Disturbing Disney #19: Cinderella’s dress is destroyed (1950)

There’s no denying that Cinderella goes through some pretty awful things before her happily ever after. Her father dies; she’s treated like a servant in her own home; Lady Tremaine (her stepmother) seems determined to make sure that Cinderella gets nothing while Anastasia and Drizella (her daughters) get everything. Knowing all of this, it’s surprising when, after receiving the invitation to the royal ball, Lady Tremaine agrees that Cinderella can go, provided she has a suitable dress of course. Even as a child I knew that something horrible was coming, but it never stopped me from being shocked and upset at what happens to poor Cinderella.

Cinderella-disneyscreencaps.com-4593.jpg

Cinderella “Dress tearing scene” (1950)

As I’ve related earlier, while Cinderella is worked ragged getting her stepsisters ready for the ball, her mice and bird friends work together to brighten up a dress that belonged to Cinderella’s mother. This involves using a sash and necklace that Anastasia and Drizella threw away (but keep in mind Cinderella doesn’t know this). Finally, as the others are leaving for the ball, Cinderella races down the stairs to join them, much to their surprise.

Lady Tremaine is nothing but a woman of her word…but she can’t help pointing out a few of the details on the dress, such as the necklace (which you know she recognized as her daughter’s) saying “These beads, they make just the right touch. Don’t you think so Drizella?”

3695216_orig.jpg

These words serve as the trigger for the disturbing portion of this scene and I must say for a long time I wasn’t able to watch this part of the film at all. Having gone through a lot of bullying as a child and teenager, seeing Cinderella basically get attacked by her stepsisters brought back a lot of painful memories, as I’m sure it does for a lot of people watching this scene. But getting back to the scene…Drizella is halfway through an insult when she realizes the necklace belonged to her, prompting her to call Cinderella a thief and rip the necklace away. Of course Cinderella doesn’t understand why Drizella is upset, she had no idea the necklace belonged to her. And upon further inspection, Anastasia realizes the sash belonged to her so she rips it away and everything devolves into a frenzy, with the two sisters ripping Cinderella’s dress apart while Lady Tremaine just watches with a smug look on her face. It’s hard to tell what Drizella and Anastasia are saying, but one line has always jumped out at me: just before Lady Tremaine stops the torment, Drizella gets right in Cinderella’s face and yells “You ungrateful little-”

cinderella10.jpg

Ungrateful?? This is one of the most delusional lines I’ve ever heard. Cinderella waits on her stepsisters hand and foot and just because she wants to attend the ball in a homemade dress, that makes her ungrateful? Not to mention they’re only living in this beautiful mansion because Lady Tremaine married Cinderella’s father, I suspect the house belongs to Cinderella by right. This is just abuse, plain and simple.

What bugs me also is why Lady Tremaine lets them do this. She could have very easily just told Cinderella “No, you’re not going, I lied” and then left. No, she clearly wants Cinderella to suffer as well for no reason, which really puts her up there with the worst of the Disney villains.

In the end, of course, the dress, her mother’s dress, probably one of the few things of her mother Cinderella has left, is in ruins. Satisfied that her stepdaughter won’t be going anywhere, Lady Tremaine ushers her daughters out and smugly wishes Cinderella “good night.” Even though this directly leads into Cinderella meeting the Fairy Godmother and getting her beautiful gown, I can barely stand to watch this scene for the reasons previously mentioned. It puts you on an emotional roller coaster that is hard to get away from.

What do you think about the scene where Cinderella’s dress is torn apart by her stepsisters? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

Become a Patron of the blog at patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

See also:

Disturbing Disney #1: The Coachman in Pinocchio (1940)

Disturbing Disney #2: The truth of Pleasure Island in Pinocchio (1940)

Disturbing Disney #3: Escaping Monstro from Pinocchio (1940)

Disturbing Disney #4: Dumbo loses his mother (1941)

Disturbing Disney #5 The death of Bambi’s Mother

Disturbing Disney #6: Faline vs. the dogs (1942)

Disturbing Disney #7: Cruella wants to do WHAT??

