AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Borserie it is finally so absorbing because it plays like a lyrical road odyssey that’s also a detective story.

InformationRap This is one of the few movies I've ever seen where the whole audience broke into spontaneous, loud applause a third of the way in.

Tayyab Torres Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Wizard-8 As you probably know, "Gulliver's Travels" was an attempt by the Fleischer brothers to compete with Walt Disney in the animated feature film market after Disney's success with "Snow White". The movie was profitable (though not as much as "Snow White"), but the critical reaction was less enthusiastic as what came for "Snow White". Seeing the movie today, one can understand why this was so. Now, I will say that the animation is very good; there are some really detailed bits of animation that will make you wonder how they were pulled off without the use of computers.However, great animation is not enough for an animated movie. Disney understood that an animated movie needs a good script as well; long periods were spent by his staff polishing the stories for their animated movies before the drawing started. This was not the case for "Gulliver's Travels"; it was rushed into production, and it clearly shows in the end results. None of the characters, for one thing, are particularly compelling. They are thin, and sometimes they are annoying. Also, the story is inadequate. There's barely a story here, meaning there are long chunks when essentially nothing of importance is happening.Despite what I just wrote, I do think there is an audience for this movie. Kids, for one thing, will probably find the movie a lot of fun. As for adults, if you have an interest in animation and are curious about the first American attempt to compete with Disney in the animated feature film market, the movie definitely has some interest.

Cristi_Ciopron Fleischer's Gulliver might be the cartoon I have enjoyed most in my life; not only a masterpiece of the Fleischers—but of the old cartoons, as well. It ain't for nothing that Fleischer is still so highly regarded. So let us try, for our readers' sake, to give a balanced account of the accomplishments and faults of this flick. This schmaltzy cartoon made by the Fleischer team (well, produced by one and directed by the other) 72 yrs ago is very loosely based on Lemuel Gulliver's storyline; we're plunged directly into schmaltz and dire triteness—a dwarf from Snow—White and a marriage—the hallmark of nicety and prettiness, plus a lot of harmless romance, the epitome of blandness, a Gulliver operetta—which is fine, if that's what you wish to settle for. Otherwise, yeah, the kitsch is thick enough to be enjoyable—to be more than palatable. The craftsmanship is impressive. This might be—what—the 4th cartoon I'm reviewing for IMDb (a Japanese one—a parable—a Hänsel …--you see, not all of it was garbage, not all of it …--that parable looked a tiny bit under—populated and even under—drawn …); what can I say, Fleischer as a cartoonist is kitsch enough, is schmaltz enough—even the gist of schmaltz. Basically, the same bland, tame buffoonery, because here the team has to supply for everything and, though done with undeniable, commendable craftsmanship, 'Gulliver' amounts to a roller-coaster of gags and niceties—which is way less than the required. The nuisance is, even apart from the couple of singing lovers, Gulliver himself, cast here as a simpleton and a soft-head. Lemuel Gulliver cast as the blandest, amidst the colorful dwarfs. So, yeah, a bit of a 'Snow—White' rip—off, instead of the cunning midgets of the original. Despite the prettiness and the dreadfully unlikable arias bellowed by the characters, Fleischer's Gulliver looks like an ancestor of the Spielberg/ Lucas flicks—it's all an American fashion—a clownish roller-coaster, as already described by the underwritten reviewer. Anyway, I took a little, unexceptionable pleasure in charming and lulling you with my prose …. (2) But then again, 'Gulliver' as retold by the Fleischers is an eminently likable yarn. So, it is simultaneously lurid, enjoyable, and bland, tame, schmaltzy, derisory, petty. Bland schmaltz. But then again—concomitantly lurid and tame, quite disconcerting; it will be enjoyed presumably more by the kiddies, which is only well, given that the adults' craze for cartoons is rather uncanny. Almost no relations whatsoever to the womanizing (or, possibly just repressed) Irish clergyman's original writings—yeah, but what a fairy tale! Gulliver suggests a fellow who can be gulled; and we also remember the surgeon from the Jack Ripper tale—the surgeon Gull, see 'From Hell'.

