Comedy

Time to do to the Senate what the Senate did to Julius Caesar

So here in Ireland (tomorrow actually) the voters are going to the polls to cast their ballots in a national referendum to abolish Seanad Éireann, the Irish Senate. My American readers are probably thinking right now “Abolish the senate? That’s crazy!”

Or “Why stop there?”. One or the other.

So let me explain why I’m actually completely in favour of this. For background, the Seanad is not like the American senate, instead being more like the British House of Lords. Members are not elected, but instead appointed by the Taoiseach, the two largest universities and members of the lower house, the Dáil. So what does it do? Two things:

1) Fuck

2) All

Originally, the Seanad did have some power to significantly delay legislation. It was envisioned as an advisory body to the Dáil, that could send back legislation to be reviewed and altered but could not block the passing of a bill outright. Then the Seanad was briefly abolished and brought back in 1937 with even less power and it’s now pretty much a talking shop that cannot propose legislation and cannot delay legislation for longer than 270 days. Unless it’s a bill relating to government spending or taxation in which case the Seanad can delay it for a whopping three weeks. The current government campaigned partially on a platform of abolishing the Seanad and maybe spending the €8 Million a year it costs on a nice day out. The polls are currently showing that the voters are strongly in favour of abolition and I happen to be one of them. I’m not nescesarrily writing this to argue for a YES vote, but I wanted to take a moment to respond to some of the arguments that people have been making in favour of keeping the Seanad.

“What’s the point in saving €8 Million a year? It’ll just be going back to the government and they don’t care about easing the hardship of ordinary people.”

Okay, so common misconception. The government is not in fact Sauron, Lord of Mordor. They don’t have a machine in the basement of Leinster house that runs on tears and starving orphans. The government would very much like to lower your taxes to zero and give everyone a monkey because that gets them votes and they like their jobs, thank you very much. The longer austerity goes on, the greater the chances are that they get chucked out in the next election. They’re not stu…they’re not THAT stupid. The reason we’re living in a Dickensian novel is because we don’t got no money. You want things to get easier? Look for stuff that we don’t need and that we’re paying money for. €8 Million a year is not a lot in the grand scheme of things but it’s not nothing and having it to hand means the next budget will be €8 Million less harsh.

“Even if it has no real power, it still provides a valuable forum for discussion and debate.”

Is something that someone said with a straight face referring to a body that had to take a quorum count the day it was debating its own abolition.

“By voting yes, you’re just giving the senators an early retirement and a fat pension.”

The senators already have early retirement and a fat pension. It’s called being a senator.

“It’s just a power grab by the Dáil.”

Surely, that would imply the Seanad has power to grab?

“We need the Seanad to keep an eye on the corrupt Dáil.”

The Seanad is not a watchdog against corruption, the Seanad is a vehicle for corruption. Senate seats are essentially gifts, a cushy job that allows the Taoiseach and the TDs to reward the party faithful for services rendered.

“You can’t have a functioning democracy without two houses.”

Well, actually, I’d argue that a government consisting of one directly elected body is more democratic than one consisting of one directly elected body and one wholly unrepresentative one elected solely by the political elite. I mean, the word “elitist” gets tossed around too casually these days but what else do you call a house of government of the elite, by the elite and for the elite?

“We should REFORM the Seanad, not abolish it.”

Okay, for the time being I will grant you that it’s preferable to have two houses instead of one in a democracy (I’m not sure exactly what you’re basing that on, but I’ll let it go). How do we reform it? What form will it take? How much will it cost? How long will it take? Probably a long time, right? So how about we work on a plan for a new improved and more representative Seanad for however many years that takes. And in the meantime, we get rid of this useless, expensive, obscenely undemocratic eyesore that is the Seanad in its current form? Any meaningful reform will involve pretty much destroying the current Seanad root and branch anyway so why not save a few million euro over the next five years while we hash out a plan for a Seanad that actually works?

And finally…

“Well, they abolished the Senate in Star Wars, and look how well that turned out.”

Uh, yeah, the senate was still around right up until the start of A New Hope. It existed for the majority of Palpatine’s reign. And it also did absolutely nothing.

Pictured: A senator.

Exercise your vote, 04 October 2013.

Disney Review with the Unshaved Mouse #38: Fantasia 2000

(DISCLAIMER: This blog is not for profit. All images and footage used below are property of their respective companies unless stated otherwise. I do not claim ownership of this material. New to the blog? Start at the start with Snow White.)

Unshaved Mouse?

Yes? Who are you?

I’m Court Appointed Attorney Antarctica. I’m to represent you at your trial.

Give it to me straight. What are my chances?

Don’t worry about it. I actually think we’ve got a very strong case.

Really?

Sure. See, Comrade Crow may have taken over but it’s still your blog. And the only way he can change the name of the blog is if he can prove you’ve failed in your duty as a Disney reviewer.

Wow! That’s great! He’ll never be able to prove that!

Just relax. I’ll have you out of here before my icecaps melt.

This is a lawyer!

All rise for the Honorable Judge Claude Frollo.

All rise for the Honourable Judge Claude Frollo!

