Halloween Special: The Halloween Tree (1993)

Surprise! We decided to do a Halloween special. Today, we have one of my favorite Halloween movies of all time, The Halloween Tree. This is a made-for-T.V. movie based on a novel by Ray Bradbury, who also narrates this film. This will be our first review that isn’t produced by Disney; The Halloween Tree is produced by Hanna-Barbera, owned by Turner, and is often shown on Cartoon Network, also owned by Turner.

Boxart Sourced via IMDB

Summary: This movie follows four kids on a strange Halloween night. They all get dressed in costume and meet up to go trick-or-treating, but when they go to find their friend, Pip, they instead find a note on his door informing them he went to the hospital due to an issue with his appendix. They leave together, but soon after see a ghostly Pip, running through a field. They follow him to the house of a Mr. Moundshroud, who has the eponymous Halloween Tree, which holds the souls of those who are dead in the form of pumpkins. They witness Pip steal his soul-pumpkin and flee into the night. The kids and Moundshroud chase after him, through the past. On this journey, the go through different ancient traditions of Halloween and learn about the history of Halloween. At the end, they find that Pip is dead and Moundshroud is trying to take him to the afterlife. The four kids give one year of the end of their life to keep Pip alive. When they return home, they find that Pip is alive and recovering from his surgery.

From an artistic standpoint, this movie has beautiful painted backgrounds, resembling a Norman Rockwell-esque view of 50’s suburbia. The animation, however, isn’t nearly as good. The first thing you’ll notice is that the objects in this movie completely stand out from the backgrounds. It’s a bit jarring and is a constant reminder that you are seeing these objects drawn of static backgrounds, instead of a fully living world. The actual art for the characters is, in simple terms, kinda bad. They’re very simplistic and while the idea of their design is decent, the actual execution isn’t that great. This is combined with some not-so-great animation and everything feels like if Recess was turned into a 90’s edutainment PC game, ala Freddi Fish or Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego? I don’t expect much from a made-for-T.V. animated film, but I know that I’ve seen better than this, even for T.V., from Hanna-Barbera.

I know that all sounds harsh, but I don’t like this movie because of it’s animation. I love it because of everything else. For example, this is a great Halloween film. Not only does it have a Halloween aesthetic down pat, but it brings you through an adventure discovering the history of our modern day Halloween and learning what other cultures, like Ancient Egyptians, Celts and Mexicans do for their Halloween-type holidays. It is a bit of edutainment, but I feel that it’s a subject that is interesting and, even as an adult, I find it immensely entertaining. To phrase it shortly, this movie sneaks some education into it’s entertainment, instead of trying to make something inherently educational entertaining.

All of this stuff I enjoyed I’ve known from previous viewings of this movie. Something new I noticed this time is how compelling this movie and it’s story can be. Admittedly, the story is a bit simple and the central message of the movie is basically given to the viewer, but there was something about it that was just effective for me. Every time the kids find Pip, each of them have a moment with him and call back to a time where he helped them out in their lives, trying to express how important he is to them. Admittedly, I’ve never had a friend take the blame because I started a fire in my house with fireworks hidden under my bed, but the sentiment still hit me.

The central theme for this movie is first hinted at with Moundshroud berating the children and asking them what the meaning of Halloween is. At the end of this film, it is resolved with one of the kids, Tom, answering that challenge by stating that we have to face death head on in order to master our feelings over it. I felt this was an important message and does explain the fun of not just Halloween, but horror movies, roller-coasters and anything that could be described as thrilling. Not to get too preachy, but many people are scared of their own mortality and, because of that, they don’t plan well for anything that could happen after they pass on. Considering that this is, ostensibly, a film for kids, I feel that this is a good way to convey that message at a younger age. It’s also good to realize that aspect in these “scary” or “thrilling” activities. In the end, it’s just good to be reminded that you’re still alive.

Overall, while this is a flawed film, I think it’s an excellent movie to watch for Halloween, especially for kids or people who might not be able to handle horror movies. Either way, it’s a good bit of lighter fare for a traditionally spooky holiday. A fun watch for the whole family. As for the holiday special, we’ll try to do more stuff life this. More one-offs or seasonal reviews. Anyway, keep tuned for next Monday, as we continue our Disney series.

-CJ

Happy Halloween everyone! Today as a bonus, we took a look into The Halloween Tree, made in 1993 for T.V. by Turner Network / Hanna-Barbera. I vaguely remember watching this as an after school special back in the 90’s, but it doesn’t seem like it hit the mark with anyone. I think the last time I remember this being on air, would’ve been about 1997 or 1998, and after that it seemed to fade into obscurity. I was pretty stoked to watch this again, and to see why this movie ended up flopping the way it did.

As always lets look at the animation. First and foremost, is that the backgrounds really set the place and time for our movie. They feel Norman Rockwell-esq, with a mix of pain and what looks to be chalk pastel. The sketchy detailing, colors and amount of detail really lend a hand in this movie. There’s a strong sense of shading and light sources, over the backgrounds, and even into the foregrounds, as well as lots of contrasting colors. I would happily sit through this without the overlaying animation just to look at the backgrounds. That being said, lets look at the main animation.

