No. 36: The Rescuers
by Matt Scalici on Jul.20, 2010, under Back to the Movies
Note: Back to the Movies is a special feature on the FilmNerds blog in which Matt Scalici will be watching the Top 50 highest-grossing movies of 1983 in order from 50 to 1.
We come to a curious installment on this list of the Top 50 releases of 1983 as for the first time we are dealing with a re-release of an older film. I considered skipping The Rescuers since it was originally released in 1977 but thinking back on why I started this project, which was to re-create the 1983 movie-going experience, I decided ultimately to include it.
I’ve been unable to find any further background regarding this (if you have any information, please drop some knowledge on me in the comments section below) but Disney’s theatrical strategy for the year 1983 appears to be fairly simple: money for old rope. Disney re-released three of its previous hits in 1983 (Robin Hood, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and The Rescuers), usually pairing the films with a new animated short (in the case of The Rescuers it was Mickey’s Christmas Carol).
There are a few likely reasons behind this strategy. Firstly, the home video market in 1983 was still in its infancy and for many Disney fans a re-release was their only opportunity to see some of their favorite classics again. Secondly, with the exit of the original crew of Disney animators following The Rescuers, the new Disney crew was having a bit of trouble creating the same kind of magic that their predecessors had managed to turn out on a regular basis. Disney’s releases throughout the 80′s releases were certainly never major financial disasters but they failed to capture audiences and critics in the same way that so many of the great ’60s and ’70s Disney films had and perhaps the folks in Burbank were beginning to get just a little bit concerned about maintaining the integrity of the Disney brand.
Whatever the reasoning, Disney’s strategy paid off as its three re-releases dominated the G-rated movie market in 1983. The Rescuers raked in $21 million and finished second among G-rated releases behind its older sister, Snow White (more on her in a few months, I guess).
While it ranked as a major success for Disney both during its initial release and its 1983 re-release, I think it’s safe to say that The Rescuers doesn’t appear to hold the same cache today among fans of the Disney Animated Classics. Most of us could sing a song from or recite a line or two from One Hundred and One Dalmations, The Jungle Book or Robin Hood but does anyone out there really have a distinct, specific moment from The Rescuers that sticks out in your mind?
That’s not to say that it’s an unenjoyable film while you’re watching it, just that it doesn’t seem to have the same resonance that some of its Disney brethren have. The heroes are likable enough, two mice named Bernard (Bob Newhart) and Miss Bianca (Eva Gabor) set out on a mission to rescue an almost unbearably cutesy little girl named Penny. Bernard and Miss Bianca work for the Rescue Aid Society, a sort of mouse version of the United Nations complete with ever-so-slightly offensive Asian mice.
Penny is an orphan who has been kidnapped by Madame Medusa (voiced by Geraldine Page in her most menacing role until Interiors), a pawnshop owner who needs a small child to fit down a whole in the Louisiana bayou so she can obtain a fantastic jewel called the Devil’s Eye. It’s not a premise we dwell on for very long as essentially the point is that Madame Medusa is putting the girl’s life at risk and doesn’t care.
Madame Medusa has her fun moments but as Disney villains go, I’m betting she’s one of the least recognizable today. I suspect that’s because there’s not much originality to her. She’s basically a slight variation on Cruella de Vil, arguably one of the greatest and most memorable of all the Disney villains. Disney animators were initially considering using Cruella as the villain in The Rescuers, an idea that was ultimately shunned out of a desire to avoid producing sequels. Frankly, I think it would have been a good idea but I appreciate Disney’s desire to create something new, something studios certainly don’t bend over backwards to do these days.
Plot-wise, The Rescuers just feels a lot like its main villain, largely unoriginal and cobbled together with elements from previous Disney movies. It’s a fun ride but you’re left in the end feeling that you haven’t really seen anything new.
One thing that is rather original about the film is the opening sequence, a rather artfully put together montage of canvas paintings set to the film’s theme song “Who Will Rescue Me”. The song is pretty corny but the visuals are very interesting and unlike anything I remember seeing in other Disney films.
I wish I was going to get a chance to review an original Disney film from 1983 rather than a re-release because it would give me a better feel for what kind of content Disney was really producing during that era. As it is, I have to be content watching a film that I’m sure a lot of people enjoyed revisiting in theaters but that just doesn’t hold up as a particularly memorable film years later.
Next Up: The second Stephen King adaptation on our countdown, Christine.
July 20th, 2010 on 2:12 pm
Madame Medusa lacking originality? Ha. I’d say she’s one of the most memorable Disney villains of all. If she doesn’t get such a rep it is simply because there’s little marketing done with her image. Sure, the driving is similar to Cruella DeVil, but that’s just about it. There are more similarities between Madame Medusa and The Little Mermaid’s Ursula, if you ask me. The animators and writers behind Ursula did base themselves a lot on Madame, beyond the pair of sneaky gren monsters as ‘petsy-poos.’
I think “The Rescuers”‘ plot is original and fresh, and likely to be remembered. The film is one that one may not remember by name, but it is the kind that we unconciously remember forever. Being a small child and watching Penny and the heroes narrowly escape death by drowning inside that frightening pirate’s cave… oof, I myself haven’t forgotten that ‘thrill’, and it’s been years. The opening credits alone showed that the film was not business as usual. Throughout the ’60s and ’70s, Disney films relied mostly on episodic comedies, while “The Rescuers” promised to be a much deeper, more serious film with a strong plot-line and plenty of heart-ache. So, I can’t agree with the inclination that “The Rescuers” doesn’t live up to “The Jungle Book” and specially “Robin Hood,” as it easily outdoes them both. In my opinion, “The Jungle Book” gets its favorable rep from being Walt Disney’s last film… because it has little to offer aside from an insipid storyline and a couple of memorable, but episodic musical numbers, while “Robin Hood” is unfortunately Disney at its weakest…
July 20th, 2010 on 10:29 pm
@Jessica: We’ll agree to disagree regarding how The Rescuers stands up as far as entertainment value alongside those other ’60s and ’70s Disney films we mentioned. I personally have a lot more fun watching THE JUNGLE BOOK and 101 DALMATIONS and I think the popularity of those two films relative to the popularity today of THE RESCUERS suggests that most viewers feel the way I do.
I worry that my review of THE RESCUERS came off more negative than I intended. It is by no means a bad film. It’s always going to be difficult to be compared to other Disney animated films because they are nearly all masterpieces and I personally feel that while THE RESCUERS has its merits, it’s not among the most entertaining and memorable films in Disney’s filmography.
July 20th, 2010 on 8:18 pm
The correct name for the opening song is “The Journey,” and it is not corny at all. It has simplistic lyrics, but it is quite unique in every sense of the word. “The Journey” is a very rare kind of song in the sense that it is sung from the perspective of the bottle. People often assume that the songs’ lyrics are sung from Penny’s perspective, but no, it’s the bottle containing her plea that is “singing”, “I’m lost at sea without a friend.” It’s a wonderful sequence; all of the elements work together beautifully and it is one of the most captivating and heartfelt opening sequence of all. The film is also the first to have a pre-credits plot sequence, and Madame Medusa is the first Disney (and possibly only) villain that is motivating the story from the very, very start.
July 20th, 2010 on 10:22 pm
@Taran: I certainly don’t mean “corny” to be an entirely negative word. I think most people today would find the song corny but that doesn’t mean it isn’t also sincere and enjoyable, and most importantly a good tone-setter for the film.
July 21st, 2010 on 9:40 am
I have to agree with Jessica. Even though “The Rescuers” is not as well known today as “Robin Hood,” it is the former that gets the most honest critical praise. “The Rescuers” has been heralded the greatest Disney film since “Mary Poppins,” and in terms of purely animation, the “most satisfying Disney film since 101 Dalmatians,” and I definitely agree. Whereas “The Rescuers” is often heralded as a ‘masterpiece’ of animation (it does have some of the greatest Disney animation of all; particularly the human animation, something that fell flat in “The Fox and the Hound” four years later), “Robin Hood” gets that kind of praise only from nostalgia-driven fanatics. Without a doubt, “The Rescuers” has the strongest storyline since “Sleeping Beauty,” as it beautifully manages to blend everyday life with more adventurous plots regarding pirate treasure. The previous Disney films were too musically/comically driven and far too episodic, often held together rather weakly as was the case with “The Aristocats.”
August 2nd, 2010 on 11:48 am
I’m not crazy that the term “episodic” is being used as a negative here. THE SWORD IN THE STONE is probably my favorite 60′s Disney film, and it’s the most episodic of the entire canon… its strength lies in how those episodes tie together into a unified theme of self-reliance.
Regardless, I’m a bigger fan of this movie than Matt (WHO CLEARLY HATED IT), but I do prefer its gorgeous sequel.
Starkness
August 2nd, 2010 on 1:02 pm
Starkness,
Thanks for joining the hoard of angry Disney fanatics attacking me for my SLIGHT criticism of this very good movie. If my opinion sounds negative it’s only because I’m comparing it to the entire Disney canon, which I think is a fair comparison. I don’t hate the movie, I just think it lacks the unique panache that some of its Disney brethren have in droves.
September 21st, 2010 on 2:07 pm
Good review, Matt, even if you clearly hate the movie. (Just kidding!)
Let me drop some knowledge. 1983 was one of the most significant, turbulent and precarious years in Disney’s history.
Walt’s company struggled with massive debt, constantly teetering on the edge of insolvency, starting with the initial box office failure of PINOCCHIO (1940) all the way to the opening of Disneyland (1954). From that point forward, Disney was good on cash but it began a trend toward less concern and care for its cinematic output.
Fast forward to 1983 and the studio finds itself a very minor player in the world of feature films, having come to rely on theme parks and licensed products to survive. That year (or perhaps the immediately preceding fiscal year, I’m not sure), Disney’s share of all box office revenues was less than 4%.
I’d be interested in seeing a list of all Disney feature releases for 1983, because I bet it’s a short list dominated by re-releases. They just weren’t a strong business. 1983 saw Roy Disney Jr. resign (he would later rejoin) and investors from Texas stepped in and rescued the company by buying up a controlling interest.
It was this ownership group that would bring in Michael Eisner, Jefferey Katzenberg and that whole regime. It worked, to say the least. Stock value rose from $2B to $23B in about four years and the decade would close with The Little Mermaid ushering in a new hit-streak of animated features.
BTW, imdb.com says that early in the film’s development, producers considered making Cruella de Vil the villain.
Also, this was the last feature that members of the legendary Nine Old Men worked on. Including Frank Thomas, Ollie Johnston and Milt Kahl.
September 22nd, 2010 on 10:12 am
David: MAJOR thanks for the info! You pondered about Disney’s release slate in 1983 – The Rescuers was one of three Disney animated features that was re-released that year, the other two being The Sword in the Stone (which didn’t finish in the top 50) and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (which I’ll be reviewing later on this countdown). Disney’s highest grossing new release in 1983 was the live action wilderness drama Never Cry Wolf (which I’ll also be reviewing later) but released three other live action features that year that didn’t crack the top 50: Running Brave, Something Wicked This Way Comes, and Trenchcoat (which was released without Disney’s name attached to try and reach a more adult audience).
September 21st, 2010 on 2:54 pm
Adding to all the chaos the corporate reorganizing was causing, The Disney Channel launched in April of 1983. So a lot of resources, energy and focus centered on successfully launching and promoting their new cable channel.
Yet another distraction preventing proper attention being paid to their slate of films for 1983. When it came to feature film product, the studio was barely trying and barely seemed to care.