The Overly Comical Sidekicks

[Disney's Divinity]

But he makes up for them 55 minutes very well.

I also believe that Genie is the first intrusive sidekick they had. It's not that I don't like Genie, and it's not as if he wasn't necessary for the story, but he practically takes over the whole film. The movie had a pretty serious tone until he was introduced.

I wouldn't say the movie had a serious tone before Genie arrived. It's not for nothing that they had Robin Williams playing the storyteller at the beginning of the film. "The famous Dead Sea Tupperware"? Gilbert Gottfried as Iago? 'One jump ahead'? I wouldn't call that serious.

It depends on what you mean by serious. I don't mean, "suicide and war" serious, but with a lot of character moments. Jafar allowing the thief to die in the Cave of Wonders, Aladdin giving his bread to the children, Aladdin's "One Jump Ahead (Reprise)," Jasmine's being locked away, Jasmine nearly losing her arm, the "Diamond in the Rough." Yes, the movie has it's comical moments, but it's not what I'd call a comedy until the Genie's entrance. After that, Aladdin's mostly remembered for Robin Williams really. I mean, TLM and B&tB (which I'm using by comparison because they came out before it with mostly the same crew) also had light-hearted moments similar to the ones you pointed out from the first half of the film--but I wouldn't call those comedies.

[Super Aurora]

Snow White- The dwarfs were essential so they are great "sidekicks" as if having their name in the title wasn't an indication. Good sidekicks.

Pinocchio- Jiminy Cricket was another important character. I wouldn't even consider him an sidekick even. Figaro and Cleo were so minor it didn't really effect the story and Gideon was one time deal that also didn't over do the humor.

Dumbo- Timothy the mouse is much like Jiminy so no need say anything here.

Bambi- Flower and Thumper are sort of annoying but it wasn't to the point that it got obvious and they really never did excess humor that went over the top. Plus it played well with what was the content of the movie

Cinderella-Now here were it starts to grow a bit. Yes the mice did some important parts, however the mice too way too much screen time. this is the almost start of where sidekicks start to over shadow the main character.

Alice In Wonderland- I honestly don't know if there really is a sidekick here. the whole movie is suppose to be illogical so I can't say anything for this movie

Peter Pan-This is an interesting one. Tinkerbell never really overshadow the main characters or shove herself in your face deal, however nowaday Disney company are merchandising the hell out of her. Smee was small add on to help emphasize the humor of Captain Hook even more so. I don't know if that's a good thing or not.

Sleeping Beauty- ok this is where I got really annoyed. The 3 ugly hags. Seriously the movie should of been called "The Three Good Fairies". They did practically everything in the movie, had most dialogue, and took majority of the screen time. They took the important of the movie way too much. I'd love to punch them in the face or have Kenshiro do a Hokotu no Ken on them.

The Jungle Book- The main character and the sidekicks(Baloo and Bagheera) were fairly balance and the sidekicks weren't too much of a shove in your face. Baloo may of took more focus than he should have, but it was still fairly good.

Fox and Hound-Boomer and Dinky were totally unnecessary. Annoying twats. Nuff said.

The Black Cauldron- Gurgi is....meh. Kinda annoying but did something important at the end.

The Little Mermaid-Sebastian was great. Had a balance of everything. Flounder was alright but again he didn't exert himself over the main character.

Beauty and the Beast- I believe Cogsworth and Lumiere were the start of the Pumbaa and Timon syndrome. However they never exert them selfs over anyone else and the humor isn't overtop, but during the battle scene, they did get bit annoying. Lufou is just an idiot HAHA.

Aladdin-Don't get me wrong, I love the Genie. But Robin William was correct when he got angry how much they exposed the Genie's fame(and Robbie's name) over us. He probably the start of the really over the top humor that kinda take overshadow the main characters. However he at least has an excuse as he was an extremely important character too. Iago was a sidekick that you love to hate. Good one. Aladdin has my favorit sidekick of all time: The magic carpet. He's a badass. I love him.

The Lion King-LOL....What can I say about them... They are funny I admit and do like them, but they really set the standard of annoying sidekicks. Especially the battle sequence, they got bit annoying.

Pocahontas- All though Meeko and Percy don't talk, they really were annoying and sort of ruin the "seriousness" of the film.

HoND- Hugo is even a fusion of Pumbaa and Timon. These guys really heighten the annoying factor, especially the nature of the movie.

