This is the first film I walked out of....so bad. I took my little cousin and he had no objections cause it was so bad..
---
Road to hell is paved with good intentions
hell yes, just saw it babysitting my sister and its just awful
share[deleted]
I agree, it was dull and slightly offensive. I loved the original, and evern enjoyed the Chow Yun Fat/Jodie Foster version. This was a stinker!
Even the most useless person can serve as a bad example.
[deleted]
Question...why is this film so terrible? ive heard a lot of people say it is but not any reasons as to why.
Now I have not seen it, so this is an honest question
my reason is, is that i collect 2D animated movies...all on DVD( I am an 18 year old Male Lacrosse Player in University....lol, surprising I bet, its a secret from teammates :) )
anyways, Im collecting all the disney ones, not the sequels just the originals. So that equals 44 movies, starting with Snow White all the way to Home on the Range
Don Bluth animated movies (e.g.an american tail, rock-a-doodle)(12 Total)
Dreamworks(e,g,Prince of Egypt and Road to Eldorado) (5 Total)
Studio Ghibli Films/Miyazaki (e.g. Spirited Away and Castle in the sky) (17 in Total)
while those 4 categories cover the bulk of 2D animation that im interested in, there are some other ones that are kind of on their own/independant. Like Swan Princess and Trumpet of the Swan and so on.
The King and I falls into the the latter. If its terrible, its obviously not worthy of the collection, so what are some reasons? ill probably rent and see anyway, or should I save my 5 bucks?
Lastly anybody else got any recommendations for my collection. The total right now is 85(lol)I dont have all of them, thats just my goal. I currently own 23 of the 85. So yes feel free to give some recommendations that I havent mentioned. they dont have to be amazing masterpieces(e.g.Spirited Away and Beauty and the Beast) they can just be good solid movies (e.g. Road to Eldorado) Remember its 2D, CG animation is for another time ahah
Some others on my list are Little Nemo - Adventures in Slumberland which i HIGHLY recommend, i find it very magical. Fern Gully while simple is quite enjoyable
thanks for any help
p.s. for those who are wondering why I am doing doing this...
1. I absolutely love animation and well thats good enough for me
2.This way when I have children of my own someday, ill be able to show them all these great classic movies that probably wont be replicated in the near future, also cause 2D animation is rarer and rarer these days, with only a company like Studio Ghibli still making them. While a movie like The Incredibles has great animation, a movie like Spirited Away or Grave of Fireflies is just an Artistic Masterpiece.
[deleted]
Contrary to other comments, I think this is a great movie. It's true
that liberties have been taken, and I'ts true that they've re-written
parts of the story to allow for a happy ending. I have absolutely no
problem with that, since we must remember that this is a movie intended
for children, who can't understand many of the adult themes in the
original story, like the harem, the 109 children, and the death of the
king. For a story like this to work for children, you have to have new
and exciting characters, and you absolutely have to have a great
villain too. I thought the movie was just wonderful, and I loved the
fact that they've used most of the music from the original. I firmly
believe that this movie is not getting the credit it rightfully
deserves. Two thumbs up for "The King and I"!
Or, you could have NOT made it.
If the children of united states are not able to understand such matters as death and polygamy, religion and culture that is unlike yours, then movies like this should not be made. Ever.
Besides, even the original story, the book by Anna Leon Owens, back in the 1800´s is considered by ALL Thai people as a major offence against the royal family and the chakri dynasty in general.
ms. Owens was never affiliated romantically with the regent.
Contrary to other comments, I think this is a great movie. It's true
that liberties have been taken, and I'ts true that they've re-written
parts of the story to allow for a happy ending. I have absolutely no
problem with that, since we must remember that this is a movie intended
for children, who can't understand many of the adult themes in the
original story, like the harem, the 109 children, and the death of the
king. For a story like this to work for children, you have to have new
and exciting characters, and you absolutely have to have a great
villain too. I thought the movie was just wonderful, and I loved the
fact that they've used most of the music from the original. I firmly
believe that this movie is not getting the credit it rightfully
deserves. Two thumbs up for "The King and I"!
...the hell? Um, I first saw the original film when I was 8...in music class at my Catholic gradeschool. The polygamy was a non-issue as far as how the film was presented to us, and it didn't confuse anyone. My teacher's main concerns were that we understand things like the mockery of Burma by Lady Thiang were not facts, but a product of the cultural/historical context. We didn't need shoddy animation, saccharine happy endings for everyone, or a slew of inane spare characters and their tedious "comic relief" scenes to find the original interesting and enjoyable. Do today's gradeschool-age children genuinely require rubbish, overly-sanitized cartoon versions of the classics? Parents need to give the kids just a little more credit and be willing to discuss cultural differences and other unfamiliar elements, rather than trying to shelter their tiny malleable brains. Jebus.
