Tag Archives: cinderella

March 4, 2018

Disney’s Best Five Film Run

By Joe

walt_disney_pictures_logo_slice_01The Walt Disney Company has been producing animated features for 80 years now. In that time, the company has released 55 films with a 56th on the way later this year and others in development. I’m only talking about the animated ones, because if you add in live-action and all of the films released by Pixar or under the Marvel or Star Wars banner then you’ll easily eclipse 100 films. Disney’s bread and butter has been the animated feature though, beginning in 1937 with Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. Over the years they’ve had ups and downs and had to keep up with changes in technology and film production techniques. It’s a very interesting history, and likely numerous rankings exist around the internet listing out the films in order of best to worst, or vice versa.

For this post, I wanted to do something different. I wanted to look more at the eras of the films produced. At first I thought about just going in 5 year chunks, but that made things unbalanced as Disney has had periods where they churn out a bunch of films and periods where they don’t. Instead, I felt it would be more interesting to just divide the films up into groups, and with there being 55 total films as of this writing, it made sense to go with groups of five. These groups seem to work well as they tend to span around 7 or 8 years and result in some fun pairings. At first, I listed them out and then just did a totally subjective ranking. I was fine with the end result, but just for some added fun I added a score to each film on a scale of one to five with five being the best and then ranked them by total score and I ended up with almost the exact same list. Since that ranking felt a little more interesting, I’ll keep it and include my totally subjective score for each film as we go along while also linking to any films I may have reviewed here, so let’s get to it.

MV5BZTgyMGI1YzUtNTI0ZC00MGM5LTk3MGYtOTkyYzMwMDBlYmM2XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjI1Mjk4MTg@._V1_UX182_CR0,0,182,268_AL_

Saludos Amigos (1942)

1942 -1949 – 10 points

Well, this isn’t surprising. By going with groups of five I inadvertently grouped basically all of the package films together in one grouping. These were the films produced during World Word II when Disney was cut-off from overseas revenue streams on its films. As a result, the company had to settle for cheaper releases. None of these films are particularly good, though each also has its moments which is why they all scored a 2 across the board (you have to be pretty bad to score less than 2, and really great to score a 5 from me). Saludos Amigos is basically a propaganda film aiming to improve opinions of South America as Disney was not opposed to making such crap. At least it has Donald Duck in it though. The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad definitely has its fans too, but I personally don’t enjoy that picture very much. Basically anyone doing a ranking like this one is going to start with this quintet.

MV5BMTkwOTU5MTA2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwMjYyNTc3._V1_UY1200_CR89,0,630,1200_AL_

Lilo & Stitch (2002)

2002 – 2005 – 11.5 Points

  • Lilo & Stitch – 5
  • Treasure Planet – 2.5
  • Brother Bear – 2
  • Home on the Range – 1
  • Chicken Little – 1

Also not surprising for Disney fans, this era captures Disney’s struggle to stay relevant in the field of 2D animation while also exploring CGi. Treasure Planet is a hybrid picture that at least looks good, but doesn’t offer much else. Brother Bear is okay, but feels outdated and like a picture that’s struggling to match some of the old Disney classics. The latter two are just plain awful and probably the two worst Disney animated features. Home on the Range has the fun distinction of essentially being the film that killed 2D animation at Disney – thanks! Propping this group up and keeping it from a dismal finish behind even the package film era is Lilo & Stitch, a supremely wonderful picture about two sisters trying to cope and understand each other following the loss of their parents. It basically explores depression in adolescents, but kind of hides it by also injecting the incredibly fun Stitch to the mix and it’s also gorgeous to boot. It’s really on my short list of the best films put out by Disney.

51WA7XEB92L._SY445_

The Emperor’s New Groove (2000)

1999 – 2001 – 12.5 Points

  • Tarzan – 3
  • Fantasia 2000 – 2
  • Dinosaur – 2
  • The Emperor’s New Groove – 3.5
  • Atlantis – 2

This era represents the winding down of the New Renaissance era started in the late 1980s. You basically have two perfectly good Disney films in Tarzan and Emperor’s New Groove together with two forgettable ones and one sequel that really didn’t impress. Emperor’s New Groove might be on the studio’s most underrated films as it’s a really fun story with some great animation. Tarzan is the more popular due to its legendary character and for some reason the Phil Collins soundtrack was really popular. It’s one of those films that I think looks better than it is, but it’s fine. Dinosaur is pretty bad, it’s earnest so I won’t drop it to the dismal rankings but it just doesn’t work and has aged poorly. Atlantis, like Treasure Planet, is visually interesting and little else. And Fantasia 2000 was about as big a flop as the original. While the original benefits from being unique when it was released, and for containing the iconic Sorceror’s Apprentice (re-including that in 2000 doesn’t really count for as much) while the 2000 version just looks better and doesn’t introduce really anything noteworthy.

