Disneycember Month by Doug Walker of TGWTG

[Dr Frankenollie]

I've enjoyed Doug's newer Disneycember reviews (particularly his rather positive review of Alice in Wonderland), but his latest review of Lady and the Tramp irritated me. Like Dumbo, he summed it up as merely 'cute' and 'decent.'

[Super Aurora]

I've enjoyed Doug's newer Disneycember reviews (particularly his rather positive review of Alice in Wonderland), but his latest review of Lady and the Tramp irritated me. Like Dumbo, he summed it up as merely 'cute' and 'decent.'

I don't blame him. Lady and the Tramp was pretty boring.

[Dr Frankenollie]

I don't blame him. Lady and the Tramp was pretty boring.

Why? It's one of the few Disney films that has a well-developed and believable love story, has some wonderful animation and music (especially the rendition of 'Bella Notte' during the opening credits), and it has a wide variety of likable characters. I don't understand why you'd find it boring.

[Super Aurora]

Just not my cup of tea. <strike>and I find dogs overrated.</strike>

[Lazario]

I agree with Dr F on Dumbo, Doug REALLY dropped the ball on that one (and Fun and Fancy Free- but that's in my top 3 favorites, so I admit a bias).

But, I agree with SuperA on Lady and the Tramp. It's easily Disney's most boring classic movie.

By the way- the next 3 reviews are up. I just finished Sword in the Stone. I'm SO GLAD I decided to pick up the reviews again after Fun and Fancy Free, I literally enjoyed all 9 of the ones I just watched. I even think he was shocking fair with Melody Time (even if I personally think Pecos Bill was superior to Johnny Appleseed) and, yeah, Alice in Wonderland. Another great surprise: he couldn't have delivered a better take on 101 Dalmatians. I have always found the film boring, however I disagree that it's inferior to Lady and the Tramp (his basic conclusion).

His take on Sleeping Beauty pretty much states the obvious: Maleficent rules, Aurora and Phillip are boring. Nostalgia Chick did a better assessment of the film but, hey, that's the way it goes.

[Super Aurora]

I agree with Dr F on Dumbo, Doug REALLY dropped the ball on that one (and Fun and Fancy Free- but that's in my top 3 favorites, so I admit a bias).

But, I agree with SuperA on Lady and the Tramp. It's easily Disney's most boring classic movie.

By the way- the next 3 reviews are up. I just finished Sword in the Stone. I'm SO GLAD I decided to pick up the reviews again after Fun and Fancy Free, I literally enjoyed all 9 of the ones I just watched. I even think he was shocking fair with Melody Time (even if I personally think Pecos Bill was superior to Johnny Appleseed) and, yeah, Alice in Wonderland. Another great surprise: he couldn't have delivered a better take on 101 Dalmatians. I have always found the film boring, however I disagree that it's inferior to Lady and the Tramp (his basic conclusion).

His take on Sleeping Beauty pretty much states the obvious: Maleficent rules, Aurora and Phillip are boring. Nostalgia Chick did a better assessment of the film but, hey, that's the way it goes.

But, I agree with SuperA on Lady and the Tramp. It's easily Disney's most boring classic movie.

But, I agree with SuperA on Lady and the Tramp.

But, I agree with SuperA .

I agree with SuperA .

[Super Aurora]

Ok I watch the newer reviews.

He's review on Alice was awesome and spot on. One of my fav too.
---------
His review on Peter Pan is fairly fair which something I would agree on as well.
--------------


His review on sleeping beauty is pretty much same as mine.

Only few differences where we disagree on.

He likes the fairies, I don't. Although he does acknowledge that side characters do take up more screen time and fillers which negate or minimize the main character's role. Something I agree on.

The other disagreement is that he doesn't find Aurora pretty or cute. I found that a bit surprising. I on other hand do find her gorgeous and beautiful.(hence my username and like of the character's design)

Other than that most is stuff I agree with. Even on Maleficent. I find her great in animation, voice, acting, movement. But Motivation and character bit lacking/weak.

His stance that the movie is more of a style over substance film that should be easy to enjoy is something I also agree with. Style over substance in a movie isn't necessary a bad thing. can actually be a great thing and I think SB is the type of movie that fits that or pulled that off better.

[slave2moonlight]

It must have something to do with personal tastes in genres or styles or something. I LOVE Lady and the Tramp. But, I love "The Shop Around the Corner" too, and I suppose it would be a boring movie for a lot of people. To me, Lady and the Tramp is very much like one of those old, feel-good, rom-coms from the black and white era. Not that I am generally into that stuff, but I can love it with the right actor, or if it's also a little holiday themed, or has something else going for it. Like with Lady and the Tramp being a Disney animated feature about dogs.

