Archive for category Childhood Revisited

CHILDHOOD REVISITED – THE RESCUERS DOWN UNDER

Oh no you didgeri-didn't!

Oh no you didgeri-didn't!

THE RESCUERS DOWN UNDER – (1990)

Director: Hendel Butoy, Mike Gabriel
Starring: Bob Newhart, Eva Gabor, George C. Scott, John Candy
Screenplay by: Jim Cox, Karey Kirkpatrick, Byron Simpson, Joe Ranft

The mice so nice that they’re doing it twice: Bernard and Miss Bianca return to the big screen after thirteen years out the rescuing game, this time down under in that wacky country/continent Australia. The Rescuers Down Under was Disney’s second movie in what is usually known as the Disney Renaissance era, beginning with The Little Mermaid and ending with Tarzan. It was also the only one to flop, only making 27 million in the box office. (I can’t seem to find a definitive budget on this film, but it seems to be 20 million according to Wikipedia, if you subtract the box office gross from the total revenue.)

Why? Well, at the time, Americans were obsessed with Macaulay Culkin and children seemed to delight in fighting off criminal scumbags; i.e., it was released along side Home Alone (future Childhood Revisited feature). Disney utilized a new digital animation process, called CAPS, and sent animators and researchers down to Australia to accurately portray the landscape. But it didn’t seem to matter all that much. While the 80s and 70s much enjoyed the success of little animal critters saving the day, the 90s and 00s preferred the appeal of “sexually” appealing princess alongside goofy sidekicks and handsome heroes. Which would certainly explain the success of Disney’s ‘Princess’ line; little preteen girls and their obsessions with shallow, mindless royal figures meeting prince charming and living happily ever after with absolutely no sense of self-preservation. Am I bitter? Damn right I am, because this movie was great!

NOSTALGIC LENS: Majestic. Of all the Disney animated films I’ve seen, this was the only one that I remember where the animation actually impressed me. Sure, I couldn’t actually put it into words at the time, but at some aesthetic level I knew that a lot of work was put into this movie. It’s obvious, even to an 8-year old, that drawing multiple angles and dynamics of a giant bird must have been hard as shit; too bad very few people actually take in the substance of the animated form.

DOES IT HOLD UP: By god, does it ever! But there are some awkward moments here and there, though.

I hope at some point this gets released on Blu-ray, because then one could really get to see the incredible animation at work. This movie is beautiful in ways I can’t even say. It’s so amazing, in fact, that I couldn’t help but think the animators were actually showing off. I’m not exactly joking here.

The early opening scene is clearly designed to be a jaw-dropping opus of animated glory, as Cody, our young protagonist, rescues the golden eagle Marahute and then goes on a four-minute thrill ride with her through the sky, across a river, through mountains and valleys, and just pretty much have all the fun a boy and his bird can have. (Sorry, Team Ico; Disney was doing this shit way before you thought it was cool.) But, as incredible as the sequence is, you really can’t help but think how unnecessary it is at the same time.

Part of the problem, I think, is we’re introduced way too early to this. In fact, a lot of stuff is awkwardly introduced way too fast. For example, Cody is immediately shown as some animal-savior, which is not exactly a mentality that kids can relate to. Also, while Penny’s ability to talk with animals was a perfect reflection of a lonely, friendless, orphan girl, Cody’s ability seems random, thrown in just to push the plot along. (They tried to emphasize his loneliness by mentioning his dead father, but considering he seems to be fine living at home with his mom, well-fed and well-taken care of, it’s really just a moot point).

And… uh, that boy can climb the shit out some wall-cliffs. What the hell?

Anyway, evil poacher Percival C. McLeach ends up capturing him to try and get him to divulge the location of Marahute. His capture gets relayed via computer-savvy mice to the Rescue Aid Society, where they’re like, “Oh, whatever, let’s just send Bernard and Miss Bianca after them, cause we got other stuff to do.” Oh, apparently going from janitor to USA representative requires the rescue of at least one (1) child. And Bernard has to interrupt his wedding proposal on Miss Bianca to fly all the way down under to save him.

It’s nice to hear John Candy’s voice again as Orville’s seagull brother Wilbur, who does a damn good job. All the really fun sequences involve him in some way or another. I’m very happy that I managed to find this clip, which shows a majority of the best scenes in the movie, and really awesome, detailed, close-up expressions of the talking mice, bird, and the kangaroo rat Aussie, Jake.

Man. That is beautiful. You really have to take it all in.