Has the prosecution prepared a statement?

Indeed, your honour. Comrades! For too long we have languished under the yoke of this detestable rodent!

UP YOURS CROW!

He claims to be a reviewer of Disney movies, and yet not one week ago he devoted an entire post to non-Disney animated films!

Your honour, my client has repeatedly proven his loyalty to the Disney canon. If this is the best the prosecution can do I feel sorry for them.

His views on Disney movies have frequently been contrarian, laughable, or just plain idiotic!

…
Swanpride?

Objection, your honour, who here DOESN’T hate Aristocats?

Sustained.

Very well, I shall prove the Unshaved Mouse is unfit to review Disney movies. Mouse, tell the court which you prefer Fantasia...or Fantasia 2000!?

Very well, I shall prove the Unshaved Mouse is unfit to review Disney movies. Mouse, tell the court which do you prefer; Fantasia…or Fantasia 2000!?

Oh. Well, on balance I’d say I probably prefer Fantasia 2000.

…

Your Honour, I cannot in good conscience defend my client. I urge you to find him guilty.

Wait what?!

I recommend death by fire ants. Kill this sick freak!

Where did you get your law degree?!

WHERE DID YOU GET YOUR SOUL!?

Okay, yes. It’s not a popular opinion but let me explain why. And then I will accept the court’s judgment. Agreed?

The court accedes.

Very well.

NO! KILL HIM NOW!

I just came to this blog because I was told there were Disney reviews here and I have no fucking idea what all this bullshit is.

New to the blog? Start at the start with Snow White. It’s right up there at the top.

(more…)

Disney Reviews with the Unshaved Mouse #37: Tarzan

So as I sit here in my small, dank COMFORTABLY APPOINTED DISSIDENT CONTAINMENT RECEPTACLE, forced to eat NOURISHING RATIONS FOR WHICH I AM GRATEFUL and being brutally beaten about the head with THE BRILLIANT INTELLECTUAL REVELATIONS OF MARXIST THOUGHT I’ve had time to think. Mostly, or course, I’ve been darkly plotting what I’m going to do to that BENEVOLENT FATHER OF THE PEOPLE COMRADE CROW, ALL HAIL CROW! once I NEVER ESCAPE. But I’ve also been thinking about Tarzan. What happened to Tarzan? Why is it that no one seems to remember this movie? If I walk into a room and randomly sing the first few lines of “Hakuna Matata” or “Part of Your World” chances are that the whole room will join me for the chorus. “Two Worlds”? Crickets.

Why did this movie leave so little trace on pop culture? Well, it wasn’t really that popular when it came out, right? Wrong. This thing opened at Number 1 and outgrossed Mulan, which had already been seen as a major return to form for Disney. And it’s not like the critics were leery of it either, this thing got crazy good reviews: 88% on Rotten Tomatoes. So why has this movie, like me, been largely forgotten? Part of the problem, I think, is that by the turn of the millennium Disney had become a victim of its own success. In America, from the late nineteen thirties to the mid nineties Disney was pretty much the only studio making top-tier feature length animations. Sure, challengers would occasionally arise (the Fleischers in the thirties and forties, UPA and Hanna-Barbera in the sixties) but for most of that half century the only studio willing to risk the massive investment of time and money that is involved in making a feature length cartoon was the mo’fuckin House of Mouse. And don’t forget, most of the movies that we’ve covered on this blog were not all that successful financially. Even the really big hits like Sleeping Beauty cost so much that their massive box office takes were a Pyrrhic victory. Disney made most of their money in merchandising and the theme parks, which meant that smaller studios that didn’t have the luxury of owning theme park were content to leave the feature length animation pastures to Disney. But then, something happened. With the advent of new computer technologies, producing a full length animated feature went from being impossibly expensive and prohibitively time consuming to merely hugely expensive and massively time consuming. Disney capitalised on this, and in one the whitest hot streaks in movie studio history, ushered in the Renaissance. These movies were huge, some of the most successful of all time. Suddenly what had previously been seen as a white elephant was now one of the most profitable genres in the business. And why was that?

Okay fine, yes. Pixar’s success was the main factor, but the way was prepared by Disney’s earlier success with the Fearsome Four of Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and Lion King.

“AW C’MON!”

Disney created a market where animated features could be hugely successful and now they had to contend with a host of rivals, some of them mighty intimidating. There was Pixar of course, who released Toy Story 2 the same year as Tarzan, and were now well on their way to being one of the most critically lauded studios in cinema history. And then there was Dreamworks, run by former Disney boss Jeffrey Katzenberg, whose ruthlessly commercial movie making would produce three of the biggest grossing films of all time. And that’s not to mention the dozens of smaller rivals that sprang up in the wake of Disney’s early nineties successes. Heck, it’s gotten to the stage where it seems like anyone can release a full length animation. Even these idiots!

