Fantasia (1940)

Walt Disney practically invented the music video. Indeed, the success of Disney was from the very beginning built on creatively combining quality animation with sound. Steamboat Willie (1928), the first animated cartoon to include perfectly synchronized sound and music, made Mickey Mouse a household name and saved the Disney studios from ruin. Unsatisfied with mere success, Walt Disney pushed the envelope even farther by creating the Silly Symphonies, a long running series of cartoons that were as much clever musicals as they were great cartoons (the first of these was the fantastic Skeleton Dance from 1929). These too would bring Disney’s animation studio fame and widespread acclaim. Both the Mickey Mouse and Silly Symphony cartoons would also spawn knockoff attempts by rival studios....which is actually how the “looney toons” came into existence, as a rip off of a much better series of cartoons.

It isn’t clear to me whether he came to Disney first or wether Disney sought him out but in the late 1930s, after the monster success of Snow White, the conductor of the Philadelphia Orchestra, Leopold Stokowski, agreed to collaborate with Disney on a full length Sill Symphony style feature film set to classical music. Apparently the two met by chance at an LA restaurant and it turned out that Stokowski, like most of the learned elite of the time (believe it or not), was a huge fan of Walt Disney’s work. Stokowski was so excited by the prospect of doing a film with Disney that he even allegedly offered to provide the music for free. Thus began the work on what would become known as Fantasia.

The idea of creating a now iconic Silly Symphony short, starring Mickey Mouse as the sorcerer’s apprentice, was already in the works as an attempt to bolster Mickey’s popularity, which had been eclipsed by the popular and extremely funny Donald Duck shorts. But with Stokowski on board Disney was set to do something experimental and bold, transcending both Mickey Mouse and the Silly Symphonies. Disney even worked with RCA to create, from scratch, an early version of modern stereo sound, to be installed wherever the film played, called “Fantasound”. Fantasia promised to be more than just a string of short cartoons or a classical music concert. It was to be an experience like no other.

Disney had clearly embarked upon something extraordinarily ambitious and risky with Fantasia and for the most part the risks payed off, at least in terms of the quality of the film itself. Commercially, however, Fantasia was something of a fiasco given the limited audience that precluded the usual swarms of children and since the film was dependent upon a cumbersome sound system that could only support a limited release. Carved into eight shorts of varying lengths, Fantasia presents itself to the viewer just as it is, a symphony concert that has been bonded to the visual magic making of Mickey Mouse. In fact, Mickey Mouse literally shakes hands with Stokowski at one point. Stokowski himself, at moments interspersed between shorts, provides a brief explanation about the traditional symphony music about to be played and what visual accompaniment we ought to expect. For all of its newness it’s actually a very conventional framework.

Some of the shorts are astounding. The Sorcerer’s Apprentice is strikingly beautiful to watch and full of all the great humor and charm you’d expect from a great Mickey Mouse cartoon. Virtually everyone remembers it who has seen it. The Dance of the Hours, a ballet put on by large African animals, is still I think one of the funniest and most creative pantomime cartoons ever made. It just has to be seen to be believed. Who knew that an alligator juggling a hippo with his legs and tail or a gaggle of pirouetting ostriches could be so freaking awesome? The Night on Bald Mountain, a terrifying depiction of the devil torturing souls in hell, is just as impressive, until the dawn breaks to the sound of church bells and the devil and his minions are sent packing to the song Ave Maria. At that moment the short goes from impressive to astounding, the best thing in the movie. Indeed, it is amazing just how far Disney was willing to take that scene and, oddly, I am not sure that it could even be made properly in today’s politically correct climate: images of nude, flaming dancing girls being transformed into pigs and donkeys to satan’s delight? A Christian candle lit procession set to one of the most treasured songs ever made with Mary the Mother of God as as its subject matter? It leaves me with goose bumps.

Speaking of offensive. As good as these portions are, and they are unreal, the rest of the film ranges from okay to downright boring. There’s a fun short of dancing mushrooms and flowers, and the like, set to the lame ass music from the Nutcracker. There’s an ambitious yet extremely dated short about the origin of the cosmos and the rise and fall of the dinosaurs as well. But in a time when we’ve all seen Jurassic Park and the Land Before Time the dinosaurs in Fantasia are about as compelling and lifelike as those cheap plastic toys they manage to sell at every grocery and drug store in America. But worse than all this is that there is, at least in the original version of the film, a scene that actually really does enter into the offensive. You may have heard of the now long since deleted character of Sunflower who has been removed from the Pastoral Symphony.

