area. So far, it's a really fun job that has its perks of being surrounded by Disney history every time I clock in. Of course, there are a lot of Disney freaks who work there. I'm definitely an admirer of Disney and all of its legacy. Since I've become a part of the Disney family, I thought I would get reacquainted with some of Walt's most herald classics. My project for this summer is to revisit all 52 of Disney's full-length animated features that belongs in the Disney canon. I need to brush up on my Disney fandom and see if all these films still hold up for my youth. A good portion of these films I haven't revisited since my early childhood. I will offer a Disney-insider look at its cultural impact on today's pop culture infested society, whether it still holds up, and primarily if its any good at all. Most of the time, the behind-the-scenes process of how these animated films go through development is sometimes more interesting than the film itself.

So unless you were someone who was raised by cavemen or had no childhood at all (Barty, I'm looking at you), Disney had some effect on you growing up.

First up: Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937)

[Skitch]

Hell yes, I am in.

[MadMan]

What took you so long? :P And of course I'll be reading.

[Ezee E]

Should be good. How are you viewing all of these?

[Lazlo]

Looking forward to it! For the past six months I've been buying all the ones that are on blu-ray thus far. I'll try to watch along with you.

[Morris Schæffer]

Sounds like a great job. And yeah, Disney was a part of my early life, but since Bambi and dumbo are sooooo long ago and I was way too young, the ones I've got the fondest memories of are The Love Bug, Swiss Family Robinson and 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea.

[Watashi]

SNOW WHITE AND THE SEVEN DWARFS (1937)

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5305/5569668491_5332556d9e.jpg

In today's movie-going society, we are bombarded with at least one animated feature per month in theaters that come and go barely registering a mark on the cinematic map. Now transport yourself back to 1937, where a fully length animated feature was unheard of and were mostly stricken to 6 minute comic shorts played before newsreels to keep the kiddies entertained. Lillian Disney, Walt's wife, famously told her husband that Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs would be a bomb and no one in their right mind would be able to sit that long for a 90 minute cartoon. Still, Walt pushed forward his ambitious project and sacrificed everything he owned (including his house) to finance the film. The studio had little hope for the film's success and referred to it as "Disney's folly" during development. Of course like all films, it went through several drafts before it became the film it was. Originally it was way more comical and gag-driven than dark and somber. The evil queen would be played for laughs and the Prince would be featured more prominently, but more in a goofball role than the traditional dashing prince.

Anyway, where was I? It's near impossible to fully understand the surprise and effect of seeing Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs for the first time in 1937. With the release of this film, Disney has crafted a winning formula that would be mimicked in every major animated film to this day. I can't think of an equivalent to what this film did for audiences and the huge risk that was involved for the creator. The closest thing I can think of is Avatar, but that didn't change a format or start a whole new movement of film.

So how is the movie? Well, I haven't seen this film in a long time and I used to follow the logic that it was a very simple film with even simpler characters that's only marveled at because of its "first" mentality and its cinematic breakthrough. Is it the "greatest animated film ever" like so many critics seem to call it? Well, it's not the Citizen Kane of animated movies if that's what they meant. I would say it's more The Birth of a Nation of animated movies. Now that's not to say Snow White is filled with racist propaganda (that would come later), but more in the fact when discussed in a scholarly fashion, its technical merits are often the forefront of discussion rather than its artful storytelling or emotional center. Citizen Kane is taught in film classes beyond its high and low angles and use of deep focus. The film is also a landmark in narrative storytelling and thematic arcs. Not so much for Snow White.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs fully embraces its fairy tale tropes that are seen as parody and cliché by today's standards. Snow White has very little personality herself and is mostly a blank slate. She is the conventional fairy tale princess who just sings about a man after seeing him for two seconds. Walt was smart by not featuring Snow by herself a lot, as a lot of the film's charm comes from the secondary characters rather than the leading princess. The seven dwarfs are the bread and butter of the film, and when animation gurus talk about Snow White's "greatness," it's usually because of these guys. The dwarfs provide the main source of comedy in a rather dark film and it's still amusing to watch their distinct personality traits clash with each other. Props have to go to the animators (and Walt) for giving the dwarfs a unique look that matches up with their name because despite being seven of them, you always know who's who. The other secondary characters are the woodland creatures that follow Snow around and help her with her daily chores. It's certainly a common trope of fairy tales now, but seeing as it likely originated here, a lot of it works. I am amazed at the detail given to each animal and how no two animal act alike. The animals are animated like real animals and not wacky personifications which I thought was incredible for 1937 animation standards. I love that poor turtle. He just wants to get up the stairs. That turtle has more personality than Snow White.

After rewatching the film in over a decade, I was surprised about how little of actual plot there was. The actual story consisting of the fairy tale is maybe a total of 15 minutes. The rest of the runtime is dealt to drawn out subplots featuring Snow tidying up the house and teaching the dwarfs manners. The scene where Snow gathers the help of all the forest creatures to clean up the dwarfs' house is longer than all the scenes with the wicked queen combined. That's main problem with the film, and I don't know if I can really criticize this because this is the first time ever someone stretched a work of color animation into a full length feature, but it feels like Snow White is just a series of animated shorts stitched together. When Snow gets lost in the forest, the film begins to drop the main plot and focuses on vignettes that could stand alone as their own short. The film strays away from the fairy tale and becomes a didactic lesson on how to behave around the house. Clean the house. Don't cut corners. Wash your face and hands before dinner. All these little lectures are very long and dominate the second act of the film. Sure they are fun in their own right, but it really hurts the film's pacing, and it doesn't pick up again until the focus switches back to the evil queen's plan a half hour later. I think if released today, this would be criticized heavily, not to mention the field day feminist critics would have with Snow being a catalyst for the good-spoken housewife who cleans and cooks and patiently wishes for her dream man to arrive.

How is the villain? The wicked queen is still pretty damn wicked. I read somewhere that children were so scared of her upon release ushers had it wash the seats in between showtimes because kids would wet themselves out of fear. Now that's some scary shit. Like I mentioned before the queen is featured very little until her transformation late in the film. I find it humorous that a lot of her dialogue is just exposition delivered to the audience by talking to herself. She is basically reading the fairy tale out loud.

How is the music? For being the first Disney musical, a lot of the songs still hold up, while some... do not. Obviously "Heigh Ho" is the most recognizable song out of the bunch and can be hummed or whistled even if the film is a scant memory in your brain. Speaking of that song, I've always wondered what the dwarfs actually do. They mine for gems and then deposit them into a vault and then what? What do they do with all these jewels? Are they saving them for a 401k plan? They seem not to care about security because they leave the key to their vault (that is clearly labeled "vault") right outside the door. But enough of that. Outside of "Heigh Ho," Snow White's number "Someday My Prince Will Come" is likely the second most popular song. After that... it's up in the air. I only saw the film yesterday and I can barely remember the other songs.

Is it still relevant today? Oh yeah. Not only is it still considered the best animated film by scholars, it still is remembered and celebrated by Disney today. Snow White has her own ride at Disneyland (and it's still creepy) and the dwarfs (particularly Grumpy) are very popular in current Disney merchandizing. Hollywood attempted to take the classic tale and give it a contemporary new look with the two films released last year, Snow White and the Huntsman and Mirror, Mirror. There's also a video game of Snow White. A video game! Granted, it's for the Gameboy Color.... but still. Disney cherishes its first princess and most revolutionary piece of work and it's likely never going away.

Final Verdict: I don't dislike the film. I very much appreciate it. The direction is gorgeous. There is a shot from the point of view of inside a well looking up through the rippled water into a singing Snow White that is exceptionally striking. The entire transformation with the evil queen into an ugly hag is edited superbly in a dark and unsettling fashion. Yet this isn't a film I would likely rewatch over and over. I respect its impact on film, animation, and pop culture as a whole, but it quickly gets outdone further down in the Disney canon.

Match Cut Discussion: When was the last time you've seen Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs? Do you think it still holds up? Does it belong as being "the best animated film of all time" due to its cinematic impact?

[Watashi]

Should be good. How are you viewing all of these?

Netflix, DVD, and other methods.

[Irish]

Wow. Goddamn, Watashi. You've outdone yourself. This is one of the most exciting threads to crop up here in awhile.

+1 for the first review.
+1 forever if you can keep up this level of detail for all the other films.

Loved this post.

As to your questions ... I have to admit I don't think I've ever actually seem "Snow White." May have to remedy that.

[Lazlo]

The last time I saw Snow White was probably about 6 years ago. It may have been the only time I've ever seen it, but I can't remember.

It feels dated and, like you said, there really isn't much that happens. But it's overall quite enjoyable despite the problems you highlighted. As far as "greatest animated film of all time", I don't think it's anywhere close to the top of that list. Just because it was the first doesn't mean it's the best. The impact is obviously huge, but "best" must be measured on other fronts besides impact. The Jazz Singer isn't the best sound film of all time.

I'll try to watch it again soon since I haven't cracked open my blu-ray copy yet; I think my official rating of it is an 8/10.

[Morris Schæffer]

Looking forward to it! For the past six months I've been buying all the ones that are on blu-ray thus far. I'll try to watch along with you.

All of them are supposed to have outstanding picture quality.

[D_Davis]

Nice write up. I love the music in the old Disney films, especially the vocal and choir work. It's so good.

And even though I'm not a huge fan of Disney now, I am still a HUGE fan of Disneyland and Disneyland lore. I will also, finally, be having a birthday at Disneyland - my 40th in a couple of years. I'm going to do the whole Birthday Button, Walk in Walt's Steps guided tour, and everything. It's gonna be rad.

[Fezzik]

While I own Snow White, I have never loved the film. I admire it for what it meant to the medium, but the film itself has felt overrated to me.

A couple of decent songs, yes, and a good villain, but when I last saw it - two years ago - I remember feeling like I was still missing something that others had seen.

[Lazlo]

All of them are supposed to have outstanding picture quality.

I've only watched Alice in Wonderland and Beauty and the Beast and they both look fantastic. The colors have an incredible pop to them.

[Skitch]

Completely agree, and so far Snow White is the only Disney animated blu-ray I own. I'm always mystified by the idea that this came out in a time when most every thing else was black and white.

[Ezee E]

Great writeup Wats. I don't know when the last time I've seen this as a whole. Maybe middle school?

I still think about it pretty well. Sure is better then all the other Snow White remakes that have been made since, and the iconic figures still stick out better then most animated characters of the last 5-10 years.

[Bosco B Thug]

An insider's look! :)

I took this in bits and pieces on TV recently so it may not actually count, but I did catch a lot of it and I was shocked by how charmed and engaged I was by what I was seeing. I remember not wanting to step away from the TV during the domestic middle section as yes, the dwarves are in fact actually amusing. Good movie (I think).


The film strays away from the fairy tale and becomes a didactic lesson on how to behave around the house. Clean the house. Don't cut corners. Wash your face and hands before dinner. All these little lectures are very long and dominate the second act of the film. Sure they are fun in their own right, but it really hurts the film's pacing, and it doesn't pick up again until the focus switches back to the evil queen's plan a half hour later. I think if released today, this would be criticized heavily, not to mention the field day feminist critics would have with Snow being a catalyst for the good-spoken housewife who cleans and cooks and patiently wishes for her dream man to arrive. Criticizable? Yes. Narratively assured? I think yes.