And I this is why I think Tarzan doesn’t stick in people’s memory. Not because it isn’t an awesome movie (it is) but because it was released in a time when Disney were no longer kings in their field. Pixar had taken the crown of critical darling, DreamWorks the crown of commercial money-making animation powerhouse (or they would with the release of Shrek a few years later). Tarzan came at the tail end of the Renaissance, overlapping with the beginning of Pixar’s reign and it just got lost in the folds. So let’s take a look at this thing, before the guards come and shackle me GENTLY to the wall and begin PLAYTIME WITH FRIENDLY DOGS who will brutally LICK my FACE while a DEDICATED SERVANT OF THE GLORIOUS REGIME OF COMRADE CROW, HAIL CROW! shoves THE GLORIOUS TRUTH OF THE ETERNAL REVOLUTION up my OUTDATED BOURGEOIS WORLDVIEW. This will probably be my last review. And God help me, I’m writing it on toilet paper.

(more…)

Recant, Retract, Remove: My open letter to the Irish Independent (and what happened next)

So, oddly enough, this blog devoted to reviews of Disney movies had its busiest day ever when I decided to talk about something entirely unrelated to reviews of Disney movies.

Man, that was a wasted year.

If you’re just tuning in, last week I posted on the Irish Independent’s sudden, unplanned trip to cray-cray town and a lot of you have asked to be kept abreast if anything came of it. Well, here we go.

I mentioned before that I’d written a formal letter of “What the hell bra?” to the Indo complaining about this article and earlier this week I got a phonecall from XXXXX in the paper saying that they’d read my letter and they’d checked with the journalist who wrote it and that he confirmed that the scientists he’d interviewed had made the claims printed in the article. I could see right off the bat that we’d gotten our wires crossed. I explained that my problem wasn’t that I doubted that the scientists had actually said those things, but that the things they said were…how shall I put this? A clenched fist of bollocks. We then had this exchange. It may not be word for word but it’s a faithful gist:

“Well, that’s your opinion. But these are some very serious scientists.”

“They’re cranks.”

“Why do you say that?”

“Because you can’t use radio waves to create energised water that makes giant animals.”

“How do you know?”

How do I know. Well that’s the question, isn’t it? It’s a bit of a stumper. It’s like being asked, “How do you know elephants can’t get heat-vision from eating lemons?” Technically, I suppose, I don’t know they can’t. But there is such a thing as an educated guess. Well anyway, XXXXXX very kindly offered to let me publish a letter in the paper explaining my concerns with the article. This is what I sent them:

Sirs,

Thank you for this opportunity to share my thoughts on the article “Wave Goodbye to Global Warming, GM and pesticides” by Tom Prendeville, which appeared on Independent.ie on 25 August. When I first read this article I was so flabbergasted that I ended up writing a critique of it online (entitled “Question: Has Ireland’s biggest national newspaper lost its goddamn mind?”) and within hours I was inundated with messages from people who were all wondering the same thing: “How did the Independent let this thing get published?”

The article, written in the best “breathless press release” style claims that Irish scientists have perfected a new technology, a device the size of a biscuit tin that converts 24 volts of electricity into a radio wave that can then be used to transform water into “Vi-Aqua” which is then used to treat vegetables. Then come the following claims (and I swear I am not making any of this up): Treated vegetables become 30% larger and are resistant to disease, rendering pesticides and GM foods obsolete. It converts excess CO2 into plant matter, thereby solving global warming. It makes “water wetter” (really), thereby reducing the amount of water actually needed. And in, a final display of not knowing when to quit, the author states that animals fed the energised water “turn into giants”. We can only assume that Mr Prendeville ran out of space before he was able to recount how Vi-Aqua fed a crowd of five thousand and then died on the cross for our sins.

Now this is of course flim flam, and obviously transparent flim flam*. The Independent may say “We published the article in good faith. We’re not scientists.” But you shouldn’t need to be. There is nothing here that should be able to fool even a moderately educated layman. If “making water wetter” didn’t tip you off, “giant freakin’ farm animals” should have done the trick. The science here wouldn’t pass muster on Doctor Who**.

But even aside from this, it’s frighteningly obvious that nobody checked this before it went to print. The basic facts stated in the article don’t stand up to even the mildest investigation. Warrenstown, the facility where these miraculous experiments supposedly took place, has been closed since 2009. That took all of three minutes with a search engine to find out. I should point out something at this point: I am not a journalist. I am a guy who writes reviews of Disney movies on the internet. When you cannot match the story-proofing and journalistic rigour of a guy on the internet who writes reviews of Disney movies, that is a bad day for you.

So why am I so upset about this? If the article is as ludicrous as I make it sound then surely no one will believe it? Well firstly, if you think that, then I have an internet to introduce you to and secondly yes, they absolutely do believe it and are sharing it because source matters more than content. I believe the Holocaust occurred and man walked on the moon. Why? Because I was there? Because these events were everyday, mundane and believable on their face? No. Because sources I trust, reputable historians and news sources, tell me that it was so.

Over the last few days I have watched this story metastasize and spread across the internet and I can tell you now with some authority that you have done the following;

1) You have opened up yourselves, the University of Limerick and the nation as a whole to ridicule and scorn, and have turned Irish scientific research and Irish scientists who do real, vital work in their fields into laughing stocks.

