The Muppet Christmas Carol turns 30 this year.

A puppet holiday song

Tonight's Nostalgic pic is "The Muppets Christmas Carol" (Disney, 1992). Wait a minute -- this is 30 years old now? Holy moly!

What's it about?

So this follows the same plot as basically every other adaptation of "A Christmas Carol. In Prose. Being a Ghost Story of Christmas" since Charles Dickens first got it published back in 1843. You all know the story by now, so there's no need to retread it here.

This is the fourth theatrical Muppet movie and the first one made by Jim Henson Productions following the eponymous creator's death in 1990 (please note, Jim Henson's Creature Shop never really stopped production and there are a lot of films that Henson worked on before his death that finished up during the lead-up to this one, but this is the first actual Muppet film produced after his death).

My strong opinions on this mediocre film

I hate this film. Well, hate is really too strong a word; I am negatively indifferent to this film. It has problems, so let's get into them.

Legacy

In some ways this film is a return to the Muppets' origins. The first feature-length Muppet productions were made-for-television adaptations of public domain stories, starting with "Hey, Cinderella" in 1969 and "The Frog Prince" in 1971. Comparing this to those Jim Henson-directed stories, however, is unfair: While those two short features were creative, whimsical, and genuinely funny ("Hey, Cinderella" in particular remains a favorite of mine), "The Muppet Christmas Carol" by contrast seems forced and semi-serious, relying on the narration of Charles Dickens (The Great Gonzo performed by Dave Goetz) and Rizzo the Rat (performed by Steve Whitmire) to deliver almost all of its humor.

Dave Goetz and Steve Whitmire reprise their roles as Gonzo and Rizzo to narrate this film. Their ho-hum antics count as much of the humor.

Michael Caine stars as Ebeneezer Scrooge, yet he performs the role with a ruthless seriousness that could have easily been transplanted into a serious adaptation of the story, which is a testament to Caine's acting chops given the silliness of the production, but which still feels wrong for a Muppet film.

Goofy movie, serious Scrooge.

Michael Caine's song at the end is about all the humor he's allowed to have in this film.

In many ways, this is what Muppet fans were afraid that the brand would devolve into after Disney's acquisition and Henson's death: Endless public domain adaptations with the Muppet characters as little more than window dressing.

Let me get this straight: You put Bunsen and Beaker into a film and Beaker doesn't get maimed or blown up at all. Great choices, guys.

It should also be noted that this is the first Muppet film after the untimely passing of Richard Hunt, and his voice is sorely missed throughout the film. I can't see the Ghost of Christmas Present without thinking that the puppet was made to be performed and voiced by him (the puppeteer behind many of "The Muppet Show" human-sized puppets such as Sweetums), and the fact that it isn't is a painful reminder of his absence.

This ghost was obviously made for Richard Hunt, rest his soul.

Remember Kermit the Frog? Because this movie seems to be making a concerted effort to relegate him to cameo status as the barely-in-the-movie Bob Cratchit. This probably has something to do with Steve Whitmire's less-than-accurate reproduction of Henson's voice, which so soon after the creator's death sounds off.

(Not) starring Kermit the Frog.

It's kind of eerie when you think that both the original actors of Statler and Waldorf had passed on before this movie was made.

Less than fresh produce

Production-wise, it is a mixed bag as well. While the sets definitely have a Muppet-skewed style with off-kilter architecture, reduced proportions, and painted-on weathering, you'd be forgiven for not noticing due to the monotone style of the color design. In some ways it looks like an old Henson production if you strained it through a "boring" filter. New background puppets look like they're trying a bit too hard to look modern and "edgy," with very little of the endearing felt sock-puppet feel of the originals.

Remember when Henson Productions thought that Bean Bunny was funny and had staying power? Yeah, me neither.

Rather than cast existing Muppet characters to represent the three spirits, entirely new Muppets were created for this task. Design choices are… let's just say unusual, and this is the first version of "A Christmas Carol" I've ever seen put to video or film where the impish Ghost of Christmas Past is far creepier than the silent Ghost of Christmas Yet-to-Come.

Definitely the creepiest thing in the film. Huge "drowned child" energy.

Not even close to being as spooky as the Ghost of Christmas Past. NOT. EVEN. CLOSE.

This is bad comedy

Is it a bad move? In my opinion, yes. I would perhaps be more forgiving of it if it were a standalone movie, but the next Muppet feature was "Muppet Treasure Island," yet another film adaptation of a public domain story with Muppets awkwardly crammed into it. The problem is that it's not even "so bad it's good," it's just a malaise "90s Disney" film that oozes potential talent but is almost completely rudderless without Jim Henson to guide it.

Quick, don't miss Fozzie Bear's brief appearance in the film...

It's always great to see Sam the Eagle.

Where can I find it?

