Whats Funny in Sword in the Stone
Probably the most underrated of all the Disneys
The Sword and the Stone is a very relaxing movie to watch. In an animation, you want humour and emotion, and this movie had plenty of both. Most of the humour comes from Sir Ektor(voice of Sebastian Cabot) and Archimedes (voice of Junius Matthews), but Merlin (voice of Karl Swenson) had some truly delicious lines. I just love Archimedes, he is absolutely hilarious, and still manages to be likable, despite being very grumpy. The animation was lovely, and the scenes when Wart (voice of Ricky Sorenson)was an animal were truly entertaining. My personal favourite was the squirrel scene, but the duel of Merlin and Mim was the highlight of the film for me. The songs by the Sherman Brothers, while not particularly memorable, were very pleasant to listen to, as was the incidental music by the composer of the Jungle Book George Bruns. All in all, a truly enjoyable movie, that is definitely underrated. 9/10 from me. Bethany Cox
43 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
T.H. White would be proud
The 90 minute cartoon is in fact the first chapter of T.H. White's novel The Once and Future King. Made for the kids, Disney does it again taking a classic story and adding fictional animal characters that can talk. Still, Disney remains loyal to the story by keeping many of the characters in the story including Kay, Sr. Pellinoire, and Sir Ector.
Worth watching twice with the family. An animated classic
42 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
maybe not one of the 'great' Disney films, but it is quite the entertainer
I used to watch the Sword in the Stone quite a number of times as a kid, and I know why later on in my years. It's actually quite a fun little movie considering its a quasi-history lesson on how Arthur (aka 'Wart') became King of England. It includes Merlin, and his 'educated Owl' Archamedes, and a whole lot of wacky adventures trying to get Arthur, who can't read or write, into a mode of thought higher than how he's been raised. For a Disney film, as well, it's also quite the quotable film at times, with some lines and situations still sticking out in my mind years later. For example, the sequence involving Arthur and Merlin as squirrels in the trees, and a small lesson in love (or lack thereof) a lady squirrel presents in the face of danger. Or the story involving Arthur as a bird, trapped in the clutches of Madamn Mim (maybe one of the funniest sequences in any Disney movie).
So, as one can figure from what I've described (if you haven't seen the film yet), it's fairly over-the-top, loaded with silly-songs (one of which a true charmer involving Merlin's proclivity for organizing a packing up of his house) and little lessons for kids. But it actually is also funny for adults too, I'd guess, or at least funny to watch along with the kids. It may not be in the absolute peek of the period in Disney films (one may try to look to the Jungle Book or Winnie the Pooh for that, or the underrated Aristocats), however I sometimes come back to this film in my mind. It has a catchy attitude that made being in the 'dark ages' as fun as possible- Archamedes in particular is maybe one of the great side-characters in any Disney film.
Alakazam!
22 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
For every laugh there should be a tear
The 18th animated Disney classic is among the most hilarious of all time. It was never very popular, which is too bad, because it deserves to be more known. However, like other forgotten Disney classics, it has been winning a legion of fans with time.
"The Sword in the Stone" is almost at the same level of the 1960's and 1970's Disney classics when it comes to artwork. It was one of the last movies with the participation of Walt Disney himself.
"The Sword in the Stone" is Disney's version of the famous King Arthur's story. Disney tells this story with its personal touch and classic humor.
I don't know if the Disney version is totally faithful to the real story, but that's not the point.
Arthur, called "Wart" by Sir Ector (his adoptive father) and Kay (Sir Ector's son), is overworked and humiliated by them both. "Wart" is almost like a "Cinderella boy". But despite these problems, he remains optimistic and still dreams about being a great warrior and a knight's squire. Somehow "Wart" was the inspiration for the character Taran from "The Black Cauldron".
In the meantime, he meets the powerful but clumsy and hilarious wizard Merlin, who wants to give him education and culture. Merlin believes that pure strength means nothing when a person has no brain.
Together, Merlin and "Wart" live great adventures, funny moments and Merlin teaches everything he knows to "Wart". We mustn't forget the owl Archimedes too. The owl, as you know, is usually «the fountain of knowledge» on cartoons.
