User Reviews

This movie was horrible. Thwe voices were all wrong, the story line was off topic from where we left off, like most Disney sequels, and none of the original people, voices or behind the scenes, were the same. The music wasn't the same old bluegrass Fox and The Hound music we all know and love, so that took away from it. It was this new uppity country music. Totally wrong to do a sequel more than 20 years later. I know half the old cast and crew is dead, but still. Bring back some of the originals. And Big mama, Boomer and Dinky weren't in this movie. If your gonna make a sequel, at least put the original characters in. Wish they hadn't made this. It really ruins the Fox and the Hound legend.

How can my dislike of this movie be put into simple words? It would be quite difficult, but I can try. First off, let us begin with the tone of the movie. If you had watched the first Fox and the Hound, you would see that the tone has a great mix between uplifting and melancholy moments that adds a sense of depth and growth to not only the characters, but the entire film as a whole. This "sequel" (if it can be called that) ruins that perfect sense of balance and has the usual Disney sequel problem of being far to frivolous, as compared to the original tone of the movie. Second, within the first 10 minutes of the film, all the hope that I had for it being a great sequel to an amazing classic had vanished. The movie had introduced Chief and Amos Slade as bumbling, old idiots instead of the loyal, yet jealous, companion and calculating, yet obsessed, hunter that they had been in the previous movie. This further adds to the antipathy that this movie had produced within only a few moments of watching it. Finally, the plot of the movie. Really Disney? As if we needed another movie about how one of the main characters doesn't "fit in" or can't find his niche, so he goes out and joins whatever the blindfolded monkey throws a dart at on the "Disney Sequel Plot Table." Also, with all the new characters being added, it detracts from some of the more important/memorable characters from the original movie. Considering how the original was released in 1981, you would think that this movie would be tailored toward the children that had watched the original film at that time; However, after watching the movie I can now see that it was intended for the children of the individuals who had watched it. This movie has only been watched because the individuals who had watched the original recognize the name and think that it would perhaps appreciate to see what had happened after the events that had unfolded in The Fox and the Hound. Very disappointing movie and Disney should be ashamed for tarnishing the name of such a great classic. "Goodbye may seem forever, but in my heart a memory." That basically sumarizes my feelings in one sentence. While the original left a great implant upon my heart, this one will leave nothing but a sad thought that they could have at least tried with this sequel.

First off, the animation and any CGI used was great. It looked amazing, yet didn't seem to push too much into the whole computer graphics world. It was still cartoony looking enough. I really liked it, and it wasn't just one or two spoofs of animation here and there, lots of the film had the cool looking animation.

But what confused me was the plot. Was this a sequel, prequel, alternate ending, what? Because in the last movie, basically the fox and hound meet, the hound goes away, becomes a hunting dog, comes back, the fox gets in trouble, the hound wants revenge, and in the end they are friends but aren't allowed to communicate.

This one, suddenly they are little again and STAY little throughout the whole film... um, where's the bear and the other things like the girl that the fox met? The plot, assuming this was an alternate middle/ending, was very well made though even though it was predictable at times. The fox still got himself into the trouble but at least he admitted it.

Anyway, I rate this 7/10.

Fox and the Hound 2 is one of those cheap direct-to-DVD sequels made by Disney, and strayed away from the original. It has none of the charm of the original, the comedy within the picture is not funny, in fact, the title of the movie is Fox and Hound 2, and yet, it makes us feel like we're paying less attention to the Fox and the Hound. It adds in new characters, but they don't make any sense. The whole goal of the new characters is to, I'm not even kidding, sing at the Grand Opry. Here's one question. What the hell does that have to do with the original? And, this movie jumps the shark so many times that it's really hard to sit through. But, aside from the negatives, the positives, which were hard to identify, do include the animation's improvement, even though I love the original's hand-drawn style, and the beginning and end are the parts that are basically the best parts. After seeing this picture, I have wondered for days how this movie could've resulted. I really wish it could've been better. I really do. But, still, it's one of the worst Disney movies I have seen in my life. And that's coming from a fox lover.