Hercules- The film make it comical to begin with(I wish it wasn't to be honest) so Pain and Panic, although I hate their designs, didn't really ruin much. Hell, It seems like Hades was the sidekick of the movie. LOL

Mulan- Like someone above said, had Mushu been something like Jiminy Cricket, it would of been great. I think main problem here is his voice. Sound too out of place compared to the rest of the cast. Also his humor was too forced. Where as the Genie's was fluid into the movie(despite out of place jokes). Cri-kee really wasn't necessary and I find the the three dudes(Ling, Chein-Po, Yao) to be the better sidekicks.

Tarzan- I believe Terk was made so Fatty O'Donnell could be in a Disney movie. Tantor was just....random.

Emperor's New Groove- the whole movie was a comedy LOL

Atlantis: Lost Empire- You know, as far as all Disney movies I've seen, It seems like this movie is the only one with no sidekicks. Good.

Lilo and Stitch- Eh never really like Pleakley and Jumba Jookiba. ......

[toonaspie]

Snow White- The dwarfs were essential so they are great "sidekicks" as if having their name in the title wasn't an indication. Good sidekicks.

Cinderella-Now here were it starts to grow a bit. Yes the mice did some important parts, however the mice too way too much screen time. this is the almost start of where sidekicks start to over shadow the main character.

Sleeping Beauty- ok this is where I got really annoyed. The 3 ugly hags. Seriously the movie should of been called "The Three Good Fairies". They did practically everything in the movie, had most dialogue, and took majority of the screen time. They took the important of the movie way too much. I'd love to punch them in the face or have Kenshiro do a Hokotu no Ken on them.

Walt-era films carry a different form of storytelling from modern day Disney films. Often time would be devoted to sidekicks in Mickey Mouse short style antics and this was definitly the case for the Cinderella mice and the three good fairies...it wasnt completely off the mark as far as story but they dragged on a bit longer than necessary and these characters did prove to be important in the stories' climax.

Giving Grumpy character development gives Snow White's sidekicks extra points. He went from being disgruntled and thrown into a bath by the others to leading the dwarves in going after the Wicked Queen.

Pinocchio- Jiminy Cricket was another important character. I wouldn't even consider him an sidekick even. Figaro and Cleo were so minor it didn't really effect the story and Gideon was one time deal that also didn't over do the humor.

Peter Pan-This is an interesting one. Tinkerbell never really overshadow the main characters or shove herself in your face deal, however nowaday Disney company are merchandising the hell out of her. Smee was small add on to help emphasize the humor of Captain Hook even more so. I don't know if that's a good thing or not.

The Jungle Book- The main character and the sidekicks(Baloo and Bagheera) were fairly balance and the sidekicks weren't too much of a shove in your face. Baloo may of took more focus than he should have, but it was still fairly good.

Since these sidekicks are characters from the original books they're based on, I'm not bothered by the importance of their use. In the case of Jiminy Cricket, I think Disney did a good job making him a semi-developed character. Same kinda goes with Tinker Bell.

I wasnt a big fan of Disney's The Jungle Book because it seemed to be told in the same manner as Alice in Wonderland where it's just one character encountering different comical one-shots and getting into crazy antics one after another. On the other hand, much like Aladdin and The Sword in the Stone...the film's main plot centered around the protagonist's close relationship with a sidekick.

Fox and Hound-Boomer and Dinky were totally unnecessary. Annoying twats. Nuff said.

Super-big ditto. I take back what I said in an earlier post about Rutt and Tuke. These guys constant pursuit of the catepillar took up wasted screen time that could've been spent on the important characters.

The Little Mermaid-Sebastian was great. Had a balance of everything. Flounder was alright but again he didn't exert himself over the main character.

Sebastian was the most important and well developed of the sidekicks. He started up very snubby but warmed up to Ariel's feelings for Prince Eric. Flounder was pointless as a character and the second film proved moreso.

The Lion King-LOL....What can I say about them... They are funny I admit and do like them, but they really set the standard of annoying sidekicks. Especially the battle sequence, they got bit annoying.

Never liked these characters until The Lion King 1 1/2.

Pocahontas- All though Meeko and Percy don't talk, they really were annoying and sort of ruin the "seriousness" of the film.

HoND- Hugo is even a fusion of Pumbaa and Timon. These guys really heighten the annoying factor, especially the nature of the movie.

The sidekicks in THoND were the same as the kind as the sidekicks in Pocahontas as you said "ruined the seriousness". Although, did you know that Djali the goat was an actual character from the original book? At least Disney wasnt totally off the original Victor Hugo novel.

Hercules- The film make it comical to begin with(I wish it wasn't to be honest) so Pain and Panic, although I hate their designs, didn't really ruin much. Hell, It seems like Hades was the sidekick of the movie. LOL

This is one of the few films where I can say the sidekicks weren't wasted. Everyone seemed to played their importance in the storyline even if they were only minor and Disney did a good job using all varities of Greek Mythology species.

