Sword in the Stone observation - new release?

[Jake Lipson]

The old Gold Collection version of The Sword in the Stone is on sale this week at Best Buy for $6.99 along with a bunch of other Disney catalog titles.

I bring this up because I remember it being on sale there a few months back. I was going to get it earlier but didn't have enough due to the purchase of another DVD which was an expensive new release that week. What exactly it was I don't remember. But I do remember Sword being on sale recently. Two or three times I have intended to purchase it.

This time, I think I am really going to do it before Sunday when it goes back to its normal price. But I bring this up because I find it quite odd they would be pushing it. When I was at Best Buy a couple weeks ago, I ended up buying Cars and Meet the Robinsons, but I did see four or five copies of Sword and considered buying it (it was $14.99 then; good thing I didn't!) Given that it is a Gold Collection disc that has been out for seven years and is not particularly loved by the general public, I think it is an odd title for them to be promoting and stocking in that quantity.

So I have to wonder if they're clearing out the inventory of it for a Special Edition re-release along the lines of The Fox and the Hound, Robin Hood and The Aristocats. From UD's review, it seems to have a pretty well-put- together disc for the time period of the film and its status in the canon, and I will probably be satisfied with the purchase right now rather than waiting for a double dip that may or may not ever come. But I do find it intriguing.

Also, the possibility is there for them to crop it a la Robin Hood and Jungle Book, in which case the Gold version would be the last chance (currently) to get it in its 1.33:1 apparently intended aspect ratio. The Jungle Book's cropping was not too bad, and if that is what screened in theaters in 1967 it was probably all right, but I would have preferred a 1.33 option on Jungle Book's Platinum and kind-of-sort-of want the Limited Issue for that reason as well. I don't yet have Robin Hood, but I may well try to track down the Gold version first instead of going for the Most Wanted Edition if I can help it.

Also notice that back when Disney did their Buy 3 Get 1 Free DVD promotion (I miss that!), Alice in Wonderland, Pocahontas and The Fox and the Hound Gold Collections editions were offered as freebie choices a year or two before they came back out. I got Fox and the Hound free then and am satisfied enough with it compared to the content of the new release that I did not feel the need to upgrade it. I am going to go the same route in buying Sword soon. But perhaps a Sword re-release would get it a little bit more heavily promoted in circulars than just Best Buy dumping it in the $6.99 stack and convince a few people who haven't gotten it yet to buy it. Particularly if it has a slipcover on it (sigh!) and Disney Movie Rewards points inside it.

So - essentially this is just an observation, take it or leave it, but...yeah. I thought it was fishy. Thoughts?

[SpringHeelJack]

Woo-Hoo! I'm picking this up! This sale starts this coming Sunday (the 11th)?

Also don't see a re-release any time soon. It's not one of the better-received movies, and by all accounts, the GC DVD is fairly solid, with pretty great video and sound, and a decent amount of extras. Though some sort of documentary would be nice.

[brotherbear]

Personally, I think you're overspeculating. Sword in the Stone is not the only set that has come back in this sale. Other repeats include "The Rescuers," "Apple Dumpling Gang," "Mighty Joe Young," and probably others.

However, that said, I do think that Disney WILL rerelease SitS, its just a matter of time. Maybe in 2009 or 2010. However, even if you're worried about it being rereleased, I would just get this set now. First, it is only $6.99, which is a steal. Second, the bonus features are unusually good for a GC release. That being said, Disney will likely just release this set with repeated bonus features, MAYBE even a few features missing, and with more fluff stuff. (Much like the current rereleases of Robin Hood and Fox and the Hound). I know I purchased this set during that last sale you were talking about, and I'm happy with that purchase. But now i'm really tempted to get "The Rescuers"... What do others think about that DVD? My only drawback right now is the UD review, which states the set isn't great...at all.

Hope I was of some help!

-BB

[brotherbear]

Woo-Hoo! I'm picking this up! This sale starts this coming Sunday (the 11th)?

The sale is going on right now. Just take a look through the Best Buy Weekly Ad on their webpage.