Archimedes is wise, intelligent, clever but also very lazy, very confident, grumpy and has a strong personality. That's what makes him so funny. In fact, both Merlin and Archimedes are a comic relief.
This film might take place in medieval times (which year is unknown). But it is one the funniest Disney classics ever, like "Pinocchio", "Aladdin", "Robin Hood" and "The Aristocats".
It has lots of hilarious moments which can make one get into uncontrollable laughter.
Let me mention some of them: the scenes with Merlin and the Granny Squirrel; the scene when the dishes wash themselves and Sir Ector and Kay get a "bath"; the scene when Kay brutally crashes with the castle's oldest tower; the part when the plane model gets stuck on Merlin's beird and Archimedes laughs so hysterically that he almost can't breathe; that part when Archimedes nearly shrinks inside his little house; the moments with the sugarpot...
I could go on, but it would take forever because there are so many hilarious moments.
The songs are clever and enjoyable, such as "The Sword in the Stone", "That's what makes the world go round" and especially "Higitus Figitus", my personal favorite.
I like this movie and I've gotta say that humor is, without a doubt, the strongest attribute of this movie.
This should definitely be on Top 250.
30 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
For every laugh, there should be a tear
This movie is another proof of the high quality of the classic Disney films. Today feature films are quite funny too... but they based mostly on simple, crude jokes and spoofing of other topical movies (remember the bullet time-spoof in "Shrek"). There is no substance to think about in it. You can see them, laughing about them...and forgot them almost completely a few years later. Who will remember, i.e., "Ice Age" or "Madagascar" in 40, 50 or 60 years? The old Disney classics are different, there are timeless! "The Sword in the Stone" contains a lot of joyful gags too, but no gag stands above the characters, no joke was made only to fill a hole in the plot. The story, the plot, and the characters are primary. And Disney add not only joyful gags. As Walt himself once said: "For every laugh, there should be a tear." Disney take children always quite seriously, and a lot of his early films contains a lesson for life, sometimes the lesson can be very sad and cruel, like in "Bambi", sometimes lesser sad, like in "The Sword in the Stone"... but can anybody forget the cute little girl squirrel, that was left by Wart, desperately crying and with a broken heart? And Merlin's closing words about love: "Well, yes, in its own way... yes, I'd say it's the most powerful force on Earth"!
This is one of the main ingredient of the famous Disney Magic: Joy and tragedy! Another is the art of hand drawn animation. The quality of the animation went downwards at Disney after WW-II too, slowly, but surely. But in 1963 cel-animation was still on a high level. Not so good as in the golden Era, when "Fantasia", "Pinocchio" or especially "Bambi" set the utmost high standards of perfectionism, but quite better than in "Hercules", "The Lion King" or "The Rescuers down under". 7 of 10 stars for "The Sword in the Stone"! It is not the best of all Disney films, but quite better and deeper than the most of the modern CGI movies!
57 out of 71 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
thin story and uncompelling kid Arthur
The king has died and no one can agree on the right king for England. A miraculous sword appear in London stuck in an anvil and stone. It comes with an inscription proclaiming the man who pulls the sword will be the new king. Many try but nobody succeeds. The Sword in the Stone becomes forgotten as the land fall into a dark age. Merlin the wizard has plans for the young orphan Arthur.
The animation is classic hand-drawn style. It has an old-style charm that is reminiscent of TV cartoons of that era. It's educational at times. It's pretty light weight humor. The story is pretty thin. It doesn't put in enough time for a compelling villain. It also suffer for not having a beautiful princess or an interesting lead. Arthur is too flimsy to be a compelling child character. Merlin and Archimedes are really the only fascinating characters. It's also missing any great songs. The best part of the movie is the transformational battle between Merlin and Mim.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Enjoyable but certainly not among the top tier of the Disney animated films.
"The Sword in the Stone" is a film that most children will enjoy. However, if you were to ask 100 random kids what their favorite Disney cartoons were, I would probably have a heart attack if even a single kid said "The Sword in the Stone". It's enjoyable enough to watch--but also lacks anything endearing that would make it truly memorable. While there's really nothing to hate about the film, there really isn't a lot that stands out either. The animation is 1960s style Disney-- which means a rougher style due to cost-cutting measures. Instead of huge armies of animators, many were fired and the use of Xerox machine was introduced. It saved money but also gave the films a slightly rougher look. The music is also enjoyable but nothing in it is memorable. And as for the story, it's nice...and nice is a term you don't use with a film that is a classic. Overall, worth seeing but nothing more.
