The Parent Trap (1961)

So I just watch the 1961’s The Parent Trap. This was one of the movies, like Pollyanna (1960) that I grew up watching in the 1990s. So I prefer it to the 1998 remake which I don’t like for various reasons in that review.

Spoilers ahead!

The Parent Trap is about a pair of identical twin girls who meet each other at camp for the first time. Since they both live with the other parent they decide to switch places on their parents so they can actually know the other parent. When their Mom has to go to California to unmix them hijinks ensure and hopefully leads the parents to getting back to together.

As I said I grew up watching this movie. I love the comedy of it. I hadn’t watched it in a very long time but it just as brilliant as it was the last time I watched it. The costumes, and the chemistry (or lack of it) from the actors was brilliant. The costumes were good. I really like the Split screen aspect of this movie which inspired was created by Walt Disney’s long time friend and collaborator Ub iWerks. I heard with other non Disney movies or TV shows the trouble when one of the actors has the first or last name of the main character that a different actor is portraying but dial that up to 11 when the name-twin, has to play the photographic double of Hailey Mills who is pretending to be Susabn pretending to be Sharon or vice versa and you get the 19961 director David Swift (who also director 1960s Pollyanna) headache! But as I said I like this split screen effect more then the computer combination that they did a little with the 1998 remake.

One thing I noticed this time around of watching 1961 The Parent Trap is apparently the foreshadowing at the beginning where Susan’s cabin booby-traps Sharon’s Cabin with string and honey on one of the cabin members’ toes which is basically foreshadows what the twins will do later to their Dad’s fiancée, Vicky when she’s tricked into going on a camping trip with them and their Dad.

Its a great movie there’s not a lot of music but the one song that’s use is absolutely brilliant and it was written by the Sherman brothers who will make popular songs like “Spoonful of Sugar” and “Bare Necessities”

As I said its a great movie and if you haven’t this movie please give it a try!

Babes in Toyland (1961)

I just finished watching Disney’s 1961 Babes in Toyland. I personally enjoyed the movie. I think some of the references in the movie (mortgage, living in a tent, depressed, or an employer saying “no one wants to work anymore”) could hold up today.

The simple story of the Babies in Toyland is two nursery rhyme characters are due to get married but a dastardly villians messes things up for everyone. But there’s a happy ending.

The characters are all interesting characters. I don’t like the fact that Mary Quiet Contrary is made out to be dumb. And I see where the Mary Poppin’s umbrella talking from 1964 Mary Poppins, might have been ‘borrowed’ from. “Silly” goose, from this movie. The Toymaker who is played by the Mad Hatter actor Ed Wynn is an interesting character he’s a bit ridiculous as first but after something happens to him, he tries to be sensible. The leading male Tom, the Piper’s son, is played by a teen heart throb of the time, Tommy Sands. The villian Barnaby is played by Ray Bolger who played The Scarecrow in the 1939 The Wizard of Oz movie.

Speaking of the Wizard of Oz movie- two of the scenes in the 2nd half of the Babies in Toyland movie makes me think way too much of the Wizard of Oz. Scary, Talking trees in the “Forest of No Return” and also when Mary, Mary Quiet Contrary, Tom, and children (Mary, Mary Quiet contrary’s siblings), are excited to go to the Toy Maker’s house is similar to the scene where Dorothy, The Scarecrow, Tinman and Cowardly Lion are running towards the Emerald City.

The sets are very interesting and especially when they had to somehow make some of the characters look tiny after a VIP (Very Important Plot) happened. I do wonder how that was set up though.

I do have to address two racial things. The first one is when Mary thinks she has no other choice but to marry the villian, the later hires a band of Romani , but in the movie, they’re called and call themselves gypsies, There’s a whole song about it. The other part is when there’s a toy fight lead by a tiny Tom, against Barnaby- some of the toys fighting look like the 1950’s/1960s “Red Indian” stereotype. I might not like the fact that was the stereotypes of the time, but I going to just accept it as is and not make a big deal out of it. The one song that has “depressed”, “living in a tent” and “mortgage” is the song called “I Can’t Do the Sum”.

I did find some interesting trivia when Disney started “hushing up” (ie Covering up) Song of the South movie as the first full length live-action musical- they promoted this movie as their “first live action full time musical movie”. The movie didn’t do so well at the box office so it wasn’t until 8 years later that it was seen on TV. Due to the movie not doing well at the box office, is why it took 2 years before another musical movie was made by Disney 1964 Mary Poppins.