After looking at the opening backgrounds the it seems like the animation should be mid to high tier quality, but unfortunately that’s not the case. Our cast of characters are pretty bland overall. They’re incredibly simplified, and other than their costumes there’s not much that defines them. With the exception of the fat kid, everyone else looks like transfigures with overly large heads and vacant expressions. There’s also lack of smooth movement, and repeated clips of animation. This is fairly standard for made for T.V. animation, so I can’t really harp about it that much, but I do wish that some more time and budgeting had been put into the characters.

The main thing that bothers me are the overly simplified characters. Other than their costumes and small details, there’s not much defining them. They have copy and pasted faces and expressions, and I really wish we could’ve gotten more here. Take for example a show like something like Scooby Doo, where everything is fairly simplified and recycled. Even with the simplification, we get different facial, and body builds, that lend character to the specified cast. Here it feels more like an afterthought. The only two characters that do feel original, are Pip, and Mr. Moundshroud, and even then, there still feels like there could’ve been more here, especially since there’s only six main characters.

The two main things that could’ve been done to help this movie would be shape and weight to our characters, and extra detailing in the eyes. Lack of detailing in the eyes and the faces means we have more dramatized expressions, that could’ve been curbed. Simple highlights in the eyes could’ve helped immensely here, along with some more defining features. All I’m asking for is some extra lines in the face, or more detailed eyes, and eyebrows. There’s so much that can be said with a simple glance, but it just feels lacking overall. With weight and form, it would’ve helped us to stick a label and connect a bit more with the kids on screen. I’m not saying make one super buff, and one super nerdy, but some simple defining characteristics would be nice.

That being said, the music, narration and story are really all top notch. The music fits the story, and eras listed, and there’s no overly hokey or goofy Halloween music anywhere. The story defiantly feels like something Ray Bradbury wrote. I really can’t find anything to complain about here. Everything is well done, and other than the half rate animation, this film feels like it should have higher marks.

While I’ve done nothing but harp about this film, I do want to say it’s worth watching. The animation in this movie isn’t bad, but it’s not good either. The story is really what saves this film. It’s engaging, and there’s plenty to learn, so the movie itself is actually very good. There are some strong themes with life and death that are played out. I really did enjoy this movie overall, and I’d be happy to watch it again.

-AJ

Peter Pan (1953)

This week, we’ve got another Disney classic. Peter Pan continues the trend of Disney adapting successful British children’s books. We follow another story about a young girl being whisked off to an alternate world where things don’t make sense. Though the two stories and movies share a lot of similarities, they both bring something different to the table and mark their own place in the history of animation.

Original Poster Sourced via IMDB

Summary: Peter Pan is an adaptation of the play and book by Sir J. M. Barrie. We open up to Wendy Darling and her two brothers, John and Michael. The boys are play acting stories that Wendy has told them about Peter Pan, a fairy boy who never grows up. Their play ends up angering Mr. Darling, who decrees that Wendy will have to move into her own room and “grow up.” Later that night, Pan visits them and whisks them all away to Never Land. There they meet the Lost Boys, Peter’s gang of kids who never want to grow up. After some adventures rescuing the Indian princess, Tiger Lily, from Captain Hook and his gang of pirates, Wendy realizes that living in perpetual childlike bliss is not all it is cracked up to be and decides to leave. Before she can, Captain Hook kidnaps her and all the Lost Boys. Pan comes to the rescue, saves the day and Wendy and her brothers return home, realizing that growing up isn’t as scary as they would imagine.

This film is a little difficult for me to categorize. Again, this was not a film I watched much as a child, as I was a child of the 90’s Disney renaissance, but Peter Pan as a concept and a story was referenced to by the movie Hook which was popular in that time. As such, while I didn’t watch Peter Pan much as a child, the concepts and story were present and memorable.

While I do like this movie and I think it is good, Peter Pan isn’t really my favorite Disney movie, even from the time frame it was released. While there’s Disney movies that are definitely worse than it, many of which we’ve already review, I can’t help to find this a little weak. For the era of Disney it’s from (after the package films but before change in animation styles starting with 101 Dalmatians), I would say that this is the worst, but I’ll admit that I haven’t seen Lady and the Tramp in a long time, so this may all change next week. The art and animation is this film is great and the music is fantastic, nearly matching the quality of the music in Alice in Wonderland.

The story, and the plot, however, just isn’t really compelling for me. It’s a decent and fun story, but trying to recall it is a bit of a mess. There’s a lot of information that’s picked up in context and it left me with a bunch of questions. How and why are the pirates in Never Land? Why are they fighting the Lost Boys? What is Peter Pan? Are the Lost Boys other children he’s kidnapped? Most people, including children, probably won’t worry about those things, but I had trouble moving past that.

Where this movie excels is its theming and deeper level meaning, so much so that, like Alice in Wonderland, that seems to be the primary point of the story. Everyone pretty much knows that this story has to do with a fear of growing up, with Pan representing eternal childlike youth and Captain Hook being the ultimate adult. Everyone also knows that Captain Hook is played by the same actor that plays Mr. Darling, a holdover from the play. This plays into that theme, with Mr. Darling being the antagonist of the real world, telling Wendy that she’ll need to grow up, he is represented in the fantasy world as the ultimate embodiment of the banality of adulthood. Captain Hook reminds eternally afraid of Tick-Tock the Croc. The Crocodile is a representation of time and old age. Much like Tick-Tock cripples Hook and continues the pursue him forever, so too can old age reduce our own abilities. Hooks difficulties with Tick-Tock represent the eternal awareness of our own mortality and knowledge of the fact that we will never escape it.

