MovieChat Forums > Dumbo (2019) Discussion > "The Big Dumbo Bust-Out" (SPOILERS)

"The Big Dumbo Bust-Out" (SPOILERS)

posted 6 years ago by ecarle (14979)
7 replies | jump to latest

Tim Burton's version of Dumbo is interesting -- in the wrong way, I suppose -- for a couple of things.

One is that he has very much "Tim Burtonized" the famous Dumbo story so that an auteur can be discerned -- the circus characters here match up in various ways with the circus characters in Batman Returns(also starring Michael Keaton and Danny DeVito) and in Big Fish. And the film has a macabre/Goth edge -- manifesting in the exhibit of monsters at Futureworld and a bit in Eva Green's character.

The second thing that's interesting about Dumbo is how the original film is used for only about the first half of the new story -- whereupon an entirely new Dumbo story commences, which overcomes both the original film and Tim Burton's vision in presenting a tale I call "The Big Dumbo Bust Out."

In short, "Dumbo" becomes an action movie, with Michael Keaton as a smarmy megalomaniac arch villain (very rich, a takeover artist who welches on his deals with "the little guys"), backed by his his scary and murderous bald henchman. It becomes clear that Keaton is out to kill off Dumbo's mother and put Dumbo's life at risk in a flying act without a net and -- our intrepid band of "little guy heroes" must stop that murderous plan by implementing a caper - the big Dumbo bust out.

As I watched "Dumbo" start to lose the emotional heft of the original and become an action movie, I'm reminded that the Disney folk did much the same thing with their Mary Poppins sequel of a few months ago. What had been good enough for Disney -- Mary Poppins as a sweet tale of family strife gone good -- became ANOTHER action movie in the sequel, with Mary and Company pitted against a villainous banker and his team of crooks in a cliffhanger climax on Big Ben.

I suppose the Disney writing team now believes that, to hook a new young audience, their timeless classics need to be converted into action thrillers. These movies follow the template of our comic book movies and our "Die Hard" type action movies(if far less violent than those) but...the innocence is gone.

I also note that the new Dumbo makes sure that Mrs. Dumbo DOESN'T sing Baby Mine(a human character does); that the possibly racist black crow number has been removed("I've seen a horse fly, I've seen a house fly, but I've never seen an elephant fly") and the lines given to the circus announcer(that same guy who says "Let's get ready to RUMBLE" now says "Let's get ready for DUMBO"), and that the lyrics of "Pink Elephants on Parade" have been dumped in favor of an artsy instrumental version for a sequence that now means nothing(Dumbo accidentally boozing has been removed.)

All in all, its pretty bad what they've done with "Dumbo" and I guess audiences figured that out. Contemporary references in the film to the "ready to rumble" guy, LA Confidential(how DeVito orates at the end of the film matches how he orates at the beginning of LAC), and Tarantino("Little Troublemaker") rather defuse the emotion further.

On the plus side, Michael Keaton is a GREAT villain (its rather like his role last year as the real-life guy who took over MacDonalds) and it is GREAT to see him paired again with DeVito(switching roles from Batman Returns; this time Keaton is the villain and DeVito is the hero.) With Connery, Hackman, Duvall and Nicholson pretty much all retired(only Duvall and Nicholson refuse to announce it) , Keaton joins Jeff Bridges and Kurt Russell in a new generation of "older character stars." A shot showing Keaton, Alan Arkin, and DeVito seated side by side is almost heartwarming as we think about all the great movies these men have been in over the decades(with Arkin starting the earliest).

Still, the fun casting can't overcome the feeling that the new "Dumbo" purposely sets out to remove what was great about the original and replaces it with "The Big Dumbo Bust-Out."

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

I'm pretty sure Nicholson is, sadly, retired, and most likely in poor health.

But Duvall had a decent part in Widows at the end of last year. I believe he's still a working actor.

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

You know, I wasn't really sure about Duvall. Oh, well, I'll leave it in with your correction. Thanks.

Nicholson has never officially said he is retired(as Connery and Hackman did), but its been since 2007 he had a full-length role(The Bucket List), and since 2010 he appeared in a film(How Will You Know.) There were rumors he'd come back in a remake of a German film -- can't remember the name, the one about the man who wears a woman's wig, etc -- but it hasn't happened.

I think Nicholson is retired. Just as well...leave us with the good movies and the younger men, Jack.

In any event, "the table is set" for actors like Bridges, Russell and Keaton to play the "old guy roles" for another decade or two. With 88-year old Clint Eastwood as the role model(rare that he is.)

[–] [deleted] 6 years ago

Nicholson was supposed to be playing the dad in the US remake of Tonie Erdmann (which I saw on the big screen a couple of years back). It's a shame he won't now be doing that since I feel that part, which would, incidentally have been perfect for Nicholson's sense of mischief, would have made for a better swansong than, the admittedly underrated but still only okay, How Do You Know (and, realistically-speaking, I don't expect to see Nicholson appear on the big screen again). From what I understand, Nicholson's decision to stand down from the film was due to a combination of a change in behind-the-scenes personnel and his poor health.

As for other 'old guys', where do you think Pacino, De Niro, Ford and Douglas fit?

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

Nicholson was supposed to be playing the dad in the US remake of Tonie Erdmann (which I saw on the big screen a couple of years back).

