Sonic the Hedgehog 3

With the third entry in the franchise, “Sonic the Hedgehog 3,” released today, has it’s foundation. Kevin Sampson said in his review, “It’s full camp. It’s a genre buffet that focuses more on its vignettes than answering plot hole questions.” It just might be the most fun you’ll have in theaters with your family this holiday season!

Picking up on what transpired in “Sonic the Hedgehog 2,” the film finds the new Wachowski family with Sonic (Ben Schwartz), Knuckles (Idris Elba), and Tails (Colleen O’Shaugnessey), trying to be on vacation with Tom (James Marsden) and Maddie (Tika Sumpter). After a hedgehog named Shadow, voiced by Keanu Reeves, breaks out from his fifty-year coma, that relaxation the family wants to get comes to an abrupt end. Team Sonic gets transported to Tokyo to try and bring Shadow under control, if at all possible.

The question is who released Shadow with what looks like Ivo Robotnik (Jim Carrey) tech? Sampson said, “It’s quickly revealed that Ivo has been enjoying telenovelas and getting the Thor post Infinity War treatment (big gut).” In comes Gerald Robotnik, also played by Carrey, Ivo’s long-lost grandfather. From there, everyone is racing to stop a machine that will destroy Earn and Jim Carrey is having so much fun on screen.

The film continues to build out the video game realm, showing character’s skills and power ups. It also noticeably changes in genre in its dialogue, cinematography, and pacing throughout the film. The opening scene is filled with action, it changes into a kid friendly horror moment, a musical dance number, comedy, and drama. This may appear disorganized at first, bit for anyone who played the game on Sega, who know that there were different levels with different styles of gameplay and music. These not-so-subtle change in cinematic genres confirms the film is self-aware. There is a joke about making a flash drive work after blowing on it, just like how everyone did with old school game cartridges.

Sampson noted, “Jim Carrey said that he came out of retirement for this film because he needed to pay bills. Hopefully he keeps overspending so we’ll see him future films because he’s so much fun to watch as both Ivo and Gerald Robotnik.” Each character is fully developed, but they work off of each other in comedic ways as only Carrey can do. Where the first two films were about making family, Keanu Reeves’ Shadow has anger to deal with when it comes to the family he lost. The franchise keeps revolving around family dynamics while adding more characters to this franchise.

Make sure you stick around for the mid and post credit scenes that show Robo Sonic and Amy. Sampson said, “This is by no means an Academy Award winning children’s film. It’s fun, nostalgic for those who played the game or watch/ed the shows.” This is a good time at the movies for all families.

Reeves killed it here. He was just awesome as Shadow. Also, Carrey is having the time of his life playing not one, but two Robotniks. If you want a film that will give you some laughs, enjoyability, and nostalgia reminiscing on the games, see this movie. There are a couple of musical motifs to Sonic Adventure and a couple of catchphrases. See this in the theaters, especially if you’re a Sonic fan. This needs to be seen by everyone.

Thank you for reading these reviews tonight. Stay tuned tomorrow for my review on the “Rio” sequel in “Disney Month 2024.”

Epic

A fairy tale with a forest crawling with fighting armies, brave knights, a compassionate queen – everyone is just 2 centimeters high.

They’re joined with normal height eccentric professor Bomba (Jason Sudeikis), his disappointed teenage daughter Mary Katherine (Amanda Seyfried), and a scene-stealing three-legged dog, which means the 2013 3D digitally animated “Epic” is filled at the seams, much like the luxurious forest where it takes place.

While “Epic,” with its amazingly unreasonable secrecy, may not live up to its title in the story area, this film from Blue Sky Studios is so visually pleasing it almost doesn’t matter.

Stephen Schaefer said in his review, “With a grab bag of references that range from “The Wizard of Oz,” “Alice in Wonderland,” Harry Potter and “The Hobbit” and a starry cast voicing­ its creatures large and small, “Epic” offers a magical wonderland of a forest that is so rich and inviting it seems only natural that it’s populated by tiny beings.”

They live under compassionate queen Tara (Beyonce Knowles) and are protected by the heroic army of green-dressed Leafmen, led by the square-jawed Ronin (Colin Farrell).

Bomba the scientist lives near the woods and believes, despite he’s never seen them, in the little people who fight with ridiculous Mandrake, voiced by Christoph Waltz, and his ugly residents of rot and decay called Boggans.

As “Epic” starts, Bomba’s daughter returns – “It’s now MK, Dad,” she tells him – following her mom’s dead to fix things with her dad and his three-legged dog.

Somehow MK no only discovers the Leafmen but is shrunk and finds a possible love interest in the rebellious free-spirited Nod, voiced by Josh Hutcherson.

Schaefer joked, “Before MK can click her heels three times — Nope! That’s another movie —” well, before the finale with Beyonce on the soundtrack, there’s a lot of flying, fighting, and comic relief with a talking slug (Aziz Ansari), snail (Chris O’Dowd), and a six-handed caterpillar Nim Galuu (Steven Tyler).

“Epic” is a journey that is both unpredictable and wonderfully familiar.

This is a good movie for the whole family to sit down and watch. In the very best sense, this is a family friendly film that also has an environmental message in it. Check it out on Hulu and enjoy the whimsical world of this animated enjoyment.

Today will be a double feature because this morning, my brother and I saw the new Sonic movie, so that review to come later.

The Lone Ranger

Heard on radios and seen in books since the 1930s, a masked lawman and his trusty Native American partner ride into people’s television with a famous 1950s show. Disney then got the team behind the “Pirates of the Caribbean” franchise with doing for cowboys what they managed with pirates. Now, the famous crime-fighting duo have been tied and dragged into the 21^st century for Gore Verbinski’s “The Lone Ranger,” released in 2013, with Johnny Depp continuing his loud eccentric façade as Tonto. Starring in a 1933 fairground, a boy meets an old Comanche who reminisces his fantastical story.

The story starts over sixty years earlier when upright lawyer John Reid (Armie Hammer) ruins Tonto’s attempt to kill the evil bandit Butch Cavendish (William Fitchner) in the prison car of a train headed to Colby, Texas. Ben Nicholson said in his review, “A subsequent assault on said train sees the varmit escape and flea into the wild with his gang. Mirroring the original story, a group of rangers – with John tagging along – set out to apprehend him but the posse is double-crossed and slaughtered in a canyon.” Tonto comes to help John, and the duo unite to hunt Cavendish down, with Reid in disguise behind the famous domino mask.