I didn't see the Sleeping Beauty review. Is that up on his site already or something? But, in regards to him not finding Aurora pretty or cute, disregarding the fact that not everyone goes for the same "type" (I agree that Aurora is lovely, but she's not high on my list because she is so angular and tall looking), I actually am often a tad put off that most of these online reviewers/critics (maybe not just online, but in general) seem to avoid saying things like, well, that a cartoon character is attractive to them. I suppose some people legitimately cannot find a cartoon character attractive, but those are usually people who don't watch much animation at all. When someone who watches a lot of cartoons/animation denies that they ever find any of the characters attractive, I tend to get the vibe that they are just trying to cover themselves, because for some reason they think that is not "normal".

They do the same thing a lot when they overuse perv/pedo jokes in regards to a character who is very close to legal age just because they are not quite THERE yet. Britney Spears, Lindsay Lohan, and other girls like that were sex symbols before they were legal adults in the U.S., but commentary personalities still over exaggerate in their attempt to point out that there is nothing attractive about such girls until that magical birthday, then all of a sudden they are super attractive. It comes to the point of being ridiculous and more than a bit condescending, in my opinion.

[Super Aurora]

(I agree that Aurora is lovely, but she's not high on my list because she is so angular and tall looking),

She's actually is smaller than you think. Look at the height difference between her and her mother when they went to hug.

She actually fits the 16 yr size model.

[slave2moonlight]

I wouldn't be surprised, but the... not short characters in that film just look really tall to me, probably because of their slim and angular designs, and I guess the short characters are extremely short then.

[Lazario]

I didn't see the Sleeping Beauty review. Is that up on his site already or something?

When I saw it, it wasn't listed on any of the pages. The newest 3 reviews (SB, Dalmatians, and Sword in the Stone) were listed in the video player archives. Meaning- after you finished one of the episodes and the advertisement would come up, after that was finished- you'd see other episodes in a row inside the player. They were in there but nowhere else.

[Rose Dome]

I don't think Doug's review of The Aristocats was very good. I had no problem with it being negative, but he didn't go into enough detail. He never even referred to any of the characters by name. That said, I have enjoyed all the others, and can't wait for the rest.

[Dr Frankenollie]

^ His reviews are only meant to be quite brief, and as the movie is quite forgettable as he said, he may have simply forgotten the characters' names.

I completely agree with Doug's review of Sleeping Beauty, and I more-or-less contend with his views on The Sword in the Stone.

His review of 101 Dalmatians is in my view spot on: Cruella is much better than everything else in the movie, and Sergeant Tibbs is the only rather likable supporting character. As he said, it's not bad, but it's not really very good either.

However, Doug's review of The Jungle Book really irked me; it's easily one of the best DACs, and the Sherman Brothers' unforgettable melodies and songs are much more than 'okay' as he blithered.

[Jules]

I'm getting extremely irritated with his criticism of the animation of certain films, like Lady and the Tramp, The Sword in the Stone, The Jungle Book, and The Aristocats. I think the animation in those films is at times sensational.

[Rose Dome]

His reviews are only meant to be quite brief, and as the movie is quite forgettable as he said, he may have simply forgotten the characters' names.

You have a point about the character's names, but it was brief even by the standards of what he's doing. No thoughts on the animation, the songs, or any indivdual characters. He just gave a very basic plot summary, and said in a number of ways that it's cute but forgettable.

That said, I too was surprised at Doug's lack of appreciation for The Jungle Book's songs, although I did think his review of the film was good.

His review of Robin Hood was fantastic. I've never cared for the film, but I'm now tempted to rewatch it and see what I think.

[Dr Frankenollie]

You have a point about the character's names, but it was brief even by the standards of what he's doing. No thoughts on the animation, the songs, or any indivdual characters. He just gave a very basic plot summary, and said in a number of ways that it's cute but forgettable.

I know what you mean...but isn't he doing these daily, or perhaps even two a day? That's a lot of viewing, writing and editing to get through!

His review of Robin Hood was fantastic. I've never cared for the film, but I'm now tempted to rewatch it and see what I think.

I've just watched it, and I have to agree. I haven't seen it years, but I now really want to watch some of the action scenes and the sequences with Prince John/Sir Hiss.

[slave2moonlight]

I didn't see the Sleeping Beauty review. Is that up on his site already or something?

When I saw it, it wasn't listed on any of the pages. The newest 3 reviews (SB, Dalmatians, and Sword in the Stone) were listed in the video player archives. Meaning- after you finished one of the episodes and the advertisement would come up, after that was finished- you'd see other episodes in a row inside the player. They were in there but nowhere else.

Thanks, I just got to see the next three that way (Jungle Book, Aristocats, and Robin Hood).

