| Rating 
                    - 
   
  Animated (US); 
                      1961; Rated G; 79 Minutes 
                      CastRod Taylor: Pongo
 Betty Lou Gerson: Cruella De Vil
 Cate Bauer: Perdita
 Lisa Daniels: Perdita
 Ben Wright: Roger Radcliff
 Frederick Worlock: Horace Badun
 Lisa Davis: Anita Radcliff
 Martha Wentworth: Nanny
 J. Pat O'Malley: Colonel/Jasper Badun
  Produced by Walt 
                      Disney; Directed by Clyde Geronimi, Hamilton S. Luske 
                      and Wolfgang Reitherman; screenwritten by Bill Peet; 
                      based on the novel by Dodie Smith
 Review Uploaded
 11/08/99
 | Written 
                    by DAVID KEYES Disney's 
                      "101 Dalmatians" is an unusual piece of work because it 
                      shamelessly ruptures from the threads of common sense. Cartoons 
                      have different rules than live action when tinkering with 
                      stories, but here is an idea so ridiculous and absurd, it 
                      is amazing how animators thought they could have gotten 
                      away with it. The theory that animals can talk with human 
                      vocabulary is unbelievable enough; imagine seeing them outwit 
                      a viscous dog-napper, and traveling miles in the snow at 
                      a staggering number of 101. These images are passable (sometimes), 
                      but when Pongo, the head of the Dalmatian family, takes 
                      inventory of his children, we jump to our feat and shout 
                      in wonder--"Who taught these dogs to count?" 
                      A 
                      lot of the postwar Disney cartoons flourished from the same 
                      prospects, and by the time "101 Dalmatians" followed up 
                      with "The Sword In The Stone," those ideas had completely 
                      consumed the animated genre. Of course, Disney died in 1967 
                      upon completing "The Jungle Book," but he left behind a 
                      legacy that would only force his studio to pursue new and 
                      exciting heights. The animation department experimented 
                      for the next few years, starting with the last approved 
                      Disney project, "The Aristocats," and eventually ending 
                      with what is generally considered the rebirth of animation, 
                      "The Little Mermaid" (although 1985's "The Black Cauldron" 
                      was the first to truly sparkle on screen). In between were 
                      projects of poor quality and often ludicrous payoffs. Each 
                      succeeded in their own ways, yes, but none approached the 
                      magic of earlier Disney days, which ended in 1959 with the 
                      masterpiece "Sleeping Beauty." "101 Dalmatians," released 
                      in 1961, was the first to precede that classic, and, by 
                      comparison, it is uneven, disappointing and lacking in artistic 
                      merit. But despite flaws, we have constant admiration for 
                      the insanely-written plot, which sets us up on a tour with 
                      101 dogs as they make their way through cities and snow-covered 
                      landscapes to get away from their enemy, in this case the 
                      notorious Cruella De Vil. 
                      The 
                      story is already familiar with animation buffs. It tells 
                      the story of Pongo and his "pet" Roger, two bachelors who, 
                      at first glance, are happy with their lifestyle. But the 
                      Dalmatian describes his life as "downright dull," and is 
                      determined to find mates for both he and his owner. In one 
                      of the film's most successful scenes, Pongo sits at a window 
                      and examines the pairing of women/dogs, and whether or not 
                      they qualify as successful mates for both he and his pet 
                      (naturally, he makes up his mind simply by the dog's appearance). 
                      At least, with this peculiar story, Pongo is willing to 
                      admit that dogs are a poor judge of human beauty. 
                      After 
                      a few pairs pass, he finds what he is looking for. Now the 
                      difficulty comes into play--how does Pongo bring both couples 
                      together? Simple: Roger takes his pet for walks after five. 
                      If Pongo manages to set the clock ahead of time, he and 
                      Roger may very well pass the females in the park. The story 
                      takes chances, and always gets away with them. 
                      All 
                      of these coincidences and unbelievable animal characteristics 
                      might have failed, if it weren't for the presence of Cruella 
                      De Vil. Cartoons of the past guarantee admiration if they 
                      are able to attract a ruthless but well-animated villain 
                      to the viewer. De Vil, one of the few scoundrels to actually 
                      be female, is perhaps one of the strongest; her style as 
                      woman in love with animal fur coats inflames us with droves 
                      of dislike. Yet she also generates a sense of admiration, 
                      as mishaps prevail over her diabolical plans, and she loses 
                      sanity when the dogs have seemingly outwitted her. The pairing 
                      of Jasper and Horace, the two hired bandits working for 
                      Ms. De Vil, is observant as well. 
                      The 
                      animation certainly doesn't score points. Being the first 
                      of the animated vault to use a process called "Xerox animation," 
                      in which animators could cut corners and copy images instead 
                      of redrawing them, the film repeats character animations 
                      in extreme ways. The 101 Dalmatians themselves have a dimensional 
                      quality to them as they scurry through halls and down hills, 
                      but the backgrounds lack depth and are filled with hard 
                      edges. The animators might have resorted to this because 
                      their previous production, the lavish "Sleeping Beauty," 
                      was budgeted 6 million dollars, and it failed to turn up 
                      profit. This new process enabled animators to get movies 
                      out faster, but in the process, decent stories were accompanied 
                      by ugly and familiar animated styles. Compared to the early 
                      days, in which characters and scenarios were hand-crafted, 
                      these films were second-rate. 
                      It 
                      will be interesting to see how well the movie sells on DVD. 
                      After two VHS editions, not to mention countless theatrical 
                      re-releases, the Disney cartoon that attracted so many die-hard 
                      animation fans has apparently gained more popularity than 
                      it deserves. Even though it clearly doesn't deserve the 
                      attention of the cartoon classics, like the recent release 
                      of "Pinocchio," we understand why this is the case--because 
                      the story's absurdity and over-the-top quality have a soggy 
                      charm, and the characters (with the exception of the dogs) 
                      are written with unique personalities. This isn't one of 
                      those Disney masterpieces like "Fantasia" or "Bambi," but 
                      it is an entertaining, observant film with enough credit 
                      to its name to be considered recommendable.   
                    © 
                    1999, David Keyes, Cinemaphile.org. 
                    Please e-mail the author here 
                    if the above review contains any spelling or grammar mistakes.
 |