Pan is also not the correct path. We find out throughout the film that Peter has little respect for other people, taking everything is a goofy manner, even when people’s lives are on the line. This leads to a lot of unresolved tension and causes him to be betrayed, damaging everyone around him. He plays the women in his life against each other and he keeps a contingent of children who wish they had a mother. The concept seems foreign to him, as he fails to properly describe the role of a mother partway through the film. He also seems to expect Wendy to just take up the role for his gaggle of child soldiers, without any thought to her wishes and desires. Even though he’s the hero of his movie, he’s not necessarily the person you’d want to emulate.

Near the end of the movie, Wendy is captured by Captain Hook. She believes Peter is dead and is given an offer she can’t refuse: to join Hook’s pirate crew. Instead of giving up on her youth and resigning herself to absolute adulthood, she holds out. I feel this is the central message to this movie. Growing older is scary and, ultimately, you have no choice regarding it. You can’t desperately hold on to your childhood, but you also can’t resign yourself to a life a banality. In the end, like most things, you have to keep yourself balances and go into adulthood willingly and at your own pace.

Overall, Peter Pan is a great movie. Though I mentioned some of my problems with it prior, this is just an excellent watch in comparison to a lot of other films. The central message of the movie is clearer than the actual story, but in a sense, that message is the primary goal of the film. All in all, a good watch; well worth your time. Join us next week for Lady and the Tramp.

-CJ

This week we took a look at one of my all time favorite Disney movies Peter Pan. I actually remember watching a play of Peter Pan as a kid, before I ever saw the movie, and I remember being pretty surprised when my aunt and uncle lent me a copy of the film. As a kid this was my number one favorite Disney movie, even over the Lion King. The story, songs, and characters always stuck with me. This weeks viewing made me re-think some of my views on how perfect this movie was. With that being said, lets take a look into Peter Pan.

Let’s look into the history of Peter Pan first. Back in the 1930’s Walt stated that he wanted to make Peter Pan as his second animated film, and debut it right after Snow White, however that couldn’t be done as Paramount held the rights to Peter Pan. Walt did eventually obtain the rights, when they won out against both Fleischer Studios, and Paramount for the rights in 1939. Work had already been started on Peter Pan, but after the bombing on Pearl Harbor in 1940, the film was shut down. Work started back up in 1947, once Disney had regained some of their finances back. Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, and Peter Pan we’re all produced about the same time, but Walt put Cinderella first and foremost as it felt like an updated Snow White.

I can’t begin to say how relieved I am that Peter Pan was shelved. I don’t think this film would’ve done well at all if it had been done in the 1930’s. The main reason I say this, is that Disney was still trying to find it’s way out of the uncanny valley as far as humanized features went. I really feel that a full done film with a large human cast would’ve been incredibly detrimental to this film. Not only that, but Disney was still figuring out how to realistically make characters integrate with their backgrounds. Peter Pan has a ton of flying scenes, and I doubt that animators could’ve pulled this off successfully when the only thing they had under their belt was Snow White. Along with the animation, I feel that this film really needs the music from the 1950’s. With how forgettable the music was in Snow White, I think it would’ve been damaging to a film like Peter Pan, where all the music is essential in setting the mood. That all being said, lets look at how similar both Alice in Wonderland, and Peter Pan look and feel.

Peter Pan and Alice in Wonderland feel like brother and sister films. The voice actors, animation and styles mimic each other in every way, shape, and form. We have some returning voice actors with the talents of Kathryn Beaumont as Wendy, Bill Thompson as Smee, and Heather Angel as Mrs. Darling. The main reason this movie feels so similar is that Wendy’s design really feels like it’s just been copy and pasted into a new film with some small changes. Kathryn Beaumont’s voice is incredibly recognizable, and her voice acting is pretty much the same. Along with the voice acting, the animation and background art share a lot of similarities too. While in the real world things are very detailed, but in the alternate world our colors are very bright, and very noticeable. Unlike Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan actually keeps it’s backgrounds semi realistic. There’s no funky patterns on leaves, or alternating color schemes when we change scenes. It leaves the film feeling a bit more whole in the grand scheme of things.

I will say, Peter Pan is the most action packed Disney film we’ve seen to date, and the key to this is the action and illusion of flight. To make it feel natural, Pans power of flight/levitation has to be integrated into everything he does. This includes traveling, fighting, dancing and sitting. The animators do a really good job here, if Pan is in the air and coming down to the ground, he slows down, and floats to the ground instead of just slamming down into the earth. There’s also areas where Peter will drop something like his dagger mid flight, and he has to flip the correct way to get to it in the right amount of time. There’s a lot of subtle areas like this that work to the films benefit. With this, it doesn’t feel unnatural for Pan or Wendy to fly all over Never Land.

Along with Pans ability to fly, the action scenes are very well done. It feels like this is the most ambitions film that Disney produced simply in the sword fighting scenes. There’s a lot of action in these scenes, and they're spread out all across the film. The only scene that feels like it’s lacking action is when the Lost Boys, along with John and Michael are ambushed by the Indians. There’s a lot happening here, but most of it is bits of trees, tomahawks, and hands flying in and out of frame that it’s just off setting. In a way it makes sense as this is supposed to be an ambush, but I do feel that it could've been spaced out a little better.