Nicholson said, “Sadly, what could easily have shaped-up as a gripping adventure yarn has a lot more in common with the bloated and dour At Worlds End (2007) than the swaggering Curse of the Black Pearl (2003). It commits the cardinal sin of any romp – that is to be laborious – with neither the action nor the comedy hitting the requisite marks. The spectacle is overblown and never excites, whilst the humour is largely reserved for Hammer’s fine, but never inspiring, Reid and Depp’s sub-par riff on his own most iconic creation.” Verbinksi’s “The Lone Ranger” also tries to navigate even more evil and serious areas – a bold and interesting decision for a film from Disney – but it never really works.

Nicholson said, “Cavendish, it transpires, is not just a gun-toting bandit but a maniac with a taste for human organs. To extenuate this re-write, Tonto’s story places huge attention on the slaughter of his people, but in such a hundred-mile-an-hour train ride of a movie, it’s never reflected on with anywhere near enough care to really hit the spot. Fervent fans of Depp’s gallery of grotesques may find the film enjoyable enough (though Tonto is no Captain Jack), and there’s plenty of action to numb the mind some, but this is hardly the kick in the keister the western genre has been crying out for.”

Sadly, Disney’s “The Long Ranger” quickly becomes very tiring. The overlong plot lacks any intelligence. The action (besides a train wreck) lacks enjoyment. Finally, the array of characters (including cameos from Helena Bonham Carter and Tom Wilkinson) lack the needed depth or enjoyment. Nicholson ended his review by saying, “At over two-and-half hours long, you may get a lot of bang for your buck, but Verbinski’s mask-adorned caper isn’t half as entertaining as it could have been.”

This has to be one of the most boring westerns out there. I never saw the show because it aired before I was born, but this film is really bad. There is nothing in this movie that people will enjoy. Just avoid seeing this film because you will not like it at all, I assure you that.

Alright, enough of these mediocre films. Tomorrow I will be looking at a very enjoyable film in “Disney Month 2024.”

John Carter

Roger Ebert began his review by admitting, “I don’t see any way to begin a review of “John Carter” without referring to “Through Time and Space With Ferdinand Feghoot.” That was a series of little stories that appeared in the magazine Fantasy and Science Fiction from 1956 to 1973 and had a great influence on my development as a critic. In one of the Feghoot adventures, the hero finds himself on Mars and engaged in bloody swordplay. He is sliced in the leg. Then in the other leg. Then an arm is hacked off. “To heck with this,” Feghoot exclaims, unholstering his ray gun and vaporizing his enemies.”

Ebert continued, ‘I may have one or two details wrong, but you understand the point: When superior technology is at hand, it seems absurd for heroes to limit themselves to swords. When airships the size of a city block can float above a battle, why handicap yourself with cavalry charges involving lumbering alien rhinos? When it is possible to teleport yourself from Earth to Mars, why are you considered extraordinary because you can jump really high?”

These questions are never asked in the realm of “John Carter,” released in 2012, and in the end, the movie feels more Western than science fiction. Even if we completely suspend our disbelief and accept the entire story, isn’t it underwhelming to spend so much time looking at fist fights when there are so many cool gadgets to use?

Ebert mentioned, “But I must not review a movie that wasn’t made. What we have here is a rousing boy’s adventure story, adapted from stories that Edgar Rice Burroughs cranked out for early pulp magazines. They lacked the visceral appeal of his Tarzan stories, which inspired an estimated 89 movies; amazingly, this is the first John Carter movie, but it is intended to foster a franchise and will probably succeed.”

Burroughs’ protagonist is a Civil War veteran who is located in Monument Valley, where he has an encounter that teleports him to Mars. Ebert noted, “This is not the Mars that NASA’s Rovers are poking into, but the Mars envisioned at the time Burroughs was writing, which the astronomer Percival Lowell claimed was criss-crossed by a system of canals.” Luckily for Carter, it has an atmosphere that he can breathe and surface temperatures allowing him to take his shirt off. In a nice scene early on, he finds that his Earth muscles allow him to jump high in the lower Martian gravity.

Ebert said, “This attracts the attention of the inhabitants of Mars, represented by two apparently human cities at war with each other, and a native race called the Tharks, who look like a vague humanoid blend of weird green aliens from old covers of Thrilling Wonder Stories. They have four arms, and it was a great disappointment to me that we never saw a Thark putting on a shirt.” John Carter feels a quick sympathy for the Tharks and also gets recruited into the war of the cities – choosing the side with an attractive person named Deja Thoris, played by Lynn Collins, who is the movie’s best character.

John Carter is played by Taylor Kitsch, who starred with Collins in “Wolverine.” Ebert said, “Yes, I agree Kitsch is a curious name for a star in action movies.” Still, that is his real name, you can think how many fans of “Wolverine,” for example, are familiar with the word or its meaning. As an actor, he is just fine as a sword-fighting, rhino-riding savior of planets.

The film was directed by Andrew Stanton, whose films include “A Bug’s Life,” “Finding Nemo,” and “WALL-E.” All three have great, well-made plots, and that’s what “John Carter” could use more. The action scenes are normally well-made enough. Ebert said, “Although I liked the scene where Carter was getting his Mars legs with his first low-gravity steps, the sight of him springing into the air like a jumping jack could inspire bad laughs.”

Ebert continued, “Does “John Carter” get the job done for the weekend action audience? Yes, I suppose it does. The massive city on legs that stomps across the landscape is well-done. The Tharks are ingenious, although I’m not sure why they need tusks. Lynn Collins makes a terrific heroine. And I enjoyed the story outside the story, about how Burroughs wrote a journal about what he saw and appears briefly as a character.” He may even appear in sequels because Burroughs wrote some.

Overall, I don’t really see myself watching this again, even though I do think it does its job fine. I don’t think it was really anything spectacular, seeing how the movie looks nice, but I didn’t really get into the story. If you want to see it, I don’t think it will hurt, but like I said, after seeing it once, I don’t think I will see it again because I didn’t get into it like others might. If you read the book, I heard this doesn’t follow it, but as a sci-fi film, it did have a nice atmosphere and gripping action. See it for yourself and judge it on your own thoughts.

Tomorrow I will look at another Western film that I will probably forget in “Disney Month 2024.”

Rio

“Rio” is as bright, fun, and dramatic as the Brazilian Carnivale where the final act occurs. The 2011 animated musical as a whole is one edge-of-your-seat race to give a bird back to his human friend, stop an evil gang of bird smugglers, and make sure that, eventually, love will prevail.