"Come on, pelican!"
Watched this for the first (and probably only!) time after my uncle picked up a VHS copy at a yard sale for $1. He walked out at least three times. I did find the character of Master Little offensive and tedious, but no other particular Asian stereotypes, just standard cartoon stereotypes. Even the kickboxing, which is Asian in origin, has been in every second movie for the longest. I sat through the whole thing and found it not all bad. I probably wouldn't give it to kids as it might poison their minds against the original.
shareI don't collect them, but I have seen 3 of those (Heavy Metal, Fritz the Cat and Wizards, and liked them all. I'll check out the other two.
Since my original post(wow almost a year ago, haha) I've found a whole wackload of other animated movies. Many of them coming from Japan by directors such as Satoshi Kon and Makoto Shinkai, as well as Oshii and Otomo(although I had heard of the last two, and had seen movies by them, but just found more by them)
[deleted]
Thanks, I'll add them to the list for sure.
I just looked at them now on IMDB and they look great. I had looked at all of Oshii's movies on IMDB before, don't know how I missed them.
[deleted]
[deleted]
Okay.. i don't trust you're taste. You call Ferngully enjoyable? Dude, you have had too many cartoons.. they have melted your brain :/
shareFerngully is enjoyable. I called it a simple movie, cause there isn't much to it. It's a light-hearted affair and Robin Williams does an excellent job It definitely isn't a great film, but since I grew up as a kid watching it, I've grown accustomed to it.
As far as "cartoon's melting my brain", some animated movies are some of the most intelligent films out right now. Films like the recently released Paprika, Jin-Roh:Wolf Brigade or the pyschological thriller Perfect Blue have more substance then the vast majority of north american film making. Just because something is animated doesn't automatically make it childish. My original post you are referring to is from over a year ago and a lot has happened since then. There are different categories of animation, some are just forms of entertainment (Fern Gully), some are great Story Telling (Beauty and the Beast) and some are brilliant films in any sense (Spirited Away, Millenium Actress and Ghost in the Shell)
But like I said over a year ago, I'm making this collection cause some of them are just very good films and also to show to my own kids on day. Since movies like these rarely get made anymore and will be harder to find down the road.
I have a recommendation for you. If you can find it for a decent price in region 1 format, Watership Down. It's a relatively loyal adaptation of the book, and any alterations are made for time reasons. Considering the year it was made (1978), and the fact that it's not made by a major studio, it's a gem of a film.
Also, have you taken a look at the Rankin and Bass fims? Perhaps the most well known is The Last Unicorn, but they also did versions of The Hobbit and The Return of the King.
--
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.
SIPTEA
ah yes, Watership Down! I've always heard of the movie, but never actually seen it. Thanks for reminding me!
I just looked on Amazon and they are releasing a brand new DVD of the movie on October 7th. I'm definitely going to pick it up.
That's a yes for the Rankin Bass films. I have the Last Unicorn(thanks to the 25th Anniversary release), but Flight of the Dragons will be harder to find, hopefully it gets a re-release one day.
I made my original post over 2 years ago (where has the time gone?) and I've discovered/remembered plenty of other animated films since then.(with some help along the way) I've got quite the collection now, haha
I'm not sure where the part about being a male lacrosse player in university figures into your collecting of animated films on DVD, but if it's a necessary part of introduction, I'll preface this by saying that I'm an nonathletic female animation major at university.
That's a great sounding collection you have listed--I've enjoyed a great majority of them--so I feel fairly confident that we share similar tastes in film. Additionally, I'm speaking as someone who enjoyed the live-action "King and I" starring Kerr and Brenner (while still being very aware of its cultural and historical faux pas) which it is important to note that the WB's animated "King and I" meant, very clearly, to emulate (right down to character design and even some scene layouts). Finally, keeping in mind that I'm speaking only from memory, as I haven't seen this film in about 8 years...
The only upshot is the songs, if you're a fan of Rogers and Hammerstein (and I generally am). They're mostly all there, and mostly capably performed. So that's the -good- part of this movie. Otherwise, it's pretty rank in every way imaginable:
1) For a major feature film by a mainstream company, the animation is surprisingly only on par with, say, the kind of stuff you'd find in a sequel outsourced to overseas studios. Which is to say that the animation (and background art, etc) is /acceptable/, if only that. If you saw the "Swan Princess" sequels, you'd have some idea what to expect from the production of "King and I". I suspect they were produced by the same animation team, actually.