9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stone cold
Pleasant Disney animation, without being a classic. It has its moments, particularly the magic-fight between Merlin and Mim, but is light on characterisation and especially good songs. The soundtrack tunes are very simplistic both melodically and especially lyrically and resolutely refuse to stay in your brain.
The narrative itself is unusual, introducing the sword in the stone legend immediately and then dispensing with it until the last five minutes or so, concentrating its energies instead on young Arthur (read Wort) and his upbringing by the kindly Merlin and his obstinate talking owl Archimedes.
I kept seeing recollections of past Disney (and other) cartoon forebears, everything from, naturally enough the Sorcerer's Apprentice from "Fantasia" and "Cinderella" while the chasing wolf early on is a blatant lift of Wile E Coyote in the "Road Runner" shorts. The old Disney trick of an experienced elder mentoring a young innocent had of course been done before in "Pinocchio" and "The Jungle Book" although I could also see some ideas which were adapted in future projects, the animated crockery anticipates "Beauty and the Beast" for instance.
Disney never did return to the Arthurian Legnd in future animations as was hinted might happen here which is a pity but for me there's far too much diversion from the legend itself so that I was willing young Arthur to hurry up and give the sword the required pull long before the ending, which when it does arrive seems far too rushed in any case.
No, not the best Disney by a long way and certainly not in the vanguard of the studio's work.
12 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
The Dark Ages via Disney; bursts of color, lots of talk, middling interest...
In medieval times, Merlin the Magician tutors a 12-year-old boy through educational magic; the lad, nicknamed Wart, is the future King of England, King Arthur, though what he learns from being temporarily transformed into a fish, a squirrel, et al. isn't made clear. Animated adventures from Walt Disney is heavy on both the slapstick and the talk--the former a handicap because of a lack of visual wit, the latter a detriment because the characters aren't very interesting. The picture has nice color, and a funny supporting performance from Junius Matthews as Archimedes the owl, but the main set-piece (a showdown of magic between Merlin and his nemesis, Madam Mim) is just a flurry of activity, magic without boundaries for easy laughers. The intermittent songs, by Richard M. and Robert B. Sherman, are weak (and unsingable) and the character of Wart, hindered by poor vocal work, fails to emerge. ** from ****
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
King Wart
Disney films are almost always great, especially the animated classics. Sadly, The Sword in the Stone is one that doesn't really hold up whatsoever. With an overabundance of goofy humor, no antagonist, little plot movement, and an ending that comes out of nowhere, The Sword in the Stone is a disappointing take on Arthurian Legend. At this point, pretty much everyone knows the basic story of King Arthur, so I guess the film ignoring most of what makes the legend popular is a bold move, but it isn't one that the film benefits from. I understand that this film deals with a young Arthur, or better known as Wart, but I'm not a fan of watching an 80-minute adventure that has little to do with anything involving King Arthur. The worst part is, the title only applies to the last 10 minutes, with the rest of the movie failing to set-up any potential payoff the ending could have. If this film wasn't titled The Sword in the Stone and didn't share some of the names of famous people, I think I could have enjoyed it a little more. Merlin and Wart go through several entertaining adventures involving many different animals and obstacles that I'm sure would be fun if it weren't supposed to live up to the legend of King Arthur. With that said, there is basically no plot at all. Merlin comes across a scrawny and clumsy boy named Wart and he just assumes that he is destined for greatness, but there's never any real movement on that besides a few training sessions. Training sessions for what you ask? It's never made clear. As I said before, if it weren't for the title this could be viewed as a halfway decent animated adventure, but the film hardly does anything to live up to the name.
4.7/10
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A legendary story. A classic in animation.