The bird is Blu, voiced by Jesse Eisenberg, a blue macaw stolen from his home in the rain forest before he learned how to fly. Ending up in a place no one would expect, Minnesota, he is adopted by Linda, voiced by Leslie Mann. Andrea Chase said in her review, “For fifteen years, they are inseparable and though Blu has never learned to fly, he has become handy around the house and learned to take the taunting of the local wild birds in stride.” Everything is fine until Tulio, voiced by Rodrigo Santoro, a clumsy ornithologist from Brazil arrives with a surprising announcement that Blu is the last male of his species, and Tulio needs him in Rio to meet the last female blue macaw, Jewel, voiced by Anne Hathaway, newly removed from the wild, in order to let nature do its work and save the species from extinction. Chase noted, “They arrive just in time for Carnivale, but, alas, the glitter and glamour do nothing to charm Jewel, who is more interested in escaping than mating.” On top of that, Blu has arrived just as an evil plan is made by Marcel, voiced by Carlos Ponce, to steal the residents in Tulios bird lab and sell them to the highest bidder.

Blu and Jewel find themselves chained together, grounding them both, as the thieves and their army, Nigel, voiced by Jermaine Clement, an unstable cockatoo with stagey tendencies and no mercy, are on their path, with Linda and Tulio close behind them.

Chase mentioned, “There is a nice attention to character detail, making the denizens who occupy this flick vivid, and driving it all with a real sense of the warmth between Blu and Linda. Macaws may not take to hot cocoa in real life, but Blu’s attachment to the perfect ration of mini-marshmallows in that beverage doesn’t seem a stretch in this context. Nor does his constant babbling of random facts gleaned from his years at Linda’s side in her bookshop.” The supporting roles have less depth, but the toucan (George Lopez) who helps Blu out has the right type of comic relief also found in Nico and Pedro (Jamie Foxx and rapper will.i.am), a pair of party birds who break into a catchy song when not thinking of the mystery of why Blu would rather stay in his cage than fly over Rio. Chase credited, “The animation takes full advantage of its South American setting, roseate spoonbills flutter over the Sugarloaf, marmosets swarm, and a determined visitor from Minnesota bashes through the favela of the titular city in search of her stolen macaw. It’s at its best, story- and animation-wise, with the romance, avian and human, which is sweet in a goofy rather than syrupy way. With little to work with in bird physiognomy, the animators have found a way to make the eyes startlingly expressive without violating an inordinate number of the many inherent restrictions. The voice component adds to it, with Eisenberg’s earnest if tentative mutter contrasting with Hathaway’s determined purr. Attempting to have them kiss, as inevitably they do, however, with such prodigious beaks was perhaps ill-advised.” Now with Nigel, animation has found one scary villain, and Nigel has found in Clement a voice that has the relaxing voice of the most dangerous criminal.

The adventure is fast-paced, with twists and turns as unexpected as they are quick. Pursuers and pursued race through the streets, over rooftops, and in the air using all type of transportations and the many ways of an adrenaline rush. Also, it takes time to make a few relevant points about effective conservation. The ending is never really in doubt, but how “Rio” gets there makes the most of its silly type of mayhem.

For a movie from Blue Sky Studios, the same one that brought us the “Ice Age” franchise, I was surprised at how well done this movie was. I’m also surprised that no one talks about this film because I think this film should be seen by everyone because I think they will love it. Check it out on Disney+ because you will enjoy this one a lot. Children will love this film a lot, I promise you.

Tomorrow I will look at a film that I found to be uninteresting in “Disney Month 2024.”

The Thirteenth Year

“The Thirteenth Year,” released in 1999, takes a very interesting idea – boy beings turning into a mermaid on his thirteenth birthday and tries to hide it from everyone. Every review I have seen said this is a metaphor for coming out as gay – and this is made boring.

The script doesn’t have a clear structure. Subplots get added and thrown away quickly. You feel as though the writer only decided on a main for the film while working on it and never got around to finishing the idea.

Dan Stalcup said in his review, “The movies is led by a charisma vacuum named Chez Starbuck playing a teenager named Cody — the ultimate 1999 name. If Starbuck’s performance was remotely as exciting as his name, I’d probably be bumping this up a rating. Alas, he has no idea what do in front of a camera and was probably cast because he could swim.”

The film’s main pro is that it builds the coming-out-of-the-closet metaphor as the film goes on. Stalcup described, “He has a confrontation with his girlfriend (Courtnee Draper) that is an astonishingly frank mirror to a teen girl realizing she’s a beard.” The movie’s climax is Cody reviving his secret best friend Jess, played by Justin Jon Ross, with a shock of love, like how Eve kissed Wall-E, to bring back his memories.

However, it doesn’t generate the smallest dramatic tension because of the bad pacing of exposition disclosure and inconsistent characters – like the adoptive parents, played by Lisa Stahl Sullivan and Joey Gladstone from “Full House,” impressionist Dave Coulier, whose personalities are different in every scene.

Stalcup described, “It’s still a Disney Channel movie with a light fantasy element, some time capsule fashion choices, and some corny zingers.”

Unfortunately, I didn’t feel anything when I was watching this movie. I felt as though no feeling was put into this whatsoever. If they did, then I probably would have been rooting for Cody the whole time, but the fact that it was combining Cody trying to find out who he is, and Jess’s dad (Brent Briscoe) trying to convince to everyone that the mermaid (Stephanie Chantel Durelli) he saw so many years ago is real, didn’t give this film a focus. If they had just focused on one central element, then maybe I would have felt different, but as it is, I can’t say I’m glad or not about seeing it. If you want to see it, be my guest, as you can see it on Disney+, but I think you can safely sail away from the deep waters this film sank in.

Alright, enough DCOMs for this month. Tomorrow I will be looking at an animated movie about birds in “Disney Month 2024.”

Don't Look Under the Bed

I’m going to be real here. The 1999 DCOM, “Don’t Look Under the Bed,” looks like it could have some potential to being a good children’s film, but it’s very messy. I know there is an audience out there for this film, but when I saw it, nothing came off as scary.

The film is about a girl named Frances, played by Erin Chambers, who is starting high school a year early. There are some bizarre events occurring all over her town. Dogs are on people’s roofs, alarms going off hours early, eggs are dropped on a teacher’s car, gelatin in the school’s swimming pool, and the letter “B” spray-painted on lockers and all over town. Frances gets blamed for these pranks, but she is completely innocent and doesn’t know what is going on.

Then she meets Larry Houdini, played by Eric “Ty” Hodges II, who says he will help Frances, and tells her he is an imaginary friend. This is where you can see that it is clearly a kid’s film. Because kids are known to having imaginary friends. I was one of those kids growing up that had imaginary friends. I used to act like a teacher reading stories to a group of school children when there was no one there. I must have really loved story time in school to be doing that often.

