CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
7.1/10
111 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Relato de dibujos animados sobre la leyenda del rey Arturo, el mago Merlín y la espada Excalibur.Relato de dibujos animados sobre la leyenda del rey Arturo, el mago Merlín y la espada Excalibur.Relato de dibujos animados sobre la leyenda del rey Arturo, el mago Merlín y la espada Excalibur.
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Elenco
- Nominado a 1 premio Óscar
- 1 premio ganado y 1 nominación en total
Rickie Sorensen
- Wart
- (voz)
Sebastian Cabot
- Sir Ector
- (voz)
- …
Karl Swenson
- Merlin
- (voz)
Norman Alden
- Sir Kay
- (voz)
Jack Albertson
- Knight in Crowd #1
- (sin créditos)
Barbara Jo Allen
- Scullery Maid
- (voz)
- (sin créditos)
Fred Darian
- The Minstrel in opening sequence
- (voz)
- (sin créditos)
James MacDonald
- The Wolf
- (voz)
- (sin créditos)
- …
Tudor Owen
- Knight in Crowd
- (voz)
- (sin créditos)
Thurl Ravenscroft
- Black Bart
- (voz)
- (sin créditos)
- Dirección
- Guionistas
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
I'm really not much of a Disney fan, and a lot of their films I find are sentimental rubbish, to put it bluntly. This, however, is different. I remember watching this when I was little and finding it hilarious. I hadn't watched it for years until recently when my younger siblings borrowed some videos from a friend. I still find it funny. The animation's nothing amazing, it's done more or less in the style of 101 Dalmations, and the storyline is basic King Arthur stuff (but I do like King Arthur stories anyway). It's the humour that really makes it memorable and charming. The characters have personality, there are no bimbo princesses or princes, and I find myself warming greatly to Merlin and Arthur and even grumpy Archimedes. Well worth watching.
The 90 minute cartoon is in fact the first chapter of T.H. White's novel The Once and Future King. Made for the kids, Disney does it again taking a classic story and adding fictional animal characters that can talk. Still, Disney remains loyal to the story by keeping many of the characters in the story including Kay, Sr. Pellinoire, and Sir Ector.
Worth watching twice with the family. An animated classic
Worth watching twice with the family. An animated classic
Pleasant Disney animation, without being a classic. It has its moments, particularly the magic-fight between Merlin and Mim, but is light on characterisation and especially good songs. The soundtrack tunes are very simplistic both melodically and especially lyrically and resolutely refuse to stay in your brain.
The narrative itself is unusual, introducing the sword in the stone legend immediately and then dispensing with it until the last five minutes or so, concentrating its energies instead on young Arthur (read Wort) and his upbringing by the kindly Merlin and his obstinate talking owl Archimedes.
I kept seeing recollections of past Disney (and other) cartoon forebears, everything from, naturally enough the Sorcerer's Apprentice from "Fantasia" and "Cinderella" while the chasing wolf early on is a blatant lift of Wile E Coyote in the "Road Runner" shorts. The old Disney trick of an experienced elder mentoring a young innocent had of course been done before in "Pinocchio" and "The Jungle Book" although I could also see some ideas which were adapted in future projects, the animated crockery anticipates "Beauty and the Beast" for instance.
Disney never did return to the Arthurian Legnd in future animations as was hinted might happen here which is a pity but for me there's far too much diversion from the legend itself so that I was willing young Arthur to hurry up and give the sword the required pull long before the ending, which when it does arrive seems far too rushed in any case.
No, not the best Disney by a long way and certainly not in the vanguard of the studio's work.
The narrative itself is unusual, introducing the sword in the stone legend immediately and then dispensing with it until the last five minutes or so, concentrating its energies instead on young Arthur (read Wort) and his upbringing by the kindly Merlin and his obstinate talking owl Archimedes.
I kept seeing recollections of past Disney (and other) cartoon forebears, everything from, naturally enough the Sorcerer's Apprentice from "Fantasia" and "Cinderella" while the chasing wolf early on is a blatant lift of Wile E Coyote in the "Road Runner" shorts. The old Disney trick of an experienced elder mentoring a young innocent had of course been done before in "Pinocchio" and "The Jungle Book" although I could also see some ideas which were adapted in future projects, the animated crockery anticipates "Beauty and the Beast" for instance.
Disney never did return to the Arthurian Legnd in future animations as was hinted might happen here which is a pity but for me there's far too much diversion from the legend itself so that I was willing young Arthur to hurry up and give the sword the required pull long before the ending, which when it does arrive seems far too rushed in any case.
No, not the best Disney by a long way and certainly not in the vanguard of the studio's work.
I used to watch the Sword in the Stone quite a number of times as a kid, and I know why later on in my years. It's actually quite a fun little movie considering its a quasi-history lesson on how Arthur (aka 'Wart') became King of England. It includes Merlin, and his 'educated Owl' Archamedes, and a whole lot of wacky adventures trying to get Arthur, who can't read or write, into a mode of thought higher than how he's been raised. For a Disney film, as well, it's also quite the quotable film at times, with some lines and situations still sticking out in my mind years later. For example, the sequence involving Arthur and Merlin as squirrels in the trees, and a small lesson in love (or lack thereof) a lady squirrel presents in the face of danger. Or the story involving Arthur as a bird, trapped in the clutches of Madamn Mim (maybe one of the funniest sequences in any Disney movie).
