Disney Disney Disney

[yumny]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

The worst I can really say about Home on the Range is that I can't remember a single piece of inspired or ambitious animation in the entire movie. It's instantly forgettable. Brother Bear, by contrast, has astonishing layouts - really some of the best background art I've seen in a Disney film since Tarzan and Hunchback - but from top to bottom, the movie has no sense of itself. Is it a kiddie film, or is it a tub-thumping drama? The movie has no idea. It just swings wildly from very frightening and serious dramatic moments to child-pandering nonsense. Rick Moranis and Dave Thomas let it rip on the commentary track, and when the commentary track is 20 times more entertaining than the movie you're watching, there's something seriously wrong with the movie. Listening to Moranis and Thomas borders on MST3K territory, i.e., "She says it's where the lights touch the mountains, but it looks like where the lights touch McDonalds." Brother Bear and Dinosaur are *disasters* in terms of screenwriting. Home on the Range is a forgettable toon with great songs. If hard pressed, I'm still deeply conflicted as to which I'd rank last. Robin Hood, Brother Bear, Dinosaur, Home on the Range, Oliver and Co. There's your crap pile in a failure bowl, right there. Which is the cruddy bit at bottom? Really hard to choose, some days.

Let me give you a rundown of those.

37. HOME ON THE RANGE (2004) – 4.5
Albeit witty and quick, Home on the Range lacks some serious heart and feels more forced and empty than anything else.

36. DINOSAUR (2000) – 4.8
While Dinosaur boasts some gorgeous imagery, that doesn't weigh up against the incredibly poor plot and clichéd characters.

35. OLIVER AND COMPANY (1988) – 5.5
Oliver and Company features colorful characters who suffer from a mediocre plot and less-than-stellar art design.

34. THE BLACK CAULDRON (1985) – 5.6
Ambitious as it is, The Black Cauldron is poorly paced, full of filler scenes and quite frankly badly plotted.

31. ROBIN HOOD (1973) – 6.5
Robin Hood is pleasant, harmless, not to mention a whole lot of fun, but fails to hold up as a true classic through it's reliance on whimsy.

29. BROTHER BEAR (2003) – 7.0
Brother Bear's art direction is a whole lot more fulfilling than it's dull plot and predictable character arcs, though it has undeniable heart.

[zoodermin]

Originally Posted by EricJ

I'll throw in the rankings/recommendations, too:
- 101 Dalmatians: Probably the most atmospheric "Walt's London" of all his 60's films next to Mary Poppins, and the most sentimental value before Jungle Book and the Ron Millers set in...Despite what some parents think, it AIN'T the goony overgagged John Hughes version.
- Aristocats, Rescuers: I'll put these together as being probably the most iconically 70's Ron-Miller of the canon next to Robin Hood, and that's not necessarily a compliment. Ron Miller didn't know how to handle "WWWD?", and the 70's movies all seemed to cannibalize our memories of better Walt-era movies (Aristocats = Lady/Tramp, Rescuers = 101D and Cruella, Robin Hood using Jungle Book footage, etc.) Good for historical value, but you just can't get the "originals" out of your head while watching.
- Rescuers Down Under: I remember thinking "Why did they bother?" (they literally didn't know what else they could sequel), and eagles and credits aside, that's....a good question that never quite gets answered.
- Great Mouse Detective: Again, with Musker & Clements co-directing with old-school directors, this feels like the missing evolutionary link between the "Cutesy critters" of the Ron Miller 70's, and the new humor and energy of the post-Mermaid 90's. If you want to explain the 90's, start with '86.
- Chicken Little: Post-Shrek Dreamworks is bad enough, now imagine jealously imitating post-Shrek Dreamworks (from a studio that at the time lived in god-fearing terror of the awesome power of Shrek 2), and giving that job to someone with a tad less attention-span. DW only puts one or two "Kitschy 70's/80's songs" gags in their movies, imagine one that kicks the list up to about seven or eight. In a ROW. Near the end, it's like Dindal just gives up in the last reel and doesn't want to do any other gags...
- Meet the Robinsons: If you must see Chicken Little (and only for academic value), see Robinsons IMMEDIATELY afterwards; the two are historical sides of the coin--The change in tone, when John Lasseter took over the studio and reworked the script, can be seen from the beginning to the end of the movie, and speaks volumes about what we lost Eisner and David Stainton. "Wacky" gags in the first half become warm-hearted Pixar gags in the second half, the repellently sitcom-oddball family becomes a huggy sympathetic family, and it ends with a Walt quote about "Moving forward"...Hell yeah. :thumbsup:

I agree with you. I went to see Meet the Robinsons with very low expectations (after Chicken Little, what else could you've expect?) and was very satisfied with the results. It has a great story, endearing characters and heart. The animation is not up to Pixar standards but 'the future' was very cool. I have to say that since Lasseter became head of Disney Animation Studios, their output has been very satisfying and all of the feature that have come from the studio since 2007 (Meet the Robinsons, Bolt, The Princess and the Frog, Tangled and Winnie the Pooh) are a statement that WDAS are still a strong force in the animation industry and we have to thank Lasseter for that (the guy brought back traditional animation to the studio!). I don't think Eisner will ever had released a new theatrical Winnie the Pooh film but Lasseter had the guts to do it and turned out to be a great film. Its timing in theaters of course is another matter entirely (putting that little film against the Harry Potter finale? Seriously, sometimes I think there is something very wrong with Disney's marketing department) but the film is great nonetheless.

[zafisher94]

Originally Posted by zoodermin

I agree with you. I went to see Meet the Robinsons with very low expectations (after Chicken Little, what else could you've expect?) and was very satisfied with the results. It has a great story, endearing characters and heart. The animation is not up to Pixar standards but 'the future' was very cool. I have to say that since Lasseter became head of Disney Animation Studios, their output has been very satisfying and all of the feature that have come from the studio since 2007 (Meet the Robinsons, Bolt, The Princess and the Frog, Tangled and Winnie the Pooh) are a statement that WDAS are still a strong force in the animation industry and we have to thank Lasseter for that (the guy brought back traditional animation to the studio!). I don't think Eisner will ever had released a new theatrical Winnie the Pooh film but Lasseter had the guts to do it and turned out to be a great film. Its timing in theaters of course is another matter entirely (putting that little film against the Harry Potter finale? Seriously, sometimes I think there is something very wrong with Disney's marketing department) but the film is great nonetheless.

agreed. Lasseter has been a saving grace to Disney. I have a great amount of respect for Lasseter and since Roy has passed away, he definitely the one I trust to respect the studio's history.

[yumny]

Originally Posted by zoodermin

I agree with you. I went to see Meet the Robinsons with very low expectations (after Chicken Little, what else could you've expect?) and was very satisfied with the results. It has a great story, endearing characters and heart. The animation is not up to Pixar standards but 'the future' was very cool. I have to say that since Lasseter became head of Disney Animation Studios, their output has been very satisfying and all of the feature that have come from the studio since 2007 (Meet the Robinsons, Bolt, The Princess and the Frog, Tangled and Winnie the Pooh) are a statement that WDAS are still a strong force in the animation industry and we have to thank Lasseter for that (the guy brought back traditional animation to the studio!). I don't think Eisner will ever had released a new theatrical Winnie the Pooh film but Lasseter had the guts to do it and turned out to be a great film. Its timing in theaters of course is another matter entirely (putting that little film against the Harry Potter finale? Seriously, sometimes I think there is something very wrong with Disney's marketing department) but the film is great nonetheless.

Hence why they made this.

Winnie the Pooh: The Final Battle - YouTube

It just NEVER stops being funny. "Were you expecting someone else?"

[Ernest Rister]

Robin Hood using Jungle Book animation

Jungle Book, Goliath II, Snow White, The Aristocats, a Goofy "Football" short, the list goes on and on. Milt flipped out during production (which isn't a real surprise, since he was a smoldering volcano on a good day, allegedly) and stormed down the hallway screaming, "You're all garbagemen!"