2) You have helped perpetuate the myth that there is some magical cure-all to the issue of global warming, the most pressing concern facing humanity in the modern age.

3) You have allowed yourselves to act as salesmen for a product whose scientific efficacy I will call (in deference to the delicate constitutions of this paper’s legal department) “a bit iffy”.

4) You have done serious and lasting damage to your own reputation as a trustworthy news source and this is by far the worst of all.

In the modern era, with the internet drowning us non-stop in a sea of never ending half truth, cons and sheer bullshit we need, more than ever, legitimate, trustworthy news sources. If I see “Asteroid Headed For Earth” on Mayanprophecy.net I won’t give it a second glance. If I see “Asteroid Headed for Earth” on the front page of The Times I’m running for my wife and daughter to hug them goodbye. We need the grownups. We need to know who we can trust, and who we cannot.

The Irish Independent has incredibly, spectacularly failed that test. With regard to this article there are now only three things you can do:

Recant. Retract. Remove.

Mise le meas,

Neil Sharpson

***

So I sent this off to XXXX and got a response asking me to edit it down to less than five hundreds words. I did, cutting a few “flim-flams” here and there and sent it back in. And then I got this response. I think the following email chain speaks for itself.

***

Dear Mr Pearson,

Thank you for your letter.

If you wish to write a letter challenging the merit of the piece, subject to legal and editorial constraints, we would welcome that.

However, this letter cannot be published due to legal reasons.

We are more than happy to publish a letter that challenges the content of the article, not the reputations of the scientists involved.

Kind Regards,

XXXXXX

***

Hi XXXXX,

Was this sent to me in error? I only ask because you seem to have gotten my surname wrong.

Regards

Neil Sharpson

***

Hi,

Apologies for that Neil – it was intended for you, but I got the surname wrong,

Apologies,

XXXXX

***

You’re kind of terrible at this.

***

So, there you have it. Nothing really left to say except that my article which mentions many concrete inaccuracies while not naming the scientists involved by name does not challenge the contents of the article and endangers the reputations of the scientists involved. My bad. Gonna try and take this up with the Press Ombudsman and see if I can get a sympathetic ear.

I’ll let you know how it goes.

All the best

Mouse

PS: I think I may have inadvertantly given the Independent a new slogan.

* Yes, I say “flim flam”. Yes, I AM a nineteenth century cotton baron, as a matter of fact.

** I love Doctor Who. But this is a show where DNA can be passed along by lightning strikes.

***

The third week of voting for the Blog Awards Ireland 2013 has now begun. If you have a minute, please click on the link below and cast your vote for “Disney Reviews with the Unshaved Mouse #8a: Song of the South. Thanks.

Disney Reviews with the Unshaved Mouse #36: Mulan

Hello internet! Man, I don’t know about you but I’m back, feeling well rested and ready to review some goddamn Disney movies! Who’s…

…with…

…me…?

Santa Claus, Lex Luthor and Asian Nixon? But they’re mortal enemies!

Okay, is it just me or has the blog gotten…sorta…Communisty since I’ve been gone?

Comrade Mouse, how’s it hangin’ dawg?

Gangsta Asia?! What’s been going on around here?! Why does my blog look like May Day in Red Square?

I’m now Comrade Gangsta Asia. And your blog is the people’s blog now thanks to the glorious socialist revolution we had in your absence. Um…for rizzle.

Alright look, you can be a communist character or a gangsta character but not both, you’re not fleshed out enough to support two defining traits.

Yeah, this is really hard.

Second, who staged a communist uprising on my…why do I even need to finish that sentence?

Privyet, Mouse.

Oh heeey Comrade Crow. Look, I know I haven’t been featuring you much on the blog in the last…

Ten months. Cinderella review.

Wow! Really? No, c’mon, you had that cameo in the Beauty and the Beast review…

Silence! As a remnant of the old regime you are considered an enemy of the blog. Take him away!

Dammit. See, this is why you have to be careful of offending communists. They tend to hold a grudge. Disney learned this the hard way when they financed Kundun, a biopic of the current Dalai Lama that kinda portrays China in a negative light. You know, like Ike always gets the short end of the stick in movies about the life of Tina Turner. So anyway, China heard that Disney had been talkin’ smack and didn’t think that China would hear it.

Yes, Hollaback Girl is about Chinese international relations. That songs has layers, man.

Suddenly, Disney found itself frozen out of what was rapidly becoming the most lucrative movie market on the planet. China only allows a limited number of Western films to be screened there each year and if you think Disney isn’t willing to bend over so far that its lips actually touch its own anus just to get a sniff of a chance of a shot of that market…well, you haven’t really been paying attention.

"Hello, Fan Bingbing? I'm just calling to let you know that China's strength and prowess fills with joy and contentment."

“Hello, Fan Bingbing? I’m just calling to let you know that China’s strength and prowess fills me with joy and contentment.”

“But of course, Mr Stark. China is well aware of its greatness. NOW DANCE!”

