Can you faithfully review a Disney film without being denounced for ruining memories of the youth (and past youth) of today? Can one say that a Disney film is merely “mediocre” without getting negative feedback? Well, today we shall find out. The Disney factory (using the word factory is an accurate representation) has been creating childhood favorites since the early 30s – and continue to push the boundaries of animation for children today with partnering with the hugely popular PIXAR as well as their most recent outing, “The Princess and the Frog”. There is no child growing up today that doesn’t know the name Mickey Mouse in some form or another – and that is an impressive feat for any studio. With that said, Disney’s normal focus is animating classic fairy tales like “Pinocchio” or “Cinderella” or “Snow White”, but sometimes they take a classic tale and rework it using common household animals. That is the case with “Lady and the Tramp”; my first Disney animated film to review. It is the infamous tale of young rapscallion winning the heart of a wealthy woman, but now instead of people – we have dogs. Made in 1955, this was probably another groundbreaking work for Disney, but watching it now in 2010, it has the feeling of being rushed, underdeveloped, and weak on story. So, I ask again – could Disney have created a film that was merely “mediocre”?
This reviewer will be the first to admit that the now-popular scene of Tramp and Lady eating spaghetti always pulls at the heartstrings, and was the pull-out-scene of this film, but looking at the film as a whole, it feels like it is missing that Disney magic. We begin with Lady being given to Darling as a gift one Christmas. She is an obnoxious puppy who desires the attention of her owners. Through years of gift giving and love, she finds comfort in the normality of their life. This is all about to change as our nuclear family decides to add another bundle of joy to the mix. With skepticism abound, Lady learns to love the changes and the new family. It is about this time that Tramp enters the picture. Representing the care-free, baby-less, lifestyle of living without a collar, he demonstrates the power of a small community, but also shows us (the viewers) the darkness surrounding this town. On the run from both the Pound and a sordid past, he eventually runs into Lady and one could say, “…it was love at first sight…”. As Darling and Jim Dear embark on a trip, an unknown relative comes to stay with two typecast Siamese cats. Songs, chases, and rats round out this story, that goes from light to bleak to dark again as Disney creates this seemingly dystopian world for the child audience.
I am aware that we all know the story, but the recap was needed to show a point about Disney’s use of class and status in this film. As a casual viewer, many will argue that this is just a children’s film – leave it be, but these are the images surrounding our children. Lady comes from an upper class family, with no worry of consequence; she and her friends go through the day oblivious to the world around them. Tramp, coming from the other side of the tracks (literally) represents the middle-to-lower class people. He finds friendship in the shop owners and transients of this town. What impressed me about this film was how dark and ill-created the lower part of town was, and Disney isn’t afraid to show it. The dirt roads, the black (or darkened) buildings, the fact that a storm arrives just as they head to town; it is night whenever Lady is away from her house. Let’s not forget as well, the rat comes out of a hole with a poster for the circus right above. This demonstrates another transient profession that is somehow darkened by this film. The stark use of light and dark in this film is used not only for tone, but also a world outside of the white picket fences and collars.
What is the impression handed to children with this imagery? If you want children or the house with the white picket fence, or safety – you need to be like Lady. While if you want to see the world, experience life without a collar, one would need to live like Tramp. What makes this reality odd is Tramp’s choice? To see this point clearer, look at Tramp’s “friends”. Where are they at the end of the film? Nobody comes to visit, they could be dead (Disney handed us that bleak image near the middle of the film), while the entire time they are speaking of him as a saint and great friend. Nobody came to bail Pedro, Toughy, or Peg out. Was this the happy ending we all wanted?
With the undertones exposed, how was the remainder of the film? While it carried some iconic images, the overall pacing of the film was a bit sloppy. As this is a story with two sets of eyes, we are never quite given a full story on either. Lady’s story is further developed, while Tramp just seems to be inserted for merely the “cause and effect” storyline. The voice work was decent in this film. The 76-minute run seemed nothing like a sprint. I think it was because I cared nothing for these dogs. They were beautifully drawn, but more development was needed. The “evil” rat was introduced twice, and represented the darkness creeping into suburbia, but it just wasn’t enough to pull Lady and the Tramp together. What did Lady really want in life? My ending question – why was she denied it?
VIDEO: This is a “mediocre” Disney film. It doesn’t have the power of “The Jungle Book”, it doesn’t have the imagination of “Robin Hood”, it lacks the love like your “Princess” tales. When looking for a stronger dog-Disney film, look towards “Fox and the Hound” – a stronger entry into the canine Disney world.
VISUAL: Disney’s 50th anniversary edition claims a stronger restoration of the print, while does look good. The colors seemed very white in Lady’s world, but extra dark in Tramp’s life. The darks were a bit too dark, missing some of the action in these scenes. Also, the visuals inside of Lady’s house seemed bland. Perhaps this was another symbolic moment, but just “ho-hum” overall.
SOUND: Very Good. The songs seemed crisp, the voice work seemed bold. This was the strongest element of this disc. The restoration was above average, but the sound was dedicated.
EXTRAS: Again, missing the second disc, I didn’t have the chance to fully explore this DVD. When Disney re-releases it from the Vault, perhaps I will explore the world of “Lady and the Tramp” further, but for now – the single disc will suffice.
Overall, this wasn’t a bad Disney movie; it just wasn’t one of the greatest. I felt the symbolism was overbearing as well as the choices made to be a bit misleading for children. The characters of Lady and Tramp seemed one dimensional at times, lacking in the ability to pull me back into a second viewing. The songs were low-key and outside of the Siamese cats’ duet, forgotten. Would I recommend this to children? Maybe – there are defiantly better options. “The Lady and the Tramp” will always have spaghetti, but they will not have space on my DVD shelf.
Found in my “Movie Mom’s Guide to Family Films” book, this is the last of the “L” category. I am excited about what is to come, but also nervous. This was a good trip, with highs and mediocre hours, but I am going into the next book with no prior film experience. Let’s see how it does. For “Lady and the Tramp” I am giving it a pink mark. Good, but not great. Disney could have done better. Also, I work for the middle class – so I was semi-turned away to begin with.
No comments:
Post a Comment