"The Muppet Christmas Carol" is currently streaming on Disney+, but I recommend almost any other version of "A Christmas Carol" over it, including Disney's own "Mickey's Christmas Carol."

 

What do you call a Muppet movie where the leads of the last three movies barely appear? A Muppet Christmas Carol, apparently.

Fun and Fancy Free. The Disney One.

Fun and Fancy Free

What's it all about?

Tonight's nostalgic pic is "Fun and Fancy Free" (Disney, 1947). In the spirit of other Disney films of the time, this one is a musical vignette program comprising two short segments intercut with framing segments.

Yumpin' Yiminy!

We are first introduced to our host, Jiminy Cricket (Cliff Edwards) who leads us to our first story, "Bongo," narrated by Dinah Shore.

Bongo

Bongo is a circus bear, an incredibly talented performer who brings joy to audiences everywhere… but behind the scenes he's treated as a slave and lives a lonely, solitary existence.

We've all been there, am I right?

One day on the circus train his longing for freedom reaches new heights and he manages to break free, slipping away into the wilderness.

Yep, a breath of insect-filled, pollen-laden fresh air!

For the first time in his life he tastes freedom and nature, and is doubly enamored when he meets Lulubelle, a similarly sized female bear.

Disney formula: Same as the male character model with eyelashes and pink clothing.

Bear bottoms in the grass with bear-nekkid onlookers.

The two are getting to know each other when they're interrupted by the hulking Lumpjaw, a bully bear with eyes for Lulubelle.

The bigger, more powerful version of the hero used in current Disney films...

When Bongo tries to stand up for her, Lulubelle delivers him a few slaps to the face, and then inadvertently slaps Lumpjaw, who sweeps her up in his arms. Hurt by what he perceives as a betrayal by Lulubelle, Bongo retreats dejectedly, only to discover that the wild bears show their affection by delivering slaps to one another.

Seems healthy.

Can Bongo win back his love from his larger rival?

Mickey and the Beanstalk

Our second story is told by ventriloquist Edgar Bergen and his "friends" Charlie McCarthy and Mortimer Snerd (both his stage dummies who are articulated by other performers in this segment) for the young Luana Patten.

I'm not gonna lie: This was funnier than I was expecting.

This is the story of "Jack and the Beanstalk" with Mickey Mouse (Walt Disney), Goofy (Pinto Colvig), and Donald Duck (Clarence Nash) standing in for the characters of Jack and his mother. In the land of Happy Valley, all is peace and happiness thanks to the magical music of the Singing Harp (Anita Gordon), until she is abducted by some unknown force.

Damsel (instrument?) in distress.

The land quickly dries up and becomes unlivable, with its few remaining inhabitants starving in the once-prosperous land. In this harsh environment, farmers Mickey, Donald, and Goofy are forced to sell their precious cow in order to avoid starvation.

No, you're not playing "Kingdom Hearts."

Mickey trades the cow for some magic beans, which after a confrontation with Donald are lost down a hole in the farmhouse floor.

The sense of scale in some of these shots is impressive for the time.

That night in the moonlight, the beans grow uncontrollably, hoisting the trio into the stratosphere where they come upon a castle owned by Willie the Giant (Billy Gilbert).

If he's just dumb, is he still really a villain?

They quickly discover that the monster has stolen the harp to help him sleep. Can the three diminutive heroes rescue the harp and restore Happy Valley?

A product of a specific timeframe

As I have mentioned before in other reviews, this film comes from a time when Walt Disney's studio was more focused on short musical cartoons rather than feature-length films. This one has a little of the live-action mixed with animation magic that Disney was developing at the time and later perfected with "Mary Poppins."

"Mixed media" seems an apt description.

It's pretty short, clocking in at just under one and one-quarter hours, which makes it a perfect film for people with short attention spans.

Not exactly a classic...

Chances are that unless you're a Disney diehard, you've never seen or heard of this feature. While it's similar in structure and length to "The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad," it really doesn't have the staying power of that other film. The "Bongo" segment is very forgettable, following story beats that were cliché even at that time.

Even these guys forgot about it.

I don't know if this has contributed to the collective ignorance of "Bongo," and maybe I'm reading too much into it, but there seems to be an approval (even glorification) of domestic violence in this segment. The "Beanstalk" portion isn't even the first time Mickey Mouse fought a giant, as he already encountered one in "The Brave Little Tailor" short from 1938. The most memorable contribution to Disney arcana in this motion picture was Willie the Giant, who appeared again as the Ghost of Christmas Present in 1983's "Mickey's Christmas Carol" (unfortunately repeating many of the same jokes).

Kiss him!