I personally recommend seeing the movie. I give it five out of five stars. Or rewatching the movie if you saw it growing up. My next review is going to be a movie I watched growing up 1961 The Parent Trap- i prefer that one to the 1999 version.

Reviews of 1961 Greyfriars Bobby:The True Story of a Dog, and 1961 Nikki: Wild Dog of The North

I have watched both these two movies and I’m going to be reviewing them both here.

Niki: Wild Dog of the North (1961)

This is a story of a dog in Yukon, Canada who ends up separated from his Trader Andre after they found a orphaned bear cub who can’t survive on his own yet. The dog and the bear who are tied together and the owner’s canoe goes over rapids, separating the Trader from the animals. So the animals hate each other at first. But eventually after they get rid of the rope tying them together, they’re able to help each other get food After both have grown into adults at winter time the bear goes into Hibernation leaving Nikki alone. After several tries of getting any kind of meat on his own-he ends up in the hands of an evil fur trapper who wants to train him to fight dogs in the dog pit and to “hate Non-white’s shadows”. When the Evil Trader gets there and is told that the new Factor, is not allowing any more dog fighting the evil trader doesn’t give a hoot and have his “dog” fight someone else’s dog. When the Factor (who is Andre from before) tells the Evil Trader to stop the dog fighting the Evil Trader doesn’t care and Andre ends up in the pit with dog, and the dog recognizes him as his old owner. Let’s just say the Nikki helps to take down the evil trader. How does he do that, I recommend watching the movie for yourself.

I think it was an enjoyable movie-it was apparently all shot in Canada. And also apparently, all the human actors were French-Canadian. I personally didn’t see any part which kind of showed it was suppose to be a two part TV show but some people have been able to see.

Greyfriars Bobby: The True Story of a Dog (1961)

Its the story of a dog who not only follows his true master, Auld Jock (Old Jock) to Edinburgh but also after Jock dies-at night, he sleeps in all types of weather on Jock’s grave, despite the attempts of the local graveyard caretaker Mr. Brown trying to oust him out of there. He’s friends with not just the children who live around the church, but also of a local restaurant owner Mr. Trail who is very generous with meals. I guess in the Disney movie, he kinds of gets everyone what they need in a sense- one of the children get a job, a disabled child gets to go to school, and in a way, Mr. Trail ends up with companionship of sort by the end of the movie with Mr. and Mrs. Brown. But anyway before that sorty-of happy ending, that there’s a point that the dog could be destroyed due to the fact the dog has to license and no collar. And Mr. Trail on principal didn’t want to shell out Seven Shillings for a dog which has no master and he argues that in front of the court. The next day, that Mr.Trail and Bobby goes in front of the Lord Provost to argue his case and at some point, the get interputted by Mr. and Mrs.Brown, but also the bairns near the church. Anyway-Bobby gets to have a collar, and is given the “Freedom of the City” by Provost himself.

I personally enjoyed the move. I might start crying at any moment because the story hasn’t technically impacted me yet. The costumes, were very accurate for something that was suppose to take place in the 19th century (about 1866-1867). And I like the fact that a disabled boy was involved in the story, even if he couldn’t have that big of a part-but he still had a big enough part when he’s the one who told the girl, to tell everyone to give money they could for Bobby. In a way Bobby is the Scottish version of other forms of stories like Japanese(?) Hatchi, and stuff. I liked the surprised ending of the Lord Provost himself paying for Bobby’s license. It was interesting seeing Duncan Macrae, who in the last Disney movie I saw with him, he was a good guy (the son of Rob Roy) but in this -he was the main bad guy-insisting that Bobby have a license and an living master. I would recommend you watch it.. but you might want to have some tissues just in case, you start trying.

The next movie I have to watch is Babes in Toyland which will be a singular review, and then I will finish up with another singular review of an old Disney movie classic of mine- 1961’s The Parent Trap with Hailey Mills. Then I will be in the 1962s and I’m not sure what I will find there.

101 Dalmatians (1961) review

I had to skip the 1960’s Western movie which i’m not going to name. So I went to see the next movie on the list which was the first animated movie since Sleeping Beauty in 1959.  The movie I watched was 1961 101 Dalmatians. 

I know I loved dog movies growing up.. I think i watched Lady and the Tramp (1955) a lot growing up and one of my parents said I also watched this movie growing up that I could maybe recite the dialogue. But I think I would need a lot more re-watches before I could do that. 

Just for a fresher here’s a plot synopsis of the movie: When 15 Dalmatians puppies are stolen by minions of Cruella that is up to Pong and Perdita to use the Twilight Bark in order to find and save the puppies before they’re turned into a horrible fashion statement.

