The Good Dinosaur 2015

To say that The Good Dinosaur is an odd film is kind of understating it a little. It's definitely a film that makes some strange choices, and I think those are what lessen it as a film, especially considering that two of them really don't have to be made at all.

It's probably the first Pixar film I can really recall where people asked 'Why?' (okay, I said that with both of the Cars films and I'll say it again with the third one, but I know the answer, and that is marketing). The Good Dinosaur had mildly traumatised children walking out of screenings, some of them didn't even make it to the film's ultimately happy ending.

The first question I asked was why was a film that was clearly an homage to the Western about dinosaurs? The film's explanation is that the meteor that struck the Earth millions of years ago and caused the demise of the dinosaurs, narrowly missed, so the giant creatures evolved to raise crops, cattle and families. Whereas humans did appear, but never got past the animal stage, which is why they behave more like dogs than advanced primates.

My own personal theory here is that Pixar were working on an homage to the Western and probably had included something about the friendship between people and dogs. Before they could complete that idea the dinosaur boom hit (Jurassic World) and Disney wanted something about dinosaurs, so they shoehorned them into the Western concept and made the dogs into primitive humans. Spot, being basically a dog that resembles a person is one of those odd ideas that didn't need to happen. He never speaks and most of the time he moves more like a dog than a person, so why not just make him a dog?

Then there's the issue of Henry, the father of Arlo the central character, dying. This really shocked and upset a lot of younger audience members and it simply didn't need to happen. Here's where the inner writer in me rewrote the film. Basically at the heart of it The Good Dinosaur is about Arlo getting lost and discovering himself and finding the courage to make his mark on the world, while trying to get back home.  The entire scene with Henry falling into the river and drowning simply doesn't need to be in the film. Arlo can run off after Spot when he finds that he's been raiding their crops again and get lost. He can be mad at Spot for getting him lost, he can still have sympathy for Spot losing his parents, just because he still has parents doesn't mean he won't understand what it is to not have them, after all he's completely lost with only the slimmest of hopes that he's ever going to see his family again. Just because Henry is still alive doesn't mean that the farm can't fall on hard times and need Arlo more than ever before, in fact that would give Arlo the impetus to chase after Spot.

The presence of the cattle herding dinosaurs only seemed to be there to help establish the film's Western cred. I still don't understand the vicious, opportunistic pterodactyls, who also more than likely entered the nightmares of young film goers. Again they could have engineered a dangerous, desperate situation for Arlo and Spot to find themselves in without those characters.

Now having said all that I have to take my hat off to the animation again. Not so much the dinosaurs and Spot, who were very cartoony (in fact Spot kept reminding me of the vicious baby caveman from The Croods, another animated prehistoric tale), but the scenery was amazing. I had difficulty believing that it was animated and not simply film stock that they superimposed their animated characters onto. Pixar and animation in general had come a long way from Toy Story in 1995.

The humour and heart that had characterised even the worst of the Pixar films (and there were really only two of those for mine) was largely absent from this one. Audiences tended to agree with my views on The Good Dinosaur. It was Pixar's lowest grossing film ever.

Casting:

I think they went for strong casting to try and make up for the film's other shortfalls. The excellent Jeffrey Wright voiced the ill fated Henry, which as a homesteading farmer dinosaur was a departure for the actor having previously played roles like CIA agent Felix Leiter in two Bond films and the technical savant Beetee in two of the Hunger Games films.

Frances McDormand's considerable talents were wasted with her playing the rather predictable mother figure as Ida.

Steve Zahn was well cast as the insane leader of the pterodactyl's; Thunderclap. He plays crazy well.

Not really sure why Anna Paquin was cast as a female cowboy T-Rex. Every time she spoke I kept seeing Sookie Stackhouse. A clever move might have been to get Joan Cusack to do this. Would have tied nicely into her voicing of cowgirl Jessie in the Toy Story franchise, and as we've seen Pixar like to use actors they're familiar with.

Sam Elliott as the crusty old patriarch of the herding family was perfect casting. I could just see Elliott in this role, shame that they couldn't find a way of giving the T-Rex a handlebar moustache.

John Ratzenberger played  a cameo as Earl, one of a member of cattle rustling velociraptors.

One Hundred and One Dalmatians 1961

Personal Overview: oh goody another dog film! That’s not sarcastic it is my actual reaction to it. My like of this one is accentuated by the fact that I read and really enjoyed both of Dodie Smith’s Dalmatian books.

Walt picked up on this one really early. The book was released in 1956 and he read it in 1957 and looked on it as a filmic possibility.

It’s a simple story and wonderfully narrated by Pongo with dashing Australian actor Rod Taylor providing the Dalmatian's vocals. I actually felt anyone with a voice like that should have had a more dignified name than Pongo. It’s a dual love story with both Pongo and Perdita meeting because of their ‘pets’ (the dogs call humans pets in a delightful inversion) and both falling in love and ‘marrying’.

