Current Events > Making the characters talking animals in Robin Hood was so arbitrary

(+) Yeah! (+)

Literally nothing would change if they were all actual humans

Everything would change.

was it? was it really?

That's what I said about the Sing movies.

Disney wanted to adapt the twelfth-century legend of Reynard the Fox, but felt that Reynard was not a suitable role model. So they just pasted him in Robin Hood.

"Reynard the Fox is a literary cycle of medieval allegorical Dutch, English, French and German fables. The first extant versions of the cycle date from the second half of the 12th century. The genre was popular throughout the Late Middle Ages, as well as in chapbook form throughout the Early Modern period.
The stories are largely concerned with the main character Reynard, an anthropomorphic red fox, trickster figure. His adventures usually involve his deceiving other anthropomorphic animals for his own advantage or trying to avoid their retaliatory efforts. His main enemy and victim across the cycle is his uncle, the wolf, Isengrim (or Ysengrim)."

didnt they recycle a lot of animation of other anthropomorphic animals? probably wouldn't exist if it was humans and they had to do all the animations again.

Norman_Smiley posted...

didnt they recycle a lot of animation of other anthropomorphic animals? probably wouldn't exist if it was humans and they had to do all the animations again.

Hilariously enough, a lot of the disney animators said it was more time consuming because of the amount of research they had to do to find movie scenes to copy was longer than if they made a scene from scratch.

If literally nothing would change, then were getting a few direct looks at Little Johns undercarriage

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/7/3/3/AAEqD0AADXRF.jpg

it was a kids movie

kids were more likely to relax watching talking cartoon animals and the animators had broader character details to work with for comedy, there was also a bunch of theatrical Robin Hood releases back then, Disney stood out by having the "funny animal" one

Disney actually knew wtf they were doin with this one

Norman_Smiley posted...

didnt they recycle a lot of animation of other anthropomorphic animals? probably wouldn't exist if it was humans and they had to do all the animations again.

From The Jungle Book and a few others.

Some of the concept art has them as humans. It was at least considered. They also considered doing a western setting which is why they have Pat Buttram as the Sheriff of Nottingham.

Supposedly, the original idea was to do an adaptation of Reynard the Fox before they realized how inappropriate that story was for children.

Prestoff posted...

Hilariously enough, a lot of the disney animators said it was more time consuming because of the amount of research they had to do to find movie scenes to copy was longer than if they made a scene from scratch.

that's interesting, I'd never heard that before.

IIRC, they copied animation from Snow White too, so the animal part is irrelevant.

Disney created the modern version of furries, and they're not even sorry about it. They made Zootopia only six years ago. If anything, they're getting more brazen about it. No longer is it "Robin Hood, but with animals."

It's "humanoid animal OCs in their own society with many animal behaviors intact." It's legitimately a movie that replicates the average furry RP community.

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Disney created the modern version of furries, and they're not even sorry about it. They made Zootopia only six years ago. If anything, they're getting more brazen about it. No longer is it "Robin Hood, but with animals."

It's "humanoid animal OCs in their own society with many animal behaviors intact." It's legitimately a movie that replicates the average furry RP community.

But I am definitely not a furry.

Sure, sure.

Maybe because foxes are sly like a thief and a lot of folk stories always feature a fox like creature as a trickster. And in the movie Robin hood has his fair share of tricks and deception

And other jokes like prince Jon being a neutered lion while king Richard is a lion with a full mane

In all honesty, the ability to reuse the character design on Baloo is a plus. Not only is it the same actor, it's pretty much the same character in a different setting. That gives the film a vote of confidence for children who remember the likeness of their friend from The Jungle Book.

This was also one of the first animated films after the passing of Walt Disney. Reusing a character design from the last film he worked on might have been a stamp of approval that this was a Disney film with or without Walt.

That scene with Maid Marian and that Rabbit kid in the bushes would have been real weird if they were humans

Turbam posted...

That scene with Maid Marian and that Rabbit kid in the bushes would have been real weird if they were humans

If I could ever do a sequel to Robin Hood, I would give that rabbit a fox girlfriend. Maybe even a minor love triangle where he likes the "bad" fox girl before entering a relationship with the good fox girl.

Like, that kiss gave him a preference. <_<

Alan-a-Dale is definitely cooler as a rooster than as a human.

Kajagogo posted...

Alan-a-Dale is definitely cooler as a rooster than as a human.

And voiced by Roger Miller. Best voice cast ever.

Movie was boring af

FortuneCookie posted...

Some of the concept art has them as humans. It was at least considered. They also considered doing a western setting which is why they have Pat Buttram as the Sheriff of Nottingham.

Supposedly, the original idea was to do an adaptation of Reynard the Fox before they realized how inappropriate that story was for children.

And yet later on they decided Hunchback was fine for some reason.

I will never forgive Disney, and I'm sure they're real broken up about it.

spikethedevil posted...

And yet later on they decided Hunchback was fine for some reason.

It was a different team by that point.

The Little Mermaid is also kinda fucked up.

Turbam posted...

That scene with Maid Marian and that Rabbit kid in the bushes would have been real weird if they were humans

This scene is really more messed up than society has admitted so far. I remember kid me being so jealous of the bunny but now I'm like... this is not ok, its kinda gross

Gobstoppers12 posted...

Disney created the modern version of furries, and they're not even sorry about it. They made Zootopia only six years ago. If anything, they're getting more brazen about it. No longer is it "Robin Hood, but with animals."

It's "humanoid animal OCs in their own society with many animal behaviors intact." It's legitimately a movie that replicates the average furry RP community.

You know, people like to shit on furries, but theyre actually one of the more innocuous, harmless internet communities these days.

Best Disney movie...

FortuneCookie posted...

It was a different team by that point.

The Little Mermaid is also kinda fucked up.

The source material or the Disney one? The source material ending was unexpected.
Not to say the Disney version was much better tbh.

Noumas posted...

Maybe because foxes are sly like a thief

That is a cultural projection which probably comes from the Reynard stories

TinglesDingle posted...

That is a cultural projection which probably comes from the Reynard stories

Being mostly quiet, clever scavengers doesn't really help their case. Then they poop in places of interest like a calling card.

theevs

Purple_Cheetah posted...

Being mostly quiet, clever scavengers doesn't really help their case. Then they poop in places of interest like a calling card.

theevs

Damn that's a good one, poop out a calling card

Prestoff posted...

Hilariously enough, a lot of the disney animators said it was more time consuming because of the amount of research they had to do to find movie scenes to copy was longer than if they made a scene from scratch.

Makes sense. Couldn't just look up the scenes on a database back then. Finding the actual frames they needed must have been like looking for a needle in a haystack.

Purple_Cheetah posted...

The source material or the Disney one? The source material ending was unexpected.
Not to say the Disney version was much better tbh.

Source material.

Prestoff posted...

Hilariously enough, a lot of the disney animators said it was more time consuming because of the amount of research they had to do to find movie scenes to copy was longer than if they made a scene from scratch.

That still makes me wonder why even do it then. Was it just so that they could reuse baloo's voice actor