You take the recycled animation and THEN include the weakest story structure of any Disney movie (there is no ending, a rooster steps out from behind a tree and says, "You know, I thought we'd never get rid of those two rascals, but lucky for us, King Richard returned, and well, he just straightened everything out."), you've got the worst of the Walt-crew-9-old-men films. The characters are charming, the music is wonderful, but the script is *terrible*. The Disney Channel once aired a snip of a deleted sequence of King Richard's return. I've seen it, damn it, a really pissd-off lion resembling what they used in Bedknobs, coming out of a tunnel while Nutsy and Trigger were demanding "Who Goes There?" or some such. They made the call that actually resolving the story on screen was too boring, so they cut it, and so Robin Hood really has no ending. A rooster just tells us in a sentence everything worked out, and hey! Let's get to the wedding! Pay no attention to the lack of story structure behind the curtain! Walt was upset by Sword in the Stone, and I think he would have had a negative reaction to Robin Hood. The fact that the characters and music are so charming blinds people to how poor the story is, meanwhile, the recycled animation demonstrates the shockingly low budget given to the animation team, but most people don't recognize that either. Robin Hood is pretty awful, folks.

A bunch of village children accidentally shoot an arrow into the castle courtyard of Prince John, where Maid Marion and Lady Cluck are playing badminton. The children sneak in to retrieve the arrow, and are discovered by Maid Marion and Lady Cluck. After Marion and Cluck reassure the children, Skippy the Rabbit pretends to be Robin Hood and grabs Marion's hand and pretends to escape into the garden.

MAID MARION
Oh! So this is Sherwood Forest.

SKIPPY THE RABBIT
Yeah, I guess so. So now what do we do?

MAID MARION
What does this scene have to do with the rest of the movie?

SKIPPY THE RABBIT
Beats the shit out of me.

[yumny]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Jungle Book, Goliath II, Snow White, The Aristocats, a Goofy "Football" short, the list goes on and on. Milt flipped out during production (which isn't a real surprise, since he was a smoldering volcano on a good day, allegedly) and stormed down the hallway screaming, "You're all garbagemen!"

You take the recycled animation and THEN include the weakest story structure of any Disney movie (there is no ending, a rooster steps out from behind a tree and says, "You know, I thought we'd never get rid of those two rascals, but lucky for us, King Richard returned, and well, he just straightened everything out."), you've got the worst of the Walt films. The characters are charming, the music is wonderful, but the script is *terrible*. The Disney Channel once aired a snip of a deleted sequence of King Richard's return. I've seen it, damn it, a really pissd-off lion resembling what they used in Bedknobs, coming out of a tunnel while Nutsy and Trigger were demanding "Who Goes There?" or some such. They made the call that actually resolving the story on screen was too boring, so they cut it, and so Robin Hood really has no ending. A rooster just tells us in a sentence everything worked out, and hey! Let's get to the wedding! Pay no attention to the lack of story structure behind the curtain! Walt was upset by Sword in the Stone, and I think he would have had a negative reaction to Robin Hood. The fact that the characters and music are so charming blinds people to how poor the story is, meanwhile, the recycled animation demonstrates the shockingly low budget given to the animation team, but most people don't recognize that either. Robin Hood is pretty awful, folks.

Skippy the Rabbit pretends to be Robin Hood and grabs her hand and escapes into the garden.

MAID MARION
Oh! So this is Sherwood Forest.

SKIPPY THE RABBIT
Yeah, I guess so. So now what do we do?

MAID MARION
What does this scene have to do with the rest of the movie?

SKIPPY THE RABBIT
Beats the shit out of me.

With nostalgia goggles on, it's brilliant. Without them, not so much. I like it a lot, but critically I really feel obliged to rip it to shreds, like you just did.

My consensus:

31. ROBIN HOOD (1973) – 6.5
Robin Hood is pleasant, harmless, not to mention a whole lot of fun, but fails to hold up as a true classic through it's reliance on whimsy.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Walt was upset by Sword in the Stone, and I think he would have had a negative reaction to Robin Hood. The fact that the characters and music are so charming blinds people to how poor the story is, meanwhile, the recycled animation demonstrates the shockingly low budget given to the animation team, but most people don't recognize that either. Robin Hood is pretty awful, folks.
.

To be fair, like certain (ahem) other movies, RH was the last-minute cleanup of several other failed projects--
Their concept going in was to do a "Southern" Robin Hood, which explains what Pat Buttram, George Lindsey, Roger Miller and Andy Devine are doing in Merrie Olde England. (And many of the villagers may have been reincarnated as the bayou critters in The Rescuers.)
Then reworked a more traditional picture for Tommy Steele as Robin, but the voice turned out to be all wrong, and by the time they could recast and re-record, the production clock was ticking.

