Before I start the review, I want to talk about why I chose to watch the sequel more than the original film when I was a kid. I'm going to admit, when it came to watching Don Bluth films when I was a kid, I was always introduced to the sequels first and in all honesty, they were the ones I watched the most since I already had them in my possession. So instead of growing up with "All Dogs Go To Heaven" or "The Land Before Time". I would usually watch "The Land Before Time 2" and "All Dogs Go To Heaven 2". In fact, if you want to know the sad truth, I never actually watched the original films either. I have never seen the first "Land Before Time" film, and I never got to watch "All Dogs Go To Heaven" from beginning to end. I never even saw "The Secret Of NIMH" for that matter either, and NO, thankfully I did not grow up watching its crappy sequel as a substitute. So as you have already guessed, I watched "Fievel Goes West" before I saw the first film. Years later, my Dad bought me a copy of the first film and while I enjoyed it ok, I wasn't as invested with it as I was with the second film when I was a kid. Could it be because I spent most of my early childhood with the sequel, yes, but I think it strongly had to do more with the fact of the different style that both of these films have. While the sequel was humorous, upbeat and cute as well as being set in "The Wild West"; the first film was dark and depressing that had humor that wasn't usually playing for big laughs along with having a historical background that adults would catch on more than kids. The question I want to ask you is, if you were a kid say around 4 or 5 who was given the choice to watch two film's that are the exact opposite from each other that you've never seen or heard of, which would you choose that you would find yourself being entertained by the most? Would you choose an upbeat comedy set in the West, or a dark and gloomy story set during a time of Immigration? While everybody is different, I'm pretty certain that most of you who are reading this question (With a mind set to a child's perspective) are probably thinking of going with the comical Western, and that was my case when it came to watching both films as a child. The sequel surprisingly didn't bomb as you would expect, it actually did pretty well.
It did so well that the sequel alone got its own TV show set in the West called...
and got its own attraction at Universal Studios Florida called "Fievel's Playland" which was a playground for kids modeled after the sequel.
Even Roger Ebert gave the sequel a higher rating than the first film. However, now that I'm an adult, I wonder how well the sequel holds up, and if the sequel itself is a fitting continuation that's better than the first film; just as good; or a mediocre sequel that just became a hit at the Box Office, that Roger Ebert just happened to like better? Well lets not waste anymore time, ON WITH THE REVIEW!
A few years has passed after the events of the first film and the Mousekewitz are beginning to think that America was not as life changing as they hoped it would be. The family along with the mice living on the streets of New York City decide to head out West for a new life style. However a cat named Cat R.Waul plans to trick the mice by letting their guard down by being nice to them, so he can kill them all with a giant mousetrap when they least expect it. Fievel catches on to the plan, but no one believes him, so it is up to him, his friend Tiger, and the down and out sheriff Wylie Burp the Dog to foil the cats' plan.
Fievel (Voiced again by Phillip Glasser) is just as cute, fun, and likable as he was in the first film, and for the some of you who found him annoying in the first film (Though I personally didn't find him annoying) he's a lot less irritating here, mainly because he grew up a bit. With that said though, after all the chaos and trouble that he went through in the first film that helps him grow up and learn from his mistakes, he's back to making the same exact mistakes as he did before. He foolishly tries to fight against the Cats single handed; he flat out tells the villain that he knows his evil plans and that he's going to stop him, while being in the villain clutches; and he gets separated from his family again by doing basically the same exact thing that he did before. Did this character ever learn anything from his dangerous and depressing journey in the first film?! I know the first two mistakes that I just mentioned are him trying to be like his hero, which is part of the characters journey towards growing up, but here are my problems with that concept. The subplot of Fievel trying to be like his favorite hero is not only down played to the point where it becomes forgettable, but it seems pointless since the character is already considered to be a hero for coming up with the idea to build a mechanical scary as hell monster to get rid of the cats in the first film. Plus, after all the abuse and near death situations that he's been through in the first film because of his idiotic mistakes, what makes him think that standing up to a giant cat with nothing but his little fists is going to work now? It's pretty insulting that Fievel in this film has pretty much learned nothing from his journey in the first film. I know him sneaking away from his parents leads to him finding out of the cats' plan which is a major plot point in the film, but that was just something he happened to stumble upon as opposed to hearing a strange noise, or suspecting something suspicious. And he still gets himself into danger after being detected by the cats, which gets himself thrown off the train, so yeah, he's still pretty much making the same idiotic mistakes as he did before. There's not even that much of a life changing journey for Fievel like in the first film, all he does is try to tell the mice about the cats' plan that nobody listens to him except for Wylie and Tiger. His journey wasn't even as dangerous as his journey in the first film. As for the concept of Fievel trying to find his family AGAIN, it only lasts for at least 10 minutes and its not only a short half-assed rehash of Fievel's adventure in the first film, but this short journey even forcefully rehashes some of the elements that Fievel and his family went through in the first movie. When the film was over I didn't feel like that Fievel changed at all. He's still the same kid as when we first saw him in the beginning of the film who will probably be making the same foolish mistakes as he did before.
