The Rescuers Down Under
Year: 1990
Directed by: Hendel Butoy & Mike Gabriel
Starring: Eva Gabor & Bob Newheart
Runtime: 77 mins
BBFC: U
Published: 28/06/21
Directed by: Hendel Butoy & Mike Gabriel
Starring: Eva Gabor & Bob Newheart
Runtime: 77 mins
BBFC: U
Published: 28/06/21
I’ve been watching the Disney Animated Classics for half a year now and as we approach the halfway mark in the series it suddenly dawned on me, there hadn’t been any sequels. In fifty-three years, Disney Animation Studios created twenty-eight original films. Yes, whilst a lot of them were based on existing properties such as fairy tales or children’s books, the studios had never followed up any of the Animated Classics with a theatrically released sequel. It came as even more of a surprise to me then that it was 1977’s The Rescuers, a film mostly overlooked and forgotten by most modern Disney fans, was the first Animated Classic to receive a sequel, thirteen years later, in the form of 1990’s The Rescuers Down Under.
In the Australian Outback, a young boy named Cody (Adam Ryen) rescues a golden eagle from a poacher’s trap, befriending the rare animal. Shortly thereafter Cody falls into a trap laid by McLeach (George C. Scott), the same poacher that had trapped the golden eagle, and killed its mate. Knowing the eagle has formed a bond with the boy, McLeach imprisons Cody to gain information on the eagle’s whereabouts.
In New York City, Bianca (Eva Gabor) and Bernard (Bob Newhart) of the Rescue Aid Society catch wind of Cody’s situation and leap into action, travelling halfway around the world to save the boy from certain death.
In the Australian Outback, a young boy named Cody (Adam Ryen) rescues a golden eagle from a poacher’s trap, befriending the rare animal. Shortly thereafter Cody falls into a trap laid by McLeach (George C. Scott), the same poacher that had trapped the golden eagle, and killed its mate. Knowing the eagle has formed a bond with the boy, McLeach imprisons Cody to gain information on the eagle’s whereabouts.
In New York City, Bianca (Eva Gabor) and Bernard (Bob Newhart) of the Rescue Aid Society catch wind of Cody’s situation and leap into action, travelling halfway around the world to save the boy from certain death.
When I said that it surprised me that The Rescuers was the first film to receive a sequel, it shouldn’t surprise me because The Rescuers was one of Disney’s most profitable films in its theatrical run. It was regularly released back into theatres because it was such a huge cash cow for the studio. But strangely The Rescuers has almost no living legacy, it’s almost unheard of by many modern Disney fans, even with people who were younger when The Rescuers released in the seventies forgetting the film existed. It’s a peculiarity of a film that despite being super successful financially, very few people remember.
So that’s why I find it odd that The Rescuers got a theatrical sequel and not something more fondly remembered by audiences, such as Cinderella, The Jungle Book, or Bambi (all of which later got sequels, but aren’t considered a part of the Animated Classics series).
So, was it worth giving The Rescuers a sequel? The short answer is The Rescuers Down Under is a good, but it doesn’t quite live up to the original film, and especially when following up The Little Mermaid, does feel like a considerable step back for the studio from a narrative standpoint.
The story is simple, which isn’t a bad thing, but with the stories in Disney Animated Classics having become progressively more complex over the past several years is disappointing. When compared side by side with the 1977 original, Down Under isn’t as progressive or as shocking. The story of Penny being tortured by Madame Medusa is still frightening to this day because of how sinister that woman is, and the film had dark imagery to match. Down Under on the other hand portrays McLeach as something of a dimwit who’s just bigger and tougher than Cody. The film doesn’t have the same threatening visual tone to it either, with much of it taking place in the scorching Australian daytime, with lots of colour and humorous secondary characters.
So that’s why I find it odd that The Rescuers got a theatrical sequel and not something more fondly remembered by audiences, such as Cinderella, The Jungle Book, or Bambi (all of which later got sequels, but aren’t considered a part of the Animated Classics series).
So, was it worth giving The Rescuers a sequel? The short answer is The Rescuers Down Under is a good, but it doesn’t quite live up to the original film, and especially when following up The Little Mermaid, does feel like a considerable step back for the studio from a narrative standpoint.
The story is simple, which isn’t a bad thing, but with the stories in Disney Animated Classics having become progressively more complex over the past several years is disappointing. When compared side by side with the 1977 original, Down Under isn’t as progressive or as shocking. The story of Penny being tortured by Madame Medusa is still frightening to this day because of how sinister that woman is, and the film had dark imagery to match. Down Under on the other hand portrays McLeach as something of a dimwit who’s just bigger and tougher than Cody. The film doesn’t have the same threatening visual tone to it either, with much of it taking place in the scorching Australian daytime, with lots of colour and humorous secondary characters.
But where Down Under does shine is in its animation. There had been some progress made with 1998’s The Little Mermaid, dropping Xerography for the first time in twenty-eight years for a new style of animation. Down Under not only refines the techniques introduced in The Little Mermaid, but also ushers in some impressive use of 3D computer animation that doesn’t look out of place against traditional 2D animation. Elements like McLeach’s truck appear as though they could be hand drawn but are in fact full 3D computer animated models. The bright colour also lends itself to some impressive sequences, such as the flight Cody takes on the eagle at the start of the film. Visually, Down Under justifies its place amongst the Animated Classics for the strides it makes in raising the bar for Disney’s quality standards.
The Rescuers Down Under may not be the most memorable Disney Animated Classic, but the progress it makes visually justifies its existence in the esteemed series. It would be quite some time until another sequel would make its way into the Animated Classics series, potentially down to the underwhelming reception Down Under received; but without Down Under the Renaissance Era of Disney Animation would not be as visually impressive or progressive as it was.
The Rescuers Down Under may not be the most memorable Disney Animated Classic, but the progress it makes visually justifies its existence in the esteemed series. It would be quite some time until another sequel would make its way into the Animated Classics series, potentially down to the underwhelming reception Down Under received; but without Down Under the Renaissance Era of Disney Animation would not be as visually impressive or progressive as it was.