I think I'd probably go with Chicken Little myself, though there was that weird time at the beginning of last decade where it didn't matter what Disney was doing, it just wasn't working. Brother Bear, Meet the Robinsons, Treasure Planet, Atlantis, Home on the Range (another contender for "worst ever"); all very different movies, all very ... not classic. Disney was kind of trying a thousand different things, and ... actually, they did throw up Lilo & Stitch and The Emperor's New Groove during this time period, so it wasn't a total wash, but it was very, very messy. Bolt was the end of this period, and I think we remember it so fondly not because it was great, but because at this point "pretty good" was "great".
The Robin Hood "oh, shit, Disney just died, where do we go from here?" period was also pretty messy; The Aristocats, The Sword and the Stone, and, yes, even The Jungle Book (heresy!) were kinda iffy. I do like The Rescuers (Miss Bianca's entrance is superb, though the movie version doesn't hold a candle to the book version). The eighties were a bit weird, but they did improve, and of course started the new golden age at the end of the decade. I haven't seen The Black Cauldron, though, so I'll withhold judgement.
Funny thing is, Pixar seems to have followed Disney's path in microcosm: Toy Story equals Snow White and the other early classics, A Bug's Life (the first weak one) is the weird war collections, Toy Story 2 through the Incredibles is the post war movies until Disney's death, Cars (the second weak one) is the time period around Disney's death to the early 80s, Ratatouille to Toy Story 3 is the big turnaround in the 90s when the Academy was literally re-writing rules so that someone else would win certain categories at the Oscars, Cars 2 (the horrible one) is the sudden crash and burn at the beginning of the millenium, and Brave (the third weak one) is today, when we're just okay and that works.
Also, Goodman seems to be critiquing the movies more based on animation than story or characters, which seems to be our basis. Robin Hood is technically bad; as storytelling ... well actually, it's not great shakes there, either, is it? Edit: Whoops, no, Goodman goes to town on the story too.
I think (and my Google fu is weak and failing me here) the animator from Monty Python actually listed Robin Hood as the best Disney film (or at least it made his top ten all time animated list) because of one of Goodman's flaws; he really liked the Southern accents, and thought they did that on purpose, in an attempt to put the Robin Hood legend in a Western context (he noted that they went out of their way to get character actors known for their Western roles), which he thought was clever.
Wes Anderson seemed to like it, and the songs are still pretty good ("Love" appeared in Fantastic Mr. Fox, which is a fact that should have won that movie the Ursa Major in itself); "Love" went up against "Live in Let Die" (the best Bond song, of course) at the Oscars for Best Song; something else nobody remembers won. I also know a guy who hates Disney's animated movies, but gives Robin Hood a pass; he's also not a furry.
I basically agree with all of Goodman's points, but still like it. It really is one of those "good bad movies," though due to it being a Disney "Classic," most people forget that.
Also, Goodman's article is frakkin' great stuff!
Edit Again: I just recalled two incidences I'd like to share; one was walking into a crowded college campus center in Stillwater, OK and seeing Robin Hood playing on the central TV with a large crowd of very mixed students watching the movie intently. The second was being asked by the small son of a local teacher I was spontaneously assigned to babysit one day if I would like to watch the movie.
I think I'd probably go with Chicken Little myself, though there was that weird time at the beginning of last decade where it didn't matter what Disney was doing, it just wasn't working. Brother Bear, Meet the Robinsons, Treasure Planet, Atlantis, Home on the Range (another contender for "worst ever"); all very different movies, all very ... not classic. Disney was kind of trying a thousand different things, and ... actually, they did throw up Lilo & Stitch and The Emperor's New Groove during this time period, so it wasn't a total wash, but it was very, very messy. Bolt was the end of this period, and I think we remember it so fondly not because it was great, but because at this point "pretty good" was "great".
The Robin Hood "oh, shit, Disney just died, where do we go from here?" period was also pretty messy; The Aristocats, The Sword and the Stone, and, yes, even The Jungle Book (heresy!) were kinda iffy. I do like The Rescuers (Miss Bianca's entrance is superb, though the movie version doesn't hold a candle to the book version). The eighties were a bit weird, but they did improve, and of course started the new golden age at the end of the decade. I haven't seen The Black Cauldron, though, so I'll withhold judgement.
Funny thing is, Pixar seems to have followed Disney's path in microcosm: Toy Story equals Snow White and the other early classics, A Bug's Life (the first weak one) is the weird war collections, Toy Story 2 through the Incredibles is the post war movies until Disney's death, Cars (the second weak one) is the time period around Disney's death to the early 80s, Ratatouille to Toy Story 3 is the big turnaround in the 90s when the Academy was literally re-writing rules so that someone else would win certain categories at the Oscars, Cars 2 (the horrible one) is the sudden crash and burn at the beginning of the millenium, and Brave (the third weak one) is today, when we're just okay and that works.
Also, Goodman seems to be critiquing the movies more based on animation than story or characters, which seems to be our basis. Robin Hood is technically bad; as storytelling ... well actually, it's not great shakes there, either, is it? Edit: Whoops, no, Goodman goes to town on the story too.
I think (and my Google fu is weak and failing me here) the animator from Monty Python actually listed Robin Hood as the best Disney film (or at least it made his top ten all time animated list) because of one of Goodman's flaws; he really liked the Southern accents, and thought they did that on purpose, in an attempt to put the Robin Hood legend in a Western context (he noted that they went out of their way to get character actors known for their Western roles), which he thought was clever.
Wes Anderson seemed to like it, and the songs are still pretty good ("Love" appeared in Fantastic Mr. Fox, which is a fact that should have won that movie the Ursa Major in itself); "Love" went up against "Live in Let Die" (the best Bond song, of course) at the Oscars for Best Song; something else nobody remembers won. I also know a guy who hates Disney's animated movies, but gives Robin Hood a pass; he's also not a furry.
I basically agree with all of Goodman's points, but still like it. It really is one of those "good bad movies," though due to it being a Disney "Classic," most people forget that.
Also, Goodman's article is frakkin' great stuff!
Edit Again: I just recalled two incidences I'd like to share; one was walking into a crowded college campus center in Stillwater, OK and seeing Robin Hood playing on the central TV with a large crowd of very mixed students watching the movie intently. The second was being asked by the small son of a local teacher I was spontaneously assigned to babysit one day if I would like to watch the movie.
"It's very fun," he said.
They should print that on the Blu-Ray.