The Rescuers is one of my favorite Disney films of all time. It's subtle, beautiful, and sweet. So that's why it irks me that this movie even exists. But what irks me more is that this movie is so completely inept at even the basics of decent storytelling, which is saying a lot considering the company it came from. But what really gets me, well not furious but pretty mad, is that people actually think this is better than the original. But I'll get to that.
The movie begins with Cody, a typical little boy living in the middle of absolutely nowhere who can talk to the animals with no real explanation as to how. We learn that he lost his father. And that's it, folks, the only character development we get from this character! We see him learn nothing or change in any way, he remains the same completely bland character throughout the whole movie. We're also given no explanation as to why he has an American accent when he clearly lives in the middle of the Australian Outback. Was he born in America and moved to Australia when his dad disappeared from existence with no explanation? Ah well, he gets trapped by a poacher and we're treated to 72 minutes of environmentalist agenda. But never mind that, we then get to see our main characters.
And, unfortunately, they play a minor role in the movie, despite the fact they're in the title of the film. The running gag is that Bernard is trying to propose to Bianca, a pretty weak gag if you ask me. Then they go flying with what has to be the most annoying character the Disney animators of the Renaissance ever put on screen: Wilbur the albatross. And he never leaves. His subplot is never funny or necessary and it just made me very uncomfortable watching him get shot with a giant needle.
And then Cody is trapped with a few characters who appear for, I guess, comic relief, but are left to rot down there because they're never shown again. Thus making that scene completely pointless. The other stupid thing in this movie is that, in the end, Bernard is standing on a weak branch holding a rope that is supporting Cody and keeping him from being washed away in a raging river. Now I know this is a cartoon but give me a break, a mouse couldn't possibly be that strong.
The only thing this entire movie has is visuals. There's no denying that it's a beautiful movie. The scenery is breathtaking. But I still think it isn't as good as the first film, which was a bit more like a gorgeous watercolor painting. But I think that's more of a matter of taste because while I may prefer the subtly of the first film, you might prefer the more realistic and gorgeous Australian scenery this film offers and I think both are equally as good. But that's about all that's good about this movie.
This movie looks like a good one on the surface but if you actually see it, it's clear there's nothing else to offer. Better than the original? I don't think so. This is one of the worst sequels to a REALLY good movie that I have ever seen. Skip this and watch The Rescuers. And if you're unimpressed by this, still watch The Rescuers to see how telling a story about two heroic mice is REALLY done.
The movie begins with Cody, a typical little boy living in the middle of absolutely nowhere who can talk to the animals with no real explanation as to how. We learn that he lost his father. And that's it, folks, the only character development we get from this character! We see him learn nothing or change in any way, he remains the same completely bland character throughout the whole movie. We're also given no explanation as to why he has an American accent when he clearly lives in the middle of the Australian Outback. Was he born in America and moved to Australia when his dad disappeared from existence with no explanation? Ah well, he gets trapped by a poacher and we're treated to 72 minutes of environmentalist agenda. But never mind that, we then get to see our main characters.
And, unfortunately, they play a minor role in the movie, despite the fact they're in the title of the film. The running gag is that Bernard is trying to propose to Bianca, a pretty weak gag if you ask me. Then they go flying with what has to be the most annoying character the Disney animators of the Renaissance ever put on screen: Wilbur the albatross. And he never leaves. His subplot is never funny or necessary and it just made me very uncomfortable watching him get shot with a giant needle.
And then Cody is trapped with a few characters who appear for, I guess, comic relief, but are left to rot down there because they're never shown again. Thus making that scene completely pointless. The other stupid thing in this movie is that, in the end, Bernard is standing on a weak branch holding a rope that is supporting Cody and keeping him from being washed away in a raging river. Now I know this is a cartoon but give me a break, a mouse couldn't possibly be that strong.
The only thing this entire movie has is visuals. There's no denying that it's a beautiful movie. The scenery is breathtaking. But I still think it isn't as good as the first film, which was a bit more like a gorgeous watercolor painting. But I think that's more of a matter of taste because while I may prefer the subtly of the first film, you might prefer the more realistic and gorgeous Australian scenery this film offers and I think both are equally as good. But that's about all that's good about this movie.
This movie looks like a good one on the surface but if you actually see it, it's clear there's nothing else to offer. Better than the original? I don't think so. This is one of the worst sequels to a REALLY good movie that I have ever seen. Skip this and watch The Rescuers. And if you're unimpressed by this, still watch The Rescuers to see how telling a story about two heroic mice is REALLY done.