But back in 1997, Disney decided on a slightly more dignified way of currying favour. Mulan originally was going to be a short, straight to video animation called China Doll, about a poor Chinese girl who’s rescued by an Englishman and taken to live happily every after in the West. And that, from the offensive title to the paternalistic premise, pretty much sounds like the worst fucking thing ever. It was Robert D. San Souci, the children’s author and sometime Disney consultant, who suggested instead making a movie version of the Ballad of Hua Mulan (not to be confused with the Ode to Fa Mulan). You can read the poem here, it’s quite short and also pretty amazing. It’s a 1500 year old poem that simply and unabashedly makes the case for gender equality, depicting a young girl who goes off to fight a twelve year military campaign in place of her aged father, wins honour and prestige and returns home at last, revealing to her astounded comrades that she was a woman the whole time. So, we have a Disney movie that not only is going to delving into depictions of a non-European culture, but also dealing with the issue of feminism. Race and gender? Well surely this can’t go wrong?

Well…no. Actually. It didn’t.

You know, I’ve been doing this a while now and if I’ve learned one thing it’s this: Every movie has its defenders. No matter how little I, or the general consensus, rate any Disney movie, there will always be someone to fight its corner. There are Pocahontas fans, Black Cauldron fans, Aristocats fans and even Three Caballeros fans. Well, maybe “fans” is not the right word for that last one.

“Almighty Rooster, hear our prayer.”

Conversely, on the other end of the scale, no matter how highly a Disney movie is ranked and rated and praised, there will always be someone who doesn’t think it’s all that. I know people who don’t like Lion King, Little Mermaid, Sleeping Beauty, Hunchback…hell there are some sick fucks who don’t like Beauty and the Beast! But…not for this one. Honestly, I have never met or spoken to a single Disney fan who does not absolutely adore Mulan. Do I agree?

Fuck yeah I agree!

Sorry, you may have wanted me to string you along until the end of the review before revealing my opinion of this movie but…really? The fact that I composed a goddamn ode to the main character didn’t tip you off? Yeah, I love this movie, and I love Mulan herself, without a doubt the most badass character in the Disney canon. Don’t believe me? Let’s take a look at the story of Mulan, or, as I like to call her; The Death Who Walks.

Probably best to do it as quick as possible.

(more…)

“So Mouse, are you going to review “Planes”? Ha ha ha ha?”

Yeah, I’ve been getting this question a lot (oddly enough, always with the same mocking supervillain laughter). So, will I be reviewing ~~Pixar’s Disney’s You Take It! No, You Take IT! Okay fin~~e Disney’s Planes. Hmmm…tough one. Will I be reviewing the tossed off, cash-in, almost direct-to-DVD spinoff to what is, without question, one of my least favourite animated movies of all time?

And while that is soooooo tempting, I think we’re all forgetting the rules. Remember, back when I embarked on this little saga all the way back in the mists of prehistory? Your grasp of archaic, 2012-era English may be a little rusty so let me sum up; No live action films, no straight to DVD movies and no Pixar films. Only the canon classics.

So, can’t. Love to. But can’t.

Also, that movie is not getting my money. Not when there’s less morally questionable enterprises to be giving my money to. Like blood diamond smuggling cartels. Or NAMBLA.

It is Thursday though, and I do really want your support for the second week of voting for the Irish Blog Awards 2013 (Please vote Song of the South for Best Blog Post thank you so much close bracket!)

So, as a consolation, I will share with you now:

The 25 Things the Unshaved Mouse would do before reviewing Planes.

1) Desecrate a stained glass window.

2) French kiss a skunk.

3) Skunk kiss a Frenchman. (Don’t google it)

4) Act disrespectfully to a lady.

5) Kick a dog that wasn’t asking for it in some way.

6) Take a ball to the groin.

7) Take a groin to the balls.

8) Eat broken glass.

9) Eat Philip Glass.

10) Eat broken Philip Glass after a horrific plane crash where he broke every bone in his body and I had to eat him to survive and also his body was full of broken glass from the crash.

11) Get in a plane with Philip Glass.

12) Hire The Coachman as a babysitter.

13) Puppets. Just…puppets.

14) Stop using the phrase “Screw off”.

15) Say “Candyman” five times in a mirror while watching the video from The Ring while simultaneously having sex with Pinhead’s wife.

16) Marathon Pocahontas, Aristocats, Black Cauldron and Three Caballeros in one sitting.

17) Defenestrate a monk.

18) Tell local ex-IRA hardman Kneecaps “They call me Kneecaps because of all the kneecaps I’ve smashed” Malone that he looks “kind of English” today.

19) Michael Eisner was right. Traditional animation is no longer viable and it’s time for us all to just accept that CGI is the superior technique. Is a thing I would rather say than review Planes.

20) Review Planes. Yes, you read that right. I hate it so much I would rather review Planes than review Planes.

21) Climb into Rush Limbaugh’s house in the middle of the night and, while he sleeps, tuck myself in between two layers of flab, spending the night cocooned within him, slowly soaking in his sweat and odour.

22) Waxing of the barse.

23) Pistol whip a ferret.

24) Let you, my loyal readers, down in any way.

25) Unless not letting you down means reviewing Planes, in which case you can screw off.