Another major detail I liked about Peter Pan is the shadow work. We’re introduced to vivid detailed shadows on the background starting with Pans own shadow. After Wendy sews his shadow back on, Pan flips it onto a wall, and from there we can see it mimicking his movements. We also see this as Hook climbs up the wall in the skull cavern when he goes after Pan. There’s a lot of nice work here, and it’s much more noticeable than other Disney films. I actually wish Alice in Wonderland had taken a page out of Peter Pan when it came to shadowing on the face during close ups. When Captain Hook is talking with Tinkerbell, he brings his face up close to her, in these shots, we can see shadowing on the lines of his face, and highlights and shadows on his lips. This really brings in a great sense of how old and wrinkled Captain Hook is, and it also works in the way that Tinkerbell is acting as a light source, and throwing those shadows back at Captain Hook.

As much as I hate to say it, looking back at this movie, the plot doesn’t work out to well. There’s so much happening, and unlike Alice in Wonderland where the movie was just one long journey. There’s a whole major underlying plot with the kidnapping of Princess Tiger Lily. The plan to kidnap her is briefly mentioned at the start of the film, but it’s interrupted when Captain Hook spots Pan and the Darling Children coming into Never Land. With all the action that happens after, it’s easy to forget the plot, and just go with the flow of things. We’re dealing with Pan and the Mermaids when we’re interrupted yet again when Hook and Smee cross with a captive Tiger Lily in their boat. The pacing around this area faces some major issues. IT seems like Wendy and her brother just got to Never Land and we’re already just leaving them behind. I wish there had been some more development between Wendy and Pan, because it more or less just feels like he forgot all about her.

After Tiger Lilly is rescued, we go back to focusing on Captain Hook and the crew. I do think it’s necessary for Hook to have some screen time to explain his next plan, but I think this could’ve been cut down just a bit, so that we could have more time to focus on the relationships with our protagonists. As it stands at this point, there’s not much of a relationship built with any of them. I feel like I know more about Captain Hook and his crew than I do the Lost Boys. I would say the main focus of growth in this film is on Tinkerbell, and she’s missing for most of the movie.

Overall the plot and character development seem as if they got the short end of the stick here. I think this is mostly due to Disney having multiple adaptations worked out for this film. There were original talks that Peter Pan was going to kidnap the Children, and there was even a suggestion of Nana the dog accompanying the Darling Children, and the entire film would’ve been through her eyes. There seems to have been a plague of issues going on with development, and I think that in the end that’s what harmed the movie the most.

I think that over the years my nostalgia glasses have blinded me to most of the errors with this movie. Reviewing it now, and really critically analyzing it I do see that there could be some definite improvements with this film. That being said, even with it’s flaws this is still one of my favorite Disney movies of all time. The music animation, and action are all really top notch, and even with the character flaws, I think Pans cheeky and charismatic nature, do help to draw connections here.

-AJ

Alice in Wonderland (1951)

This week, we’ve got Alice in Wonderland. It’s hard to say anything that hasn’t already been said. This is one of Disney’s best films and, for a long time, it was a bit of a forgotten classic. AJ will probably mention it, but this movie wasn’t released in the U.S. in it’s full form for twenty years. Luckily, it was rediscovered and we have the pleasure of seeing it now.

Original Poster Sourced via IMDB

Summary: This is an adaptation of Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll. The story follows our titular character, Alice, as she wanders through Wonderland, trying to find the white rabbit and return home. In her journey, she meets a lot of kooky characters and deals with a bunch of silly situation. At the end, she ends up at the court of the Queen of Hearts. Alice accidentally makes fun of the Queen and is taken to trial where she is sentenced to death. She flees the court and tries to run home, only to discover that she’s been sleeping the whole time. She wakes up, glad to be out of the strange world of Wonderland and back in the sensible real world.

From a technical standpoint, this movie has got everything on point. This really feels like the first time where Disney got realistic human animation absolutely correct. Cinderella was pretty good, but there were some scenes and shots where she crossed the border of the Uncanny Valley. Alice and her sister, on the other hand, have great human features and they don’t ever really get to the point where her appearance or animation looks inhuman. All the cartoon-ish inhabitants of Wonderland are done well as well, with interesting and memorable designs.

Another place where this movie excels is its music. This movie is chocked full of music and it is all great. Generally, they are adaptations of poems from the book. One of the most memorable is “The Walrus and the Carpenter,” which is basically a really good short that was placed in the middle of this movie. Another favorite of mine is “All in the Golden Afternoon,” but almost any of the songs you hear in this movie are well worth the time they take.

From a thematic standpoint, I feel that some of the subtleties of the plot are lost in both the adaptation from the original book, as well as the separation from the time the book was written. Basically, it seems, every interaction that Alice has is a parody of sorts of normal social interaction. The subtlety is with the society it’s parodying, as it seems to be making a point about Victorian British society. As such, it’s hard to understand some things, but I feel that most of the film is still relatable.

