The Writer's Poke

But what if Quasimodo could find love? That had to be the question screenwriters worked with when they pitched and wrote the sequel. When we watched this film last night, my daughter said, "Who asked for this sequel to be made?" I think it's a fair question. All of the voice actors, for whatever reason, came back. But the budget is clearly no longer $100 million. The songs are weaker. The animation is weaker. And, while I don't actually mind the storyline that much (except for the ending), it's weaker as well. Esmerlda and Phoebus are married. They have a son, but neither they nor the goat look any older. They haven't aged at all. Nor have their characters developed in any noticeable way. Quasimodo does seem a little more social. He goes out and about, and none of the people run from him or throw rotten vegetables at him. Everyone seems to get along. Enter this movie's "gypsies" -- the circus people. The whole plot centers around the Madellaine (...

When I was a kid, I didn't care for Disney films. Bambi was okay, and so was Lady and the Tramp, but I never went out of my way to watch any other Disney animated films. I think there were a couple of reasons for this. One, the films usually felt girly to me, because they focused on princesses, and I didn't care about princesses. And two, and maybe equally girly, they all seemed to be full of songs. I didn't care for all the singing. But by the time I saw The Lion King, and I was cool with princesses, and I didn't mind the songs. That said, The Hunchback of Notre Dame just has too many damn songs. Google says it has between 7-to-9, depending on what's counted as a song, and that it's one of the "most heavily dense" Disney animated movies with songs. The actual movie, which had a $70-100 million production budget, is quite good. They really make Esmerelda's (Demi Moore) eyes pop, for example. (By the way, Moore didn't sing Esmerelda's song. ...

Maybe Peter Pan (1953) doesn't age well, I don't know. For me, the concern isn't that Peter Pan is racist or that Captain Hook is misogynist... It's more that Wendy is. She's the storyteller, and as an adult viewer, I tend to see her as the "storyteller." Peter Pan and Hook are simply characters in her stories. Or even if we buy into the idea that Peter Pan and the Lost Boys are real, they're all kids. None of them are mature, and obviously even the pirates shouldn't be seen as beacons of maturity and good morals. So does it really matter how the movie depicts Indians or how it thinks about women? None of that is really considered in my rating of the movie. As I watch the entire canon of Disney movies again this year, I find myself wanting to use 4/5 stars as the baseline. Most Disney movies have their flaws or weaknesses, but generally speaking, they are usually good movies, fun to watch. I think I had fun watching Peter Pan, but in terms of stand...

Dumbo has a real name, it's Jumbo, Jr. That's the name Mrs. Jumbo (she doesn't have her own name) gives him, but it's only used once in the movie. Thereon out, he's Dumbo. We only see moms, no dads. When the storks come to deliver babies -- and all are delivered at the same exact time (weird) -- they drop off the bundles to the moms, and the moms are alone. Where are all the dads? It made me wonder if Circuses only wanted female animals, and if so, what do they do with all the male offspring when they start to get a little too old and a little too male? Dumbo's "villains" in this movie are funny, because they aren't the other animals who make fun of him. They are the older female elephants -- the sewing circle. They are the ones that cannot stand Dumbo's ears, as if his ears are somehow a slight on all elephants. What happens to this group of elephants? At the end of the movie, they are totally gone, as if the circus has discarded them. The DVD...

In Snow White, the evil stepmom/queen puts her daughter to sleep. In Sleeping Beauty (1959), Maleficent attempts to kill Aurora, but the three fairy godmothers step in and change the spell from death to sleep. It's no wonder I end up getting the two films confused, because in some ways, they use the same plot. Snow White is a cute movie, but like Sleeping Beauty, it leaves a lot left unexplained. Like, where is everyone? We have two kingdoms represented, and all we ever see is the Queen, the daughter, the Woodsman, and the Prince. Where are all the people? For that matter, what happened to the King? What happened to the first Queen? I understand that a lot will be left unexplained, but sometimes in Disney movies, the plot is an afterthought. They spend 10 minutes focused on Snow White cleaning the "dollhouse" the Dwarfs live in, but nothing on backstory, nothing on the PTSD that Snow White might be experiencing being forced to run for her life. Did she not know the Queen ...

How do Monsters learn how to be Monsters? They go to college, of course. In Monsters Inc. (2001), I think we just assume that Monsters intuitively know how to be scary, or they have internships and on-the-job training through simulator training sessions, and so on. The prequel, however, develops the idea that Monsters receive more formal academic training. In fact, going to school to learn how to scare is a very prestigious field -- maybe like going to school to become a lawyer or doctor -- and not everyone that begins the program will finish.  Both Mike (Billy Crystal) and Sully (John Goodman) fail the program. Mike is book smart, but he's never going to be scary. Sully is naturally scary, but he's not book smart. They apparently meet as freshman, and I point this out solely for the continuity error (in Monsters Inc., Mike mentions that Sully has been jealous of him since 4th grade).  When Mike and Sully are dropped from the program, they have one chance at redemption: They, ...

What produces more power? Screams or laughter? It's an odd question, but the answer is laughter, and it changes the way that the Monsters in this universe operate. No longer do they work to scare human children; rather, the less scary monsters work to entertain them and make them laugh.  At the beginning of the film, for example, we see monsters working in pairs. Sully (John Goodman) scares, and Mike (Billy Crystal) takes care of the canisters, orders the doors, and write up the reports. Once laughter replaces screams as the Monsters' renewable resource, one assumes that the jobs Mike and Sully perform are reversed. But is Sully very good at paperwork? (Not that Mike was the best, but...) I like this film. It's funny that at the beginning the Monsters are just as scared of human children (and maybe more so) as the children are of them. Monsters have the belief that children are "toxic" and deadly. In fact, entire contamination crews exist just in the event that a ...