Skip to main content

Give poor, starving Gurgi munchings and crunchings.

The Black Cauldron

(SPOILERS) Dark Disney? I guess… Kind of. I don’t think I ever got round to seeing this previously. The Fox and the Hound, sure. Basil the Great Mouse Detective, most certainly. Even Oliver and Company, so I wasn’t that selective. But I must have missed The Black Cauldron, the one that nearly broke Disney, for the same reason everyone else did. But what reason was that? Perhaps nothing leaping out about it, when the same summer kids could see The Goonies, or Back to the Future, or Pee Wee’s Big Adventure. It seemed like a soup of other, better-executed ideas and past Disney movies, stirred up in a cauldron and slopped out into an environment where audiences now wanted something a touch more sophisticated.

It probably doesn’t help any that it’s very similar to Legend (which actually came out afterwards, but you get the idea). Ridley Scott’s movie was hardly the high-water mark in originality or sophistication either, but at least its expense was all up there on screen. The Black Cauldron’s animation is a mixed bag, intermittently very impressive, but also far below the standards Don Bluth, having absconded, was eking out during the decade, so making the Mouse House realise they were trailing very badly. Part of the problem is the uninspired character designs, be they the comic relief, the villain or the heroes. The Horned One (John Hurt) is exactly what he says on the tin, whereas other approximations (Tim Curry’s Darkness or Skeletor) at least had some degree of chutzpah on their side.

It seems The Horned One’s something of a composite of the source material; Disney purchased Lloyd Alexander’s The Chronicles of Prydain trilogy in 1971 (and then repurchased it in 2016). It’s actually five novels, based on The Mabinogion – see also Alan Garner’s The Owl Service – and it has been rumoured everyone’s favourite wokester Rian Johnson may limber it up for the remake. This version took until 1980 to enter production, at which point Disney was undergoing an existential crisis – appropriately, since it seems Alexander was preoccupied with existentialism – and second guessing their target audience. They duly, mostly, failied to hit that target for a good half decade as they strived in vain to keep abreast of the changing face of ’80s cinema (The Black Hole, TRON, The Watcher in the Woods, Something Wicked this Way Comes, Return to Oz were all, to a greater or lesser degree, financial disappointments).

Tim Burton had worked on The Black Cauldron, and the animation was, in conceptual form, an attempt to appeal to more than just the junior viewers. Disney understandably wanted a slice of that broader audience base flocking to the Spielbergs and Lucases. Part of the problem, it seemed, was the Disney old school versus the new young punks, leading to a neither-flesh-nor-fowl picture that supplied many of the Disney standards yet also a less edifying streak.

Notably, exec Jeffrey Katzenberg, newly appointed and later to hog all the credit for resuscitating the studio’s animation arm, blanched. He demanded the excision of ten of the blackest minutes of The Black Cauldron (the most infamous of which being a man mauled by one of Cauldron born before rotting away into one of their number). It became known as “the movie Disney tried to bury”, and if you doubt a studio would wish to do that, it’s accepted and expected practice for the new guard to throw away potential jewels they’ll get no credit for (see Columbia and The Adventures of Baron Munchausen). There’s talk that, in original form, this was destined for an R rating, but I’m dubious; it’s hardly Ralph Bakshi (it earned a PG, but a U in the UK).

Whatever development process the picture was wrung through, it came out feeling rather bereft of passion and distinctiveness. The ickier elements – the un-dead sequence – are memorable, but most of the rest seems little more than a knock-off. A comedy mentor type (Freddie Jones’ Dalben), a comedy minstrel (Nigel Hawthorne’s Fflewddur Fflam), an earnest but bland hero (Grant Bardsley’s Taran), a princess who barely gets a look in (Susan Sheridan’s Eilonwy).

Gurgi: Oh poor miserable Gurgi deserves fierce smackings and whackings on his poor tender head.