The big finger that Roger gives to Cruella without her knowing it is quite funny now that I think about it. I mean the entire time in the audience’s first time seeing Cruella, is that Roger is playing on various instruments (piano, trumpet, and something else) his new song “Cruella Deville” all without Cruella knowing its a big finger to her. 

I realized when watching how one line of Horace just went over my head as child. The implications of the fact the Baddunns are already criminals and that they just supposedly been released from jail before they get hired by Cruella for puppy napping or is it dognapping in this case. the Raddcliffe’s puppies? The line is “I don’t like this Jasper, one more pinch and they’ll throw the keys away”

Its still a great movie as it was growing up! The dog characters were very good as was Captian the Horse and St Tibbs as well. Basically the Suffix Military Unit.. did you know that’s 101 miles from London, England? 

A minor note before I get onto my next point. I knew the cameos of Jock, Peg, and Bull, the bulldog from Lady and the Tramp in the “Twilight Barking” sequence but I never noticed before that you can kind of see the titular “Lady” from the same movie in the darkness and ground-level of the scene until my most recent watch you just like see her outline in the darkness. Some people say you can see Tramp’s outline too and he’s on top of a car. My question is what in the world are the characters doing over there? I guess I could pretend that for Lady&Tramp, and Jock that they’re visiting British relatives for Christmas. And for Peg and Bull being in a pet store-maybe America couldn’t find anyone to adopt or buy them so send them to the England instead.

After the Pong and Perdita get their 15 puppies and adopt the 84 other puppies and are trying to walk through a snow storm and a collie founds them and tells them they have shelter for them at a Dairy farm across the road- and they go there and once like Roly says he’s hungry, its an echo of 99 other puppies all also say they’re hungry and the cows over their milk to them.  A question appeared in my head, is what in the world did the Dairy Famer think in the morning when they went to milk the cows and the cows had less milk then usual? Since the farmer would know how much milk the cows would normally release. Also we don’t know if news ever travelled to the country side about the 15 puppies being stolen from the Raddcliffes. 

And my final point before I make a conclusion about the movie is. I bet at the end of the movie after Roger starts playing “Dalmatian Plantation” and the 101 dogs in the house start barking along and dogs join in as the camera pans out of the house and over London as one house after another starts to turn on their lights until all the lights are on and that the dogs’ ”pets” are probably thinking “NOT AGAIN!”

As I said the movie was great and if I watch it a lot more times I could probably recitate the dialouge as long as my attention wasn’t in two places at once. IF you love dogs, you should definatley watch this movie!

Kidnapped(1960)

Warning: Spoiler!

Kidnapped was a great Disney movie. Its about the 1751 story of a Scottish boy David Bafour (who doesn’t know he was Scottish until his father’s death) who goes to live with his misery uncle. Due to plot reasons, the Scottish misery uncle doesn’t want to live with him so arranges to have him kidnapped. After meeting Alan “Breck” Stewart (a historical character) on board the ship and getting shipwrecked, the two try to find their way back to England- for David to get to a lawyer and for Breck to get a ship to France. Using Breck’s help, that they got David’s uncle to confess to the crime of paying someone for kidnapping David. The plot reasons being that David’s father, the eldest brother, gave up the right to the estate/wealth when the girl both liked chose David’s father. But that agreement died when David’s father died.

The movie was very interesting, I think i read the book quite a long time ago so I can’t remember if it matches up or not. But sometimes I wonder if I had another life- as a child or youth who never reached Young Adult but watched these movies because when I watched Kidnapped- near the end I thought it looked familiar and this time I can’t pass it off as seeing it on the “Family Film Collection” ad because it’s not there.

It’s was interesting seeing Peter O’ Toole as a son of Rob Roy McGregor as the Disney debate folks put it- Kidnapped is the unofficial sequel to Rob Roy movie. Robin McGregor (O’ Tool’s character) and Breck have a bagpipe duel instead of using swords. Both of them were pretty good but Robin appeared to be even better. This is from someone who doesn’t have much experience with them. This movie was Peter O’ Toole’s first film, and two more movies with him followed in the same year and within weeks of this film.

