Robin Hood

I loved this movie as a kid, as did just about every person I know. So it works for the youngins. As an adult, and an animation fan, I was surprised to learn that this movie is sort of the Disney studio's secret shame. I had nothing but fond memories of it, after all. And I could name at least a dozen Disney films that I would have put ahead of it on my Most Crappy list. I very recently watched it on television after many years, and yes, it is definitely flawed. The quality of the animation is terrible, and the lack of an over arching story makes the whole thing seem frivolous, like it was made for TV and not for a big studio release. There are holes in the narrative, scenes that should exist that don't, and scenes that have no reason to exist that do. And I think the somewhat random decision to cast the film with animals lends to the Saturday morning vibe as well.

But there's enough cool things peaking out from under all the half-assery that rescues the film just enough for it to be enjoyable. Peter Ustinov turns in an excellent, excellent performance as Prince John, at turns hysterical and genuinely nasty. Brian Bedford oozes easy going charm as Robin. He's probably turned in the second most likable performance of the character captured on film. He's just unfortunately delivering it through the poorly animated mouth of a cartoon fox. And though the actual quality of the animation is poor, some of the character animation is pretty clever and expressive. And I have to applaud the choice to add Roger Miller to the mix as a folkie, possibly pot-smoking minstrel rooster. His character adds a cool, Earthy vibe to the proceedings and as others have mentioned, his song, Not in Nottingham, actually sort of works as a blues song. Weird.

So Robin Hood is definitely not the epic tale Disney was capable of churning out in its hey days, but I dug it as a kid, and I still dig it today. You know, looking back at all my reviews on this site, it seems I mostly leap to the defense of classically bad films that I like anyway. That's OK, I guess. Someone has to.

I've watched this video so many times, I can no longer count, and every time, I wind up laughing my head off! I really think this is one of the most underrated Disney movies out there.

This version of Robin Hood has animals in the roles of the characters, and it works marvelously! It would be natural for Robin Hood to be a fox if he was an animal, for both the fox and Robin are very clever. And if Robin Hood is a fox, naturally, Maid Marian would be a vixen. Also, having Prince John and King Richard as lions are natural choices, since the lion is the King of the Jungle.

What I loved most about the film, as I hinted at earlier, is the humor, most of it provided by Prince John, Sir Hiss (a snake), Trigger, and Nutsy (both vultures). Prince John's habit of sucking his thumb whenever anyone mentions his mother is priceless! And he's so vain it's little trouble for Robin Hood and Little John (a bear) to rob him when they're disguised as fortune-tellers! Sir Hiss is smarter than any of the other bad guys, but the humor with him is that Prince John never believes him until it's too late, and abuses him afterwards. Trigger's "old Betsy" (a crossbow) provides plenty of laughs, especially when it goes off! And Nutsy is so stupid he says "One o'clock and all's well!" when it's three o'clock, and when told to set his brain ahead a couple hours, he doesn't know if he has to add or subtract two hours! That's a scream!

If there's any real fault, it lies in the animation. It is really substandard, and I have noticed reused or inaccurate footage in the film. But it is a minor flaw in the film, and it doesn't take away from my enjoyment of it.

So, rent or buy "Robin Hood" today! It's a scream!

Belle Book

When one thinks of Disney songs, one generally thinks along the vein of "Someday My Prince Will Come" or "Once Upon A Dream". Disney songs are usually silly love songs, villain's expressions of their villainy, or some generally upbeat nonsense. Disney songs are generally not hard and gritty.

Which is why "Not In Nottingham" is my favourite Disney song ever. It is a hard and emotional song, blues like an icepick to the soul, the loudest and harshest cry of pain I have ever heard in a Disney film. Where else in Disney-land would you hear a line like "Don't you know there's nothing left for me?".

Combined as it is with the jail scene, it is melancholia at its depths, and a refreshing change from the general froth one expects, and generally gets, from Disney movies and songs.

Disney's Robin Hood is my all time favorite Disney animation movie and right up there with one of my favorite all time movies. I can practically recite every word from "Robin Hood and Little John Walking through the Forest" to "There's the church bells someone's gett'n hitched". Yet it's hardly ever mentioned, it's always been hard to find and you can never get a poster. The songs are never lauded and they should be "The Phoney King of England" is a hoot! And even though "Love" was nominated for an Oscar, it's an obscure fact.

The animation is beautiful! Those scenes of the castle & the church in the rain - you would think it was shot rather than drawn. The dialog is smart with subtleties & wit. The character's motives are seen and not told. It's not dumb down at all for kids. It's more romantic then Lady & The Tramp, Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid combined. And yes, that Fox, Robin Hood himself, voiced by Brian Bedford was and will always be sexy!

The opening credits present us with all of the animals who will later appear in the film (the very same footage, in fact), parading themselves in front of a white background and a rather catchy tune. We see a fox dressed as Robin Hood. ROBIN HOOD, reads the credits. And in smaller letters underneath, in brackets: (a fox). We see a badger in a monk's outfit. FRIAR TUCK, says the credits. (a bear). I find this highly amusing. I love it. Don't ask me why. I think, though, that it demonstrates two things: that "Robin Hood" was made under the same cost cutting Disney regime that made "The Aristocats" three years earlier and "The Rescuers" three years later; and that it has far more life than both of these films put together.

It IS the cost-cutting that would damn this film, and it's liveliness that redeems it. (That, and Peter Ustinov's vocal performance as Prince John.) I can't even find it in my heart to condemn the Southern voices scattered throughout Sherwood Forest and Nottingham - replacing a human sheriff with a lupine one is such a violent change that the use of expressions like, "Aw, geez, Nutsy," seems trivial by comparison. At any rate I found the voices far less irritating than Kevin Costner's drawl in HIS version of Robin Hood.

The animation is mostly good but without the stand-out brilliance of, say, "The Jungle Book". There are a few scenes that look as if they belong on television (which is a problem shared with the next five animated features that Disney made). The children are more cloying than usual with Disney and we see too much of them. That's about it with the carping. All in all it's cheerful, it's shameless, it's hard to resist.