Still have to watch the Jungle Book one, which is still one of my favorite Disney films. Actually, as a kid, my favorite was a tie between Jungle Book and, actually, Robin Hood, so I rather enjoyed his positive Robin Hood review. It's nice to see the film treated well. Maybe it's because it's anthropomorphic animals, but I have always gotten a sense that it was one of the less respected Disney films, yet I always loved every second of it. The disappearance of Maid Marian through most of the later part of the film never bothered me. I suppose nowadays she would be heavily involved in the climactic action, but considering the period the story takes place, that is probably not very realistic, ha. I assume she would be left safe at the hideout. Anyway, while it may not be a "Masterpiece", I always loved it and it was nice to see someone point out all the great things about it.

On the other hand, I didn't agree with him on Sword and the Stone or Sleeping Beauty. With Sword in the Stone, perhaps it was largely a matter of taste. I just don't see how such a magical film can bore someone. But, with Sleeping Beauty, I disagree with the specific complaints to some degree. I don't think it fails or is weak in the storytelling aspect at all. It is easy to follow and, in my opinion, exciting throughout. Perhaps some of the scenes could be called filler, but I don't know, I'm kind of against that word lately, as I value scenes that help me get to know characters, even if they don't always move the story along. Especially if it is entertaining. I think some of the mice filler in Cinderella bothers me more than anything in Sleeping Beauty. And yet, it doesn't bother me much, really. I LOVE Cinderella probably more than Sleeping Beauty, or maybe they are too different to say that, with the type of villains and climaxes they have. Anyway, I don't really find Sleeping Beauty a "mess" at all, and I have always thought Phillip was an underrated prince. No dialogue in the second half? I never even thought twice about it. He didn't have anyone to talk to, really, aside from the villain, whom he chose not to speak to, which worked fine for me. I don't really see why having him speak was necessary. That's the most exciting part of the movie, even if my favorite might be the cake making scene, ha.

I can see his point about 101 Dal, though I have always found it very entertaining anyway. And though I can still enjoy it, I agree quite a lot about Aristocats. It's very forgettable, despite some cute characters and Phil Harris, whom I always enjoy in Disney films. There really isn't a lot going on in the film. I know some people, especially girls, just love the cute kitty stuff, and I've always had a weakness for cute stuff too, if it isn't waaay ridiculously, forced cute. I think Disney always manages to stay away from going over the top with it in the animated features, but I have a high tolerance for it too. This was one of the few Disney animated features I didn't see until I was an older kid, so it doesn't hold extreme nostalgia for me, so I can see its weaknesses more easily, but I still like it alright. I agree that I expect more from Disney though. There ARE some things I like about the film though. Good songs, for one thing, and I like that cat characters, though it doesn't seem like we got to know them very well, or else they needed less 2-dimensional personalities. Of course, I admit that I haven't seen this one THAT recently.

Well, here I go to watch his Jungle Book review. Hope it doesn't irritate me too much. For me, it's my fave pre-Little Mermaid Disney animated feature.

[slave2moonlight]

Okay, his Jungle Book review sucked. Maybe it was purely a matter of different tastes, but c'mon. I disagreed with pretty much everything negative he said about it. I wondered if he'd mention the Chuck Jones version, which I do really like, but which isn't better than this one, even if it's closer to the book. However, I DO wish they had done the smart thing when making Jungle Book 2 and looked to the book a bit, instead of making a purely for kids sequel that should never have hit the big screen at that quality level. A lot of people said the film didn't need/beg for a sequel. I totally disagree because what happens when Mowgli comes to the man village would have been so interesting to see, how he is accepted and adjusts, I mean, like in the old Sabu film. I would have loved to see Disney make a sequel for this, and that should have been a full-on project like Rescuers Down Under, not direct to video "merchandise". It had some redeeming qualities, but its bad qualities are soooo bad (though, for the record, I do like some of the Disney sequels).

I definitely agree that Shere Khan is an incredibly awesome villain. In fact, he is probably my favorite Disney villain, even though sometimes I don't remember that when I am asked, because there are just sooo many great ones. The scene with Khan and Kaa is one of my all time favorite pieces of animation.

Oh, and Doug mentions he just plain dislikes the sketchy animation style from the 60's films. Jeez, I love it and think it totally works for these films! I wouldn't want to see it in a princess film, but in films that are largely about animals, like the Jungle Book and Robin Hood, 101 Dal, etc.., I think it is very appropriate! It only bothers me when I see the circles for drawing the heads, ha. Like I said, I wouldn't want to see it in a princess film or anything that should have a more refined look, but for a film in the jungle: just perfection.

[toonaspie]

In a good amount of these movies, he's just rambling the same stuff over and over. I wish he would have more informative things to say about them.

[Flanger-Hanger]

I'm suprised at how much his opinion on Jungle Book refects mine. In all the previous reviews I've at least disagreed on some point.

He's got alot to do for the viedos, but even some research on context or production facts would help to clarify points of confusion like Arthur's changing voice.

And if Aurora isn't all that pretty, than who is?