2) Character designs are uninspiring, bland, and badly researched. No, I did not expect 100% accuracy, especially as animation demands a good deal of simplification for the sake of the artists. But this looked like the '50s "King and I" was their sole source of research, and everything else was an amalgamation of broadly "Asian" aesthetics. "Uh, let's see.. Mandarin collars and slippers and high ponytails.. that's Asian, right? And Siam was in Asia. Okay, we're good, roll with it!"
3) A loyal character from the original "King and I" production was adapted to play the part of the villain of WB's movie, a move I won't argue much (because I understand that children's movies require a clear-cut villain to make things less complicated for their wee heads, which the original "King and I" lacked). Fair enough. He's also made inexplicably magical, which I gradually came to forgive as well, since.. I suppose villains are more clearly villainous when they're evil wizards. That's fine.
Unfortunately, this villain came equipped with a sidekick in the form of possibly the most racially demeaning character I've ever laid eyes on in a post-'90s production. I couldn't believe that this film was the one-year follower of Disney's "Mulan". This "King and I" gave us a fobby, buck-toothed, squinty pinpoint-eyed Asian caricature, presumably for the purpose of making children laugh at his clownish antics. And as much as I don't support censoring children from ideas, this is just not the sort of thing I'd feel comfortable sitting my own children (if I had them) in front of. Because then they would think I hated them.
4) Hackneyed and formulaic, where ever they could get away with it. The '50s "King and I", for all its faults, was an impressively done character-driven work. Warner Bros. gives us a kind of a harmless, bumbling romance that ultimately fails to connect with the audience, and monkey/baby elephant antics. And.. something about a magical sea dragon and a hot air balloon and REALLY any potentially endearing character examinations get buried beneath the jarringly incoherent window dressings like this.
I don't doubt that a lot of hard work went into the making of WB's "The King and I". And I'm generally rather forgiving of animated features for one reason or another if I can find -any- redeeming quality in it. So the fact that I was unable to do so with this film would suggested some... not very pleasant things about the experience of watching it. As it is though, it's just over an hour of my life that I will never get back. So I hope that (LOL 2 years later) you've still not let this film see a penny of your money, and that you'll continue to invest in more worthwhile features.
Thanks for the detailed response! Although I have since seen the film, I still found your insight into the film to be an excellent read. I love seeing/reading other peoples opinions on the subject, which must be why I adore the bonus features/Commentaries on DVD's so much. Disney Platinum additions are probably the best, since I get to hear the opinions of animation historians such as Jerry Beck, J.B. Kaufman and John Canemaker. There is also this British fellow that I really like, but his name escapes me at the moment.
I cannot believe it was almost 3 years ago that I posted my initial query about this film. (April 2006)
But fear not, I did not buy the film, but I did employ the wonders of the internet to actually watch it. All I will say is that I am glad I did not buy it, haha. Since I made that original post, not only have I discovered a plethora of other great animation, but I've also tightened up my standards a decent amount in regards to what films I actually purchase.
As for my little tidbit about being a Lacrosse player, yeah not really needed, but oh well haha. I just found that my hobby didn't really fit with what people might expect from me. If I were to write the post again today, I doubt I would mention it. Although there was one time where our team was on the road and a teammate of mine found me watching the Platinum Release of the Cinderalla DVD on my laptop in our hotel. In fact, I believe I was watching a bonus feature about the Nine Old Men at the time. (What a fascinating bunch of animators) He had himself a good chuckle.
Also, if you don't mind my asking and seeing that you are a Animation major, where are you currently studying?
Vejiita4evada: Thank you for actually taking some time to explain why you don't like this movie. But even in your case, I think most of what you said is just nit-picking. I think the animation and character design was okay, for example. I'm going to comment on some of your points though.
Unfortunately, this villain came equipped with a sidekick in the form of possibly the most racially demeaning character I've ever laid eyes on in a post-'90s production. I couldn't believe that this film was the one-year follower of Disney's "Mulan". This "King and I" gave us a fobby, buck-toothed, squinty pinpoint-eyed Asian caricature, presumably for the purpose of making children laugh at his clownish antics. And as much as I don't support censoring children from ideas, this is just not the sort of thing I'd feel comfortable sitting my own children (if I had them) in front of. Because then they would think I hated them.
The '50s "King and I", for all its faults, was an impressively done character-driven work. Warner Bros. gives us a kind of a harmless, bumbling romance that ultimately fails to connect with the audience, and monkey/baby elephant antics. And.. something about a magical sea dragon and a hot air balloon and REALLY any potentially endearing character examinations get buried beneath the jarringly incoherent window dressings like this.
thanks for the recommendation, Ill look into it!
share[deleted]