[Watashi]

PINOCCHIO (1940)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/pinocchio/w448/pinocchio.jpg?1334607093

Now this is a Disney film that deserves the title of "classic". Who knew that this was released only three years after Snow White? It feels like it was made by an entirely different studio. Pinocchio isn't just an empty vessel, but a fully developed character that goes through an actual arc. Even though Pinocchio is structured in an episodic manner, they bridge one to another seamlessly in a very exciting way taking the characters to new settings and challenges.

I've seen Pinocchio multiple times and I'm still taken back at how dark and scary the film is. If kids wet the beds over Snow White, what the hell did they do when they saw little boys turn into donkeys? A scarier thought is that the original European story is even more twisted. The author, Carlo Collodi, originally had Pinocchio's legs cut off and eventually killed until he was pressured into giving a happy ending and turning Pinocchio into a real boy. Children's literature was fucked up back then.

The biggest change that Disney made to the original story was the characterization of Pinocchio himself. Collodi's Pinocchio is a crude, impertinent kid who resists compassion and gains no sympathy from the audience. Who the hell would want to see this puppet turned into a real boy? Disney made the smart decision by turning Pinocchio into a naive, yet relatable being who is full of energy and curiosity about his newfound reality. I think that change is the key in making Pinocchio a timeless classic and not stuck in a conservative fairy tale environment. Pinocchio is not a prince, a knight, or an outlandish creature, but just a young boy. I've always thought as Pinocchio as Disney's cautionary tale about the prepubescent alteration of a child learning the ethical principles and starting to think for themselves beyond the comfort of their parental guidance. A Freudian analysis would open up some interesting conversation about the transition into puberty and the desires and sexual temptations deep within a young boy's mind. You could probably dissect Pinocchio's growing wooden nose when around the sexually drawn Blue Fairy as some phallic discovery of manhood or whatnot. I'm not saying it's a stretch, but the undertones are clearly there. Hell, there is a lot of perverted imagery and subtext all throughout the film primarily in Jiminy Cricket's sexually charged thoughts towards the Blue Fairy and even Stromboli's wooden puppets. You're a cricket for Christ's sakes!

Anyway, the film underlying message is that through the eyes of a child, the world is a scary and dangerous place. No matter where Pinocchio tries to go, there's someone there waiting to snatch him away, be it Honest John, Stromboli, the Coachman, or Monstro. I think it's a wonderful parable that digs into the psychoanalysis of evil and how it is always there disguised as attractiveness. This is something every kid can understand. Evil is never "defeated" like in Snow White or any traditional fairy tales. The kids are still donkeys sold by the Coachman, Monstro still roams the ocean, and Honest John and Gideon are waiting at the corner of the street for the next adolescent to corrupt. I am fascinated by this observation and how the film (and story) takes a no-bullshit approach in approaching the real world. Despite the overly embellished villains and scenarios, there is some cold hard truth to be found.

Let's talk about the animation and the characters. The animation is extraordinary. Disney expanded on the revolutionary animation of Snow White with the most impressive example is the entire climatic third act in the ocean with Monstro. The groundbreaking work makes the water look as realistic as possible with crashing waves and ripples. The entire climatic escape is like a moving painting where you can see the impressionistic brushstrokes in every detail. By pantomiming the character movements first and then animating later, artists make a meticulous and fully rounded characters that have weight and are grounded in this beautifully animated world. Look at the character interactions between Geppetto, Figaro, and Cleo. Figaro acts like a real cat down to his persistence of attention. He's not anthropomorphized like the other animal characters, but his facial expressions convey his mood and desires perfectly. Plus, he's adorable. The relationship between Figaro and Cleo is some of the most charming work Disney has ever done.

While I've talked a lot about the darkness and psychological aspects of the film, there is quite a bit of humor found in the film. A lot of it is the silent adventures of Figaro, but also in the wittiness of the screenplay. Watching it now, I've never noticed a lot of the fourth-wall breaking quips thrown aside (I love the line "I'd rather be smart than be an actor"). I still don't know what to think of Jiminy Cricket. His pervasive behavior can be seen as disconcerting, and his yearning for a solid gold badge from the Blue Fairy sends mixed messages about greed and consumerism.

How is the villain? Absolutely horrifying. The entire Pleasure Island scene is scarier than most modern horror films. When the Coachman rounds up all the donkey-boys, and there's one still crying for his momma, that image and sound will be engrained in my memory forever. How can you not watch that scene and immediately hug your child, dog, cat, or all three at the same time? Lampwick's transformation is deeply disturbing and feels like something from a Universal horror film than an innocent Disney cartoon.

There's also this: http://devilindetails.webs.com/Coachman.jpg

How is the music? "When You Wish Upon a Star" is still seen as the one song that defines the Walt Disney company. It's impossible to not know the lyrics and understand its significance in Disney history. I mean, it's the theme music for the opening logo!

Is it still relevant today? Even more than Snow White, I think. The importance of music is already pointed out. The theme is employed in the fireworks show at Disneyland. Also, Pinocchio has its own ride (Pinocchio's Daring Journey) which takes you through the scenes of the movie from being locked up in Stromboli's cage and then into Pleasure Island where you watch everyone turn into donkeys. It's pretty much the ride that nightmares are made out of. Jiminy Cricket has also reappeared in many forms of media, as well as being a character at Disneyland along with Pinocchio and Geppetto. The film was also made into a video game for the SNES and Genesis. Did anyone play it?

Final Verdict: Not only one of Disney's best, but one of the best films of that era. It's not my personal favorite Disney film, but it's completely deserving of its legacy among animation scholars.

Match Cut Discussion: Where does Pinocchio rank in your list of animation greats? What do you think of the subtext about the perspective of evil through the eyes of a child and how it never comes to any justice? Did this film also give you nightmares?

[Watashi]

Don't expect this amount of heavy analysis when we get to the more smaller and recent Disney films. No way in hell am I putting more than two paragraphs dedicated to Brother Bear.

[Skitch]

Where does it rank for me? There's two Disney films I consider their absolute masterpiece classics...Pinocchio and Alice In Wonderland.

[Morris Schæffer]

I've only watched Alice in Wonderland and Beauty and the Beast and they both look fantastic. The colors have an incredible pop to them.

I've got the latter and The Lion King, both blu-ray 3D. I've yet to watch them, but I'm gonna hold out until my Panasonic Plasma has been professionally calibrated. Can't wait to see Finding Nemo 3d. Never been a fan of the movie, but that underwater world is supposed to look gobsmacking on the 3D blu-ray!

[Fezzik]

Pinocchio is a masterpiece. Period. It's one of Disney's two or three best hand-drawn animated films and one of the best films of all time.

Wats, you are 100% right about the terror layered throughout that film. I'll take the chills generated by Pinocchio over any horror film I've ever seen.

[Ezee E]

I've seen Pinocchio in the last year, and had the same reaction. It has consistently been in my top 50, and may certainly be my favorite animated movie.

[Skitch]

Pinocchio's island always reminds me of this...

"Not a speck of light is showing so the danger must be growing,
Are the fires of Hell aglowing?
Is the grisley reaper mowing?
YES! The danger MUST be growing for the rowers keep on rowing!
And they're not showing any signs that they are slowing!
AHHHHHHH!!!!!!"

[MadMan]

Pinocchio is still due for a rewatch, but I don't recall thinking too highly of it when I was a kid. I've always liked Snow White and the Seven Dwarves but its merely solid/decent at best.

[Watashi]

FANTASIA (1940)

http://www.thehdroom.com/images/news/7989a.jpg

I tend to use words like "revolutionary", "ambitious", "groundbreaking", and "innovative" when describing these few early Disney films, but goddammit, if there is one film where all these adjectives apply, it's Fantasia. This movie has a fascinating background. In the late 30's, the popularity of Disney's round eared mascot was fading, so Walt decided to make a cartoon centered around the poem The Sorcerer's Apprentice set to Paul Dukas' now recognizable orchestral piece. Walt hired British composer, Leopold Stokowski to collaborate on the project for zero charge. Now putting orchestrations over animation was not new to Disney, as it was common practice in their short cartoons Silly Symphonies, but Walt wanted this symphony to be less silly, and more fantastical and dramatic. Thus Fantasia was born. Walt and his board of writers, musicians, and animators put their heads together and picked which orchestrations to use and how to match it via animation. A lot of famous pieces were left off and some were used for the sequel Fantasia 2000. I always found it funny that Walt Disney was not a classical music fan and left the expertise to the experts. He always hoped Fantasia would bring classical music to the mainstream.

I don't think Disney has ever made a more ambitious film. If Lillian Disney wondered how the hell kids were going to sit still during a 83 minute cartoon in Snow White, then she probably tore her hair out wondering how a 2+ hour experimental concert film with no plot would pass with the general public. The movie was never really intended to be a wide huge release. Disney's plan was to make it a limited roadside attraction to build awareness, but also very few theaters were installed with the latest Fantasound that was invented primarily for this film. You think James Cameron and Peter Jackson are technical innovators of cinema today? They got nothing on Disney. He practically invented the surround sound system and moviegoers had the option of seeing it in mono or this new technological format. I can only imagine the shock at hearing something this crazy. It would be interesting to see if there was any controversy around it like with Jackson's push of 48fps.

The film was not a huge success, primarily because the world was at war with Europe and the last thing audiences wanted to see was an abstract musical experience. Also Disney was unable to ship prints to Europe. The film received mixed reviews and it didn't see a resurgence in popularity until its rerelease in 1969. Now I find the following bit hilarious. Disney marketed it as a psychedelic experience to lure the teenager stoners and Woodstock gatherers. I can only try and imagine watching the Dance of the Hours on shrooms and turning to your friend uttering, "Dude... that crocodile is dancing with a hippo."

What do I think of this majestic endeavor? Well, I've always not been a huge fan of Fantasia growing up. Mainly because I was a fidgety teen who found a lot of the segments to drag on. I actually saw Fantasia 2000 before seeing the original and preferred the sequel. As I watch it now, I appreciate it a lot more, but I'm still not totally in love with it. Like a lot of films that separate into clearly labeled segments, some portions will be stronger than others. I think Fantasia works best in experiencing it in shorts rather than all at once. I'm a big fan of The Sorcerer's Apprentice and Night on Bald Mountain. Both are gorgeously animated and its pictured the intensity of the music perfectly. I enjoy the early abstract segment scored to Toccata and Fugue in D Minor where lines and patterns are matched up with the rhythm of the music. The Rite of Spring is visually impressive and daunting in scale and essentially doing Tree of Life before Malick did, but I think it drags on too long and it's usually the segment where I tune out. I compare Fantasia a lot to a similar visual experience in 2001: A Space Odyssey. While I greatly prefer the Kubrick film, they are both audacious exercises in visual artistry and musical accompaniment. Also both films work best when viewed in a theater with the appropriate sound system hooked up. Fantasia isn't like other Disney films where you toss in the DVD player to watch with the kids on a Friday night. It's definitely the least kid friendly film in their canon.

How is the villain? No real villain in the narrative sense, but Chernobog in the Night on Bald Mountain segment is the embodiment of the Prince of Darkness himself. Can't get more evil than that.

How is the music? It's decent. Some catchy music by a lot of no name composers.