As far as villains go, McLeach (really? Mc-LEACH?) is probably the most underrated badass in villain history. Excellently voiced by George C. Scott, McLeach really displays a psychopathic disregard for everyone around him combined with a inflated view of himself. Subtle great moments include him singing a ditty as he prepares to toss Cody into a crocodile-filled river; talking to the radio about how smart he is; and my favorite, his bizarre need for proteins from eggs. The latter is particularly great since it comes from absolutely nowhere.

There’s an interesting subplot that includes Jake trying to muscle in on Miss Bianca, creating some jealous friction between Jake and Bernard. (Too bad this doesn’t go anywhere. We see scenes where Bernard shows his smarts, quick thinking, and balls, but the jealousy stuff is wrapped up too nicely. But hey, it’s Disney.) There’s also another nice but pointless set of scene where a trapped Cody befriend some other captive animals, and they have goofy asides to each other, and Frank the frilled-lizard acts straight-up retarded in an insane escape attempt/conflict between him and Joanna, Mcleach’s evil pet goanna lizard. It fails miserably, doesn’t incite much laughter, and worse of all, they’re completely forgotten about by the end of the film. Were they rescued too? The world may never know.

Also, one other thing I noticed about this movie: Bianca doesn’t do ANYTHING. She belittles Bernard a lot, much like the first movie, but at least in the first one she managed do actually do some work. Here, she’s completely worthless, leaving Jake and Bernard to do most of the difficult stuff as she’s strung along. She was a trick in the first movie, but here, she’s a trick squared.

All that aside, though, this movie was a lot of fun. While The Rescuers played perfectly into the seventies styles of cinematic aesthetics, The Rescuers Down Under worked perfectly towards nineties filmic sensibilities, with a slightly tighter screenplay and an animation style that works wonderfully for today.

IN A NUTSHELL: Like I mentioned in the previous entry, I don’t want people to think my nitpicks indicate any ill-will towards this movie. I loved this film a lot, and even early on, I started to tear up a little due to how stunning everything looked. Still, there are those slightly groan-inducing moments, but nothing mind-numbing. I truly wish that one day Disney would go back to exploring the world of the tiny animals.

June 29th: The Adventures of the American Rabbit
July 6th: The Great Mouse Detective

Share

, ,

6 Comments

CHILDHOOD REVISITED – THE RESCUERS

Don't tell me you aren't turned on, too. This is the internet, after all.

Don't tell me you aren't turned on, too. This is the internet, after all.

THE RESCUERS – (1977)

Director: John Lounsbery, Wolfgang Reitherman, Art Stevens
Starring: Bob Newhart, Eva Gabor, Geraldine Page
Screenplay by: Larry Clemmons, Ken Anderson, Frank Thomas, et. al

We do so love it when little critters try to do big things. Whether it’s mice saving children, rodents taking over the world, or chipmunks stopping evil scientists, there is an almost universal appeal of the underdog (undermouse?) success story, especially in animated, anthropomorphic form. I need not say that stories like these give us faith and hope for ourselves when, within our lives, we are faced with insurmountable odds. And in times like these, with a faltering economy and dangerous global landscape all around us, maybe faith in the little guy is exactly what we need.

The Rescuers was the first posthumous-Walt Disney animated film to be released, and was a huge success, even outselling Star Wars in some parts of Europe. At this time, many original Disney animators were growing old and soon to be moving on, while a young, bright-eyed Don Bluth arrived to learn a thing or two about that drawing thingamajig. Combined original and re-release returns total 48 million dollars at the box office. Surely with that much talent and critical acclaim, this movie still holds up. Right?

NOSTALGIC LENS: I remember the Rescue Aid Society song, and even began singing the song last week. I remember the ending involving a wacky fireworks display, and the flying via a seagull. Overall, I remember enjoying it, but never really loved the movie as much as my nostalgic lens would have me believe. In other words, I have no inclination to say, “Remember when animated movies used to be GOOD?” in reference to movies like this.

DOES IT HOLD UP: YES. And yet, no. Hmm, this requires some explanation.

Cinema from the late sixties and seventies is a unique breed; more geared toward strong, stylistic aesthetics and visual impact (Panned zooms! Muted colors!) over tightly coherent stories and intricate character development. Now, it may be asking a bit much to receive a strong story from an animated film and nine different writers, but compared to other Disney films, the story here seems to be more a means to an end—a beautifully animated film—over making a tight screenplay. The celluloid beat the written page.