Warning: Spoilers
''The Sword in the Stone'''is one of the classics from Disney that I watched when I was a kid and probably the first movie I saw about the Arthur's and Merlin's stories. Wart is a young boy who wants to be a knight's squire. During a hunting trip,Wart meets Merlin, a great and powerful wizard who sees in the boy the chance to give a great education. Wart learns many of the truths of life with Merlin when he become different types of animals. The problem is when Wart makes contact with the evil witch Madam Mim, who will fight against Merlin in a witch/sorceress battle.
Ps:I think it is pretty obvious to say that Wart will pulls the famous sword in the stone out of it, and will become the future King of England, thanks to his good,loyal and brave heart.
9 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Lowbrow fun
This isn't usually counted as being one of the top-ranking Disney films, but I insist on not being snobbish in this list, and remembering the films that brought me joy as a kid. Wart gets to be a squirrel, a bird and a fish during this film which plays fast and loose with Arthurian legend. Merlin is great, and his battle with Madam Mim the stuff of legend. It's not big, it's not clever, but it is fun!
15 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good, but the magic touch is missing
Warning: Spoilers
"The Sword in the Stone" is the Disney version of the Arthurian legend, adapted from the first of four books by T.H. White telling the life events of the young Arthur, before he became king. It is also the last feature-length animated film from the company of Uncle Walt to be released before he died. In addition, it is the first solo effort of Wolfgang Reitherman who would later direct other great animated movies, such as "The Jungle Book", "The Aristocats", "Robin Hood" and "The Rescuers".
The movie was released in theaters on Christmas day 1963, almost one month to the day after the assassination of John F. Kennedy. This dark moment in American history established a striking and timely parallel with the dark atmosphere prevailing in England as depicted in the animated film.
"The Sword in the Stone" begins by the death of a heir-less king. One night in London, an astral light comes down from the sky and a sword lodged in an anvil itself embed into stone mysteriously appears. On that sword (which will be later known as Excalibur) are inscribed these words: "Whoso pulleth out the sword of this stone and anvil is rightwise king born of England". With nobody being able to accomplish the impossible feat, England remains king-less and the period now known as the Dark Ages begin.
The movie then shifts to the great hero Arthur himself who is only a not-so-smart puny runt nicknamed Wart (Rickie Sorenson). Venturing into the forest, Wart literally falls on the house of the powerful and wise, but absent-minded wizard Merlin (Karl Swenson) who lives there as a hermit with his educated pet owl Archimedes (Junius Matthews).
Merlin, convinced that the young Wart is destined to a great future despite what his physical appearance could reveal, begins to learn him about great life lessons in his fashion by changing him into a fish, a squirrel and a bird.
In general, I'd say that the film is not bad, far from it, but it is also far from being excellent. The plot is generally short and somehow empty, but it also contains some rather useless over-long passages.
But there's absolutely no doubt that this picture has a lot of ambitions and it has things to show to its audience. In fact, "The Sword in the Stone" is one of the most instructive Disney movies for the kids, not only because of the number of lessons that can be learned, but also because of their clarity and their direct character, which make them easy to catch and understand.
But I would have liked to see these lessons more treated on-screen when Wart becomes king. Merlin predicts celebrity and a bright future to the young monarch, but the young boy has no idea how to govern a state. It's at that moment that the learned lessons should have emerged and Merlin should have mentioned them.
After all, Wart's adventures with his mentor brought out the three most important characteristics of a good king: wisdom, love and intelligence. So "The Sword in the Stone" is for kids what Machiavelli's book "The Prince" is for adults.
Unfortunately, even if it's instructive, "The Sword in the Stone" loses points when it comes to the capacity to wonder, astonish and entertain. The animation is often spoiled and the sets are visibly nothing more than static colored paper sheets on which animators make mobile characters streaming in and out. It's a colorful movie, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it is alive.
And yet, the dark atmosphere of the movie is also reflected in the presentation. Some people will say that it's OK since the pictures adequately re-create the era and the society at the time, but let's not forget that we're talking here about a children's movie. In such a case, the dark (and not much cared over) images become depressing, boring and not much enjoyable to watch.
There's also a cruel lack of lively songs, which looks pretty bad for an institution like Disney. The songs go so much unnoticed that it becomes almost impossible to remember their titles.
