One Hundred and One Dalmatians

One Hundred and One Dalmatians (1961)

One Hundred and One Dalmatians is a cheerful film of originality and ambition, if not fantastic quality; after the failure of the highly expensive Sleeping Beauty, Disney’s animation studio was in danger of being shut down completely, causing them to have to take some cost cutting measures in regards to their animation style, starting with this film. While it’s debatable whether this ended up being a good or a bad thing in the long run, it definitely makes One Hundred and One Dalmatians stand out from the previous Disney films and while it does have some familiar aspects, such as a focus on talking animals, the movie itself has a pretty different story and general style to what we’ve seen so far as well, making it a refreshingly new experience, even if it doesn’t quite match up to some of Disney’s better works.

The aforementioned cost cutting measures consisted of using Xerox photography to transform the rough drawings of the animators straight into animation cels, removing the need for hand painting, which is extremely costly and time consuming. This had a pretty drastic effect on the animation style of the film, which looks unlike anything we’ve seen from Disney before; as a result of being transfers of the animator’s basic drawings, the lines are very hard, rough and scratchy, as opposed to the soft, rounded look we have grown accustomed to. Sometimes the lines get so rough and thick that it can actually appear as if you’re watching an animatic, rather than the finished product. The character designs are also a lot more angular and stylised, rather than rounded and cutesy; we saw the beginnings of this new style in Sleeping Beauty, but the characters still had the familiar Disney touch, whereas One Hundred and One Dalmatians goes so far with these new designs that, when combined with the rough and scratchy animation style, it barely resembles Disney at all.

‘And kids, that’s how I met your mother... and her dog’

The backgrounds are similarly stylised, they are more simplistic than previous ones, with a lot less detail and none of the subtle, watercolour-like colouring of films such as Pinocchio, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, or Bambi; buildings and structures are heavily angular and rough, filled with blocks of solid colours that at times even spill out of the lines of the drawing. This gives the whole film a very different, more modernised kind of look which really helps set it apart from its predecessors – Disney continued to use this style for a number of its future films and while I feel like it may have grown a bit tiresome eventually and when it comes down to it, I do prefer their classic style, I like how it’s used here. After so many done in the same style, to the point where Disney was starting to rehash previous ideas all too frequently, with the similar character designs of Snow White,Cinderella and, to an extent, Sleeping Beauty and the fact that for a while they had remained relatively stagnant and made little to no progression or changes with their style, it’s nice to see something so radically different from them; the animation is still smooth and impressive, as well, so overall this new approach is a breath of fresh air. The best sequence of the film is the opening, which animates the Dalmatian’s spots in a very creative and energised way, pairing the animation with upbeat jazz music which helps create a really fun and high energy atmosphere that draws you into the film right from the start.

The story is a little different for Disney as well, it doesn’t ascribe to the fairy tale format ofSnow White, Pinocchio, Cinderella or Sleeping Beauty, nor the collection of somewhat loosely connected set pieces seen in Dumbo, Bambi, Alice in Wonderland or Peter Pan. After a brief introduction which follows the meeting of the two adult Dalmatians and their human owners, the plot is pretty quickly established when Cruella De Vil kidnaps their puppies and the rest of the film is a continuing rescue attempt. Though the film does shift between a number of different characters, the main plot is always present and rarely deviated from and the film never loses focus; considering Disney’s tendency to go off on tangents in order to facilitate musical numbers, bizarre animated sequences or goofy slapstick scenes, it’s nice to see them stay on point and follow the story all the way through. The story isn’t incredibly engaging, but it works well for what it is and never really gets boring, it’s an interesting idea that’s followed through to its natural conclusion; there aren’t really any twists and turns along the way, it’s a fairly standard line from point A to point B, but there’s no real harm in that. I do like how they kept the film from ever getting too silly or too sweet; so many previous Disney films, even some of the better ones, felt the need to insert overly cutesy “heartwarming” moments, or over-the-top, ridiculous slapstick moments into stories that didn’t really need them. While there is some level of cutesiness in the form of the puppies and Jasper, Horace and to a lesser extent, Cruella do engage in a little slapstick, the film keeps things relatively low-key and never goes too far, it’s a relatively serious and self-assured film that, thankfully, doesn’t feel the need to cheapen itself.