At the beginning of the film, Alice basically says that she wants to go to a world where “Nothing would be what it is because everything would be what it isn’t. And contrary-wise; what it is it wouldn’t be, and what it wouldn’t be, it would.” Its implied that Wonderland is such a world. When she falls in to Wonderland, she seeming falls through the middle of the earth and flips upside down; literally becoming topsy-turvy. From here on, she keeps running into situations which are supposed to be the opposite of how people treat each other; the satire is that the relate to ways people actual treat each other, meaning the real world is the opposite of how it should be.

One of the first things she runs into is the Caucus Race, a parody of the political world with all the candidates running in circles trying to get dry, while the Dodo remains dry standing above them. All the while, he tells them to keep running in the Caucus Race. Likewise, the flowers in the garden seem to be a comment on social interaction, with all the flowers shunning Alice because of physical features she lacks, not realizing she’s something different than them. Soon after, she runs into the Caterpillar, a comment on education, whose pontificating and philosophizing leaves her with many more questions than she starts with. There’s the teaparty, a comment on etiquette and the crazy rules of polite society. The Mad Hatter and the March Hare have an everlasting teaparty to celebrate the Unbirthday, which seems to make a comment that people just make up reasons to have celebrations so they can have parties. 

This all comes to a head when Alice comes to the Queen’s court, where Alice has to deal with crazy social rules, a kangaroo court, and perhaps the biggest non-sequitur; everyone listens to a “fat, pompous, bad tempered old tyrant” and kill others at her request. Obviously, this seems to be a scathing criticism of the British monarchy. In modern times, the monarchy seems to be a joke, but when the book was originally written, the queen had a lot more influence over her nation.

All in all, this was a good movie. Almost everything in this movie is just fantastic. The only problem I could name is that the end seems to fall apart, like they didn’t know how to finish the film. Overall, though, the movie comes together and it really is a joy to watch. Join us next week for Peter Pan, another movie based off a British work of fiction.

-CJ

This week we took a look into Alice in Wonderland (1951). I would certainly say this is one of the most memorable films out of the core full length Disney features, and I’d also say this would be Disney’s first full musical. Alice in Wonderland is a really well done film, but upon it’s initial release it turned out to be one of Disney’s disasters.

Walt had wanted to make Alice in Wonderland and had planned to do so starting in the 1930’s, but due to cuts, and the eventual war it was scrapped. Alice had originally been planed out as full live action, then half action half animation, until it was picked up again in the 1940’s, where it was decided that it would be a fully animated movie. Alice in Wonderland actually had a very bad start when it first hit theaters. It was premiered in London and New York City, where it received a lukewarm reception. Due to this, Walt refused to re-release the film theatrically. It did premier on ABC television in 1954, but the entire movie was edited down to less than one hour. The movie itself is 75 minutes long, so chances are there were 20 to 40 minutes edited out of the entire film.

Alice did go on to gain some popularity in the 1970’s. There were several sold out showings in college campuses that led to the movie getting a new theatrical release in 1974. The film was marketed more as a “psychedelic film” and used Jefferson Airplanes “White Rabbit” as a marketing tool in their adds. This is where Alice actually gained the majority of its attention. The film did better with this release, and actually gained a re-release in London.

Alice in Wonderland is one of the best films animation wise that we’ve reviewed. I know I say that on all Disney films, but this one holds especially true. The level of detail, and style applied to this movie is incredibly well done. There’s only a few areas where the styling of the 1940’s shorts hold over, but other than that, it feels like a fully classic Disney film.

With that said, let’s look at the finer points of what makes this movie so interesting starting with Alice. Alice is our main point of focus in this movie, and with that all the detail is applied to her. She’s incredibly emotional, with how quickly her facial expressions change and move. This is easily one of the main reasons it’s easy to get in touch with our main character. When looking back at Cinderella expressions were a bit washed out, and at times, seemed static. However, Alice shows us a wide range of emotion, from concern, to sadness, to resolve all within a few minutes of us watching her on screen.

There’s a lot of this shown specifically in her eyes. Alice has darker eyebrows than Cinderella, and therefore it’s easy to see if she’s upset, or surprised, even if she’s far out of the frame. There’s more detail in the eyes as well, they’re bigger, and more expressive this way, and there’s also line work above the eye. This helps to keep the shape of the eye on screen, so we can draw that emotional line, even with her eyes closed.

Backgrounds and foregrounds are well done in this film, and there’s a great subtlety of how they change over time as well. When Alice first starts off her journey, everything is very realistic. The blades of grass all have fine details in them, and the layering of the back grounds is done in such a way, that it feels to obvious that we’re in a rich England countryside. However, as we progress into wonderland, things start changing. Colors become more muted, or more intense. We start getting whimsical details on leaves, and other stand out objects. It’s not until Alice shrinks and is among the flowers and the caterpillar that things really take a turn. Blade of grass now have intricate or simple whirls, and zig-zaged patterns on them. The colors go from greens and blues to tans, grays, and weird purples. It seems like it should be an over obvious change, but the way it’s done is very subtlety.

Action and movement is another real key point to this film. Even when our characters may not have a big grin slapped on their face, their movements can still give us an idea of how their feeling. Lets take for example, Alice in the White Rabbits home. She starts growing after taking a bite of cookie, and the viewer gets to see just how uncomfortable this must be. Her head is jammed into the roof of the house, her arms are stuck out of the windows, and one leg is out the front door. She tries to lift part of the house up so she can have more room to move, but finds it impossible. Even though we can’t see Alice, we can find that she’s trying to find other ideas, when she goes to scratch her head, but instead scratches the top of the straw roof. It’s a great way to lend some character to the situation even though we can’t see her face.