There are some great moments however. The teaching sessions were Wart becomes an animal, accompanied by either Merlin or Archimedes, are entertaining and they lead to exciting and dangerous moments, where there's no lack of thrills for nobody. The best moment remains the magical duel between Merlin and the witch Madame Mim (Martha Wentworth), where the two opponents ceaselessly change themselves into different animals and give a high-level spectacle of which we are the lucky spectators.
The three main characters are also unforgettable. Wart's psychological evolution is well tangible. We can see at the beginning that he is puny, clumsy and naive, but also full of potential. And as he learns, he finds the courage to confront his adoptive tutor Sir Ector (Sebastian Cabot) and even his powerful teacher Merlin.
The magician himself is presented as somebody who is wise, but also absent-minded, which renders him quite funny. Unfortunately, he often loses himself into his futuristic anticipations, which leads to pathetic anachronisms and uninteresting discussions.
Archimedes is also intelligent and resourceful, but he is also touchy, cynical and often very grumpy. It means that we have as many reasons to like him as we have to hate him. And unlike Merlin, Archimedes prefers to keep both feet on the present ground, rather than thinking about the future.
"The Sword in the Stone" is not one of the greatest movies of Disney's career, but it nevertheless remains an instructive and funny picture, the kind of work that only Walt and his partners can make.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not quite the book, but nice indeed..
This very nice Disney Classic was based on the children's novel by TH White. This was not yet that very well-known, heavy novel titled "the Once and Future King" that so many later movies were based upon, but the lighthearted earlier version. Many agreed that the later novel has disfigured the first, so that we may be thankful for the Disney version!
Though it does not quite follow the book (this is hardly possible, at times) it is a very good version as animated movies go. Not tedious, though of an age where children were meant to learn something from a movie...
A collectors item!
15 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Disney Classic
The Sword In The Stone is such a wonderful movie!!! A great cast along with a wonderful storyline!!! It has laughter throughout the entire movie, love, thrilling moments and a wonderful outcome for the film.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A lot of fun, but not among Disney's best
This is Disney's version of the legend of King Arthur and it represents an adaptation of T.H. White's children's story. Here, Arthur is a young boy who is unaware of his great destiny. He meets and befriends the great wizard Merlin who decides to give him a proper instruction and education in order to prepare him for his future.
The film has some great characters: Merlin the wizard and his intellectually trained owl Archimedes are particularly funny. The animation is very good, but this is Disney after all, so you would expect it to be like that. The film is definitely entertaining, but there are a few drawbacks as well. There are moments when it feels a little too similar to Disney's other animated features from that period. The film also incorporates a lot of plot elements from other Disney movies and the film is very predictable at times. In comparison to another Disney classic, "Sleeping Beauty", this film looks more like a secondary project.
"The Sword in the Stone" is nevertheless a good film and it is superior to many of Disney's modern efforts ("Hercules", "The Hunchback of Notre Dame" or "Pocahontas" to name a few). It is very entertaining and definitely worth watching.
My rating: 7/10
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Not much plot but great for little kids.
This is one of my all time favorite Disney films. The lyrics of the songs are clever and memorable. Who can forget "Hockety Pockety Wockey Wack?"
The characters are also very entertaining. The idea of Merlin as a clutz is unique to this version of the story. Archimedes also offers several laughs.
Though there isn't much of a plot, the development of character makes this film very entertaining.
My four year old sister loved the film. She has already watched it at least a dozen times, and I only checked it out from the library three days ago. Modern Disney bores her. I've found that young children can't sit through "Beauty and the Beast" or "Mulan." This older style of Disney catches attention and entertains.
22 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Disney film not to be missed!
Warning: Spoilers
I cannot believe I never wrote a comment on The Sword in the Stone, my friends always joke how I'm the ultimate Mickey Mouse since I'm such a fan and I own every Disney movie on DVD. I wanted to watch one of my movies last night and I picked The Sword in the Stone and rediscovered how much I loved this movie when I was a kid and still love it today. I went on IMDb to see if I gave the appropriate rating, but I was surprised to see that I never did write about it, but I guess better late then never. Sword in the Stone is just a classic treasure that no family should be without but also the film lovers. A wonderful classic story told Disney style and filled with great songs and beautiful animation, how could anyone not fall in love with The Sword in the Stone.
