Responses:
1. Childish is an improper word because the animation in the first could be considered "childish" at times. Is Sorcerers Apprentice adult animation? The biggest problem the animation has is its not timeless and is very much applicable to the time it was made. Some of the hand drawn stuff looks incredible but clashes horribly with the cgi. Its not bad animation or stories, just not worthy of being in a sequel to fantasia or being carried on through generations.
2.Completely agree. I feel like they did not try to make it a movie to last through the ages, but rather make one that will make money right now. Which is odd because disney is known for its movies that have a lasting impact. How many others kids movies from the 40's are still popular??? Disney dropped the ball for some cash.
3.See I feel they went with a balance of new direction and being the original. The very first piece of music and animation feels like it came from that time, world and inspiration of the first film. Then you have the tin soldier story.... does not hold up at all and looks like a final project done by a film student. I think the new directions it tries to take are the weakest points of the film.
4.There is a fair amount of diversity. Rhapsody in blue is a classical jazz number which was very fresh and new for fantasia, the animation and concept is really great BUT doesn't really feel like fantasia... It seemed like an opener to a disney flick or something. Its just too grounded in our world and not really trippy or abstract enough. I think the songs they use do not have the same iconic or memorable impact. My girlfriend mentioned that its good to use unfamiliar pieces, which I agree with to a point. I then asked her to hum the tune used in the last number and she couldn't. Neither could I because the music just doesn't grab you like the first film did. Its more like standard score to any regular film. And the use of the graduation theme to a telling of noahs arc was just an epic face palm fail.
5.Yup. I also find it funny that we were willing to tackle things like space and evolution in the 1940's, but now focus on noahs arc. The final story is decent, but its trying too hard to match the dichotomy and brilliance of the first ending, and fails. I like the approach of nature, but they just oversimplify it.
6. Yea they even had to include sorcerers apprentice to fulfill the run time. Can you blame them though? They obviously had nothing to work with.
7. Not only that, but the most random grab bag of guest that kids of the past and future wont recognize. Quincy Jones? Bette Midler? Penn and Teller??? Only one who did a fine job was james earl jones and they really should have let him do the whole thing.
Overall, this movie is terrible and a disgrace to the first one. I grew up with the first fantasia and I was 9 when this came out. I am so glad my childhood self did not have the desire to watch this at the time. I watched it for the first time as an adult and can safely say I will never watch it again. Just re-watched the first one since I was a kid and I was in awe the entire time. Dont give me that nostalgia crap either, I turned it on just for kicks to see if it held up and was silent the entire movie. Its brilliant. Its funny too, as a kid I would fast forward past the first 15 min cause i thought it was boring. Now that I love film and music I was able to appreciate them showing instruments being tuned and used with abstract animation. If I did see 2000 and liked it as a kid, I would still loath it just as much. Probably more from the shame of knowing I once enjoyed it.
Fantasia is one of the best films of the 40's. Fantasia 2000 is one of the worst films of the 90's/00's. So I guess its fitting.
reply
share