The Sword in the Stone Discussion

[Harbinger]

I just watched this today after many many years. I remember liking it. Today I was so devastated to see that the movie was really really bad. What really was bad that it was VERY episodic and didn't really have a clear plot. It only was interesting in the beginning and the last minutes of the movie. I found every time Arthur was turned into a different animal very annoying. I'm sad to say I really did not like this movie.

[rafiki]

it's a wonderful film and definitely one of the most underrated along with the great mouse detective

[Lars Vermundsberget]

What really was bad that it was VERY episodic and didn't really have a clear plot.

I'd say that's exactly what it's usually critisized for. One prabably has to appreciate the "episodic elements" quite a bit to enjoy this movie.

[candydog]

I don't know why, but I love it. It's not dramatic or a story of romance and adventure, but it has a good moral - brains beat brawn in the end. The characters aren't the most popular or well developed, but they're fun to watch. Merlin became quite popular, and the film got an impressive range of merchandise in the short lived "heroes" or "adventures" franchises (depending on which country you live in) a few years ago. It's my little brother's favourite film, and he loves archimedes the owl. I find it easy to watch over and over again, but I guess everyone's tastes differ. (I should know - I don't like The Lion King)

[UncleEd]

Were these Sword in the Stone Heroes/Adventures items released in the US? I have a few of the European sets.

[Lars Vermundsberget]

What's that? I don't think I ever heard of it...

[slave2moonlight]

This has always been a fave at my house, and I've never understood why it is so little-known and appreciated. I absolutely love this charming tale, and the animal transformations are definitely the highlight of the whole thing. They say Walt was fascinated with transformations, and I also love them and love this film! The battle between Merlin and Mim is legendary!

[MagicMirror]

I've noticed that a lot of people are calling Merlin a bumbling idiot. The joke is on them - storyman Bill Peet based Merlin on Walt Disney himself!

It's a well known fact that Peet and Walt didn't get along, so I think that Merlin and Archimedes' constant bickering is a reflection of that.

I'll also say that this film definitely has some of the best animation in a Disney film. It's certainly some of the best animation from the Nine Old Men's period; it's also vastly better than any of the animation of the 80s and 90s (which everyone seems to hold in such high esteem).

There was no live-action reference for the animation in the movie. Look at the animation of all the human characters and tell me you aren't impressed! The likes of Milt Kahl were at the top of their game here.

[pap64]

Me and a friend believe that certain movies are good because a character is so great that he or she is able to carry the whole movie and make it interesting till the end. In our opinion, the best examples of this are Dragonheart and Hellboy. Both movies have very charismatic leads. If they take them away from the movie it loses spark, energy and heart. I believe that Sword in the Stone is a good example of said notion.

While the story is good and some of the characters are neat its very hard to deny that the heart and soul of the movie lies in Merlin. Its the first character we see and its the last one that appears. Many of the film's morals are presented through him and he provides many, MANY great scenes. So if you were strip the movie of Merlin it would've been a bore to watch.

So in short, the movie would suck if they take Merlin away.

[Super Aurora]

I might be one of the only ones here that didn't really like it. I felt it was bit...weak. Funny yes, but to me(being epic, myth, and fantasy fan ala Lord of rings etc) I wish Sword in the Stone was handled more seriously and was attempted later with better animation and character designs. I think that one of the reason Black Cauldron(though I find that better attempted than Sword in the Stone) didn't do well either.

Stories like those have to be handle with serious dedication and time for an animation movie like Prince Of Egypt. That was an epic movie handle so well. Same should of gone for Sword in the Stone(and any squeals for the matter, if ever) and Black Cauldron/ Chronicles of Pydrain.

There is one Authorian story(though not focused on him or is it by Disney) by Warner Bros called Quest for Camelot. Though some may disagree but I founded that true-er to Authorian time period/ and style. charatcers more rounder and fleshed out oppose to the stylize attempt Disney used for Sword.

[UncleEd]

I still like this film. This and any of the B rated Disney films still beat most of that cheapquel crap.

I finally got a record recorder and have been editing a Sword in the Stone soundtrack for myself. Maybe I should post some MP3's here. What I find interesting is that all the songs have more verses to them than were in the film. The Legend of the Sword is my favorite with the second verse not used in the film. In all cases the film version is better sun so I've been editing in the cut material where it applies. In most cases it works rather well. I dream of the day that this and Robin Hood get their own CD releases.

Black Cauldron should have been a series rather than one film. That is why it sucks so bad.

[Disney's Divinity]

Stories like those have to be handle with serious dedication and time for an animation movie like Prince Of Egypt. That was an epic movie handle so well. Same should of gone for Sword in the Stone(and any squeals for the matter, if ever) and Black Cauldron/ Chronicles of Pydrain.

I'm actually kind of glad they didn't go that direction, just because you would know what was going to happen before the movie even started. Besides, the movie mostly comes from the early sections of the The Once and Future King, so I think they did well personally. It is a bit episodic, but the central characters are entertaining enough to keep you watching.

