Christmas Shelf Reviews: Richard Williams’ A Christmas Carol (1971)

Tags

A Christmas Carol, abe levitow, academy awards, adaptation, allistair sim, animated, animated cartoon, animated short, animated shorts, animated special, animation, animators, Bob Cratchit, charles dickens, Christmas, christmas carol, Christmas cartoon, Christmas review, christmas special, christmas story, chuck jones, drumpf, Ebenezer Scrooge, fuck trump, ghost, ghost of christmas future, ghost of christmas past, ghost of christmas present, ghosts, god rest ye merry gentlemen, hand drawn animation, Jacob Marley, ken harris, London, michael hordern, Mickey's Christmas Carol, oscar nominated, oscar winning, oscars, richard purdum, Richard Williams, short, Tiny Tim, traditional animation, troll

Surprise, we had a tie in the shorts category! As my way of making up for the lack of reviews this year, here’s a little Christmas bonus for you all.

Last year we said goodbye to a giant in the field of animation, the one and only Richard Williams. In honor of his memory, I added some of his work to the Shelf, including this, a retelling of A Christmas Carol produced by fellow legend Chuck Jones with animation by Abe Levitow, Ken Harris, Grim Natwick and Richard Purdum among others. Adding to this auspicious company is Allistair Sim and Michael Hordern returning to voice Scrooge and Marley twenty years after playing them in the iconic 1951 film adaptation; it’s not Christmas in my household until I watch it with my father, the tree glowing in the corner as we huddle together in the dark in front of the TV, so hearing these voices again is a special treat.

Of course, since this is a Richard Williams’ production, there was no shortage of drama behind the scenes. Williams was a man who expected nothing less than perfection from his employees, and his stringent standards nearly proved to be his downfall (not for the last time either, if you know what happened to The Thief and the Cobbler). Work fell so behind schedule that the animators were forced to pull 7-day 14-hour workweeks with unpaid overtime, and the final product still wasn’t ready until one hour before the deadline! The results, however, speak for themselves. This is a beautifully crafted feature. Though Williams and crew had to resort to some rotoscoping to finish the job, it’s difficult to pinpoint exactly where they did.

This short was originally made for television, but the high praise it received emboldened ABC to distribute it theatrically. It would go on to be nominated for and win the Oscar for Best Animated Short the following year. This also gives it the distinct honor of being the only version of A Christmas Carol to win an Academy Award. Imagine, 200+ versions of the same story made over a period of nearly a hundred years yet only one gets that kind of recognition! Members of the Academy chafed at the idea that a short first shown on television took home the gold, and would quickly change the rules so that any future works that premiered on TV would not qualify for a nomination.

Despite its accolades and the high-profile names attached, Richard Williams’ Christmas Carol is surprisingly hard to find on home video. The version I watched for this review came from Youtube via TheThiefArchive, where you can find all things related to Williams uploaded for posterity.

So, classic story, some of the greatest animators of the twentieth century, all brought together by a man whom I consider the definitive Mad Genius of animation. What’s the worst that could happen?

Rankin-Bass Month: Cricket On The Hearth (Review)

Tags

2D animation, A Christmas Carol, animated, animated musical, animated special, animation, bertha, blind, blind girl, blindness, Britain, caleb, cartoon review, cat, charles dickens, Christmas, Christmas cartoon, christmas episode, Christmas review, christmas shopping, christmas special, christmas story, christmas toys, cricket, cricket crockett, Cricket On The Hearth, Danny Thomas, Dickens, dolls, England, green, green guy, hand drawn animation, Hans Conreid, holiday special, irish animation, London, magic toy, magic toys, Marlo Thomas, musical review, Paul Frees, Phelous, Rankin Bass, review, Roddy McDowell, Romeo Muller, tackleton, television review, the danny thomas hour, toy factory, toy shop, toymaker, toys come to life, toys coming to life, traditional animation, tv review, tv special, uriah, voice actor

Ladies and gentlemen, I have found it.

The lowest of the low.

The Rankin-Bass special that even Rankin-Bass fans despise.

Call it a hunch, but I think Charles Dickens really had a thing for Christmas. His most popular novel has the holiday in the title and has been adapted for the screen and stage at least over 200 times. Dickens set a few other tales at Christmastime, no doubt to recapture the magic and spirit of the holiday in the same way A Christmas Carol did, but those were met with less success. Does anyone here remember that classic “The Haunted Man”? That one was a ghost story that also took place at Christmas. Where are the hundreds of versions of that tale? Or “The Chimes” for that matter? Or “The Battle of Life”?

Then there’s today’s tale, “Cricket On the Hearth”, which only received two silent film adaptations (the first directed by D.W. Griffith) and a long-forgotten stage play. For yet-to-be-fathomed reasons, Rankin-Bass deemed it the perfect material to follow up their smash hit Rudolph three years prior. Instead of stop-motion animation, however, we get hand-drawn animation. While that would normally be a plus in my book, I’m not kidding when I say this is some of the cheapest, most unpleasant animation I’ve set my eyes on. It’s heavily recycled, the character designs are unappealing, and it cheats numerous times by just showing long periods of still images with nothing happening. I also had to be careful grabbing screenshots because the far-right side of the video flickered and was several frames off for some reason. And it wasn’t a corrupted file issue either, this is straight from the dvd. They aired this special on national television, how could they not be bothered to fix that?

And those are just the issues I have with the visuals.

The characters are one-dimensional tools, the songs are at best forgettable and at worst unbearable, and the story manages to be both devastatingly bleak and disgustingly saccharine while also insulting to its audience. Now, Charles Dickens was a talented writer knew how to properly mix those elements to tell a compelling and resonant story. In his Christmas tales, the sentimentality and darkness complement each other and ring true.

