DVDizzy Forum

Flanger-Hanger wrote:I'll later post the shots from Your Host Walt Disney (though I didn't notice a difference when I first viewed it ichabod)

Do you think you could find the time to post those screencaps? There is definitely a different framing on the Your Host DVD. Not by much, but all three heads seem to be framed more logically in that shot. There is also more picture on top and a bit less on the left and the bottom of the shot.

O.k., after watching this and backstage party, I noticed that the later of the two when showing clips of the film had actualy MORE on the sides of the image even though it was fullscreen. Really noticeable in the clip from "We Won't Be Happy 'Till We Get It". This leads me to think that Babes in Toyland's DVD is like Blackbeard's Ghost (Pan and scan of cropped widescreen image) but not in all the parts. Probably it started like Blackbeard and then someone took notice and then prevented the rest of the film from happening this way. Anyone else notice this? Anyone care? I'll try to post screencaps soon.

Edit: Oops I realized I just posted my thoughts on this before, but I will get those screencaps soon.

I REALLY want to see this! I think my grandpa has a copy of the VHS,so I'll try to borrow it.

I wish somebody could solve the mystery of the OAR in this flick. To tell the truth, I don't think it's ever been properly presented on home video. I do recall seeing it in re-release in the early 70s. And I think...I think it was in a widescreen format. I don't remember thinking it looked 1:33.

But the film has never, ever, ever looked right to me. Right now, looking at the current dvd, it seems like the larger dance numbers like "Lemonade" and "Gypsies" seem cramped and P&S. I wish Disney would look into this matter and put it out correctly when they get around to it on Blu-Ray. I don't see a reason to upgrade unless the AR is correct.

As for the film...sigh...this is the one Disney film that should have been a big classic hit but wasn't. It has all the elements that it needs: terrific cast, great score, good special effects...but it may have been too corny and cutesy-poo even for 1961. I think it's kind of in-your-face; it takes terrible liberties with people's nerves from time to time. All the jokes misfire because the powers that be are jabbing you in the ribs so hard that you can't laugh. It might have worked better as an animated film, but I dunno. (If it had been, you'd bet that little kids would watch it more often, and that it'd be a 'classic' just because more people would have seen it when young).

A big part of the negative reaction to this film is supposedly because they did not use Victor Herbert's original lyrics, and the score was modernized. That's understandable for a couple reasons. Number one, the lyrics as written in 1903 would have sounded incredibly dated in 1961's rock early rock era. Number two, the film was not going to be an operetta; it would have to exist as a sort of rude, contemporary stage musical. There was no other way they could have gotten away with it. That said, the Herbert songs that do make it into the film are at least pleasant enough, and the new lyrics at least clever enough to be still enjoyable. Where the film trips up most, however, is when it strays too far from the Herbert original. The film seems to lose inspiration the second they get to Toyland, and Sands' number "Just a Toy" sounds too contemporary. Then Tommy Kirk comes in...he too, seems too contemporary. He just kinda breaks the fourth wall a little. His hair is tousled and you almost expect him to snap his fingers and say "yeah, yeah, baby!" I usually like Kirk, but here he's almost a pushy presence, like he was a 19 year old punk trying to compete onscreen with Ed Wynn (lotsa luck there, cat). Grumio is a little cocky when he should have been sweeter, dorkier and clumsier. He just takes me right out of the film. I don't know. Then...Disney really wrecked the film. In the stage version, what happens is that the Toy Soldiers come to life and march across the stage, down the aisles, and so on. Disney reversed that plot point and instead of having giant toy soldiers, used shrinking gas to have little toy people interacting with the (relatively) huge toy soldiers. Didn't work. The sudden size change physically limits the scope of the movie. If you want what should have been the real ending, see "March of the Wooden Soldiers." That big battle royale with the six-foot toy soldiers is what the whole movie seems to be building up to, yet it's done in reverse. Weird logic, but it did give Disney a chance to show off some delightful stop-motion animation. I think it would have worked better if the big soldiers had come to life and caused chaos like the suits of armor at the end of "Bedknobs and Broomsticks."

I just admit I was always very intrigued by the film as a kid. It was never an especial favorite of my mine, but I wanted to like it. I liked the trees; I liked the toy-making machine. Those are the kinds of things that get a kids' attention. As an adult, I like the dancing (it really is quite good), I like the energy, I like Ed Wynn. The only thing I don't get is Annette, because in this film she's as stone-faced as Ed Sullivan. Look throughout the whole movie; she hardly smiles, (or has any facial expression at all for that matter). That's weird; she certainly wasn't like that in her black and white Disney films, or a couple years later in the Beach Party movies. A strange Babes in Toyland theory: did some idiot at Disney remind her that she was playing Mary, Mary Quite Contrary, and that's why she looks so sullen throughout the film??? One wonders.

As for Tommy Sands? I don't know why other posters here have a problem with him. He's fine. Bobby Rydell might have been funnier or more energetic. But we got Tommy Sands and his post-crooner era singing style, while almost non-existent today, is actually kinda nice.

