Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001)

Here is Disney’s first true post-Renaissance misfire. While it has plenty of promising elements and interesting ideas to its credit, Atlantis: The Lost Empire is not a well-oiled machine. For some strange reason its components do not play well together. It may sound like I am about to come down harsh on this film but please know that I was left disappointed after rooting for it to right itself for most of its runtime.

In 1914, millennia after Atlantis sank into the ocean, Milo Thatch (Michael J. Fox), an overzealous Atlantis researcher at the Smithsonian Institution, believes he has discovered an ancient manuscript that will point the way to the lost civilization. Enter an eccentric millionaire friend of Milo’s grandfather who already has the manuscript and needs Milo to interpret the ancient Atlantean language to lead a crew, already waiting in port no less, for a grand adventure. While Milo is going purely for scientific discovery, upon arriving at the fabled kingdom, he learns that others have ulterior motives for making the trek.

Maybe I’m finally being too nitpicky with a children’s movie but there are a number of things that just don’t make sense in this film. The Atlantean people, culture, and history is interesting but do you really expect me to believe that Kida and her people can understand English because it shares a common root with the Atlantean language? That would be like expecting me to be able to understand Hindi because it stems from the Indo-European language tree. Also, how are some of the characters such renowned explorers if they are so prone to making bad decisions? How exactly have the Atlanteans survived with little to no air filtration in their subterranean rock bubble? And who built the robotic lobster that guards the entrance to Atlantis anyway? It couldn’t have been the Atlanteans.

Perhaps it’s the specific mixture of fantasy and realism attempted by the filmmakers that holds me up. Perhaps if this had been a book written in the 19th or early 20th century it would be easier to swallow. But this is an original tale gushing with rich fantasy elements that totally overpower the lost-world fantasy sub-genre construct. We’re used to the discoverers being more advanced than the lost civilization. I don’t mind turning the tables on convention (and legend almost requires Atlantis to be advanced) but I think Disney’s team went a little too far with it to the point that it’s hard to buy into.

A clunky and muddled story don’t help matters much either. After growing up on Indiana Jones, the whole scientific idealism vs. greed/power conflict doesn’t feel fresh. Atlantis also plays its cards close to the vest for too long. Secrets about Atlantis’s power, technology, and history are kept from audiences and the film’s characters until the eleventh hour and only in order to prevent calamity. Don’t ask your audience to process a huge amount of information late in the game like this. Had the filmmakers revealed a little bit at a time throughout the film, then a lot of things would have made more sense and would have actually added more tension to unfolding events because we would know at least a little about the stakes involved.

For all the good things at work in Atlantis: The Lost Empire, there are an equal amount of things that either work too hard or not hard enough. This results in the film feeling unbalanced. If you can keep everything straight in your head until all the secrets are revealed, you probably think my review is silly. Otherwise, you are probably like me and see a lot of potential for an old-school discovery adventure. It’s a shame that this film couldn’t hold it together because it could have marked a bold new direction for Disney to explore.

RATING: 2.75 out of 5

The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996)

To date I have met zero people who hold this as their favorite Disney film and I do not think I will ever meet anyone who does. It is very hard to create an animated film that is less than ‘okay’ on my rating scale. There is always talent and craft evident in any animated feature. Sadly, that is about all I can say for The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

In 1482 Claude Frollo, a powerful Parisian judge, has a gypsy woman murdered in the streets but is stopped by the archdeacon of Notre Dame before he can kill the woman’s deformed child as well. Frollo agrees to care for the child, calling him Quasimodo, but keeps him secluded in the bell tower of the cathedral. Years later, Quasimodo falls in love with Esmeralda, a gypsy street performer he watches from above. This puts him at odds with Frollo, who is determined to eliminate the gypsy presence in Paris.

This is exactly what it sounds like- bold, dramatic stuff. There are plenty of heavy religious and emotional undertones at play and they drag the film down at times. The ultimate goal of this film was to return to the glory of Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King- lush animation and a powerful dramatic story. For the most part, Disney accomplishes both of these goals. What they fail to do, however, is make the film enjoyable to watch.

