I complained about the pacing of The Secret of NiHM, but at least that story had a plot to get to. This? This had no plot, it was all just padding. You could cut out over 60 minutes of film, and nothing would be different! The main character is taught lessons that have no barring on the story, and are completely forgotten by the end!
But beyond the story, or lack there of, the characters are also terrible. Arthur "Wart" Pendragon is as dull as Kristen Stewart with zero ambitions. Archimedes, the wise owl, is a jerk. Wart's foster father is quite mean and unforgiving. And Merlin, the most recognizable character from this movie, who has a massive fan base thanks to the Kingdom Hearts series of games, is a ditz trying to play at being a teacher. It is pretty sad when the audience ends up identifying more with a squirrel who doesn't speak a word of English in the entire film, than with the main characters.
But, I'm not here to tell people this movie is bad and people were bad for making it... I'm here to help improve it.
Improving the story
The first step to improving it: give it a plot. The plot I choose to give it is thus: Arthur and Merlin go on a quest to Camelot, so that Arthur may pull the sword form the stone, and become king (At least Merlin knows that, Arthur is going along because he doesn't have a home). Along the way, they encounter obstacles, and Merlin uses the opportunity to teach Arthur how to be a good king, teaching him wisdom, compassion, and bravery.
The second step is characters.
Characters
Arthur needs to actually take the lessons to heart, and utilize them in his quest as well as grow form his experiences. In the beginning he could sort of complain that he is a weak nobody, but by the end he shouldn't be complaining, or afraid, or an idiot... By the end, the audience should be able to see Arthur as the King. Think Ned Stark, but with more emphasis on wisdom than Honor.
Merlin should be an extremely wise old man. He knows the future, and everything about it. He knows the answer to every question, and should act that way. He should also limit his anachronisms, make reference to the future but not say something that, should Arthur repeat it, get him branded as an insane Heretic to the church. Like he could refer to his bag containing his stuff as "A Bag of Holding." That would somewhat make sense since the reference is to Dungeons and Dragons, which is set in medieval times. All other anachronisms should be subtle, like humming a pop tune or representing things with the modern way of drawing as opposed to the medieval way (almost perfect representation VS simplistic). He shouldn't be referring to Helicopters, Bermuda, planes and trains... As the movie actually points out, referring to them only causes confusion.
Now, there is one other character to add to the group. Do you remember Abu from Aladdin? Imagine if he wasn't annoying, and wasn't a monkey, and you get the idea for the next Character, Hazel. Hazel is the fan-name for the Squirrel girl in Arthur's second lesson, who falls in love with Arthur, and is broken hearted when she discovers that he isn't a squirrel (Or, since she can't understand English, more likely she thinks her mate is dead). After the conclusion of the second lesson Merlin teaches Arthur, Arthur shows compassion toward the Squirrel, in trying to calm her down, and requests that she join them. Thus she becomes the sidekick character, helping Arthur and Merlin out on their quest. Whether Arthur asks Merlin to turn her into a human or not depends on how the love works in the story. If it ends up as Platonic, she'd stay a squirrel. Otherwise, she'd become a human.
(Why all this for a squirrel? Because gosh darn it Arthur was inconsiderate in the movie itself. He didn't thank her, nor even try to for saving his life. He just wanted her off his back, and barely cared that he broke her heart.)
That is pretty much all the movie really needs. A plot, and better characters.
Though This movie was made back in the fifties... standards for animated movie were much lower... But Sword in the Stone is so dated that it is not much of a classic anymore. If they were to update it, and make the necessary repairs... Then it might actually be a classic.
(Oh, and I am aware that Sword in the Stone was a book. Disney may have followed it to the letter for all I know, but I do doubt it. Besides, the real story of king Arthur tells how he was crowned by a woman in a lake that tossed a sword at him. At least the sword in the stone has some actual meaning behind it.)
This has been Fixer Sue, caring more about squirrels than kings since 2000!
No comments:
Post a Comment