I saw "Fantasia 2000" in Irvine on January 1. And I really, really hate to say this, but I left the theater mildly disappointed.
Was it the animation quality? No way! The animation was superb.
Was it the IMAX presentation? No, except for the poor transfer of "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" to the format. I realize that Disney went to great lengths to restore the original print of this segment, and even processed it to remove a great deal of the "graininess," but it still didn't cut it. Perhaps it was simply asking far too much to transfer a sixty-year-old piece of film to IMAX. Otherwise, seeing such images on such a gigantic screen was wonderful.
Was it the IMAX sound? Certainly not! I would say that if you are unable to hear a live symphony perform these pieces live in an actual concert hall, then this would be the best alternative.
Was it the interstitial segments where celebrities introduced each piece? No. I found nothing wrong with a little break between each musical segment. And most of them were quite entertaining, in my opinion.
So was it the music pieces themselves? Well, the performances of the pieces were quite good (although Kathleen Battle's shrill soprano near the end of the "Pomp and Circumstance" segment was needless excess, and sounded awful), and the selection of music was wonderful. But having listened to many of these pieces prior to this film, it really annoys me that they were severely cut in length and presentation. Okay, I understand that you can't animate the entirety of "The Firebird." But when you have a piece such as "Beethoven's 5th, 1st Movement," it simply seems ridiculous to me that a 5-minute music piece needed to be cut to 4 minutes. How much more would it cost to present an animated segment that last the entire duration of this piece?
So how about the segments themselves? Well, going in order:
"Beethoven's 5th": Terrible. I would assume that the filmmakers wanted to begin this version of "Fantasia" in a manner similar to the original--an abstract interpretation of a piece of "Absolute Music." However, the images presented in the original made sense when matched to Bach's "Toccata and Fugue," while the Beethoven segment made no sense whatsoever.
"Pines of Rome": Absolutely incredible. I would pay money to watch and listen to this segment alone. The idea of whales flying might seem farfetched, but the way the story matched the music was phenomenal.
"Rhapsody in Blue": This segment underwhelmed me when I saw it, but now that I've thought about it, it's not bad. It's incredible the way a story was created to match the highs and lows of the musical piece. The animation style takes some getting used to, though.
"Steadfast Tin Soldier": I've heard this segment called "Toy Story's ugly stepsister." They're right. I guess it's a decent story, but I wanted something spectacular and grand, and for me, it was "just there," offering nothing special.
"Carnival of the Animals": I would compare this to the "Dance of the Hours" segment in the original, and it's Wonderful stuff! Absolutely tremendous! So why was it SO DAMN SHORT! That's my only objection to this segment--it's TOO DAMN SHORT!
"The Sorcerer's Apprentice": In the original movie, this was a highlight among highlights. But its inclusion here on an IMAX screen just destroyed it, no matter how much labor and love went into its restoration.
"Pomp and Circumstance": Great stuff. Donald Duck gets to show off his unique personality and talent for physical comedy in the epic story of Noah's Ark. SO WHY WAS IT SO DAMN SHORT!
"Firebird": Excellent work here, but the close of this phenomenal segment was just a bit flat. This musical piece is widely regarded as a prime closing number for a concert, so it would seem that its place at the end of "Fantasia 2000" would be a foregone conclusion. But for some reason, the end of the piece just didn't have the emotional impact I was expecting, especially after the chills I experienced at the end of the "Pines of Rome" segment.
So, I guess I was disappointed because two of the segments were absolute Turkeys, one should have been left alone in the original version, and two of the remaining 5 segments left me hungry for more, since they were too darn short. "Fantasia" (1940) was two hours long, while "Fantasia 2000 was a mere 75 minutes. Why? What would it have hurt to develop a few of the segments' stories a bit more, and increase the film's length just a bit? I believe doing so would have enriched the experience. But in examining the five new "Good" segments on their own, I would have to say that they were excellent.
So, in short, I was disappointed because of the film's brevity, disappointed with at least 1/3 of the movie, and disappointed that I had to pay nearly double the admission for a normal movie. However, because I loved such a large part of the movie so much, I can't give it a bad review. Maybe my attitude will change when I can scrounge up the extraordinary amount of money it costs to see it again.
1 out of 1 found this helpful.
Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Tell Your Friends