The Aristocats Blu-ray Release

The Aristocats tells the story of three kittens and their mother who lived in the lap of luxury with their human Madame Bonfamille.  One day, while working on her will, her butler Edgar overhears that he is to receive all of her money upon her death, but only once the cats have also moved on.  He decides to remove the cats from the equation by abandoning them in the countryside, and much of the movie deals with their journey back home to Madame.  If you’d like a more in depth look at the movie itself, we suggest you check out Episode 58 of the Disney Film Project Podcast where we reviewed the Aristocats.  

Now Disney, working hard to increase their Blu-ray library, has released the Aristocats - already available in stores.  The Blu-ray follows what I’m beginning to think of as the “Disney Blu-ray Formula”.  And I really think they nailed this formula with their catch phrase of “Magic in High Definition”.  Each disc always starts with three tie-ins: an advertisement for Disney Studio All Access, an advertisement for one of their more prominent upcoming Blu-ray releases - in this case Cinderella: Diamond Edition due out on October 2, 2012, and finally an upcoming movie release preview, which here is Finding Nemo 3D.  

The Main Menu of this Blu-ray does an excellent job of presenting different examples of the gorgeous artwork found in this movie.  Each time you jump there, a different scene is represented - of the times I went there I didn’t see it repeat.  There is the usual round of Disney movie related previews to be found.  You can also choose from one of four languages: English, French, Spanish, and Portuguese - and the are all also available as subtitles as well.

This Blu-ray shines in it’s Bonus Features, many of which include appearances by the Sherman Brothers.  In the first one titled “The Lost Open”, Richard Sherman tells us about a deleted character named Elvira, and a deleted song that she and Edgar were supposed to sing a duet for called “How Much You Mean to Me (Court Me Slowly)”. It also includes a scene where the cats are introduced to us as they attend a Cat Museum that is apparently inside the Louvre. We get see the opening played out using storyboards and old recordings, including singing by the Sherman Brothers.

Next we get a music video called “Oui Oui Marie” which is a remix of things that all the cats in the movie say, but mostly Marie.  It’s not something I particularly care for.  This is made up for by the inclusion of the deleted song “She Never Felt Alone” which is a song about how much Madame really does love the cats.  Richard Sherman discusses the song, and it’s lead in called “Porquoise?” - which on the storyboards we see is referred to as “Purrquoise”.  This is also played for us using storyboards.  

We are then presented with an excerpt from an interview with the Sherman Brothers title “The Sherman Brothers: The Aristocrats Of Disney Songs”.  In it they discuss how they worked with artists to create the songs for the movies in a sort of symbiotic relationship of design.  They also discuss how they were able to get Maurice Chevalier to do the opening song for the movie and also some discussion about “Scales And Arpeggios”.

There is then an excerpt from the episode of Walt Disney's Wonderful World of Color called “The Great Cat Family” that is all about how the domesticated cat has evolved and interacted with man for thousands of years.  And we have to Thank the Phoenicians for it.  In keeping with the whole “cat theme”, the final bonus feature is the 1946 short “Bath Day” staring Figaro.  It starts with Minnie Mouse giving Figaro a bath and through a series of events leads to Figaro once again needing a bath.

As said above, the big win for this Blu-ray is the Bonus Features. Especially enjoyable is the way that the missing or deleted scenes are brought to life for us with music, dialogue, and storyboards.  It brings back for us what would otherwise be lost.  This is a solid Blu-ray release that any fan of the Aristocats will want to have in their collection.

Disney Film Project Podcast - Episode 58 - The Aristocats

This week the DFPP team decides that they all want to be cats, so they head to Paris to learn the fine arts and end up assisting a big old alley cat help three kittens and their mom get home in the 1970 animated feature The Aristocats.

Listen, download, etc.

Show notes:

• IMDb
• Wikipedia
• Official Site
• Soundtrack (US vs Overseas plus Lyrics)
• Concertina
• Carmen
• DOA: Aristocats II

Enjoy the show!

Fun and Fancy Free - Bongo

As previously mentioned, Fun and Fancy Free consists primarily of two featurettes that Disney was unable or unwilling to develop into full length features. Using Jiminy Cricket as the bridge device between the two, the film launches into Bongo as the first subject.

Bongo is a character in search of a story, as best I can tell. The story told in this film is that of the circus bear who escapes, only to see that life out in the open is not as easy and carefree as he might have imagined. When he meets a female bear, Lulu Belle, however, that changes. Although he has to overcome some challenges for her affection, Bongo ultimately prevails and is able to win her heart.

It’s a very slight story that could honestly have been told in a 7 minute short, so seeing it stretched over 35 minutes is a problem. It’s kind of like spreading your peanut butter too thin. While you still get some peanuty goodness, in the end it’s not enough. Bongo is that kind of effort. There’s good stuff in there, especially the animation and some of the storytelling, but the overall story is lacking.

A couple of things that seem like they were put in the film to alleviate that problem actually tend to make it worse. The first is the narrator Dinah Shore, who handles all the dialogue for the characters. That leaves every character in the film silent, trying to act to Shore’s intonations. Unlike Dumbo, where the main character doesn’t speak but the others do, it makes every character reliant on the narration, and that lessens some of the impact.