It was also interesting in seeing James McArthur for me the last time since I already watch Disney’s Swiss Family Robinson movie and I have to agree with Disney Debate folk- he was way better in this then A Light in the Forest and Third Man on the Mountain -but I have to think historically in the first film-A light in the Forest about the actual reason for McArthur’s character to be ‘having a ton of arguments” – I mean imagine if you were taking by another (non-white) culture as child and raise in that culture’s ways and then suddenly you’re can become a “white” person again but you haven’t been a white person since you were “6, or 7 or 8” (and yes I might have borrowed that half-line from a non-Disney musical) and you’re like 16, 18, or 20 years old now? Especially when their (the white folks) customs are strange to you compared to the customs of the non-white people who mostly raised you after taking you? 

Its like the other way around of cases, here in Canada where youth of I believe it was Afghan descendent are deported to Afghanistan despite being born in, or at least raised here since they’re really young so they don’t speak the language of their people and the parents have passed away or something before the youth was deported.

Not entirely certain why the other character from Third Man on the Mountain was so argumentative, but maybe it’s because everyone – his uncle, mother, and the hotel owner – were cramping his style as he tried to follow in his father’s footsteps as a mountaineer guide. Naturally, that would make anyone grumpy. I can relate to that frustration – I have to assert my independence too, but in a completely different way.

During the movie I sometimes have to remind myself that we are in 18th century that means the 1700s so King George the first was on the throne-first of the Hanoverians which technically ended when Queen Victoria married Prince Albert and the family became Saxe-Coburg and Gotha which didn’t get changed until WWI under George V to “Windsor”.  I’m kind of used to the tri-corner hats but sometimes its gets confusing sometimes watching men where weird hats like that but I sometimes have to remember I used to see a dog wear a hat like that before -(Wishbone TV series). I also have to remind myself in movies in the 18th century-what a Jacobite was. Someone who believes that James II’s Catholic descendants should be on the throne instead of the “foreigner” Hanoverian King George Ist. 

Supposedly the Kidnapped story by Robert Louis Stevenson (Who was apparently half-Scottish on his mother’s side, the last name for David, was his mother’s maiden name), were inspired by two real-life events- the kidnapping of a Irish boy, by his uncle who was sent to do indentured servitude in the Carolinas but after 13 years he escaped and came back to Ireland and caused a very long lawsuit aganist his uncle. 

The other inspirations and the only inspiration, according to Fanny Stevenson was the Appin Murder trial otherwise known as The Trial of James Stewart the trial of James Stewart for the murder of Colin Roy Campbell, otherwise known as “the Red Fox” , due to the fact he as a Royalist, Hanoverian supporter was clearing out of the Stewarts clan and replacing them with members of his own Clan Campbell. Their (Campbell clan) main suspect was Alan Breck Stewart but he was out of their range because of being in France so to speak. And James was just as innocent and when his body was returned to the Stewart clan, the actual murderer of the Red Fox had to wash James’ bones for the Reform Funeral. And also the hills, or Glens, which the murder took place, the lord (or laird) was James of the Glen who might have actually ordered the kill despite him denying it for years afterwards.

Royalty concepts

I thought that because of misinformation online and people not really knowing much about being royatty I should share a few things about concepts At times I might make reference to the fictional Princess Diaries movies to help my case. So we should dive in to the concepts.

When a monarch dies or in one particular cases (Edward VIII) abdicated there is never ever a break in a ruling monarch the person next in the line to the throne automatically because the monarch. So for instance on June 19th, 1837 Victoria went to bed as Victoria but woke up the next morning as Queen Victoria. Or to be more precise in 1952, the then Princess Elizabeth went to bed as Princess and woke the next morning as Queen Elizabeth. It doesn’t matter if the next monarch in line is 9 days old or 74 (now 75) years old.

A similar concept happens with the Vice Presidency of United States that if a president dies in office either of “natural causes” or other ways- the VP becomes president. When Abraham Lincoln died his VP, Andrew Johnson became President, when Garfield died his Vice President, Chester A. Arthur became president, when President McKinley died, his VP, Theodore Roosevelt became president and the last one, After JFK’s death, his VP, Lydon B. Johnson became president. See how they’re so of the same?

Moving on to the next topic. The wife of a King is always called a Queen just like a woman who is ruling in her own right but a spouse of a Queen isn’t called a King not normally really because places don’t want confusion to happen if the monarchs are visiting other places and a King is normally ranked higher then a Queen. So the status is Queen consort (ie “wife”) but we never ever call them “Queen CONSORT (name)” only “Queen name”, for instance Queen Elizabeth II’s relatives after Queen Victoria, King Edward VII’s wife, Queen Alexandria of Denmark, or “Her Majesty Queen Alexandria”, George V’s wife, “Queen Mary/Her Majesty Queen Mary” and the Queen Elizabeth II’s own mother was “Queen Elizabeth” but unlike her daughter she didn’t have any power.

