Product: The Rescuers Down Under [VHS] (1990)
Rating: 2.0
Anyone for an Unoriginal Sequel?
"The Rescuers Down Under" is supposedly a sequel to its' original. However, the dictionary defines a "sequel" to be a "work whose narrative continues that of a preexisting work." In other words, a sequel is supposed to extend and continue a storyline... however, "The Rescuers Down Under" fails to continue a storyline, rather it recreates the storyline in the original into a twisted case of déjà vu. Basically, if you've seen the original, you've already seen the less pleasing "sequel."This time around a young blonde boy, by the name of Cody, replaces our charming Penny from the original. Cody is sent out by his animal friends to rescue a trapped golden eagle. Unfortunately, the villainess poacher who captured the golden eagle in the first place out of greed, doesn't take too kindly to this rescuing and locks Cody up to keep him out of the way.The Rescue Aid Society is sent out to rescue Cody, and we see a triumphant return of the same pairing of voices for Bernard and Miss Bianca (Newhart and Gabor). Since these two characters were in the original, we already know their personalities, lucky thing, because the sequel takes no time to portray any of the character's personalities. Other characters in the film are introduced with no personality, who serve only one purpose -- to make the film happen (although we would have been happier if it hadn't happened in the first place).Bernard and Bianca are promising characters (since they came from the original) but unfortunately are overwhelmed by the less-pleasing qualities of the movie. Including weak characters, a repeated storyline, an unoriginal villain who has no personality to define him by other than "the bad guy." Everything about this movie is just an ailing repeat of what has happened in the original, even their mode of transportation, an albatross named "Wilbur" is a repeat.The film parallels their efforts to find and free Cody, who is held captive throughout the film while the villain, McLeach, attempts to intimidate the boy to tell him the whereabouts of the insanely large eagle's nest. Which, as viewers of the original can see, is a complete repeat from the original. In both films the villains held the children captive because they needed the children to help themselves quench their greed.Cody never gives McLeach what he wants, his death is faked so that the rangers won't come looking for him, and we watch the unoriginal story take place against beautiful scenery until the end where we find a literal cliff-hanger, and Cody is reunited with his mother. It would have been nice, though, if the film had actually shown us Cody and his mother being reunited - she thinks he's dead, after all. And the captive animals who were also in McLeach's lair, we find, were introduced only to be forgotten.Overall, there are some beautiful sequences, Australia (where the film takes place), looks very appealing and the characters are all dressed in cleaned-up animation. But the film itself is unoriginal with only a one or two breath-taking scenes.Ironically, it seems that the fans of the original dislike the sequel while those who disliked the original enjoyed the sequel. I never quite understood this since the sequel is merely an ailing repeat of the original, maybe some people find unoriginal films to be appealing...