Unknown-40

The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh (1977)

1977 – 1986 – 14.5 Points

  • The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh – 3.5
  • The Rescuers – 3
  • The Fox and the Hound – 3
  • The Black Cauldron – 2
  • The Great Mouse Detective – 3

Commercially, this era of films is looked on rather badly. This is when critics were sounding the bells of doom for Disney wondering if the studio could turn it around. The Black Cauldron was one of the biggest flops the company ever endured, costing a boatload of money to produce while failing to connect with critics and audiences. Because of that status it might be lumped in with a few others as being among Disney’s worst, but it’s really not that bad. It at least contains a really memorable, and frightening, villain in The Horned King and brings back some of that old scary fairy tale vibe. It has its fans, like noted critic Roger Ebert. As for the rest, they’re all pretty good films just none are able to really rise above the cream of the crop. The Pooh shorts collected in The Many Adventures are pretty much considered classics by now while The Great Mouse Detective gets the credit for turning the studio around. It’s a fun adventure and one I’m a little surprised didn’t get a sequel. The Rescuers will get that honor a few years later, but the first outing for Bernard and Miss Bianca is the superior one. And then there’s The Fox and the Hound, a nice little buddy movie that aims big, but doesn’t quite deliver as impactful a story as it wants to. It’s still a nice little picture though.

tangled2010

Tangled (2010)

2007 – 2011 – 15 Points

If this era had a title it would probably be The Great Turn-Around. After bottoming out with the pair of Home on the Range and Chicken Little, Disney really needed to reassert itself as a leading producer of quality animated features. Pixar had eclipsed them and this group of films marks the moment when things finally started to get going in the right direction, though they still needed to take a couple more lumps. It’s also, sadly, the last of the 2D animation and marks the full commitment to CG pictures going forward. Meet the Robinsons and Bolt were another duo of clumsily animated CG pictures. Bolt is the better of the two, and I considered going with a 2.5 score, but in the end it’s also really not a film I care to watch again. The Princess and the Frog is gorgeous, and Winnie the Pooh is a delightful continuation of The Many Adventures that should please most children. Tangled is the clear star though and it’s the first CG film Disney made that is on par with Pixar in terms of visuals and it’s also a modern princess film that works. It helped lay what is a new foundation for that sub-genre of films and it kind of gets overlooked because of the success of another princess movie still to come, but I actually prefer it to all of the CG princess tales.

MV5BYTYxNGMyZTYtMjE3MS00MzNjLWFjNmYtMDk3N2FmM2JiM2M1XkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNjY5NDU4NzI@._V1_UX182_CR0,0,182,268_AL_

The Lion King (1994)

1994 – 1998 – 15.5 Points

  • The Lion King – 4
  • Pocahontas – 2
  • The Hunchback of Notre Dame – 3
  • Hercules – 3
  • Mulan – 3.5

The coasting years. Hot off the success of early 90s films like Aladdin and Beauty and the Beast, Disney settled into a nice groove of pretty films with big songs and good enough stories. The Lion King is probably the studio’s last hallmark offering of the 90s. It’s a film some might give a higher score, but I think it’s definitely not as good as the group of films that preceded it. Meanwhile, the only dud of the group is Pocahontas, a film that has its heart in the right place, but plays too loose with actual history and is hampered by the G rating from telling the story it probably wants. The Hunchback of Notre Dame, on the other hand, found a way to tell a more mature story under the restraints placed upon it by the studio. Hercules is a fun film, nothing more and nothing less, while Mulan is a greater triumph than all but The Lion King. It tells its own Joan of Arc tale through the eyes of a strong, young Chinese woman. I wish it had a little better of a climax, which is the only thing keeping it from being among Disney’s best, but at the time it was a much needed film as it took the lead woman out of the damsel in distress role. All of these films follow the broadway format, which was getting tiresome by this stage, but all of them also look and sound fantastic. If we were ranking just by visual fidelity, then this group would probably place near the top.

220px-One_Hundred_and_One_Dalmatians_movie_poster

One Hundred and One Dalmatians (1961)

1961 – 1973 – 16 Points

The Xerox era. Finding animation was too costly, Disney turned to a new technique that utilized Xerox to copy cels and thus reduce the load on the animators. The studio basically gives credit to this process for even allowing them to create One Hundred and One Dalmatians as animating all of those puppies the old-fashioned way would have just been too daunting. As a group of films, that gives them a pretty distinct look as the earliest films done this way have a very rough, sketch quality to them. It has its own charm, though I prefer the old days. This is a solid, almost spectacular, grouping though. You have The Sword in the Stone and Robin Hood, both fun little tales that can please a gathering of all ages. And then you have One Hundred and One Dalmatians and The Jungle Book, two pretty big releases for the Disney company. Dalmatians, in particular, is one of the studio’s best and it’s a fun caper set in a modern setting that doesn’t beat you over the head with songs. The Jungle Book is just a good buddy comedy of sorts, and Mowgli is a relatable and sympathetic character throughout while the shadow of Shere Khan adds intrigue along the way. It also features some of the best work of the renowned Sherman Brothers. Lastly, there’s The Aristocats. If Dalmatians hadn’t come before it I wonder if I’d look upon it more fondly as it basically feels like a retread of that picture, but with cats instead. It has one pretty good song though, so at least there’s that.