I’m pretty sure in the show the Crown there’s a scene with Queen Mary, then Dowager Queen, and when she is told that a ” Queen is visiting”, Queen Mary had to spell it out to the nurse that her granddaughter was “THE Queen and she and the Queen mother, were only Queens during the time their husbands were alive and ruling.

Julie Andrew’s character, Queen Clarisse Renaldi, in the Princess Diaries movies was a Queen consort but due to the lack of an eligible heir after her husband’, King Rupert’s death the year before the first movies Queen Clarisse had to rule the fictional kingdom of Genvoa-because with their first born wanting to be a minster of the church and the other one Mia’s dad dying, that there was no eligible Renaldi heir for the Renaldi bloodline until Mia took up the chance to be the Princess Amelia Mignonette Thermopolis Renaldi and Clarissa ruled as the “caretaker” until Mia’s 21st birthday in the 2nd movie when Mia became Queen Amelia Mignonette Thermopolis Renaldi..

While we’re on the subject of titles- the way people title Diana, or now Catherine, as Princess Diana/Princess Katherine is incorrect- because both of them married into the royal family, they can only have the the name of Princess *after* the their name , so the correctly way is Katherine, the Princess of Wales. Now if you actually did want to call Catherine a princess her name would actually be Princess William Arthur Phillip Louis. its only girls who are born into the royal family who can have Princess first as a title, like, Princess Charlotte or her Dad’s cousins, of Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugene or her great-aunt Princess Anne.

People get confused in the first Frozen movie why Anna had to ask if she could marry Prince Hans is not that’s surprising really. In any royal family, the people in line to the throne have to ask the ruling monarch if they can marry someone. This is actually what led to what some people call the “scam of a wedding” of the now King Charles III and Diana, Princess of Wales. In the 1970s, Charles III, then prince of course- asked his mother Queen Elizabeth II if he could marry Camilla but the Queen said no -so he went off to do some kind of military work and when he came back Camila was engaged to be married to Andrew Parker Bowles. When Charles III asked his mother if he could marry Diana, she said “yes” and as we already know she said yes to her grandsons by Diana- Prince William and Prince Harry.

Some of the “princess lessons” we see in the first Princess Diaries movie is very much in line with what people like Katherine, the Princess of Wales, had to learn before they could marry. For instance something both the fictional Mia had to learn as well as the real-life Katherine had to learn was how to cross their legs without actually crossing them like a normal person would. Katherine also had to learn which fork to use properly (outside in-this is useful for *any* formal occasion not just royal), who to cursty too, who not to curtsy too-for instance if she’s by herself she has to curtsy to Princess Eugene and Princess Beatrice, but if she’s with her husband, they have to curtsy to her, basically she was given lessons on how to be a “royal wife” for Katherine there was also lessons how how to get out of a car or how to receive flowers from a child without “accidently exposing her modesty”. and guess who give Katherine these lessons? Queen Elizabeth II did- you sometimes wonder how she fit that in her day with “meetings with Spain and Portugal” and who knows what else was on her schedule of the day.

Why I don’t think Disney in any trouble

People believe that the Disney company is in a bit of trouble with several movies failing at the box office.    I don’t believe that and this post is going to explain why I think that is.   I’m not thrilled about their redos in the theme parks, but I still would like to visit the theme parks with a group of other Disney fans for personal reasons that I’m not going to get into.  But let’s get into the main topic of the post.

Some people think that Disney will go bankrupt due to failures at the box office during the opening week,  Strange World (2022) or The Marvels (currently out in theatres at the time of this writing; 2023) or Elemental (2023) but the last one recovered its money eventually.   I’m sitting there and thinking “so what if they’re a bit of a flop? They have been there before in history at least twice (maybe three times) and they survived basically unscathed at least.”   The making of Cinderella (1950) and the making of (depending on who you’re talking too) of Touchstone’s (who is a subsidiary of Disney company) Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) or The Little Mermaid (1989) is what made Disney get back on their feet after a slump due to reasons either inside or outside of Disney.