It’s a kidnapping story once the evil Cruella has her henchmen steal Pongo and Perdita’s fifteen puppies. It’s rather dark really when you consider what Cruella wants to do is skin 99 Dalmatian puppies to make into coats. I’m betting she featured in more than a few nightmares for young theatre goers, especially if they had cute puppies.

I like the idea of the Twilight Barking, which is how the dogs communicate. I enjoyed the book and the film, although it wasn’t quite up to the standard of Lady and the Tramp for mine.

Hero/es: there are any number of canine heroes in this film. From the distressed Pongo and Perdita to the cat Sergeant Tibbs and the dotty old Colonel. Even the unnamed black Labrador who helps them get back home and away from Cruella.

Villain/s: Cruella, Cruella, Cruella De Vil. Even the name sends a shiver down the spine. She looks like the typical Disney villain although updated for the time. 101 Dalmatians was one of the few Disney films to actually be set in the time which it was screened. The car is delightfully over the top, and she is truly terrifying when she cruises past the shed that hides the Dalmatians with her two toned hair and those wild rolling eyes, face contorted into a rictus of suppressed rage.

Cuteness Factor: again the subject matter is naturally dripping with cute, but it’s amped up by Patch, Rolly and Lucky, the only 3 named Dalmatian puppies. They also have personalities. Patch is feisty and tough, Rolly is always hungry and Lucky is obsessed by TV.

Animation: the backgrounds are those 2D looking ones again, but they work for the setting. The dogs are well done, and must have driven the animators mad with all those spots. There were cameos from Peg and the British bulldog from Lady and the Tramp. You have to look close, but they do appear briefly. The opening credits were also animated with Dalmatian pictures. Little shout outs like that were what set Disney apart at the time.

Final Words: for me 101 Dalmatians is a winner. Audiences thought so too, which is just as well, because of Sleeping Beauty’s failure there was some thought at the company given to shutting down the animation department because it wasn’t profitable enough. Personally I don’t think this ever would have happened in Walt’s lifetime. Of course I’m a dog person, but it wasn’t just that it was about cute dogs, it’s a story about family and what parents will do for their children and to be honest what people will do for their pets.

Lady and the Tramp 1955

Personal Overview: I think I have seen this, but couldn’t really remember. Again I knew the story very well from a book I had of it. It’s something that the company didn’t use an already written work for really. The idea came from an experience one of Disney’s writers had when his English Springer Spaniel was pushed aside for a new baby. The scene where Lady is given to her mistress in a hat box was actually something Walt Disney did with his wife and a chow puppy.

What I love about this is the way the dogs act like real dogs a lot of the time. The way they move and some of the things they do. The scene where Lady won’t stay in the laundry and cries until the Dears relent and let her sleep in their room is exactly what happened with my parents and their Cavalier King Charles. I know Lady is meant to be an American Cocker Spaniel, but the docked tail and the colouring aside she looks exactly like a Cavalier, and I adore them, so this was always going to hit me hard.

Essentially Lady and the Tramp is the old rough around the edges streetwise guy meets pampered princess from the upper side of town and they click story. It ticks nearly every cliché in the book, including not actually letting Trusty die when he gets run over by the horse and cart. I got another pang at the end where the mischievous member of Lady and Tramp's pups is called Scamp. I had a little mongrel called Scamp too as a kid and he was every bit as much a rascal as the puppy is.

Hero/es: Lady is the focus, but Tramp is a hero too. In fact all the dogs are. Even the likes of Boris and Peg down at the pound. Largely they do what dogs do and that makes them heroes. They have all the heroic qualities. Lady is loyal and fiercely protective of her family, including the human members. While Tramp appears initially to have an issue with humans, he does what he has to when the lives of Lady and her family are at stake, even though it may come at a personal cost to him, the loss of his freedom.

Villain/s: I guess you could say the rat is, but it’s really just doing what rats do. Oh, spaniels can be good ratters too. My parent’s Cavalier was. Aunt Sarah is also a villain to an extent, but that’s largely because being a cat person she doesn’t understand dogs. She does send Lady a packet of dog biscuits for Christmas by way of an apology. Sarah’s cats Si and Am take the honour for mine. Nasty, sneaky, deceitful, vile creatures. I’m not a cat person and these ones are definitely unpleasant cats. The behaviour is real too. My uncle had cats; a mother and daughter. We housesat for him once and the cats ganged up on Scamp and attacked him. Dogs will lose most fights with cats. We had to let Scamp stay with my grandmother who lived nearby for the duration of the holiday.

Cuteness Factor: these are dogs that talk and fall in love, they eat spaghetti and meatballs and accidentally kiss while eating a strand of spaghetti! Does anymore need to be said, really?

Animation: although the backgrounds are kind of flat and look like 2D sets, it kind of works for the setting, which I think is early 20^th century and Walt Disney said it was based on his hometown, so that works. The achievement here is how real the dogs look and how doglike they act.

Final Words: I loved this! I didn’t really think I would, but getting Lady so spot on sold me on it. Probably up to this point my favourite.