In conclusion, no. I will most likely not be reviewing Planes. I will however, be reviewing Mulan, so I look forward to seeing you on the 5th of September.

VOTE MOUSE!

Something to get you in the mood for the Mulan review. Also: VOTE!

Well, I don’t know about you, but I’m starting to get antsy waiting for the fifth to roll around so here is something I threw together with my friend, the incredibly talented Jeda DeBrí and my equally talented wife Aoife O’Donoghue. Yes, we do video here now! Like a real internet!

Okay, so now that I’ve lured you back to the blog I have to confess an ulterior motive. Let’s be honest with ourselves here. There’s no use fighting it. You feel it. I feel it. There’s something between us. Always has been. But I’ve been hurt so bad before. I just don’t know if I can trust someone again, to let my barriers down and let a community of internet commenters into my heart. What’s that you say? How can you prove your love?

Well…there is one thing, but…

No. I could never ask you.

What’s that? You insist?

Well…

So you remember I told you that I’d been nominated for the Blog Awards Ireland 2013?

Oh dear oh dear, did I leave this old thing lying around here again?

Well it turns out that I’ve also been nominated for Best Blog Post. (Twice technically, the Song of the South and Black Cauldon reviews both got nommed.) This one works a little differently from the other categories. You vote for your choice (you can vote once a week) and then at the end of the week the 5 posts with the fewest votes get eliminated. This goes on every week until there are only ten left, and the winner will be announced at the Blog Awards on 12th October.

So please. If you have a moment, pop over and vote here for Song of the South for Best Blog post. (I don’t want to split the vote, and honestly, the SOS review is the one I’m more proud of.) So go, exercise your democratic right and vote. Otherwise the terrorists win. By which I mean the other bloggers. Who are terrorists. Nah. I’m kidding. They’re great, it’s all in good fun and may the best man win. They’re not terrorists.*

Thanks guys.

*No, seriously. They hate our freedom. It’s us or them.

Disney Reviews with the Unshaved Mouse #35: Hercules

(DISCLAIMER: This blog is not for profit. All images used below are property of their respective companies unless stated otherwise. I do not claim ownership of this material. New to the blog? Start at the start with Snow White.)

***

Pff. Hercules. What a poser. You want to talk about impossible labours? Try writing a comedic review about a comedy while looking after a sick baby, fighting off a stomach bug, grappling with unreliable internet connection and only three days to write the review because you’re going on holiday. Now there’s a challenge. Especially if it’s a good comedy. And I’ll admit, this is a funny movie. Maybe it’s just because it comes right after three of the most serious movies in the canon (yeah, Lion King is light-hearted in places but nothing that has that death scene gets to call itself jovial) but fair is fair, it goes for the yuks and it gets them more often than not.

Production started in 1994 under the directorship of Ron Clements and John Musker, the directing team behind The Little Mermaid and Aladdin, the movie it most closely resembles. In fact, if I had to describe Hercules it would be, “Aladdin, but more.” Actually no, it would be “Aladdin, but too much.” Hercules sees Aladdin’s celebrity voice actors, heavy emphasis on comedy, deliberate anachronisms and pop culture references and raises the stakes like a wild-eyed gambler in a saloon who won’t listen to his wife pulling at his arm and screaming at him not to bet the farm, Lawence! The end result is that…that…

Aw hell, I can’t hold it in anymore…

ONE YEAR BITCHES!!!!!! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

Sorry, where were we?

Oh right, Hercules. My point is, while Aladdin is overall a very fun and light movie, they still treated the story as something that mattered. You care about Aladdin and Jasmine, and while the genie might seem like a joke dispensing machine, he does actually get some quite affecting character beats.

I’ve been chopping onions, shut up.

Hercules though? The whole thing just comes off as such a lark that it’s kind of hard to give a damn about anything that happens. It’s an easy film to be entertained by. But not really an easy film to care about.

This represents Disney’s first foray into actual mythology rather than fairy tales, literature or legends. And no, a legend and a myth are not the same thing. In fact, let’s do a quick crash course on terminology (please let me do this, this is literally the only time my degree in Folklore has had any, even slightly, practical use).

Okay, so a fairy tale (or as folklorists prefer, a wonder tale) is set in a faraway place, a long time ago. It’s not about a real place, and it’s not about real people. It’s a fictitious tale told purely for enjoyment and usually has fantastical elements and magic and what have you. A legend, while also fictitious, takes place in a real place and time and features real people. So, for example, Washington chopping down his father’s cherry tree is a legend. It never actually happened, but Washington was a real person and it’s set in a specific time and place, Colonial America. Finally, a myth is the remnant of a now extinct religion. Hercules is a myth because both he and Zeus were once genuinely worshipped as gods and the tales featuring them had the weight of religious belief behind them. Myths tend to be taken more seriously than legends or wonder tales and while wonder tales tend to be considered universal (which culture gave rise to Cinderella?) myths remain very closely linked to their native culture. This may explain why this movie is absolutely loathed in Greece, where its, shall we say loose, interpretation of the Hercules stories enraged the Greeks.

Whoah whoah whoah, hold the phone. The Greeks were pissed off about something?