The funny thing about the film is I always felt like the film was more about Tiger, than it was about Fievel since he pretty much has a story arc. First of all, I just want to say that I'm glad that the film gave Tiger more screen time and more of a purpose in the story, than his presence in the first film. I actually really enjoyed seeing Tiger go from a scaredy cat that always runs away from his problems, to a tough heroic badass. The voice actor Dom DeLuise is also given more to work with than what he was given in the first film, and his comical voice acting, with the slapstick and situations that his character goes through throughout the film is seriously some of the funniest stuff that I've ever seen in an animated movie. However, I will admit, the idea of Tiger completely changing his image to act like a dog just didn't feel right to me. It's humorous, and can at times be cool, but at the same time, I just didn't feel like having him act like a completely different species felt like the necessary way for him to change his image, since there are a gang of cats who are just as tough as dogs.
The biggest offense when it came to him changing his image is mainly because he doesn't do it to save the mice, actually he doesn't seem to care (Some friend Tiger is), he only does it for his girlfriend (Voiced by Amy Irving)! Yeah, Tiger has a girlfriend! In the first film we never met her or got so much as a hint that Tiger was seeing someone, and right during Tiger's first scene in the movie, she suddenly appears. I mean granted a good amount of time did go by between these two films so it would be likely that Tiger would have met some beautiful feline, and that would be fine if she was at least likable and interesting, but the problem is she's really not that interesting or that likable for that matter either. Ok she has a cute little relationship with Fievel's sister Tanya by helping her boost up her courage to become a singer, and she does care about the mice. With that said though, she still comes off as pretty shallow, as well as being a bit cold. When we first meet her, already she's acting full of herself while coldly insulting Tiger and leaving him, telling him that she wishes he was more like a dog. Oh yeah, I already like her and feel the connection between her and Tiger after that introduction. Seriously, I don't see the connection between her and Tiger at all, hell, we hardly know anything about their relationship, so why should we care if they get together or not? Alright, there's a moment where she misses Tiger as she looks at a picture of him, but I'm sorry, I didn't find it effective at all, it just felt forced in to give her a moment that she quickly brushes off like its nothing. Again, I do like her relationship with Tanya, but at the same time, she's still a jerk because before they become friends, she actually insults her a bit. The point I'm making is Tiger doesn't change his image to help the mice, he's changing his image to not only impress a girl but for a girl that pretty much treats him like crap because he's not the cat that she wants, despite that Tiger has been very good to her! If her character was just in the film to help Tanya with her career, and perhaps become Tiger's love interest in the end for his heroic deeds and innocent personality which would be a proper start for their relationship I'd actually be fine with it. But for what we're given we get a love interest that we can care less about, while making Tiger's journey towards manning up feel just as bad as the solutions between a couple in films like "Grease" and "The Quiet Man".
As for the rest of the film's supporting characters (Despite being only a few left), they're actually really likable. Fievel's family are still as lovable as they are and the first film (Oh and the baby that disappeared in the film's second half is back!); and Tanya's subplot of becoming a singer, while nothing special, it's still pretty cute as she has more of a personality when compared her apperance in the previous film. Finally you have the washed up Sheriff Wylie Burp. As cliched as the character is and his story arc of getting back on his feet was nothing interesting or exciting, nor does he do anything during the climax when he's back to his old self, the actor voicing him is what made the character so likable, and that actor voicing was the great James Stewart in his final acting role in film. He puts so much heart, emotion, and even a bit of humor towards voicing this cliche character with an unexciting story arc, that his performance is what makes this character stand out. His best moment in the film is the final scene as he and Fievel watch the sunset together as he gives Fievel a short speech about finding the hero within yourself, and James Stewart's performance in that scene along with the music and animation chokes me up every time I see that ending, making it just as emotionally heartwarming as the ending to the first film; and the fact that this was James Stewart's last scene in his film career, makes this conclusion even more touching. Now for those of you who are thinking where Tony and Bridget are, they just show up as cameos in at least two scenes as a happily married couple with a child. While a cool cameo, I find it really disappointing that two of the characters that we spent a lot of time with in the first film are only in this film so briefly. They don't even interact with Fievel or say so much as a single word!