Another way you can tell this is a children’s film is when Larry tells Frances that the villain is called the “Boogeyman,” played by Steve Valentine. Now that is a cliched villain name for a children’s film. Of course, if you’re in high school, you would not believe in such a thing called the “Boogeyman,” like Frances doesn’t.

Jake Sakson plays Frances’ little brother, Jake Sakson, who is in remission from surviving leukemia. Their older brother, Albert, played by Nathan Stevens, donated his bone marrow, even though Frances wanted to donate.

Guys, I’m sorry, but if I was younger, maybe I would have gotten into this, but as an adult, I just saw this as a typical kids flick. Especially the imaginary friends realm, which they teleport to after going underneath a bed. That doesn’t really look anything that fascinating. To children, maybe, but not to adults. If you have kids, they can see this fine, but for adults, I wouldn’t recommend it. If they do see it and love it, great, but I think I will not watch this again after seeing it once.

Tomorrow I will be looking at another strange DCOM in “Disney Month 2024.”

Can of Worms

The 1999 DCOM film, “Can of Worms” is about a boy named Mike, played by Michael Shulman, who is not happy with his life on Earth. He sends out a message to space for help to escape Earth and gets more than he asked for when aliens actually arrive.

Elena Square Eyes said in her review, “I can safely say that if I had watched Can of Worms as a child, I wouldn’t have liked it just how I don’t like it now. I feel like the poster and even the short promo is misleading as the aliens don’t make an appearance until almost 50 minutes into the film. Plus, I was thinking there’d be a can of space worms or something but really the title is a reference to the phrase “opened a can of worms” aka have done something that has caused things to be far more unpleasant, difficult and problematic than you might’ve first intended.”

Mike’s life isn’t all that bad before the aliens arrive. He has a crush on the head cheerleader (Erika Christensen), has some rivalry with one of the players on his football team (Marcus Turner), and he’s a computer genius who loves to write sci-fi stories, but he isn’t the most hated kid in school or the one nobody acknowledges. He has friends (Adam Wylie and Andre Ducote) and a nice family (Garrett M. Brown, Lee Garlington, Brighton Hertfort), and when one thing goes wrong, he sends a message to space asking for someone to take him away. It’s overexaggerated.

When the aliens do arrive, there is some nice animatronics effects but a lot of them are childish with fart and vomit jokes. Elena admitted, “At least there’s a talking alien dog called Barnabus (voiced by Malcolm McDowell who wasn’t someone I was expecting to find in a Disney Channel Original Movie) who is pretty cool and helpful. Anything with a dog automatically goes up in my expectations a bit to be honest. Though Barnabus was pretty much the only character with commonsense so he had that going for him too.”

The pacing for “Can of Worms” was off. It spends a lot of time on Mike’s every day life which can get boring and then when the eccentrics start it’s almost overwhelming as there are so many different aliens at once. Elena noted, “Then Mike and his friends have to go on a rescue mission into an alien’s home world which kind of feels tacked on as otherwise it would be plain bureaucracy that would get Mike out of this mess he’s caused.” Clearly, they needed more action at the end to try and keep viewers interested.

Elena ended her review by saying, “Not a fan of Can of Worms at all and I don’t think this one is a case of being roughly two decades older than the target audience.”

I believe I was the wrong age group for this movie. If you have little kids, then they can enjoy this fine. However, I don’t think adults will be watching this movie after only seeing it once. This is not a movie for everyone, and I am clearly not one of them. This movie just seems unrelatable to the teen life, so that’s why I say skip this one over.

Tomorrow I will look at another unbelievable DCOM in “Disney Month 2024.”

Under Wraps (1997)

The 1997 Disney Channel Original Movie, “Under Wraps,” tells about three friends, Marshall (Mario Yedidia), Gilbert (Adam Wylie), and Amy (Clara Bryant), accidentally awakening a 3,000-year-old mummy. They have to find his sarcophagus before midnight on Halloween or he’ll turn to dust.

Elena Square Eyes said in her blog, “Under Wraps was the first ever Disney Channel Original Movie and while I certainly haven’t watched them all, it started off a lot scarier than I was anticipating.” It starts with Marshall and Gilbert watching a horror movie at the theaters and the film their watching has a moment where despite not seeing any blood, the viewer can think of a very scary movie. Thankfully Gilbert and Marshall’s journey with the mummy (they name him Harold) isn’t so scary.

Actually, Harold, played by Bill Fagerbakke, is somewhat silly and likable even if all his grunting gets old very fast. Elena credited, “Fagerbakke gives a great physical performance and the prosthetics on his face and teeth still look really good.” The relationship between Marshall and Harold is surprisingly nice and it feels like Marshall sees him almost as a father figure and someone to talk to. Seeing how his parents are divorced and he isn’t sure about his mom’s (Corinne Bohrer) new boyfriend Ted (Fagerbakke). Also, seeing how Fagerbakke plays both Harold the mummy and Ted the boyfriend gives the father/son parallels more meaning.

All three children are pretty great. Marshall loves horror films and all the monsters after the main shock, kind of enjoys having a mummy living with him. Elena said, “I loved how Gilbret was a scaredy cat and openly owned that part of him and while they might’ve made fun of him a bit, Marshall and Amy didn’t think any lesser of him. Amy is a confident preteen and the kind of person who would’ve intimidated me when I was their age. They felt like real friends with all their banter which was great too.”

“Under Wraps” is a nice combination of scary, funny, and adventure with the three kids who have great camaraderie.

This might have been one of the first Disney Channel Original Movies, but no one really talks about it. I guess this movie does have a lot of good moments in it, but I don’t know, maybe you quickly forget about it. Which is sad because I think this movie can be seen and no one would really get annoyed or bored by it. I can understand if this may not be everyone’s type of film, but I wouldn’t say not watch it. If you can, find it somewhere and check it out.

Tomorrow I will be looking at another Disney Channel Original Movie in “Disney Month 2024.”

Newsies

Certain movies hit your emotions so strongly that, even if they start to fall apart, you seem to keep rooting for them. That’s basically the case with the 1992 film, “Newsies.”

It’s a large, bright, moving period musical and its subject – the 1899 New York City newsboys’ strike – makes it feel out of place. Michael Wilmington said in his review, “The various elements often seem to clash: Golden Age musical and the ‘30s- or ‘60s-style left-wing labor drama, the young cast careening and leaping to songs like “Seize the Day” while the writers try to fill a broad canvas with social detail.”