Better than it might seem

That's not to say that this movie isn't without its merits: For one, the animation is pretty good. It's not going to win any awards, but it is competently done nonetheless. The film is also extremely funny in spots. The Edgar Bergen dialog is more humorous than I was expecting, and really shows why he was such a draw for so long. The beanstalk segment is another great example of Donald Duck being a complete murderous psychopath, which is always disturbingly pleasant to see. The sense of scale in the fight with Willie is communicated well, and overall "Beanstalk" is the standout of the two featurettes.

Might not be great for kids

If you're of a certain age, you probably saw much worse when you were a kid, but the more humorous jokes will probably fly over most children's heads, while the violence introduced in the "Bongo" segment and implied murderousness of Donald Duck may be a bit much for modern kids to appreciate. Also, ventriloquist dummies are creepy at any age, so just be cautious when watching with younger kids.

Where can I find it?

"Fun and Fancy Free" is currently streaming on Disney+.

Hacksaw... Not the tool, not Jim Duggan.

Hacksaw reviewed

What's it about?

Tonight's nostalgia pic is "Hacksaw" (Disney, 1971). This is another "Wonderful World of Disney" made for TV movie from the disco decade. Tim Andrews (Tab Hunter) is taking big city businessman Olney Curtis (George Barrows) and his daughter Sue (Susan Bracken) on a fishing trip.

Fisher-man

Daughter of Fisher-man.

Tim is a man of many skills: Bush pilot, cowpoke, classically trained concert violinist, wilderness guide, fish and wildlife expert, tracker, expert horseman, field surgeon, racing driver, computer expert, and game trapper. I only made two of those up (I'll leave it to you to figure out which).

The talented Mr. Dripley.

While exploring, Tim and Sue come upon a beautiful horse which Tim explains is a wild stud named "Hacksaw" by the locals.

Film star.

Sue notices that Hacksaw is interested in the mare that she is riding (Twinkle Toes), and talks Tim into trying to catch the wily horse by using the mare as bait. Thus begins a series of events that leads to Tim bonding with Hacksaw and eventually competing in a championship chuck wagon race.

Wait, what?

Confused by that last sentence? Good. I have opinions…

I don't know that I have ever watched a more rambling movie than this one. It's not boring, exactly; it's more like a series of five to ten minute shorts that chronologically connect to one another shown back-to-back over an hour and a half. It's sort of like Richard Linklater's "Slacker" if you just stayed with a couple of characters throughout. While the bond between Tim and Hacksaw is the primary driver of the film, it's not really deeply explored in any real emotional capacity. Even when the movie tries to elevate the stakes by showing a daring rescue or by putting Hacksaw in jeopardy there's no "edge of your seat" suspense. Let me see if I can sum up the plot of this film from memory:

1. "The Rancher" (Ray Teal), our narrator regales us with the tale of how Tim Andrews got into chuck wagon racing.

   

   Our omniscient guide.

   
   
2. Tim flies the Curtises to the Rockies.
3. Tim and Sue try to catch Hacksaw but accidentally snag a grizzly.

   

   Hilarity ensues.

   
   

   

   Hilarity ensues... Again.

   
   
4. Hacksaw follows the mare to Tim's ranch where they catch him.

   

   More believable than the human love story.

   
   
5. Everyone tries to ride Hacksaw to no avail.

   

   Here we meet our bad guy.

   
   
6. Tim uses Hacksaw as a pack horse while Sue goes back to the city.
7. Tim discovers that Hacksaw can pull a sled while gathering firewood.
8. Winter comes, and Tim and Hacksaw rescue a pilot from a crashed plane.

   

   Seriously not suspenseful.

   
   
9. Sue returns and Tim enters Hacksaw into a sled race, which he loses.

   

   If at first you don't succeed, just cry about it.

   
   
10. Sue goes home while a rancher offers to teach Tim how to race a chuck wagon, where *cough* "The big money is."
11. Spring comes and Tim trains for the chuck wagon races with his business partner, Cascade Joe (Victor Millan).

    

    There is a "musical" interlude here. Yes, that is in quotes.

    
    
12. Tim's rival sabotages him by bringing another stud to the ranch where the horses fight.

    

    Horses "acting."

    
    
13. An injured Hacksaw is missing, everyone looks for him.
14. A healed Hacksaw returns just in time for the big chuck wagon race.
15. Sue and her father come back to watch Tim and Hacksaw win the big race.

    

    Got it on the first try!

    
    
16. Inexplicably, the movie keeps going for a little while longer.

It's like a vignette film smooshed with a "sports film." You've all seen sports films: There's a passionate and skilled individual or team who tries to win but is beaten by an evil cheating rival (in this case Russ McCubbin as "Dusty Trent"), but overcomes their failings through pluck and training and eventually beat the evil bastard(s). The problem with this film is that there's multiple sports and Tim Andrews just falls ass-backwards into them. He loses the first race he ever tries and seems DEVESTATED. He doesn't even have any interest in chuck wagon racing until the last quarter of the film and wins the first championship race he ever tries. How is that an underdog story? And chuck wagon racing. CHUCK. WAGON. RACING. Seriously, how is this a sport, let alone a "big money" sport?!