The Pastoral Symphony is a rather drab and drawn out depiction of Greek mythological creatures set to Beethoven. It’s really, artistically, the weakest of the shorts in the whole film. The characters range from tacky little cherubs to tacky centaurs or tacky looking Gods. Seriously, they all look like they might be turned into porcelain and sold on QVC. It’s during this sequence that we see Sunflower, a little black centaur with characteristically racist, pickaninny features (crazy braids and everything) who is submissively catering to a beautiful white Centaur who towers over her. She is meant to be a comical character it seems but she just isn’t funny. Apparently the Disney corporation must have agreed because the character was discreetly removed in the 1969 re-release and has not appeared in subsequent versions. I think this represents the one legitimate case of racism in any Disney cartoon that I am aware of. I can easily apologize for the black crows from Dumbo and the very misunderstood Song of the South or even the light hearted song about Indians in Peter Pan, but it is impossible for me to come to the defense of this instance of racial stereotyping. It just is racist and wholly inappropriate.

That being said, Fantasia in large parts is every bit the masterpiece that movie critics claim (and boy do they love this movie), but in other large portions it is something of a bore. This makes it a great Disney movie even beyond considerations of its great historical importance in the history of film and sound in general, but it is far from being the greatest Disney movie ever made....which some have claimed. Boring, racist people no doubt.

I give it 3.8 enchanted broomsticks

Peter Pan (1953)

In the wake of the monumental success of Snow White, the studio's first feature length film, Walt had very quickly decided to make a movie based on J.M. Berrie’s constantly evolving play about Peter Pan, the magical boy who didn’t want to grow up. Unfortunately for Disney getting access to the rights to a produce a film proved difficult and the studio opted to make a movie based on Carlo Collodi’s novel, “the Adventures of Pinocchio” instead. When Disney finally acquired the rights to make a movie four years later, from a children’s hospital in London, to whom J.M Berrie had bequeathed the rights to his story in 1929, the studio was financially deeply troubled and its future thrown into uncertainty by World War II. Despite Walt Disney’s deep personal interest in the project, his film about Peter Pan wouldn’t be released until 1953.

In the meantime, however, the Disney storytellers had been hard at work attempting to find their own way to tell the oft told tale, which actually exists as many different versions since J.M. Barrie himself had changed various details and scenes in his play (and novel) over the years with each production. Similarly, the final Disney story had gone through a number of different versions before being finalized by Walt Disney himself. The result is a very well packaged if not slightly puerile story which probably stands as the version most of us know best.

Today Peter Pan is remembered as a classic and easily one of the most popular in the Disney film canon. For many years, until recently, the entire pool structure at the Disneyland Hotel in Anaheim was completely Peter Pan themed. Michael Jackson has even gone on the record saying that it was his favorite movie of all time, which actually explains quite a few things for me. My wife also claims that it is her favorite Disney movie of all time. The critics generally praised it as well. Me on the other hand, I just kind of like it, but that’s all.

As I’ve said, the story telling is nicely done and imaginative. If you don’t know, Peter Pan is a brash pubescent boy who dresses in green leotards, has the ability to fly, and resides in a magical place called Neverland where children go to never grow up. At first it seems like he only exists in the bedtimes stories told by Wendy to her younger brothers until one night, after their parents are away, Peter Pan appears to them in the flesh and whisks them off on an adventure meant to keep Wendy from having to grow up (and so she can tell her stories to Pan and his L.A. street gang of boys known as the “lost boys”). However conflict emerges as Pan’s fairy companion, Tinkerbell, is intensely envious of Wendy, who has gained the constant attention of Peter Pan and to complicate matters a band of pirates led by Pan’s arch nemesis, Captain Hook, is hatching a plan to knock-off the flying boy wonder once and for all. No scene is wasted and every whimsical little moment of it somehow pushes this story forward in satisfactory fashion.