Honestly giving this film two points out of ten was too generous. This movie is so bad that I can't literally can't sit through it without gagging every 5 minutes. Even recalling everything about this film bothers me to the worst degree.

For those of you who don't know, the first Fox and the Hound was one of Disney's most adult works. It was about a fox (Todd) who lived near his neighbor who was a hound (Copper). They're best friends even though they're destined to grow up and be enemies. Though made for young audiences, it stated the facts of life without being cheesy about it or even slapping a happy ending onto it. The sequel, or midquel on the other hand is about when the two were still young, still friends, and they join a dog band. Could I go kill myself now?

Where do I start on what's wrong with that? How about the fact that it's a midquel? If you look at the first movie, there's no legit reason for this movie to exist. There are literally three days that Todd and Copper hang out before Copper gets taken away for the hunting trip, so where did these events come from? Second, why would this movie be selected for a direct to DVD midquel? Of all the movies to pick that didn't get one (like Alice in Wonderland or Sword in the Stone) why would a harsh story be picked out? I don't care if Todd and Copper look cute or if the animation's better, the first movie was about how life is not simple. This movie takes that message and trashes it with every bad children's movies clichés: bright and colorful, misunderstandings, unfunny slapstick, random celebrity cameos, horrible songs, liar revealed, moping and doping, lying to make everything right again, and a sappy happy ending.

The songs are the focus of the movie (aside from the uninteresting friendship), and they sound terrible. Of course Reba McEntire sounds gorgeous and Patrick Swayze is not too bad, but when you think "Fox and the Hound" do you really think of a country music concert? No, you would think of either the original book that Disney changed, or one of Disney's most thought provoking films ever made. This film manages to botch both by placing Copper and Todd in a band and having Copper be one of the singers. Not to mention his singing voice is way off key and is painful to hear it coming from Copper's mouth. It's painful to see the dogs singing or howling (whatever the humans can hear, that rule's never fully explained) because this plot came totally out of nowhere. Disney usually has a way of working songs into a story, but this movie just randomly pasted it onto the story in a way that it ends up working against itself.

I hate this movie with such a burning passion. This movie insulted and hurt me every 5 seconds. Hurt me visually, hurt my brain cells, hurt my ears, and hurt my intelligence. It was as though the people writing this movie did not ever watch the first movie and decided to write a movie. Or if they ever saw the movie, they wanted to demolish the adult theme to keep kids from thinking about the future or know the truth of life. Aside from Hunchback 2 and Belle's Magical World, I consider this one of The worst Disney sequels ever, because I can't stand the sight of it in any way.

For once I was expecting total disappointment and got better than I ever would have hoped for. Yes, this is a "mid-quel," but once you've seen the (incredible) first you can sort of imagine where these events might fit in. This has its own climax and all, but the plot fits within the original's parameters. It might not make 100% sense, but to go back and do something like this is pretty tough. It's all right.

So, what's good about The Fox and the Hound 2? Much more than anyone expects. First, the obvious animation. It, and the scenery, are wonderful. Bright, bold, shiny, fresh colors, detailed and true-to-the-first backdrops. Very expressive characters who are just delightful to watch--the way the dogs move is fantastic and well done. As to the country music, even if you're not normally a fan, there is nothing to dislike about the movie's songs. Particularly "Good Doggie, No Bone." (Great song. Like "Streets of Gold," it's sung to a young animal to educate them about something (it's really about herself, and what she's learned the hard way.) And ain't that what life is, though? "It's all, 'Good doggie,' but no bone!") They're nicely done by stars from the heart of country music, as explained on the DVD bonus feature.

And the story? Surprisingly great too; good dialogue, witty and humorous bits, good character development. None, or very little of, the usual sequel hokeyness and cheese I'd anticipated. The story of the county fair and aspiring Singin' Strays band is actually very believable. There are so many highlights it's hard to remember them all, but the scene near the end, in which the group performs for a jolly talent scout outside a quaint, old-fashioned diner comes to mind for one. The setting just helps to make the story work; that little diner is so cute, and so perfect for the scene. Same with the design of the Strays' trailer and its 'woman's touch' from Dixie.