Wilmington continued, “The bumptiously sunny Hollywood happy ending, probably a commercial prerequisite, clashes with everything. The real strike didn’t end this happily, and to suggest that these Davids could bring Goliaths Pulitzer and Hearst to their knees with heart and hope, some slingshots and an assist from Teddy Roosevelt, is as false to the material as it is to history.”

However, for all its flaws, “Newsies” has something that many successes miss. Wilmington noted, “It’s done with such full-bore enthusiasm, verve and energy, that--crazy as it often seems--it really does have moments that lift your heart or moisten your eyes.” Kenny Ortega, the director and Peggy Holmes, the co-choreographer, don’t act like the material has flaws: automatic plot twists, corny lyrics or characters. Ortega is like the newsies: He’s out to seize the day. When the material works, so does he.

The story is standard. We see three boys who will be the main people in the strike: an intellectual (David Moscow), his kid brother (Luke Edwards), and a rebel (Christian Bale). Wilmington said, “We get a glimpse of their seething turn-of-the century world, and the forces arrayed against them: local bullies, their weaselly distributor (“Barton Fink’s” splendidly sleazy Michael Lerner), all the way up to Joseph Pulitzer--played as a cold, compassionless patrician by Robert Duvall.”

Wilmington continued, “In the first, and best, part of “Newsies,” Ortega keeps rushing us and the boys from place to place, in big, eye-catching, mobile Panavision shots that bustle and boil with background detail. The production design and cinematography (Andrew Laszlo) are often smashing, and Bale--the boy protagonist of “Empire of the Sun”--has lots of streetwise charisma. When we reach the end of the first “act”--Bale’s wistfully romantic, nocturnal walk-in-the-streets-and-dream number “Santa Fe”--the movie has created its own little world, sucked us in with its movie-movie romanticism.”

Then Pulitzer raises the price on newspapers, the strike begins, and the story deteriorates.  Wilmington said, ““Newsies” which, up till then, has looked a bit like “Oliver!” mixed with “Ragtime” and “Angels With Dirty Faces,” suddenly becomes, more obviously, a formula Disney movie.” The tone goes off. There’s little feeling of how this strike might develop or tolerate itself.

Writers Bob Tzudiker and Noni White insert a prison, an evil warden (Kevin Tighe), a principled reporter (Bill Pullman), unlikely twists, benefits (with Ann-Margret), and melodrama aplenty. Wilmington noted, ““Newsies” becomes a string of set-pieces, some of which work, some of which don’t, all barreling full-speed ahead toward its Teddy Roosevelt deus ex machina.”

However, if you’re stuck at the opening – maybe because of preference – it keeps some of its charm. Wilmington noted, “Composer Alan Menken, who lost his longtime partner, lyricist Howard Ashman, to AIDS, is like Rodgers without his Hart. He has a new lyricist here, Jack Feldman (who, unpromisingly, wrote Barry Manilow’s “Copacabana”)--but, although Feldman can’t match Ashman, Menken’s music is still in the best Tin Pan Alley-Broadway heart-tugger tradition. It has lilt and range, infectious inevitability.”

Wilmington continued, “These days, big-studio movies don’t often look at labor unions or history. They leave it to low-budget, documentary or independent efforts like “Roger & Me,” “American Dream” or “Matewan.” So, treading on this new and old ground--trying to revive the Hollywood musical and the ‘30s social drama--”Newsies” (MPAA-rated PG) stumbles a little.”

Maybe the movie’s “fall” is like its own breathtaking last shot: a freeze frame of a jumping newsboy, who suddenly falls to the ground after the credits finish rolling. It’s a hilarious mistake: a mistake that may lead Ortega and the rest to better ones.

I don’t think this movie is entirely bad. There some good things in this film that unfortunately get overshadowed by all the mistakes of it being annoying. If you want to check this out, I don’t think it will hurt, as it is streaming on Disney+. The choice is yours, but if you don’t see it, I don’t think you’re missing anything. Still, this is an average film.

Tomorrow I will review a Disney Channel Original Movie in “Disney Month 2024.”

The Prince and the Pauper

In 1990, Disney released their 29^th animated film, “The Rescuers Down Under.” ON the theatrical release, the film had the 25-minute short, “The Prince and the Pauper,” directed by George Scribner. It is a strange short of Walt Disney animation history, and probably deserves to be talked about and appreciated more than it currently it.

The film adapts the Mark Twain 1881 novel and uses Disney’s most famous characters in place of the original characters. Mickey Mouse (Wayne Allwine) plays both the main prince and pauper, one who has Donald Duck (Tony Anselmo) as a friend, and the other Goofy and Pluto (both voiced by Bill Farmer). The famous villain Pete, voiced by Arthur Burghardt, plays the antagonist captain of the city guard. Other famous characters include Horace Horsecollar (Farmer) and Clarabelle Cow (Elvia Allman) make cameos. Grant Watson said in his review, “They are a wonderful range of characters with a rich, memorable history, and it is good to see that even as the company’s original animated films went from strength to strength they were not forgotten.” It was Disney’s first Mickey Mouse film since “Mickey’s Christmas Carol” in 1983, which came with the re-release of the original “Rescuers.”

“The Prince and the Pauper’s” other famous trait is that it was the last traditionally animated film that Disney ever made. Watson noted, “The Little Mermaid had included a test sequence at its climax of a new computer-aided animation system known as CAPS, and from The Rescuers Down Under all of Disney’s subsequent cel-animated films made use of it. The difference is palpable: there is a genuine hand-crafted sense to The Prince and the Pauper, and a loose roughness to the details that all-but vanishes from later films. It creates an immediate warmth: a human touch that you only really gets from films that have been drawn and coloured by hand.” Everything is well directed by George Scribner, and is far superior to “Oliver & Company.”

The length really helps. Watson mentioned, “At 25 minutes, there is no need for padding or extended musical numbers.” It is much longer than a usual Disney short, which lets the story have more depth and a three-act structure. Watson said, “It is an odd length all told, and it is a shame that there are not more avenues for works at this length. Hopefully with the versatility of online streaming, we might get more half-hour animations via Disney+.”

This version is available on Disney+ along with the 1962 live-action version. This short was released on DVD as part of the Walt Disney Animation Collection and Walt Disney Fables range. This is a well made short that should be seen by everyone.

Like I mentioned already, this is a nice little short that everyone can put on Disney+ and enjoy. Check it out and see what you have been missing because this is an easy short to put and sit through the entirety of. I give this a high recommendation because I think everyone will love this short, especially with the classic characters playing the roles from the book.

Tomorrow I’m going to look at a live-action film that I believe Nostalgia Critic was going to review by Nostalgia Chick already did in “Disney Month 2024.”