In the 1940s due to the World War II closing the overseas markets, so movies like Pinocchio (1940) Fantasia (1940), Dumbo (1941) and Bambi (1942) couldn’t be released overseas and then, on top of that, Disney studios were hired by the USA’s Army to make propaganda films like a certain cartoon which is Donald Duck having a nightmare about serving the Nazi that people believe is banned.  So, because of their focus, mainly being that the North American market had to be content with what, is known as “package  films”, like: Saludos Amigos (1943) Three Caballeros (1945)  Make Mine Music (1946), Fun and Fancy Free (1947) Melody Time (1948) and  The Adventures of Mr. Toad and Ichabod Crane (1949),   Between the three things, there wasn’t a lot of money in the studio at that point. Disney Studios was going to go bankrupt. They were pinning their hopes on Cinderella being a success in the theatres to get them back on their feet.   And as they hoped, Cinderella (1950) actually was the last successful “Princess” film until 1989- Sleeping Beauty wasn’t successful at the box office for some reason, but that’s an entirely different story for another day).

After Walt Disney’s death in 1966, the company released The Jungle Book (1967) and then there was one last movie that Walt gave the green light to before he died- The Aristocats (1970).  But after that, the Disney company was floundering for awhile without him.  

 In the 1980s they tried to appeal to, I assume, the teen market with darker, more realistic films like  The Black Cauldron (1985) and the Great Mouse Detective (1986).  The Black Cauldron didn’t do so well at the box office due to the fact it got majorly messed up by a change in the management, so to speak, with Jeffery Katzenberg and Michael Eisner coming on board as part of the management team.  I have to admit I don’t know Katzenberg’s history pre-Disney,  but it seems to be that he  mostly worked with live-action films previously, so he didn’t understand how animation couldn’t be “as easily edited” as live-action films, so he fiddled around with the The Black Cauldron until I believe Michel Eisner talked to him.  And the company couldn’t go back to the “pre-edit” animation because of Katzenberg’s messing around, so the movie got released in the messy state it was in.  Which wasn’t good because the Disney company had been pinning its hopes on the movie to the point that they were even planning on making a restaurant in  a Disney park which was going to be named after the Gurgi character from the movie.  

During the making of The Fox and the Hound (1981), some middle-ground animators- people who came after the Nine Old Men animators  but before people like Tim Burton took over-like Don Bluth, quit working with Disney due to issues on the production and left the studios, which meant that young people like Burton who was starting out at the Disney company had to take over with making the movie.

Their next successful movie was either Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988) by the Disney subsidiary of Touchstone Pictures or The Little Mermaid (1989). Both movies were successful at the box office -the latter is known for setting off the Disney Renaissance which lasted until 1999 with Tarzan (1999).  

Their last time the company had a series of flops or movies become popular later on was in the 2000s after the Tarzan (1999) movie. With movies like  Emperor’s New Groove (2000) Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001) Lillo and Stich (2002) Treasure Planet (2002) Brother Bear (2003)  Home on the Range (2004)  Chicken Little (2005) Meet the Robinsons (2007) and Bolt (2008).  

Their first successful animated film in this time period was The Princess and the Frog (2009) even though not a lot of men or boys went to this movie, which meant they changed the name of the movie Rapunzel to Tangled (2010) for marketing purposes.  But that’s a different story for another day.

In conclusion, this is why I don’t believe Disney company will be going bankrupt anytime soon due to the fact, yes, they might be having flops at the moment, but they did it before and they still survived and they will do it again. They’re like the saying by Yoda. “Do or Do not, There is No Try”. They keep at it until something is successful. 

EXCITED FOR ONCE UPON A STUDIO short

I’m really excited about the very extensive Once Upon a Studio Short from the Walt Disney company. Unless you been living under a rock last Thursday the Disney company released a trailer for a Disney short that is airing on ABC for those of us who have ABC chanel in North America on Sunday October 15 or for those “across the pond” or those who don’t have ABC in front of the WISH movie in November

The trailer shows: Tinkerbell, Mickey&Minnie mouse, Bambi, Flower, Thumper, Rhino,Mittens,Bolt from Bolt, Peter Pan, Wendy, John Michael, Moana/Vaiana, Flounder, Jock, Trusty, Flora, Fauna, and Merryweather, Eyeore, Kanga, Christopher Robin, Winnie the Pooh, Antinio having Pui, Meeko Pascal Crickcree (, and Cinderella’s bird friends , Aurora, Prince Philip, Hades, Cruella Devill, and one of 2 characters I didn’t actually know but I found out later is John Henry from one of the Disney Shorts,-Urslsa, Elsa, Anna, a mouse I didn’t recongize until of a character I didn’t recognize (Ben and Amos from “Ben and me” short), Phill, Louis between Ben and Amos and Luisa–Lusia holding the Cows from Home on the Range, and the mooses from Brother Bear, as well as what people believe is the horse that Icbhod rides in The Sleepy Hallow segement of 1949 package film, there’s Pacha and Kuczo, and behind Pacha you can make out a face that looks to be “We Don’t Talk About” Bruno, with Colonel Hathi and his Winifred, Drizella, Anastasia, Smee, Captian Hook and the Three Little Pigs- Fidler Pig, Fifer Pig, Pratical Pig, and to end of the short trailer was Goofy with his own Whilhem Scream fondly known as the “Goofy scream” being the accident prone goof that he is.

