Walt avant Mickey

After watching this movie, I have very mixed feelings. A part of me loved the movie for its story and the atmosphere. The other part of me is disappointed because I don't feel like it fulfilled its true potential. Many of the characters felt shallow and without depth, and the actors were just acting. There wasn't too much feeling in their performances, and the dialogue never felt natural or relaxed.

But to be honest, I'd easily watch it again. I don't know why, I just didn't think it was THAT bad. Many people put a lot of hours and hard work behind this movie, the least I can do is try to appreciate it for what it is and see the positive sides of it.

It was somewhat interesting to learn of the struggles Walt Disney went through in his early life.

It made me want to read more about the story.

They made some interesting choices with casting.

It's always good to learn about how people struggle before they become famous.

Wholesome story.

The sets and costumes looked very realistic for the vintage times.

I learned quite a bit watching the movie.

It would be nice to see a follow up movie and take up where they left off.

I liked watching a good moral story such as this.

As a Disneyphile of sorts, there was no way I was going to miss watching this film on the big screen even though I had to travel two hours via the Interstate through Kansas to the Kansas City metro area (appropriately enough since that is where Disney started his animation company) to get to the nearest theater showing it. The trip was worth it for me personally, but the film itself may disappoint others. Its quality is uneven; it needs the sort of polish and texture that the Disney organization would be able to give it. Don't expect something like "Savings Mr. Banks," the Disney film that dealt with Disney's struggles to get "Mary Poppins" made toward the end of his life. While the story of "Walt Before Mickey" is itself engaging, and the plotting, pace and dialogue not all that bad, the editing is uneven, the cinematography is uninspired, and the acting is just this side of wooden and amateurish. However, Thomas Ian Nicholas saves the day, practically carrying the entire film on his performance alone. His acting is earnest and sympathetic to the persona of a young and struggling Walt Disney; and the character he creates is believable and likable. In the final analysis, the film will never win any awards, but it has a lot of heart and wins the approval of those, like myself, who wish to see Disney (and the Disney legacy) treated in the sort of fair, even-handed, and yet respectful manner he deserves.

"Walt Before Mickey" (2015 release; 110 min.) is a look at Walt Disney's early years, in particular the decade between 1919 and 1929. As the movie opens, we see a 7 yr. old Walt in rural Missouri, with a stern father. As a 13 yr. old, Walt officially becomes interested in animation, and we swiftly move on to 1919, when Walt moves to Kansas City and starts his first company "Laugh-O-Gram". At this point we are 15 min. into the movie, but to tell you more would spoil your viewing experience, you'll just have to see for yourself how it all plays out.

Couple of comments: first, this is the movie adaptation of the book of the same name by Timothy Susanin (and a foreword by Diane Disney Miller). I have not read the book and so cannot comment how closely the movie sticks to the book (I'm guessing, very closely). I don't want to overstate this, but at the same time don't want to not mention it, namely that this movie comes with the official Disney stamp of approval. That could be a good thing, although the downside of this is that there isn't the slightest negative thing about Walt Disney in this movie. I mean, to accept this movie as 100% true, Walt Disney had to have been a living saint. It even goes so far that at the end of the movie, when we are informed what would become of many of the characters featured in this,, it states "Walt never held a grudge against Charles Mintz". (You need to see the movie to fully understand how badly Mintz treated Disney...) As to the acting performances, I felt many of them were quite 'wooden', you can tell they are literally 'acting'. Thomas Ian Nicholas (best known from the American Pie franchise) tries to make the most of it, but even he cannot save the movie. Bottom line, I was disappointed with the second rate quality and overall feel of the movie, like this was a TV Movie of the Week, directed by a first time feature-length director (in this case: Khoa Le). Is there a great story to be told? Absolutely! But it won't be found in this movie, unfortunately.

The movie opened this past weekend and the matinée screening where I saw this at was attended very nicely, somewhat to my surprise, since this movie has not gotten much of an advertising push or anything. Seems that people really do want to find out more about the early life of the American icon that is Walt Disney. Surely Walt deserved a better movie than this. "Walt Before Mickey" is strictly for Disney fans, and even then, viewer beware!

I have to confess, I'm a sucker for true stories of people overcoming great odds to do worthwhile stuff. And when you consider the obstacles (Disney's father was actually a lot stricter and demanding than the movie depicted) and the lovable creations he gave the world, done with groundbreaking methods and an undying focus on quality, I of course am drawn to watch this movie. It was, as some of the other reviewers noted, slightly disappointing in some ways...where maybe it missed some humanity in favor of melodramatics. I think it was a little too focused on the details of the financial challenges of the early years (half as much time would have been good). And on the flip-side, there were very telling stories from his childhood, published in well-regarded biographies, that weren't even mentioned...things that obviously fueled his passion to eventually create the happiest place on earth.

But on the other hand, the piece that seemed the most incredulous to me (the mouse that seemed to be more of a friend than a pet) turns out to be real (based on authorized biographies and accounts of the family). However, it looks like the scene in the alley with the cop was made up, which gets back to the unnecessary dramatics that aren't nearly as compelling as the truth.

All in all, I agree with the other reviewers that it's the actual true story that is the draw...not so much the handling of it. (Possibly a larger budget would have helped.) At any rate, because of the amazing heart, vision, tenacity, and legacy of the person, it's still worthwhile (for me) to watch.