Ernest Goes to Jail

The third film where Jim Varney reprised his role as Ernest P. Worrell is “Ernest Goes to Jail,” released in 1990. This time, Ernest is the accident-prone janitor of a bank who wants to be a bank teller one day and that’s where all the stuff starts. Does this sound familiar. Everything is so uninspired and in a strange turn of events, Ernest is selected for jury duty and what can be said as a doubtful comedy of errors is mistaken for criminal Felix Nash, also played by Varney. Nash thinks his luck is good for being a janitor at a bank, so while he’s planning to rob the bank, Ernest must find a way out of jail before he is given the chair as Nash. Ken said in his blog, “This film lacks any real laughs but seeing Varney volley back and forth between slackjawed Ernest and the cutthroat Nash is fun stuff.  So while I thought it was a fairly substandard comedy retread whattya the kids think? They loved it of course.”

This film is very weak. The story is a repeat of “Ernest Goes to Camp,” but without him interacting with kids. This is not up there but it has it’s moments and is worth seeing only to see Varney switch when he plays the criminal Nash.

I didn’t enjoy this film at all. I don’t know anyone who would. Unless they find some sort of enjoyment and entertainment in this film, fine, but I don’t think there is anything about this film that would be worth checking out. If you have seen the Ernest films, this one can be skipped over and nothing will be missed.

Tomorrow I will be looking at another short that is probably a classic in “Disney Month 2024.”

Ernest Goes to Camp

With the passing of comedian Jim Varney 24 years ago, his legacy as Ernest P. Worrell is being forgotten from pop culture’s memory. Which is sad because Ernest was maybe one of the most sensible slapstick characters that we saw on screen. He was insistently positive, known for pratfalls, stuck on overacting, willing to put on different disguises, and filled with catchphrases like “Know whadda mean, Vern?”

Varney created the character in 1980 for commercials, eventually bringing him to his first starring role in 1987, “Ernest Goes to Camp.” Made for an insufficient $3 million, the film became an unexpected box office success and made in over seven times its budget and started a nine-film series that went into the 1990s.

The movie starts at Camp Kikakee, where Ernest is a repair man who wants one thing: to become a camp counselor in his own way. That’s a problem because basically no one respects him. However, when a group of children come to the camp as part of a program, Ernest gets his opportunity to lead, which he does in his own awkward, crazy way. Syp said in his review, “These kids are supposed to be super-tough, but it’s the ’80s, so at best they’re caricatures of what writers thought tough kids might look or sound like.” They aren’t very nice to Ernest in the beginning but his sincerity eventually makes him likable.

Syp admitted, “And I can see why, because Ernest is exactly the kind of camp counselor you’d actually want in your cabin. As I was watching this, I was thinking of how he really is doing a great job.” He genuinely cares for the students, is extremely patient with them, and is always entertaining to watch – especially when he makes a mistake. Which he does a lot.

There’s some other stuff that occurs also. Movie tropes want an evil corporation trying to buy or steal the camp lands for their own use, a runaway golf cart that makes occasional appearances, two camp cooks, played by Gailard Sartain and Daniel Butler, that make the most horrid food kids don’t want to eat, and a little friendly rivalry between social groups.

It’s not classy humor but there’s a lot of energy spent here to get jokes on the screen – and a lot of that depends on Varney’s acting. Syp credited, “He’s like your bizarre uncle that always has a nonsensical story on hand and a willingness to teach you something he has little idea how to do himself.” Varney is just funny as he goes on with his various lessons and plans. You might think you’re too classy to laugh at him initially. Syp reassured, “But trust me, after a while, you’ll be chuckling even as you’re rolling your eyes. He doesn’t let any imaginary pride get in the way of being a comedian, and that actually opens the field up more than you’d think.”

With so many summer camp hints soaking this whole film and a sincere amount of laughter, “Ernest Goes to Camp” is a classic that holds up a lot better than one would think, even if it’s not professional filmmaking.

I was familiar with this character when I saw commercials of him back in the 90s and maybe saw one part of a movie as a child, but I never watched any of his movies until now. I do say this is a funny movie and you can enjoy it, so check it out wherever you can find it. You will see what you have been missing out on.

Tomorrow I will be looking at one of the other Ernest film in “Disney Month 2024.”

The Watcher in the Woods

The section labeled “Disney Horror films” isn’t too substantial. The idea of staff welcoming John Hough’s 1980 film “The Watcher in the Woods” as ‘this could be our Exorcist’ suggests that the company were actually looking in surprising directions in the early 1980s. Eddie Harrison said in his review, “The Watcher in the Woods came out just before The Shining, and has a number of similar tropes, notably children discovering backwards writing on the windows of a crumbling mansion. But Watcher was pulled by the company bosses, re-edited and given a new opening and closing sequence.” The original version, and Hough’s preferred version, are even harder to find than the 1982 re-release.

Harrison noted, “Safe pair of hands Vincent McEveety was drafted in for the reshoots, but the regular reader of this blog will know that John Hough is the draw here; from Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry to Biggles, his directorial skills are first rate.” Here, he brings a real magic to accounts as David McCallum and his family (Carroll Baker, Lynn-Holly Johnson, and Kyle Richards) movie into an old house, where Bette Davis has a secret about a missing child (Katharine Levy) and a haunted presence.

Since the 1980s, PG horror was something of a principal, but in 1980, the whole concept of a children’s horror movie looked like a contradiction. Hough’s movie has plenty of jump scares, like a child putting on a witch’s mask, that doesn’t really connect to the main story.

Harrison said, “Safe pair of hands Vincent McEveety was drafted in for the reshoots, but the regular reader of this blog will know that John Hough is the draw here; from Dirty Mary, Crazy Larry to Biggles, his directorial skills are first rate.” This has the atmosphere, even if the story defies logic for children and adults alike.

In all honesty, I don’t really see anything special in this film. If you want to check it out, I don’t think it will hurt, but I don’t know if this will be remembered by everyone who watched this. Sure, this is a legitimately scary film that Disney made and it does give that look, which it succeeds at. It won’t hurt to check it out, so if you can find it, then see it and see if you get scared or if this is something you can just simply watch once and never again. I guess it will depend on the person but maybe a majority to find this scary and will love it.

Tomorrow I will be looking at a film that is on a character that a late actor was famous portraying in “Disney Month 2024.”

The Small One

“The Small One” is a 1978 Disney animated short film directed by Don Bluth. It’s one of the classics.

