Modern Mouse: Contemporary Ideas and Disney Animation…

It appears that the latest Walt Disney Animation Studios film is starting a lot of conversations…

Opening next week, Ralph Breaks The Internet, the sequel to the studio’s video game-centric hit, happens to be a somewhat rare contemporary Disney animated feature.

Since the trailers and marketing materials have highlighted lots of pop cultural references, memes, and all sorts of other in-the-now things, some have been concerned. Even with the movie garnering a meaningless 93% on the coveted Rotten Tomatoes. It also has sparked a discussion that comes up every now and then concerning feature-length Disney animated films… Should Disney be modern? Or should they only be about “timeless” fairy tales?

I’ll break it down, even though I might not be old enough to suggest anything… Oh well, here it goes…

I don’t agree that Disney animated films shouldn’t be modern.

The present day Mickey Mouse cartoons aside, Walt Disney’s fourth ever animated feature took place in contemporary America. That film was Dumbo, and it was released in 1941.

Walt’s fourth feature feels very much like a 1940s movie, but not to its detriment, other than some of the more questionable elements that have less to do with the storytelling. That’s another discussion for another day…

I consider Dumbo to be one of Disney’s best. Right up there with olden day fairy tales like Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs and Cinderella, up there with old world fantasy stories like Pinocchio, up there with period pieces like Lady and the Tramp. If anything, the modern setting MAKES the movie. It is also proof that Walt Disney wasn’t one to repeat himself. After two fairy tales and an anthology of segments set across different time periods, all of them classical, he followed it all up with a modern story. Then he followed that up with Bambi, which no doubt takes place in the modern day, even if we never see or hear humans, for we only see their campsite and hear their contemporary-sounding hunting rifles.

Walt would later tackle One Hundred and One Dalmatians, which was released not even five years after the novel it was based on was published! The film is clearly a modern feature: The vehicles, the style, the London setting, the TV, the radio, the jazzy soundtrack, and if you’re really sharp-eyed… There’s a little detail in the movie that seemingly confirms its setting: 1952. There’s a stretch where the villainous Bad’uns watch a parody of a 50s game show.

Modern features continued to happen after Walt’s passing… There’s the two Rescuers films, Oliver & Company, Lilo & Stitch, etc. However, an overwhelming amount of Walt Disney Animation Studios’ output is either period pieces or really old tales. Films mostly set a long time ago. Even Glen Keane himself remarked one time, something along the lines, “If Disney is ‘once upon a time,’ then Pixar is ‘wouldn’t it be cool if?'”

After The Walt Disney Company’s acquisition of Pixar and the subsequent leadership change of Walt Disney Animation Studios, the features line-up became a healthy mix of contemporary stories and tales set in the past. If you ask me, they’ve done pretty darn well with the modern stories and – for the most part – found a good way to differentiate them from cousin studio Pixar’s current day movies. I think Bolt is a very fun and sweet buddy comedy-cum-road trip romp, Wreck-It Ralph is a dazzling and warmhearted video game action-adventure, Big Hero 6 is a very enjoyable techno-superhero blast, and Zootopia? A bona fide classic that I feel nearly stands up there with Walt’s best, even. I’m not joking when I type that.

With that all said, I personally feel that the folks at Disney Animation can tackle whatever kind of stories they want to. I don’t like the idea that Disney should ONLY make stories set in the far past, and should never touch anything remotely contemporary. What about made up settings? What about the future? Can Disney Animation make movies about the future, too? Well, I think they did a good job with the uneven but ultimately very sincere Meet The Robinsons. Walt was all about the future. I mean, Tomorrowland anyone? There’s a great big beautiful tomorrow, shining at the end of every day…

Disney’s done modern animated stories before, as far back as the “good old days.”

Sometimes, “timeless” becomes shorthand for stale, stagnant, and safe. There was a time when Disney mostly played it very safe, and it impacted their animation, their reputation, and their position in the ever-expanding world of cinema. They were in the danger of becoming a corny oldies act, and not a premier force in animated storytelling. It isn’t the setting that defines the film, nor is it the presence of very contemporary things… It is the characters and the storytelling…

Now… Films that rely on their contemporary settings… A whole other can of worms…

I get that concern. I understand the concerns about Ralph Breaks The Internet‘s more dubious elements. The movie is a few days away, and while some have been fortunate enough to already see it, a lot of the public hasn’t. We can’t make the call just yet, but…

Even if Ralph Breaks The Internet is indeed loaded with things that will date it 5 years after its release, will it matter 20 years later?

I think the Internet setting was kind of a risk to begin with. The Internet is an ever-changing world, and whatever approach Ralph Breaks The Internet took, it was going to be dated. The first Wreck-It Ralph, I think, wasn’t in danger of that. Commercial video games have been around since the 1970s, and Wreck-It Ralph wisely covered games from different eras: The protagonist comes from an early 80s 8-bit game, the deuteragonist is from a mid-90s 3D kart racer, and another major player comes from a gritty, high-tech modern first-person shooter. The story covered a lot of bases, but the video games were merely the settings… What kept Wreck-It Ralph afloat was the character work and the storytelling. Perhaps the same will hold the sequel high?

I mean… No one seems to care that a lot of acclaimed live-action movies from the 60s, the 70s, and the 80s were very contemporary. They hold up because the characters in all of those movies are great, they’re iconic, their stories are worth revisiting again and again. They didn’t overdo their time periods, and sometimes they worked right off of them. Not only do trends change, but so do attitudes, and society. Why is it suggested that Disney’s animation should never be modern?

This image from Pinocchio actually contains a big pop culture reference in it.

