DVDizzy Forum

I finally found the dvd in a store today after a long search (is it OOP or something? Jeeze!). Now I haven't seen this film since I was a little kid, definately ten years ago or more so my memory of it isn't very clear. I do remember it being much different from the original Rescuers.

So OPINIONS!

There's a very pompous cult on IMDB which continues to raise the pedestal of the first film and lower the ditch of the sequel, but I must say that I quite liked 'The Recuers Down Under'.

I do prefer the 'Rescuers', which probably has better characterisations, rather more heart and some brilliant animation (particularly Milt Kahl's Medusa), but I think 'Down Under' has better design; 'The Rescuers' is limited to the xerox look (which really only worked for '101 Dalmatians' and perhaps 'The Sword in the Stone') and there's an inconsistency between the sketchy lines of the characters and the shadowy tonal backgrounds. The look of 'Down Under' seems to be a little more consistent to me.

I'm watching the film right now and it's ALL coming back to me now. I seem to remember so much of it! Must have watched it more in my youth than I thought I did. So far it's a wonderful little flick, with a super cool setting, some great characters and admirable animation.

And I sort of agree with you, MagicMirror, thanks for the contribution.

I re-watched it last night, and whilst I wasn't disappointed I still prefer the original Rescuers. Still, this isn't without its charms with some lovely looking graphics and a great villain. Brings back so many memories.

Wow, I just checked amazon to read some reviews and many of them are incredibly harsh. Quite unwarranted if you ask me, having seen the entire film just now. I found it to be a very pleasant film and much work and effort was obviously put into making it. It easily stands out from all the following, soulless, money-making sequel outings! Glad to have it in my dvd collection, now, 101 dalmations can't come soon enough!

I much prefer The Rescuers Down Under to the original. The protagonist and antagonist are both better, and TRDU has John Candy's albatross character. As mentioned before, the animation is so much better and more dynamic in the sequel. I don't have my list handy, but I think I gave it a rating of three to four stars out of five the last time I watched it.

The movies are polar opposites.

The original was a wonderful story but rather poorly animated. The sequel was wonderfully animated - the scene with the kid on the eagle is breathtaking but the story is an utter disaster. The script writers really had no idea what to do with the rescuers and they were reduced to a subplot.

Hey Mr. Toad, have you got a new MANIA yet?

It's been a while seen I have seen it (still have to buy this and the first one) But I love them both, but the second one doesn't compare with the first. Not in terms of quality, but the stories and settings are totally different. Which is a very good thing, I think. I don't understand the negativity around it.

Not in terms of quality, but the stories and settings are totally different.

Actually, the stories are exactly the same haha. That's one thing a few customers on amazon have noted fairly and they raise a good point. Not that it bothers me though, I think it's cleverly disguised. I didn't even noticed it while watching the film, hah.

Two excerpts from an amazon:

''To be a "work whose narrative continues that of a preexisting work." In other words, a sequel is supposed to extend and continue a storyline... however, "The Rescuers Down Under" fails to continue a storyline, rather it recreates the storyline in the original into a twisted case of déjà vu. Basically, if you've seen the original, you've already seen the less pleasing "sequel''.''

''Story-wise, this movie left me flat, after putting two and two together I realized that it was nothing more than a rehash of the original. Imagine, two mice from the Rescue Aid Society fly on albatross to a faraway land to rescue a child who's been kidnapped and has sent a plea for help. It seems that the villain and his minions need the little boy to help him retrieve a valuable treasure. As you can see, the storyline is anything but original, that's why I was shocked when I read that the makers of this had thought the original had a weak story, but compared to this one, it had way more lust and charm.''

It's very true that the stories are the same; but this is true of a lot of Disney films. 'Sleeping Beauty' has 'Snow White''s story; 'The Little Mermaid' also follows this general mould and most of the 90s films follow 'Mermaid'. Even 'The Rescuers' borrows quite a lot of story elements from '101 Dalmatians'.

Major Fatal Moebius wrote:

Not in terms of quality, but the stories and settings are totally different.