The other thing that pads out the film is a grouping of songs. From “Lazy Countryside” to songs about the bears falling in love, the musical portions are very lengthy and although they advance the story nominally, they also slow it down considerably. Add in the fact that Dinah Shore sings all the songs, and you have one voice throughout the entire film.

This is not to say that the entire thing is bad. The character designs for Bongo and Lulu Belle are completely adorable. The acting between them and the emotion that the animators embue them with is fantastic, especially considering that they had no voice acting to cue them. Also, the gags in certain places are quite funny, even though many others don’t quite hit the mark.



In the end, Bongo learns that you need motivation to change, which comes in the form of Lulu Belle. But it’s very hard to connect to either he or Lulu Belle as characters, despite the great work that the animators do. It never gets to the point of boring, but Bongo drags a great deal, and makes it hard for the viewer to remain engaged with the characters.

Development of Fun and Fancy Free

1947 was a continuation of the strange post war period for the Disney studio, as Walt and his team were trying desperately to find ways to churn out new product that was commercially successful but also artistically appealing. This wasn’t an easy task. After all, the tastes of the public and the Disney artists didn’t always match up. See Fantasia if you want an example.

The development of features in this environment was a tough road. That’s why we ended up with package features taking up much of these years. Fun and Fancy Free, released in September of 1947, continued the formula of these years by taking a couple of shorter stories, combining them into one feature, and tossing in some familiar characters and live action stars to make a combined film.

The two main stories of Fun and Fancy Free, Bongo and Mickey and the Beanstalk, were developed originally as feature films before World War II. Mickey and the Beanstalk was first, as Walt took yet another stab at the Jack and the Beanstalk story. He had visited the story in 3 earlier shorts, once in Kansas City with his Laugh-O-Gram studios and in the Mickey Mouse cartoons Giantland and The Brave Little Tailor.

This time, though, the idea was to further reinvigorate Mickey by bringing a fully realized feature film look to him. Donald and Goofy were incorporated to make this a trio picture, which was very common in the shorts before the war. Work on this film began in 1940, so this was very much in keeping with the cartoons of that time.

Remember, at the time before the war, the studio was growing. Snow White was a huge windfall, and while Pinocchio and Fantasia were disappointments at the box office, they reaffirmed the fact that Disney was in the features market and made good artistic statements. So Walt was buying up stories to be adapted into films from all sorts of places.

One of those was Cosmopolitan Magazine, where a story by Sinclair Lewis caught Walt’s eye. The story was that of Bongo, a circus bear that longs for a life in the world at large. Joe Grant, one of Walt’s story men, told him that the story was not suitable for a feature, but Walt ignored him and bought it anyway. The first treatment for Bongo was turned in on December 8, 1941, one day after the attacks at Pearl Harbor.

The war years postponed both features, and when they were revived in 1946, it was as a combination. The decision was made to bring in famous stars to serve as narrators and attractions for the moviegoer, and add Jiminy Cricket as a bridging device. Dinah Shore was recruited to serve as narrator and songbird for Bongo, and Walt’s friend Edgar Bergen brought his ventriloquist skills to the narration of Mickey and the Beanstalk.

The final product became a mish mash of ideas that was very common to this era. Between the two South American films, the music packages (Make Mine Music and Melody Time) and this film, there were many films of that nature. Fun and Fancy Free was created specifically to provide a lighter, more hopeful tone to the postwar years. Tomorrow, we’ll take a look at how it does with that job.

Clown of the Jungle

Walt’s South American trip was about more than just producing a couple of package features like Saludos Amigos or The Three Caballeros. The original goal was to establish a program of short subjects that would provide Disney with new characters. Some of these, like Pedro the airplane or the Flying Gauchito, never really took off. One, though, did manage to break through a little bit into the Disney canon.

The Aracuan is the crazy red headed bird that showed up first in The Three Caballeros. His crazy patter and wild nature was endearing there, so he was brought back for this short, Clown of the Jungle. The Aracuan appears on screen to break up the otherwise monotonous story of wild birds in South America. He shows up with a cigar, bounds around the screen and squeaks and coos to the viewer.

In many ways, his unbounded energy and chaotic attitude are the perfect foil for Donald Duck. Introducing Donald into the mix as a bird photographer gets things going, since he is looking for “serious” subjects while the Aracuan is there to only to interrupt and generally play. He sees Donald as an opportunity to enjoy himself and doesn’t take the duck too seriously.

Donald, though, is drop dead serious about his need to take great pictures, and the Aracuan isn’t having it. The antics are hysterical, because the Aracuan is unbound by the typical constraints that other Disney characters operate under. He can pop in and out of the screen with no logical progression, can defy the laws of physics and move any which way to make a gag work.

That makes him a wonderful character. All the other Disney characters are fairly conventional, and the ways the Aracuan acts drives Donald so insane that he ends up adopting these unconventional traits himself. It’s an amazing thing to behold, really. I know the Aracuan shows up again in other shorts and it’s no surprise why. He’s so much fun that I can just imagine animators eager to play with their medium using this fabulous little bird.

Pooh First

Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you’ve probably seen the trailers or commercials for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2. It’s likely the most anticipated film in the last decade, since perhaps The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. As such, most analysts and film critics expect Harry Potter to bring in lots and lots of money when it opens on July 15.

