Personally, I enjoyed the concept of 'Treasure Planet'; I'm a big fan of steampunk/cyberpunk/etc. (i.e., in 'TP''s case, 19th century style set in the future), and who doesn't like pirates, so to me, at least, a film like this is appealing.
However, there are three main faults to the film which I think really hurt the final product, but I don't quite blame the Disney execs for including them:
1. The inclusion of cute, wacky (and most importantly, marketable) side characters. Every Disney film has these types of characters, and with 'TP', there were two. Though I didn't as much mind that blobby, morphy-type creature, I reeeeeally could have done without the Martin Short robot. I know that his role is integral to the film, and it's a part of the original novel, but they could have found a less...annoying way to deal with it. It seems everytime the robot spews generically wacky dialogue, the film is screaming "AND HERE'S SOMETHING FOR THE KIDS!". It's distracting.
2. The overall "Look! It's in outer space" vibe! Sure, it's *set* in space, but at times the amount of aliens and general outer space effects is a bit too much. I believe Roger Ebert (or someone) described the film as having the appearance of a "prototype for a video game", and frankly, it's sort of true. It detracts from the original source much more strongly, and makes one wonder why they just didn't either go with a traditional adaptation of 'Treasure Island', or simply just another (original) story set in space. I'd ask for a bit more 'Treasure Island' and a little less 'Star Wars'.
3. The inclusion of action sequences. This I didn't mind as much, since the ones in 'TP' didn't feel as forced as some action sequences in other Disney films. However, Disney is still under the impression that children have the attention spans of mosquitos and won't pay attention to anything that doesn't have a large amount of explosions. But then again, I wasn't that bothered by 'em.
If I had to do anything else to it, it'd be a little more tightening of the script. If the writers treated it more as a "film" rather than a "children's film", i.e. stronger dialogue, flesh out the characters a bit more...this could have been one of the Disney greats, but as it stands, it's just...eh.
Wow, I have a lot of spare time on my hands to squawk about this film at this length...
reply
share
urobolusring
17 years ago
Interesting.
I could definitely see where people might feel there are too many comic side-kicks. I loved all of them, but I believe Peter Travers pointed out that three (Dr. Doppler served as a comic sidekick, he argued; I agree) is too many for some.
As for the space vibe, for some that's the whole problem with the movie--the premise. I wanted to know how the movie could have been changed to something more universally appreciated while keeping that premise the same. In this case, though, I think if you don't like the conceit, the movie's dead-on-arrival. For those who liked it, the movie is infinitely more entertaining. I appreciated it as a brilliant pastiche and even possibly a deconstruction of nautical narratives. (though I doubt Musker and Clements thought of it that way) Ebert had the opposite reaction, obviously.
As for action sequences...I can understand your POV, but they didn't bother me as much. Maybe if they had erased one or two and replaced it with a scene expanding on the characters the critics might have liked it more. Still, 'Aladdin' had the 'Cave of Wonders' action scene and the 'Battle with Jafar' and that's a well-respected Disney classic. (it's my personal favorite, actually) But, like you said, that's the thing that least bothered you.
I've often tried to think of ways in which the script could be "tightened" like you said, keeping all the same characters and general plot, and am often at a loss. I think it's just hard to strike the right balance that universally appeals to both children and adults. TP appealed to me in that department, but obviously didn't to a lot of others. I guess I would've tried to add a few more wrinkles to the Doppler/Amelia romance and expand a little bit on BEN, Doppler and Amelia. Hard to do without becoming ponderous, though.
Anyone else?
reply
share
Jnbfwc
16 years ago
Hmmm. . . I think I would have done the 'black hole' scene differently. Why?
Because if you know ANYTHING about black holes or evolution, then that scene is, in a word, absurd.
It's the ONE scene where, although in the end it has me on the edge of my seat, I still sigh at its beginning. It's like that ONE scene in a movie that, if it were gone, the movie would be perfect.
I loved the style they did it in. They made it full of suspense and such, and I really DO like the scene, but if I had made the movie, it would have been done differently.
It's simply too silly as it is, and it assumes that evolution is true, which will be really stupid when people finally give up the dead theory.
At FIRST, I REALLY would have dispensed with, or severely modified the robot. He was yet another, "Oh, great. . . forgot about him. You're RUINING THE GOOD MOVIE, MAN!" character. After watching the movie a dozen times or so, I warmed up and eventually really enjoyed every second of him.
That's a sign of a good movie, where the more you watch it, the more you like it.
Furthermore, I would have CERTAINLY added more of the Captain Amelia and her incredible English skills.
As for the animation itself, I didn't like when things like Billy Bones showed up because he really didn't look as realistic as, say, anything from anime. Anime style monsters look more fierce and realistic than the ones in Disney cartoons, and while I eventually warmed up to him, as well, he just wasn't as realistic looking as I would have liked.
But this is coming from a guy whose FAVORITE Disney movie is -- Treasure Planet.
reply
share
skids20
15 years ago
I've seen the movie three times now and I haven't warmed up to it yet. I'm not sure what I think is wrong with the movie. I guess it's the Star Trek fan in me that can't wrap my mind around why they have all this technology around them and they're dressed up in 1800's clothing and living/working at an Inn. I guess the premise of "in SPACE!" really is shoved in your face too much.
I don't know. I had this crazy idea about replacing one male character
with a female character that could be Jim's childhood friend (note, not
a girlfriend.) She wouldn't have to be there for the whole movie, but
the beginning would've been nice. I guess two (3 if you really
want to count the alien pirate) female characters is
to few for me, being female myself. I think the whole movie suffers from character overload anyway and, as it was said, not enough character development for minor characters.
I didn't have a problem with Ben. I guess because I like Martin Short.
I know it's a movie aimed at little boys (probably), but I think there could've been more romance in the film.
The pacing seemed 'off' too. I think the movie was too rushed.
Maybe if I see TP a few more times, I'll like it better, but as of now
I don't love it. If I never do that's okay because everyone has different
tastes. (I actually own it, so I can watch it anytime.)
Still can't pin-point that specific thing that's keeping me from loving
the movie, but this thread has given me some insight as to where the movie
went wrong in it's production/writing/whatever. It just felt like it was missing
some element (I know I said romance, but it doesn't have to be just that), but
I don't know what that element is.
Edit:
Maybe the movie just wasn't executed well. It has potential, good story telling and characters, and I can almost get with the mixture of space and 1800's stuff,
but maybe it just wasn't executed well enough to live up to some expectations.
I did enjoy how suspenseful it was, but something in the movie just fell short.
reply
share