Leaderboard

I love animation, especially hand-drawn, so I'm happy that there's at least one for discussion in this list That said, I know Snow White out of all of them is a hard sell for audiences in 2019. Not the least of which is the dated style of acting with such a heavily rotoscoped performances by the human actors. It's probably my predilection, but the film only really comes alive with the relatively more freeform and cartoony dwarfs, which of course have all the personality and charm. As for the debate whether it's legacy should be a strong (if not sole) criteria for inclusion in the list, it's the same for any of the "old" movies. It was certainly a selling point for City Lights if it arguably set the standard for rom coms ever after. I think there's enough to make Snow White a worthy inclusion on its own merits, although certainly I can rattle off any number that would be more sophisticated technically as well as story wise. And I fully admit that rewatching this film makes me yearn to watch Enchanted

I hadn't seen this since the theatrical re-release in 1987 and I get the reason why it's on the list. It's the first and a huge step forward from what animation was doing even in 1936. I'm not super into the movie. I like the first 40 minutes or so but I find the stuff with the dwarves not as interesting. The songs are good but ehhh, I don't really care about what's going on.

Also FYI, Fantasia was on the 1998 list (#58) but dropped off entirely for the one we're using

I’m completely opposite. I hated Cinderella the last time I watched it (a year or so ago). Snow White completely astounds me from both a technical and storytelling perspective. For example, the Dwarf hoedown really seems to be there to show off just what they could do with animation, but it also serves to cement Snow White’s relationship with them. The last time I watched Cinderella, I was shocked by how little she was actually in it. It was like she was a guest star in her own movie with most of it being devoted to her mouse friends. In this movie, there’s no doubt that it is Snow’s story.

Two comments: In relation to how it's creepy what people do with dead bodies, Paul mentioned the Body Worlds exhibit. The people whose bodies are in that exhibit have all donated their bodies. Those people knew exactly what they were getting into. In discussion how dark Disney was and how it has changed to be more happy go lucky, they mentioned how even Wreck It Ralph keeps things fairly positive. How can you forget "Inside Out"? That's a relatively recent film entirely about how a child deals with their emotions.

Same. Honestly I really do enjoy Cinderella a hell of a lot more as a story and musical.

My answer to this question is no. I get that this movie has a lot of greatness by being the "first" but I can pick a handful of Disney movies from the same era that are better/more enjoyable.

As a counter-anecdote, I showed this to my son yesterday, who has been raised on all sorts of Hotel Transylvania type nonsense, and he was super into it. It also, as Paul kind of brings up, has a lot of teachable moments. (e.g. This is why we don’t take candy from strangers.) Although, I think my son’s favorite early Disney movies would be either Pinocchio (which I hate) and 101 Dalmatians (which I’m not sure counts as “early” Disney).

Oh yeah I totally understood him, but my point was just that then if this one movie is representing everything this catalogue could offer, then they're basically expecting you to be drawn into watching more to get that glimpse ya know? I guess for me by the time I came around my first intro to Disney films were Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin. Those two films are not only animation marvels to watch, but have amazing stories and musical numbers that just make them amazingly well-rounded films. So then to go back to something like Snow White later you kinda just feel like... yeah this is cool I guess lol. And I've heard from new parents who sit their kids in front of things like Snow White and Sleeping Beauty and they get legitimately bored. So the animation style is no longer something that is considered a marvel enough to makeup for the lack of a good well-rounded movie. Y'all I'm realizing I may not like Snow White at all lololol.

Yea I'm not sure how I feel about it. Those are good points. I don't think Snow White should be on here by itself, if you divorce it from its pioneering status. It feels to me voters may have been, "I can't decide which Disney movie so let's go with the prototype" and that has led to its elevation over all the others. I mean, we could easily argue for at least 6-7 others, right? So then you're in a situation where the top-100 has like 5 similar animated Disney movies on it, or none at all. But I liked Amy's comment right at the end about leaving "first" culture. The next iteration of a list should indeed make the tough choices and decide which are the best.