Actually, the stories are exactly the same haha. That's one thing a few customers on amazon have noted fairly and they raise a good point. Not that it bothers me though, I think it's cleverly disguised. I didn't even noticed it while watching the film, hah.

Well, I meant that the original was more a detective story, and the second more of an Indiana Jones-adventure type. But perhaps it's more visible in style than in the story.

The Rescuers Down Under is certainly a fun movie, but I get the feeling the animators were mainly using the film to experiment with their new animation process. You have to remember this is the first animated film to utilize the digital ink and paint process.

The main theme from this film is excellent (although it certainly sounds simliar in the Indiana Jones' theme). They use that music with the fountain at Future World Central at Epcot. The music does a wonderful job of building anticipation and excitement at the park and the cordination with the fountain is fantastic.

I remember liking it a lot as a kid. And the visuals are what I most liked, though the music also impacted. I mean, I loved the warm colors, which of course would be used in Australia, and the shaded look that Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin and most following films recieved. But I also liked a lot of the vsiual ideas, like the mice above the restaraunt dining, or their communication system, or the lizard making pea soup...? I need to watch it again real bad, I remember loving so much of it!

And I watched some of The original Rescuers and...well, it has dark colors, and seems just darker and somehow boring as well as depressing. I know just from the tone and animation I would not like it like I love Down Under.

its rather unfair to judge the rescuers down under as repetitive.it certainly is forgivable seeing that the rescuers premise is about handling cases for people around the world ala...james bond, nancy drew, enid blyton or hardy boys and the like.

imagine a james bond movie where he goes on vacation and falling in love and drinking tequila all the time while thinking about his relationship with his dad without any actions or solving cases.would that have make james bond movie james bond?

akhenaten wrote:imagine a james bond movie where he goes on vacation and falling in love and drinking tequila all the time while thinking about his relationship with his dad without any actions or solving cases.would that have make james bond movie james bond?

i actually pictured that

anyway; i love this movie and it was my fist disney movie i owned.

i think this movie showed an amazing improvement in animation at disney,
the little mermaid was released before it and it looks so much older, and even if it was a sequel it was a great movie it could even have been a non-sequel, i never knew it was one until like seven years ago.

Have to agree with the points made by akhenaten and KubrickFan in regards to the story. It's going to be repetitive to a certain degree, as it's about "special agents," particularly ones in the business of rescuing. Yet, they're not all that similar, as the first is more like a detective story and the second a bit more of an Indiana Jones type adventure.

Anyway, while I don't hate any Disney 2D animated features and the only one I feel disappointed in is "Atlantis" (though I have yet to see "Home on the Range"), the original "Rescuers" is fairly low on the list. I love the characters, but the whole film is drab and dated. I don't mind it being dated so much. There's a certain charm to dated stuff, but I never cared for the lacklustre visuals, and I feel that sets it apart from other Disney animated features in a not-so-good kinda way. Personally, I much prefer "Rescuers Down Under." I love the characters and visuals, and I don't find the story to be a mess at all. It's a pretty straightforward rescue story of a little boy (who seems like a young Steve Irwin) with strong conservation themes, and it continues from the first by developing the romance between Bernard and Bianca. Or, at least, taking it to the next level. I don't remember this film being much of a smash when it came out, but it probably would have been if it had come out during the Croc Hunter craze of later years. They should have given it a rerelease at that time. Would have been loads better than the movie Croc Hunter himself came out with. We couldn't get through the beginning of that one at my friends' house.

the only drawback is the lack of aussie slang in cody. yeah the rescuers set a pretty low standard to emulate..so it was a win-win situation.

does anyone remember the rescuers girl in the forum..i forgot her name..

While I have not seen it in a while, I think that it is an okay sequel. I am not really a fan of either movies.

I like "Down Under". I think part of it may be that of the two Rescuers films, it was the first of them to get released on VHS (I think) so for a long while it was the only Rescuers movie I had seen. I really liked the characters and the music. Later, once I saw the original movie, I liked it better, but "Down Under" still has a special place on my shelf.

Though I am inclined to agree a bit with whomever said that it was more of a test movie for CAPS than a fully-though out film. I can imagine how after "The Little Mermaid" it would seem like a step backwards.