Is it still relevant today? Very much so. Despite being an initial failure upon release, Fantasia is now embraced as being one of Walt's finest achievements. Mickey donning the blue and white sorcerer's hat is still an iconic image of the mouse. The entire segment has been parodied and homaged several times. My personal favorite is on The Simpsons with "Scratchtasia." Disneyland has a nighttime water show called Fantasmic! which is greatly influenced by The Sorcerer's Apprentice with Mickey conducting music and images on water projected screens. And yes, there's also a video game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fantasia_(video_game)) that was released for the Sega Genesis. I can't possibly imagine anyone watching Fantasia and thinking "hey this really needs to be a platforming video game."

Final Verdict: It's definitely a yay, and I have to admire the stones of everyone involved to put this concert film in theaters right after Pinocchio (which also was not a success). I can't completely put it near the top of the best Disney films, because I think it works in individual moments rather than a whole. The animation is awe-inspiring and the music of course is legendary, but it doesn't move me or challenge me emotionally like other Disney works do.

Match Cut Discussion: What is your favorite piece from Fantasia? Do you think it works as a whole? Do you consider Fantasia a "kid's film"?

[Sycophant]

Fantasia is a film that, it seems to me now, is really best experienced in the theater, and every viewing I've had of it on ~26" television screens likely fails to do it justice. I have a new goal and it is to see Fantasia on the big screen.

My favorite bit of Fantasia is "Rite of Spring." It's simply astonishingly breathtaking. But the whole work is truly wonderful. "Dance of the Hours" is also a delight.

I remember Walt wanted to rotate pieces in and out of Fantasia, touring it with different segments in different years. Had any significant portion of the public been in love with the idea as much as Walt had, the culture surrounding animation film and distribution would surely have looked different.

Both Snow White and Pinocchio I haven't seen in close to or over a decade. I have a copy of the latter next to me right now. I should watch it soon.

[Ezee E]

I really don't remember much about Fantasia except the masterful sequence of Night on Bald Mountain which is simply amazing.

[Skitch]

I haven't seen Fantasia in at least 25 years.

[Lucky]

Aside from The Sorcerer's Apprentice, The Nutcracker sequence stands with me best. They did a good job trimming the interesting segments from the ballet. I also liked Disney's dabble into Greek mythology with The Pastoral Symphony. Something we wouldn't see again until Hercules, an underrated Disney gem.

[Lucky]

And no, I don't consider Fantasia a kids' film. I couldn't appreciate it in its entirety until later in life. A segment here and there would entertain a child. Its disconnect and lack of fluidity between pieces tries the patience of not only children, but some adults.

[MadMan]

Its due for a rewatch, but based on a pretty good memory of Fantasia I think its the best Disney animated film out of all them. My second pick would be Sleeping Beauty.

[Watashi]

DUMBO (1941)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/dumbo/w448/dumbo.jpg?1289434215


World War II made it very difficult for Walt Disney studios to seek a profit for their first few films. Their connection to the European market was cut off so they only had their domestic sales to go on. Nowadays, so many studios hinge on oversea markets to provide a huge financial percentage to their box office gross. Now imagine if that connection was broken. There would be panic in Hollywood and films would suddenly become less expensive and giant mega-blockbusters would be less frequent in multiplexes. That's how it was in the early 40's for Disney. Pinocchio and Fantasia did not fare well with audiences so Disney moved forward with a more streamlined and family-friendly approach with Dumbo. Dumbo is one of the shortest Disney films at a mere 63 minutes. It costs about half as much as Disney's previous films. With its simple and dialogue-scarce plot, Dumbo is a near faithful adaptation of the 8-page children's story its based on. Due to the budget setback and animators' strike during the production, Dumbo lacks the lush brushstroke details of the previous films. The animation was very simple in a cartoony way, but this simplicity however gives Dumbo a bright, colorful look that highlights the fantastical atmosphere of the circus.

I hadn't seen Dumbo in years. I knew Dumbo held claim as the most emotionally devastating Disney film, but I wasn't quite prepared for this. I'm a big softy when it comes to film featuring animals in distress. I cry at a lot of things. Hell, I cry at dog food commercials (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asnbU7m-z5o). So when watching Dumbo, and seeing poor Jumbo Jr. sharing a quick moment with his locked up mother, I was a blubbering mess. With only one line dialogue between the two elephants, Disney is able to craft a believable and heartfelt mother-son relationship solely through their physical interaction. I think by giving Dumbo and Mrs. Jumbo prominent speaking roles would dampen the intimacy of their brief moments together. The image of the mother's trunk acting as a swing for little Dumbo to rest on is a powerful image on its own. In fact, I love that Dumbo is the only character in the film that doesn't speak. He cannot speak for himself, because everyone else does it for him (whether it be the ringmaster, the other elephants, or Timothy). He simply goes where he's told to and does not question authority. This symbol of blind commitment leads me into other another subheading I will be bringing up a lot in this list:

Is the film racist? Absolutely not. There is some controversy surrounding a group of crows that are modeled after stereotypical African Americans and even the lead crow is named Jim. Now this could be seen as a problem if the crows were made a mockery or portrayed in a villainous role, but the crows are actually some of the most humane characters in the film. This is not racial derogation, as the crows eventually come to Dumbo's help after Timothy scorns them for teasing him. Just listen to Timothy's speech: "How would you like being left out alone, in a cold, cruel, heartless world? And why? I ask ya, why? Just because he's got those big ears, they call him a freak. The laughing stock of the circus. And when his mother tried to protect him, they threw her into the clink. And on top of that, they made him a clown! Socially he's washed up!" The analogy is as clear as the bright blue sky painted above. Earlier in the film, the circus tent is being raised up in a thunderstorm. African-Americans are pounding away at stakes along with the rest of the circus animals. In the next scene, Mrs. Jumbo is being whipped and chained by her Master for stepping over the line. This is not a racist film. This is a film criticizing racism.

The film is above all about love and tolerance. Mrs. Jumbo loves her son for who he is and goes to great lengths to protect him. The crows tease Dumbo at first, but immediately sympathize with his situation, because they are social outsiders too and are a part of a prejudice that they wear on their face like big ears. The fact that people who can only look at the crow's dialect are a part of the problem that feeds into the ludicrous accusations. Watching this film today where racial tension has been replaced by the controversy over LGBT rights, the parallels haven't changed and if anything this film has aged stronger because its message is still as important as ever. The way the other elephants gossip behind Dumbo's back and refer to his condition by spelling it out (E-A-R-S) right than saying it is still prevalent in a society where gay kids are scrutinized and seen as taboo. This film is like a precursor to the "It Gets Better" viral videos that tells children to embrace their uniqueness and one day they will soar (in Dumbo's case, quite literally). A lot of Disney films have questionable morals to teach young children, but this isn't one of them.

How is the villain? There isn't one. You could make a case for the Ringmaster especially in the scene where he locks up Mrs. Jumbo, but he is never vilified further. The real villain is just the everyday "cold, cruel, heartless world" as Timothy puts it. Though there is this douchefuck:

http://imageshack.us/scaled/landing/560/74867534685779315c59.jpg

How is the music? Excellent all the way through. I think the main theme "Casey Jr." is extremely catchy. Of course you can't mention music and not talk about the famous "Pink Elephants on Parade" scene. Yeah, that scene is something else in what is otherwise a harmless kid's film. Dumbo has just hit rock bottom so he does what anyone rightfully does and gets drunk and hallucinates a crazy vision that would haunt the most horrible serial killers around. I've heard that the scene was originally going to be used for Fantasia, but got scrapped and put into this, which sorta explains it random placement, but still... such a weird scene. A weird amazing scene. The animation is terrific and is full of surreal imagery like a man with a body made out of elephant heads. No kids film nowadays would have a scene like this. You can't even have characters drink alcohol let alone a baby elephant.

Is it still relevant today? You wouldn't really think so, but yeah, Dumbo is extremely popular still. He does not have his own video game (unless you count his cameo in Kingdom Hearts), but Dumbo is prominent figure in Disney merchandising. Dumbo has not one, but TWO rides at Disney parks (Dumbo the Flying Elephant and Casey Jr. Circus Train). I actually never been on either. "Baby Mine" is played during the fireworks show above Sleeping Beauty's castle at Disneyland with Dumbo flying around the castled synced up to the fireworks (it's pretty cool).

Final Verdict: A masterpiece. Disney perfection in just over an hour. The film is just beautiful to behold. Sweet, but not overdone. I usually hate movies that play on the "awwww" aspect of cuteness (I'm looking at you Despicable Me), but every moment of sweetness is earned. My only gripe is that I wish it ended with Dumbo and his mother leaving the circus to form their own act. The film never fully goes through with the cruelty of the circus.

Match Cut Discussion: Admit it, you cried when you saw the picture above. What memories do you have of Dumbo? How do you interpret the criticism of the racism controversy? What in the hell was that Pink Elephants trip about?

[Ezee E]

This was the most recent of the Disney movies that I've seen, about 4-5 months ago. I was a little confused at how fast it went by since it is only 63 minutes. Could you imagine if that happened today? I think people would ask for refunds. Although, I have a feeling it was probably combined with a 10-20 minute short during its initial run.

Anyway, this holds up too. As mentioned a few months ago, Pixar and Dreamworks haven't had a bit like Pink Elephants in the last 15-20 years. Nothing quite compares to that piece.

The Dumbo ride is one of the sillier rides at Disneyland, for young kids only, but as a kid, it's one of the coolest things you can see.

[Watashi]

I'm kinda interested in the Match-Cutters with kids (Spinal, KF, Raiders (?)) if they've watched the older Disney films together. I wonder if they enjoy them on the same level as they do with the recent flashy pop-culture-infested kids films these days. I can't imagine a 9 year old having enough patience to sit all through Fantasia.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I'm kinda interested in the Match-Cutters with kids (Spinal, KF, Raiders (?)) if they've watched the older Disney films together. I wonder if they enjoy them on the same level as they do with the recent flashy pop-culture-infested kids films these days. I can't imagine a 9 year old having enough patience to sit all through Fantasia.

My kids have watched Sleeping Beauty, Peter Pan, Pinocchio, etc. They enjoy them, but none outweighs Wall-E, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo, etc. as far as they're concerned. We haven't watched Snow White. I tried to watch it three times when it was first rereleased in some deluxe set or other, but fell asleep all three times. Figured I didn't want to inflict that on my kids. I torture them enough in other ways.

[Watashi]

My kids have watched Sleeping Beauty, Peter Pan, Pinocchio, etc. They enjoy them, but none outweighs Wall-E, The Incredibles, Finding Nemo, etc. as far as they're concerned. We haven't watched Snow White. I tried to watch it three times when it was first rereleased in some deluxe set or other, but fell asleep all three times. Figured I didn't want to inflict that on my kids. I torture them enough in other ways.

Yeah, I never fully watched Snow White either as a kid. I think this was the first time I've ever seen the film in one sitting. The amazing run by Pixar has almost spoiled kids these days. Older classic films (even masterful ones like Dumbo), look so simple in perspective.

[Skitch]

My kids have mostly watched the Batman TAS, Superman TAS, Justice League, Unlimited, Spider-Man (1994), Avengers...that kind of stuff. We did watch Snow White, and the recent Disney stuff on Netflix has all been added, but I would bet they will give high marks.