921845-338

Lady and the Tramp (1955)

1950 – 1959 – 17 Points

Perhaps the most divisive grouping. This is a group of films lots of people grew up with, so they pack a lot of nostalgic value. They’re also a bit divisive as well since you have some old-fashioned princess tales where a kind, submissive woman is rescued by a dashing prince. There’s the racial imagery in Peter Pan, also not a high point for Disney, and then just the manic atmosphere of Alice in Wonderland that you either like or don’t like. As you can tell by my score, I’m among those who do not particularly care for Alice in Wonderland. I think it starts off fine, but then just gets too bogged down in being “wacky” and I struggle to remain invested whenever I watch it. Sleeping Beauty was another huge flop for the studio, but it seems like over time it’s become much more beloved. I don’t particularly enjoy the very angular features of the characters and the flatness of the visuals, plus the story is kind of the studio’s low point as far as making interesting leading women. It’s saved by the iconic Maleficent from being truly dreadful. At the other end of the spectrum is Cinderella, which tells the tale of a victim of circumstance who finds a way to be a decent person throughout it all and is rewarded in the end. By itself, it’s a nice film and I don’t find fault with the film’s message. It’s only when lumped in with other “princess” movies that it starts to feel problematic. Peter Pan is merely fine. I think it’s weak in terms of song and as an adventure it’s ho-hum. It’s more of a kid’s fantasy film, than anything. The best though is Lady and the Tramp, a really fun “dog movie” with interesting characters, a simple but effective premise, and the best visuals of any Disney movie. This one is beautiful and I get a little sad every time I watch it because Disney just doesn’t make movies that look like this anymore and maybe never will. It also doesn’t feature a ton of songs, which is a plus in my book. I understand those who may find it boring or slow, but for me it’s almost perfectly paced and just too visually stimulating for me to lose interest at any point.

pinocchio1sh

Pinocchio (1940)

1937 – 1942 – 17 Points

The group that started it all. It’s actually tied with the group preceding this one at 17 points a piece. My tiebreaker was simply to pick the best film of the bunch and go with that group, and if you’ve read my reviews for some of these films then you would know that Pinocchio is my all-time favorite Disney picture. It’s a great story that’s captivating, warm, scary, suspenseful and is pushed along by wonderful visuals and timeless songs. It’s the best example of Disney’s old way of creating an animated movie which wasn’t as reliant on song-breaks like the films of the late 80s and 90s. Joining Pinocchio is, of course, the one that started it all – Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. I recently reviewed this one in light of the fact that it recently turned 80(!) and it seemed like a good time to revisit it. It’s breath-takingly beautiful, even by today’s standards, which helps to cover-up a sometimes slow moving plot. It may have scored a half-point for nostalgic reasons now that I think about it, but I’m sticking with the 3.5 since it feels like it should be elevated about the likes of Dumbo and Bambi, which round out this list. Both are adorably sweet films that also have moments of fear and sadness to balance them out. Dumbo is the simpler of the two, while Bambi is the more visually impressive. Fantasia was basically Walt’s pet project and something that I think was made to appeal to him first and foremost, which makes it rather interesting. It’s not really for me, but I recognize that it has value and The Sorcerer’s Apprentice segment is pretty wonderful. It also has the distinction of being one of the only Disney movies to never be aired on free television.

1200x630bb

Wreck-It Ralph (2012)

2012 – 2016 (Present) – 18 Points

  • Wreck-It Ralph – 4
  • Frozen – 4
  • Big Hero 6 – 3
  • Zootopia – 4
  • Moana – 3