What you might have missed, even if you’re a Disney fan, is that the all new hand drawn animated film from Walt Disney Animation Studios comes out that same day. Yes, a brand new version of Winnie the Pooh arrives in theatres on July 15, the exact same day as Harry Potter. I’ll let that sink in for a moment.

The last Disney hand drawn film was The Princess and the Frog. Some love it (me) and some hate it, but it was a moderate financial success, grossing $104 million dollars during release in the United States. That did not accomplish the task of recouping its production costs. Consider a marketing push and various other tie-ins, and you can see how people viewed the film as a failure.

Going back to Winnie the Pooh was considered a safe bet for Disney. Hand drawn tales of everyone’s favorite stuffed bear should be money in the bank, right? Not if you are going up against the boy wizard. Harry Potter will be a financial juggernaut, and we should not pretend otherwise. But what are the consequences if Winnie the Pooh does not do well at the box office?

Consider this – there are no other hand drawn films that have been announced by Disney. Andreas Deja, one of the key animators at the studio for the last two decades, has left the studio, for reasons he has not stated. No other animation house is doing hand drawn animation anymore. Is it possible that the reason Disney has put Pooh at this release date that they want to kill hand drawn films?

To be sure, there’s no love of tradition in today’s Walt Disney Company. There’s no Roy Disney there fighting to keep animation alive. Pixar has replaced hand drawn animation in being able to churn out viable characters. But I have to say that putting Winnie the Pooh out on the same day as Harry Potter seems like malpractice.

So, here’s what I propose we do about it. I know we’re all Harry Potter fans out there. All I will ask of you, my Disney loving friends, is to go and see Winnie the Pooh first. Weekend box office can make or break a film. When the Friday numbers for July 15 come out, Harry Potter will crush Pooh. But if all of us, as Disney fans, make a vow to go to see Winnie the Pooh first, perhaps we can make a difference.

I’m not saying that you should not go to see Harry Potter, just go to see Pooh first. If you can put Potter off until Monday, even better. If we want more hand drawn films, we have to demonstrate to Disney that hand drawn is still viable. If Pooh fails, they will have the excuse they need to shut it down. Let’s not give them that opportunity.

POOH FIRST!

Make Mine Music - Part 2

I left off yesterday on the note of Casey at the Bat, the fun piece of Make Mine Music that has been pulled apart and shown separately multiple times. The next piece of this film is again a tonal shift, moving from the literal style to the impressionistic style with Two Silhouettes. Once again, it doesn’t entirely work.

Two Silhouettes could not be a better title for this segment. The short features two dancers, filmed in live action, then reversed out into silhouettes. They are doing ballet, and the figures are manipulated around the screen across an animated background. Honestly, it just doesn’t work. The music is good, the animation is fine, but the live action figures don’t play well in that world. Especially when you turn them into silhouettes, with not features to act from, the figures look stiff and unwieldy.

Once again, though, the film switches back to a more literal style, but this time playing off a piece of classical music in Peter and the Wolf. To say this is the best piece in the movie is an understatement. The brilliance of the short is the way it takes the inherent story of the music and brings it to life, not only through Sterling Holloway’s narration, but the acting of the characters.

Peter and his animal cohorts are visualized here in a way that makes them relatable and exciting. I was instantly hooked on this short by the bravery that Peter displays in going after the wolf, through his puffed out chest and bravado. The acting that these characters do, from Sasha the bird to Sonia the duck, is fantastic. It’s a tour de force of how to marry animation, music and narration to create a compelling story.

After You’ve Gone, the next segment in the piece, tries to marry the two conflicting styles we have seen so far in the film. Set to a Benny Goodman number, this short features instruments taking on human qualities to dance around the screen to the music. It’s a different piece than the other impressionistic segments, though, because the animation style is much more direct. It manages to soften the transition between the two styles rather well. There is still no narrative flow to the piece, but that does not matter quite as much, because the music is better and the figures are easy to follow and enjoy.

The final two pieces of the film are more direct storytelling, although the first, Johnny Fedora and Alice Bluebonnet, is told entirely through the song of the same name. Telling the story of two hats that fall in love would be a difficult proposition if it weren’t for the skills of the animators involved. We get to see emotion on the “faces” of the hats very well and consequently develop an attachment for them.

The Whale Who Wanted To Sing At the Met, meanwhile, falls squarely in the tradition of other Disney shorts, and reminds me a great deal of Baby Weems, from The Reluctant Dragon. Not from an artistic perspective, mind you, as the style on this short is the typical short subject work, but from the way the story is told. The storytelling device is a flashback/news style that creates a momentum to the story.

While the ending is tragic, this short still manages to be uplifting and tell the story with a moral of letting people (or animals) do their own thing. It’s a fitting end to Make Mine Music, a jumbled mess of a film that allowed each different segment’s director to chart their own path. That’s not something you would have seen from Disney in the Snow White and Pinocchio days, but I can only assume the experience will be of use to the team in later films. For now, Make Mine Music doesn’t work. It has great individual parts, but the sum is not compelling.