The magical oracular pig (Hen Wen) seems like a sparky idea, but said pig doesn’t have much going on beyond looking cutely porcine. There’s a magic sword (read lightsaber). There’s comedy evil minion Creeper (Phil Fondacaro) and comedy friendly sidekick Gurgi (John Byner). The latter is a like a hairy Gollum, but slightly less psychotic, inclined to refer to himself in the third person and discuss “crunchings and munchings”.

More than a degree of dark Disney, I was struck by pervy Disney, however. We’re veering towards a category The Young Ones’ Neil referred to as a Disney Nasty. Obviously, this is the studio that would flash Jessica Rabbit’s snatch a few short years later, but I didn’t expect the Carry-On shenanigans presented here, as a buxom witch gets all feisty with Fflam, causing a string to spontaneously snap on his lyre. And then, the leading invitation “You don’t mind if I pluck your harp?” Following which, transformed into a frog, Fflam plunges into said witch’s cleavage. In closeup.

I don’t think one can really lay a particular finger of blame at Disney not knowing what to do with the movie (although, it would be nice to see the unsullied cut, to get a better idea of what it was they had in the first place). Very few were actually showing acumen getting fantasy onto the screen at that time, despite it being a relative boom period. Peter Yates went belly up with Krull a few years before, and Lucas would do the same with Willow a few years later. Ridley had dynamite visuals, but lacked the inner poetry to make a wafer-thin story work. It seems The Black Cauldron’s problem, in part, was shearing off the more thoughtful elements of the source material, such that what we we’re left with feels perfunctory. As if it got so far down the line in development that the makers lost sight of it is initial appeal.

Popular posts from this blog

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies.

Watership Down (1978) (SPOILERS) I only read Watership Down recently, despite having loved the film from the first, and I was immediately impressed with how faithful, albeit inevitably compacted, Martin Rosen’s adaptation is. It manages to translate the lyrical, mythic and metaphysical qualities of Richard Adams’ novel without succumbing to dumbing down or the urge to cater for a broader or younger audience. It may be true that parents are the ones who get most concerned over the more disturbing elements of the picture but, given the maturity of the content, it remains a surprise that, as with 2001: A Space Odyssey (which may on the face of it seem like an odd bedfellow), this doesn’t garner a PG certificate. As the makers noted, Watership Down is at least in part an Exodus story, but the biblical implications extend beyond Hazel merely leading his fluffle to the titular promised land. There is a prevalent spiritual dimension to this rabbit universe, one very much

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Other monks will meet their deaths here. And they too will have blackened fingers. And blackened tongues.

The Name of the Rose (1986) (SPOILERS) Umberto Eco wasn’t awfully impressed by Jean Jacques-Annaud’s adaptation of his novel – or “ palimpsest of Umberto Eco’s novel ” as the opening titles announce – to the extent that he nixed further movie versions of his work. Later, he amended that view, calling it “ a nice movie ”. He also, for balance, labelled The Name of the Rose his worst novel – “ I hate this book and I hope you hate it too ”. Essentially, he was begrudging its renown at the expense of his later “ superior ” novels. I didn’t hate the novel, although I do prefer the movie, probably because I saw it first and it was everything I wanted from a medieval Sherlock Holmes movie set in a monastery and devoted to forbidden books, knowledge and opinions.

He tasks me. He tasks me, and I shall have him.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982) (SPOILERS) I don’t love Star Trek , but I do love Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan . That probably isn’t just me, but a common refrain of many a non-devotee of the series. Although, it used to apply to The Voyage Home (the funny one, with the whales, the Star Trek even the target audience for Three Men and a Baby could enjoy). Unfortunately, its high regard has also become the desperate, self-destructive, song-and-verse, be-all-and-end-all of the overlords of the franchise itself, in whichever iteration, it seems. This is understandable to an extent, as Khan is that rare movie sequel made to transcendent effect on almost every level, and one that stands the test of time every bit as well (better, even) as when it was first unveiled.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.

Maybe the dingo ate your baby.

Seinfeld 2.9: The Stranded The Premise George and Elaine are stranded at a party in Long Island, with a disgruntled hostess.