-BB

[Simba3]

I think that the recent release of "The Fox and the Hound" and the upcoming release of "The Aristocats" is proof that any Disney Animated Classic can earn a re-release. I think eventually "The Sword in the Stone" will get a new release, it is just a matter of time.

[jennydumas]

I am totally getting some!
That is beyond cheap for me.
I'm hoping mom will go get me some. There's ones on there that I have been wanting forever.

[SpringHeelJack]

Woo-Hoo! I'm picking this up! This sale starts this coming Sunday (the 11th)?

The sale is going on right now. Just take a look through the Best Buy Weekly Ad on their webpage.

-BB

Woot! Tomorrow morning before work, I'm off to Best Buy.

[blackcauldron85]

Also don't see a re-release any time soon. It's not one of the better-received movies

I think that the recent release of "The Fox and the Hound" and the upcoming release of "The Aristocats" is proof that any Disney Animated Classic can earn a re-release. I think eventually "The Sword in the Stone" will get a new release, it is just a matter of time.

I agree, Simba3. "Robin Hood" and "The Aristocats" aren't "better-received movies", but they have gotten/will get new releases. I think that, in time, all the DACs will have been rereleased. Some will take longer than others (SW&t7D will be rereleased again probably before "The Black Cauldron", for example). Also, an incentive for Disney to rerelease films is putting newer ads on the DVD- I'm too lazy to pop in my SitS DVD, but I'm assuming that some of the trailers are for movies that may be in the vault now. And, Jake Lipson mentioned a slipcover and Disney Movie Rewards points- those alone may warrant some fans to double-dip, regardless of any new content.

But, I'm not sure if the abundance of copies has anything to do with an upcoming rerelease, but it's definitely possible.

[singerguy04]

I would be really happy and excited about a re-release of this. I really like this film and a nice documentary would be great. Even if it were only 20 mins or so, it would make me happy.

[reyquila]

I'm ready to double dip!!

[jennydumas]

Yay!
My mom got me 5 Disney movies from BestBuy today :]
Plus she got me Ratatouille the day it came out!
There's a catch that I can only open one on my birthday. And I can't open any of the others until my party..which will be sometime in December.

Anyway, I LOVE DISNEY!
I am so excited that I got all the ones I wanted!(that were on sale, anyway lol)

[Jake Lipson]

Just to be clear, I'm not saying in the original post, nor am I saying now, that I was ever going to hold out for a double dip. Just observing a lot of things that might lead to this being reissued sooner than later. But the UD review indicates to me that it has a nice disc, and it seems a good deal more packed than most Gold Collection titles. Even if not everything has to do with the film itself, from the sound of it the bonus material does have some relevance and adds value to the package. Which is why I finally went ahead and got it today. The fact that $6.99 is the new record lowest price I've ever paid for a DVD doesn't hurt either.

I have seen the movie before, but not in *ages*, so I am really looking forward to rediscovering it. I deliberately try to distance myself from some of the higher-profile releases well in advance of their coming out (i.e., even though 101 Dalmatians is sitting across the room from me right now, there will probably be no watching that until the DVD gets here.) This makes it much more exciting to finally get the movie on disc and, because so much time has elapsed since I last saw it, it is *almost* like watching the movie for the first time a second time. Does that makes any kind of sense? It doesn't so much make a difference with Lion King, Aladdin, et.al because I literally memorized those movies growing up, but others, it does.

With Sword in the Stone, though, I haven't even had to distance myself on purpose, it just happened. We never owned an official studio-liscenced copy of it on VHS; it was one of many that Dad simply taped off the Disney Channel of old (ahhh, good memories, and they probably wouldn't even air it today!) and then refused to actulally buy. I wanted these in official studio casing to match my collection, but my protests were for naught.

Four years ago in English class we did a unit on Aurthurian legend, and the teacher supplimented the texts with short clips from various filmed versions of the stories. I offered up the Disney version as a loaner and thought we could maybe watch the scene where he actulally pulls the sword out of the stone (we had read that.) Plus I realized I hadn't seen it in what seemed like forever and was curious to see the whole thing again just for myself.