It wasn't the last time Disney said "Whatever it is, at least we finished it!", but there are even better examples of those.

[Pixelfox]

Originally Posted by zoodermin

I agree with you. I went to see Meet the Robinsons with very low expectations (after Chicken Little, what else could you've expect?) and was very satisfied with the results. It has a great story, endearing characters and heart. The animation is not up to Pixar standards but 'the future' was very cool.

I STILL have not seen Meet the Robinsons. I really need to fix that. Not in TOO much of a rush though, a few years ago when it was going to be playing on TV the ad completely spoiled the ending. o_o

[disneyfreak]

Originally Posted by Pixelfox

I STILL have not seen Meet the Robinsons. I really need to fix that. Not in TOO much of a rush though, a few years ago when it was going to be playing on TV the ad completely spoiled the ending. o_o

Disney seems to like to do that. Especially the 90s movies trailers, they used to give the whole story away haha

[Show spoiler]

Disney's The Little Mermaid Theatrical Trailer (1989) - YouTube

The Lion King (Trailer) - YouTube

Aladdin (1992) Trailer - YouTube

[JavaJulien]

Originally Posted by EricJ

- Meet the Robinsons: If you must see Chicken Little (and only for academic value), see Robinsons IMMEDIATELY afterwards; the two are historical sides of the coin--The change in tone, when John Lasseter took over the studio and reworked the script, can be seen from the beginning to the end of the movie, and speaks volumes about what we lost Eisner and David Stainton. "Wacky" gags in the first half become warm-hearted Pixar gags in the second half, the repellently sitcom-oddball family becomes a huggy sympathetic family, and it ends with a Walt quote about "Moving forward"...Hell yeah.

I agree. Meet the Robinson's came out during my senior year of high school, and I skeptically went into the theaters to see it (since Chicken Little was so laughably bad.) My little sister wanted to see it so I ended up going along with her. It was surprisingly really good. In fact, Meet the Robinson's was actually the first time I had actually gone to see a Disney movie in theaters since Atlantis the Lost Empire.

[PeterTHX]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

The fact that the characters and music are so charming blinds people to how poor the story is, meanwhile, the recycled animation demonstrates the shockingly low budget given to the animation team, but most people don't recognize that either. Robin Hood is pretty awful, folks.

Yes, for me Robin Hood is bottom-of-the-barrel Disney. I didn't like it in 1973 and don't like it now, nostalgia or not.

It's so Saturday morning cartoon-ish at times it just saddens me how low the animation unit at Disney got. Hanna-Barbera the same year released Charlotte's Web theatrically. To me the quality was nearly the same!

I actually liked Chicken Little and really enjoyed Oliver & Company so I don't get where a lot of the hate goes for those films.

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Pixelfox

I STILL have not seen Meet the Robinsons. I really need to fix that. Not in TOO much of a rush though, a few years ago when it was going to be playing on TV the ad completely spoiled the ending. o_o

Meet the Robinsons was a real surprise. My wife loves it to death. We haven't seen it in a while, maybe we'll give it a spin in the morning.

[Batman1980]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

Meet the Robinsons was a real surprise. My wife loves it to death. We haven't seen it in a while, maybe we'll give it a spin in the morning.

I like it as much as Bolt, although I may be slightly biased as I am adopted and I tend to like

[Show spoiler]time travel movies.

[zafisher94]

Originally Posted by PeterTHX

I actually liked Chicken Little and really enjoyed Oliver & Company so I don't get where a lot of the hate goes for those films.

I've never seen Robin Hood so I cant rate it. Chicken Little for me is the worst in the cannon, although it's still worth a watch every now and then. I happen to really like Oliver and Company though

[Ernest Rister]

Originally Posted by Darth Anakin

I like it as much as Bolt, although I may be slightly biased as I am adopted and I tend to like

[Show spoiler]time travel movies.

I liked Bolt as well - again, another surprise.

[Ernest Rister]

When the film was over, I was surprised to find that I enjoyed it. Was it masterpiece? No, but I found it entertaining, moreso than a few other Disney films.