Was their ire justified? Let’s take a look.

(more…)

Disney Reviews with the Unshaved Mouse #34: The Hunchback of Notre Dame

***

Hey, you know what I love? Long, angry flame wars. By which I mean, I do not love those. At all. I bring this up because…while I know that I don’t have anything to worry about (the followers of this blog were, after all, recently voted Nicest Commentariat on the Internet)…

There was a whole ceremony and an award presented by Tom Hanks and a crazy party after…did I forget to tell you guys?

…but nonetheless I’m a little nervous going into this review. Hunchback, man. People feel…”strongly” about Hunchback. There are those who will loudly and passionately proclaim this to be the unacknowledged masterpiece of the Renaissance, the best thing Disney ever did. And then there are the Hugo loyalists, who think that the movie is an absolute disgrace to the source material, the perfect case-study for the abominable practice of Disneyfication. And then there are some who don’t have any particular fealty to the source material and just hate it as a movie. My friend Moira, (bracketsandampersandsyoureadnow) has often told me she just finds the whole film to be downright nasty and unpleasant.

So, which camp do I fall into?

Alright, let’s be honest here. This movie has problems. Serious problems that run right to its very core. The source material, The Hunchback of Notre Dame by Victor Hugo, quite frankly is not suited to being adapted into a Disney movie. Not because it’s dark, although it is. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; Disney can do dark. It just can’t do bleak. Now, full disclosure, I haven’t actually read the novel…

Yeah. That’s right. I didn’t read the 200,000 word 18th century French novel to research my silly little cartoon blog. Scandal.

…but it ends with Frollo being flung from the cathedral by Quasimodo, Esmerelda being hung and Quasimodo mourning beside her body until he slowly starves to death.

Coupled with that, the book is an often scathing critique of religious hypocrisy and extremism…right?

“Hm? Uh…sure, why not?”

And that’s something that Disney is just not cut out for. So we get changes like Frollo being a judge rather than the Arch-Deacon of Notre-Dame which leads to all kinds of plotholes and general silliness. These two forces, the dark source material and the sunny demands of the Disney formula are constantly pulling this movie in different direction and often threaten to tear the whole thing to pieces.

And yet…and yet…

When it works? When the emotional power of the story comes together with the gorgeous visuals, the near flawless animation, some great voice work and an absolutely spine-tinglingly excellent soundtrack by Alan Menken and Stephen Schwartz?

Guys, when this thing works? It SOARS.

And it’s brave too. I mentioned the laicisation of Frollo (and you know what? Fair enough. Catholic parents shouldn’t have to deal with a Disney movie telling their kids what’s wrong with their faith any more than Aladdin should have a screed on the depiction of women in the Qur’an) but notwithstanding that, this movie goes to some pretty dark places. And in its portrayals of sexual obsession and prejudice it’s remarkably honest and unvarnished. And that’s really Hunchback all over. It’s a weird, misshapen, sometimes ugly thing on the outside. But inside it has such beauty, and heart and courage…it’s kind of like…um…

Dammit, I had something for this.

Ah well, let’s take a look at the film.

(more…)

Disney Reviews with the Unshaved Mouse #33: Pocahontas

***

“We’d been working it on it for a couple of months and then Jeffrey calls a “breakfast meeting”. And in the meeting, we have the whole crew from Pocahontas and Lion King. And Jeffrey said “Pocahontas is a home run! It’s West Side Story/Romeo and Juliet with American Indians! It’s a smash hit! Lion King on the other hand, it’s kind of an experiment, we don’t really know if people are going to want to see it.””

Rob Minkoff, Co-director of The Lion King.

Guys. You know me. I’m not a hatchet artist. I don’t enjoy tearing movies to pieces. I didn’t start this blog because I wanted to take cheap shots, I did it as a ~~cynical promotional tool to advance my writing career~~ because I love this gorgeous, hilarious, deeply weird gaggle of animated films we call the Disney canon. And I know a lot of you have been looking forward to seeing me feast on this thing’s entrails like a rabid boar but I honestly cannot think of anything more dispiriting to write and unpleasant to read than one long, unending rant.

So…

I’m laying down a few ground rules right from the start. Think of these as handicaps to give this movie a fighting chance so that it doesn’t just turn into a complete bloodbath.

I’m not going to mark this movie down for its inaccurate portrayal of ~~Indians~~, ~~Native Americans~~, ~~American Indians, Amerindians, Native Peoples~~…

These guys.

Not that the movie doesn’t get a lot of things wrong (I have it on good account that it does) but it’s not like I’m an expert so I don’t really feel qualified to call the movie out on its failures in that regard. See, the thing is…it is damn hard to write a portrayal of Those Guys in any medium that doesn’t end up annoying somebody. There are just so many stereotypes and tired tropes floating around that it is almost impossible to write a character that doesn’t fall into at least some of them. (Actually, if there are any Native Americans or people of Native American ancestry reading this I would be very interested to know if there are any portrayals in TV or movies that you feel actually got it right. Let me know in the comments.) I am under no illusions that by deciding to make this movie Disney wasn’t setting itself up for a lose/lose situation.