Disturbing Disney #8: The Whale Who Wanted to Sing at the Met (from Make Mine Music, 1946)

Disturbing Disney #9: Dr. Facilier’s Fate (The Princess and the Frog, 2009)

Disturbing Disney #10: The rat in Lady and the Tramp (1955)

Disturbing Disney #11: Clayton’s Death in Tarzan (1999)

Disturbing Disney #12: The Bear from The Fox and the Hound (1981)

Disturbing Disney #13: “Smoking them out” in The Fox and the Hound (1981)

Disturbing Disney #14: The Salt Trap in The Jungle Book (1994)

Disturbing Disney #15: Night on Bald Mountain from Fantasia (1940)

Disturbing Disney #16: King Triton destroys Ariel’s grotto

Disturbing Disney #17: Ratigan becomes a monster in The Great Mouse Detective

Disturbing Disney #18: The Queen’s assignment for her Huntsman

Advertisements

Moana “How Far I’ll Go (reprise)” (2016)

maxresdefault.jpg

Moana “How Far I’ll Go (reprise)” (2016)

Given how vigilant Moana’s father is about no one leaving the island, I was curious to see how his daughter would manage to get away. The moment arrives, rather shockingly, when Grandmother Tala is revealed to be dying (a fan theory speculates that this is because she gave the Heart of Te Fiti to Moana that had hitherto been keeping her alive all these years). Moana is deeply upset, but Tala, knowing that this is her granddaughters only chance to get away, tells her to go and find Maui. This is absolutely heartbreaking: Moana doesn’t want to leave her grandmother without properly saying goodbye, but she also wants to set things right for the island. So she heads for the boats, which starts off the reprise of “How Far I’ll Go.”

There’s a line where the sky meets the sea and it calls me
But no one knows, how far it goes
All the time wondering where I need to be is behind me
I’m on my own, to worlds unknown

There’s a surprising moment when Moana is gathering supplies at her home: her mother Sia finds her and there’s a long stretch where they just stare at each other. And without saying a word Sia shows her support by throwing in some more supplies and giving them to Moana. She’s heartbroken but she also knows this is something her daughter has to do (I have a suspicion she’s known this for a while now).

Every turn I take, every trail I track
Is a choice I make, now I can’t turn back
From the great unknown where I go alone
Where I long to be

d05847c83c4db74a8726fcce3f443c7d.jpg

Having selected her boat and pushed it out into the lagoon, Moana looks back at the island and then comes my favorite part of this scene. All of the lights go out in the big hut and a huge manta ray spirit comes flying into the water. The manta is wonderfully animated, shining with bioluminescence in a design that matches the tattoo Tala had. Earlier, Tala had revealed a manta ray tattoo on her back, revealing that she would come back as one when she died. Moana sees this spirit and knows its her grandmother guiding her out to sea. This moment, I admit, always brings tears to my eyes because, despite being beautiful to see, it also means that her beloved grandmother is gone.

See her light up the night in the sea, she calls me
And yes I know that I can go
There’s a moon in the sky and the wind is behind me
Soon I’ll know how far I’ll go

With the help of Tala’s spirit, Moana is guided beyond the lagoon with far less fuss than I thought there might be. I admit, when I first watched this film in the theater, I half expected to hear her father pleading for Moana to come back, but nothing of the sort happened. On another random note, I’m really glad her father didn’t follow through on his threat of burning the boats. When he said “I should’ve burned those boats years ago” I had a strong flashback to King Triton just before he destroyed the grotto in The Little Mermaid and for a moment I believed we were going to get a repeat of that scenario.