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

Make Mine Music - Part 1

Yesterday, I talked about the disjointed nature of Make Mine Music, and how the different shorts did not hang together well as a feature film. Each of these shorts, though, have some unique features, and they are worth discussing individually, beginning with the one that originally opened the film, The Martins and the Coys.

This short was removed because of the gunplay and violence throughout, and that’s a shame. Featuring the King’s Men singing a narration of the story, it’s basically a retelling of the Hatfields and McCoys feud. The animation in this short is quite good, with fluid movements of the characters and appealing designs. It plays much like one of the better Silly Symphonies.

While it takes a while for any story to come through, once it does it’s fantastic. We see one member of each feuding family come together to marry, but then end up still feuding. The dancing, fun and overall silliness of this piece is a great addition to the film, and its absence is truly felt if you watch Make Mine Music without it.

The next segment, Blue Bayou, however, is not such a piece. While The Martins and the Coys plays like a great short cartoon, Blue Bayou attempts to be something more. It is obviously an effort to be an interpretation of music like Fantasia. Unlike Fantasia, though, the short feels incomplete, and doesn’t provide characters to watch, just pastoral imagery.

This could be intentional, as one source I read claimed that Blue Bayou was intended to be part of Fantasia. Seen back to back with other segments of Make Mine Music, however, the tone seems off. It’s not the fault of the animation, which is gorgeous. This is feature quality stuff, which is rare at this point in the Disney feature films. There’s just not enough in the story to make it work.

What makes it even more jarring is going from Blue Bayou to All the Cats Join In, which is much more similar in tone to The Martins and the Coys. This is a fun and exciting segment, because the animation is so fluid and stylish. To the tune of a Benny Goodman song, it’s a moment in time captured perfectly. We get the bobby socks, the malt shop and the cruising culture all portrayed with fun and fast moving animation.

Once again, though, the next segment, Without You, makes a jarring transition from the quick pace and sends us back into the impressionistic style of Fantasia. If viewed on its own as a piece of art, this would be a perfectly acceptable short subject. Andy Russell croons the title song while we get a series of images accompanying him, moving from brush strokes and moving lines into more defined images like trees or rivers.

If you paired Blue Bayou and Without You together and made a movie with that style, it would not be a commercial success, but could arguably be an artistic one. What you have in The Martins and the Coys and All the Cats Join In is a less artistic statement but still a stretch of the medium. I happen to prefer the latter approach, and that is what happens during Casey at the Bat.

Jerry Colonna steps in to voice the short, reading the classic poem of Casey at the Bat while the story is told through animation. The style is again less impressionism and more short subject, but it works beautifully. The arrogance of Casey, the nervousness of the pitcher, the fluttering hearts of the women – all of them come across quickly and easily. It takes great skill to do that in animation, and this is a case where you can see the talent that Disney had on staff at the time.

The jumps back and forth between the two styles contributes greatly to the uneven nature of Make Mine Music. The first half of the film embodies this. But what of the second half? Ah…stay tuned, dear reader.

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

The Three Caballeros

At the end of 1944, Disney had made multiple trips to South America and Mexico as part of the Good Neighbor project and had released Saludos Amigos as a feature film that did fairly well. So well, in fact, that another feature was prepped using more animation that was intended for shorts as well as some brand new pieces that would expand the animation art form. The end result is a mixture of pieces that forms The Three Caballeros.

As in Saludos Amigos, there are separate pieces of animation, tied together by a framing device. In The Three Caballeros, it’s the idea of Donald opening birthday presents from Latin countries. The first one he opens is a film about Rare Birds, which manages to combine two shorts into one piece of the film.

The first short is Pablo the Cold-Blooded Penguin, featuring the story of a penguin who is trying to escape the South Pole and find refuge in warmer weather. A cute premise, it doesn’t quite play out well enough for the needs of the film. Pablo is an interesting little bird, but you don’t form much of an attachment to him in the film. There are nice tidbits, such as Pablo sailing up the coast in the same manner that Walt and his team did, but Pablo ends up being cute not interesting.



Things improve somewhat with the second short that lives inside the “Rare Birds” film, which is The Flying Gauchito. In this segment, a young headstrong boy dressed as a gaucho discovers a donkey that can fly and enters him in a horse race. The characters here are more appealing and the humor is better, primarily because of the oft used device of the narrator speaking to the character, similar to the Goofy films.

Where Three Caballeros hits its stride, though, is when Jose Carioca pops up, out of Donald’s second present, and offers to take Donald with him to Baia, a lovely town in Brazil. From here we get a beautiful mixture of the genius designs of Mary Blair, the live action performance of Aurora Miranda, and the technical wizardry of Ub Iwerks.



The Baia sequence combines all of these elements, sometimes shifting back and forth between them, and working the live action of Aurora into scenes with Donald and Jose. All of this is framed by the beautiful design work of Mary Blair, who was beginning here to exert more influence over the Disney look, as would be seen in later films and in the parks.



Once this sequence finishes, however, we are treated to the crazy mind of Ward Kimball, who animated the introduction of Panchito and the Three Caballeros song. Ward let his imagination fly on this piece, as characters pop in and out of the screen, singing wildly all the way. It’s a tour de force of zany animation that you would not expect from Disney.