Having said that, let’s be clear: They FUCKING LOST.

I’m not going to mark this movie down for its historical inaccuracy.

It’s a cartoon. Not a historical document. So I don’t particularly care that Pocahontas is not twelve and John Smith is not a forty year old ginger. I will still mock this movie like the dickens for comedic effect, but it’s not going to have an impact on the final score.

I’m not going to mark this down for failing to address the issues of genocide, forced relocations, slavery et al.

It’s a movie set in 1607. Short of one of the characters getting their hands on a time machine, how can the movie address events that wouldn’t happen decades or even centuries into the future? Granted, it hangs like a big black hanging thing over the entire movie, but that’s more history’s fault than the film’s. Besides. Do you really want to see a Disney movie that gave a realistic depiction of the Jamestown settlement? (Answer: No, no. Not even a little. No.)

I’m laying down these rules because, honestly, if this movie was good? If I cared deeply about the characters? If I was entranced by the story and thought the script was witty and emotionally satisfying? If I loved the art style and didn’t find the songs insufferably smug? None of the above would matter. You think I care that Mulan is set in the wrong dynasty or that Jungle Book makes no reference to India’s struggle for independence from British rule? Not a bit. So if it doesn’t matter to me when the movie’s good, why should it matter when the movie’s bad?

Oh yeah. The movie’s bad. Really bad. Like, a failure on all but the most technical level. Technically, it’s fine. The story structure is pretty much text-book. The animation is largely excellent if joyless and devoid of any real inspiration. But this thing is dead inside. It’s like someone killed a Disney movie and staged a macabre puppet show with the body. It’s the worst kind of formula driven, corporate movie making trying to hide its soullessness behind a vague veneer of empty New Agey spirituality. And it’s dumb. It’s really dumb. There are dumb movies, and there are smart movies and the great earth is big and rich enough for both but one thing I cannot stand is a dumb movie that thinks it’s smart.

So. How came we by this travesty?

Being Irish, I know a thing or two about booms and busts and when I read about the giddy optimism that was bubbling through Disney by the mid-nineties I can’t help but feel a little twinge of Celtic Tiger PTSD.

True story: Where I live was right in that thing’s crotch.

Under the guidance of the Katzenberg/Eisner/Disney triumvirate the Disney animation studio had gone from being a financial liability to a money making machine. Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and Lion King. One after the other.

“HEY! WHAT ARE WE, INVISIBLE?!”

Four of the biggest animated movies, hell, four of the biggest movies of all time in a six year span. Couple that record box office take with equally record breaking VHS sales and merchandising and you are talking about a billion dollar enterprise. I wouldn’t be surprised if years later it turned out that the real reason Katzenberg left was that Eisner kept cheating during their daily money fights. And, to their credit, Katzenberg and Eisner made sure plenty of that money got to the people who made it all possible. Suddenly, the animators’ parking lot was filling up each day with Bentleys and Jaguars. Generous bonuses were being lavished all around and the animation wing had a brand new state-of-the-art office building built just for them. But there was a cost to all this. Whereas the animation studio that Walt Disney had founded would slowly and methodically work on one film, release it, and then start on the next, Roy Disney had decreed that a new full length animated film would be released every year. As well as working on Pocahontas, the animation studio was finishing off Lion King, prepping for Hunchback of Notre Dame and working on A Goofy Movie and Nightmare Before Christmas. This massive workload resulted in long hours, stress and more than a few ruined marriages. And the toll wasn’t merely psychological either. Watch interviews and footage of the Disney animators of this period and you’ll see a lot of people rubbing their wrists, flexing and unflexing their fingers, squinting…we don’t normally think of artistic fields of endeavour as being physically gruelling but animation can put an absolutely brutal toll on the human body. Then of course there was the tragic death of Frank Wells, a huge psychic shock to the company made worse by the ugly fallout and Katzenberg’s departure from Disney.

It’s not possible to recount why Katzenberg left without getting into a lot of “he said she said” bullshit. From what I can gather Katzenberg’s version of events was that Eisner promised Katzenberg the position vacated by Wells but then withdrew the offer because he was jealous of how Katzenberg was getting all these press accolades for having turned things around at Disney. Eisner, for his part, says that the position was Katzenberg’s for the taking if he’d just waited a while and not been lobbying for it so soon after Wells’ death. Did Katzenberg resign? Was he fired? Don’t know, honestly don’t really care. The point is, halfway through production of Pocahontas Katzenberg had left Disney vowing revenge.

“Fools! I shall destroy them all!”

I think all these factors, the over-work, the shock of Wells’ death, the sheer weight of expectation to keep the gravy train on the tracks and the bad blood caused by Katzenberg’s departure all combined to make Pocahontas a thoroughly miserable experience for the animators to work on. I have no proof of that, maybe it was an endless merry go round of delight, but it sure as hell doesn’t feel that way. There is a sense of joylessness that pervades this thing, like everyone was just gritting their teeth and thinking of the paycheck.

Kind of like me, except I don’t get paid.

Sigh. Let’s just get this over with.

(more…)