But guess who did such a bang-up job encumbering a song about ableist reindeer with a meandering hour-long plot that he was given free rein over the story?

Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou, Romeo? Deny thy special and refuse thy Writer’s Guild card. Or if not, throw thyself into the roaring cauldron of the sea and let the sirens peck at thy swollen flesh…sexist pig.

Well, this preamble has gone on long enough. Grab your insect repellent, folks, let’s look at Cricket On The Hearth.

Christmas Shelf Reviews: Mickey’s Christmas Carol (1983)

Tags

1980's, A Christmas Carol, adventures of ichabod and mr. toad, animated, animation, black pete, Bob Cratchit, charles dickens, Christmas, christmas carol, christmas classic, christmas story, daisy duck, Disney, disney animated, disney animation, disney review, Donald Duck, ducktales, Ebenezer Scrooge, ghost, ghost of christmas future, ghost of christmas past, ghost of christmas present, ghost of christmas yet to come, ghosts, goofy, graveyard, graveyard scene, Jacob Marley, jiminy cricket, London, magic, Mickey Mouse, Mickey's Christmas Carol, Minnie Mouse, mole, mr. toad, Peg-Leg Pete, Pete, rat, Scrooge McDuck, the wind in the willows, Tiny Tim, traditional animation, Uncle Scrooge, willie the giant

Some stories are so timeless, so resonant, and so iconic that they deserve to be retold for every generation.

And then there’s Charles Dicken’s A Christmas Carol, which according to IMDB has nearly 200 adaptations. If you decide to watch one a day, it’s almost enough to see you through to next Christmas! And do I need to recap the story of A Christmas Carol? It’s so ubiquitous that the only people who don’t know it must have grown up under a rock. That’s the only explanation I’ll accept.

I wouldn’t call this over abundance of A Christmas Carol a bad thing, however, as each version manages to bring something unique and memorable to the original tale. Like with Peter Pan, there’s one for every generation – well okay, more like five, but you get the idea. It’s great to see people discussing which one they believe is best because there’s no shortage of fascinating takes out there (As for me, I find the best straight adaptation is the 1951 version with Alistair Sim, the best take with a twist is the Muppets one, and the best modern day/parody one is Scrooged). But of course we’re here today to talk about one particular adaptation many have grown up with. For some, it was even their very first exposure to A Christmas Carol. I should know. It was for me.

Mickey’s Christmas Carol actually began as a read-along record album produced in the 70’s and narrated by Scrooge McDuck himself. There’s little differentiating it from its eventual animated counterpart, though the cast of holiday haunts is slightly altered – jolly old wizard Merlin from The Sword in the Stone is the Ghost of Christmas Past, and Snow White’s Wicked Witch takes an even more frightening turn as the Ghost of Christmas Future. In an attempt to revive Mickey Mouse’s waning popularity, it was decided that the story would be perfect fodder for a brand new short. It was originally supposed to premiere on television as a regular holiday special in 1982, but after an animators’ strike delayed production, the short was given a theatrical release one year later alongside a re-issue of The Rescuers. So yes, Mickey’s Christmas Carol was technically the Olaf’s Shoehorned Holiday Adventure of its time. I’m happy to say it earned a much more deserved positive reception, however, even gaining a Best Animated Short Oscar nomination.

April Review: Peter Pan (1953)

Tags

1950's, Captain Hook, crocodile, Disney, disney review, fairies, fairy dust, Fantasy, George Darling, indians, JM Barrie, John, John Darling, London, lost boys, Mary Darling, Michael, Michael Darling, movie review, Mr. Darling, musical, musical review, never land, never never land, neverland, Peter Pan, pirates, pixie, pixie dust, Smee, the elegant Captain Hook, wendy, Wendy Darling, what made the red man red, you can fly, you can fly you can fly you can fly, your mother and mine

(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.)

“All this has happened before. And it will all happen again.”
– Opening lines

No truer words have ever been spoken.

JM Barrie’s Peter Pan is as timeless a fantasy story as you can get. It’s nothing short of pure magic. Who among us hasn’t wished to never grow up and live in a world not run by fun-sucking adults? Who can openly admit that they never dreamed of flying and going on exciting new adventures every day? The tale of Peter Pan appeals to the kid in all of us. It doesn’t surprise me that every couple of years we seem to get some kind of new retelling of it because the lore of the Boy Who Never Grew Up offers so many possibilities. It’s difficult to pin down which version could be considered the most definitive adaptation (though the 2003 film comes the closest to being the most faithful in story and tone) but this is a case where every single one out there has something to offer for each generation. There were stage plays and silent films for those who were children when the book first came out, the 1960’s musical starring Mary Martin (and later Cathy Rigby) was an annual television tradition for decades, Fox’s Peter Pan and the Pirates is considered one of the most creative animated shows of the late 80’s-early 90’s, Steven Spielburg’s unofficial sequel Hook has gone on to become a cult classic (as well as a kickass video game), and of course we have the film I’ll be looking at today, the Disney animated one from the 50’s.

Walt Disney once played the role of Peter Pan in a school production; as such, the story was very close to him. Peter Pan was planned to be one of the first animated films his studio would release – story ideas were tossed around as early as the mid-30’s – but it fell into development hell thanks to the frenzy of World War 2. Look carefully when watching the 1941 film The Reluctant Dragon and you’ll see early maquette versions of some of the characters in a few places. After the much-needed success of Cinderella in 1950, work resumed on Peter Pan. The results, however, were mixed, with some critics and even Walt himself being disappointed with the final product. Most audiences, on the other hand, gravitated towards it, and today it’s considered a classic of Disney animation as well as one of the most outstanding adaptations of Barrie’s work. Why is that? Let’s find out.