[Gizmo]

My 4 year old loves the princesses, and has seen most of the movies, but is more into the Pixar colorful ones, like Cars. Though as far as actually sitting through a whole movie as a family is just something she's still to little for. Mostly they're on in the background or at bedtime/naptime.

[Watashi]

BAMBI (1942)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/bambi/w448/bambi.jpg?1333973265


"I thought you said the Great Bambi."
"That wimpy deer?"

Ham's remark on Smalls' unintelligible slip-up on the Sultan of Swat's identity reveals the cold, hard truth of what to make of the great Prince of the Forest. It's true, Bambi is a wimp.

Bambi was originally going to be Disney's second feature after Snow White, but animators were unable to animate deer realistically so Walt put it on the shelf for later use. The original story "Bambi, A Life in the Woods" was not meant for children and was pretty grim and gruesome. Writers had a tough time configuring this story to make it a family-friendly film which lead to the addition of Thumper and Flower to be Bambi's friendly sidekicks. Has Disney ever made an adaptation that was darker than the story it's based on?? Dumbo is the only one I can think of where the film added more weird shit (Pink Elephants) than the original source.

Of course what everyone remember's most about Bambi is the mom dying and traumatizing millions of kids worldwide. It's like Walt saw Dumbo and said, "Yeah, chaining and locking up Dumbo's mother is sad and all, but I can do better. In my next film, I'll just kill off the mother! Yeah! That'll get those kids scarred for life." Diane Disney, Walt's daughter, felt like Bambi's mother didn't have to die and felt like a cheap ploy. I absolutely agree with her. Now the way it's directed is done very effectively. Disney surprisingly doesn't milk out the emotion with Bambi wailing over the corpse of his dead mother. The scene is quick and doesn't feature any music. The reason why I never liked the death of Bambi's mother because it doesn't change ANYTHING about the character of Bambi. Bambi is essentially a coming-of-age story where Bambi grows from young fawn to adult through the passing of the seasons. Usually in a coming-of-age story there are several obstacles one must overcome in the passage from child to adult. There is growth not only physically, but also in their character. Bambi has no such character growth of any kind. His only obstacle he has trouble with is that he has wobbly legs. That's it. So when Bambi's mother dies, we expect this death to have a heavy toll on Bambi and he will have to overcome this trauma to prove his worth. But nope, we get none of this. The very next scene is all smiles and happy music as Spring is in the air and Bambi and friends are falling in love. His mother is never mentioned again and whatever character development happened is left to our imagination. When watching the film, I expected the mother's death to be at the halfway point, but it's actually near the end. There's very few scenes spent with adult Bambi. He falls in love with Faline, battles a deer, and runs away from a fire. That's it. He barely says anything.

When reading up on the book Bambi was based on, I found out that Bambi went through a lot of crazy shit. He was a loner who constantly cried to his mother. His relationship with his father is also fully expanded on, whom teaches him important life lessons about the dangers of man through childhood to adulthood. The book is all about the dominance of masculinity and not being a crybaby who relies on their mother. The film kinda touches on this theme with the role of Bambi's father as a mystical and respected leader of the forest. However the interactions between the two are so few we can't really get an understanding of their relationship. In fact, the way the female characters are portrayed kinda irks me as they are either are temptresses or mothers. During the "twitterpation" scene, Thumper and Flower are easily seduced by their female counterpart in a very sexual submissive way (the scene when Thumper gets "excited" when being stroked is just... wow). The mothers only come off as overly protective who live in the shadow of their husbands (I always found it odd that Bambi's father and mother never share a scene together). Even Thumper's mom scolds her son to remember his father's words.

Bambi also falls under the trap of "cutesy-syndrome." Bambi should have gone the Dumbo route and have a silent protagonist. I think this film would have been a lot better without any dialogue at all. The characters of Thumper and Flower are expendable and are barely in the film to register anything at all. They're there primarily for the kids and to play on the cuteness of their antics. Speaking of Flower.... what was is he all about? For a film that is supposed to be about accepting your masculine role, you have a character like Flower who has very feminine qualities, and who seems to have a mad crush on Bambi. Is he gay? Well, he gets a female skunk friend at the end, but then he names his kid after Bambi (obsessed much?). I have no idea what to make of this character and how he fits into what this movie is trying to say about gender.

Even though I'm piling on the negatives, I do want to point out the good stuff that this film gets right. The artwork is phenomenal and breathtaking. Animators spent time watching real deer and rabbits at the LA Zoo to get their motions just right. This method of animating would become a common practice for all future animated films. I was surprised to learn that the film got mixed reviews upon release, but not for the reasons I mentioned above, but because it lacked a lot of fantasy elements and the "Disney magic." I personally enjoyed the restraint of the fantastical and applaud Disney for trying to capture the realism of nature. The forest is very much a character in its own as it goes through mood shift with the different seasons. In a way, Bambi is a Whitman poem brought to life and all the other transcendentalists who view a spiritual connection to the natural world. The film is at its best when Mother Nature takes over the plot and we see all of her inhabitants react to the sounds and fury of the thunder and rain. This is Disney's major environmentalism film and most of the film's legacy is how its message of nature conservation influenced many activists.

How is the villain? When AFI revealed that "Man" from Bambi was number 20 of their list of Heroes and Villains, I rolled my eyes. The only damn reason why "Man" was on that list is because of Bambi's mother death. So many members of AFI must have been traumatized by that scene as kids to put it that high. I found its placement silly then and I found it even sillier now after rewatching the film. The off-screen presence of man is painfully telegraphed and their evilness is overly simplified. Man is evil because it wants to kill every living creature and burn down every forest. The book actually handled Man's villainy more complex and fair. In the book, a deer who has been shot is rescued by another man who raises him and is kind to him. When released in the forest, he tells everyone that man is not so bad, but Bambi pities him. This causes the deer to foolishly run towards a hunter thinking that he will be treated with the same amount of hospitality like before, but ends up getting shot. Doesn't that make for a better story and creates a more complex villain that is able to show two sides? Nope this "Man" just wants to fuck the forest up.

How is the music? Bambi is the first Disney narrative film where characters don't sing (and thank God for that), but there is definitely songs in the film. The musical score is essential to the story and just like the setting, it is a vital character on its own. The "Man" theme is quite memorable and said to be the inspiration for John Williams when composing the theme for Jaws.

Is it still relevant today? Kinda? I mean it's widely considered a classic now and the character of Bambi has been used as somewhat as a mascot for forest fire prevention. But in the world of Disney, you don't hear or see much of Bambi anymore. He doesn't have much of a presence at any of the theme parks. Bambi is not that marketable a character. He's not like Dumbo who has a unique talent. Blame it on the lack of "Disney magic" on this one.

Final Verdict: I was tempted to give Bambi my first 'nay' on the list, but I think despite the flat characters and uneventful story, the overall beauty and presentation of nature gives it a small bump in the positive direction. This film has the makings of a powerful mini-epic, but Disney skirts around the big themes and focuses it on the coy antics of Bambi and his friends.

Match Cut Discussion: What are your memories of Bambi? Do you think AFI's decision to list "Man" as one of the best villains silly or warranted? What do you think this film is trying to say about gender or anything at all?

[Irish]

Nicely done, Watashi. These keep getting better & better.

[Skitch]

Man Villain silly.

[Gizmo]

I don't think I've seen Bambi in 25 years. I thought the mom died at the beginning, and Bambi had to rely on his friends to get through life and grow into his own man. Guess I'm remembering a better story than what's actually there.

[Ezee E]

Yeah, don't have much to say about Bambi except that Thumper is probably the most recognizable character out of the bunch.

[Ivan Drago]

Yeah, don't have much to say about Bambi except that Thumper is probably the most recognizable character out of the bunch.

Same. I haven't seen it in forever. I remember the Animaniacs parody of it.

And your analysis of Pinocchio was spot-on! I never thought of it with that subtext.

[Watashi]

SALUDOS AMIGOS (1942)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/saludos-amigos/w448/saludos-amigos.jpg?1289473041

After Bambi, Disney went on a little break with the full-length features and instead released six "package films" that consisted of different short films between 1942 and 1950. The first of these package films was Saludos Amigos. This animated-documentary hybrid was intended to broaden the gap between the cultures of the two Americas. Today there are several sources to gain access into foreign lands with a press of a button or a click of a mouse. Back in the 40's, in order to see the environments of South America and to learn about their culture, you had to experience it for yourself. Saludos Amigos is quite influential in raising the public interest of Latin America among American citizens.

The film is a live-action/animated documentary of the behind-the-scenes process of animators experiences a new culture and using it as inspiration for the following short segments. The segments themselves are decent. The first few feature Donald and Goofy educating the audiences of the vast culture differences between the two worlds. It's amusing, but ultimately it feels like a sixth grade report. It doesn't really offer any particular insight beyond the different clothes they wear and food they eat. Another short features a small anthropomorphized plane named Pedro who has to deliver mail over the Andes mountains. Again, it's cute, but it's basically fluff. The only interesting short is the finale where Donald meets José Carioca, a cigar-chomping Brazilian parrot. There is some fun meta-humor between Donald and the animator (ala Duck Amuck) and its visually impressive.

Is it still relevant today? No. Ask people to list all the major Disney animated films, and I guarantee you most will forget that this movie existed. It's sequel, The Three Caballeros, is the more well known film.

Final Verdict: I can't really say much about Saludos Amigos compared to other films. It's incredibly dated and the shorts are not that memorable. It's interesting to check out to see it as a cultural and historical influence, but as a piece of entertainment, you can do better.

Match Cut Discussion: Has anyone seen this movie?

[Sycophant]

It's been far too long (at least 15 years, quite possibly 20) since I've seen Bambi, so I can't discuss it in much detail. It's something I really want to return to before too long.

Theoretically, "Man" as a significant and legendary villain is not something I'd dismiss out of hand. It's for the most part an existing but invisible threat that ultimately takes more from Bambi than anything else in the movie. However, I can't remember how it's dealt with in the film concretely, so I can't properly assess or defend it.

[Sycophant]

I get the Disney "package" films pretty easily confused, and I can never remember exactly which segments go together in which film, partly because the animation segments have been extracted and released as individual shorts in various programs and collections. I expect the next few of your reviews will look a lot like this one, though looking at a list of the segments, this may be the overall weakest and least interesting of the bunch.

Kind of fascinating that after Bambi in 1942, Disney didn't produce another feature-length story until Cinderella in 1950.

[MadMan]

Dumbo is pretty good. As for the racism, well I just chalk it up to the film being made in a racist era. Does that make it right? No, but I understand why it happened.

Bambi is a great film, and one of Disney's best efforts. I love the animation in that one especially.