I tend to agree -- my problem with Chicken Little was that it felt so obvious and forced. It felt like Disney trying to be Dreamworks. Fish-Out-Of-Water, though, for me, is the cutest, most appealing Disney creation in a long time. Aside from that, the movie is a lot like Dreamworks films from the time - predictable, a little mean-spirited, full of garbage puns and in-jokes, and really not amounting to a whole lot by the end. It's glib product filler. Like Home on the Range, it's forgettable. Not eye-gouging horrifc, just forgettable.

[zoodermin]

Originally Posted by Ernest Rister

I liked Bolt as well - again, another surprise.

As I said before, the 5 films released in the Lasseter era have been utterly satisfying. Wreck-It Ralph should be awesome too.

[The Mad Kiwi]

See, my relationship with Chicken Little is sort of a roller coaster. When it was first announced, I was excited because I adore The Emperor's New Groove - another film by the same directorial team. I figured, "Man, if they could churn out something THAT good under the crazy 11th hour pressure they were in, I can't wait to see what they do on a film they can take their time on." Then the trailers started coming in, and I got skeptical. Then the reviews started coming in, and I got dismayed. I went to see it in theaters, anyway, because of my loyalty to Walt Disney Feature Animation, but I wasn't expecting much. When the film was over, I was surprised to find that I enjoyed it. Was it masterpiece? No, but I found it entertaining, moreso than a few other Disney films. With repeated viewings, though, the cracks have begun to show to me. Now the film's gone from a decent 7/10 from that initial viewing to an okay 6/10.

Really, I find the worst of Walt Disney Animation Studios is still in the "okay" category. I've yet to see a film from them I'd call abysmal. The only WDAS one I'd give less than a 6 would be Dinosaur, which gains a 5 for me only because of the animation and score. The characters are forgettable, the voice work uninspired, and the screenplay is limp. With the 6/10 rated films, they usually have something going for them, whether it was good songs (The Aristocats, Oliver & Company) or fun characters (The Sword in the Stone, Chicken Little). With Dinosaur, though, it's just so...bland. And while WDAS at its worst can be messy, you can't ever call it bland...with the exception of Dinosaur.

Bolt, I think, is a nice, warm movie. It does sort have a safe, "Been there, done that" feeling, but it's likable and professionally done. The animation is lush and gorgeous, and the characters are fun. It's not the liveliest or most inspired Disney flick, but it's got a lot of heart and maintains my interest from beginning to end. Oh, and the TV show prologue is pretty ingenuous.

And for the record, I absolutely am in love with Meet the Robinsons. Yes, the middle act is pretty frenetic and choppy, but it's still hilarious, in my opinion. It's a mix between Alice in Wonderland's whimsy and Emperor's New Groove zanyness. Plus, that crazy center is bookended by some of the strongest first and third acts of any Disney film. The first third is charming and endearing; the last act (even with all of the coincidences of everything getting tied up at the science fair) is emotionally resonant and brilliant. I actually welled up at the end of it, and I couldn't think of the last time a WDAS film did that to me. It's funnier than Chicken Little, more touching than Bolt, and it's got more personality and creativity than either one. It's one of my favorite Disney movies, and in terms of the new millenium films, I'd only put it behind Tangled, The Emperor's New Groove, and Lilo & Stitch.

[Ernest Rister]

"Plus, that crazy center is bookended by some of the strongest first and third acts of any Disney film."

+1

[PuppyJonathan]

Originally Posted by The Mad Kiwi

And for the record, I absolutely am in love with Meet the Robinsons. Yes, the middle act is pretty frenetic and choppy, but it's still hilarious, in my opinion. It's a mix between Alice in Wonderland's whimsy and Emperor's New Groove zanyness. Plus, that crazy center is bookended by some of the strongest first and third acts of any Disney film. The first third is charming and endearing; the last act (even with all of the coincidences of everything getting tied up at the science fair) is emotionally resonant and brilliant. I actually welled up at the end of it, and I couldn't think of the last time a WDAS film did that to me. It's funnier than Chicken Little, more touching than Bolt, and it's got more personality and creativity than either one. It's one of my favorite Disney movies, and in terms of the new millenium films, I'd only put it behind Tangled, The Emperor's New Groove, and Lilo & Stitch.

Meet the robinsons is an underated classic, glad to see more people think that