There’s an absolute ton of music here, when compared to Cinderella. Cinderella had three or four songs in it, but with Alice we’re treated to six or seven songs. The songs themselves are one of the more memorable parts of this film, with “Painting the Roses Red,” “The Walrus and The Carpenter” and “Very Good Advice,” I do wonder if Disney had written some of these songs for a live action feature, since we really don’t see this many musical pieces until we hit The Jungle Book in 1967.

I really have nothing, but praise for this film. I really feel that Disney found their calling with their animation here. It fixes brushing the lines of the uncanny valley with adding more cartoony detail, instead of straight realism. The voice acting is very well done, and there’s really nothing to complain about here.

The one small complain I do have, is that there’s a jarring sequence when Alice is in the caterpillars garden, and takes a bite out of one of the mushrooms, and grows into some trees. We’re given a re-looped sequence for a few seconds, that jars the viewer out of this kind of complacent mental state. However this is fixed in it’s own way with the backgrounds changing to a more normalized state, before sinking back into the more chaotic and abstract.

It’s quite sad that this film received as much initial dislike as it did. It really is a stunning piece of work, and even though it doesn’t match the classic story, it’s still very well done. It’s easy to follow, it’s fun, bright and cheery, and there’s a lot going for it. Everything form the music to the animation is spot on here, and it really deserves more praise. Alice's voice actor and model will return next week with our next review of Disney’s Peter Pan.

-AJ

Bonus: Walt did make a Micky Mouse short called Thru the Mirror in 1936. I do wonder if this short was a prototype to see if an Alice in Wonderland film would do well. If you’d like to view it, you can find it here:

Cinderella (1950)

Finally, a return to form. I’m so excited to get back to the classics. This week, we had the pleasure to watch Cinderella. And I feel that this is a turning point for Disney. Up until this point, most of Disney’s works are shorts. Considering the last near decade Disney, it seems that Disney had firmly planted their flag in the ground of shorts and anthology films. With Cinderella, it becomes clear that they will also completely dominate the medium of the animated feature for a long time to come.

Original Poster sourced via IMDB

Summary: In case you somehow don’t know of the story of Cinderella, the story starts with our titular heroine who is forced to be a scullery maid for her abusive stepmother and stepsisters. A local prince holds a ball to find a wife. Cinderella wants to go, but is forbidden by her stepmother unless she fulfills some ridiculous conditions (finish an ever growing pile of work and make her own outfit.) Despite the hardship, she pulls through, only for her to be attacked and forbidden from attending anyway. With the help of her fairy godmother, she is able to attend. After enamoring the prince, she realizes that her magic will run out and flees the ball, only leaving a glass slipper. The prince searches the land for the woman which fits the slipper and, despite her step family doing their best to stop it, she is found, marries the prince and lives happily ever after.

Like some of the previous films, I didn’t hold this movie in high regard before this last viewing, primarily due to the amount of time since the last time I saw it. Like those previous movies, I was pleasantly surprised. This is a fun, whimsical experience. This movie was also a big breath of fresh air considering the preceding onslaught of anthology films. Even though there were some gems in the shorts and even though there was nothing truly awful, it’s so nice to get back to a form that you would expect. Even still, it seems that the period of shorts was something Disney needed to go through, as I’ll discuss in a bit.

In a lot of ways, Cinderella feels like a spiritual successor to Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. It returns to the traditional fairy tale setting; it focuses on “disgraced” female protagonist; there’s a clear, strong antagonist who happens to be the heroine’s stepmother. It isn’t just the thematic connection between the two; the animation also returns to the “realistic” human look. Cinderella, unlike Snow White, is able to animate realistic people while not appearing washed out and inhuman. I believe it comes down to the detail and color in the faces; whereas Snow White was pretty fuzzy, Cinderella better defined facial features.

Sourced via IMDB

Cinderella is also interesting in the way it handles other humanoid characters. Everyone seems to be on a sliding scale between a realistic human and a cartoon person. One the far side of realistic, we get Cinderella and the Prince and on the other side, we get the cartoony Drizella and Anastasia, who’s appearance seems to be a callback to the cartoony humans of some of the better shorts from the “package films.” In particular, they call back to “The Legend of Johnny Appleseed,” “Pecos Bill,” and “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.” Through the use of this dichotomy of humanoid depictions, the animators are able to convey characteristics through more than just speech or action. Drizella and Anastasia’s awkward nature is conveyed through through their goofy, cartoony appearance, whereas Cinderella’s grace and beauty is conveyed through her realistic depiction. What’s masterful is how the two styles don’t clash, primarily due to the other human characters depicting subtle transitions between these two extremes.