That makes me sound harsh, but I truly mean that in the nicest way possible. As great as this movie gets (and at times this movie is GREAT), minor flaws here and there stand out so much, storywise. I feel like a coach trying to get one hundred percent talent out of potential player only giving ninety percent. You love what you’re getting, but you know you could have gotten much more.

First, the good: the animation is gorgeous. Lush, detailed backgrounds; excellent human models; smooth, tight animation and fluid movements—the great Disney animators really went all out with this one, and it shows. It’s like watching a famous painting by Da Vinci in motion. The voice work is pretty excellent, too: Bob Newhart’s stuttering and stammering as Bernard the janitor mouse and Eva Gabor’s sultry but determined line readings as Miss Bianca are complete opposites but complement each other so well. Even the side characters are excellent: Orville the seagull, Rufus the cat, Penny the orphan girl, Medusa the villain—clearly the actors and actresses really enjoyed their work.

And the music is, quite possibly, the best music from any animated film, ever. It hasn’t been pop-culturally destroyed like “A Whole New World” and it doesn’t pander itself better than it actually is like “Colors of the Wind”. Instead, it perfectly balances the lush animations and filmic moments, fitting together like the perfect puzzle. The flight sequence with Orville as “Tomorrow is Another Day” plays is hypnotically exquisite (Note this isn’t the actual clip from the movie, just an mp3 of the song played over the scene): The Song (sorry, the youtube poster disabled embedded videos).

The incredible intro scene is amazing as well, foregoing the smooth animations and concentrating on a montage of chalk-like pictures as “The Journey” plays:

Now, watch that opening scene again. Penny runs out and drops the bottle into the water. But…. Where did that bottle come from? She clearly is not holding it a few seconds earlier.

That’s where my nit-picks come from (and yes, I fully admit they are nit-picks). The movie has a number of these awkward moments. They are small, slight, and most likely wholly forgettable, but they are there. Early in the film, for example, Miss Bianca and Bernard try to take a shortcut through the zoo, but due to scary lions, end up taking the long way. Other than a tiny (har-har) character moment, the scene seems superfluous. Other “meh” moments include The Swamp Brigade, who pretty much appear from thin air and rush in to save the day, which is something that might as well have been played against “Yakety-Sax”. Evinrude, the dragonfly engine and clear precursor to Zipper in “”Rescue Rangers” has a random flight encounter with bats, which is not really tense… just there. Interesting and wonderful animation, but it seems shoehorned in to me. Again, I don’t mean this as a bad thing. Just merely to point it out.

I REALLY hate over-thinking the intricate plot details of the movie, which involves an evil pawn shop owner named Madame Medusa, who kidnaps an orphan girl from New York and sends her down to what I assume is Louisiana, to find a special jewel in a pirate cave (I mean, Florida is closer). Miss Bianca, bless her bleeding, Hungarian heart, opts to save her, and because she likes her men clumsy and superstitious, chooses Bernard to go with her. It’s interesting to see the subtle growth of Bernard, who seems to push past his bouts of paranoia and do some pretty brave things. Bianca, however, is what us black folk would call a “trick”: she would talk crazy shit in a bar and antagonize everyone, and then send her “boyfriend” to take care of it. And, sadly, women like that never change.

One more point: I do like the implied social elements of the missing children dilemma, in how some missing children from well-to-do families are plastered all over the news, while the missing poor children are essentially shrugged off. An upset Penny cries over not being adopted because she wasn’t pretty enough; Rufus tries to reassure her, but I can’t help but think that there’s an air of truth to this very sad statement the creators wanted to convey (also, the implication that Penny can understand the animals is a nice touch—a poignant reflection of her state by giving her the ability to only befriend animals). It’s only AFTER Penny returns with an expensive diamond and becomes newsworthy is she adopted. It’s suspect, and maybe not intentional; but with Bluth involved, you never know.

IN A NUTSHELL: Please don’t get the wrong idea. I LOVED watching this movie. It looked great, sounded great, and almost made me cry. The little things that I pointed will not take you out the movie at all. (If you said I pointed those things out to fill two-and-a-half pages, I probably wouldn’t argue!) But, again, with all the wonderful experiences this movie musters, you just wish, deep down inside, that they tightened the bolts on a beautifully made ship.

June 22nd: The Rescuers Down Under
June 29th: The Adventures of the American Rabbit

Share

, ,

5 Comments

CHILDHOOD REVISITED – BATMAN: MASK OF THE PHANTASM

This shot is too epic for witty words.

This shot is too epic for witty words.