She drives like crazy

The characters are mostly fine, but not really very interesting, the main two human characters of Roger and Anita disappear for most of the film and don’t really have much to do, though when Roger is around he’s a pretty fun and likeable guy – he’s nice and friendly, but isn’t a pushover and doesn’t fall for Cruella’s nice act, for a male Disney “hero”, he’s rather intelligent and realistic. Anita on the other hand is a bit of a bore and absolutely does fall for Cruella’s act, scolding Roger for accusing her of stealing the puppies and being evil when it’s incredibly obvious to anyone with a brain that both of those things are 100% true; still, you don’t see her much, so no harm done. Nanny is the only character I didn’t especially like, again, she isn’t in it much, but when she is she’s constantly screeching something and really, she just got on my nerves, I didn’t want to hear her talk.

Pongo and Perdita are, to a degree, pretty much just dog versions of their owners, Pongo’s a fun and likeable guy and Perdita is nice but a bit boring, though she is admittedly less blind and trusting than her human counterpart (Really, who in their right mind would be friends with Cruella De Vil, what does she get out of that relationship?) They are absent for a decent portion of the film as well, but are still in it enough to be thought of as the protagonists and they fill their roles adequately, though hardly bring much personality to the table; they’re kind of like Lady and the Tramp, but with less to do and thus, fewer opportunities to show us their personalities. The puppies are more like props than characters but most of the original fifteen do get at least a line or two and they all have a little quirk to their characters – Rolly is always hungry, Lucky has a tendency to stand up in front of the TV, Patch is scrappy and acts like a tough guy, they’re all very one-note and reminiscent of the Dwarves from Snow White. Like their parents, the puppies serve their role in the plot appropriately and only really exist to be kidnapped and subsequently rescued, but it’s probably better that they have a degree of personality, even if they’re simply defined by one attribute, as opposed to simply being blank slates that exist only as props, at least they have some semblance of a character.

‘FRESHEN YA DRINK GUVNA?’

There are a slew of other animal characters that appear, usually only for one or two scenes, some exist only to have brief conversations about the puppies’ kidnapping, before sending the message on and others exist to actively assist Pongo and Perdita in the rescue. The most prominent of these are the Colonel and Sergeant Tibbs, a stuffy, absent-minded old dog and his more competent, but anxious feline sidekick; Colonel is a classically goofy archetype, a leader who thinks he’s smarter than he is and has to rely on his subordinates, who he gives no credit – it’s a type we’ll see used again later down the line in films such as The Jungle Book – he’s just okay. I quite liked Sergeant Tibbs though, you expect him to be kind of incompetent, because he’s so nervous and seemingly hesitant, yet he’s surprisingly capable and heroic; something about him is very likeable and makes you really root for him, his scenes were some of my favourites. As for the villains, Jasper and Horace are a pretty classic villainous double-act: the two incompetent bad guys, one fat and short and one tall and thin, one who’s a little more dim and one who’s a little smarter, but thinks he’s a lot smarter; it’s been done before in films likePinocchio and Peter Pan and will be done again in films like Song of the South and Home Alone, it’s hardly a particularly creative idea, even if it hadn’t been utilised as much at this point. Still, they can be rather fun to watch and though their dynamic is very predictable, it still produces some funny results; like I said, it would be easy to just make them vehicles for extreme slapstick, like Captain Hook and Smee, but the film thankfully keeps this to a relative minimum.