From a thematic standpoint, Cinderella has a couple of interesting things going on. To cover some of the lighter things, we can start with what Cinderella borrows from Snow White. Like Snow White, Cinderella makes a connection between the moral main character and their connection with nature. While not as explicit as Snow White, who’s fake death summons bolts of lighting to smite her enemies, Cinderella does have the same amount of animal helpers. Her animal helpers, in particular the rats, play a much more prominent role in the film, forming a sort of B-Story where they have to constantly outsmart this film’s “proto-Chesire Cat,” Lucifer, in their many missions to assist Cinderella. I feel it’s a great addition to this adaptation, lightening up what is, admittedly, a pretty dark story. It also adds a lot of drama and tension to the final scene, which would otherwise be a slightly boring and quickly resolved misunderstanding, where Cinderella would just show up and prove she’s the girl. As it stands, we now have a fun action scene to show her animal friends working to free her from confinement. Cinderella’s connection with nature reaches it’s strongest when her fairy godmother shows up to get her to the ball. She turns all these elements of nature into a temporary entourage, seemingly just because she’s a good person who has had bad things happen to her and nature wants to settle the score.

Sourced via IMDB

There also seems to be a theme of virtue being tied to hard work. Obviously, Cinderella is our virtuous example and she works hard, but this is also shown by the juxtaposition of her to her stepsisters. They don’t do anything, they always call for their mother’s help when anything happens and, when they’re getting ready to go to the ball, they demand that they get new clothes because their old clothes and accessories won’t due. On the opposite side, Cinderella plans on making her own dress after working hard. And even though the animals do it for her, they use the same discarded clothing to turn her dress into something that is more beautiful than either of the stepsisters can pull off. Snow White explores this theme a little on it’s own, with her cleaning the dwarf house on her own just because she notices it hasn’t been cleaned, but it isn’t as central to the movie is it is for Cinderella. Which leads to our biggest thematic element.

Cinderella and Snow White are tied in many ways, but their biggest connection is the central message of each film, which is “What is the ideal woman?” The central characters of both of these films are examples of what is valued in a woman for a wife. And, by living into these examples, our characters are shown to be virtuous, good and desirable by royalty. What’s interesting about juxtaposing these two is that we can see what is valued in the 30’s, when Snow White was made, versus the 50’s, when Cinderella was made. For Snow White, her primary virtues are shown to be that she’s innocent, fair and has the ability to raise a family, as shown by her taking care of the dwarfs and making sure they live cleanly and that they’re taking care of. She does fulfill domestic duties, but that isn’t shown as a particular hardship. On the flip side, Cinderella is shown to exemplify the dualistic nature of a woman, the domestic and the noble. She works hard to take care of the house and fulfill her domestic duties. The story specifically points out that this work is hard. Whereas things get done for Snow White because she is virtuous, Cinderella is shown to be virtuous because she makes things get done; a subtle distinction. Besides being a hard worker, though, she is also shown to have a side that is, in some way, regal or noble. As soon as she is freed from her chores, she is immediately able to get herself ready for a ball. When she shows up, she is able to dance and enamor the Prince with no no effort or previous experience. If she were just the domestic without the noble, she would be some unknown scullery maid, cleaning some house. If she were just the noble without the domestic, she would be Anastasia or Drizella. By successfully being in both realms, she is the ideal woman.

While I knew that I would like this movie, just because it wasn’t another anthology film, I didn’t expect to like it as much as I did. The animation was refreshing and shows a clear life of development from old Disney to the new age of Disney that comes after this movie. Thematically, the movie is interesting, exploring a woman’s role in society. The movie is able to provide tension, even for a story I already know. Overall, I feel that it was a good movie and well worth the watch. Join us next week for Alice in Wonderland.

-CJ

Sourced via IMDB

Cinderella wasn’t my favorite movie growing up, but I would watch it often enough when over at my grandmothers house growing up. It was a pretty regular occurrence that we’d watch a Disney movie then read the original story it was based on and discuss similarities and differences between the two. That being said, it’s been about eighteen or so years since I last laid eyes on this movie.

Overall, Cinderella feels like a better done Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. We see a return of the humanized faces, but this time it’s incredibly limited. We only see the humanized faces on Cinderella and the Prince, and this works extremely well. We’re not overloaded by rotoscoping this time, and there’s a nice mash up of simplistic and detailed cartooned characters. One thing that I was really thrilled about is that, even though we had humanized faces again, there’s more detail in them. The faces have realistic proportions, the eyes are outlined and brightly colored and, there’s little lines in the nose to show if it’s being scrunched up. All together there’s a really nice feel to the quality of the animation, and unlike Snow White, there’s a good wall between the animation and the uncanny valley.

Sourced via IMDB

Lighting and shadowing have been brought back in a huge way here. I would assume this would mainly be due to Disney having a proper staff and budget for a film this time. This is one thing I’ve really missed from films like Bambi and Pinocchio, so I’m really glad that we’re seeing it again. Everything gets a bit of high light and low light treatment, and this causes the characters to fit in much better with their environments overall, something that’s been missed from almost all of the bundle films.

That being said the one thing that does bug me about Cinderella are the out-of-place styles. Styles seem to be all out of place in this film. Hair Styles and dresses feel like they’re out of the 1940’s, while the outlaying buildings and interiors look like old estate homes and castles out of the 1800’s. Disney manages to make everything fit in it’s own way, and it’s not to distracting if you aren’t actively looking for it. However, once it is noticed it can make for a strange feeling for the overall movie. It feels like these characters shouldn’t be in this time frame, and I wish they’d done some more work on fitting everything in one specific time.

Form and movement is fantastically done in film, and it’s really the first movie where I’ve felt like Disney hit the nail right on the head. Form and movement are the two main ingredients to creating the illusion of life. That’s not to say that prior Disney films haven’t used these factors well, but Cinderella is the first film to really make me step back and notice it in detail.