BATMAN: MASK OF THE PHANTASM – (1993)

Director: Eric Radomski, Bruce W. Timm
Starring: Kevin Conroy, Dana Delany, Mark Hamill
Screenplay by: Alan Burnett

Tell all the modern Batman Begins and Dark Knight fans to go jump off a cliff, since us “real” fans knew how awesome Batman already was via “Batman: The Animated Series”. Christian Bale and (RIP) Heath Ledger are nothing compared to the Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill voices that showcased the airwaves for three seasons (1992-1995). And, truth be told, Conroy’s Batman voice is a hell of a lot better than that raspy, sandpaper noise that emerged from Bale’s mouth when he donned the black mask.

Of course, I’m exaggerating. I certainly enjoyed Batman Begins and The Dark Knight a whole heck of a lot. But the rich, deep, dark Batman everyone knows and loves now was fighting crime back in 1992 every afternoon. In retrospect, it certainly was an excellent show, but other than a few awards and a die-hard fan base, I don’t think anyone watched it. The series debuted Mask of the Phantasm to theaters in 1993, and pretty much broke even at the box office. Gee, I sure wonder how the show/movie would perform now…

NOSTALGIC LENS: I remember little about this movie. I vaguely remember the flashbacks and I do remember (SPOILERS) that the Joker was the one who managed to solve the identity of the Phantasm before Batman did. I was pretty young, so to be honest, I don’t remember much about the animated series other than being enamored by it, and Batman whipping some series ass. Also, I do remember hearing that the show was animated on black backgrounds to really bring out the dark aesthetic. The specifics, however, are gone from my memory.

DOES IT HOLD UP:  This movie is fantastic.

Now, granted, I fully understand why the movie failed at the box office. First, there was little to no marketing of the movie prior to its release. Secondly, the story engages in a lot of tropes and ideas that stem directly from the TV show. In other words, if you didn’t watch the series, you were a few steps behind. It’s not that the plot is too complicated; it’s more that the overall style doesn’t quite cater itself to the movie-going audience, especially those hard-bent on Tim Burton’s vision or delighted more in campier versions of the masked vigilante. To say nothing of those misguided souls that automatically peg animation as “kids fair”.

That final point is more significant than you may think, since the movie is rated PG.  A number of Netflix and IMDB reviews seem to be disappointed by this “kiddie” rating, expecting, perhaps, a PG-13. Well let’s just say in this day and age, it would have certainly received that rating—but the real wonder of the film is how it delves into such strength, drama, action, and danger without dropping curse words or ramping up the blood.

As a new masked vigilante starts killing mob bosses, Batman is wrongly implicated for their murders, which has the police on his tail. Meanwhile, former lover Andrea Beaumont returns to town, which causes Bruce Wayne to relive some painful memories of his past. It seems Wayne and Beaumont were lovers, which left Bruce stuck between giving in to the love of his life or the vow to his parents. (By the way, the exact nature of this vow—to fight for vengeance in terms of righteousness—is never quite explained. I can’t even say for sure it’s implied, either. So it’s bit tricky to expect audiences to know what exactly is troubling Wayne, unless, again, you’re keen on to the TV show.)

But even if you’re not aware of the details, the movie really drives in some serious emotions:

The story is intriguing enough that it works perfectly for the elements that the film tries to convey, even though it’s really just a prolonged episode of the TV show. But the conflicts are full blown (Batman’s escape from the police is a tour-de-force in animated action) and all the ideas we know now about the Batman oeuvre are present here. An early scene of pre-Batman-Wayne fighting criminals near a warehouse perfectly compliments a similar moment in Batman Begins. Regarding The Dark Knight’s theme of people going over the edge of sanity? Why, the Joker (Mark Hamill is on top of his GAME) here delights in the idea that Batman may have finally snapped, too!

Again, the story isn’t too complex, which involves some vague, past mob threats and a unique (if not too original) plot-twist. But for PG movie with a short running time (76 minutes), there’s a lot of subtle drama with dark edges and overtones, making this a great and satisfying way to kill an hour with absolutely no regrets. Also, the animation is gorgeous. Who ever said it doesn’t date well is severely mistaken.

IN A NUTSHELL: Excellent movie, despite a few minor flaws here and there (some specific voice readings are kinda awkward, and there seems to be a misstep, plot-wise or timing-wise, in a few early scenes). Otherwise, though, it works in so many ways, and the animation is quite good—Batman was doing hardcore art-deco before Bioshock made it COOL. Check out this dramatically powerful yet understated ending sequence:

I want a full, HD poster of the shot at 0:41.

June 15th: The Rescuers
June 22nd: The Rescuers Down Under

Share

, , , ,

1 Comment