[Watashi]

THE THREE CABALLEROS (1944)

http://comicsmedia.ign.com/comics/image/article/699/699278/toybox2006330-02_1143702392.jpg


I had never seen The Three Caballeros until now. I always thought it was an actual full-length movie starring Donald and not a "package film." You only get to see Donald team up with the other two caballeros in the last third of the movie. Saludos Amigos was popular enough for Disney to go ahead and make a pseudo-sequel in The Three Caballeros. I say pseudo because there's no actual plot being carried over, but just more animated shorts talking about the different cultures of Latin and South America. The actual "plot" to this movie is basically "Donald gets three presents for his birthday and he opens them." That's it. Each present showcases a different area of Latin America from Brazil, Uruguay, and Mexico. The film is split up into seven segments. The first two feel like separate short cartoons that have a plot. The first short is about a penguin named Pedro who is tired of the cold of the South Pole and decides to travel up the coast to Argentina. The second short is about a boy who stumbles upon a winged donkey which he uses to win a race. The shorts are nothing spectacular with some decent gags. I will probably forget them in the morning.

Then the remaining segments become interesting, and not really in a good way. Like Saludos Amigos, The Three Caballeros acts a travel brochure more than a movie. Donald reunites with José Carioca and travel to Bahia, Brazil and watches some local samba dancers. Then Donald falls in love with the lead female dancer and begins ogling her. In fact, the entire rest of the movie is just Donald and his two amigos pining for beautiful exotic women. When Donald exits Brazil and journeys into Acapulco, he sees a bunch of bikini-wearing women on the beach and wolf whistles and chases them around trying to make out with them. I'm not kidding. Once that scene ends, they go into the night skies of Mexico city and one of the stars turns into a beautiful woman singing a song, and yep, Donald can't control his urges and falls in love. You learn more about Donald's hormones than any actual culture of Latin America. This is a problem because the film takes an abridged look at Latin America and paints a romantic exotic society full of beautiful women and elaborate dances. It's a very stereotyped view of this culture. Imagine if South America made a movie about North America and only showed beautiful movie stars and people eating cheeseburgers. Donald's strong lust for of all the foreign women probably garnered some laughs in the 40's, but viewing it today it came off a very sexist and humiliating. It probably wouldn't be a problem if one segment had Donald lovesick for a singer/dancer, but when TWO THIRDS of your movie is just repeating the same routine over a different backdrop then it raises some issues.

Technically the film is pretty impressive. The Three Caballeros is one the earliest films to have animation integrate with live-action. It's not quite Roger Rabbit level, but for 1945, watching Donald dance along with real dancers is quite a technical feat. The film also has its "Pink Elephants" moment where Donald gets punch-drunk love from a kiss which leads to a wild colorful and very bizarre scene. The rest of the film is pretty normal to this point, but then the animators decided to take LSD and go on a magical journey where Donald dances with cacti and turns into a mechanical bull. I recommend seeing the film just for this. This also where the theme song "The Three Caballeros" comes in. The movie also just kinda ends after Donald recovers from his acid trip. It is one of the most unusual endings to a Disney movie ever.

Is it still relevant today? People have probably heard of The Three Caballeros, and some can probably hum or sing its title song. However outside of its hallucinatory closing number, there's not much to recall. If you said the film was about Donald's sex drive for Latina samba dancers, you'd be mostly correct. In Disneyland, for the Sensational Parade that happens twice a day, Donald, Jose, and the other caballero, Panchito Pistoles, has their own float and are meet-and-greet characters.

Final Verdict: It's definitely more watchable than Saludos Amigos, but The Three Caballeros doesn't offer much variety in terms of its shorts.

Match Cut Discussion: What, if anything, can you recall from The Three Caballeros? Do you find these "package films" interesting?

[Dead & Messed Up]

Some great stuff in here, Wats.

I only really want to speak to Fantasia. Because I love it, and it's one of my favorite movies ever. You cite most of the major reasons (its ambition, its beauty), and for me, a lot of the love was deeply personal, because it caught me during a time when I was obsessed with Greek myth and dinosaurs and cutting my teeth on horror stuffs ("Night on Bald Mountain" is among the most magnificent macabre displays in cinematic history). You're right that it doesn't always hang together terribly well, and I can understand tuning out during the "Rite of Spring" segment, which is more formless than the others. But, goddamnit, the film is so bold and vibrant and daring and alive...and funny too! "The Rite of Spring," "The Sorcerer's Apprentice," and "Dance of the Hours" masterfully mix suspense and humor.

[Raiders]

I swear I did this exact same thing back at RT like, nine years ago (I think I ranked them instead of chronological). Anyway, good thread so far. Definitely agree on the YAY Dumbo, nay Bambi (even if you chickened out at the end...).

[Watashi]

I swear I did this exact same thing back at RT like, nine years ago (I think I ranked them instead of chronological). Anyway, good thread so far. Definitely agree on the YAY Dumbo, nay Bambi (even if you chickened out at the end...).

You did. I reread your thread as preparation for my list.

[Raiders]

Ha. I don't stand by anything I said. I am certain I am 100% different now.

[Raiders]

Ha. I don't stand by anything I said. I am certain I am 100% different now.

By the way, I was curious about this so I went to RT and cannot find my thread (in fact, I can only find a handful that I created back then... some are surely missing). How did you find it?

[Watashi]

Huh. I can't find it either now. Weird.

[MadMan]

RT's search engine no longer lets you search for anything older than 2004 or 2005. I hate it but I can see why they decided to do that because of the site's bugs. Oh wait no they just suck.

[Watashi]

MAKE MINE MUSIC (1946)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/make-mine-music/w448/make-mine-music.jpg?1310282907


It was in Walt's plan to release a new Fantasia film every couple of years, but when Fantasia was met with mixed reviews and didn't perform well enough (thanks to WWII), Disney put a plug on future development. Make Mine Music is the first film to be released under the Mouse after World War II and it feels very much like a follow up to Fantasia than the previous two package films.. While this film is certainly not as grandiose and ambitious as Fantasia, it has the same formula of being divided into segments with music being the key theme to bind them together. I'm not going to break down each one, but as a whole, there are a lot more positive than negative.

The first segment, The Martins and the Coys, was actually cut out of the home media version due to outrage by its violence and critics felt it was too intense for children. You can watch the short on YouTube. It's not as outrageous as people made it especially with a film like Pinocchio release six years earlier. It should have been cut because it's not very good and unfunny. It's basically a Romeo-and-Juliet story between the Hatfields and McCoys, but it's really lame and even uses domestic violence as a punchline.

The next segment, Blue Bayou, was actually intended for a Fantasia follow-up using the orchestrations by Claude Debussy, but it was thrown in here except the Debussy music is replaced with a more modern song. It's probably the most Fantasia-esque of the shorts.

All the Cats Join In is a jazzy piece of animation where teens get together and dance the night away at the local malt shop. The innovative aspect about this short is how its animated; everything is animated as it currently happens by an omnipotent floating pencil. Also this short might have the first instance of side boob in Disney history. Pretty provocative those animators in the 40's were.

Casey at the Bat is one the more famous Disney shorts and likely to have been seen by most here. However its placement in the film makes no sense because it's not connected by the theme of music. It's just an animated retelling of the poem. It's very good and funny, but it seems like it was a late minute addition to fill up time.

Then there's Peter and the Wolf, my personal favorite of the shorts. A lot of you probably saw this as kids on VHS when it was edited as its own separate short, but it actually originated in this film. The story is of course Disneyfied as the original composition ended a bit more gruesome, but the musical ballad is one of my favorite pieces of music ever. I still hum it daily. The cartoon is good as well, and I forgot how fucking scary the wolf. I mean, you should rewatch it. I remember being terrified by it as a child. What I love most about it is Sterling Holloway's narration. It's a very laid back telling of the story and feels improvised.

Johnnie Fedora and Alice Blue Bonnet is a love story between two hats who fall for each other in a department store. It's actually a lovely short, but I think it would be better without the accompanied song attached to it. It's just a simple and beautiful short on its own.

Finally there's the finale, The Whale Who Wanted to Sing at the Met. While this finale is not quite Night at Bald Mountain (then again, very few things are), it's definitely the most bizarre and ambitious of all the shorts. The story is this: A whale with a majestic operatic voice is found in the ocean, but is believed by an expert to have swallowed an opera singer, and therefore must be harpooned. The best part of the short is the music and how opera singer Nelson Eddy provides the voices for all the characters in the short. A whale singing opera on stage dressed up in various garbs is just a surreal site for Disney standards. But again, should I really expect anything different from the company that brought us Pink Elephants on Parade? The short even has an interesting twist at the end, but it even has a weirder subtext that I'm not quite sure I grasp fully. Like all opera, it has a tragic ending with whale being harpooned and going to heaven (yes, the whale goes to heaven) with the narrator saying something about we shouldn't be killing miracles. Is this a sly pro-life message? I'm sure it's not intentional, but it definitely can be read that way.

There's other shorts in between those, and some are fun, but they don't stick out like the ones I mentioned.

Is it still relevant today? As a whole? Not really. Casey at the Bat and Peter and the Wolf are the most memorable shorts and are probably the most seen due to being edited and released individually on home video. Everyone remembers Fantasia, but few remember Make Mine Music.

Final Verdict: It's not as crazy and artful as Fantasia, but it's the best package film so far. More shorts work than don't, but even the best short here (Peter and the Wolf) isn't enough to be put on a pedestal. It's fun and silly, but it doesn't push any animation boundaries.

Match Cut Discussion: What is your favorite segment from Make Mine Music? Did you first experience some of these shorts as individual shorts before you knew it was part of a package film?

[Ezee E]

I don't think I've seen this one.

[Winston*]

I don't think I've seen this one.

Never even heard of it.

[Watashi]

You can watch it on Youtube. It's only a hour long. It's worth it.

[Watashi]

FUN AND FANCY FREE (1947)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/mickey-and-the-beanstalk/w448/mickey-and-the-beanstalk.jpg?1299254669


So you're probably asking yourself, "Why did Disney make so many package films in the 40's?" (if you weren't, just pretend you were). Well, Disney was still financially crippled from WWII and didn't have the immediate funds for a full-length feature, so they developed smaller and inexpensive short films so they could use the extra profit to finance their next big film, Cinderella. For Fun and Fancy Free, Disney intended to release Bongo and Mickey and the Beanstalk as their own separate films. Both went into early development in the early 40's, but were both shelved for later due to World War II (it's crazy how big of an impact the war had). Once the war was over, Disney went back to the shelf and due to financial restraints, packaged Bongo and Mickey and the Beanstalk together as short films.

The film starts out with Jiminy Cricket flipping through a newspaper and showing how cruel and ugly the world has turned (an obvious nod to the aftermath of WWII), and sings about being "fun and fancy free" and not letting the troubling world trouble you. It's actually a leftover song that was cut out of Pinocchio.

Bongo, first. I remember having a lot of nostalgia for Bongo as a kid. I had it on VHS and watched it a lot. This is the first time I've seen it since my fun and fancy free days. I'm sad to say it doesn't hold up. At all. It's actually quite unspectacular. The story was actually suggested as a prequel to Dumbo (given the circus theme). Bongo has more in common with Bambi than anything else. The story goes as this: Bear escapes circus. Bear falls in love. Bear has to beat bigger bear to win affection for girl bear. The film doesn't really explore anything beyond that synopsis. What's disturbing about the short is how much of its focused on the rituals for bears getting laid. There's an entire song dedicated to bears mating. What the hell, Disney? Do kids want to see this? The song is terrible too. Everything about the short is so flat and boring. Dinah Shore's narration is the only vocal performance in the short and it's completely unnecessary. What was with Disney in the 40's and showing their characters wanting to get laid so very badly? The moment Bongo sees the girl bear, he has his "let's fuck" face on and the rest of the short is him beating up on a rival bear to win his prize.