Even in Disney’s fairy tales and period pieces, there’s modern stuff. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs has some 30s-isms, and there are little subtle pop culture references like Dopey belting out a hot jazzy drum solo while attempting to swat a fly. Jiminy Cricket, who was voiced by the then very popular Cliff “Ukulele Ike” Edwards, talks like a 30s wise-guy throughout a movie that appears to take place sometime before the end of the 19th century. The Sword in the Stone‘s time-traveling wizard Merlin is a source of many modern jokes, heck the final line in that movie is a reference to an obscure product commercial. The Jungle Book has a 60s jazz soundtrack, Beatles look-alike vultures, and lots of modern sort-of hip talk. Often times, the voice acting in Disney’s films barely match the settings… No one seems to care about that, though.

Flash-forward to the much-heralded Disney Renaissance. The Little Mermaid definitely has an 80s vibe to it, and Aladdin? Ho-ho-hooooo Aladdin. I mean, the Genie makes a ton of different references to things no one born after – say – 1987 would even get. I was born the year Aladdin came out, so at like age 8 or whatever, I didn’t get most of the pop cultural references. What if someone born in – say – 2005 went their whole life not being a cinema or old pop culture scholar? And what if that person watched Aladdin in 2025 and failed to get the references to things like Taxi Driver and Arsenio Hall? Some have indeed pointed out that Aladdin did not age well at all, but still, a lot of people love the story and the characters, so it ultimately does not matter.

Outside of Aladdin, you also have the very modern Hercules. The Emperor’s New Groove is similar in that it’s set in an ancient Incan setting (which was much more prominent in the scrapped movie that it evolved out of, the legendary Kingdom of the Sun) and has an up-to-date attitude to it, not to mention elements that are very anachronistic. Trampolines and elaborate underground rollercoasters and little mechanized dioramas. Yeah, you get the idea. Even stories like The Lion King (whose time period setting is already ambiguous) and Mulan throw in stuff that contradicts their respective settings. How the hell do Timon and Pumbaa know the 50s doo-wop hit ‘The Lion Sleeps Tonight’? How does Zazu know Disney itself and ‘It’s a Small World’?! How does Timon know how to do a Hawaiian dance? Why is that okay? Why is the current regime approaching modern stories not okay?

It’s all about execution. If Walt Disney Animation Studios made something akin to Shark Tale, knock on non-existent wood, there’d be a reason to panic. However, it wouldn’t be a mess of a movie because of the modern setting, but rather how they used the setting and how they didn’t craft a compelling story and characters. Pixar can excel at modern-set movies, so can Disney, so can any other animation studio really. Disney is not imitating others by making contemporary animated movies, and again… They did that years and years ago! Dumbo and One Hundred and One Dalmatians predate Toy Story by decades.

What Disney Animation does with the setting matters more, and the characters. One time, Disney did make an overtly-modern animated feature, almost exactly thirty years ago. Oliver & Company was not only set in 1980s New York, it also had then-hot pop stars like Billy Joel, Bette Midler, Huey Lewis, and Ruth Pointer voicing characters and/or singing songs. It’s a thoroughly modern Disney animated feature, and it’s very VERY dated. To me, that would not matter, if the storytelling was better. The modern setting of Oliver & Company isn’t what really affected that movie, it was the lack of great characters and a story that did something cool with them. Clearly it was prep work for what would come later. Oliver & Company isn’t terrible in my opinion, it’s merely just an extended Saturday morning cartoon romp with some tonal issues. The characters are just ok, what happens in the story makes for a mild diversion. Inoffensive, ultimately harmless, doesn’t leave you with much, Oliver & Company is just okay. With a better story and characters, the 80s stuff in it being dated would be a minor complaints. Dumbo is still beloved some 77 years later, Dalmatians is still beloved some 57 years later, Oliver & Company is mostly obscure for a Disney animated feature. I feel something like Wreck-It Ralph, and if it’s really really good, Ralph Breaks The Internet, will not fade away like Oliver & Company did. Ditto Zootopia and Big Hero 6.

More than anything, all the stuff that audiences 20-30 years from now won’t get really won’t impact the story. And hey, there are things that happened in medieval and fairy tale times that don’t happen nowadays. Old tech, old things, things no one uses anymore, mindsets that are no longer a thing… Well, there will be things in Ralph Breaks The Internet that people won’t be using or thinking about in 2038 and beyond. Heck, some of the stuff might be taught in history classes. Again, will that matter if the story quality is great? Will some viewer in 2050 have a hard time understanding the story of the movie because of the very in-the-now stuff? If the story is easy to follow, then I also don’t think that will be a problem…

I think Disney Animation exploring contemporary settings and themes also gives us audiences a look at modern times from a unique set of lenses. What would the current day be like if it were a Disney animated movie? What’s exactly wrong with that idea? To me, Disney Feature Animation should remain a premier force, but I think by retreading well-worn ground, they stop being just that. They’ll continue to approach past-set stories with a recognizably Disney style, and won’t be changing that anytime soon, so why not apply that storytelling style to something set in some time OTHER THAN THE PAST? Not only would they excel at modern stories in this century (and again, I think Zootopia is marvelous despite not being set in our world), but think of what kinds of futuristic stories they could tell. Imagine a futuristic sci-fi Disney animated feature! Or a story set in a whole other world. There’s been scratches at that, but imagine that they keep doing that and really commit to it. Yowza, yowza, yowza!

If Ralphy Two is a miss in your eyes, then think about this… They could very well try again. Why is it that Disney has to pack up and never try again? Didn’t Walt Disney once say… Keep moving forward?