However, I don't think every Disney film needs to be "breathtaking and original" ... just like too much comedy can become overkill, too much epic can, as well. Yes, films like "WALL-E" superbly balanced the sweeping music, unique environment, and moving moments with comedy, but sometimes I think a film can be much lighter and still have its moments.
The banter about being a house pet versus a wild animal, although no different than the Jessie/Woody talk in "Toy Story 2" or the Duchess/O'Malley talk in "The Aristo Cats", still offers a reflective side story to the frenetic comedy. Bolt's insistence to find Penny presents the unconditional love of animals, and again, while I may be a sap because I have a dog of my own, it was touching to me. I thought these moments were sweet and the comedy sweeter.
As we move into this projected 'second renaissance' at Disney animation, I'll be less forgiving. Then why am I so willing to glaze over the recycled story aspects of "BOLT"? Simply because it was vital to the sustainability of Disney. After many Disney aficionados threw in the towel when "Home on the Range" was the 'last traditionally animated Disney feature' and the CGI "Chicken Little" and "Meet the Robinsons" were considered mediocre at best by critics (and a fair amount of Disney fans), Disney realized they needed to step up their game and put out a feature that was just strong enough in the areas that their previous features had been lacking in to re-gain some viewership.
Disney's more experimental features were not big hits. Take "The Black Cauldron", for instance, many many people don't even realize it exists. When I showed my Disney montage video in media class, my friends knew "Saludos Amigos" and "Make Mine Music" but had never seen nor heard of TBC. I've heard the same said by others in forums. Disney's attempt at the dark and brooding failed miserably. "Treasure Planet" is the more recent TBC. Not a fairy tale or comedy, but rather a sweeping adventure film, it failed to find a widespread audience and some might say it doesn't even have a niche audience - it just didn't capture enough people's interests.
Even "WALL-E" has some of these issues. Countless parents whined on IMDb because "WALL-E" wasn't 'talky' enough. They were expecting another comedy a la "Finding Nemo" with the fish swapped for robots, and instead got a film that was silent sans some beeps and whirs for large portions of the film. They felt cheated and said their children fell asleep. Dozens of parents who said this. They were crusading that other parents go see "Kung Fu Panda" with their children instead.
Disney knew this. Lasseter knew this. And that's one understandable reason why "American Dog" could not be made. It was too much style. It was too quirky. Disney needed something mainstream if they were going to survive much longer. If traditional animation was going to see a return, than they had to be willing to compromise on the breathtaking and original qualities of "BOLT" in order to make a film that would keep the kids' attention and entertain parents, as well.
This is something DreamWorks has done with largely every film. I'm far too critical of them for for it. It makes sense from a business point-of-view. Why expand too far beyond the comedy films you've mastered making when they continue to make billions? If it's not broken, why fix it? Sure, some are more stale than others, but theater seats continue to be filled. DreamWorks has no reason to change their formula, it continues to rake in the gold. DreamWorks and Disney are first and foremost both companies who need money, so while DreamWorks continues to follow the same formula, Disney is treading carefully and not making anything too unusual. Only Pixar has the license for the out-of-the ordinary at this time.
That is why "BOLT" has some flaws. Disney couldn't take risks, it couldn't afford another "Atlantis: The Lost Empire" or "Treasure Planet". What it needed was as "Shrek" - something full fat on comedy, lean meat on heart. It needed to fill theater seats.
We can only hope that now that they pulled out a relative hit with "BOLT", they can keep the momentum but raise up the heart on the balance and lower the comedy a stinch. "Princess and the Frog" has the opportunity to be equally epic/beautiful and funny - for every laugh, there should be a tear.
We can only hope.
But I stand by my belief that "BOLT" was better than it's being given credit for, and believe the flaws being pointed out were almost a 'necessary evil' in order to ensure Disney will be around for some years to come. That's why tPatF may be an hour and a half advertisement for the Disney Princess franchise - more desperate attempts at sustainability. And if we want to see Disney return to its once golden self under Lasseter's tutelage, we may have to live with a few films that don't deliver the kind of heart, beauty, and epicness we want. We're taking a detour before we return home.