One last remark. About the music: I have the original LP; I thought it was supposed to be a soundtrack recording but it sounds nothing like the actual movie. The score in that record is about twice as good as what you hear in the movie. The orchestrations are straightened out and not as "Disney cute." The record producer was certainly taking the music more seriously than whoever scored it for the movie (oh, don't tell me it was the same person). But if you run across it, get it. If the album music gets stuck in your head, you'll like it much, much more than the stuff that's in the movie alone.

The aspect ratio of 1:85 is totally incorrect for Walt Disney's 1950's-60's releases. The Shaggy Dog, Jungle Book - - all wrong - - totally wrong.

These films were shot full aperture 1:33 to be projected masked at 1:66, this includes Babes in Toyland, Summer Magic, Mary Poppins, Moon-Spinners, etc.

1:66 is an archaic ratio, so people tend to ignore it, but that's why these things never look right when letterboxed in recent years. Cropping at 1:77 and 1:85 eliminates too much picture on top and bottom.

Well should it be presented as 1:33 and uncropped? Or masked at 1:66? What is it on the current dvd? Anyway, as I said above, it's never looked right to me on home video, or even when it's shown on tv.

I'd go with 1: 66 and remaster the track from true stereo music stems that exist.

Also, a special edition should include the original trailer, "Backstage Party" (with a better remastering and color/telecine than the version on Treasures), "Title Makers" and "The Truth About Mother Goose." Also: the Annette Funicello episode of "Disney Family Album."

As an audio extra include the full stereo original cast LP by Camarata - - and radio ads/interviews.

FYI - -the Camarata original cast LP for "Babes in Toyland" is now available on iTunes. Well worth getting.

Yeah, they should put some of those LPs on the dvds as extras. I really like the one they did for Alice in Wonderland way back when. The songs are fully orchestrated and complete; unlike in the actual movie. It's a very nice album. And I think I mentioned in my long post above that Camarata's cast album for Babes in Toyland was in many ways superior to the actual film.

The scene where Annette is singing the counting song and there are multiple, rainbow colored images of her, is terribly cropped and proof enough for me that the film is P&S. Many times in that scene one or more images of her is partially or totally lost off the screen.

Well, I recently checked this out from the library, and, I really wasn't impressed.

My mom quit watching about 30 minutes in (well, we had to leave it and go across town, but she didn't care to resume it later on.)

As I said earlier in the thread, I grew up watching the March of the Wooden Soldiers version with Laurel & Hardy, so I am kind of viewing this as a remake of a film that was enjoyable by itself. The songs didn't seem to click for me, I enjoyed the cast, but the story and dialogue didn't seem to do it for me either. The shrink ray stuff at the end really seemed strange.

I didn't really care for the pale Laurel & Hardy imitations (or really, Hardy and Harpo Marx.) Plus, those characters were villains throughout the film, only becoming a bit good because their bacon was in the fire. The Laurel & Hardy characters in their version were more bumbling nitwits, but not actively working with Barnaby.

The Counting Song with Annette was interesting, although I could see some people today thinking it wasn't very flattering towards women.

One of the things I find really cool about "Babes in Toyland" is that it is a 1950's Disney cartoon come to life. The color and design and shapes in the sets and costumes are wonderful and a direct parellel to animation art of the period (and used many of the same artists to design and lay it out).

Because Ward Kimball storyboarded the film when he was planning to direct (he ran afoul of Walt on this project), it also plays like a cartoon in terms of gags and visual invention. Sadly, I don't think the director they chose was up to realizing what Kimball and Rinaldi had envisioned.

It's like stepping into a Disney cartoon on stage. Not quite successful, but a fascinating experiment - - and delightful for those reasons.

Does anyone know who voiced Sylvester (the puppet goose?)

It *almost* sounds like Walt himself... Was it common for him to have a small uncredited role in some films like this?

littlefuzzy wrote:Does anyone know who voiced Sylvester (the puppet goose?)

It *almost* sounds like Walt himself... Was it common for him to have a small uncredited role in some films like this?

Is there anyone out there who knows this?

littlefuzzy wrote:

littlefuzzy wrote:Does anyone know who voiced Sylvester (the puppet goose?)

It *almost* sounds like Walt himself... Was it common for him to have a small uncredited role in some films like this?

Is there anyone out there who knows this?

Dave Smith? If anybody would know it's him.

This is why we need the Disney Magazine.

I loved this movie as a child. I still enjoy it as an adult. I remember being amazed by the "I Can't Do The Sum" number, lol. How they did all the Annettes in all different colors. Reminded me of Pink Elephants on Parade.

I checked my Leonard Maltin book The Disney Films and no credit given there for the voice talent responsible for Sylvester J Goose.

jon

Sylvester is definitely NOT voiced by Walt.

But if you watch "Backstage Party" you'll notice that director Jack Donohue sounds a whole lot like the goose - and they share a little "moment" together where Jack shuts him up.

Sylvester was voiced by Ray Bolger (who was double cast as Barnaby) This makes some of the interaction between the two especially delightful- once you get the inside joke.

It's a shame they cut the original ending with the tiny-sized Barnaby held prisoner by Mother Goose in Sylvester's bird cage. It was shot - -there are stills.