I'm still dismayed to see sneak peeks for Cinderella 3 and The Little Mermaid 3 on the DVD, but at least this movie gives me hope that somebody still may know what they're doing making these sequels. Then again, this movie was almost tailored directly to me. More than anything I am a sucker for singing and dancing dogs: show me a film centered around that, and you've got me. I like to imagine a world where everyone's a dog and there are musicians along the lines of the Singin' Strays anyway, but even without such a love for this type of thing, you can appreciate the movie. It stands well enough on its own. But I'm saving the best parts for last.

Yes, it's pretty original; far from perfect, of course, but I won't run down all of the weaker points because as with any sequel, there are many. However, they don't drag down the big picture. Tod and Copper are naturally your young and precious main characters, but Chief, Widow Tweed and Amos Slade haven't been left out--or ruined, either. Chief is especially well animated and a good source of humor. The one character, though, who in my opinion really makes the movie great--in fact she makes the movie--is Dixie. When I first saw her and Cash on the cover, my impression was: 'OMG! It's Dodger and Rita from 'Oliver and Company' redone!' Because Cash's bandanna HAS to be an homage to Dodger. And Dixie has that same sort of look as Rita (which is my favorite 'look' in the world and when I see such a character, it's instant Favorite)--seriously, she's her cover-art twin. Well, turns out Dixie is something like the country cousin of Sasha LaFleur, another sequel-starring performer and Rita-type. A force to be reckoned with and of course the love interest of Cash, she's the most interesting character (and thanks to being in show business, the road is rough for her and Cash). Visually Dixie is an amazing character to watch; the way they made her move and dance just perfectly captures how you'd want to do it if you were her. She steals every scene she's in and I'm glad she's such a central character. Her song is probably the best part of the film. In fact, this movie probably should have been a separate, Singin Strays-centric non-sequel. So to wrap up, this movie basically blew me away--two thumbs up just for stunning me.

I suppose that most of us are now familiar with the term "Disney midquel", however I was not until I purchased the Fox and the Hound 2. (Because of the title's long name, I will refer to it as TFATH 2) The animation was stunning, and the characters were very smooth and polished, like most of Disney's DTV followups. However, the same cannot be said for the somewhat lackluster story.

**this comment contains mild spoilers**

Copper and Tod are portrayed as pups in TFATH 2, yes, despite the "2" in the title's name. Copper becomes a member of the "singing strays", replacing an old member, and Tod becomes jealous. Well, we all know how this sort of story ends. How Disney manages to gain fanclubs for these midquels again and again (Bambi II is a good example of this) mystifies me. TFATH 2's quality was sub-par, and the story was a complete failure when compared to true Disney films such as the Lion King, Bambi, exc... Let us not forget the tacky country songs that will drive non die-hard country music fans up the wall. Now how could kids enjoy that?

I did not appreciate how Disney has fooled me by calling this a sequel. I hope that this review helps others to not make the same mistake that I did.

This movie was a train wreck. To eliminate the confusion about this being a prequel or sequel. It's none of them. This movie was a 'midquel' I was surprised there was such a thing. The Fox and the Hound is a classic Disney movie, a strong storyline and which this one lacked by far, the story of this movie was weak and unstable. Now granit kids from this time who watched this movie enjoy it. It's a kids film, but not like when I was a small kid. The fox and the hound is a powerful film it's a prized film for Disney viewers and Disney themselves. This particular film was a get rich quick film, by incorporating real artists to sing in the film so they can pretty much advertise their work to younger generations. Resaulting in the Hannah Montana effect, if you know what I mean. Tod and Copper were greatly remade near perfection in this film, like a copy and paste from the firstwhitch was great I thought. But that's why I gave this a 2.0. Copper and Tod were adorable as in the first one. To sum this up, this film was really unnecessary for Disney to release, it destroyed the original idea of the film. The fox and the hound was a happy, sad, cute and heart wrenching story, to this day I still cry to it. But this film lacked every thing the story of the cute dog and fox had in the first film. This was better off being a completely new original film. Then again it was a money game. They had to hurry and make a film and put a country artist in it cause they needed to put that specific artist on the map per say. Sorry to be so rough, but this is the truth of the film. Great kids movie but commercially inspired to make money quick.