I hope you enjoyed “How Far I’ll Go (reprise)” I hope I can come back and finish the rest of the songs from Moana sooner rather than later. Let me know what you thought of this song in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Moana “Where You Are” (2016)

Moana “How Far I’ll Go” (2016)

Disney Films & Soundtracks A-Z

Become a patron of the blog at: patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

My thoughts on: Richard III (1955)

Of all of Laurence Olivier’s Shakespeare films, my absolute favorite remains Richard III (1955), one of the best (if not entirely complete) film renditions of the story. The play, as the title indicates, follows the titular Richard, brother of Edward IV (Sir Cedric Hardwicke) as he rises in power to become Richard III, last king of the Plantagenet dynasty. The cast is full of talent, the principal players are as follows:

  • Richard III: Laurence Olivier
  • Edward IV: Sir Cedric Hardwicke
  • Clarence (brother of Edward and Richard): Sir John Gielgud
  • Duke of Buckingham: Sir Ralph Richardson
  • The Lady Anne (Richard’s wife): Claire Bloom
  • Henry, Earl of Richmond (Henry VII): Stanley Baker

MV5BMTkxNDcyMjg0N15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNDYzMTMwNw@@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,1460,1000_AL_

From start to finish, Olivier’s Richard dominates the story. Similar to Iago in Othello, the future king hides his true motives from all but a few (namely the Duke of Buckingham his confidante) and to most of the court appears to be brusque, awkward, but a gentleman regardless. Nothing could be further from the truth: Richard more than anything wants the crown of England, but his brothers Edward and George, the Duke of Clarence (not to mention Edward’s sons) stand in his way. To achieve this goal, Richard resorts to murder, threats and outright playacting to get what he wants.

Olivier’s acting is so versatile, it’s a delight to watch him at work. When he talks directly to the audience, as in the “Now is the winter of our discontent” monologue, he speaks as if he’s talking to a fellow conspirator. When he woos the Lady Anne, he lays the charm on so unbelievably thick that you almost believe he’s sincere…until Anne leaves and Richard reveals that this was all part of the plan. The only time Richard lets his ‘mask’ slip is when young Richard of York, his nephew, taunts him by saying that his uncle Richard should carry him on his humpbacked shoulder. This invokes one of the oldest storytelling tropes: no villain can stand to be mocked. Olivier created this moment from scratch, there’s no precedent for it in previous adaptations. In that moment, he turns and stares at young Richard with an absolute death glare, sending the young prince stumbling backward in fright. Oddly, no one else (except for maybe Buckingham) seems to catch this moment.

RICHARD III

Another scene I like comes late in the story when Richard (with Buckingham’s help) has finally convinced the people to have him proclaimed king. As the people leave to prepare for the coronation, Buckingham walks up to congratulate his friend, only to be stopped short as Richard thrusts his hand out, signalling that Buckingham should instead kneel before him. It’s an abrupt moment, one that clearly shows that things are not as they were between the two.

I said at the beginning that this adaptation was not entirely complete and that’s because a lot of material is cut out. This is one of Shakespeare’s longer works, a complete performance would last upward of four hours, so for a film naturally some parts had to be cut out. One of the biggest changes is the removal of Queen Margaret (the widow of Henry VI) from the story. This is huge because Margaret’s ‘curses’ play a crucial role in the story. Also, the roles of the Duchess of York (Richard’s mother) and Queen Elizabeth (Edward IV’s wife) are severely reduced as well (you can see more of their performances in The Hollow Crown: The Wars of the Roses).