That's a very interesting idea! I'd love to dig into that "what's a stand-in" a bit more. Snow White might indeed be a contender. I do wonder how much, however, it presumes that it must have a princess in order to be something quintessential. Because if that's so, and I get to consider all of Disney's animated films to date, I might say that Beauty and the Beast would take that title. What's more interesting is to consider if we really need a princess to be a stand-in. After all, Disney's last animated film was Jungle Book in the late 60s, meaning there was only three Disney princess at all in that 30 year period -- Snow White, Cinderella, and Sleeping Beauty. The "mythos" of capital-D Disney was really part of the re-invention of the company in the late 80s with Michael Eisner and the so-called Disney Renaissance that banked heavily on what would be corporate synergy and branding and any number of other corporate buzzwords. Walt Disney himself would likely consider films like Fantastia, Dumbo, and Bambi as much more worthy of what should be contenders (in that he's often gone on record as these are his favorite films) for representational "stand ins," and I'll probably stick with those myself.

Oh that isn't what I see as the film's flaws; I was mostly being sarcastic about Amy and Snow White up there, tbh. Though I do think that's part of what we're doing here with this podcast, isn't it? We're not assuming anything is great. Or that looking at things in a modern lens will get the same result. I know the initial conceit was to watch great movies. But it's also to think, is this still? Why should we cut anything any slack? That's been the most interesting thing for me to think about, and to hear Paul & Amy discuss (and us here). At first I was very similar to Paul here -- I've seen maybe 40 of the list, but it's been at least 20 years for most of those. And I'm not clueless, I know what most of these films are about or like even I haven't sat through them before. I wanted to learn about the language of great movies; that's why I started this podcast. But that's less my focus now, I think, and I find myself wondering, do these hold up to more current and my own sensibilities? Not everything has to be woke, I don't think I'm demanding that, but I dunno, I think someone should hold some of these films to the fire a bit.

Nice research skills, Soup! I had a feeling it was him because I've always been the biggest Tim Heisenberg fan ever. I just remembered that I made a plea for his appearance here before. It took a few years, but they finally listened!

Hayes talks to TIM HEIDECKER about getting replaced in a comedy duo. Also, Sean calls in from the hospital (he’s okay).

So I think Amy's interpretation of the ending is completely at odds with what the movie has to say. Here's this Tramp who has nothing, sleeping on a statute, and he happens upon a wealthy man who seemingly has everything to live for, but is really a suicidal alcoholic. In my interpretation, the Tramp sees the pain the rich man is in, and sees him as a person (not just some wealthy schmuck), and it's that humanity that forges their unlikely friendship. And of course, the flower girl is blind, and only thinks the Tramp is rich because she hears the car door when they first meet, and he takes her around in the car, but when she goes home to her grandmother she says he's rich, but he's "so much more" than that. Despite being blind, she gets to know him as he really is. Then, after he's worked to get her sight back, and she sees him for the first time, I interpret her reaction to understand that his gift to her meant so much more because he was poor and, though he could have used that money for himself, he used it to get her sight. And then when she ends with something like, "yes, I can see now" she sees not just his appearance, but who he is as a man, as a person, as someone who loves her and cares for her, when it seems no one but her Grandmother even gave her a second look. So if she rejects him because she sees him, it ruins the whole point of the plot.

henry, it is that guy, that tim guy you like? same guy. tim hendeckhiminerman.

hayes we're all jealous of baby.

Yippie-ki-yay special thanks to KindaGamey for the idea

I must admit I thought the idea of an actual santaman movie was silly, but after hearing this ep's commercial i'm like... this could work.

Even though Tim has already obviously appeared on Earwolf before I still consider him to be a guest on the "get down and suck on these" level. How exciting!

I didn't even listen yet and I'm already laughing so hard hahaha update (post listen): yup.....it was funny alright!!!

This is the HH ep I've really been waiting for, Now the HH I'm really waiting for is Tim Heidecker again but with both boys in the lab.

Sean's son is starting to get good

I could listen to an entire podcast of Conan and Gourley doing historical figures.

That "breakdown" in the first song was simply fantastic! Filled me with so much joy. And apparently everyone in the studio too. Will Hines is a treasure, and Dan handled it perfectly! C+ bit!