Thank Yeezus the next short is Mickey and the Beanstalk. Once titled The Legend of Happy Valley, the film was truncated into a shorter run time to fit alongside Bongo. It's a shame because I would totally watch a full-length Mickey and the Beanstalk film. This is a great short. It probably has to do with the fact that it features the big Disney three: Mickey, Donald, and Goofy. I believe this is the only time they've ever been together in a film. The way they play off each other is fantastic. I love that scene pictured above with them so pathetic and hungry. This is my favorite portrayal of Donald Duck ever. He is just batshit insane here. His breakdown is hilarious and oddly sad. He then goes nuts and try to butcher and eat the cow. That scene is pretty damn dark. The music is great too. The short has some really memorable songs. The opening song "Oh What A Happy Day" is one of the more catchy songs in the Disney canon. I remember my father humming this song when he tried to get me out of bed when I was a kid. However what makes this short stand above the rest is the animation. The growth of the beanstalk under the full moon light is still amazingly directed to this day. It's so quiet and hypnotic, yet still has time to pull off some great visual gags revolving around keeping the peasants still asleep. My only criticism is that I wish it was longer and more fleshed out. There's not enough time with Willie the Giant, whose small screen time is hilarious. I usually prefer my villains to be silly rather than "look how evil I am."

Actually I know what my main qualm with the film is: that weird live-action interlude between shorts with Edgar Bergman attending a birthday party of a young girl. This would be okay if it was a large party, but nope, it's just him, his two dolls, and this young girl. It's so creepy. How did someone think that would be okay? The footage itself is not that amusing. They often interrupt the short to give their particular insight or have the girl get mad at the direction the story is going. Goddammit, I just want my Mickey and the Beanstalk with no creepy interruptions.

Is it still relevant today? Bongo? Hell no. No one even mentions that stupid bear anymore and for good reason. However Mickey and the Beanstalk is very relevant. It's still cherished as a classic and Willie the Giant has reappeared in other films and shows.

Final Verdict: The greatness of Mickey and the Beanstalk makes up for the lackluster Bongo. I would just watch Mickey and the Beanstalk preferably in its alternate release without the creepy Edgar Bergman party scene. It was re-released later separately with different narration and bookends. It's much better.

Match Cut Discussion: Uh... I guess you can talk about what you remember from Mickey and the Beanstalk because I doubt you remember anything from Bongo.

[EyesWideOpen]

Both times I've started rewatching through the Disney films the package one's is where I lose interest.

[Watashi]

Both times I've started rewatching through the Disney films the package one's is where I lose interest.

2 more to go! At least they are very short.

[MadMan]

Wats that review is mostly hilarious. Bravo.

[Watashi]

MELODY TIME (1948)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/melody-time/w448/melody-time.jpg?1337881888

Didn't I just see this movie a few days ago? This film is a copy of Make Mine Music down to its title cards and format. The shorts are different, but there's not much evolution between the two films. The shorts could have been rearranged in both movies and it wouldn't make a difference. There isn't a strong connection to each musical number, as most of them feel like Fantasia rejects. Fantasia had ambition with its poetic marriage between music and animation. Melody Time is just a bunch of cute cartoons that, with exception of one or two, are pretty unmemorable.

My favorite segment is one called Bumble Boogie. This is one of the more abstract shorts that follows a lone bee being attacked by a musical onslaught scored by Rimsky-Korsakov's Flight of the Bumblebee. It's an excellent display of surrealism in which notes and rhythms morph into ways to capture the bee.

Probably the most recognizable short in The Legend of Johnny Appleseed which originated here. You've probably seen this short as a kid packaged together on a VHS entitled American Legends with shorts of Paul Bunyan and John Henry. The short is one of the more unusual segments in all of the Disney package films. It's not really funny, ambitious, or crazy. It's just the story of Johnny Appleseed with a few Disney touches. It's also one of the rare faith-based stories, with Johnny singing the famous tune "The Lord is Good to Me." It's not preachy in any way. It's just interesting seeing Disney tackle a character like this. Do kids still learn about Johnny Appleseed nowadays? I remember vaguely talking about him in my elementary school in the 90's.

The other shorts barely register any remembrance from me. The Pecos Bill short is fun, but it's not as inspired as the Johnny Appleseed one. Donald and Jose Carioca show up again to do another samba in front of a beautiful woman. It's basically an extension of the wild ending of The Three Caballeros. Why it showed up here, I don't know. The only short I remember actively disliking was the first one that had a young couple in a winter wonderland who fall in love, quarrels, and then fall back in love. It's really trite and kinda ugly.

Is it still relevant today? No. Like I said above, these shorts are so indistinguishable from the rest of the packaged shorts, it's hard to remember what came from where.

Final Verdict: Meh. I struggled with this one. Only one short really held my attention.

Match Cut Discussion: Whatever.

[Gizmo]

I'm still surprised that a lot of the shorts I used to watch as a kid actually came from a "movie" and wasn't just made for tv.

[Lucky]

I definitely remember the Flight of the Bumblebee one. In fact, I'm pretty sure my dad must have recorded this one on VHS off the TV for me because most of those sound familiar.

I don't know if it's Disney, but I also remember an animated short from my youth that had personifications of flowers waking up to the tune of Grieg's Morning Mood (I think -- I could be making the music part up).

EDIT: Yup, I remembered the music incorrectly, but this is it. Predates Snow White.


http://youtu.be/cLsl-DNzakY

[Ezee E]

Looking forward to when you get back on the movies I've seen!

[Watashi]

THE ADVENTURES OF ICHABOD AND MR. TOAD (1949)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/the-adventures-of-ichabod-and-mr-toad/w448/the-adventures-of-ichabod-and-mr-toad.jpg

The last of the package films (finally!) is the most well-seen, well-known, and well-liked. I'm sure all of you have seen at least one or both of these segments growing up (except for that philistine Barty). What do I think? Does Disney end their package streak on a bang? Well, yeah. I guess. I like them a lot and they are certainly more memorable than any random musical segment from the previous films.

Like Fun and Fancy Free, both of these shorts were intended to be full-length movies and both were left on the cutting room floor only to be picked up again and condensed for a shorter run time. The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad of course combine the adaptations of the two classic literary stories, The Wind in the Willows and The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. These stories were likely popular in schools during that era and taught more than they are today. I never read these stories as a kid. In fact, the first time I was ever exposed to them was watching this film.

I understand The Wind in the Willows is a very popular UK children's story, but I never read it when I was younger. Maybe that says something about my American upbringing and education system or my lack of exposure to real classics. While I enjoy Disney's take on the material, I do feel like there's a longer, more substantial film in there. It was no surprise when I read up on the production that a feature script was already written and a lot was cut out when it was squeezed into a package film. Seeing it again as an adult made me realize how weird this film is. I don't really know what it's all about. You have talking anthropomorphized animals that seemingly live alongside regular sized humans. Okay. I think I can buy that. The main character is Mr. Toad, a wealthy frog who has a knack to go into an obsessive trance over the latest technological fad. He wants a motor car, so he tries to buy one off a mob of weasels which leads him into court accused of stealing the vehicle. He gets framed and put into jail until he escapes with the help of his trusty horse (yeah, I don't get it), and a rat, mole, and a badger. He breaks into his old estate (now run by the weasels) to get back the deed to his house which he traded to get the car. Then it ends. What. Now I don't know if what I just saw was a faithful adaptation or not, but I can definitely tell there are moments in the short where an extra 20-30 minutes were needed. What is this film trying to say? Mr. Toad has some weird transportation fetish, but he doesn't learn anything at the end. I don't know. It's fun. The escape from Toad Hall at the end is a great set piece filled with fast-paced animation and clever gags. I just really don't think it works as a short especially with characters like Rat, Mole, and Badger not really doing much. There's also a few songs in the short, but I don't remember any of them.

The next short is one of Disney's most famous animated works, The Legend of Sleepy Hollow. Again I wasn't properly schooled on the Irving classic as a wee lad. We only read Rip Van Winkle. I think more people associate the Tim Burton film with the short story, but that film is very loosely adapted. More people remember the Headless Horseman in the story when really he doesn't show up until the closing moments of the story. For us academically tuned scholars, we'd know that the story is primarily a love triangle with a little gothic horror mixed in. The Disney short is actually a pretty faithful adaptation of the story. Why this short works and has stand the test of time is because of how un-Disney it is. Outside of Bing Crosby's narration, very little dialogue is spoken and most of the slapstick foreplay between Ichabod, Katrina, and Brom Bones is pantomimed. Ichabod Crane is one of Disney's best character designs. His hook-nosed lanky appearance appropriately matches Irving's descriptions. You'd think his oddball appearance would make him the butt of a lot of jokes, but no, the moment he enters the pictures, he is swooning ladies left and right. Ichabod is also notable for being one of the most unlikable Disney protagonists. The guy is just an asshole. He uses women for their cooking and wealth. He even admits that he's only pursuing Katrina because of her father's wealth and can't wait until the day he dies. Hell, Brom Bones is the sympathetic one. He's set up initially to be the foil to Ichabod, but he always falls short. This scalene love triangle is all over a girl who is flat as they come and pretty much throws herself upon any man that show any interest in her (seriously, what DOES she see in Ichabod?). Let's just cut to the part everyone remembers: The Headless Horseman. His entrance and chase with Ichabod rules. The use of color and shadows make it a legitimately scary scene. However it's also very funny in a Sam Raimi kind of way.

Is it still relevant today? Out of all the package films so far, this one is remembered the best. They even constructed a ride after The Wind and the Willows called Mr. Toad's Wild Ride. If you thought the short was strange, the ride is ten times messed up. I don't understand how it's a kid's ride. You're basically touring the short as Mr. Toad as you get sentenced to jail and then GO TO HELL. There is a tunnel in the ride that takes you down to hell. What the fuck is up with this ride? Mr. Toad never went to hell in the original short. This is one of Disneyland's most popular rides.

Final Verdict: The last of the package films is upon us, and it's fitting that it's the best one yet. The animation and action are great with The Legend of Sleepy Hollow being the stand out. I only wished The Wind and the Willows was longer. Fun fact I got from Wikipedia: Guillermo Del Toro was working on a new take on the book for Disney which would incorporate CGI and live-action, but when a studio executives said, "Could you give Toad a skateboard and make him say, 'radical dude' things," Del Toro immediately left the project.

Match Cut Discussion: Did you have much familiarity with the two stories growing up? What do you think The Wind of the Willows is about, if anything?

[Winston*]

The Legend of Sleepy Hollow is so weird.

[amberlita]

Outside of Bing Crosby's narration, very little dialogue is spoken

When you have Bing Crosby narrating, there is no reason to sully your presentation with further dialogue.

[Ezee E]

Mr. Toad's ride terrified my brother at an early age, and then the next time we were there, he went about a dozen times. Great ride, but can't remember the short.

Sleepy Hollow, however, is one of my favorites. Watched constantly. Great stuff.

[Thirdmango]

Just wanted to jump in and say I had put off watching Fantasia for a long time because I didn't like it as a kid. It is great, but not really a great for young kids thing (especially if your mother is a violinist and you're already sick of hearing classical music in your daily life.)