The animation itself is also quite good though cartoonish when compared to earlier Disney classics. Don’t expect the kind of work found in Cinderella or Snow White, but you still have to love the details in the flying sequence over London. The music is fun but thin. Beyond the tight storytelling if this movie has strength its in the fun characters. Captain Hook is simply one of the greatest Disney villains of all time. He’s the perfect comedic combination of a 19th century dandy with a ruthless brigand who though hilarious still retains the air of being a real threat to Wendy and her brothers. Mr Smee, Hook’s dotingly doltish first mate, is equally fun. Peter Pan on the other hand is obnoxious. I can’t imagine a more unlikable hero. He’s mean spirited, selfish, and well....a little odd. Wendy on the other hand is just sort of dull. She’s almost just a prop for Peter Pan to fly around with in order to showcase more interesting people and places. Tinkerbell on the other hand, while poorly dressed, is really great as Pan’s would be pantomime love interest....would be, if she were only a little taller, I guess. Seriously though, she’s really great, if not a cause for scandal to your eyes.

My biggest beef with this movie though comes down to a controversial issue handled poorly within the film that bothers me intensely. You probably already know what I mean, yes, that’s right, I’m referring to the stereotypical and hurtful depiction of pirates. Pirates play a central role in Berries original play, along with Native Americans, English children and fairies, so I understand why they hand to be brought into the film but couldn’t they have been added with more care to their depiction, especially in light of how they have been so often misrepresented and maligned in popular media? Not all pirates wear canvas breeches, bandannas or even an eye patch. Many don’t even live on ships at all but rather do all of their pirating from a computer at home. There’s even an entire musical sequence that mocks the pirate life, “the life of a crook”! Since when did engaging in the mere re-appropriation of wealth entail being a crook? It’s ridiculous and wholly insensitive to an entire group of people. The Somalies are probably totally pissed.

Otherwise, this is a very fun if not slightly vapid and childish Disney classic with a wholly disagreeable protagonist. I give it 3.7 half-naked pixies out of five.

Aladdin (1992)

After the release of the Little Mermaid Disney animation came back to life after decades of mediocrity and people finally began to see the upcoming summer Disney release as a big deal. The second biggest deal of the big deals to come out in this period of renewal was Aladdin. I was certainly moved by the whole affair. I would even go on to choose Aladdin sheet music for my piano lessons and dress up as Aladdin for Halloween.

Aladdin, loosely based on the Arabian Nights fairy tale of the same name, tells the story of a young “street rat” (homeless kid) who is conned into aiding Jafar the evil, plotting advisor of the local Arab-ish (not Arab) Sultan who is looking for a way to take over the kingdom for himself. The job? Going into a magical cave to retrieve a magical lamp containing a wish granting, all powerful genie...but beware, only a “diamond in the rough” may enter. So Aladdin, being that thing, I guess, goes into the cave and meets the Genie of the lamp famously voiced by Robin “look at me” Williams who grants wishes aimed at helping Aladdin get the girl of his dreams who also happens to be the Sultan’s daughter.

Unfortunately for Aladdin Princess Jasmine isn’t impressed by power or prestige but, fortunately for Aladdin, she is apparently impressed by anything else and one of the more developed (and yet lame) Disney romances thus ensues, climaxing in a magic carpet ride that promises a “whole new world”. A song so overplayed on the radio that I now reflexively burst into song myself whenever I hear it. Such is the power of cultural conditioning.

Aladdin is/was extremely popular, especially for the “funny” antics of Robin Williams and it’s excellent broadway style soundtrack provided by Howard Ashman and Alan Menken. But it is also typically quite overrated. First off, Robin Williams is more frantic than funny and his “jokes”, which are really just a100 mph string of pop-cultural references, have not aged well. Second, I don’t buy the Saved by the Bell romance between Aladdin and Jasmine that was so popular at the time. In fact, I don’t even know why this movie has to have a romance in light of the fact that no one would want to marry a girl as vindictive and snooty as Jasmine if not for the fact that she dressed like a harem girl and was impossibly rich. Wait, isn’t that precisely her problem in the movie? That those are the only reasons men wanted to marry her? You’d think the solution would be to improve her character or you’d think that Aladdin himself would see something in her other than the fact that she’s hot but this doesn’t happen. Plus how can any movie with so much talking time for Gilbert Gottfried be that good? Listening to his voice is like nursing a hang over.