You may think this one is up this high because of recency bias, but let me assure that is not the case. This is the first, and only, grouping of all CG films and it just so happens all of them are pretty damn good. While none managed a 5 rating from me, none also fell below a 3 which is also a first on our list. Let’s start with my pick of the worst, which is Big Hero 6. It’s a great visual film, but it suffers because it just feels too derivative of other Disney films in its turning points. It also is a victim of being essentially a super hero film and there’s certainly some fatigue associated with that genre these days. If you’re a younger person who is only familiar with Disney’s modern output then it might be more appealing to you since its tragic elements feel less repetitive, but for me it’s just okay. Moana is slightly better. It’s a pretty solid adventure with a fun pairing between its heroine and Maui, a god, that would probably be better if it was a bit shorter and knocked out a song or two. Zootopia is ambitiously serious and it’s a pretty fantastic one-time viewing experience. Its lack of “fun” and reliance on mystery and plot twists cause it to not hold up as well on repeated viewings, but just judged by itself it’s actually pretty great. Frozen is the most popular film on this list, though I think it’s visually the worst. It had a whole bunch of problems during production, originally starting off as a hand-drawn picture, so it’s not really surprising to see it doesn’t look its best, but it makes up for it in charm. This is a likable cast that puts a nice twist on the princess formula. I think, musically, it’s a bit overrated. Not “Let It Go,” that song is fantastic, but other than “Do You Want to Build A Snowman?” I could do without the rest. Wreck-It Ralph is the star for me, and not because it’s a video game movie, but because it best combines characters, heart, plot, and visuals into a total package. In looking at my ratings, I’m actually thinking maybe I should bump it up a half-point to separate it from the rest, but I’ll stick with what I’ve got. It’s only real failing is that it doesn’t really take advantage of the cameos from video games, outside of the therapy session, and it does feel a bit on the long side. Still, a great movie and one I tend to get sucked into whenever it’s on television (which is a lot, it seems).

61F14ZAHR6L._SY445_.gif

Aladdin (1992)

1988 – 1993 – 19 Points

At last, we’ve come to our top spot and perhaps not surprisingly it captures the peek of Disney’s New Renaissance. This is a three-headed monster of films that really changed the game on what an animated feature could deliver, including the first one to be nominated for an Academy Award for best picture. It’s also a gauntlet of pictures as each one was released in a different year – five pictures for five years. The amusing part is it also contains two films that are certainly not beloved. Oliver & Company holds some nostalgic value for me because it’s the first film I can recall seeing in a movie theater. As such, I probably like it a bit more than the 2 rating I gave it, but I can see it’s faults as a film. It does deserve credit for establishing the new format that our big three would adopt. The Rescuers Down Under has the distinction of being the only theatrically released direct sequel of any animated Disney feature, a distinction that will end later this year when the Wreck-It Ralph sequel is released. By itself, it’s fine and Bernard and Miss Bianca are actually interesting enough to justify another feature, even if no one was really begging for it. Hardly Disney’s worst, but possibly its most forgettable considering the film that preceded it and the ones to follow. This group is defined by the three big ones:  The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, and Aladdin. Some dislike The Little Mermaid for being another princess tale, with Ariel needing to be rescued from the likes of her father, King Triton, and her love interest Eric – the dashing prince. I see it more as a tale of adolescence with Ariel embodying the personality of many 16 year olds I’ve come across. She has passion, a rebel spirit, and is perhaps too quick to identify what she wants. Perhaps an ending where she decides that Eric isn’t all that great would have turned things on its head and been more interesting, but it’s not as if Eric is a bad person. He actually is pretty great, so maybe happily ever after isn’t so bad? It’s also Disney’s best film when judging it strictly on the merits of its soundtrack thanks to the triumvirate of “Under the Sea,” “Part of Your World,” and “Kiss the Girl.” With Beauty and the Beast we’re treated to a heroine that’s a bit more realistic and willing to take charge of her situation. She sacrifices herself to The Beast to free her father, a noble gesture for sure even though it’s not what any father would want for their daughter. The film is hurt slightly by the fact that they need to gloss over the warming-up of The Beast and Belle, but that’ what happens with 90 minute features. Lavishly animated and wonderfully scored, it’s not a surprise why so many think it’s the best the studio has produced to date. And lastly, there’s Aladdin – Disney’s greatest tale of adventure. It’s almost surprising it took the studio this long to tackle the story of Aladdin as it fits in with a lot of the adventure pieces from both the animation department and the live-action one from the decades before, but Aladdin benefits greatly from being made in the 90s because it looks incredible and packs an iconic performance from the late Robin Williams as The Genie. This is a supremely entertaining film that might be my favorite of the bunch, but really on  any given day I could make a case for why any of those three are the best.

 

 

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Film

July 11, 2014

The World and The Land: A Disney Comparison

By Joe

orl-disneyland-vs-disney-world-castles-pictureIt has been a long time between posts for me. Never since I started this blog have I only made one post for an entire month, but my personal life left little time for leisure throughout the month of June. Without getting into too much detail, I spent the end of June and the start of July honeymooning in Disneyland: The Happiest Place on Earth.  As a dweller of the east coast, I have been fortunate enough to vacation in Disney World several times as both a kid and adult (it’s actually where I “popped the question” to my now wife) but I had never left the east coast for the west and visited the original park, Disneyland.