My favorite performance and character in the movie goes to the villain voiced by John Cleese. As much as I enjoyed the villain Warren T. Rat in the first film, Cat R.Waul sticks out to me the most when comparing the two. Could it be because I watched this film more than I watched the first film, probably, but even as an adult, I still find myself remembering this villain the most. First of all, he's voiced by John Cleese who's a great comical actor that I enjoy watching, as well as listening to his awesome British voice. He's not as intimidating and scary as Warren T. Rat, but his classy, elegant, and sophisticated personality is what makes the character so fun and villainous. His henchman are nowhere near as horrifyingly scary as Warren T. Rat's cat gang in the first film, but they're still fun and cool characters with their designs and personality. Plus, he has a talking wisecracking Spider voiced by the humorous Jon Lovitz who is not only funnier than Warren T. Rat's cockroach accountant (Who I still get a kick out of by the way), but he actually does plenty of things to help out the villain. However, I think the main reason why I prefer Cat R. Waul over Warren T. Rat is because of his plan. They both are con-men who trick the mice, but Warren T. Rat only tricked the mice to give him money for protection, while Cat R.Waul tricks the mice to actually eat them, while acting as their friend, than a business partner who doesn't act as suspicious as Warren T. Rat, which is both clever and twisted. However, I do find it really odd (Even as a kid) that none of the mice realized that Cat R.Waul and his gang were the same exact cats that attacked them in New York City and destroyed their homes! Even a mouse auditioning to be a performer for the cats in the Saloon some how doesn't even hear the cats shout about eating mice, despite appearing a second after the chant!
As I watched this movie more than the first film, I will admit, the songs in the first film are way more memorable compared to the songs in this film. The songs in this film aren't bad, but I certainly don't find myself singing these songs as often as the songs in the original. The mice's travel song "Way Out West" is pretty much like the song "There Are Not Cats In America". While the song does sound big with that Western adventure feel from the music and energy from the chorus, aside from the mice choir singing the lyrics "Way out west", I pretty much find myself drawing a blank. With the choir to "There Are No Cats In America" I not only remember those short simple lyrics, but also enjoyed how big and epic the choir sounded along with the visuals during that number. Most of the other songs in the film are sung by Tanya and with the exception of her really short and interrupted rendition of "Somewhere Out There", the two songs that she sings are good and her voice is wonderful (Did I mention that the girl who voices Tanya and sings the song is the same voice actress who voice Blossom on "The Powerpuff Girls"). However, I will admit, out of the two songs, I found one song catchy, while I found the other song not all that memorable. The song I found catchy is "The Girl I Left Behind" that Tanya sings for the cats, and the energy, the singing, the choir, and the music is so catchy and up-beat that I still find myself humming it. The song that I found forgettable was the song "Dream Of Dreams" which is supposed to be the "Somewhere Out There" of the film (Which is by the way based on a theme in the original film that can be heard during Bridget’s Speech, and at the end of the “Orphan Alley” scene). It's not at all boring, or something that I would say will be one of those songs that will easily leave your brain, since it is enchanting and beautiful, it's just not as memorable as the song that it’s trying to be like. It's also the song I remember the least in the film, so even without comparing it to "Somewhere Out There" it’s still not that powerful. It's far from bad, but it's not as memorable compared to the other songs in the film. Surprisingly, the song that I found catchy as a kid and even now as an adult is the "Rawhide" theme as Fievel is rolling on a tumbleweed by singing animals lip syncing to the original recording of The Blues Brothers cover of that song (And to think that this film is a sequel to the first film). While not at all an original song or recording made for the movie, that's the song I remember the most from the film, and when a musical film's catchiest song is not something written nor recorded specifically for the film that's never a good sign. But again, the songs are nowhere near bad; they're just not as memorable as the songs from the first film.
The film's music is composed once again by James Horner and the minute the opening credits started as I heard the theme to "An American Tail" it was just as emotionally haunting as the theme in the first movie, but once I saw the title appear, the music quickly changes into Western music and the Western music in this film is great, and I seriously mean that too! For a cartoony sequel that's not well written, the music actually sounds like an epic Western. The animation for the film's Western look is also epic looking too. Looking at the Western desert landscapes; from seeing the dusty streets of the old Western town; to those cool animated shots of the sun shining and setting; to the tough and yet comical close-ups, it’s no wonder why the writers wanted to set this film up in the West. It's incredible to look at along with James Horner's Western score. The film's comedy is also really hilarious as well. I still find myself dying of laughter with the many comical situations that Tiger goes through; I always get a kick out of the humorous personality and dialogue that the voice actors deliver; the quick humorous expressions from the characters' I still find to be priceless; and the timing and slapstick along with the sound effects are still die-hard hilarious.