Tarzan- I believe Terk was made so Fatty O'Donnell could be in a Disney movie.

No...spit.

[ajmrowland]

I can't believe it! Almost all the sidekicks are getting bashed! I'm actually disagreeing with a lot of people.

[Disney-Fan]

Hunchback's sidekicks are pretty much the main reason I put off watching this movie time and time again. The rest of it is so beautifully executed, it's such a shame they had to shoehorn in some funny characters just for the kids.

[ajmrowland]

Well, they couldn't afford to make the movie too serious. They also couldn't find a place for comedy without giving off the feeling of being transported to a different film.

What I'm trying to say is it's not exactly a win-win situation, is it?

[Siren]

The problem is the way the sidekicks are presented. Most of the time, the sidekicks are necessary. Its just HOW they act that is the problem. For instance, let's compare Flotsam and Jetsam to Pain and Panic. Flotsam and Jetsam did everything right and the movie flowed well for it. It wasn't too dark to have them, it was just dark enough. Where as Pain and Panic stalled the movie at times to get their one liners in. Though Hercules and Little Mermaid are different movies...one is a fairytale adaptation and one is a mytho adapted into a comedy.

Which brings to mind something we need to understand about comedy sidekicks. With Aladdin and Hercules...those are comedic movies. So having comedy sidekicks among the rest of the funnies wasn't taking away from it for the most part.

Where as you have a movie like Hunchback of Notre Dame and the comedy sidekicks feel VERY out of place. And I found them to be trying too hard to be funny. Most of the time they did come off as annoying and totally out of place. I like the idea of Quasi's imaginary friends being gargoyles. In the book he talked to them. But I think they went overboard with them. A little bit of comedy to lighten a dark movie, but let's not ruin entire scenes.

[BelleGirl]

I think this is an interesting discussion. Sometimes I find it hard to make a distinction between a sidekick and a supporting character. Sebastian from The Little Mermaid for instance: is he a subordinate pal (sidekick) or somewhat on equal footing wih Ariel? (supporting). Though he was clearly made up by Disney, he doesn't feel shoehorned into the story. That's what makes this character work. And luckily there are no annoying anachronisms connected to this character, as with Mushu (toothpaste-tube) or with the Gargoyles (tuxedo, grand piano).

Though some may find the animal-sidekicks in Pocahontas annoying and taking away from the seriousness, at least the are not so intrusive and DO NO TALK. I know that several fans are dissapointed with the mute animals, but I'm really glad not to hear Meeko blurting out (with a high-pitched voice)something like "Mr Smith, some more seabiscuits please!" it would have detracted even more fron the seriousness and realism than the slapstick.


I agree with most people that the gargoyles in Hunchback are annoying, but I've stated that before on this forum.

I'm surprised people complain a lot about the sidekicks being too much 'out of place' in the 1990's films. I mean, Jiminy Cricket was out of place in 18th century Italy, too! He was such an 20th century all-American character, yet nobody complains about him. He does fit the movie, though.

I really never notice that Jiminy Cricket was 'out of place' for I could not make that fine distinction between "20th century all-American character" and "18th century Italy" (by the way, Goliath, how do you know precisely it's the 18th century? Powdered wigs were in fashion then all over Europe, but I don't see any in Pinocchio - I always assumed it was the 19th century)

Disney's Divinity wrote:
I also believe that Genie is the first intrusive sidekick they had. It's not that I don't like Genie, and it's not as if he wasn't necessary for the story, but he practically takes over the whole film.

I agree. While I still love Aladdin and consider it to be a great Disney film, I think the Genie was the beginning of Disney's over-the-top humor.

I think it also was the beginning of annoying anachronistic jokes. They were good for Aladdin and a powerful Genie, but not for Mulan and THond.

[Goliath]

I really never notice that Jiminy Cricket was 'out of place' for I could not make that fine distinction between "20th century all-American character" and "18th century Italy" (by the way, Goliath, how do you know precisely it's the 18th century? Powdered wigs were in fashion then all over Europe, but I don't see any in Pinocchio - I always assumed it was the 19th century)

Yes, you're right, I screwed up: I meant to say 19th century, since the story was first published in 1883. But when you look at Jiminy and his comments all through the film, it's so obvious he's acting like a 20th century American. He basically *is* Cliff Edwards, who voiced him.

[KubrickFan]

If you really want to get technical, a lot of things and people in Pinocchio stand out. It doesn't even look like Italy, to be honest.