Sourced via IMDB

Let’s take Cinderella and The Prince for example. As stated earlier, Cinderella and the Prince are the only two with humanized faces. They are also the most graceful of the entire cast of characters we’re given. Their movement is the most human of all the characters, and I believe this is one of the main reasons it’s easy to relate to them. They look like us, they move like us, they even have little bits of additional body language in them, that other characters lack. Along with these traits, the voices are also closer to our own. Instead of the stepsisters whiny and nasally voices, Cinderella’s is smooth and soothing. The princes is soft, yet has an air of authority.

Stepping back from Cinderella and the Prince, let’s look at the supporting characters and the step-sisters, Drizella and Anastasia. Almost all of the background support characters have design hold overs from shorts such as “The Legend of Johnny Apple Seed” and “The Legend of Sleepy Hollow.” They’re faces and bodies are super exaggerated, as are their movements. They’re close to walking slapstick characters, but that works for this movie. If everyone had looked like Cinderella and The Prince then this film would be one gigantic muddled mess of rotoscoping, and it would just feel like watching an hour of uncanny valley footage. Having cartoonish characters in a world with more realistic ones makes for a much better overall viewing experience, and it injects the film with some great subtle comedy.

Sourced via IMDB

In a league of of her own comes the evil stepmother, Lady Tremain. I’d forgotten just how intimidating and how ruthless Lady Tremain is. Her design borders on realism, but the lines in her face, and bright green eyes keep her more centered cartoon wise. That being said, one of the reasons she’s so frighting is her form and posture. Every time we see her on screen, she cuts a tall imposing figure. She’s always stiff, her head is tilted back so she can look down at Cinderella and the viewer. Her voice is sharp, and matches her character in every way possible. But even with all of that behind her, she moves with mechanical grace. Everyone of her movements is sharp, clean cut, and precise, and it’s absolutely amazing just how much you can dislike her from just watching her movements. Her voice actress Eleanor Audley (who would go on to play and model for Malificent in Sleeping Beauty) was a perfect fit for this role and she adds another incredible layer into making us really hate and despise Lady Tremain.

Unlike prior films, Cinderella is one of the first films where we hit some memorable songs, such as “A Dream Is a Wish Your Heart Makes,” and “Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo!” The songs do feel a bit lacking for a feature length Disney film, but I really don’t mind that. The movie has a well done score to accompany it, and I feel that this is all the movie really needs.

Pacing is another field where Cinderella hits it’s mark. There’s some fluff with the animal side-kicks around the start of the film, but at least it’s enjoyable enough to watch. There’s plenty of time to develop a bond with Cinderella and to really develop a dislike for the rest of her family. We’re even given some time to bond with The King and The Grand Duke. The little bits of interaction really help flesh this movie out and make it more engaging to watch. Everything else is well placed and balanced as far as events in the movie go. The waltz at the ball doesn’t feel dragged out and the chase from the castle brings back some elements of the headless horseman chase from Sleepy Hollow. Personally, I feel that the end build up of this film is actually one of the better conclusions in any Disney film I’ve seen up to this point.

Sourced via IMDB

Lady Tremain finally realizes that Cinderella was the one dancing with the prince the night before, and does her best to sabotage any attempts for Cinderella to fit the glass slipper. There’s some great footage of Lady Tremain locking Cinderella away, we’re given a glimpse of Cinderella doing her hair in the mirror and from behind her we can see Lady Tremain come up the stairs behind her. We see her put a key in Cinderellas lock and as Cinderella realizes what’s happening she turns just in time to see the door close behind her. There’s something about that specific scene that catches my attention. Maybe it’s the look of shock and horror on Cinderellas face or maybe it’s just the way the scene is set and shot, but it really does stick with me.

The build up from here is great, the mice have to get the key from Lady Tremain and free Cinderella before The Grand Duke can leave with the glass slipper. Once the mice get the key, they’re faced with having to haul it up several flights of stairs, and once they make it, they’re then harassed by Lucifer the cat. Things look hopeless until Cinderellas dog Bruno comes to the rescue and even that takes it’s sweet time, which helps the tension all the more. Cinderella is finally freed and makes her way to try on the slipper, when she’s dealt one last blow by Lady Tremain who trips the man holding the slipper causing it to break. There’s a short moment of hopelessness until Cinderella pulls out the second slipper from behind her back.

Sourced via IMDB

From here we’re graced with a look of horror from Lady Tremain to see that all of her plotting and scheming was for nothing. While the shot only lasts for a few seconds it’s enough to really get in a sense of triumph, and to say “NOT TODAY YOU OLD HAG!” It really just makes you want to cheer at the end of the film and it’s a great closing segment.

Overall, this movie is superb. It’s a huge leap from the bundled films we’ve been subjected to, and it’s nice to see some classic Disney I know. I really find it hard to find anything wrong with this film. It does skim the uncanny valley for a few seconds on some close ups of Cinderella and The Prince, but other than that, everything is very solid. I really think Disney hit it out of the ballpark with this film, and I’m looking forward to diving into the rest of the golden age Disney films from here. Next week, we’ll be looking at one of CJ’s favorite films Alice in Wonderland. See you then.

-AJ

Sourced via IMDB