So, as one can figure from what I've described (if you haven't seen the film yet), it's fairly over-the-top, loaded with silly-songs (one of which a true charmer involving Merlin's proclivity for organizing a packing up of his house) and little lessons for kids. But it actually is also funny for adults too, I'd guess, or at least funny to watch along with the kids. It may not be in the absolute peek of the period in Disney films (one may try to look to the Jungle Book or Winnie the Pooh for that, or the underrated Aristocats), however I sometimes come back to this film in my mind. It has a catchy attitude that made being in the 'dark ages' as fun as possible- Archamedes in particular is maybe one of the great side-characters in any Disney film.
Alakazam!
So, as one can figure from what I've described (if you haven't seen the film yet), it's fairly over-the-top, loaded with silly-songs (one of which a true charmer involving Merlin's proclivity for organizing a packing up of his house) and little lessons for kids. But it actually is also funny for adults too, I'd guess, or at least funny to watch along with the kids. It may not be in the absolute peek of the period in Disney films (one may try to look to the Jungle Book or Winnie the Pooh for that, or the underrated Aristocats), however I sometimes come back to this film in my mind. It has a catchy attitude that made being in the 'dark ages' as fun as possible- Archamedes in particular is maybe one of the great side-characters in any Disney film.
Alakazam!
This movie is another proof of the high quality of the classic Disney films. Today feature films are quite funny too... but they based mostly on simple, crude jokes and spoofing of other topical movies (remember the bullet time-spoof in "Shrek"). There is no substance to think about in it. You can see them, laughing about them...and forgot them almost completely a few years later. Who will remember, i.e., "Ice Age" or "Madagascar" in 40, 50 or 60 years? The old Disney classics are different, there are timeless! "The Sword in the Stone" contains a lot of joyful gags too, but no gag stands above the characters, no joke was made only to fill a hole in the plot. The story, the plot, and the characters are primary. And Disney add not only joyful gags. As Walt himself once said: "For every laugh, there should be a tear." Disney take children always quite seriously, and a lot of his early films contains a lesson for life, sometimes the lesson can be very sad and cruel, like in "Bambi", sometimes lesser sad, like in "The Sword in the Stone"... but can anybody forget the cute little girl squirrel, that was left by Wart, desperately crying and with a broken heart? And Merlin's closing words about love: "Well, yes, in its own way... yes, I'd say it's the most powerful force on Earth"!
This is one of the main ingredient of the famous Disney Magic: Joy and tragedy! Another is the art of hand drawn animation. The quality of the animation went downwards at Disney after WW-II too, slowly, but surely. But in 1963 cel-animation was still on a high level. Not so good as in the golden Era, when "Fantasia", "Pinocchio" or especially "Bambi" set the utmost high standards of perfectionism, but quite better than in "Hercules", "The Lion King" or "The Rescuers down under". 7 of 10 stars for "The Sword in the Stone"! It is not the best of all Disney films, but quite better and deeper than the most of the modern CGI movies!
This is one of the main ingredient of the famous Disney Magic: Joy and tragedy! Another is the art of hand drawn animation. The quality of the animation went downwards at Disney after WW-II too, slowly, but surely. But in 1963 cel-animation was still on a high level. Not so good as in the golden Era, when "Fantasia", "Pinocchio" or especially "Bambi" set the utmost high standards of perfectionism, but quite better than in "Hercules", "The Lion King" or "The Rescuers down under". 7 of 10 stars for "The Sword in the Stone"! It is not the best of all Disney films, but quite better and deeper than the most of the modern CGI movies!
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaArthur was voiced by three different boys - Rickie Sorensen, Richard Reitherman and Robert Reitherman. The changes in voice are very noticeable in the film because of the way Arthur's voice keeps going from broken to unbroken, sometimes in the same scene. One of the easiest noticed is in the last scene in the throne room when Arthur asks in his "changed voice", "Oh, Archimedes, I wish Merlin was here!" Then, the camera cuts farther back and Arthur shouts in his "unchanged voice," "Merlin! Merlin!"
- ErroresThroughout the entire film Wart's voice keeps on changing from being child-like to adult-like. One of the easiest spots to notice this is in the throne room towards the end when Wart is trying to get somebody else to take his place. He says "Oh Archimedes, I wish Merlin were here!" in his adult voice, then the camera goes to a distant view and he calls "Merlin, Merlin" in his child voice.
- Citas
Madame Mim: Sounds like someone's sick. How lovely. I do hope it's serious. Something dreadful.
- Versiones alternativasThe UK DVD version omits part of Madam Mim's first line "Sounds like someone's sick. How lovely. I do hope it's serious. Something dreadful." She now says "Sounds like someone's sick. How lovely."
- ConexionesEdited into El libro de la selva (1967)
- Bandas sonorasThe Legend of the Sword in the Stone
(1963) (uncredited)
Music and Lyrics by Richard M. Sherman and Robert B. Sherman
Sung by Fred Darian
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is The Sword in the Stone?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 3,000,000 (estimado)
- Total en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 12,000,000
- Fin de semana de estreno en EE. UU. y Canadá
- USD 2,230,614
- 27 mar 1983
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 12,000,000
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 19 minutos
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.37 : 1(original & negative ratio, open matte)
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
By what name was La espada en la piedra (1963) officially released in India in English?
Responda