Growing up, Disneyland was sold to me as the lesser Disney World. As such, I never had any desire to really see Disneyland if Disney World was better. When vacationing at Disney World, the cast members there love sharing the fact that the entire Disneyland park (and the new park, California Adventure) could fit inside the parking lot of Disney World’s Magic Kingdom. The common thing I heard from people who had been to both was that Disneyland was something to do on a weekend, while Disney World was a destination worthy of a week’s investment. Recently though I became interested in the historical aspect of Disneyland. As many know, Disneyland was the original park and its construction was orchestrated by Walt Disney himself, while Disney World was in the early planning stages when Disney passed away in 1966. And while many attractions are shared between the two resorts, Disneyland does have a few unique rides and also still has some of the older rides that have vanished from Disney World over the years. When it came time to settle on a honeymoon, going back to Disney World was certainly an option for my wife and I but we both had a desire to do something at least a little different. It seemed like the right time to hop on a plane bound for California and check out the original and see for ourselves which was best. In the end, we came to find the two were comparable, but also different enough to possess their own charm. It didn’t seem right to necessarily pit the two against each other, which is why this post is merely a comparison and not a contest. After a week (with a five day park hopper pass) at the Disneyland Resort, this is the impression it left upon me:

Size

A map of Disney World, Disneyland is said to be able to fit in the Magic Kingdom's parking lot.

A map of Disney World, Disneyland is said to be able to fit in the Magic Kingdom’s parking lot.

The first thing that comes to mind when comparing the two resorts is size. Disneyland started off as one theme park with Sleeping Beauty’s castle serving as the central hub for park goers looking to experience the wonder of Fantasyland, the thrill of Adventureland, and the mystique of Tomorrowland. Since 2001, California Adventure has existed opposite Disneyland on the site of the original Disneyland parking lot. Loosely inspired by Disney World’s Hollywood Studios park, California Adventure is home to Pixar and the unique Paradise Pier and Cars Land attractions. Disneyland covers approximately 160 acres with California Adventure an additional 67 acres. By comparison, Disney World’s four parks and several hotels occupy 40 square miles, with the Magic Kingdom totaling 107 acres, Hollywood Studios 135, Epcot 300, and Animal Kingdom a whopping 500 acres. There are also two water parks at Disney World and both have a Downtown Disney area but it should be clear that it’s an apples and oranges comparison when it comes to size.

The size of Disney World was the main draw for Disney as he wanted an area with limitless potential. As a result, Disney World still has tremendous room for expansion should the need or desire arrive while Disneyland is basically locked in. The added size means more room for guests and more variety, but it also means a heavier reliance on transportation. Get used to waiting in lines for a bus at Disney World, while Disneyland’s compact size means everything, including most hotels, is within walking distance. The size of each resort is both a pro and a con, and Disney World at least gives patrons multiple options for park hopping via the shuttle lines, monorail, or ferry boats (the only exception being Animal Kingdom, which is basically isolated from the other three parks). I love the variety of Disney World, but I also really loved going back and forth between Disneyland and California Adventure throughout the day, gaming the fast pass system or just trying to avoid whichever park was more crowded.

Rides and Attractions

Disneyland's current biggest attraction: Radiator Springs Racers.

Disneyland’s current biggest attraction: Radiator Springs Racers.

The size of both resorts is obviously of no consequence if there’s nothing worth seeing and experiencing at the parks. To make comparing the two easy, many rides are duplicated across the parks while some of the seemingly unique rides share the same technology or format as a ride at the other park.

Disneyland and The Magic Kingdom are the easiest to compare as The Magic Kingdom is essentially the sister park to Disneyland. They have the same layout and general design with a castle serving as the central hub of everything. In Disneyland, it’s Sleeping Beauty Castle while The Magic Kingdom is home to the colossal Cinderella’s Castle. Cinderella’s Castle is the representation of the size difference between the two resorts as it dwarfs Sleeping Beauty Castle. When it comes to the surrounding lands, the only major difference is the northern most land at each. In Disneyland there’s Mickey’s Toon Town while Disney World boasts a larger version of Fantasyland (and at one point in time, had its own Toon Town). Originally, many of the classic Disneyland dark rides existed at Disney World, such as Snow White’s Scary Adventure and Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride. These have been replaced at Disney World in favor of an additional Dumbo ride, a small Goofy coaster, and the new Seven Dwarves Mine Train, a ride unique to Disney World.

And here's Disney World's newest ride: The Seven Dwarfs Mine Train.

And here’s Disney World’s newest ride: The Seven Dwarfs Mine Train.

The dark rides are mostly for kids. As an adult, I find myself only riding them to escape the heat. Between the two parks, the only one to really leave an impression on me is the Disneyland version of Peter Pan’s Flight which seemed faster and appeared to be kept in better shape than its Disney World counterpart. Disneyland has some unique dark rides such as the Monsters Inc. ride and Alice in Wonderland, but none are difference makers. As for the rides the two parks share, I prefer Splash Mountain at Disney World to the one at Disneyland. Disney World’s version has a bigger car and a bigger drop at the end. Disney World’s Space Mountain is a bit better, though I’m personally not a fan of the ride. A lot of people prefer Disneyland’s version of Pirates of the Caribbean, but I don’t find either ride compelling. Disneyland has a newly refurbished Big Thunder Mountain that’s noticeably smoother than Disney World’s, and therefore better. The original Tower of Terror at Disney World is a more immersive ride experience, but I actually preferred the shorter and quick to the point version at California Adventure. Disneyland also has the superior version of Buzz Lightyear thanks to the non-mounted gun, though both versions of Buzz pale in comparison to Toy Story Mania, which is the same experience at each park.