I have family that are heavily into horses. I have been to rodeos and fairs. I have never heard of this sport.

Not dressed up

It looks like an old TV movie, and that's not a compliment: Film transfer with overblown colors, 4:3 aspect ratio, and even some interlacing artifacts visible during scenes of motion (if you're watching it on a modern television).

Should I watch it?

Unless you're really keen on horse movies I would give this one a pass; The transfer hurts the majesty of the scenery, the acting isn't what I would call "top notch," and the story would be cliché if they would just pick one cliché and stick with it.

Where can I find it?

"Hacksaw" is currently streaming on Disney+.

Cloak & Dagger (not the Marvel one)

Put on your cloak, and grab your dagger

Cloak & Dagger? Stranger Things have titles...

What's it about?

Tonight's nostalgia pic is "Cloak & Dagger" (Universal Pictures, 1984). We're introduced to Jack Flack (Dabney Coleman) AKA "Agent X," a super-spy during the cold war with the Soviet Union that occupied much of the 20th century.

"Jack Flack always escapes!"

He's everything you could want in a hero: Clever, quick, deadly, with spy gadgets galore. But there's a catch…

Flack is the imaginary creation of Davey Osborne (Henry Thomas, after his debut as "Eliot" in "E.T. The Extra Terrestrial"), a kid who is coping with the loss of his mother by immersing himself in military role-playing and video games with his friends Kim (Christina Nigra) and mall game store owner Morris (William Forsythe).

Jack Flack is Davey's OP character

Pictured: Super friends!

When Morris sends Davey and Kim to pick up a product catalog from one of his suppliers, things take an unexpectedly deadly turn; Davey witnesses a murder, and the victim passes him a video game "tape" with a secret message.

"5200?! How the heck am I supposed to use this?!"

Of course, by the time he gets people to listen, the murderers have scrubbed the evidence. Taken home to his dad (also played by Dabney Coleman), Davey quickly learns that they bad guys know where he lives.

Dual roles for Dabney

Can Davey and his imaginary construct of Jack uncover the conspiracy, retrieve the top secret plans, and save the people they love from the cabal of spies that are gunning for them?

Lots to love

I love this movie. It's an adult spy thriller starring a child and his cheesy imaginary friend, and yet it still somehow remains gripping, thoughtful, and even a bit scary throughout. The acting is superb, even the worst actor in the film (a very young Christina Nigra) is absolutely hilarious and believable when she needs to be. The movie doesn't pull its punches: The consequences of violence are in full force, and even though the kids have "plot armor," the people around them are decidedly not immune. Things get quite emotional towards the end (for a multitude of reasons).

Not without problems, however

Is it perfect? Oh no. Not by a long shot. 

I got 5200 problems...

It's a bit funny that they were banking on the Atari 5200 and its notoriously defective controllers as the video game platform of choice in the film, as almost no one in the 80s owned one.

I'm not going to lie: This game looks dope as hell.

The "Cloak & Dagger" game featured in the film is actually an arcade game named "Agent X" which was going to ported to the 5200 as "Cloak & Dagger," but it was 1984 when this movie came out, and if you know anything about video game history you know why this is problematic…

Smile, you're on tape

I've heard a lot of speculation online that the film mistakenly refers to video game cartridges as "tapes," and as a kid who played and rented video games in the 80s let me just say that is was common terminology at the time (in much the same way that all video games in the latter half of the 80s were collectively referred to as "Nintendo") and is in no way an inherent error by the screenwriters. I have many memories of my Dad taking us out for dinner on a Friday night, then stopping by the video store to rent a movie and a "Nintendo tape" for the weekend.

What's a pee-gee?

Is it appropriate for children? That's a tough call. It only has a PG rating, but note that it's a strong "80s PG." On the one hand it stars kids and does not in any way patronize them or pull its punches.

Typical 80s bad guy is... quite scary, actually.

Jack Flack is a cool character and his advice to Davey throughout the film is both humorous and exciting.

On the other hand, there is very realistic death and consequences in the film (with very little gore), and the bad guys are genuinely scary with descriptive threats of violence and the means to carry it out. This dichotomy makes it a tough call, but one should also consider that this film is firmly a product of the 1980s, meaning that the norms of the time were quite different in regards to unsupervised children,

"In my day, you'd be drafted into the war!"

and the "cutting edge" and "futuristic" technology of the time is incredibly dated by today's standards in a way that tech savvy kids might not be able to wrap their heads around.

Pictured: Cutting edge.

Where can I find it?

I watched "Cloak & Dagger" on DVD, but it is available to rent/buy on Amazon Prime Video, and nowhere else that I could find.