If you like Shakespeare on film, you will love Richard III. A fully restored copy can be bought from the Criterion Collection (in fact this was the first Criterion film I ever owned) and is well worth the price. Let me know what you think of Richard III in the comments below and have a great day 🙂

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

Become a patron of the blog at: patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

My thoughts on: Othello (1965)

41AntNFkbVL._SY445_

When I was in high school, I had to read several of Shakespeare’s plays for class. We read Romeo and Juliet; Hamlet; Macbeth; Julius Caesar and my favorite was Othello. This is one of Shakespeare’s tragedies and follows the ill-fated story of the titular character, a Moorish general serving the Duke of Venice who elopes with the beautiful Desdemona. Iago, a soldier who is bitter that Othello did not name him as his lieutenant, conspires to bring about the general’s downfall.

othello

Of the Shakespeare works I’ve read, Othello is one of my favorites. Iago is a truly despicable villain, made more so by the fact that up until the final moments of the play, nobody realizes what he’s done and calls him “honest Iago.” The play has been adapted to film in English several times, but I think the best example is the 1965 film starring Laurence Olivier in the title role. The main cast is as follows:

  • Othello: Laurence Olivier
  • Desdemona: Maggie Smith (aka Professor McGonagall in Harry Potter)
  • Iago: Frank Finlay
  • Emilia (Iago’s wife): Joyce Redman
  • Michael Cassio, Othello’s lieutenant: Derek Jacobi (in his screen debut)
  • Robert Lang: Roderigo, a Venetian nobleman who wants to marry Desdemona even though her father already said no several times.

image-w1280.jpg

The first thing we must talk about in this version of the play is Olivier’s portrayal of the character. Controversially, remember this was the mid-1960s and the Civil Rights era was in full swing in the United States, Olivier plays the character in blackface from head to toe and also adopts a deep, booming voice. It seems shocking that an actor as well regarded as Laurence Olivier would do this, but in truth no offense was intended (though it would certainly not happen if the film were being made today). Actually, up until the 1990s, there was a long tradition (going back to the 1600s) of actors “blacking up” in order to play the Moorish general (this is because most interpreted “Moorish” to mean African and therefore dark skinned). This is not like some blackface that mocks Africans; Olivier plays it completely straight. Please don’t let this turn you off from watching this version of the play, Olivier’s performance is one for the ages (he earned an Oscar nomination for it).

In the story, after it’s revealed that Othello and Desdemona have eloped (to the shame and outrage of her father Brabantio), the Duke sends the general to Cyprus in order to deal with a Turkish fleet that is threatening the area. Desdemona accompanies him, as does Iago, Emilia and Michael Cassio, whom the aforementioned Iago is determined to ruin so that he might be lieutenant instead.

article-2412397-1BA8CB33000005DC-74_634x430

Manipulation is a big part of the story, particularly how Iago manipulates Othello to believe things that the audience knows are simply not true. For example, Iago begins by getting Cassio drunk and then has him purposefully provoked, knowing how the lieutenant will retaliate. He then spreads a lie that Cassio is like this often, and given the spectacle Cassio makes, Othello dismisses him from his service. But it gets worse: Iago then contrives to have his wife steal one of Desdemona’s handkerchiefs (one that her husband gave her) and ensures that it finds its way to Cassio’s hands. He ends up giving it to his mistress Bianca, but Iago tells Othello that it came straight from Desdemona’s hands, leading the general to believe that his faithful wife is sleeping with Cassio!

Iago is completely sure of himself for most of the story; he actually reminds me of Littlefinger in Game of Thrones. He manipulates everyone so well that no one realizes his connection to what has happened until the very end, when his wife puts two and two together and realizes Iago started everything. You will love Frank Finlay’s performance as Iago, he seems to be everywhere throughout the story (only Olivier has more screen time than he does).

2be7470868e4086cd76aaa26229db8a6.jpg

This being a tragedy, it is no surprise when I say that Othello, Desdemona and Emilia end up dead. Having been whipped into a jealous frenzy, Othello smothers his wife and later commits suicide when the truth has been revealed to him. Emilia on the other hand, is murdered by Iago when she blurts out the truth to several witnesses (Iago tried to have Cassio murdered, but he survived albeit with a bad leg injury). Othello’s last scene is mesmerizing: this is a man who knows he’s killed a woman who was nothing but faithful to him and the guilt is eating him alive. Olivier pours all of his ethos into this performance.