--

That's it! I couldn't remember the name ..thanks again.

---

It's a shame he won't now be doing that since I feel that part, which would, incidentally have been perfect for Nicholson's sense of mischief, would have made for a better swansong than, the admittedly underrated but still only okay, How Do You Know (and, realistically-speaking, I don't expect to see Nicholson appear on the big screen again).

---

Its rare, I suppose, for a major movie star(male especially) to get a really fitting final film. I can think of two off the top of my head: John Wayne in The Shootist, and Henry Fonda in On Golden Pond(for which Henry won his only Oscar.) Hackman's last one was "Welcome to Mooseport"(which maybe The Royal Tannebaums would have been a better last one) and Connery's was "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"(which Connery hated -- it helped make his retirement decision.)

Its too bad that Nicholson did "How Will You Know?" as his last one, but it was a favor to director James L. Brooks, who gave Nicholson his Oscar roles in "Terms of Endearment" and "As Good As It Gets." "The Bucket List" got mixed reviews, but it was a hit and the phrase "Bucket List" has entered the lexicon of the world. That's OK for a final film, but not great(maybe About Schmidt would have been better? Or The Departed?) Oh, well.

---

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

From what I understand, Nicholson's decision to stand down from the film was due to a combination of a change in behind-the-scenes personnel and his poor health.

--

Well, Nicholson has joined Marlon Brando and John Travolta on the fairly short list of major leading men who had weight problems in their later years. Its hard to maintain that leading man status -- even for character roles -- with too much visible weight gain. The weight was noticeable in How Will I Know and perhaps that drove Jack to stop working for awhile. Interesting, weight gain when he was younger(around the time of The Two Jakes) drove Jack to various diet plans that gave us a more trim Jack in A Few Good Men and Blood and Wine...but the weight eventually came back. If this has led to health issues, that's probably another part of Jack's absence, indeed. But still -- he was at least willing to consider coming back in Toni Erdmann.

Exactly when and how major stars(and I'm thinking of the men here) decide to retire has been interesting in movie history. Cary Grant perhaps did it best -- he quit at a now very young 62 and refused all offers to return. Which may have been a good thing, because James Cagney came back after "retiring" on Billy Wilder's One, Two Three ...and he seemed too old, both in the good movie "Ragtime" and in the TV movie about an old boxer which proved a terrible swan song.

Spencer Tracy acted his last role -- Guess Who's Coming to Dinner -- not only knowing it would be his last, but worried about surviving the shoot. He died shortly after finishing the movie. Clark Gable died of a surprise heart attack after finishing The Misfits with Marilyn Monroe. It would be her last film before death, too.

[–] ecarle (14979) 6 years ago

So now we come to a more healthy generation of actors who, unlike Cary Grant, simply couldn't or shouldn't retire at 62. And we've got Grand Old Man Clint Eastwood acting above the title in hits in his late 80's, while directing even more movies at that age. Clint will be the Gold Standard...can some of our 60-something stars of today(like Jeff Bridges?) keep leading man parts into THEIR 80's? I wouldn't bet against them.

---

As for other 'old guys', where do you think Pacino, De Niro, Ford and Douglas fit?

---

Oh, I didn't mean to omit them. We have a LOT of older male stars now, don't we? Pacino and DeNiro are heading for 80, however(well Pacino is) and so we'll see if they end up like Jack or Clint.

Ford and Douglas perhaps join Sly and Arnold in this debate: have they maintained enough star power to BE movie stars? Connery and Hackman and Nicholson were all above-the-title stars as they retired. I think only Ford maintains that level now of the ones I've just mentioned. Michael Douglas just did a Netflix series with Alan Arkin, so he is diversifying away from the big screen. Also, I was demoralized to find Douglas in a "straight to cable" movie about a murderous rich hunter; he made that "movie" about three years ago, and it really isn't a movie at all.

I suppose, with Dumbo, I was realizing that Michael Keaton not only has "come back"(thanks largely to Bird Man) but he's pretty old now, and will join the list of older male stars who can be cast in movies AND retain a certain star quality(which I think Arnold, Sly, and maybe Douglas have lost.) Pacino and DeNiro are the "prestige grand old men" of the business with Nicholson out -- but even those two have had trouble finding major roles. I'll add Kevin Costner as an "older man" comebacker. He's not the superstar he was in the 80's and early 90's, but he's back doing good character work.

One more thing about Dumbo: one doesn't think of Danny DeVito as a leading man, but he is certainly a character star, and in his scenes with Keaton and the very old (but fit) Alan Arkin, I was reminded: DeVito's come a long way, too. HE is still bankable.

That's the thing about Dumbo: its got some great movie stars in it. Too bad it generally trashes the original.

[–] albertmar (93) 6 years ago

I haven't seen the new Dumbo in theaters but I'm relieved if they didn't sing Baby Mine, changed the crows and took out the drunk sequence. I thought this was going to be an exact copy of the cartoon and that's why I haven't seen it. Other people are probably also thinking they've already seen this film, so why bother. Your post made me interested in the movie now. A dark Dumbo sounds cool to me. I think it would be fun for kids today to see the new movie and maybe see the original film a few years later and see some fun "new" scenes they haven't seen before, like the drunk scene.