To be honest, that piece is the highlight of the film, despite the fact that there is much more remaining. Panchito’s tour of Mexico with Donald and Jose is rather dull, despite Donald’s repeated insistence on chasing women and the fine effects that show up in the La Pinata sequence. There is lots of beauty there, but nothing hangs all of the scenes together in a satisfying way.
The Three Caballeros is a film that brings a huge variety of influences and styles together into one package. The problem is that these things don’t all mesh seamlessly, and they do not always compliment each other. If you watch each segment individually, they are fun to see, but they do not work together to make a great film.

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

Bambi - Film Review

Last Thursday night, some friends and fans alike sat down to watch Bambi together, in the first ever Tweetwatch on the Disney Film Project. We joined together in the DFP Friendfeed room, over Twitter via the use of the hashtag #BambiDFP, and watched one of the classic Walt Disney animated films.

What did we think? If I can offer my opinion first (it is my blog, after all), most animation historians consider Disney’s first Golden Age of Animation to consist of Snow White, Pinocchio and Fantasia. I would submit that those people have no heart, because Bambi is one of the most beautiful, moving and textured films I have ever seen.

“Man this sort of animated movie is such a lost art, so pretty, and nothing like it anymore.”
Todd Perlmutter

He’s absolutely right. A movie that has such detailed and intricate backgrounds could never be made today. There is a depth of field and a realism to the animation that would be impossible to achieve in today’s short turnaround and quick deadline world.

“I think I would've watched this film a lot sooner if I'd actually known the animation was this gorgeous.”
Alison D

The backgrounds by Tyrus Wong were the first thing I noticed, probably because the book by Frank and Ollie called so much attention to them. They do such a good job of giving the impression of a rich forest while also giving off the proper mood. I was incredibly impressed.

“Notice the drastic difference from how he greets Faline and how Simba greets Nala. Boy, the world has changed.”
Lori Abramson

Lori brought up a good point. The innocence and heartfelt nature of all the characters comes through almost immediately in Bambi. In current films, there’s more of an edge, and while the animation is very top notch, it doesn’t convey the same emotions as you see here. The story of Bambi in the original novel is a harsh portrait of the cruelty of nature, but this film is about the journey to adulthood, and infuses charm along the way.

The entire film is a classic, but really, the way it manipulates emotions and plays on your expectations is fantastic. Throughout the viewing of the film, I kept getting tweets from people asking if “it” was coming or if it had happened. The “it” of course, was the death of Bambi’s mother. When I heard the music play, a chill went through my heart. That music was on an old cassette and book set I had, and hearing it again was so powerful.

If there’s any drawback to Bambi, it’s that the film is so short, it doesn’t really provide deep insights into the characters. Modern films like Beauty and the Beast give us a penetrating look at the main characters. However, I don’t know that that would have worked in this film. In the end, what we’re left with is a quick snapshot of the life cycle of a deer in the forest, and it’s an amazing view into that world.

Next up for our Tweetwatch is Saludos Amigos, so if you want your thoughts in the next review, get all the details and join us next Wednesday, September 9 at 9 p.m.!

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

Bambi - The Story and the Film by Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston

Bambi is a tough film to do research for, in a lot of respects. Because it was under development for so long, there is a plethora of artwork out there, as well as some amazing stories of how the film was put together. Not all of the sources agree, as in any research, and it’s difficult to prioritize things.



That’s why getting things straight from the people who were there is so important. In the book Bambi – The Story and the Film by Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston, we get just that. Two of the famed Nine Old Men team up to produce a book that tells the entire story of how Bambi came to the screen, as well as showcasing some amazing artwork.

The stage is set quickly for the book, as Frank and Ollie relate how Walt wanted to use the extensive library of artwork done for Bambi to create a book that told the story of the film. Like a children’s book, but done in a different way. As such, the first part of the book is devoted to just that. Using the years of art developed, Frank and Ollie write out the story in a clean and simple way.

I personally didn’t care for this section, just because I knew the story, and wanted to get right to the story of how the film was made. That’s not to say it was bad, however. It’s a fantastic resource for looking at what kinds of paintings and sketches were done for the film. I’ll also say it’s an ingenious way to use that artwork without it feeling forced. I think from a flow standpoint, it might have been better at the end of the book, though.



The second part of this book, though, is where it shines. Delineated by year, Frank and Ollie take us through each phase of the development of Bambi, being perfectly frank and honest about what setbacks were suffered, why certain things fell away or came back and an idea of the despair that some of the artists felt trying to get this film done.

Much of the material in this section I covered in the Development of Bambi post, but there is such a wealth of knowledge here, that you really must read it for yourself. From the background paintings of Tyrus Wong, to the fun stories of Walt trying to make the best of all the work his staff had done.



Best of all, it doesn’t come from an impartial observer, although it is written that way. Instead, this comes from two people who were intimately involved in this film. If you don’t know about Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston, you probably shouldn’t be reading this, but they were among the most instrumental animators ever. To have their perspective on this film is invaluable.

This book is out of print now, but you should be able to find a copy on eBay or Amazon. Do it. It’s well worth your time and money, and will give you incredible insight into a remarkable film.