Beside the characters I named or referenced there’s going to be an total of 543 characters from over 85 different Disney movies and shorts going back to 1923 when brothers Walt and Roy O Disney started what we know now as of the Walt Disney Animation studio as the “Disney Brothes Studio”-that’s what the 100 years of Disney has been celebrating since January since the day after the short airs on ABC, is what I will call “Founder’s Day” for WDAS. And apperently after the group picture, the short will finish with a song and it will feature 54 voices. And there’s newely recording of Walt’s favourite song from Mary Poppins (Feed the Birds), being played exclusively, by the surving Sherman Brother who is 94 years old.

Another reason to be exicted is the fact not only are actors who originated the characters in Disney movies in the last 33 years are coming back to reprise their roles (Jodi Benson, Page O’Hara, Nathan Lane, Josh Gad, Kristen Bell, Idina Menzel) but Disney company is using archival recordings for Peter Pan (Bobbie Discroll), Winnie the Pooh (Sterling Hollway), Flora (Vera Felton) and others (Cliff Edwards) and they got permisson from the Williams’ estate to use unused recording of Robin Willaims as The Genie.

The characters’ will be drawn with new animation in the same kind of format that WDS used to create the the characters orginally -so ink and cell characters drawn that way, and characters like from 99 puppies (And maybe others characters) from 101 Dalmatians-being “drawn” in a Xerox kind of style, and CGI and computer animated characters from more recently flicks

One of the characters said to make an apperence in the short is Gugi from the 1980s The Black Cauldron so that this is the first time (17 years) that the Disney company has made any accknowledgement of that movie (which was a disaster) since Toyko Disneyland removed a hidden attraction that was all in Japanese called “Cinderella Mystery Tour” even though the only character from The Black Cauldron to appear in that attraction was the Horned King.

So that’s my take on the upcoming short and that everyone including myself is excited about. What are you thoughts about the short trailer which I embeded above?

Is Disney Company conflicted over its identity?

I’m starting to wonder for reasons if the Disney company is conflicted over its identity due to shoe-horning in both their  own  (new) Intellectual Properties (IPs) or ones brought from other companies (Piar, or Lucas Films) into the Disney Parks,  but on the other hand, adding both to a park event and also on a new Cruise ship- adding older Intellectual Properities

For years now that Disney company have replaced more popular atrractions with something sort of more “newer”.. like the most recent attraction currently reciving a “replacement” is what the Disney company considers to be an embarrassment (well the movie Song of the South is) the Splash Mountain in Disney Land’s Critter Country-its going to be replaced with 2009’s “Princess and the Frog” ride (still a log-flume) called “Tiana’s Bayou Adventure” -A Walkabout Tiana had recently been seen in Disney land in a Bayou outfit.

But lets us head off to Florida to talk about some more recent updates that have happened in Walt Disney World, Orlando, Florida. The most recent replacement that I am aware of in Flordia was the replacment of the Great Movie Ride at Hollywood Studios with a more kiddish (boring?) ride of “Mickey and Minnie Runaway Railway” and another part of the Hollywood Studios in Disney World is Toy Story land or you can meat Pixar characters like Mike and Sulley from Monsters, Inc movie in Pixar Building. Now let’s us go over to EPCOT

In EPOCT in the WorldShowcase in the Norway Pavillion they replaced some time ago the Maelstrom ride with a “”IP” water ride of Frozen: Ever After. And its not just replacing rides due to the popularity apperently of the Trackless Ratatouille ride over in France- that in the France Pavailion at Disney Worl’s EPOCT they added the same ride.

In the Magic Kingdom at WDW they replaced the “Snow White’s Scary Adventures” with the more kid-friendly/boring “The Seven Dwarves’ Mine Train” ride. And well we’re on that subject lets us head back off to California.

They also replaced at Disneyland the opening-day attraction of Snow White’s Scary Adventures with “Snow White’s Enchanted Wish” And of couse what was Paradise Pier in Calforinia Adventure has been replaced with “Pixar Pier” so its obvious what that means-that there’s a lot of Pixar-related content there like you can find Woody, Flik, Nemo, on what is now called “Pixar Pal-A-round” aka the Ferris Wheel. Or you can take a ride on something related to The Incredibles. Somewhere else in .Calrofinia Adventure what had been Tower of Terror ride been replaced with a simliar drop-tower designed but with “Guardians of the Galaxy: Mission Breakout” Now let us head over to France for a bit.