Also I wanted to mention it's good to know there's another movie crier on here.

I haven't seen a single package film. I did however watch a couple of the Alice shorts from the 1920s, have you had a chance to see any of those?

[Watashi]

CINDERELLA (1950)

http://s3.amazonaws.com/auteurs_production/images/film/cinderella/w448/cinderella.jpg?1289434134


Finally after eight years of recovering from crippling financial loss and playing it safe with easy-to-digest package films, Disney goes big again in 1950 with their first full-length feature since Bambi. So what does Disney unveil after a long hiatus? Why they go back to what made them bank in the first place: the fairy tale. There's a lot of common ground between Cinderella and Snow White. They're both fairy tales about wishful women who are held captive by an oppressive stepmom/witch/queen and end up doing chores with the help of their animal friends. The small difference is that Snow White is just an empty vessel who waits and sings hoping someday her prince may come, yet Cinderella is just someone who wants to get out of the house and live her life. Cinderella is so endearing and humble while being a subject of cruel torture by her stepmother and stepsisters, it's hard not to feel like she's earned her small moments of happiness at the royal ball. As for Snow? She doesn't really do anything to warrant a prince to kiss her back to life. I think that's why I always preferred Cinderella over Snow White. She's one of the early progressive Disney princess who doesn't dream of a prince to sweep her off her feet. Her number "A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes" follows the Pinocchio formula of equating wishes with dreams with the help of a supernatural goddess to solve the problem. Cinderella could be dreaming about a man, but we don't know, as she won't tell her animal friends any of her kinky sex dreams. Even with the announcement of the royal ball, Cinderella gets excited about the possibility of going but makes no mention of meeting or marrying the prince. She just wants to go out to dance and have some fun. If she met a guy there as a bonus, that would be great too.

Cinderella is a weird fairy tale full of cynical morals, and Disney made it even weirder by devoting a large chunk of the film to talking mice and their scurries with the hellfire-named cat, Lucifer. The first twenty minutes of Cinderella are dedicated to watching the mice outmaneuver Lucifer so they get breakfast on time. After the audience is confirmed that these mice are getting their daily nutritional needs, THEN we get to the main plot of Cinderella. This beginning can be observed as a psychological examination of poor Cinderella's deterioration through her imprisonment. Cinderella is the original Oldboy. Being imprisoned for most of her youth has washed away her sanity and lead Cinderella befriending the mice in the walls and making tiny clothes for them. I always liked my version where Cinderella imagines that the mice go on exciting escapades with the house cat and dreams of being visited by her fairy godmother all while she's actually in bed slowly dying from infectious rabies. Where is THAT story, Disney? The increasing roles of the mice and cat is a prime example of "Disneyfying" a classic story by providing its heroine with cute animal sidekicks who break up the main plot to pad the extra runtime with slapstick entertainment for the fidgety kiddies. Bambi does this too with Thumper and Flower, but their role is very minuscule compared to the mice of Cinderella. The mice are the first instance where adorable side characters are used as marketing tools to be placed on posters and trailers to appeal to a wider audience. This has become a common practice with animated films these days (Minions in Despicable Me, Penguins in Madagascar) and you could probably point to Cinderella as the source of this strategy. Even though a majority of the scenes featuring the mice are filler, I do enjoy them and fall directly into the trap placed by Disney. They are annoyingly cute with their sped-up voice and habit of speaking every word in doubles ("cat-cat"). I just wish their Tom-and-Jerry chase scenes didn't overshadow the entire film. Some of that precious runtime could have been devoted to more time developing Cinderella and her stepsisters, the Prince, or his father.

The actual story (sans mice) of Cinderella always disturbed me and it seems that author Charles Perrault intended it to be. Here is a woman who is punished for no reason, but she just accepts this cruelty by being hopeful that something good will happen. She is constantly genial towards her stepmother, the mice, and even the cat. Even after Lucifer ruins Cinderella's chores or tries to kill her rodent friends, she still feels sympathy towards the evil creature. When she is at rock bottom and doesn't understand why bad things happen to good people, all of this patience eventually pays off as she is rescued by her fairy godmother. Then there's the cynical side of the moral which Perrault seems to endorse by saying, "Without doubt it is a great advantage to have intelligence, courage, good breeding, and common sense. These, and similar talents come only from heaven, and it is good to have them. However, even these may fail to bring you success, without the blessing of a godfather or a godmother." There is an unclear theme of the proper definition of "family." Cinderella was loved dearly by her widowed father, but once he remarried and died, she became a burden to the new family members. The prince's father desperately wants his son to marry, but not out of love or happiness, but so he can provide some grandchildren for him before he dies. It appears that the moral is that family cannot come later down and should be there to love you from birth (hence the blessing of a godparent in case something tragic happens). I don't think I like this message if I'm reading it right. A lot of fairy tales like to vilify stepparents because they are either after only the SO's wealth and don't like when their spouse's children try to interfere with their plans. They're also real easy to be villains because they are not seen as "real family" so when they get demised or get foiled, no real love is lost. I never liked that reading because I think blood doesn't define family, which is why I always appreciated a movie like Kung Fu Panda where Po learns to accept his adoptive father as his real father.

How is the villain? I just ragged on the evil stepmother above, but holy shit is she evil. Lady Tremaine's cold death stare is the stuff of nightmares. She doesn't have a warm bone in her body. Eleanor Audley gives a terrifying performance (who would go one and give an even more scarier performance in Sleeping Beauty). However, Lady Tremaine borderlines on too evil to be a really great villain. She has no motive for being this heartless and unlike say a Cruella DeVille, she's not having fun with it. She's just a bitch and goes to extreme lengths to prevent Cinderella from living a life. The scene where the two stepsisters rip off Cinderella's dress and Tremaine just sits there with that hateful sneer on her face is just painful to watch. I like my villains evil, but at least make them somewhat entertaining or cunning.

How is the music? I really enjoy "A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes." Ilene Woods sings wonderfully unlike the shrill voice of Snow White. Honestly, before I rewatched the film, the only song I could still hum was "The Working Song." All I have to do is say, "Cinderelli, Cinderelli," and most you could sing or hum the entire song right now. "So This is Love" is the love song, and it's probably the most unmemorable Disney love song in the entire canon. It's sung when Cinderella is dancing with the Prince for the first time and thinks she has found love. Knowing this is the probably the first male that Cinderella has seen in probably a decade, she seems to latch on to the guy immediately and fall in love. "Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo" is probably the most recognizable song even though I don't know why. It's only 4 lyrics long and I don't really care for it.

Is it still relevant today? Disney loves their princesses. Cinderella is still popular to this day mainly for being a huge hit that brought them financial security for the next decade. Even though she doesn't have her own ride or video game, Cinderella has a big presence over Disneyland and all of its merchandising. "A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes" plays over the nighttime fireworks show in grand fashion. Disney is even planning a live-action version with Kenneth Branagh directing scheduled to be released in 2015.

Final Verdict: I enjoyed Cinderella a lot more than I thought I would. I still have a problem with some of its questionable messages and underdeveloped characters, but I really like Cinderella's earnestness and graciousness even when she is being degraded to filth. The animation is of course lovely. There are some really gorgeous shots in this film. I especially love a particular close-up of Cinderella's face through the bars of a mousetrap.

Match Cut Discussion: What are your memories of Cinderella? What do you think of Lady Tremaine and what Perrault says about having a godparent. Do you like the mice or find them annoying?

[Irish]

Not sure if I said this already or just thought it, but for my money this is one of the best threads on Match Cut.

[Watashi]

Not sure if I said this already or just thought it, but for my money this is one of the best threads on Match Cut.

One question about "Cinderella": What's the connection between Lady Tremaine and Britney Spears/ Crossroads (your link)?

Huh? What are you seeing?

[Irish]

Also, given the time period in which "Cinderella" was made, do you think the reason she never explicitly desires a man is because she doesn't have to? On one end, who goes to a big dance without looking to hook up? On the other, wouldn't the audience expectation of the time be something like "Of course she wants to find a good husband and have a family"?

In other words, she may not need to say what the audience already knows, or assumes.

[Watashi]

The link "Don't believe me?" was going to a picture of Britney Spears at the "Crossroads" premiere at fanpop.com. Now it's just forwarding to their main domain.

Even now?

[Watashi]

Also, given the time period in which "Cinderella" was made, do you think the reason she never explicitly desires a man is because she doesn't have to? On one end, who goes to a big dance without looking to hook up? On the other, wouldn't the audience expectation of the time be something like "Of course she wants to find a good husband and have a family"?

In other words, she may not need to say what the audience already knows, or assumes.

I think Cinderella is juxtaposed with her two stepsisters who clearly want to go to the ball to only win over the prince. It's certainly in Cinderella's mind that she will meet the prince, but she just wants to get out and socialize with other people. She doesn't even realize that the guy she is dancing with is the prince, so she is not falling in love with royalty.

I do think her immediate "I'm in love" moment with her song is a bit much.

[Mara]

For my money, the nameless Prince in Cinderella is the most bland, underdeveloped love interest in any Disney film ever. He has no personality, has about two seconds in "So This is Love" and then cries out, "Stop! Wait!" I mean, does he even have any other lines? He has no motivation or backstory. He's the epitome of romance-writing laziness.

Compare Prince Phillip in Sleeping Beauty, just a few years later, who has a family, a personality, a history, and charm. Oh, and A NAME. It's similar insta-love fairy tale story-line, but we care so much more because he feels like a real person.

[Watashi]

For my money, the nameless Prince in Cinderella is the most bland, underdeveloped love interest in any Disney film ever. He has no personality, has about two seconds in "So This is Love" and then cries out, "Stop! Wait!" I mean, does he even have any other lines? He has no motivation or backstory. He's the epitome of romance-writing laziness.

Compare Prince Phillip in Sleeping Beauty, just a few years later, who has a family, a personality, a history, and charm. Oh, and A NAME. It's similar insta-love fairy tale story-line, but we care so much more because he feels like a real person.

Oh, I agree. The Prince had a much larger part in the initial draft of the script.

Who cares about the love interest when you have 30 extra minutes dedicated to Lucifer.

[Mara]

I actually think Sleeping Beauty holds up the strongest of early Disney. I'm excited to see your write-up.

[Lucky]

It's not insta-love, Mara. They met once upon a dream.

[EyesWideOpen]

After I'm done watching through all the Hitchcock films I'm gonna go through and watch all the Disney blu-rays. I own all of them released so far even the one's for movies I've never seen like Home on the Range and Brother Bear.

[Watashi]

I actually haven't given up on this thread. I've just been too busy working at Disney which is keeping me from watching Disney.

[MadMan]

I actually haven't given up on this thread. I've just been too busy working at Disney which is keeping me from watching Disney.Hah, awesome.

I don't know how I truly feel about Cinderella. My kid self thinks its good, and then I disliked it as I grew older, and now until I give it a rewatch I'm really mixed about the entire movie. But the musical numbers are fantastic. Hmmm. Oh but the animation for that movie is goddamn fantastic. Absolutely.

[Watashi]

ALICE IN WONDERLAND (1951)

http://www.fantasy-magazine.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/alice1951.jpg


And we're back! Sorry for the delay, but when you're for working for Disney, the last thing you want to do when you come from work is to watch and write about Disney. This job is going to ruin me.