The animation does hearken back to the quality of Beauty and the Beast. There is a vibrant color pallet for the people of Paris, especially the gypsies, juxtaposed against the drab colors of some of the architecture and the religious zealot bad guys. There is a fair amount of detail in the background and a few attempts at camera trickery. Some of the CGI works but the grandest uses of it (including Quasimodo swinging from the bell tower down to the crowd below) shows that Disney still hasn’t figured out how to blend the two styles together convincingly all the time.

One of the chief problems is that the characters of Hunchback do not translate well to a family-friendly film. Quasimodo is a fairly vanilla protagonist, more of a curious and awestruck man-child than a tormented soul longing for acceptance. Esmeralda fits the spirited norm-challenging outsider well but adds a dash of sexuality not normally found in a Disney film.

Finally, the film suffers from a weak villain. Frollo himself is spooky looking but is not inherently intimidating or threatening. His power comes from his position. He can make things happen because of his stature. Take all that away, and I could probably take him in a fight. His internal conflict over Esmeralda is poorly developed and rushed over.

Essentially, The Hunchback of Notre Dame tries too hard. It has the feel of a Broadway musical drama but it gets forced into the confines of a children’s movie. It’s dark and feels far from appropriate for kids at times. As a musical, it bombs- I cannot recall a single song from this film. Add on top of this the fact that the comic relief falls largely flat on its face and you are left with The Black Cauldron: Redux. It’s got its game on in the animation department but the other ingredients weren’t added in the proper proportions.

RATING: 3 out of 5

Beauty and the Beast* (1991)

If the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences felt that they owed Disney some Oscar love after the triumph that was The Little Mermaid, they didn’t have to wait long for a chance to pay it forward. Fitting the same mold as Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast combines lush animation and Broadway-esque spectacle to form a real treat for the eyes and ears. For me, The Little Mermaid reigns supreme over all of the Disney Renaissance films, but Beauty and the Beast stands strong as one of Disney’s all-time greats.

Long ago an uncaring young prince and his subjects are respectively transformed into a hideous beast and various pieces of décor by an enchantress, doomed to remain that way unless the prince can find love before his 21st birthday. Several years later, the lovely Belle takes residency at the Beast’s castle in exchange for her eccentric father’s freedom. As she learns to understand her captor, Belle’s father seeks help in rescuing his daughter. A cocky sportsman named Gaston, who is determined to marry Belle, takes up the challenge of acquiring two trophies at once.

While The Little Mermaid was about love at first sight and teenage rebellion, Beauty and the Beast focuses on empathy, lust, misunderstanding, and jealousy. With these weighty topics as its foundation, it amazes me just how well the filmmakers navigate these potentially perilous waters. This film could have been an overly dramatic mess and very un-Disney. Instead, those foundational elements come through only as undertones, almost unnoticeable at times amidst all the Technicolor fun.

The animation in this film is excellent. Backgrounds are rich and foreground elements are full of detail. The craftsmanship is evident just about everywhere you look. This film also employs a CGI/traditional animation hybrid for several signature scenes. Since I do not remember how well the effect looked at the time, I can only comment on how dated and obvious the effect looks now. It was an attempt to add depth and the illusion of multi-plane camera work to the film. The effect now feels somewhat disjointed and even distracting, and is, for me, this film’s Achilles’ heel.

Enough cannot be said about the characters and music of this film. Traditionally, those two aspects have been the lifeblood of Disney animated flicks. The characters here all possess colorful personalities and have an air of authenticity about them. The way the servant characters interact with each other is brilliant; you really feel like they’ve known each other forever. My only minor beef lies with Gaston. He’s a little too much at times with his cocksure swagger, but the character has to be. It’s not necessary for the laughs that his machismo generates, but if we were forced to take him seriously, Gaston would drag the film into some dark territory.

The music by itself is terrific. Combining the show tune songs together with elaborate and witty on-screen antics, you create something fresh, unique, and memorable. That is the legacy of this film. It’s not as pulpy or solely kid-friendly as other Disney near-hits, but it never loses touch with its core audience. Great Disney movies don’t just appeal to kids; they appeal to families. This one has classic family entertainment written all over it.

RATING: 4 out of 5