101 Dalmatians 1996

101 Dalmatians 1996

As a kid, I was quite obsessed with Dalmatians because of Disney. I had a game, the teddies, the figures... you name it, I had it. However, despite my yearning for everything spotted, I don't remember particularly enjoying the animated film as much as the product. And if the animated film didn't turn my young head, neither did the live action version made five years after its debut. However, out of a mixture of curiosity, the need to update from video to DVD, the want of a growing collection and the premise of a cheap shopping spree at CEX encouraged me to purchase it and put it at the front of my DVD stack. Why? Because its alphabetised. Which puts it slap bang at the beginning of my journy of analysis and review.

Plot and Script

The plot stayed pretty closely to the animated version and I presume pretty closely to the original book (though I've never read it). Dog meets dog, causing guy to meet girl,  fleeting romance and marriage ensues, then puppies appear. Naturally. The puppies are then kidnapped by goons working for antagonist Cruella De Vil, who 'lives for' and 'worships' fur. The adult dogs, Pongo and Purdy then rescue their puppies, along with the other 84, travelling with them away from the De Vil house and through the countryside to safety. 

  There are a few adaptations to the animated predecessor. For one, it expands on the fact that Anita designed the dog-skinned coat later used by Cruella: something I don't remember being pushed before. It does make the suspect of Cruella a little more realistic: moving it from 'shes just evil so it must have been her' to 'oh, heres some proof it was her'. This change, though, allows for the increased involvement of the police, leading to what was quite a rushed ending. We no longer get the careful creeping through towns disguised as labradors or any exhilarating car chases. Instead, we get some too-good-to-be-true policemen who manage to find all the dogs and bring them back to London in their police cars.A bit of realism people!

  Other changes to the plot included: the forgettable character Skinner, Roger (the man of the house) being a video game designer instead of a wanna-be beethoven and there was little suggestion that Roger and Anita's progress from falling in love, to getting married to her being pregnant took longer than 3 hours to complete. However, overall the plot moved quite well. Wasn't too long, wasn't too short. The ending wasn't as satisfying at the animated version, but it provided a humourous version of the story. 

  One problem I have with the scriping and plan of the film was its' occasional... odd quotes. I'm not quite sure where the scriptwriter John Hughes was going having Horace say 'that gives me a shrinky winky' and I personally think he should have been fired for just thinking of including it. But he also has some other, less shocking, more cringe-worthy lines that make you remember why it wasn't much of a hit at the box office. A second problem I had was the bad research. The film is meant to be set in London, England. However, last time I checked, we don't have racoons or skunks as natural wildlife and Roger must have been a super human on that bike to travel the distance from Leicester Square to Trafalgar Square in less than a street. However, you can see the genre the American scriptwriter and director were going for and if you keep in mind it was a film designed for children, the humour is barable to a point it becomes quite funny.Though saying that, I don't remember quite understanding the verbal jokes when I was younger, such as Roger saying 'would you like a cup of marriage'. Its only now I can appreciate the awkwardness of such a slip-up, whereas when you're a kid... who cares, right? So perhaps they were aiming this more for the adults. I can get a fair laugh out of it now, at any rate. 

Characters and Actors

A good thing about this movie are the actors. I feel it has quite a strong cast, especially looking to Glenn Close (Cruella) and Hugh Laurie (Jasper), but also including Joely Richardson (Anita) though I feel the script let her down slightly. All cast-members kept to the lively American-kid-comedy vibe, bringing the quite animated chatacters to life in a whacky, yet fairly realistic way. Some characters, like Roger for example, were still boring and flat - much to Jeff Daniels attempts to boost the characters personality - but the film was kept together mainly by Glenn Close and the well trained dogs. In fact, I found myself to be enlightened and was more interested in how you could train a dog to do certain actions than the film itself at times. All of the animals were well trained and body language and expressions were all used nicely - animated and comedic rather than natural.

Scenary and Style

The style of the film very much fitted with its premise of 'American-Kid-Comedy' in that it had forms of slapstick humour, animated characters and corny jokes that you couldn't find in a more serious comedy, but it suited the film. Its bad points all were fitted together in a nice frame that made it slot into place. The style was bright, with good imagery. They probably tried to fit too many iconic views of London in the chase scene, but it all felt very cheery and very.. British! I think the producers may have planned to change the setting to modern-day, however as a change to the animated versions' setting. This change doesn't unsettle the film or the plot, but the animated film gained a style from its setting and paiting style, which the live action film has lost by its update.

I have a personal love for the style of Cruella in this film. Everything from her dress sense, to her hair to her office screams evil and it really helps this film along. I think Glen Close was a particular big name in this movie and they just wanted to make the most of her, but even if this was the case they did a good job. Perhaps I'm biased to all things black and white, but I want that office!

http://images.artistdirect.com/Images/nad/video/tribune/41632/392_ah.jpg

Music

The music for this film I'm sure was nice, but it is quite forgettable as I don't remember it.  I don't remember it being powerful for adding to the plot in any way that some soundtracks do, yet I don't remember it being a problem either. Its not anything I'll be adding to my playlist.

Overall

Overall, I like this film. Sure, it has its' quirks and its' odd lines and... bad scripting. But, its a cheery family comedy that acts as a nice comparison with its animated counterpart. I enjoy it and it has a pleasant ring of nostalgia to it. I feel its not a film to venture to, however, if you're older than 10 and don't have that child-hood link to dalmatians, but you may find out you enjoy it anyway if you keep in mind it was aimed at kids. As thats really the whole essence of this film... its trying to make live action films exciting for kids through whacky antics and its progression from an animated film. But, all in all, my overall verdict is ok! But... LONG LIVE THE SPOTTED DOGS.