But I couldn't find the darn thing. I ransacked my room and every other place in this house where tapes could possibly have been kept and I found -- literally -- every single other VHS I could possibly want to see. Sesame Street, Barney, a host of other old movies, even my brother's ultrasound -- but NO SWORD IN THE STONE. It infuriated me and I wanted the DVD *BAD*. It had always been on my long list of DVDs to get "eventually" (especially since I am trying to collet the animated classics) but this was when I really started aggressively wanting it.

And yet for whatever reason I never had money to go get a $19.99 catalog title because new releases on sale were -- and are still -- coming out that demand first priority attention if I'm going to get them at a cheap price. Even the first few times it did pop up in the el cheapo Best Buy sales I passed because a new release that week was occupying all my money. A couple weeks ago I saw multiple copies for $14.99 at Best Buy and considered it but I ended up going with Meet the Robinsons and Cars. I'm glad I did that, of course; not only do I now have all three movies, but it would have really irritated me to see Sword in the $6.99 sale so soon after buying it instead of Cars/Robinsons had I gone that route. So I'm happy. It is both a pleasure and a relief to own it now, and this is not something I plan to lose.

(Oh, I did eventually find the VHS just a few months ago while cleaning my room -- I'm not sure where in here it was or how I missed it back when I was searching specifically for it -- but I still didn't watch, mainly because of my "no watching for a while when you want to get the DVD soon" mandate. Which demonstrates how the heck long I've wanted to get this darn thing into my posession.)

In fact, I'm not exactly sure how I had the money to get Sword now either, since I did give Ratatouille priority and got that a couple days ago. But I'm certianly not complaining. It has been years since I last saw this film -- longer than most of the animated classics I think, since I didn't return to it in childhood as much as the modern ones or the other Walt classics that surrounded it. I remember almost nothing except that I liked it, so even if it isn't one of the studio's best efforts, it should be a great treat rewatching it tomorrow. I'm really looking forward to it.

[Jake Lipson]

Upon seeing this again, I think it's a good film and I...(read more)'m glad I bought it; it was amusing to watch, funny (the squirrel sequence in particular) and has some memorable moments (the wizard's duel is fantastic, and the climax when Wart/Arthur actulally pulls the sword out of the stone is naturally a highlight.) But the movie just seems to exist and doesn't do anything particularly novel or exciting (yes, I know it was made in 1963, but still.) After a strong book-being-read beginning, I didn't really connect to it too much until that moment when the sword is removed, by which time, of course, the movie is nearly over. There really isn't an emotional center here; you don't care about Wart as much as you should, and though the magic all around him is fun to watch, it seems a little alien. (Better fantasy films are still emotionally grounded even while the fantasy surrounds everything.) Going lighthearted in tone instead of epic like most King Arthur stories works, particularly since this focuses on Arthur before he became Arthur. However, this is only ever mildly funny, not laugh-out-loud hillarious. More importantly, the the strength of feeling and emotional oomph that should be present just isn't there. I felt much more empathy for a devistated comic-relief female squirrel than Wart himself, and he's the main character! Worse, and an extreme rarity for Disney animation, the movie meanders along doing nothing in particular to the point where it felt quite long even though it's only 79 minutes. While the individual sequences are fun, they lack the cohesiveness that makes it work as a whole *film.* Technically this is a fine movie, but it is surprising to me that it ended up chronologically in between 101 Dalmatians and The Jungle Book in the studio's cannon; those are two of the best films in the studio's history. I saw The Jungle Book for the first time again recently too thanks to its new DVD release, and it is episodic in nature as well. That something is episodic is not a bad thing; it's the exicution that matters, and that is where the two films are radically different. The Jungle Book flows better from one adventure to the next, never feels at all long and contains a lot more heart and character development. Stone came out four years earlier and in revisiting it so close to its immidate younger sibiling, I wonder what happened on the production of this film because it doesn't all seem to click just right like it should. One other thing: I understand he can see the future, but Merlin's refrences to current material really distract from the storyline, robbing the movie of some of the timelessness usually associated with Disney animation. He's not as manic and interesting enough for that to work seamlessly with the movie's actulal plot, as it did perfectly with Genie in Aladdin many years later. Still, though, the film is enjoyable enough, colorful and certianly merits a viewing.