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

Development of Bambi

Did you know that Bambi was intended to be the second animated feature from Walt Disney Studios? Work on the film began as early as 1937, before Pinocchio and Fantasia. The story of how Bambi made it from a Felix Salten book about the harsh nature of the forest to a touching film by Walt Disney is an amazing one.



The rights to the book were originally purchased by live action producer Sidney Franklin in 1933. After struggling for years to figure out how to adapt the lush forest and talking animals to a live action film, Franklin sold the rights to Walt, but ended up staying on the production as a consultant, because of his passion for the project.



Walt’s team began story work in 1937 but it was tough going. While the book was a grim portrait of nature, Walt and his crew were more used to gags and humor as means to tell a story. Keep in mind, this work was going on before the advancements made in Fantasia and Dumbo. There was honestly a question as to whether the animators could balance honest and realistic portrayals of the animals with the realism of the book and the humor and heart that Walt wanted.

These issues forced Bambi to keep getting pushed back on the schedule. Production was shut down a couple of times, pushing Bambi behind Pinocchio and Fantasia on the release schedule. In their book about the film, Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston wrote about how the crew ended up in an entirely separate building, isolated from the rest of the studio, wondering if their work would ever see the light of day.



Walt was really going for realistic portrayals of the animals. He had teachers come into the studio to educate the artists and even brought live deer in to stay in a pen next to the animator’s area. The artists named the deer Bambi and Faline. The problem was, when Bambi got moved back on the schedule, the animators working on it were moved away from the pen, and they could barely see the deer!

Some key breakthroughs had to happen to make Bambi a viable film. The first was the backgrounds. Artists struggled with the detail and complexity of the backgrounds, tyring to render each and every branch, while still giving off the “magical” feeling of the forest. The solution came with Ty Wong, an artist who was new to the studio, but when asked to submit some paintings for Bambi, came up with a fusion of Oriental style and realism that was key to breaking through the background problem.



The second key breakthrough was in the realization that the children, Bambi, Thumper and Flower were the key to the story. By using the children as the focal point, the emphasis on realism among the animals was lessened. In the final film, those three characters move realistically, but their emotions and actions are more caricature. Meanwhile, the adult animals are portrayed realistically. This solved the realism problem, and ultimately made Bambi a more successful film.

Tomorrow, we’ll look at the Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston book that was the source of much of this great info, as well as containing plenty of gorgeous art.

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

Dumbo

The best Disney features are those that induce an emotional reaction in the viewer. Whether it’s fear from the Evil Queen in Snow White, joy when Pinocchio and Geppetto are reunited or awe at the artistry of Fantasia, it is that visceral reaction that makes Disney films so unique. Dumbo is no exception to this, and in fact could be the most emotional film that Disney made.

We spoke before about the limitations placed on director Ben Sharpsteen – he had to keep things simple and keep the budget down. Perhaps it was the limitations that forced him to make certain choices, we don’t really know. But the resulting film is a masterpiece of storytelling, that evokes real, raw emotions in a multitude of scenes.

The story of Dumbo is a simple one – an elephant born with unusually large ears is ridiculed until he learns to use his ears to fly. The telling of the story, though, is an emotional roller coaster, from the depths of despair when Dumbo’s mother is taken away from him, to the highs of seeing Dumbo fly through the air.

Some of the choices made in the telling truly make this film unique. The first is the fact that neither Dumbo nor his mother speak in the film. While the other elephants gossip and carry on, Dumbo and Ms. Jumbo do not. Therefore, their emotions and thoughts have to be communicated through their actions and their eyes. It works beautifully, such as when Ms. Jumbo lashes out at the kids teasing her baby, or especially during the elegant and beautiful “Baby Mine” sequence.



The second choice that I thought was very unique was that few of the humans in the piece are very developed. The circus hands are faceless drones as they set up in the rain, and with the exception of the boys teasing Dumbo or the ringmaster, none of the other humans are real characters. It helps to put the highlight on the animal characters, and especially Dumbo. Sure, this was probably a time saving device, but it works.



There are just so many outstanding sequences in this film, that it’s a true credit to the Disney staff they were able to get it done. With restrictions in place, to turn out a sequence like “Pink Elephants on Parade” is amazing. It’s very much like a piece from Fantasia inserted in the midst of the story, but it works! Not only does it work, it works well, serving as a bridge between Dumbo drinking the contaminated water and ending up in a tree.



Dumbo also has some interesting sociological and controversial elements, if you look for them. The faceless drones who put up the circus tent are obviously African-American, and sing a song about how they throw their money away and are “roustabouts.” The crows, who end up helping Dumbo fly, are caricatures of African-American attitudes of the time, if seen through one prism. And the clowns, who end up dumping booze in the water Dumbo drinks, are making fun of the striking animators. It’s a credit to the film, though, that these things do not distract from the main story’s impact.



At its heart, Dumbo is a story about overcoming obstacles and succeeding in spite of them. It’s also a story of love, and how belief and love can help overcome those obstacles. In the end, though, it’s just a fantastic story, and a beautiful film. One of my absolute favorites, and a film that does not get enough credit for how wonderful it is.