Over in Euro Disney in the Walt Disney Studios Park what had been a Tram Studio Tour-like one you used to find in Hollywood-MGM have been replaced with a very stagnant and boring experience of a suppose “road trip” with a bunch of boring (and not-moving) billboards and characters like McQueen, etc.. from the CARS franchise Now our final stop in Euro-Disney that i’m aware of is Discoveryland-particular what was a very interesting concept for the “Space Mountain” ride in that park. What was Discoveryland’s Space Mountain was based upon Jules Verne’s “From the Earth to the Moon” in English in 2015 to people’s disappointment its “refurbishment” was Star Wars themed ride called “Star Wars: Hyperspace” I just decided to stop here because of something outside this partiuclar ride at Discoverland the walk-through the Nautilus- which ties into the next part.

The Euro-Disney Nautilus walkthrough in Discoveryland park at Euro Disney was the last time there was a 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea attraction at a Disney Park until now. The Disney Company recently unveiled its newest Cruise ship- The Disney Treasure and a pub aboard the ship- called the Periscope Pub makes you feel like you’re on the Nautilus (and supposedly if you stay long enough in the pub you could have a visit with the giant squid) so that 29 years since there been any reference in Disney related ventures to the Disney company’s 1954 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea movie. People my age would only know of the movie if they hadn’t seen the movie growing up themselves with the promos on our 90s and early 2000s disney movie video casettees of the “Family Film Collection” or other simliar promos

Well we’re on the topic of the older IPs- you can find Judge Doom, the villian from 1988’s Who Framed Roger Rabbit? movie at Disneyland’s Oggie Boogie’s Halloween Bash on Immersive Treats Trail. This is the first time in awhile that there’s been any accknowledgment of the movie since 2003 when there’s a statue of THE Roger Robbit himself at Disney World’s Pop Century Resort that opened Dec 14, 2003. Judge Doom is even “dipping” toon socks into the famous “Dip” from the movie. Of course this is the 2nd year in a row they include an older IP character for Oggie Boogie’s Halloween Bash last year apperenty it was Madame Mim from the 1963’s Sword in the Stone movie. And of course for both this party and “Mickey’s Not so Scary Halloween” is the only time that the Headless Horsemen ever comes out in the Disney parks and when you consider how old The Adventures of Mr. Toad and Ichbhod Crane movie is that Disney World start having Halloween parties in 1995 and Disneyland did the same thing but only retitled it with the last century to its currently title of Oggie Boogie’s Bash.

In Conclusion, as I have stated in this post the Disney company doesn’t seem to know which direction to go in. On one hand they’re shoe-horing in new IPs into Disney parks but with other ventures like cruise ships or hoilday events they’re trying to incorperate some of their older movie IPs.

Disney’s Zorro movie from the late 1950s is a great movie!

I’m trying to watch the entire Disney movies both animated and live action starting from 1937 to the present 2023. There’s only one movie so far I hadn’t been able to watch (Westard Ho, the Wagon) and I’m debating on forcing myself to watch the Pirates of the Carribean franchise because of how gross out I was when I saw a bit of it years ago after I watched something else.

The last movie I was on was Disney’s The Sign of Zorro (1958). It was quiet an entertaining movie. I didn’t really know much about the character of Zorro except for a character from A Cinderella Story (2004) being dressed up as the character for the Homecoming/Halloween dance.

As I said the movie was called. The movie is based apperently on the first epoisde of the Zorro TV show from around the same time. That Diego is called back from Spain by his father for some reason and discovers that Calforina has a bad Commandante in the area where the Diego’s family lives. Diego pretends to be what we would call a nerdy guy but behind the scenes (sort of) he will be a sort of amigos to the folk by being a hero. His mute servant Bernado pretends to be deaf as awell as mute in order to fool people into talking while around him. In the end the Commandante gets his desserts.

In one scene where Zorro has to try to fight with a doppleganger the Commandante had tried to have rob other people in the tavern. But before the two Zorros fight the fake!one goes to one balocny and there’s no ladder and then when he’s trying to get to the other bacolony Berendo switches the ladder to the other balcony.

But the movie was really good. I don’t know If will want to watch the TV series because of it being the same plot for several eposides or so I have heard.