[SwordInTheStone777]

The Sword in the Stone deserves a brand new special edition, I would like to see Disney re-release this on DVD next year, for it's 40th Anniversary.

perfrabley a 2-Disc Edition would be nice.

[Simba3]

The Sword in the Stone deserves a brand new special edition, I would like to see Disney re-release this on DVD next year, for it's 40th Anniversary.

perfrabley a 2-Disc Edition would be nice.

Actually next year would mark it's 45th anniversary. I'd love to see a new release soon too, but a 2-disc release is pretty much out of the question.

[SwordInTheStone777]

SwordInTheStone777 wrote:
The Sword in the Stone deserves a brand new special edition, I would like to see Disney re-release this on DVD next year, for it's 40th Anniversary.

perfrabley a 2-Disc Edition would be nice.

Actually next year would mark it's 45th anniversary. I'd love to see a new release soon too, but a 2-disc release is pretty much out of the question.

I meant 45 Anniversary, my bad

This film needs the 2-Disc Special Edition treatment, with everything from commentaries to the not so seen trailers, Disney forgets to put on there realeases.

[David S.]

I'd like to see a re-release as well, with more suplements... but please, please, PLEASE do not matte it to 1.75:1 like they did with Jungle Book and Robin Hood (and possibly the upcoming Aristocats). I want to see EVERYTHING the animators drew and photographed on the original frame, rather than lose nearly a third of it just so some people with widescreen TVs can "fill their screens" at the expense of cropping the movie.

Hmm, this is a compelling argument to grab the Gold disc while it's still in print... it may end up being the "definitive version" on DVD, at least in terms of Original INTENDED Aspect Ratio!

[SwordInTheStone777]

I'd like to see a re-release as well, with more suplements... but please, please, PLEASE do not matte it to 1.75:1 like they did with Jungle Book and Robin Hood (and possibly the upcoming Aristocats). I want to see EVERYTHING the animators drew and photographed on the original frame, rather than lose nearly a third of it just so some people with widescreen TVs can "fill their screens" at the expense of cropping the movie.

Hmm, this is a compelling argument to grab the Gold disc while it's still in print... it may end up being the "definitive version" on DVD, at least in terms of Original INTENDED Aspect Ratio!

The Jungle Book 40th Anniversary Edition was in the right ratio.

so The Sword In The Stone would be in 1:75:1 or 1:66:1

You would still be able to see what the animators drew, but you would be able to see more of what they drew.

[David S.]

Actually, you see more of what they drew in 101 Dalmatians, Sword In The Stone, Jungle Book, Aristocats, and Robin Hood in the fullscreen 1.33:1 ratio. That is the dimensions these films were drawn and photographed in. So by my definition, 1.33:1 is the correct ratio, since that shows more information in the frame.

Since few theatres were equiped to still exhibit fullscreen in the 60's and 70's, these films were "matted" to 1.75:1 in most theatres, cropping off about one third of the picture on the top and bottom, making for a compromised presentation, IMO.

This might be "correct" in that it conforms to the original theatrical presentations, but IMO is not something to strive for when those theatrical presentations themselves were as FLAWED as a pan and scan or cropped on the sides transfer of a widescreen film like Little Mermaid would be!

Especially considering some of these 60's films were susequently reissued to theatres "pillarboxed" insuring the entire 1.33:1 frame could be visible, AND were always released to home video at 1.33:1, showing more information on the top and bottom than in theatres or in the recent trend of cropping these DVDs to 1.75:1

Check out the side by side screencaps in the Robin Hood Most Wanted edition review on this site and you'll see what I mean: http://www.ultimatedisney.com/robinhood-mostwanted.html

The fullscreen 1.33:1 ratio shows more info on the top and bottom, and loses none on the sides, and is therefore correct for these five films IMO

[MadHatter]

i icked up The Rescuers and The Rescuers Down Under the other day from best buy for $6.99, also my boyfriend got me Ratatouille too. This was a good week. lol.