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

Development of Dumbo

We’ve talked before in this space about the struggles of the Disney studio in 1941. Pinocchio was a mild success, but not hugely profitable like Snow White, and then the expense of Fantasia had put the studio on some shaky financial footing. Then, the outbreak of war in Europe took that market away, the animator strike damaged the atmosphere at the studio and Walt began to suffer.



So it’s hard to figure out how, in the midst of all this turmoil, Disney came up with one of its most hopeful and inspirational animated features – Dumbo. Part of it was necessity, or course. Disney needed the revenue that a feature would provide, and director Ben Sharpsteen was told to make the film as cheaply and quickly as possible. It was conceived and animated in less than a year, which is remarkable in itself.

Perhaps, though, necessity was the mother of invention. I’ll fully review the film myself next week, but Dumbo is a simpler, cleaner and easier film to follow than Pinocchio or Fantasia. It’s really a character study on Dumbo, and that made it fun.



I’m getting ahead of myself, though. As mentioned, Dumbo was conceived as a film that would make a profit for the studio. To accomplish this, the film had to be scaled back from the expensive productions of the 1940 films, and even somewhat from Snow White. Backgrounds were ordered to be simpler, so they could be reused, and characters were easier to draw.

That said, it is on Dumbo that many feel that the Disney animators did some of their finest work. Bill Tytla on Dumbo and Ward Kimball on the crows are just two examples. The Pink Elephants on Parade sequence is phenomenal as well.



Dumbo, on its release, was successful for the company, almost doubling the money spent on it. It put the studio back into a decent position, and combined with Walt’s South American trip, was a shot in the arm going into the World War II era. The future would bring occupation of the studio by the military, and the war even bumped Dumbo off the front of Time Magazine, when the Pearl Harbor attack took the front page.

It’s worth noting, I guess, that Dumbo was only 64 minutes long. This was an issue with Disney’s distributor, RKO. Most films were at least 90 minutes, if not longer. RKO wanted Disney to trim the film to 30 minutes or expand it so that it would be a better feature. Disney refused, though, and RKO released Dumbo as intended.

Dumbo would be the last “original” feature for a while. After that, the war impeded Disney’s efforts to do full length films. Package features would become the new normal for a while, including efforts spawned from the South American trip. But all that in good time. First, we’ll talk about the artistry of Dumbo. Next week, the review!

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.

Pinocchio in the Parks

When you’re looking at a company like Disney, it’s hard to not compare the effects of an animated film on the theme parks. After all, if characters are popular, they will endure in the parks, and if they are not (see: Mr. Toad) they will not. Pinocchio is an interesting case study in that regard.

Pinocchio did not have an attraction in the parks for several decades. Disneyland and Walt Disney World did not open with Pinocchio themed attractions. Walt Disney World did have a nod to the film, with the Pinocchio Village Haus restaurant in Fantasyland. Still open to this day, the restaurant is themed to the German look of the film (note: yes, I know the film is set in Italy, but concept designs were German in nature, as were the designs of the restaurants), with paintings on the walls of the characters. Most people remember it for two things: the window on the far left that looks over into It’s A Small World and the Figaro Fries, the fries covered with cheese, bacon, lettuce and tomato.

Photo courtesy of wdwinfo.com

It was not until 1983 that a full Pinocchio attraction made its debut in the Disney parks, coming first to Tokyo Disneyland. The attraction debuted in Disneyland that same year, replacing the Fantasyland Theatre. The new ride took guests in carved vehicles that looked like Geppetto’s creations, through scenes from the film, roughly following the storyline of the movie.

Photo courtesy of All Ears Net

It was and is a fantastic ride, featuring some great scenes, such as Stromboli closing the cage around the guest and the reveal of Pleasure Island from a fun park to a desolate wasteland. Built with updated technology from the original dark rides, Pinocchio’s Daring Journey looks and feels a little newer and fresher when compared to the others.

Pinocchio has also appeared in the parks as a walk around character and especially in parades. For Disneyland’s 50th anniversary, there was a Pinocchio themed float in Walt Disney’s Parade of Dreams, featuring a band of Russian marionettes just like in Stromboli’s show in the film.

Monstro has an interesting career in the parks as well. As part of the Storybook Land Canal Boats, the entrance to the Storybook Land portion sails through Monstro's mouth, entering the area. When there, you'll see Geppetto's house as well. Monstro is also featured in Fantasmic! at both parks, as a projection on the water screens. Those both feature Pinocchio as well, with a puppet appearing, as does Jiminy Cricket on one of the water screen segments.

Photo courtesy of All Ears Net.

But the most “visible” presence in the parks is Jiminy Cricket. I put visible in quotes because many times, Jiminy has been an audio presence as much as a video. Back in the olden days of Disneyland, Jiminy narrated a record introducing people to the park, and was featured on the Bell telephones in the old Circlevision building.

These days, Jiminy is featured as the narrator for both Wishes and SpectroMagic in the Magic Kingdom at Walt Disney World. It’s Jiminy’s narration that carries Wishes, and he makes a brief appearance at the end of SpectroMagic to cap the parade.

Of course, “When You Wish Upon A Star” is also featured at the parks. It plays around the castles at both domestic parks, as well as versions of it in other areas, like Cinderella’s Golden Carousel, audio loops in Fantasyland and a few other places.