Sigh, though I will be honest, while still laughing at the majority of the humorous things that the film shows, a big part of me inside feels insulted by the fact that this film is a sequel to a lighthearted but dark and serious film, as this film is all comical and over the top that hardly ever takes itself seriously. There are maybe one or two dark moments in the film, but they quickly become comical after a minute or two. The majority of the film is really nothing but overly cartoony elements that you'd see on Saturday Morning Cartoons or classic short cartoons only done with a bigger budget. I mean you have a skeleton controlled by Mouse Indians dancing to "Puttin On The Ritz"; a fish with a Dog's face; Tiger inflating and deep flatting himself like a balloon; slapstick that would actually kill the characters in the first film as well as not caring about the continuity during the slapstick; having the characters quickly going to a spot from a far away distance in only a second or two (Which that element is done as a big heroic deed in the film's conclusion) as well as at times making a sudden random and out of nowhere appearance; and of course, the critters singing the Blues Brothers cover of "Rawhide". If that's not out of place enough for you, the film even breaks its own rule with the separation between the animals and the humans. Instead of humans just being freaked out by the presence of a mouse (Despite not being also shocked that the mouse is wearing clothes); they now throw stuff at Tanya because of her singing voice, and Tiger actually tries to ask a human a question. Ok, I'll buy the fact that humans aren't shocked by the fact that the mice are wearing clothes since that's part of the fictional element of the first film; but seeing humans thinking a mouse singing is ordinary, and the fact that Tiger tries to talk to a human thinking he won't get into any trouble, is a stretch too far. Oh and did I mention that Fievel can turn the old hat that his Father gave him that has been passed down from generations, into a Cowboy hat by turning it inside out! Ok, maybe that's his imagination, but I must say the opening scene with Fievel imagining himself meeting Wylie Burp and taking down the Cat gang who he's never seen or met, nor does he recognize Wylie Burp at all when he finally meets him, is pretty scary that his imagination becomes real. For me though, the most uncomfortable humorous moment in the film that's disgusting, perverted, and awkward is when Cat.R Waul sees his owner who has gigantic boobs that calls him by his real name "Pussy Poo" as he tries to get out of her gigantic boobs, which looks like she's putting him in there, instead of hugging him. This is a kids film right?! The film's stereotypes are no longer played for satire like in the first film. Here, they're as cartoony as seeing racial stereotypes in an old cartoon, especially towards the Indian Mice. I know the stereotypes in the first film were a bit offensive too, but not only was there a clever satire behind them, but they at least had some dignity, compared to this film. So as you may have guessed, despite having the characters; the film's look, style, and feel is completely different from the first film, which is very distracting and pretty insulting as well. Even as a kid, after when I saw the first film, I felt pretty uncomfortable with how different that these films were from each other despite still watching this film more than I watched the first film.
While playing out more for kids than the first film, it sadly doesn't do to well as a sequel. The stuff that the film rehashes from the first film are lazy and poor; Fievel going back to who he was in the beginning of the first film, makes the first film feel like that Fievel's journey was completely pointless; and the over the top and cartoony style and feel is so different from the style and feel of the first film that it feels like the characters went into a completely different world, which is distracting and even at times insulting. If this was a stand-alone film instead of a sequel, all of those elements would be forgiven, but with that said, it still wouldn't have saved the lame and half-ass story and character development, especially with Tiger's story. But while being a really bad follow up to the first film that doesn't mean that the film doesn't have a few good things going for it. The characters (For the most part) are likable, despite the bad story arc's that they're given; the voice acting is good; the villain is awesome; the songs, while nowhere near as memorable as the songs in the first film are still really good; the animation is gorgeous; the music is powerful; and the humor despite being very, and I mean very out of place is still funny and entertaining. As close as it is to getting the same rating that I gave the first film since it does pretty much have the same amount of hits and misses as the first film, I'm going to have to give it the Worth Watching rating because since it's a sequel that's supposed to be a follow up to the first film, it really does fail miserably at being a continuation. However, I still say the film is worth checking out for being fun to watch while having a few great things going for it.
RATING 2/5
No comments:
Post a Comment