The "Sword in the Stone" appears in London, with an inscription proclaiming that "Who so Pulleth Out This Sword of this Stone and Anvil, is Rightwise King Born of England." None succeed in removing the sword, which is soon forgotten, leaving England in a Dark Age. Some years later, Arthur aka "Wart", a 12-year-old orphan training to be a squire. While accompanying his older foster brother Kay on a hunting trip. He falls into Merlin's cottage, Merlin declares himself Wart's tutor and the two return to Wart's home, a castle run by Sir Ector, Arthur's foster father. There Merlin stays with Arthur to teach him the ways of the world and the magic as well as the intelligence and strength he will need for his true destiny.
I think my favorite moment of this film is definitely the battle between Merlin and Mim, since this is one of the rare Disney movies that doesn't have a definitive villain, but I think Mim was a close as you could get. Their battle was epic and absolutely amazing to watch, plus I love the classic sound effects with good old slap stick humor. Also I loved the story when Merlin turned Arthur and himself into squirrels and they were attacked by the lady squirrels was just too cute for words. I know the animation isn't up to par with today's standards, but this is the exact animation that I loved growing up with because the animators seemed to have a love for the film they were making.
The Sword in the Stone is a classic Disney film that should never be missed and I can't wait to show my children one day. Disney always had a way of taking classic stories that may not interest a small child and puts action, adventure, romance and wonderful animation into it and made it come to life. I can't believe I hadn't watched this movie since I was a kid, because no film lover should be without this treasure, it's just so excellent and magical, takes you back to a simpler time where we were destined for greatness and the world was at our fingertips.
10/10
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Funny and worth watching
I'm really not much of a Disney fan, and a lot of their films I find are sentimental rubbish, to put it bluntly. This, however, is different. I remember watching this when I was little and finding it hilarious. I hadn't watched it for years until recently when my younger siblings borrowed some videos from a friend. I still find it funny. The animation's nothing amazing, it's done more or less in the style of 101 Dalmations, and the storyline is basic King Arthur stuff (but I do like King Arthur stories anyway). It's the humour that really makes it memorable and charming. The characters have personality, there are no bimbo princesses or princes, and I find myself warming greatly to Merlin and Arthur and even grumpy Archimedes. Well worth watching.
20 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Disney is almost unrecognisable
Walt Disney the film-maker didn't fritter away the 1960s entirely - not with `One Hundred and One Dalmatians' and `Mary Poppins' - but he was no more than a shadow of the artist he had been in the 1930s and early 1940s. More than any other animated film he made this one fails to live up to his standards. He made nothing so nothingy. `Peter Pan' had been bland, but not THIS bland. `Alice in Wonderland' had been bad, but its badness was the badness of excess - in any event, it looked good and had some touches that make it worth watching. Apart from some accomplished animation there's no evidence that `The Sword in the Stone' even came from the same studio.
Writer Bill Peet's approach is disastrous - although I admit it feels incongruous to use such strong language for a film so uniformly unmemorable. The Arthurian legend, however you slice it, is a fantasy. This treatment of the fantasy offers no magic, no buzz, no confection, no charm. Peet is studiously detached from his material. Why he was detached, I have no idea. He doesn't distance himself from Arthuriana in order to do anything WITH it, in the way Monty Python did. Here we have a film that has sold its soul - or at least its spirit - and gotten nothing in return.
The songs might as well not be there, not that they make enough of an impression to do any harm, the story goes all over the place without going anywhere, the art directors had no very strong ideas - how many ways can I say it? Not that it would even be worth saying if the film hadn't had Disney's stable of animators working on it, turning out their usual good work and struggling to make an impression. They come close to doing so in the magical duel at the end. But even here, the dogged presentation, the way everything is telegraphed in advance, undercuts their efforts.
No-one has explained to my satisfaction what happened to the old (or rather the young) Walt Disney. So - what happened to him?