The film is about a Judean boy (Sean Marshall) who, after his father (Olan Soule) tells him that his favorite donkey is too old to work for them any longer, takes the donkey to the town to find the right person for him. When he fails, Joseph, played by Gordon Jump, appears to take the donkey and his wife to Bethlehem. The ending shows the film as a traditional holiday favorite that for once uses on the Christian nativity story properly without any forced outcome or moralistic.

Simbasible said in his review, “I absolutely loved this film. I found it to be incredibly emotional, especially in that gorgeous, truly inspired ending. The animation is terrific with excellent background work and good character designs, though the boy obviously has a rehashed Mowgli design. I did also like the score, and the soundtrack. Yes, the film is somewhat of a musical, and it actually succeeds in all of its songs, especially in that first very endearing one. I also liked how the father was firm, but still understanding. The only problem here is the pacing as the structure in the middle act was troublesome and too episodic, but still most of those scenes worked, and the attention to detail and realism are to be appreciated.”

“The Small One” is a Don Bluth/Disney classic that works from gorgeous animation, a great soundtrack, charming characters and such a heartwarming ending. It’s a timeless classic with a lot of heart.

As I stated yesterday, I first heard about this short from Nostalgia Critic when he was listing the best Christmas specials. When I checked this out some time ago, I really loved this a lot. I cannot believe that I had never seen it before, but now that I have, I can safely say that this short should be a tradition to watch every holiday season. Check it out on Disney+ and see what you have been missing.

Tomorrow I will be looking another strange film in “Disney Month 2024.”

Babes in Toyland

“Babes in Toyland” was a huge step forward for Walt Disney in 1961. Brian Orndorf said in his review, “His first live-action musical, the mogul proceeded carefully with the work, updated from the operetta by Victor Herbert, casting fan-favorite and loyal Mouseketeer Annette Funicello (the girl who launched an entire generation of boys into puberty) in the lead role, while filling the frame with all kinds of advanced Disney wizardry to keep audiences amazed and, at times, distracted. Experimental in nature but familiar in design, the picture is a mixed bag of delights, with the majority of its success tied to the designers and animators, who bring a surprising amount of invention to the screen, working to open up the limited stage setting Disney requested. While it's rarely daring, "Babes in Toyland" does enjoy moments of sparkle, while supplying enough requisite shenanigans to fuel an unfussy tale of heroes, villains, and shrinking rays. Perhaps 105 minutes of this sugary concoction borders on punishment, but when the movie hits a creative groove the results are highly amusing, generating a heightened sense of theatrical entertainment with a definite Disney twist.”

A major wedding day approaches for couple Mary Contrary (Annette Funicello) and Tom Piper (Tommy Sands), with their community of nursery rhyme characters overwhelmed with happiness, toasting the couple with celebratory lemonade and demonstrations of ability. Who doesn’t approve is the antagonist, Barnaby, played by Ray Bolger, who wants to take Mary for himself, wanting to claim a vaguely defined legacy. Hiring thugs Gonzorgo (Henry Calvin) and Roderigo (Gene Sheldon) to stalk and kill Tom by throwing him into the sea and steel her beloved polychromatic sheep, Barnaby sets his evil plan in motion, hoping Mary will have no choice but to marry him and live unhappily ever after. Trying to double their fortunes, Gonzorgo and Roderigo secretly sell Tom to a group of Gypsies, returning to Barnaby without proof he’s dead. Trouble in the realm grows once Mary and the group find the Toymaker (Ed Wynn) and his assistant Grumio (Tommy Kirk), who are desperate to come up with a solution that will help them make enough toys to meet the Christmas demand, finding the apprentice’s amazing manufacturing inventions causing more harm than good.

Orndorf noted, “"Babes in Toyland" exists in a wonderful era that predates political correctness, displaying a range of behaviors and plot turns that would never fly with today's parental supervision. Perhaps the most interesting narrative curveball is Barnaby's plan to murder Tom to clear a path to Mary, hiring two bumbling killers to do the dirty deed.” No kidding, Tom is aid to be dead early in the movie, with a song devoted to the plan, helping to soften the supposed scare of the act with a musical number that turns the murder plan into slapstick comedy. Later in the film, Mary, believing herself to be abandoned by her man and her sheep, worries about her supposed future with intimidating mortgage numbers. Orndorf mentioned, “It's a surreal dance number of colored multiplicity that Funicello pulls off satisfactorily, yet the message is ridiculous, positioning Mary as a moron who can't fend for herself, stymied by the simplest financial woes. It's enough to make Malibu Stacy proud. Of course, I'm not criticizing the film's dated interests; in fact, I found them enlivening the "Babes in Toyland" viewing experience, enjoying the unsavory activity of the screenplay and the often elaborate means to bring it all to cinematic life.”

Introduced by Mother Goose (Mary McCarthy) and her comedic goose friend Sylvester (Jack Donohue) starts as an elaborate stage show, with curtains rising to reveal a magical land of nursery rhyme characters working their traditional parts (Jack jumping over the candlestick), while the restricted areas filled in extraordinary sets, brought to life through the magic of Technicolor. Orndorf credited, “It's a gorgeous film, pure eye-candy in the best Disney sense, and while it lacks breathing room, "Babes in Toyland" has plenty of energy and a great number of tricks up its sleeve. Director Jack Donohue and his creative team do a splendid job with special effects (scale work is excellent) and visual trickery, gifting the picture a cartoon mood to appease younger viewers, keeping antics successfully boisterous and, at times, genuinely mysterious.”

Orndorf credited, “Casting goes a long way to making "Babes in Toyland" palatable, with an impressively committed performance from Bolger, who makes for a convincingly nasty, pussyfooting villain, though there's just enough charm to make one forget that he would like to see the hero suffer brain damage and drown. Accepting Laurel & Hardy assignments, Sheldon and Calvin are equally amusing, working through more physical antics with bouncy charm and solid timing. Sands (who has the hair of ten men) is a slightly bland hero, yet his commitment to the part is commendable, zipping around the frame like a kid in a candy store. Of course, if handed an opportunity to swordfight with Bolger, anyone would be excited to participate in the picture. Funicello is lit like a princess and treated with respect. She has her thespian limitations (she was 18 years old when the movie was shot), but Funicello is here for marquee value and her ease with virginal appeal, finding her place in the effort without disrupting the flow.” For added fun, Ann Jillian makes her feature film debut playing Bo Peep.