The unique rides offer the best way for the two parks to stand out. I haven’t been on the newest ride at Disney World, the Seven Dwarfs Mine Train, but it does look pretty rad. A unique ride at Disneyland that I wasn’t able to experience is the Finding Nemo Submarine Voyage due to an expansive refurbishment going on right now. The ride is a rebranding of the old submarine ride that also existed at Disney World and was pretty hokey, so I can’t say with any certainty that it’s a worthwhile experience. Seemingly unique rides like the Indiana Jones ride at Disneyland, exist at Disney World but under a different theme, in this case the DINOSAUR ride at Animal Kingdom. Of the two, I prefer Indy but the experience is pretty comparable. Another one is Epcot’s Test Track, which basically exists at Cars Land as Radiator Springs Racers. Again, if given the choice between the two, I’ll take the Disneyland version because of the fun theme though Test Track offers a bit more thrills than its counterpart and both are awesome. The two resorts also each sport their own roller coaster: California Screamin’ at California Adventure and Rock n’ Roller Coaster at Hollywood Studios. Both start off with a bang and contain sharp turns and an inverted loop. The Rock n’ Roller Coaster is indoors and features an Aerosmith theme while Screamin’ is outdoors, is longer, and overlooks the Paradise Pier area. Of the two, again I side with Disneyland as California Screamin’ offers the overall better experience. And for some reason it’s not very popular and boasts consistently short wait times. Animal Kingdom has the safari ride which is obviously an experience unique to that park. It also has the Expedition Everest ride which also does not have a Disneyland counterpart and is a pretty thrilling experience.

Both parks feature shows and fireworks displays to entertain guests when they’re not eating or enjoying the rides. Every night at Disney World’s Magic Kingdom, there’s “Wishes” the fireworks show. It’s a love letter to the Disney films of old (and some new) that will stir the emotions of anyone with fond memories for such films. The outdoor spectacular “Fantasmic” at Hollywood Studios is something to be seen if you’re a kid or adult. One part water show, one part broadway, and one part fireworks, it’s probably the best thing going at either resort. Not to be outdone, Disneyland has the Magical Fireworks each night which are entertaining but not quite on the same level as “Wishes.” Disneyland also has its own version of “Fantasmic,” but without a dedicated amphitheater setting, it’s not as grand, but gets the job done. California Adventure boasts “The Wonderful World of Color” which is basically a laser water show out in front of Mickey’s Fun Wheel. It’s unique and pretty neat to experience, and the special Glow With the Show edition of the famous Mickey Ear Hat is a fun, albeit pricey, addition to the experience. It’s not quite on the same level as “Fantasmic,” but is something visitors to Disneyland should go out of their way to experience at least once.

Making its debut in 2013, Disney World's Magic Band is the new fast pass.

Making its debut in 2013, Disney World’s Magic Band is the new fast pass.

One huge difference between the two resorts is the Fast Pass system. At Disneyland, patrons are able to visit kiosks throughout the parks and essentially reserve time in the future to experience a certain ride or attraction. For most rides, it means avoiding a line and returning to the attraction in an hour or so (for the mega-popular Radiator Springs Racers, it may mean returning to the ride in several hours) at no additional cost. The downside to this is that only certain rides are equipped for Fast Pass with some popular rides like The Matterhorn or Toy Story left off. The system was in place at Disney World for years until recently when Disney introduced the Magic Band and Fast Pass Plus. Basically, now park goers decide before they even enter the park what rides they want to fast pass and for when. The downside is that each person gets only three fast passes per day so if you want to experience an entire park in a day you’re going to have to wait in some uncomfortable lines. Especially if you have kids that want to go on Peter Pan, Dumbo, It’s a Small World, Splash Mountain, Big Thunder Mountain, etc. On one hand, it’s convenient to be able to decide ahead of time what rides you want to go on (you can also make changes at the locations in the park or via a smart phone app), but only having three and being limited to one park per day kind of sucks. It would be nice if they added one or two more, or at least let you spread the three across parks, but I don’t know if Disney really has any incentive to do so (aside from the potential to sell more park hoppers).

Dining and Accommodations

Epcot; otherwise known as my home away from home.

Epcot; otherwise known as my home away from home.