On the other hand the animation at the time was the best yet for the era and Disney got all experimental on us trying out what were extremely impressive computerized special effects at the time. By today’s standards they are primitive but at the time it was great. Also the musical sequences were extremely entertaining and inventive. The story itself? It’s engaging. The characters? Better than boring. But the action is always fun to watch and you have to love the way they ended up defeating Jafar and saving the kingdom. I know it’s anathema to say this, since this is supposed to one of its strong points, but I just wish the love story wasn’t so lame.

I give it 3.6 fez wearing monkeys

Lady and the Tramp (1955)

Almost all of the early Disney animated films were adaptations of fairytales or popular children’s literature. One odd exception is Lady and the Tramp, which is instead an original story conceived by  Disney legend Joe Grant who built the narrative up around the the observation that he and his wife stopped paying as much attention to their dog after their real baby was born. If this story would have been conceived of in today’s culture maybe the dog would have had a fair shot at familial supremacy but suffice it to say that, at the time, dog’s weren’t people....in fact, we can probably blame THIS movie, and all subsequent anthropomorphized dog movies for the fact that many are those among us who just can’t help but feel that their dogs ARE people. But let’s not worry about that right now.
 

Joe Grant played a major role in the creative development of some of Disney’s greatest movies, both old and less old.  He worked on Snow White, Pinocchio, Fantasia, and Dumbo early in his career, mainly as a story-boarder. Then he retired from Disney after WW2 to start his own business but eventually came back in 1989! What did he work on then? Beauty and the Beast, among other things. The guy lived until 2005 and even then he died while drawing in his studio. That’s dedication. I think.

Anyway, so this film is a story built around an amalgam of the insights of dog lover’s like Joe Grant and others hanging around the studio, like Walt Disney. The cute scene where John Dear gives his wife the puppy in a hat box for Christmas? Disney did the very same thing for his wife Lilian in real life. You get the idea. But the narrative isn’t just about a dog who feels saddened by her ontological position in relation to her owner’s newborn child but there is also a Tramp in there too and that aspect of the story was borrowed from an old story in Cosmo magazine about a mischievous yet charming stray dog who went about doing fun dog-like things. Disney bought the rights to the uncredited story and brought the idea to Grant as a way to incorporate a canine love interest for his dog story and, voila, Lady had her tramp. So, yes, this movie exists because two guys at Disney really, really liked their dogs. So what did all this misdirected affection get us as an audience? Something pretty charming. 

 

Lady is a groomed, upper middle class house dog learning to cope with altered familial dynamics after her owners, who had previously been strictly attentive to her, find themselves with better things to do (as I’ve said). Indeed she does come to terms with the new baby and, in fact, the family is not negligent of her after all. But at some point the owners have to go away on a trip, leaving Lady and the baby (yes, the BABY!) at home with cantankerous Aunt Sarah and her two racist Siamese cats, who happen to be singers and, like real cats, full of the devil. There is a grave misunderstanding, Lady is falsely accused and mistreated by Aunt Sarah and runs away where she finds more trouble being alone on the streets until she is finally helped by the charming though unpolished Tramp who takes her on his escapades. The rest of the story is essentially a strangely dramatic doggy romance that climaxes in an appropriately intense, though somewhat disjointed, moment of heroic redemption.

When this came out in 1955 it was at a time when the film critics, fickle and pompous hipsters that they all are, had turned on Disney for being too darned popular. Thus the critical consensus was that this movie was somehow of little artistic merit. Eons later, in the 21st century, it is generally universally acclaimed as a classic and the assertion is fitting. It’s way better than it should be for being the animated equivalent of that stupid “dogs playing poker” painting. You know the one. It’s right next to your portrait of a crying clown. You do have a portrait a crying clown, don’t you? Tell me I’m not the only one!

The animation itself is about as good as anything done before Disney’s death. The dogs move and act almost photo-realistically and yet emote human facial expressions brilliantly when engaged in inter-canine dialogue. The score is sweet and memorable; I sometimes hum “Bella Notte” when I’m drinking (I’d sing it if I spoke Italian).The story, though obviously ad hoc, is charming enough and the happy ending (you know there is one) well deserved. The characters are cute and even the doggy romance can’t be denied for being as touching and well developed as a doggy romance can be. Who doesn’t love the iconic scene where Lady and Tramp accidentally kiss while slurping the same noodle of spaghetti? Only a soulless monster.

It’s not Disney’s greatest movie but it is Disney’s second greatest movie about Dogs. I give it 3.6 bella nottes.