12 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Young King Arthur
Walt Disney produced this animated version of the legend of King Arthur and the wizard Merlin, who in this adaptation teaches a young Arthur(nicknamed Wart!) the ways of the world, and how to read, etc. He is helped by Archimedes the wise old owl, though Arthur's bumbling and idiotic relatives are a hindrance, as is evil Madam Mim, a witch who wants to battle Merlin out of professional jealousy and overall malice. At one point, Arthur finds himself transformed into a squirrel, and must fend off the affections of a lady squirrel(a most sad interlude in the film, and also its highlight). Misfired film is a real disappointment; it looks inexplicably cheap, and the story is dumbed-down and charmless, not to mention tedious. Watch "Excalibur" instead!
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A triumph of fun and intelligence over animation
just like brain over brawn, Merlin's eternal motto.
The initial reactions to "The Sword in the Stone" left me astonished. How could such a merry and original piece of animation get such negative criticism? From what I've read, nothing was spared: the animation didn't match the quality of previous Disney's works, the episodic structure lead to a conclusion disappointing because of the lack of a memorable plot line or a clearly defined antagonist … in this list of flaws, where I only concede the issue with Wart's voice, nothing seemed enjoyable enough to redeem the film: not Merlin's eccentric personality, not the humor made of unusual anachronistic references, not even the scene- stealing exuberance of Madame Mim.
Well, since reviewing is about giving opinions, I'll give you mine: "The Sword in the Stone" was victim of an unfair bias constantly leaning on Disney's 'Golden Age' standards, while for one thing, it was a respectable attempt to take some distance from the usual formulas (and I'm pretty sure viewers enjoyed the new storytelling format, since the film ended-up being one of the highest grossing of 1963). And now that these fifty years of existence did justice to "Sword in the Stone", now that there are enough Disney animated features to make a clear distinction between the indisputable classics, the underrated gems, and the forgettable ones, I think we can all agree that "The Sword in the Stone" is in the same league than "The Jungle Book" or "Robin Hood", all contained in that entertaining parenthesis of the 60's-70's.
And it's precisely the sketchy animation so typical of that period that elevates "The Sword in the Stone" to more interesting level of appreciation, more focused on the story, as the counterpart of such ambitious projects like "Sleeping Beauty", a film of dazzling imagery but certainly poorer story-wise. "The Sword in the Stone" is an educational journey guided by Merlin the wizard, whose long beard, blue pointed hat and long robe belong to the best of Disney iconography. His disciple is Wart, a twelve-year old boy, whose destiny is to become the future legendary King Arthur. The mentorship goes through different stages, using magic as an accessory but never as the crucial tool, in order to make Wart learn from practice, the values of the driving forces of our universe: physics, gravity or survival, all the stuff that makes 'things go round' and the greatest lesson of all being that brains always triumph on brawn.
This 'brains over brawn' dichotomy is the pattern that forged human civilization and Merlin's divinatory power allowed him to check the validity of his point, what Wart would only see through experience. The film is made of many vignettes during which Arthur is turned into an animal. As a fish, he's victim of a bullying bull-frog before confronting a pike, as a squirrel, a female gets infatuated with him, turning the lesson on gravity into one about a much greater force. The third lesson involves Arthur as a sparrow learning to fly with Merlin's owl Archimedes, but his abrupt encounter with the witch Madame Mim, Merlin's archenemy, leads to one of Disney's greatest moments: the wizardry duel. The sequence is a triumph of imagination and animation combined, having both characters turning into various animals while conserving their defining traits is a delight to the eyes, and it concludes perfectly with Mim finally "catching" Merlin' but not the way she intended.
Again, Merlin always proves his point.
The secret of "The Sword in the Stone" lies essentially on its relative absence of a plot, and the episodic structure, which constitutes the basis of Merlin's mentorship. Each sequence is not only full of educational and philosophical value but stands alone as a great moment of animation. The fish part involves Arthur's first confrontation with a giant predator and the first opportunity to use his brains by turning his smaller size to his advantage. In the process, it also unveils an heroic facet in Archimedes' grouchy personality. The squirrel part, after a series of laughs driven by Merlin's misadventure with a fat beaver-like creature, finally illustrates Disney's formula that for every laugh, there should be a tear. And even if it's not 'Bambi' or 'Lion King', there's something extremely poignant and heart-breaking in the squirrel part's conclusion, even more because it's unexpected.