Orndorf said, “"Babes in Toyland" is wildly overlong, though the ending does introduce an army of stop-motion animated toy soldiers marching into battle against Barnaby, and there's fun in Grumio's toy-crafting inventions, which lends the picture a semi-sci-fi appeal.” However, Donohue doesn’t know when to stop, with the last 15 minutes consisted of battle scenes and usual chaos that gets boring just before it becomes irritating. Orndorf criticized, “"Babes in Toyland" is a matinee diversion meant for kids, but it's also excessive, ignoring opportunities to simply further the plot and move along. However, it has numerous highlights along the way, maintaining reminders that beneath the superfluous monkey business and tuneless songs, there's a feisty Disney fantasy that's aching to please, laying the foundation for countless big screen delights to come.”

This is a mixed bag of a film, but if you want to check it out, I don’t think there will be any harm in doing so. See it on Disney+ and judge for yourself if you like this or not.

Tomorrow I will be looking at a short that I first heard from the Nostalgia Critic and fits right for the holiday time in “Disney Month 2024.”

Darby O’Gill and the Little People

After traumatizing a whole generation with “Old Yeller,” Walt Disney and director Robert Stevenson decided to go lighter with “Darby O’Gill and the Little People,” released in 1959. Ken Hanke said in his review, “Though the movie is much prized by Disneyphiles and admirers of 1950s fantasy, I have to admit that by the second or third time I saw leprechauns depicted as magical by speeding up the film, I was hoping for someone to show up with a gun. Heresy? Very likely, but I really think this is a movie that works best if you saw it as a kid (somehow I didn’t), or if you have endless tolerance for quaint blarney. It’s not a bad movie, though its much-praised scary-effects sequences—the banshee and the “death coach”—now look and feel altogether too much like a ride through the Haunted Mansion at Disney World.”

In fact, “Darby O’Gill” is very good at being what it is: the simple story of an old man, Darby (Albert Sharpe), and his ongoing fight with King Brian (Jimmy O’Dea), the ruler of the leprechauns. Most of the story concerns Brian making Darby look like a dishonest fool by never letting anyone but the old boy see him. The question is less one of quality than whether or not the material attracts you. It’s a classic case of “if you like this, it’s the type you will like.”

Hanke admitted, “For me, it’s just too precious.” Most people seem to disagree. It does have the novelty value of seeing the late Sean Connery before he became 007 (he also sings) as the romantic lead. That (not to mention Connery’s unusual eyebrows) may make it worth a look by itself.

I had completely forgotten that Nostalgia Critic had mentioned the banshee being the “Scariest Nostalgic Moment.” Of course, I don’t agree because it is a dated effect and a lot of people did. However, this is a good movie to check out because it is a classic. Especially seeing Connery in the main lead, which is something that no one thought about at the time, but he did a great job, as always. See it on Disney+ and enjoy.

Tomorrow I will look at a rather odd film in “Disney Month 2024.”

Davy Crockett and the River Pirates

When Walt Disney’s TV series debuted its first Davy Crockett short-lived series in 1954, no one would have thought it would be such a success. Rick29 said in his review, “Not only was it a ratings smash, but it spawned an extremely lucrative line of tie-in merchandise and a hit song. It also made a TV star of then-unknown 31-year-old Fess Parker and made coonskin caps popular again (at least with the young folks).” To exploit on the overwhelming response to the three-episode Davy Crockett series, Disney had an edited version released as “Davy Crockett: King of the Wild Frontier.”

A sequel was predictable and in 1956, Disney aired two additional Davy Crockett episodes. They were also edited together and released in theaters as “Davy Crockett and the River Pirates.” Technically, the second film is a prequel as it takes place before the climax at The Alamo at the end of the first film.

After several months of hunting, Davy and his friend Georgie Russel, played by Buddy Ebsen, plan to hire a keelboat to travel from Kentucky to New Orleans to sell their pelts. They first encounter the energetic Mink Fink, the self-proclaimed “King of the River,” played by Jeff York, who wants to charge them $1000. Davy and Georgie veto that offer and decide to make their own crew aboard the old Captain Cobb’s (Clem Bevans) Bertha Marie Marietta.

Mike Fink doesn’t respond well, so he gets a drunk Georgie to bet every fur against two barrels of whiskey that Davy and crew reach New Orleans first. Rick29 said, “It's a lively boat race with Davy navigating river rapids, fighting Indians (more on that later), coping with sabotage, and helping out a marooned farmer.”

The second half of the film is Davy and Georgie trying to fight a local Native American rebellion. They find a band of cruel “river pirates” are imitating the Native Americans and attacking boats. Realizing they need some help; Davy turns to Mike Fink and his crew.

Rick29 noted, “The plot of Davy Crockett and the River Pirates is understandably disjointed, as it was comprised of two 60-minute episodes that aired on Disneyland as Davy Crockett's Keelboat Race and Davy Crockett and the River Pirates. The keelboat race is the more entertaining of the two as it provides more screen time to Jeff York as the colorful Mike Fink. York breathes life into his loud and bigger-than-life character, providing an effective contrast to Fess Parker's incorruptible hero.” Fink even has his own catchy song which describes him as “a bull-nosed, tough old alligator, and real depopulator, born too mean to die.”

If Jeff York looks familiar, you may be remembering him from “Old Yeller,” where he played Fess Parker and Dorthy Maguire’s lazy, grub-hunting neighbor. Rick29 mentioned, “He also later appeared opposite Parker as a guest star on the Daniel Boone TV series. York briefly had a series of his own, co-starring with Roger Moore in The Alaskans (1959-60).”

The other standout performances in the film are Buddy Ebsen and Kenneth Tobey. Rick29 noted, “The former rarely got a chance to stretch himself on The Beverly Hillbillies, so it's entertaining to watch him as a humorous sidekick. As for Tobey, who famously played the hero of The Thing from Another World, he's barely recognizable as Fink's grizzled, cigar-chewing, red-headed crony.”

Watching it today, the film is filled with nostalgia and is highly recommended for film and TV fans who grew up in the 50s and 60s. It’s also surprisingly progressive the way they treat Native Americans, who are not portrayed as villains.

Rick29 ended his blog by noting, “Incidentally, Fess Parker did not benefit financially from the Davy Crockett merchandise bonanza due to the nature of his contract with Disney. When repeats of the Davy Crockett episodes sparked renewed interest in the character in 1963, Parker approached Disney about a Davy Crockett TV series. When that didn't work out, Parker and producer Aaron Rosenberg developed the Daniel Boone TV series, which ran for six years on NBC. Parker owned 30% of the show and pretty much retired from acting after its run.”

Even though you might say that this was superfluous and not as good as the first, it is still another one that is worth seeing. If you liked the first film, you should not skip this one. Check it out on Disney+ whether you’re familiar with the show or not. You will love it, I promise you.

Tomorrow I will look at a film that I first heard about when Nostalgia Critic did his first Top 11 list in “Disney Month 2024.”