The film is shot with minimal sets which are expanded from the sets used for a 1964 stage version of the play staged by the National Theatre Company. This is the first English-language version of the play to be filmed in color and also, of all Olivier’s Shakespeare films, the one with the least music. Except for one scene where the soldiers sing some drinking songs and some instruments are played, there is no music at all (contrast this with Richard III (1955) which has a HUGE score).

To conclude, if you want to see a masterful rendition of Othello, please check out this film. I don’t think anyone has done the story more justice than Laurence Olivier. If you’ve seen Olivier’s Othello, what did you think about it? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

Become a patron of the blog at: patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

My thoughts on: Island of Lost Souls (1932)

photo_14585620_66470_31915620_ap

H.G. Wells 1896 novel The Island of Dr. Moreau has been adapted to film multiple times in the course of film history, but the first was a pre-Code film entitled Island of Lost Souls (1932). When I say “pre-Code” I mean it was a film released before the Motion Picture Production Code (better known as the “Hays Code”) took effect. The Code, which regulated film content in the decades before modern film ratings existed, was in place from 1934 to 1968 and made sure films didn’t contain such unsavory details as scantily clad women or other such content they deemed “inappropriate” for film. Being pre-Code then, Island of Lost Souls contains a number of elements that wouldn’t reappear in cinema for several decades (more on those details later).

The film stars Charles Laughton as the infamous Dr. Moreau, a brilliant doctor and scientist with a keen interest in the evolution of life (both plant and animal). Richard Arlen plays Edward Parker, a shipwrecked traveler who ends up stranded on Moreau’s island; the famed Bela Lugosi is the Sayer of the Law and Kathleen Burke is Lota, the mysterious “panther woman.”

23KEHR1-jumbo.jpg

From the moment Parker arrives on the island (even before when he’s rescued by a ship headed to Moreau’s island), it’s clear there’s something strange going on. Moreau’s manservant M’ling (Tetsu Komai) has strange features, including fur tipped ears under his hair. On the island itself, the “natives” possess a variety of animal-like features. Though they wear clothes and walk on two legs, they seem barely human, despite Moreau’s assurances that nothing is amiss. Laughton’s performance as Moreau is spine-chilling: he presents himself as an amiable scientist, a man of culture, but the truth is he sees himself as a god, a being capable of terrifying things. Actually I see a great similarity between Laughton’s Moreau and Colin Clive’s Frankenstein (which only came out the year before this film). In that earlier film, after the Monster comes to life, Frankenstein proclaims “Oh God, now I know what it’s like to BE God!!” Really the only difference between the two is Frankenstein worked with deceased bodies to craft his monster, while Moreau worked on living animals. And while the latter’s look slightly more human, they’re no less monstrous.

Island-Of-Lost-Souls.jpg

Parker eventually stumbles onto the horrifying truth: these “men” of the island were made this way by Moreau. He’d started by forcibly evolving plant life into strange and exotic forms, but that hadn’t been enough. He’d begun to experiment on animals in London, relocating to the island when a dog got loose and revealed his work too soon. Moreau is obsessed with evolving animals into human form and develops a set of laws to keep them in line. As pronounced by the Sayer of the Law, the law is as follows:

“Not to go on all fours, that is the Law. Are we not men?”

“Not to eat meat, that is the Law. Are we not men?”

“Not to spill blood, that is the Law. Are we not men?”

Originally, Parker was to be allowed to leave the next day, but after meeting Lota, a mysterious woman (the only one on the island and Moreau’s greatest creation), the doctor notes that Lota is responding to Parker the way a real woman would, so he conspires to keep Parker on the island to see if Lota is capable of doing everything a woman can, up to and including getting pregnant (never mind that Parker has a fiancee waiting for him). Lota is an interesting character: she looks completely human (and is presented as such by Moreau), but if you watch her carefully, you can see she still moves in an animal like manner in the way she holds her head and her body. They also used faint makeup around her eyes to give the impression of feline eyes.