The big villain of course is Cruella De Vil, a character I have practically no opinion of beyond a fundamental lack of understanding as to her popularity; she’s got an interestingly bizarre design and she can say some funny lines, but on the whole... I just don’t get it. She really doesn’t have any unique nuances or interesting quirks to her character, except that she’s obsessed with fur, but you don’t really get a feel for that and the film doesn’t really take advantage of it much, partially because Cruella isn’t really in the film for very long. She’s just kind of silly and ridiculously evil, she literally wants to murder puppies for coats and suggests that Jasper and Horace ‘poison them, drown them, bash them in the head’ in a laughably cavalier and nonchalant manner, it’s very hard to take her seriously. Though the Evil Queen and Maleficent are also insanely evil for petty reasons, they also manage to be threatening and forceful, taking command of any scene they’re in; they are also so absorbed and seemingly thrilled with their own villainy that you can’t help but be drawn in to having fun with them. Cruella on the other hand, is not threatening at all and never really has the power or energy to take control of a scene, you always get the feeling that none of the characters are really taking her seriously and so, neither do you; unlike the Evil Queen and Maleficent, who you laugh maniacally alongside as their villainous plans unfold, you simply laugh at Cruella, who never stops being a bad joke, making for a pretty ineffectual villain.

‘It’s our calling card! All the great ones leave their mark, we’re the spotted bandits!’

‘You’re sick, you know that?’

It’s difficult to call One Hundred and One Dalmatians a musical as there’s only two songs in the whole film, “Cruella De Vil” and “Dalmatian Plantation”, the latter of which only has a couple of lines and the songs are literally spaced as far apart as possible, being very near the beginning and in the very last scene, respectively. Though this is perhaps evidence that Disney were indeed becoming tired of musicals or at least, lacking in the creativity to continue to make effective ones, at least the film isn’t populated with lazy or annoying songs that shouldn’t have been there in the first place, like some of their previous efforts – if they could only come up with two good songs, then fine, I’m glad they only used those two. Indeed, the two songs they use are really quite good, “Cruella De Vil” is of course very memorable and powerful, much more so than the actual character it’s named for, in my opinion and “Dalmatian Plantation” is a fast paced, energetic song which sends the film out on a high note. The general music of the film follows a rather jazzy, upbeat style, which fits the more stylised art design and gives the film a more contemporary feel – indeed, One Hundred and One Dalmatians was the first Disney film to be set in the modern day, rather than the past or some fantasy, fairy tale world. The music works well with the animation and general art design to help lock this feeling down and create a newer style that really lets you believe the film takes place in the early 60’s.

‘They call me MISTER Tibbs!’

One Hundred and One Dalmatians isn’t a masterpiece, but it also isn’t a bore and most importantly, it isn’t lazy. How much their financial issues contributed to how this film turned out and how much of it was due to actual conscious decisions and creativity, I don’t know, but regardless of the reason, One Hundred and One Dalmatians has a fresh, new feel quite unlike any of the Disney films that came before it. Though sketchy and unrefined, the new art style has a distinct charm to it and is a welcome change from Disney’s traditional style; the contemporary setting and use of jazz music also helps set the film apart as a newer kind of work. Appropriately, the film also avoids going back to the well for ideas, forgoing familiar fairy tale plots or happy-go-lucky adventures with a lot of silly, physical humour and not very much direction – the film has a clear story and goal that it sets up early on and follows for the duration of the picture; the characters are unfortunately a little bland, but they work well enough as tools to service the more concrete and defined plot. The music is fun and well constructed and, thank goodness, the film knows only to use the best songs at its disposal and not try to pad the film out with weaker musical numbers.One Hundred and One Dalmatians isn’t groundbreaking like Snow White or Fantasia and despite its new style, it definitely hasn’t escaped some of the lingering problems we’ve seen throughout Disney’s films so far, but it’s a nice start; it might not be a great film, but I admire and appreciate it for trying something different and, at least to some degree, succeeding.

Other Thoughts