Disney World, being true to its name, is expansive and boasts numerous Disney brand hotels. It’s one of the main advantages the resort has over Disneyland for The Walt Disney Company was able to control all of the land surrounding the parks. By contrast, Disneyland is literally surrounded by tons of hotels, all but three are independently owned by non-Disney corporations. For the consumer, this means some very reasonably priced rooms, but a lack of Disney flair.

Even though Disney owns nearly all of the hotels in Disney World, it is possible to stay onsite without breaking the bank. The “value” hotels are fairly priced and offer free transportation to the park via shuttle. The moderate and premium resorts will make a dent on your wallet, but offer better locations and grounds. Conversely, if you want to stay at a Disney hotel at Disneyland expect to pay, at minimum, $300 a night for a bland room. I did stay at the Disneyland Hotel, and even though I can freely admit it’s overpriced, it is a really great hotel for Disney fans. Nearly everything in the hotel room is adorned with a Mickey Mouse head and the swimming pool boasts a monorail themed water slide. Ultimately, a room usually just ends up being a place to sleep but if you want to go nuts both resorts have plenty to offer, but Disneyland on the cheap pretty much can’t be done at a Disney hotel.

While I feel both resorts compare quite favorably with one another in most areas, one they do not on is dining. As far as dining and food go, Disney World is hands-down the better experience and that’s almost entirely due to Epcot. Both resorts offer the same old stuff in the parks and at the hotels, but Epcot’s World Showcase is the only place where you can sample all kinds of different cuisine and get a stiff drink too. California Adventure offers beer, wine, and frozen margaritas, but both the wife and I found the margaritas and mixed drinks to be a little on the weak side. By contrast, even hint at Epcot’s La Hacienda that you want a little kick to your margarita and you’ll be going home in a wheelbarrow. My wife and I very much enjoyed Disneyland, but on more than one occasion we both voiced our disappointment at the lack of an Epcot.

Final Words

fantasmicIn the end, Disney is Disney and if you like the Disney experience you’ll love Disney World and Disneyland. It’s charming and familiar and both feature a lot of the same rides, attractions, merchandise, and so on. If you just want to go and enjoy the rides, you’ll have a blast but if you only have a day to spend there then Disneyland will let you see more. If you’re interested in the history of Disney, both parks offer very well done tours including Disneyland’s Walk in Walt’s Footsteps which takes you inside Walt Disney’s private apartment atop the Main Street firehouse. Disneyland will also provide the more casual experience, with cast members heading to and from work a common site outside the park. Disney World will go the extra mile to make you feel as if you’ve left the country and entered another world. The workers seem more devoted to maintaining the illusion at Disney World and it definitely attracts a more diverse workforce. My wife and I will never forget the dinner and waitress who served us at Be Our Guest following our engagement at Disney World. She was superb!

Because I live in the northeast, Disney World will likely be my preferred destination for a Disney vacation for as long as I live here. It’s more of a destination and it’s designed to be seen and experienced in a week as opposed to a weekend. That’s a not a slight against Disneyland, they just serve different purposes. I loved my Disneyland experience and I recommend anyone who loves Disney and has never been there to make the trip out to California. See and experience where it all started, just know you’ll probably only need a three day pass (with park hopper) as opposed to a five day one. And if you’ve never been to either resort, well then I just feel sorry for you.

Leave a comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | posted in Film, General

June 1, 2014

Walt Disney’s Sleeping Beauty

By Joe
Sleeping Beauty (1959)

Sleeping Beauty (1959)

If you played a word association game with random people and asked them to say the first thing that comes to mind when they hear the word Disney I’d be willing to bet that the top three responses would probably be Mickey Mouse, theme parks, and princesses. It’s that third word I’m keying in on for this post as the princess character has seemingly become synonymous with the Disney brand. This is mostly due to the creation of the Disney Princess line of clothing, toys, and such marketed at young girls as well as attractions like the Bibbidi Bobbidi Boutique at the theme parks. This gives off the impression that the Disney films, particularly the golden age unofficially beginning in 1937 and ending in 1967, are overstuffed with princess stories but that’s really not the case. Of the films spanning those forty years, only two star an actual princess; Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Sleeping Beauty, with a third, Cinderella, featuring a woman who would end the film a princess by marriage.

In recent times, the princess as a character has become somewhat controversial as many people feel like these characters are poor role models for young girls. Snow White flees her unhappy life in the castle but assures her audience that someday her prince will come and save her. Cinderella, on the other hand, passively escapes her droll existence through her dreams and is too content to wait around for a fairy and a prince to save her from her wicked stepmother. These are admittedly cynical ways to view what are otherwise considered timeless classics. Parents are free to decide what is and what isn’t appropriate for their children but I don’t think kids necessarily take anything from these, aside from maybe that Cinderella has a pretty dress or Snow White a nice singing voice.