912eHFzLEgL._SL1500_.jpg

However, there’s a flaw in Moreau’s work: Lota begins to revert to her original form as claws replace her fingernails. Presumably, the other beast men of the island are also reverting, however slowly, for it partially explains what happens at the end of the film.

In the climax, Parker’s fiancee has gone looking for him and gets another captain to bring her to the island. Moreau doesn’t want his “guests” to leave, so he orders one of the beast men to kill the ship captain before he can bring more of his crew onto the island. The beast man does as he is asked, but now there’s a problem, a big problem. By ordering the beast man to kill and thus “spill blood,” one of the laws has been broken. When the Sayer of the Law confronts him about this, the beast man replies “He TOLD me to spill blood.” Moreau did his experiments a little too well and doesn’t realize his beast men have an ability (however basic) to reason things out. Thus, led by the Sayer of the Law, the beast men reason that: Moreau told one of them to spill blood, which breaks the law, which means there is NO law. Also, the Sayer confirms that Moreau is a man like the dead ship’s captain…which means Moreau, their creator and tormentor, can die as well. When this realization is reached, all hell breaks loose. Having lost all authority, Moreau is dragged to the experimentation room and torn apart by his own instruments while the island goes up in flames. Parker, his fiancee and Moreau’s assistant Montgomery get away, but Lota sacrifices her life to stop a beast man from pursuing them.

Island-of-Lost-Souls (1).jpg

The film is a good example of early horror, the beast man makeups are particularly well done. Bela Lugosi is practically unrecognizable as the Sayer of the Law (in fact if I hadn’t known he was in this film I’d have never guessed it was him). If you’re a fan of H.G. Wells, I highly recommend this film to you.

If you’ve seen Island of Lost Souls what did you think of it? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

Become a patron of the blog at: patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

 

My thoughts on: Watership Down (1978)

MPW-54085.jpg

For a long time the only thing I knew about Watership Down was the book written by Richard Adams in 1972. I did my best to read my mom’s battered copy, but it was a very long story and I quickly lost interest. Fast forward a number of years and I was delighted to discover a movie version of the story existed! The film simplified the story considerably and it’s remained a favorite of mine for many years.

Watership Down, to put it simply, is a story about rabbits. Author Richard Adams created an entire rabbit language and culture and it’s so thoroughly put together that by the end of the story you kind of believe that these things about rabbits are really true, but I digress…in the story, we primarily follow a group of rabbits led by Hazel and his runt brother Fiver. The latter has this gift of seeing things before they happen, and one evening he has a vision that something terrible will happen to their warren. While most of the rabbits don’t believe a word Fiver says, Hazel believes his brother and convinces a small group to leave the warren and find a new home.

maxresdefault.jpg

Finding a new home (the titular Watership Down as it becomes known in the book) takes up most of the story and it’s far from easy. The rabbits travel across the countryside, evading dogs, busy roads, a weird warren of rabbits led by Cowslip and most importantly, the overcrowded warren of Efrafa led by General Woundwort. The film, though animated, does not shy away from revealing how graphically dangerous the journey is. For example, one female rabbit is snatched by a hawk; Bigwig is nearly strangled to death in bloody fashion by a snare; and in Efrafa, we see numerous examples of how rabbits are punished for breaking the rules (getting scratched up and having their ears torn up). Watership Down is one of those films that on the outside looks like an ordinary children’s film but it really deals with some extremely adult topics (lucky for me I didn’t see the film until I was in my teens).

The story isn’t ALL dark, some wonderful comic relief is provided by the seagull Kehaar (Zero Mostel in his final role). The rabbits befriend him when they discover him by their new warren with a damaged wing. He helps them rescue a lot of rabbits from Efrafa in the climax of the story before returning to his “big water” (the ocean).