But there are laughs in the film, and quite a lot, "The Sword in the Stone" is full of anachronisms, of priceless interactions between Merlin and Archimedes, who make a great pair of "Grumpy Old Men", and some hilarious scenes involving a wolf that have irresistible Warner Bros cartoon vibes. And the few songs are so catchy we end up inevitably humming them while enjoying the animation.Who can resist to the sight of Merlin's furniture lined-up with a hot-tempered sugar pot on the lead, and being reduced over and over again to fit in a ridiculously small bag, or to the dishes washing by themselves motivated by all these "Hockity-Pockity" or "Higites-Figitus", which sound like improvement on "Cinderella"'s 'Bobbidi-Bibbidi"?
The film isn't flawless, the irony is that the more you like it, the more you watch it and discover some bits of repetitive or lazy animations. But "The Sword in the Stone" works thanks to its independence from a plot line's tyranny. Granted the film doesn't feature all the Disney archetypes, Mim is the main antagonist but not the larger-than-life villain with a heart- pounding demise. Even Arthur's foster father Ector has heart and his son Kay is more of a dim-witted comic relief. No abundance of songs, no memorable climax either except from the wizardry duel and the magical sword moment, but despite all these missing elements, "The Sword in the Stone", through its difference, marks itself among the most memorable work from Disney studios with an undeniable educational, intellectual and philosophical value.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Great one!
I thought that the characters were really funny and all had great personalities. The animation in My opinion was crisp, clean, and really clear. Not to mention beautiful! Most of the characters in this show are hilarious Looney Tunes characters that we all love. in My opinion these characters are the funnies and talented ever seen. In fact, The things that goes on in this series' cartoons are in My opinion nuts which that is what makes them hilarious! There are so many to like and laugh at and the silly things they do! If you like the original Looney Tunes and animated films then I strongly recommend that you watch this movie today!
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Classic Disney
Tired of living in a Medieval mess... Merlin uses all his magic powers to change a scrawny little boy into a legendary hero!
When you think of strong Disney films, this may not immediately come to mind, but it should. While people tend to either think of the classics (Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Bambi) or the early 90s revival (Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin), this is every bit as good with an entertaining story and lots of fun, with good animation, too.
The most memorable part is with Madam Mim, and it is not surprising that Disney has used her in other cartoons, and even put her in their "Kingdom Hearts" video game. She is a great villain, especially given that she is most kooky than evil.
The moral of the story is somewhat obscure. Early on, we are lead to believe that the importance of education would play a big role in Arthur's success. Merlin makes education out to be the most important thing. But as the film progresses, we see more time is spent turning into different animals (fish, bird, squirrel) than actually learning.
Apparently this is one of the few Disney films of its era without a sequel or platinum DVD. Why? If there is someway to put together a handful of special features, this ought to be seen by more people and respected as a historic treasure.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Disney's take on the life of Arthur before he became king
This Disney film tells the tale of Arthur, a somewhat weedy boy usually referred to as Wart. He is training to become squire to his foster brother when he causes an arrow to be lost; he enters a forest to retrieve it and comes across Merlin the wizard. Merlin determines to educate the lad so returns with him to the castle. As part of his education he transforms him into various animals; a fish, a squirrel and a small bird. Each of these brings different challenges... a menacing pike; an amorous girl squirrel; and a hawk... not to mention the Mad Madam Mim; a witch with powers that rival Merlin's. Finally he accompanies his brother to London where there is to be a contest to find England's new king.
This is an enjoyable animation from Walt Disney; the story may be fairly weak but there are plenty of fun episodes which should appeal to the young and young at heart alike. Apart from a brief mention of the sword in the stone at the start it is just about forgotten about till the film's closing minutes. Instead most of the film is taken up by the animal antics... these are cute and provide both child friendly thrills and laughs. Wart and Merlin, along with Archimedes, Merlin's talking pet owl make good central characters and Mad Madam Mim was a great laugh even though she is only in for a scene or two. As one would expect the animation is great and impressively detailed. Overall this might not be among the very best of Disney's animated films but it is still a lot of fun and well worth watching.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
barrewasheigandis.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0057546/reviews
0 Response to "Whats Funny in Sword in the Stone"
Postar um comentário