All in all, it seems that Pinocchio has had a long ranging effect on the parks, and the characters are still popular today. Much the same can be said for Snow White. As we’ll see when we get into the next set of films, that doesn’t always happen.

The Reception of Pinocchio

Pinocchio was released to the world on February 7, 1940, and the expectations had to be high. Snow White was one of the most successful films of all time at that point, so another Disney animated film should have been a sure bet, right?



For critics, the answer was a resounding “yes!” Archer Winsten, one of the foremost critics of the time, had been very negative on Snow White, yet wrote of Pinocchio: “The faults that were in Snow White no longer exist. In writing of Pinocchio, you are limited only by your power of expressing enthusiasm.” His was not the only review singing the praises of the film.

The Academy Awards would eventually recognize the film as well, mostly for the song “When You Wish Upon A Star,” which closes the movie. That song went on to win the Oscar for Best Song and the score won for Best Score of a Musical. It was recognized then and now as a peak of Disney’s animated features.

The problem was that audiences did not embrace the film in the same numbers as Snow White. While Pinocchio cost just north of $2.2 million to make, it did not recoup those costs during its initial release, topping $1.4 million. For comparison, over nearly the same amount of time, Snow White was able to make $3.5 million, making it the most successful film of all time.

Now, movie box office is not the end all and be all of measurements, but it goes to what I said in my review yesterday. Pinocchio is a very good, even great film, but it’s not one that I would say that you want to watch over and over again. It’s not a tragic story, because there is a happy ending, but it is somewhat of a dark film.



It’s easy to see what people took away from this film when you look at the most popular characters from the movie today. Jiminy Cricket, who is really intended to be the comic relief/sidekick character, has to be considered the breakout character from the film. He is ever present today in a host of media, and has been a big part of the Disney company for decades.

Other than Jiminy, the big take away from this film is the song, “When You Wish Upon A Star.” It has become the anthem of the company itself, and most people don’t even associate it with Pinocchio. My children have never seen the entire film, but both of them know that song and think of the Disney parks when they hear it. Speaking of which, tomorrow, we’ll take a look at how Jiminy Cricket, Pinocchio and even Monstro have become big parts of the Disney theme parks.

Pinocchio

Many animation historians and people much smarter and more experienced than I have named Pinocchio as the masterpiece of Walt Disney’s first Golden Age of Animation. Not to say that I disagree, but I think there is a definite difference between a technical masterpiece and something that the audience will embrace.



First, let me say that Pinocchio is a fantastic film. The artistry and storytelling are beyond compare. The leaps made from Snow White to Pinocchio are impressive. The characters, who were all retooled in the middle of development, are extremely well done. The backgrounds are very detailed and convey the tone and mood of each scene.



All that being said, I would rather watch Snow White than Pinocchio. This is a debate that my wife and I have often – what makes a film great? A film like Pinocchio is great because it manages to affect the viewer emotionally. The story is engaging, the characters lively, and it reaches a place within the viewer that few films can. But I’d rather watch Snow White, because it’s more fun, and the story is still as good as Pinocchio, if not as emotionally resonant.

Pinocchio’s strong point is the emotion it manages to convey. From the very first scene, where Geppetto finishes Pinocchio and wistfully hopes for him to become a real boy, this is an emotional film. It’s easy to feel Geppetto’s desire for love, to feel the fear of the boys on Pleasure Island, the joy of Pinocchio and Geppetto when they are reunited, and the despair when Pinocchio “dies.”



This film more than Snow White relies on its main characters. There is very little slapstick or gag sequence like we saw with the Seven Dwarfs. Instead, it’s the personality of the characters that is the driver of this film. Pinocchio’s innocence is his defining trait, which is a far cry from the original book or how he was being developed in the early days of this film. Jiminy Cricket’s character is probably the best, as he is the de facto narrator and gets most of the screen time. Even the side characters, like Figaro and Cleo, are easy to relate to. I felt for Figaro the entire film. That poor cat gets mistreated and pushed aside all the time!



The darkness of the second half of this film is where I feel it achieves technical brilliance, but loses some of the mass appeal. The Pleasure Island sequence is terrifying, plain and simple. Seeing the coachman talking with Honest John and Gideon you get the sense of foreboding, but then watching the boys change to donkeys and realizing that they will not get out, it is sheer terror.

Then, having Pinocchio realize his lesson and take off undersea after Geppetto, there is the massive whale Monstro to contend with. The whale chasing Pinocchio and Geppetto around the ocean is scary, but not quite the same emotional turmoil as the Pleasure Island bits.



Where I felt like this film did not capture me was with a sense of fun. Jiminy Cricket is the main comic relief or gag for the film, but it wasn’t enough. Seeing Pinocchio get caught up by Stromboli and then off to Pleasure Island, the viewer is constantly worried, and having Jiminy voice those concerns does not allay them. That is why I feel better watching Snow White than I do watching Pinocchio.

That is not to say that one is better than the other, they are just different films. Pinocchio may well be a better film from a storytelling and emotion standpoint. It’s just difficult to watch, because it is a mature film for someone who has children and has a hard time watching Pinocchio being led astray. Regardless, Pinocchio is a masterpiece that should be viewed by any serious student of animation.

All images copyright Disney. All rights reserved.