Anyways, I'm here to talk about Alice in Wonderland. When you think of Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, what images immediately pop up in your head? You might picture John Tenniel's illustrations, but as far as adaptations go, the 1951 Disney version is the most cited by popular culture. It's hard to imagine the Mad Hatter and not think of Ed Wynn's portrayal (and if you think of Johnny Depp first, then you need to go outside, rethink your life, and then kill yourself). It's funny how the two most profitable adaptations are both done by Disney. It's not like there were so little adaptations of Carroll's book. There are actually many, but no one really remembers them as much as the Disney version. Before Burton's version, the only adaptation I seem to remember was a made-for-TV mini-series that starred Martin Short as the Mad Hatter and Whoopi Goldberg as the Cheshire Cat (*shudders*). I'm actually surprised that Disney never revisited this film and attempt to do a sequel. There were so many stories left out of the original and a whole other book to adapt. If Cinderella can get THREE films, it's a relief that Disney restrained itself from going down the rabbit hole again.

Uncle Walt had the idea to bring Alice in Wonderland to the screen in his back pocket since he was a boy. Like every Disney film ever made, the film went through many phases during preproduction. Alice was initially going to be the first feature animated film, but Disney was beat to the punch by the 1933 live-action adaptation, so Walt moved ahead with Snow White instead. As Walt was trying to revive production on Alice, it went through many stages and setbacks (mostly caused by that pesky war overseas). The original draft of Alice was a bit too dark and grotesque for Walt's tastes as he wanted it to be more comedic and whimsical. Now this next bit of information I didn't know about until I read up on the developmen, but after the war, Disney hired sci-fi scribe Aldous Huxley to rewrite the script. The script was not used because Walt felt it was too faithful to Carroll's work. Now I would have LOVED to see that version brought to screen. We finally get the film we have today that is regarded as a classic.

Is it still the timeless classic that I remembered so long ago? Well, yes and no. I know a lot of literary nerds who love Alice in Wonderland. It's one of those texts where English freaks gobble up everything about it. I was never one of these people. I have no strong connection with the source material beyond my enjoyment of reading it in college. I know that the film was very poorly received by literary critics upon release blaming Disney for "Americanizing" the great British novel. It wasn't until I read the book a few years ago when I realized how much the Disney version cut out and how loose of an adaptation that it is. I don't think this harms its reputation (I like when filmmakers trying to transform the source), but it's surprising that the most embraced adaptation of the book fails to capture a lot of the satire and oddities of the book. The 2010 film was even worse at this. Burton attempted to try to add a narrative framework and emotional core to the story by expanding on character's backgrounds. Burton was trying to wash the nonsense out of the book where its nonsensical riddles and problems are the sole essence of the why the book is so beloved.

Why am I talking about Burton's abomination anyway? I'm here to talk about the good version. What's good about the 1951 film is Alice herself. To this point in the Disney canon, all of the leads are simplistic in their choices. The two previous heroines (Snow and Cinderella) were the basic princess models who were animated to be rescued from their imprisoned torment by a dashing prince. Bambi, Dumbo, and Pinocchio also don't really think for themselves and just coast right along (though with Dumbo, that was kind of the point). With Alice, Disney managed not to stray away from Carroll's literary heroine and keep the heart of her youthful curiosity intact. In fact, Alice talks a lot. More than any of the previous lead characters combined. She is always asking questions, doubting her reality, and trying to bring logic to a illogical world. She was not made into a "Disney Princess" and given an expanded love interest or companion. She is a lot like the Alice of the books. I think Kathryn Beaumont is the real the star of the film. It's the first time I really noticed a voice actor carry the film and make it her own. She gives an incredible performance by bringing Alice's frustration to life, yet also still keeping that childish wonder to her voice. I think my favorite scene in the film is when Alice is playing croquet with the Queen of Hearts and watching her annoyance trying to keep the flamingo still, but still laughing like a little girl when the flamingo tickles her and that face she gives to the queen (http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130315231955/disney/images/f/f0/Alice-in-Wonderland-1951-alice-in-wonderland-1759032-640-476.jpg) is just so perfect. That's the Disney I love.

Unfortunately I am not as enamored with the rest of the film as most are. I think the problem is with Wonderland itself. It never really feels threatening or extraordinary until much later. The designs are very simple and cartoonish, and it isn't until the Mad Hatter and the March Hare show up that the inhabits of Wonderland aren't as colorful and charming as before. Even the Walrus and the Carpenter scene which is a pretty mortifying tale is played with a lot of slapstick that its horrors are lost in all of the goofiness. I think why everyone loves the Mad Hatter's tea party the most is because it's the moment that truly captures the spirit of Carroll. The nonsense is on full display here and the chemistry between Wynn's Hatter and Jerry Colonna's March Hare is impeccably zany. There's songs, riddles, puns, and visual gags galore. I love that the Hatter thinks putting mustard on the clock is going too far. Before Alice arrives to the Hatter's psychedelic fume party, the film is rather ho-hum with its episodic format. Disney can animate nonsense very well and bring the forth the illogical turns and twists, but what is Disney really trying to say? Carroll's book was all about its mathematical prose and unanswerable riddles as well as its mockery of British establishment. Disney takes a more streamline approach and gives it a more understandable theme of "not letting your curiosity get the better of you" or whatnot. Alice's journey through Wonderland mirrors a lot with Dorthy's own in Oz, but there's a goal for Dorthy to achieve and a more hero's journey arc to the story. Disney brings alive a lot of the characters and stories from Alice's Adventures, but really doesn't go beyond just translating them from the page to film.

How is the villain? I love the Queen of Hearts. I just wish she was introduced sooner or at least give her a foreboding presence through the film and build to her. However once she's on screen, she's as scary as they come. What makes her so threatening is her wild mood swings. She can go from cartoony and harmless to mad and bloodthirsty in a heartbeat. Her unpredictable bursts of anger and her hunger for decapitations is also another one of Disney's great transformations of Carroll's prose and satire of the royal crown. I also love the King. Such a great small character that says so much by saying so little.

How is the music? Would you be shocked to know that Alice in Wonderland has the most songs out of any Disney film? There are 18 songs in the film! Of course a lot of them last for mere seconds and not as memorable. All the songs are ways of trying to translate Carroll's poems and verses faithfully. Some songs work more than others. The two most memorable songs are "The Unbirthday Song" and "Painting the Roses Red", mostly because they are easily hummable (you are humming them right now, aren't you?) and the lyrics are easy to remember. Alice has two songs on her own ("In a World of My Own" and "Very Good Advice"). They are two contradictory numbers coming at the beginning and end of the film, but only the latter song is worth mentioning because it comes at a climatic moment for Alice to confront her fears of being trapped in Wonderland. Also, Beaumont kills it with a great teary-eyed performance.

Is it still relevant today: In case you skipped my first paragraph, you would know it is very relevant. Dare I say probably the most relevant film in the entire canon? No other adaptation after it has really become as timeless and the only company to bring it back to cinemas in a big way was Disney. Alice is beloved by everyone mainly because of her girlish innocence and not being stemmed from a fairy tale. Alice was a big part of Disneyland from the very beginning by having two rides dedicated to her film (I will never go on the Tea Cups, even if you paid me). Alice and the Mad Hatter are the two most prominent characters in the park besides Mickey and Minnie. Disney's Alice is the definite Alice for most people.

Final Verdict: I enjoyed revisiting Alice in Wonderland. It's really my only gateway into Carroll's book (though I did later see Jan Švankmajer's stop-motion film). I actually prefer Jan Švankmajer's version because how creepy and unsettling it is. For the Disney version, I don't really fall in love with it until Alice reaches the Mad Tea Party. Then the dream-like aura becomes more fluent and not simply an educational meet and greet. It becomes a bit more dangerous and intimidating.

Match-Cut Discussion: What is the definitive version of Alice in Wonderland for you? Have you seen any of the other adaptations besides the two Disney ones? Do you think Disney fails or succeeds to capture Carroll's nonsense and imaginative prose?

[Ezee E]

I'm quite the fan of it all really. The best thing about this, for me, is the use of the Cheshire Cat, and the use of the "rabbit hole." It works both as an adult and as a kid. The Mad Hatter is also very amusing without trying so hard like Johnny Depp.

It's one of my favorites.

I need to revisit the Svankmajer movie. I remember it being what I hoped the Burton movie would be.

[Skitch]

My favorite Disney film. Balls nuts from beginning to end, and I love every moment. There are two other version of this story I also like. The first is this version (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_in_Wonderland_%281999_fi lm%29), with Martin Short and Whoopi Goldberg. Its too long, but it creates one hell of a world, and Martin Short is always great. Second is Jan Švankmajer's Alice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alice_%281988_film%29), which is a nightmare version that is just brilliant.

But yes, the Disney version is my favorite.

[Raiders]

Svankmajer captured the terror and dream-like quality that has to be so apparent in any visual translation of Carrol's book, though as an enjoyable piece of cinema that I want to watch multiple times, meh. I tend to find Svankmajer a little too grotesquely cute to really hold my attention. Plus, Carrol had a whimsy and sense of play that Svankmajer ignored, though I don't hold fidelity to the source against him, it just makes the film a little one-note.

Disney made it into a hybrid classic Disney film and genuine adaptation that succeeds in spurts and fails on the whole. Love the vibrancy of its colors though, thanks to the inspiration from Mary Blair.

[Mara]

Love the books, personally, and enjoy the Disney version. The most faithful adaptation I've seen was a made-for-television version we had on VHS when I was a kid and starred a truly bizarre ensemble of anyone relatively famous in the 80's who was willing to show up. (Just look. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088693/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast ))

[Gizmo]

Never read the book(s?), and didn't really care for any of the adaptations I've seen (this, Burton, and some live action one I don't remember). Haven't watched this in a long time, so maybe I should revisit it, I'm sure it's somewhere in my wife and daughter's collection.

[number8]

Wrote this a few years ago: http://www.justpressplay.net/articles/6444-the-screen-history-of-wonderland.html

[Watashi]

I love Pogo and think his Alice remix is better than the film itself.

[Scar]

Love the books, personally, and enjoy the Disney version. The most faithful adaptation I've seen was a made-for-television version we had on VHS when I was a kid and starred a truly bizarre ensemble of anyone relatively famous in the 80's who was willing to show up. (Just look. (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088693/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast ))

JABBERWOCKY!!!!

[Raiders]

JABBERWOCKY!!!!

Yeah, that version has the batshit Jabberwock attack:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DV7ASH_BHR0

[Skitch]

Wasn't that in Conan The Destroyer too? :lol:

[Mara]

Yeah, that version has the batshit Jabberwock attack:


It has been a loooooong time since I saw this. Totally nuts. Not entirely accurate to the books.

[Morris Schæffer]

Well, dayum, The Lion King 3D on a 55inch Plasma is quite a sight to see. Excepting the inevitable brightness drop, a really stunning presentation. Hardly my favorite Disney, but still highly memorable.

Edit: I came here to check Watashi's write-up, but it seems I must be patient. :D

[Irish]

*bump*

Watashi. It is time.

[Watashi]

You're a funny guy Irish. :lol:

I barely have time to do groceries let alone to find time to sit down and watch a film.