Gulliver en el país de los enanos

Just throw any negative comments you read here from IMD comment contributors in the wastebasket. I don't know what they were smoking.

Gulliver's Travels is beautiful! It is just as beautiful now as it was 60-plus years ago when it premiered, perhaps even moreso with the wonderful restoration we have now on DVD. This film doesn't have to compete with anything by Disney, and I don't see how this story has anything to do with Snow White. It stands on its own two feet as a captivating and charming classic story that children can enjoy over and over again, made when animation was really animation, and all the cells were handpainted by artists, instead of slopped together on boring, cookie-cutter computer models.

The storyline is perfect and has an anti-war undertone that was a bit daring for its time, made on the eve of World War Two. Even Disney's Snow White didn't have the guts to do that! So kudos to the Fleischer Brothers!

The songs are all wonderful and the soundtrack sounds marvellously enhanced on the new DVD version. "We're All Together Now", "All's Well", "It's A Hap Hap Happy Day", "Bluebirds In The Moonlight", and especially the haunting "Come Home Again, Sailor Man" are all perfect and flow into the action of the film, instead of being placed there with no relevance just to try and get a hit song. These sheet music pieces always sell well on Ebay, highlighting the fact quite clearly that this is one of the most beloved animation movies of all time.

Talk about unforgettable music! I saw "Gulliver's Travels" forty years ago on Saturday-afternoon television, and I can STILL hum much of the Ralph Rainger/Leo Robin score, especially "Faithful", "Forever", "Faithful Forever", "We're All Together Now", and "Orchids in the Moonlight". What a songwriting team they were.

It's impossible to not compare "Gulliver's Travels", and its songs, to today's animated product, and it's sad when I try. The knack seems to be lost in all regards.

Lanny Ross and Jessica Dragonette, top radio stars of the period, actually enunciate the lyrics, and in tune, and with varying dynamics. What a relief to remember a time when that was mandatory in film music.

And we can also luxuriate in the well-drawn visuals, which allows the audience time to wallow in the rich colors and narrative (without the slam-bang short-attention-span cutting that sea-sickened me during "Atlantis" and similar Y2K material).

Give the youngsters a taste of the Golden Age of animation, songwriting and storytelling with "Gulliver's Travels", and take the time to enjoy it with them.

Highest recommendation. ****

My mother broght this for me on VHS when I was around six or seven years old.

I watched it so much I wore the tape out.

While shopping in the grocery store last week I happened upon this classic on DVD. I thought this would be a great way to let my children watch something that I used to watch as a tyke.

They loved it.

And I even at 27 years old found myself watching it with the same enthusiasm as I did when I was but a mere pup.

beatufil animation even in the computer age.

Rivals anything done today.

Lemuel Gulliver, his ship wrecked in a fantastic storm, washes ashore on the island of Lilliput, inhabited by people so tiny that Gulliver is a giant in their eyes. Soon Gulliver finds himself entangled in a war between Lilliput and neighboring Blefuscu, all brought about because the two kings of these lands couldn't decide which song was to be sung at the wedding of their two beloved children, who happen to be deeply in love with one another.

The animation is often breathtaking here especially when it focuses on the fairytale like romance between Prince David and Princess Glory. Unfortunately we never fully learn their back story or get to see much of them at all except when it's absolutely necessary to advance the plot. The rotoscoping process used for Gulliver is also fascinating to watch both in terms of its historical significance and the interesting visual impression of realism it creates on screen.

However Jonathan Swift's satirical story is almost completely sacrificed here in favor of fairytale fantasy which arguably borrows more from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet than it does Gulliver's Travels. Its main focus also is on the wrong character, a town crier named Gabby who isn't particularly appealing to the viewer. Too many of the other far more interesting and fun characters get sacrificed to make room for him. Actually the best fun here comes the two kings and their interactions with one another not to mention the hijinks that goes on between Belfuscu spies Sneak, Snoop, and Snitch. Gulliver himself is reduced to friendly giant peacemaker. Prince David does get a great moment towards the end. Of course, it would have had far more impact of the viewer was actually made to care about him.

I remember watching very few movies and even less television as a child. This was one of the movies that I would check out periodically from the main branch of the library and I remember it being a very special treat. I had forgotten about it completely until recently I found it laying on a shelf in my local Wal Mart for a dollar. I bought it and watched it a few days later.

Looking at it through adult eyes, I saw that yes, the animation was poor, the singing extremely "60s choir" and not at all pleasant. The dialog and storyline were hardly complex but then again, what episode of "Barney" has complex dialog and storyline? It's a kids' movie and personally, I think kids would benefit far more from watching this than "Barney"!

Gulliver's Travels is the timeless story of a man who washes up on the shore of a country inhabited by little people. While the town crier strives to inform the king that "There's a giant on the beach!", the king is planning a fantastic wedding for his daughter, who is engaged to the prince of a neighboring country. A simple disagreement between the two monarchs leads to war and Gulliver looks to find a way to make peace between them. I laughed harder over this movie than I have over most of Disney's new fare.

It's not rocket science, but it's a nice way to spend 78 minutes, especially if you're only five years old or remember this movie from childhood.