MV5BNDA5MzA2MjIxOV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDI2OTI4NDE@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,1244,1000_AL_.jpg

Another character I must talk about is the fearsome General Woundwort. He’s the biggest rabbit you’ll ever see (in fact the book implies he’s more hare than rabbit, and yes there is a difference). Woundwort rules Efrafa with an iron paw and won’t allow any rabbits to leave, despite legitimate complaints that there is simply no room for kittens (baby rabbits) to be born. When the Watership Down rabbits successfully rescue a large group of Efrafans, Woundwort goes on the warpath and leads his rabbit soldiers to take ‘his’ rabbits back. The depths of Woundwort’s madness can be seen in his final moments: Hazel has contrived to lead a dog to the down, knowing that it will hunt down or chase away all the Efrafans (his people are safely underground in the burrows where the dog can’t get to them). As the Efrafans run for their lives, Woundwort appears and shouts “Come back you fools, come back and fight, dogs aren’t dangerous!” Any rabbit with common sense would know that dogs are very dangerous and should be avoided at all costs. Not only does Woundwort claim this ISN’T the case but his last act is to charge straight at the dog!

2016_WatershipDown_Press_290316-920x610.jpg

While I wouldn’t recommend showing this film to children under the age of 10, it is a good film to watch if you like stories about adventure with a touch of the supernatural thrown in for good measure. There’s a wonderful song, “Bright Eyes” sung by Art Garfunkel halfway through the story while Fiver searches for Hazel after an expedition to add female rabbits to the warren goes wrong. It’s a great interlude in the action.

All in all, Watership Down is a great film and one that everyone should see at least once. What did you think of Watership Down? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Animated Film Reviews

Become a patron of the blog at: patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂

 

My thoughts on: Won’t You Be My Neighbor? (2018)

neighborposter

I was beginning to think I’d never get to see this amazing documentary about the late Fred Rogers. First, I didn’t think it was showing anywhere close to where I lived. And then, when I did find it, things kept coming up to prevent me from going. But finally I was able to go and I’m so glad I did. Won’t You Be My Neighbor loosely tells the story of Fred Rogers and how he created Mister Roger’s Neighborhood (1968-2001).

While billed as a documentary, Won’t You Be My Neighbor? doesn’t feel like one in the traditional sense. There’s no overarching narrative where a voice intones “In 1968 this happened and in 1969 that happened…” Instead, the story is related via many clips of Fred Rogers and is supplemented by many people who worked with him and lived with him, including his widow and his two sons.

Many of these clips will be familiar if you’ve ever searched for Fred Rogers on YouTube. For instance, they show the clip of Mister Rogers speaking before Congress, a video that makes the rounds on social media about once a month. There’s also the special video he made after 9/11, that reappears on Facebook every once in a while. What’s really fascinating is in-between these clips are all the stories about the show: how it tackled pretty adult issues for a children’s show. For instance, in June of 1968 (shortly after RFK’s assassination) there was a show where Daniel Tiger asks Lady Aberlin (Betty Aberlin) “What does assassination mean?” This was interspersed with footage from the night of the assassination. Part of what made Mister Rogers so extraordinary was his understanding of what children really needed, as one person explains, he never forgot what it was like to be a child.

I told myself going in that I wouldn’t cry but…towards the end of the story, I couldn’t help myself. See, towards the end, the story shifts to the present day and there are hints about the current situation and what Fred might have said were he still here. And as they kept sharing his message of love and compassion and just helping others, the tears came and I could not stop them. In this messed up world, we need Mister Roger’s message, now more than ever.

If you need a break, however briefly, from the madness, go see Won’t You Be My Neighbor?. It’s only around 90 minutes, but it’s a really fascinating look back at an extraordinary man.

What did you think of this documentary? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below and have a great day!

See also:

Film/TV Reviews

Become a patron of the blog at: patreon.com/musicgamer460

Check out the YouTube channel (and consider hitting the subscribe button)

Don’t forget to like Film Music Central on Facebook 🙂