As a result of these portrayals, many movie-goers these days want a stronger female lead. And lately, that’s become true with films such as Frozen and even Beauty and the Beast back in the 90s. Unfortunately, in 1959 this trend was still far away when Walt Disney released Sleeping Beauty. If viewers are uncomfortable with the female leads in Cinderella and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, well then they really won’t like Aurora.

Some of the backgrounds are truly stunning, but unfortunately give the film a flat look.

Some of the backgrounds are truly stunning, but unfortunately give the film a flat look.

Aurora is the title character of Sleeping Beauty, an animated film more famous for its villain and the castle that inspired the famous one at the entrance to Disneyland than for its lead. Aurora has the misfortune of being cursed at her royal unveiling by the evil fairy Maleficent and is fated to die on her sixteenth birthday. The three good fairies decide to take her into hiding and raise her as a peasant girl in order to hide her from Maleficent and hopefully prevent her curse from becoming reality. Aurora assumes the identity of Briar Rose and lives there until her sixteenth birthday when she meets the charming Prince Phillip, and after sharing a song in the forest, the two decide they’ve fallen in love. Of course, Aurora ends up being lured to that famous spinning wheel by Maleficent where she pricks her finger and falls into a deathlike sleep and only true love’s kiss can ever hope to wake her.

Aurora appears in less than 18 minutes in the film as a result of her coma, leaving most of the screen time to the three fairies; Flora, Fauna, and Merryweather, as well as Maleficent. Aurora has no real personality and is completely defined by her situation and is quite literally dependent on the Phillip character. Phillip, in turn has little personality of his own save for he is a good and just person willing to do what is necessary to save his princess. Maleficent is the true star of the film, though she is pretty much a by-the-numbers villain with a cool look and an even cooler ability to change into a menacing dragon. The good fairies provide some laughs, as do the royal parents of the two leads, but this is a fairly weak Disney film where plot is concerned.

Maleficent has proven over the years that it is she who is the star of Sleeping Beauty.

Maleficent has proven over the years that it is she who is the star of Sleeping Beauty.

For many, these classic Disney animated features are less about the story and more about the look and score. This version of Sleeping Beauty is adapted from the ballet by Tchaikovsky and is appropriately scored. It’s lone drawback from a musical standpoint is the one song sung by the main character, “Once Upon A Dream,” is too similar to Cinderella’s signature “A Dream is a Wish Your Heart Makes” and not as memorable. The scene in which it’s sung is also too similar to Cinderella’s as Aurora dances in the forest with animals of high intelligence. For the visuals, Disney made use of Super Technirama 70, which allows for more detail and complexity in the backgrounds. Walt Disney also wanted the film to separate itself from the previous fairy tales the studio had done and requested his artists employ a sharper look. Aurora’s face is noticeably more angular than Cinderella and Snow White’s rounded look and the backgrounds resemble still paintings as opposed to fully realized environments. The approach comes at a cost as the film has a very flat look to it. The colors are rich though, and I’m reviewing this as a blu ray feature, which help separate it form its peers. This was the last Disney film to use hand-inked cells as the following ones would utilize xerox. I like the direction the studio took, but I do think it needed further refinement to remove that flat look. The image where Aurora is found unconscious after pricking her finger on the spinning wheel is particularly ugly as her body looks like it’s been run-over by a steamroller.

I can't believe this shot made it into the final film. Aurora looks like a piece of paper.

I can’t believe this shot made it into the final film. Aurora looks like a piece of paper.

The standout scene for Sleeping Beauty is unquestionably Maleficent’s battle with Phillip, in which she takes on the form of a massive, black dragon. Prior to that, Phillip is blocked by a massive wall of thorns that are wonderfully illustrated and appropriately vicious looking.  Maleficent’s menacing transformation is foreboding and her green-tinted flames eerie. It’s a classic sequence and among Disney’s top ten. It doesn’t save the film, but is an accomplishment by itself.

When I was a kid, Sleeping Beauty was probably my favorite of the princess movies. That was entirely due to the fact that it had a cool looking dragon at the end while Cinderella and Snow White were boring by comparison. As an adult, I view the prior two films in a much stronger light and even enjoy the both of them. They aren’t my favorite Disney films, but they do charm me. Sleeping Beauty is able engage me visually, but even there it’s a bit of a mixed bag. While I enjoy the art direction and use of color, I find the earlier films from Disney to be overall better visual experiences. As a story, it’s rather bland with uninteresting main characters and little to get attached to. There are some decent funny-points, but nothing gut-busting by any means. Maleficent is the most engaging character defined as much by her interesting visual style as she is by her voice actress, Eleanor Audley, who should have been everyone’s go to voice for evil women. As such, it’s not at all surprising that Disney has chosen to place the spotlight on her for a feature film starring Angelina Jolie. I have not seen the film, but it won’t have to do much to top Sleeping Beauty.

1 Comment   |  tags: , , , , , , , , , | posted in Film

%d bloggers like this: