I agree with most of this video, but the literal best joke was completely ignored lol. When the alley cats and the mouse are running back to the other cats, they run past a man who's drinking, and upon seeing the mouse chasing the cats, he pours out his drink.
To be fair, O'Malley hitting on Duchess while she finds it charming despite of being the first time they ever meet is pretty accurate with real life cats
It's hilarious because a little while earlier he did that with the cat fights but in reverse, used what irl cats do to call something dumb and then not using it later, both times to call something sexist
@@Dovah_Slayer do you know any shows/movies/Books where The person who they fell in instant love with is actually a bad person? There are probably a lot of those but I want to ask if you have suggestions.
I love the 'scratchy' era of Disney films and how they look, especially Robin Hood and the Jungle Book. There's something so 'tangible' about the characters and their 'roughness' which came from them xeroxing their drawings, and I love it. It gives the films a cozy feeling.
I agree as well! Not every piece of animation has to have a smooth 4K look and feel to it, just as not every art piece has to be an abstract painting. Besides, there can be times when scratchy/sketchy animation can be a good stylistic choice (like in Cartoon Saloon's Wolfwalkers, to help differentiate the characters from the village to the wolfwalker characters living in the woods).
@@anthonygillette the TLDR version, after Sleeping Beauty cost a lot of money, Disney had to find ways to do animation in other ways, so in 101 dalmatians they created the Xerox process to directly copy onto cells which saved time and money hence from 101 Dalmatians through the Rescuers you get that sketchy style where sometimes you'll see random lines on faces or bodies
You'd actually be very surprised how liked this movie is in both Mexico and Japan, specially the character of Marie. Mexico also had a very talented and charismatic actor giving voice to Tomas O'Malley, Germán Valdez "TinTan".
I’m a girl, but I really don’t think it’s that bad for Duchess to tell Marie to be more ladylike given the time period (1910?) since modern people will look through a different perspective. And they come from a wealthy family, so of course Duchess will teach her children to be proper. My mom used to tell me to act more like a lady and sometimes it annoyed me, but I don’t pay too much attention to it. It was nice to see Duchess like Thomas even though he’s not rich, but the characters could have more personalities. So yeah, this movie is pretty forgettable, but I don’t think it’s as eye-rolling compared to Ralph Breaks the Internet.
I was about to comment and say that he's going way too far on the whole "girl power" and "women are more than that" feminism argument when it's a movie about old rich people, it's in the name of the movie, that's how people were, just look at most princess movies lol but I'm glad I'm not the only one who didn't think it was that bad. Idk why he went on a mad rant about that. As for the movie, I think it's just ok, not terrible but not impressive
I mean true cause the movie took place between 1910 to 1920 (roughly) and around that time, it was common where woman (and little girls) to act more proper and lady like so I wouldn’t blame Duchess too terribly much for telling Marie to act the same way (also like you said, since Duchess and her kittens were from a wealthy family this could be also a factor) so honestly I don’t get why he got angry over that
@@AbrasiousProductions Not to mention, _Bedknobs and Broomsticks_ would have been close to finished when this movie released, and that movie had a strong female lead.
I agree as well. My mom told me to be more lady like and would also tell this other kid to act like a gentleman. Like why is it wrong for a mom to tell their child to behave or have manners?
i don't see anything wrong with the movie it's actually the most realistic, rich people not caring for anyone else, and cats being cats, and sometimes dogs just want to bite you for being there, except for the cartoony scenes this could be a documentary lol 😂
I used to love this movie. So much that I had an unhealthy obsession with Marie, and threatened my sister when I was younger to buy me Marie merch when she went to disney. Good times
I can understand why someone doesn't like it (not me though, that was one of my favorite movies when I was younger), but to put it next to Ralph Breaks the Internet? Thats a little too harsh
I completely agree, his reasons for hating the film is understandable but comparing it to Ralph Breaks the Internet is a very unfair comparison,I like this movie and still rewatch it (even though I agree some parts are filler, when I rewatch the movie I literally skip the parts with the dogs coz I consider those genuinely boring and pointless) but after my first viewing of Ralph Breaks the internet I have never even thought of rewatching it nor do I think I ever will ,it was just that bad but this isn't as bad as that,most of the things that make it bad are a product of the era it was made in,so I think the comparison is quite harsh and unfair to the movie,I would take this movie over Ralph Breaks the internet any day of the week
It is unlady-like to play rough like the boys. Historically a Lady doesn't just mean a female, or even just girly. It means a woman of standing and dignity. Like a Gentleman, or going back even further, a lord. So any lady who'd brawl with her brothers would be acting extremely unladylike.
Something I think you don't get about the kittens is the fact that kids are like that. Kids mistreat people who treat them nice. They're little demons until they grow up a bit and learn to be nice. And edgar trying to throw the cats into the contryside is very evil, hes throwing out a mother cat and her defenseless BABIES. while cats can live in urban areas alright due to humans giving them food and there being lots of places of shleter and almost no predadors, the countryside has none of that. The life of a cat living in the wild is short and painful. Even city stray cat lives are full of pain and suffering. Edgar is not a super interesting villian but he is pretty evil.
Well, I guess it makes sense that someone with a cat profile pic would have something against Edgar. Still, I don't think Edgar intended to harm them, even if it was dangerous, he probably didn't know what danger he was putting them in due to living in the city most of his life.
"Something I think you don't get about the kittens is the fact that kids are like that. Kids mistreat people who treat them nice. They're little demons until they grow up a bit and learn to be nice" This is not true...
@Anônimo I dont think youve ever met human children. Theyre selfish. They make messes and chaos. They dont understand social cues yet and say things you shouldnt say. Children arent nice because theyre too young to have developed their social skills and empathy
Most of everything you said 1 The Kittens are not jerks they might be bratty but most kids are , just look at Simba , Vanellope in the first film , Dash and Peter Pan , also Maria had this funny limne that rings true " Ladies do not start fights , but they can finish 'em " and Duthces was raised to be a proper lady cat , plus she was no where near as snobby as Georette or like Dutches from Fosters 2 " The Madame wasnt insulting Edgar she was just being oblivlous to what she was saying like this moment from EEn E Ed " Its ok Double D its not your fault your so useless ." 3 About Edgar you could say the same for Yzma and Larwince who were more mistreated upfront by Kuzco and Naven as the cats didnt do anything nasty to Edgar to his face like pee on purpose . 4 Calling O Mally the worst character is a bit overdone as jsut because he sings about himself does'nt make him bad as Tigger did the same thing " Wonderful thing about TIggers " and Mally come s off as less than a creep then Pepe Pew 5 In fairness about Mally getting on a truck that wasnt his Tramp and Doger did something similar where Tramp got a random man in trouble with a cop to go in a zoo and Doger had Oilver help him steal hotdogs and was'nt planning on sharing and keep in mind hes a kid to his adult . 6 Dutches did have a point to call him horrible by throwing things at her and her kittens that could be considered animal abuse 7 The Geese were more crazy as they snapped off the vine Mally had to hang on to and were under the impression he was trying to swim 8 Are Drunk people funny ? Barny Gumble 9 In some book adpations Edgar's fath is him being arrested which is slightly better than the one in the movie . 10 Not all characters need to learn something as Mr . Toad didnt really learn anything about recklessness he still goes extream and Robin Hood himself also doenst learn much of anything as Little John tells him he's taking too many chances and Robin just scoffs. The movie doenst show him taking any chances that got him or his friends nearly killed.
With all due respect, I never sided with Edgar. The point that you completely glossed over was that Edgar gave the cats SLEEPING PILLS in the movie. Hence why the cats probably weren't able to hear the loud motorcycle. Sure, his intentions weren't to poison or kill the cats, but he dumped numerous pills into that cream he cheerily gave them. He could've easily overdosed one of the kittens and had them die from respiratory failure. Edgar to me was always set up to be a greedy, coward of a butler that was only nice to Madame for her inheritance and got greedy when he realized the will wasn't immediately going to him. After all, you never see any meaningful interactions between him and Madame in the movie. And him poisoning the cats with the sleeping pills (regardless of intention) was enough to vilify him in my mind.
Worst Disney villain ever. And I mean in the bad way. He's not even funny. Tbh the slap stick he gets into is more hilarious because he deserves it. He's a jerk.
Anyone who abused animals is an immediate villain to me. Those poor kitties really could’ve died and the butler would’ve been charged with animal cruelty.
No, we're never suppose to side with Edgar but in terms of like the long list of Disney villains in films; he's probably the only one who was right about things, in a way. He's spent his whole life serving his mistress and then he finds out she practically finds him lesser than her own cats? I mean, jeez, I'd tender my resignation and curse her out that very hour if I was in his shoes.
@@jessicapinkman-hd4bw I mean after rewatching the movie I understand, the old woman really tried to give all her inheritance money to animals that have no way of spending it. She should’ve gave it to Edgar under one condition, to take care of the cats.
@@Pink_pr1ncess That is LITERALLY what was going to happen. It's in the dang film. Edgar inherits AFTER the cats have passed on. Until then, the money is tied to them, so he has to take care of them. It's also hard for me to sympathize with him when he's so stupid that he can't figure out that A. cats do NOT have nine lives and thus WON'T outlive him, and B. that since he's clearly not super scrupulous if he's willing to get the cats out of the way he could EASILY live a life of luxury while still taking care of the cats in mostly the same way as when their owner was alive, just presumably with fewer carriage rides.
I can acknowledge how you may feel bad for Edgar. Or think the dogs aren’t funny. Or be annoyed by furry child characters acting like children. But seriously, man, why ya gotta hate on O’ Malley? Does a catchy song count for nothing? Does a fun vocal performance count for nothing? But honestly O’ Malley proves you wrong about there being no character development in this film. He starts out self-absorbed and flirtatious. At first he only rescues the kittens in order to impress Duchess, but over time he sees Duchess as more than just a pretty face. (even if the writers kinda don’t) By the finale he’s willingly risking his life to rescue the family from Edgar. A selfish cat would have abandoned them and found a different woman to hit on. It’s this act of selflessness that earns O’ Malley a place in the cats’ family. And he does end up teaching the kids a few things about the real world outside their pampered palace. Also if convenient coincidences in Disney films bother you, perhaps the fact that in The Rescuers Down Under, Cody just HAPPENS to fall into a the trap that HAPPENS to belong to a despicable poacher who just HAPPENS to notice a golden feather on his person. So yeah. It is, indeed, a cartoon. And these coincidences are kinda fun and whimsical
To be fair the movie was made in a type with more stereotypes, less mental health awareness, and when people cared more about others fitting into idolized roles. I.e "woman must be pretty" and "men must be strong" etc.
@@Nic_2751I agree, I love the Aristrocats but it's okay to not like something. But it is not okay to bully people for something they don't like. Like, I don't wanna watch the new little mermaid and people called me racist over not wanting to watch it because I said and quote. "It looks cheap."
Want to know an even crazier fact? He was "the first person to build and patent a mechanical artificial heart, implantable in the chest cavity (US Patent #3097366 of 1963)"!
@Splashy21 Yes, he was. Just search "paul winchell heart invention" , you can go the easy route with the wiki page, but he's credited on multiple sites, including MIT. And all sites also mention him also being a character actor ,so it's not a guy with the same name.
Around 22:06, something I would like movies to do more often, is have both humans and animal characters be unable to understand each other. Like the animals and humans might be able to pick up facial expressions or physical movements to communicate, but they can't understand the actual words they are saying.
Arthur (the PBS show) does this exact thing. The animals and babies can understand each other just fine but they can't understand the "humans" (who aren't literal babies) and vice versa. The "human" characters can naturally only understand the animals/babies through animal and baby noises naturally. On the other side, the animals/babies can't understand the "humans" outside of specific words. The show doesn't execute in a great way but it is better than the standard trope of "humans can't understand animals but the animals can understand the humans".
probably why i also love one hundred and one dalmatians, fox and the hound, and oliver and company because they also mirror real relationships with animals and how we just have to wing it with communication
I'd like (And honestly prefer) to see the INVERSE of that, where both 100 % understand each other. Hey, just because I'm an adult, doesn't mean I should prefer realism(With The exception of Thomas the Tank Engine, Mr Rogers' Neighborhood, & the hosts of Blue's Clues, but that's because the realism IS what made them stand out.)
It's definitely nothing special, that much is a fact. While I used to enjoy it as a kid, looking back on it now, I find it to be pretty forgettable. And yes, the whole plot of the movie with the lady giving her fortune to her cats, rather than ANOTHER PERSON, who could actually DO SOMETHING with it, is extremely stupid, even if we ignore the fact that Edgar quite honestly deserved it as recognition for all his hard work
I haven’t seen Hop, but I will say that at least Edgar wasn’t as unfairly mistreated as Carlos was so I could at least see Edgar as the bad guy (at least I would if he wasn’t such a dumb villain)
@@timey_103 he kinda is. Both are characters that served a wealthy figure for a long time Both are refused to inherit the wealth and are given to other characters who deserve it far less Both act justifiable in their actions against the other Neither do anything wrong for the majority of the movie Both do occasional stupid actions to move the plot along and have the “heroes” win and defeat the “villain”
Whenever I hear a plot that doesn't work, I like to think about what could be changed about it to make it work. Just like a thought exercise to help myself distinguish working plot points from non-working ones. Let's see, if I were to fix this story: 1) Make Edgar an animal-hater. Have him aim a kick at one of the kittens when the Madame isn't looking. Let him make disparaging comments about them; not in response to any annoyance or mistreatment from them, but just because he doesn't like them. Let him mistreat other animals around the estate too. In a story mostly told from the perspective of animals, this is an effective way to make him unsympathetic in the eyes of the cats and the audience, as well as establish him as a threat to the cats. 2) Make the cats more sympathetic. If they do or say anything against Edgar, just let it be in response to something Edgar did or said against them. Make them less annoying. And while you're at it, do something to establish their bond to the Madame. Maybe Duchess could notice the Madame crying alone and climb into her lap and purr to comfort her. They're house cats and can't reasonably do work, but they *can* provide comfort and companionship to a lonely old woman; also, establish the Madame as being lonely, to better explain why she would be so invested in her pet cats. 3) Instead of literally leaving a fortune to a family of house cats who can't even spend it, leave it to Edgar *on the condition that he takes care of the cats and treats them well*. This is a relatively reasonable request, and Edgar would seem very unreasonable to try to kill them just because he doesn't want to share his fortune with his late boss' pets. 4) Oh yes, and have Edgar try to kill them instead of just abandon them! This would be simple; just have him toss them off a bridge into a river, and they wake up just in time to scramble to shore while Edgar drives away cackling. If those dogs see Edgar tossing a basket of cats into a river and *then* decide to attack him, that would come across as much more justified. I didn't even get into Duchess and O'Malley's characters or the "Everybody wants to be a cat" song, but I feel like this improves the premise.
To improve O'Malley's character, first have him be less self absorbent and as the cats swim to the shore have O'Malley spot them from the distance to rescue them and take them to a farm or somewhere where they'll be safe and have them interact with each other to give us a reason to get attached to Duchess and O'Malley relationship or something idk.
Personally, I'd prefer to go the opposite route with Edgar. Make him MORE sympathetic and put emphasis on how insane it is for the lady to give her fortune to her cats. I feel bad for Edgar, and I think he deserved a better ending than he got, and I'd kinda like to see a remake where the lady realizes what she did and fits Edgar in the will, maybe have a joke about "you could have just asked) or something along the lines. TBF, I'm sure we all have our own ways we'd do things.
I absolutely loved this movie, from Marie, whatever that orange cat’s name was as he actually didn’t treat the kids like an obstacle, and the musical numbers, and I would love a Cedric video
Does this movie technically have no plot? Yes. Is it kinda forgettable? Yes. Do I still like it a lot? Yes. Tbf, I'm mostly talking because of nostalgia probably, because I understand it's not a good film, but the animation style has weirdly it's own charme and tbh, the main reason is just the fact I love having/knowing at least one movie where the cats are the main good guys. More love and appreciation for cats is always good for me lol.
It took me till a fourth of the way through the video to think this was a joke, and then some more skipping around and reading comments to realize you were serious but exaggerating. Genuinely a very poor analysis of a kids film, there were a lot of times where you just completely misinterpreted the movie either by reading too much into things (the kittens and Madame teasing Edgar which is clearly just them being familiar, the will is comical and would in the end leave Edgar in charge of the cats and estate), or by not reading enough (the kittens only thank the horse because the horse is THEIR equivalent of Edgar, it's pretty clear the animals and humans socialize separately). As well as what I can only imagine is straight up lying. I have no idea how you can interpret the geese as sexualized, making fun of animal butts is pretty normal in cartoons. Making the geese act like giggly women when they're just silly birds is the joke. Which with stuff like the Everybody Wants to Be A Cat scene and a couple others proves that the movie is trying to be cartoony, maybe not to the slapstick levels of the scenes with the dogs, but not to a degree that makes them as jarring as you make out. There are character arcs too, they're just not as grand and clearly designed as in other films. Duchess and the kittens by going out and exploring become more worldly and get the Madame to house "all the cats of Paris", which for the cats is opening up the home to the poor. The go from being pampered and rigid to open to their lil cat community. And Thomas by settling down with them learns to become more selfless and grounded. These aren't revolutionary arcs, and I'm not saying the movie tries to be daring at all about it's class themes, but there is something there and enough for what they were aiming for. It's a lighthearted little adventure film about a family of pampered cats meeting some alleycats and becoming buddies, it's simple, not even as ambitious as Lady and the Tramp, but far from bad. Which is the thing, there are many bad movies or children's films out there that do have material worth dissecting for harmful messages or artistic critique that are relevant today. Picking apart a movie from the 70s for effectively just being too lighthearted and not polished is just ridiculous. There's definitely things to be said about race, class, and gender in this movie that relate to today and the overall history of Disney, but this was just CinemaSins level critique. I am saying this as a nostalgia diehard, but it's not hard to analyze a film like this without wailing about it being THE WORST THING EVER because it isn't a cinematic epic. If you ARE trying to do CinemaSins level critiques as a joke you are very convincing.
Well I'm sorry you didn't enjoy the video, but to be fair, most of my other videos are less over-the-top compared to this one. But there really is something about this movie that I really don't like, I tried to explain it, in detail, but I guess that came off as nitpicking. Believe me when I say, I don't usually pick apart movies in this much detail, this one of the few exceptions. Also Cinema Sins is certainly not what I am going for, they hate on movies just to hate, whereas this is one of only a select few movies that I actually hate. And even then ,I enjoyably hate it.
Okay so while I agree on some of your points like the dogs(always skipped them as a kid) and Edgar being over punished, there are also some things that I disagree with. I do understand that this movie is kinda meh but they're genuinely times where you're kinda misrepresenting certain points by ignoring details which makes review very nitpicky rather than critical. One of the main issues me for example, you say that Duchesses is a sexist caricature as she's romantic, lady-like, and gullible but she's far more assertive than you give her credit for. For one she isn't immediately woed by Thomas and she quickly calls his bs once he finds out about her kids(which she sighs in disappointment almost expecting that response) and she's still not fully convinced when he genuinely wants to help her. She's not gullible in the slightest. You also stated that the Duchess didn't want Marie to be unladylike due to the fighting but you omitted out that she quite literally says the same thing for Berlioz too! This isn't just something specific for Marie because of sexism, Duchess clearly wants all of her children to be well-mannered. She clearly values politeness and there's nothing wrong in that. And on a more biased take, why is it a problem for Duchess to show romantic interest for Thomas? Thomas showed interest in not only her but her children as well. Duchess does have feelings for him too but it's obvious that her children take priority over love. She wasn't fully convinced with Thomas in the beginning but warmed up to him once he showed genuine interest and care for them. And the same goes Thomas too. I get that some of his traits are outdated but to say that he's nothing more than a sexist creep is far from the truth. For one, he risks his life to save the family multiple times throughout the movie. He engages with the kittens in meaningful and fun ways, similar to that of father(ex. When had the kittens "summon" the creme). And furthermore, he completely respects Duchess' decision to return to Madame, even if he didn't fully understand it in the rooftop scene. Ultimately, he gives up his life of the "highway" in order to live a domestic life with not just because of Duchess but for the kittens as well. He's the stepdad, that stepped up and that's a lot considering Disney's prior history with stepfamilies before this film. There's more to it, but I've already rambled enough so basically what I'm saying is that you bring a lot of good points but a lot of times I do feel like you're getting carried by your distaste of the film that it winds up sounding like nitpicking rather than genuine criticism. Like are we really gonna go off on Thomas stealing the creme, when he's literally a stray cat. I doubt stray cats have the concept of stealing. Of course, this is coming from someone that genuinely loves the film. It's nothing special I know, but it holds a special place im my heart❤. The best thing however, is to agree to disagree🤝. I genuinely respect your stance.
Thank you for your perspective, I think you make some good points, I'm always open to improving my videos, I'll try to be less nitpicky in the future if possible (it can be fun to nitpick the really bad movies though, just for the lols).
@@Rockotarthepurplehatguy That's perfectly valid. I often rag about the Incredibles 2 for a lot of things too. There's always gonna be that movie that you'll hate, remorselessly.
Honestly, The Aristocats is not a bad movie, and you're being a little too harsh on it. Terrible movies are movies that are so boring or so insufferable at times that you question why they were made to begin with. I was bored out of my mind when I watched Frozen II. Ralph Breaks The Internet was insufferable at times. But The Aristocats, Oliver & Company, and even The Rescuers were entertaining enough that I'll give them a free pass.
What you just described is how I genuinely feel about this moviel. Boring, insufferable, and questioning why it was made. We just can't stand different things I guess.
The whole inheritance plot in this movie is so stupid. I mean, who would make more sense to give your inheritance to? Your cats who have no idea how money works and likely won't be able to do anything with it, or your hardworking butler who did everything you told him to do for years and can use that money to continue to take care of your cats that you love so much. Edgar actually makes more logical sense for Madame to give her inheritance to, rather than her cats who realistically would have no clue how money even works.
In real life many give their inheritance to their pets, obviously this is not giving animals money to spend, but saving the money to be spent on them until they die. At the end someone else is spending the money, but the priority should always stay on the animals, what they eat, how they are treated etc
@@russianvalkyrie2358 Kids become adults. That money usually ends up in a trust fund that's managed for them until they're adults, at which point they can do whatever they want with it (unless there's specific strings attached).
You know what’s funny about O’Malley? He’s singing what is referred to in the musical sphere as an “I am” song. An “I am” song is usually exclusively saved for villains, while “I want” songs are meant for hero’s. So the fact that they’re introducing him like this with what is usually associated with villains is honestly pretty hilarious.
@@ARCtheCartoonMaster Gus, Grizabella, and Mistoffelees, are also innocent of the charge of villainy, unless you are discussing the animated movie, which is a very different story.
Honestly, this movie is a vibe to me. I come from a family of jazz musicians and for that reason alone, we all loved it, all generations. The arpeggio song was one of the first I learned on the piano and the whole moment with jazz cats is classic. The music is so good, the ambiance reminds me of sketchy bars with jam sessions, the kind that were everywhere in my city (in France) and the cats themselves (apart from the racist stereotypes) are kinda cool. The wild sections with the dogs are so cartoony, they’re on the level of looney tunes visual comedy. And the scratchy look gives it that old timey vibe, I was never bothered by this. Anyway, it’s no masterpiece by any means but it’s not nearly as bad or offensive as some of Disney’s other movies.
One major complaint I have with this video: You didn't address the time period this movie came out in until 40:10, or until 80% of the video was over. Given a huge number of your talking points throughout the video could have been much-better contextualized by the fact that this was made in a different generation, I think that was pretty poor scriptwriting on your part. Keep in mind, this is by no means a defense from me of what is in this film, as bad stereotypes and archetypes in fiction are still bad regardless of if modern-day thinking is applied to them or not. But it is still something to consider as far as what people of that time period the movie released in considered to be in bad or good taste, as that is the whole reason stuff like this could be gotten-away-with many years back. It's something that should be brought up early on in a classic media review, so the audience of said review can themselves choose to ruminate on that fact while watching the review rather than possibly remaining ignorant or uninformed of it. Great video otherwise!
Yeah, I probably should have added a throwaway mention near the beginning, but I was too busy ranting in my notes about how stupid the scenes I was watching were.
It does a have a scene that makes me chuckle. That scene is where a man is drinking wine and he sees a mouse chasing cats then he checks the bottle of wine before sadly maybe even depressingly pours it onto the ground.
Everybody wants to be a cat is a play on popular slang from the 60's. Cat meant someone was cool and hip, square meant...you weren't cool and hip lol. But yeah, I too have realized how slightly bizarre the lyrics are recently.
Well, I will admit, in spite of the complete lack of logic and sheer pointlessness, the dog scenes are definitely the most entertaining parts of the movie.
It’s feels like you’re critiquing the movie just for the sake of it. A lot of things you’re saying just doesn’t make sense. « The animation is okay » bro what ? The animation is crazy good, yes it’s rough but that’s because the cleanup part was not viewed as necessary as today. And cleanup animator is expensive as you said I guess. But saying the animation is « okay » when this is probably one of the best 2D animation we’ve ever had is just non sense. Let’s talk about the duchess critics.. god, it just seems like you completely forgot that this movie is 50+ years old. It was okay for the time to think like that. Yes it’s stereotypical and boring if you look at it though 2023’ lens but it doesn’t make sense to do that without mentioning the period the movie was released in. Judging the kittens because they’re acting like .. kitten ?! Have you ever been in contact with children before ? I’m working with them and the way the kitten are depicted couldn’t be more accurate than that, I don’t even know what to add here since it should be obvious that this is just some child having fun and being annoying as they are. Edgar deserving everything but getting nothing.. this is the whole point of the movie. The dogs attacking him for no reason .. I mean, that’s how some dogs act. They attack.. for no reason. I’m not going to continue because I’m pretty sure you’re aware of everything you said and there’s way too much to add
I completely disagree. I think Aristocats is a good movie. The kittens are just that kittens. Of course theyre little jerks. Have you met a human child? Theyre even worse. Also with Marie ofc her mother tells her to behave like a lady. Its 1910. Things werent the same back then and women didnt have as much choice back then in society. On that note Madam clearly didnt amass her fortune by being a business woman or owning stocks or something. Women werent allowed to do those things in 1910. So she must have gotten her fortune from her parents or most likely from a deceased husband. You have to have some sympathy for a woman with no family left who also lost her husband. Also Edgar doesnt deserve the inhertance just for being the butler. Hes an employee of the madame. Edgar is NOT her family. The cats are the closest thing she has to family. Also its not unheard of cor people to leave their inheritance to their pets or even children who have no way of spending it. Whats a 4 year old gunna do with real estate? Nothing, but people leave their inheritance to their children too. Edgar is being really selfish to think he deserves wealth for having a job working for someone wealthy. Also cats dont live that long and Edgar is a moron. The plot only can happen if edgar cant realize that it isnt 4 cats times 12ish years times 9 lives, but in fact theyll all be dead in like 15 years and he will get the money he greedily thinks belongs to him. O'Malley does start is a creep. But in his defense he becomes a better person at the end of the movie. He realizes that he actually likes her and isnt just lusty and he even accepts the kittens. And duchess falls for him despite his low social standing being an alleycat with no owner meaning she isnt shallow. Also his song slaps. The milktruck scene makes sense. Theyre just cats. They dont understand economics. They dont know that theyre hurting this man by drinking the cream. Sucks for the milkman ofc, but from the cats point of view he is horrible he tried to hurt them. Everybody wants to be a cat is a BANGER. I mean the asian cats kinda racist but honestly compared to a lot of Disneys racist stuff in old movies its pretty benign. Like Dumbo is crazy racist. Dont forget the stereotyped native americans in peter pan oof. It could be much worse.
Remember really liking this as a little little kid like 7 and under (tho when you're that young you think everything is great) but now yea it's most deffinatly a product of its time and pretty obviously the first movie after Walt's death and beginning of Disney's dark age in the 70s and 80s
Seeing this video in my subfeed honestly unlocked a memory from my childhood, because I swear I watched this a lot as a kid, but eventually I forgot it was even a Disney film lol. After watching the video, I don't remember it being this flawed but I guess you'll always have that one childhood film you grow up to realise isn't actually as good as you thought when you actually see what's wrong with it.
I feel like you over antagonized O'malley in the milkman part From the cat's perspective O'malley provided food for the hungry kittens, so of course Dutchess considers him a hero. Cats get food by hunting or stealing by being cunning (our neighbour's cat stole our steak once lmao) so maybe his ability to startle and trick the milkman impressed the female cat and her kittens. Of course stealing is not good but like, they're cats, animals don't have a concept of stealing like we humans do. They were just getting food.
This has to be easily one of the most forgettable classic Disney movies. It's like you watch it once when you were young and then you'll rarely think of it again.
Knowing how this video went, I infer that Chicken Little is gonna be picked as the final film of this trinity due to it's horrible morals of punishing people for being unpopular and rewarding people for bullying those deemed as the dregs of society.
Well... I certainly wasn't expecting that. 😳 Admittedly, I used to watch The Aristocats a lot when I was a kid and liking it quite a bit. However looking back at it as an adult, it hasn't aged well in some areas. The lady passing down her mansion and fortune to her cats instead of Edgar is pretty dumb in retrospect. While I personally wouldn't put in this movie in my worst Disney ranking, your criticisms are valid! Keep up the good work, Rockotar! 👍❤️ Also I'm predicting that the final unholy trinity, will either Chicken Little or Frozen 2.
Instead, it was Home on the Range. Frozen II made the honorable mention as the fourth worst. Dinosaur and Chicken Little are the fifth and sixth worst.
Sadly this is realistic there's a woman that passed down her entire inheritance to her dog when she had a daughter and gave her daughter nothing it's honestly disgusting when it's not too far from reality
1:25. Okay let's see if you can convince me 'cause this movie was one of my childhood clasics I really like the animation, I love the schechy style on anything tbh 14:07 It's suppose to be funny not logical, the dogs are preatty much comic relief in this film so I think it's realistic to give them the funniest moments 18:13 Tomas is not a human, he's an uncastrated horny cat in the late spring/early summer wich is peak mating season 20:03 Why wouldn't her partner be with her and the kids if that was the case? 26:09 I see this scene a bit different. Tomas needed help, he thought he didn't so he didn't explain the situation which led to that missunderstanding, all he needed to do was say, I need to get to the shore please help me and all would have been much easier 37:27 Why would anyone want to be a cat? Idk mabey the fact that they sleep 14 hours a day, just that fact alone is enough for me, plus the physical capabilities, and if there also is jazz involved that's a big plus
Alternate video title: “Overanalyzing the Politics and Political Views of a Movie About an Old Lady in 1910, Paris, Giving her Inheritance to Talking Cats”
I feel like the only problem with this movie was Edgar's reaction to the will. It going to the cats first should have been a non-issue. Edgar would still be responsible for the money because he'd be taking care of the cats. And if he didn't want to take care of the cats, he could have just dumped them somewhere AFTER Madame died, and boom, the inheritance would be in his name. But since that issue is the inciting incident of the entire plot, the movie is just fundamentally flawed.
I genuinely like your reviews but I'm gonna pass on this one. Not because "this is my favorite movie and I won't hear slander about it" or anything but if the first criticism on a character is their portrayal is "sexist" especially if it's pertaining to a female character then it just turns me off from whatever argument you have. Like if the girls are sexist stereotypes because they are proper and ladylike then why are the boys not considered sexist stereotypes? Because boys are always seen as rowdy and messy and those male characters are pretty rowdy and messy. It's a bit hypocritical to label one side sexist while not calling the other side out when they are also portrayed with sexist stereotypes. Like I said I enjoy your content but I'll sit this video out, I'll catch you in the next video. Have a nice night.
In truth O Malley is sexist as well in the sense that he is portrayed as "the ideal man" when he is completely the opposite, it just doesn't really click on my head to mention that since society has pretty much turned the term of "sexism" into something that people only think of connecting to women not men. But technically everyone (except Edgar) is super stereotypical in this movie in one way or another. This video is very different from my usual stuff, so you probably won't have to skip many more videos in the future. In fact, if I didn't already dedicate myself to talking about Disney animation's worst 3 movies, I probably wouldn't have bothered with this video at all, since the stuff that makes this movie bad is mostly touchy subject matter that was guaranteed to turn several people off by default. But I have to be honest with my opinion, so I didn't hold anything back (perhaps to a point of occasional nitpicking, but still).
It’s a simple movie about a rich woman loving her cats (not every movie ever made.. even back in 1970’s needs to have woke complex characters breaking gender norms). The art style is adored, music is fun, characters are funny, and the plot is enjoyable with the found family aspect. So i couldn’t disagree more. Kittens were just being kittens (not whiny, not annoying), its absolutely fine for Marie to be “girly” and love “romance”, a butler who decides to drug then get rid of the cats (the only source of happiness of Madame) is evil and he was proud too! The dogs add humor, the cat band is fantastic, i could go on and on..
I dunno. I guess it's a matter of taste. I have this same problem with Charlotte's Web 2: Wilbur's Great Adventure. I grew up with that film as a kid (I was 8 when I got the VHS in Easter 2003) and I look back on it and think "Man. Good times!" Just like The Aristocats, which I had on DVD when I was five. Prior to that, I had the 1996 VHS.
@@Rockotarthepurplehatguy Honesty me neither. As a kid i didn't understand disney bronze age or Renaissance age etc and saw the aristocats as pure escapism. To this day, mum and i still quote "DEEPER!!" I'm dreading what the CGI remake will be like.
My fave parts: -Edgar: *wheezy voice* CATS!? -Old guy dumps out his wine when he sees Roquefort running with the alley cats -Georges and Edgar struggling upstairs -Toulouse’s painting bleeds at the nose and mouth -Uncle Waldo: WHOOPAY!!!! -Roquefort and the cats eating together -O’Malley grabs the geese by their tails when he’s drowning -Berlioz: Sissy stuff!
OK, but really, what is even the point of the Edgar and dog scenes in this movie?!?!?! Edit: Since I am seeing a lot of people saying it's crazy to call this worse than Ralph Breaks the Internet, let me clarify. What I really meant was that I like this movie LESS than Ralph Breaks the Internet. Even though Ralph Breaks the Internet is almost certainly objectively worse. Just wanted to clear that up, thank you for understanding. Also, leave your guesses for the final part of the unholy trinity, and congratulations to anyone who actually guessed this movie would be part of the trinity.
If it's not Chicken Little, I will genuinely be confused. It's legitimately one of the worst movies I've ever seen in my entire life and has the worst character ever in Buck Cluck who can fuck off into the sun.
Being mad about gender roles in a film made in 1970 is like getting mad at the way Hellon of Troy is portrayed in the Iliad. It’s a product of its time and to mark that as one of the reasons the movie is one of the worst in the Disney catalog 50 years later is about as arbitrary as you can get.
I would say the biggest crime of this film is that it meanders. This was the first film Disney made without the Guidance and Leadership of Walt and it shows. Although Walt approved of the idea of this film, he never approved on a set plot, so the Animaters kind of improvised. But to say this film is worse than "Ralph Breaks the Internet" is just simply false in my opinion. Though it is certainly flawed, at least the Animators did the best they could with what they were given. If your going to tell me that "Ralph Breaks the Internet" was seriously the best these modern Animators could come up with (With 6 yrs between films mind you!) then I am afraid I must respectfully disagree. Good intentions following a tragic event is much more sympathetic than having no good ideas and just doing the Internet Trope
Ok, maybe it was a stretch to say that, but I think I would genuinely rather rewatch Ralph Breaks the Internet, of course both of them I'd rather not rewatch if I don't have to.
24:28 If you think these are bad, just wait till you see Balto 3! Which you shouldn’t do ever for any reason. Watch Saberspark’s Balto video instead of the actual movie. 28:40 Whenever I hear Uncle Waldo, I instantly think of Hoppity Hooper. 38:12 Paul Winchell(AKA, the original voice of Tigger)voices the horrifically racist Chinese cat. Thurl Ravenscroft(AKA, the guy who sung “Your A Mean One, Mr. Grinch”)voices the Russian stereotype cat. Scatman Crothers(AKA, the performer for the Hong-Kong Phooey theme song)voices the amazing, great, and beloved Scat Cat character. Sterling Holloway(AKA, the original voice for Winnie The Pooh and Kaa The Snake)plays the incredibly important, wonderful, and meaningful mouse character(I have no idea what his name actually is). Your Welcome❤
Thomas at first seemed like Puss In Boots but without what makes him a likable character jokingly but no by the end he literally is Puss if he was written with the skill of a middle school English paper
Dream cast for that: I'm picturing Ralph Feinnes as Edgar. Helen Mirren as Madame. Morgan Freeman as the old lawyer, Chris Evans voicing O'Malley and Lea Seydoux voicing Duchess.
Poppy cock, the aristocats is a fabulous movie. The animation has character and catches your attention. The voice cast is spot on. The comedic timing is brilliant. The content including stereo types is fantastic. The storyline is simple yet flowing and the music aspect is a nice touch. The love story is the icing on the cake. You need to back to media studies classes and get some real perspective while you're at it.
I loved this movie as a kid, mostly because cats were my favorite animal. But even with the nostalgia shades, I can admit that it has a lot of problems, even compared to its peers. And this was the last movie to be personally greenlit by Walt himself. Sometimes I wonder how it would have turned out if he lived just a little longer to oversee its production.
super unfair of you to belittle what Tom did for Duchess and the kittens like that tbh but go off king he legit risked his life multiple times and showed that he indeed had gentlemanly characteristics and cared for her kittens, putting them before himself even though at first it was v selfish bcos yes, hot lady cat. he himself didnt even know he had that stuff in him bcos he's used to being selfish and living life only for enjoyment. he fed them, saved them, kept them safe, returned them home and at the end of it, was willing to leave them alone without asking for anything, like an actual hero. he only stayed cos the madame and everyone else wanted him too, even though he clearly thought he wouldnt fit in w them it's also clear that bcoos he's a tom cat, he had some sort of disdain for that kind of life, and anything that seemed proper or "pretentious" thats part of the reason why he doesnt like the geese. i dont even like Tom that much but he's far better than Edgar on all fronts bcos he saw past their breeding and class, and saw their kindness and appreciation. Edgar thought he deserved everything that old lady had cos he "served" her, but he didnt do so without payment or even perks. not to mention the time line of that film, like he's lucky he didn't have to "settle" for some manual labour job, which he obviously would have looked down his nose at as well. he's legit the worst of the worst and even Timbuktu didnt deserve the displeasure of having him.
Isnt this 19th/20th century london? Of course the rich, pampered, high society cat is acting how she does. Shes not going to be a tomboy or something. And her daughter wrestling isnt "ladylike" because neing a biological woman and being a "lady" are two different concepts. These arent sexist stereotypes, they're representations, products of a raising up and outlook on life that many women had in the past.
I wouldn't call The Aristocats one of the worst Disney movies of all time. That title could go to any of their "live-action" remakes. That being said, Lady and the Tramp did the whole theme and plot of this film much better.
I also just realised, they could’ve introduced Thomas O’mally in a positive way by having him save the kittens from the dogs. Think about it, what if the dogs tried to eat the cats instead of Edgar? Not only would it spare us the looney tune scenes, but it could make for some actual entertainment and make Omally likeable to begin with.
my paents own a vhs tape of the aristeocats literally on the back of the tape it says "the last movie to get the nod from walt disney himself" i think he supported the idea but he died somewhere mid production ;-;
I don't know either, I just really hate this movie, it's one of those movies where I dread the thought of rewatching it, only the unholy Trinity movies are like that for me out of Disney's animation line up.
@@RockotarthepurplehatguyWhat would you give Lady and the Tramp out of 5? Also, Oliver & Company. Can I guess? 2.5/5 for both. Because in a previous post, you said that LATT was mediocre but better than The Aristocats because it isn't as nonsensical or contrived. I guess Oliver & Company is the same way?
I can't believe you don't think what Edgar did was that bad😮! It was absolutely monstrous, abandoning those poor cats. I can't believe either that you think Ms. Adelaide owes him an inheritance. She doesn't. It's her money and she have it folded into kites if she wants to. Besides, when the lady passes presumably Edgar becomes the cats' guardian meaning he could stay in the mansion, hire his own servants and even take five star trips. All for the good of the cats, of course.
As a kid the lesson I got from Uncle Waldo was that drunks can be funny in a pathetic way and should be politely tolerated since their choices are not really your business. That was reinforced by most depictions of alcoholics. I never saw it as glorifying alcohol, though. They may be shown as silly and happy but also kinda gross. I didn't get the implications at the time but even so the way he acted can be funny on screen but it'd be unpleasant in reality. It's an increasingly dumb movie but it does show the mentality Boomers were raised with and have been clinging to as tradition.
Aristocats summery: Rich cats bully the poor butler so much that he decides to get rid of cats for money he so much deserves only to be deemed the bully by the end. But I still love this movie, I can’t help it.
I liked the Aristocats when I first watched it. I haven't re-watched since, but it doesn't seem that bad to me personally. But I do have a number of issues with the film, and I can see why you and many others don't enjoy it. I hate the two stupid dogs and every moment they're on-screen, but they thankfully aren't very prominent so they don't come close to ruining my overall enjoyment. I also find O'Malley to be very pushy, which can sometimes feel uncomfortable, but I don't find him to be a bad character still (he DID help Duchess and her kittens on their way back) And as for the unholy trinity, I wouldn't be surprised if either Chicken Little, Home on the Range or Dinosaur ends up next
In defense of the cats inheriting first, this is a construction that used to be common, where people try to use their wealth to protect their pets, so that they can live a happy life, and pay their carers a fair salary. The idea in this construction is that Edgar would be the trustee, given access to the money and the mansion, to use how he pleases as long as he takes proper care of the cats.
I actually never knew that the song is called "Everybody wants be a cat" in the original. I used to watch this movie A LOT as a child and in Germany its "Katzen brauchen viel Musik" meaning "Cats need lots of music". And with all the cats playing instruments... it does make sense lol
Watching this knowing my nostalgia for this movie will be wrecked 37:17 Fun Fact: In the German Dub they changed the song to be "Cats need music" which makes way more sense for the scene
Very funny take on one of my favorite movies. Just goes to show you how everyone sees the world a bit different from each other. Because I saw Duchess as knowing he was just out for one thing but knew she had her kids to think about and needed to get home. So this guy can be of use but I'll be keeping my eyes on him, he probably knows his way around town, maybe he'll help, and cats are pretty tough in a pinch Mama cat plus her kittens they could probably take him on. I feel like duchess is using him as much as he was trying to use her. I could go on but I think you get that we had two different views on this movie. I still very much enjoy this video and your take on it and the crazy situations. The only thing I want to correct is that Edgar drugged the cats so thats why they didn't wake up.
I've generally agreed with you on most movies. But i do have to disagree with you on this one. I saw that aristocats was included in your bad movie trio, and before i saw it, i figured i'd hear you out, even though i didn't agree. And im only a few minutes in and disagree with you on almost every point you've made so far. First. Keep the timeframe in mind and when this movie was made. French people were stereotyped as women being very proper. And that doesn't make them a bad character trait. Dutchess is a very proper woman. And she's been pampered her whole life, of course she'd be regal. And she's trying to teach her daughter the same(this is coming from a woman. I have absolutely nothing wrong with this type of charater. I personally hate that every disney woman now has to be a steong independant woman). There's nothing wrong with that as a character. Her boys, while rude, are children. Children act like that. And while the butler doesn't show any malice before this, we have no clue what he was like to the cats before the movie takes place. We know he's allergic. And if he goes to great enough lengths to drug the cats and discard housecats in a field(which is almost a death sentence for an indoor cat), there was obviously some build-up to that. Sure, it would have been smart to show that, but im sure they couldn't due to runtime and the cost of animations at the time, considering they wanted the movie to be about the cats' return home. Im pretty sure the animators were relying on audience intelligence to put those together. Something they dont do anymore. But i think the worst mystake you made within the first 10 to 15 minutes of this review was asking why the cats didn't wake up on a loud scooter. The butler drugged their dinner. You see how much sleeping medication he puts in their dinner. Which quite honestly, in reality, could have been more than enough to kill a cat. And then he leaves them out in a field. Indoor cats that dont have any survival skills, and they're drugged. Even if he is shafted in the will(something i might point out is very unusual for someone who isnt a family member to be added in anyway) that isnt just a morally grey action, that's a pretty evil action. Adding him to the will pretty much says he gets to benefit from all her riches, as long as he takes care of the cats since obviously the cats can't benefit from human money directly. So im sorry, i like your analyses most of the time. But i think you dramatically misunderstood this movie
@Rockotarthepurplehatguy and there's nothing wrong with it not being your cup of tea. It is always interesting to hear why someone doesnt like something. The movie wasnt a masterpiece by any means. I just feel there are other movies more deserving of being labeled one of the worst. But, this is also your list and reflects how you feel. I certainly dont have the courage to make videos voicing my opinions, so i still commend you for putting this out there, even if i dont agree with this one