[Super Aurora]

I'm actually kind of glad they didn't go that direction, just because you would know what was going to happen before the movie even started.

It's not point of knowing or not knowing the story but seeing HOW they went with the direction of the story and HOW they use the key elelments of the story.

Besides, the movie mostly comes from the early sections of the The Once and Future King, so I think they did well personally. It is a bit episodic, but the central characters are entertaining enough to keep you watching.

Even though it's focus on young author I still believe it should of been taken more seriously. And used with better animation.

[blackcauldron85]

Black Cauldron should have been a series rather than one film. That is why it sucks so bad.

Come again?

I'm glad that TBC wasn't a series of movies. I haven't read any of the books (I was going to a few years ago, but never got around to it...I'm not a big fan of the genre, but I love this movie for some reason)...from what I've read, there are SOOO many characters in the books, and probably many different plot lines. I like the movie just as it is, thank you! (Except I'd rather be able to see it with the edited footage reinserted.)

[UncleEd]

It doesn't over all suck. It just has a reputation for sucking. The film falls apart at the point where they decide to get the cauldron and use it. The characters act strangely and Doley just gets mad for no reason and vanishes. The transistion between act 2 and act 3 is where the problems are.

If it were a series a films what would be wrong with expanding upon the depth in the books? I'm just saying that out of all the properties this is the most worthy of a sequel and will never get one.

[MagicMirror]

Stories like those have to be handle with serious dedication and time for an animation movie like Prince Of Egypt. That was an epic movie handle so well. Same should of gone for Sword in the Stone(and any squeals for the matter, if ever) and Black Cauldron/ Chronicles of Pydrain.

The Prince of Egypt came off as pretentious to me (and the portrayal of the Egyptians as evil tyrants really annoyed me, but that's down to the Exodus story itself, not the film). If it is possible for a film to be pompous, The Prince of Egypt was pompous. You can count the number of ripoffs of the Lion King (an overrated film if ever there was one) , for goodness sake.

Had 'The Sword in the Stone' been handled that way it would have been similarly hammy and overdramatic (though it may well have sold better). No; the satyrical, witty method of storytelling used in The Sword in the Stone is what I love about it. But then I'm a cynical, cold-hearted Englishman; I'm sure tastes differ.

[pap64]

Stories like those have to be handle with serious dedication and time for an animation movie like Prince Of Egypt. That was an epic movie handle so well. Same should of gone for Sword in the Stone(and any squeals for the matter, if ever) and Black Cauldron/ Chronicles of Pydrain.

The Prince of Egypt came off as pretentious to me (and the portrayal of the Egyptians as evil tyrants really annoyed me, but that's down to the Exodus story itself, not the film). If it is possible for a film to be pompous, The Prince of Egypt was pompous. You can count the number of ripoffs of the Lion King (an overrated film if ever there was one) , for goodness sake.

While I enjoyed the Prince of Egypt I agree that the film was to an extend pompous and pretentious.

I mean, one of the things Jeffrey Katzenberg said on the DVD was "We didn't want to make fairy tales". They didn't make it because they truly wanted to make an animated film based on the exodus, they just wanted to outdo Disney with a bible story.

[Super Aurora]

The Prince of Egypt came off as pretentious to me (and the portrayal of the Egyptians as evil tyrants really annoyed me, but that's down to the Exodus story itself, not the film). If it is possible for a film to be pompous, The Prince of Egypt was pompous. You can count the number of ripoffs of the Lion King (an overrated film if ever there was one) , for goodness sake.

to bolded: care to clear that a bit? where were they ripoff in Prince of Egypt?

Still even if it is overly pompous and pretentious. It was a good movie never less and succeed as an good animated feature.

Had 'The Sword in the Stone' been handled that way it would have been similarly hammy and overdramatic (though it may well have sold better). No; the satyrical, witty method of storytelling used in The Sword in the Stone is what I love about it. But then I'm a cynical, cold-hearted Englishman; I'm sure tastes differ.

The movie wouldn't have to be over dramtized but played out for thoughted movie and give stronger impression. Like Beauty and Beast did.

In fact look at Beauty and Beast and even Little Mermaid(yea I know that a bit overated but bare with me)

both were originally wanted to be created by Walt him self however he never knew how to pull it off. Rather than starting on it right away because Walt wanted to and possibly become half assed, he held it so future generation could one day do it and make it better. And that was the case, especially BatB.
Sword and the Stone and it's possible squeal stories, could of done the same.

Again, I like epic stories so this is why I feel that way.

[Lazario]

Well, I think when you add the positives of Sword and the Stone, I really think you have a stronger film than several other Disney films - certainly it's better than The Aristocats and I think infinitely better than Fox and the Hound. And still better than Rescuers Down Under.

[neurotic_Donald_Duck]

One of Disney's best movies top 10 on list for sure!