TheLittleSongbird I haven't read Jonathan Swift's story for a long time, but I remember loving it very much. This 1939 animated film mayn't be the best, definitive or the most faithful version, but can I be honest, it's actually my personal favourite. I don't know why, maybe because of nostalgia, this was a favourite of mine when I was a kid and I still love it. It is so warm, entertaining and beautiful, and might I say I consider it timeless too? The animation is actually really lovely, not tedious, undistinguished or dated as it has been criticised as. Instead it is beautiful and colourful. The colours are lavish, the backgrounds are mellow and the character designs are typical Fleischer, while the use of the Roto-Scope is incredibly effective.I also love the story. As I have said it is not the most faithful to the original story, but it is still a great and sweet one. It is one that tells of love, hope, friendship, adventure and even humour, all those qualities that makes an animated film so great. In some ways the first half-hour is better than the rest of the film, however the film is full of charming moments such as when Gabby pleads not to be eaten, when Gulliver brings David and Glory together, "there's a giant on the beach", the interaction between the spies and of course my favourite the really touching ending. There is a bit of Romeo and Juliet too, with the idea of the feuding kingdoms and I think it works.The script is really nice too, I admit I've heard better dialogue but there are much worse as well. Anything Gabby says cracks me up and Gulliver says some interesting things too. In fact, there is a perfect balance of humorous lines and touching sentiment. And I love the characters as well.Gulliver apparently was made to look like a real person, a bold and ambitious move and one that pays off, is it me or isn't he handsome and I love his rich baritone voice, reminds me of Emile from South Pacific. The King of Lilliput is also a nice character, bumbling and humorous, same with Bombo who appears to be rather mean but there is a small part towards the beginning that suggests otherwise. David is someone we don't see much but he is very handsome with a kind presence with a voice that takes you to another world. My favourites though are Princess Glory and Gabby. Princess Glory is absolutely beautiful, and while she has a quivering vibrato(like Snow White does) she has a very limpid and pleasant voice. And what do I need to say about Gabby? There may be times in his cartoons where Gabby comes across as selfish, mean and unapologetic, but we see a different Gabby here. A somewhat funnier Gabby, and in some ways you feel sorry for him too.The voice acting is also top notch for the time. Pinto Colvig, the wonderful voice actor he was, is great as Gabby, and Jack Mercer has fun as the King. Jessica Dragonette and Lanny Ross provide the voices of Glory and David beautifully, while Sam Parker is interesting as Gulliver. The pacing is brisk too, so the film never feels tedious or draggy, and while Gulliver's Travels is short it is very fulfilling.But do you know what my favourite part was? It was the music. It's all an acquired taste of course, but I absolutely love this sort of music, the mellow and rich sounds that are almost reminiscent of Rodgers and Hammerstein. "All's Well" has had me humming the tune for days on end, "It's a Hap Hap Happy Day" is quirky and upbeat and "We're All Together Now" is wonderfully uplifting and memorable. "Come Home Again" is hauntingly beautiful, while "Forever" and "Faithful" are sweet and romantic.In conclusion, beautiful, timeless and I think underrated film. 10/10 Bethany Cox

colby-sites Have you ever watched a cartoon you used to watch a long time ago? Like watching the 1940's Superman today, Gulliver's Travels from 1939 leaves viewers of today not only feeling nostalgic, but like it was a good movie by the standards of today. True, tastes in movies change with time, but true classics never die.The animation style of Gulliver is simple and the story straightforward. It starts with Gulliver being shipwrecked onto an island full of tiny people, about the size of ants. One nation's princess is getting married to another nation's prince, and the kings are planning the wedding. When it comes down to the wedding song, both kings suggest their own songs and have a fight about it. They end up going to war over it, but before the war can start, Gulliver is found and captured by the tiny people. He escapes and becomes allies with the people of Lilliput, the nation with the princess. The rival king has sent spies to Lilliput and asks them to kill Gulliver. The movie progresses with the countries warring and Gulliver trapped in the middle. Gulliver reunites the prince and princess and is about to put a stop to the war when the spies pull his own pistol on him. The prince hops on his horse and knocks the gun off just in time, but falls down a cliff in doing so. Gulliver picks up the boy and tells the kings how stupid they've been, fighting over a song, and that the prince is dead. In the end, the prince turns out to be alive and sings his country's song with the princess singing her country's song. Gulliver gets a new ship and is on his way. All is well.The most striking thing a viewer will notice in the movie is the differences between characters. The smarter, most knowledgeable and reasonable characters like Gulliver, the prince and princess all are animated to look lifelike, whereas the villagers, spies and kings all have a sort of dwarfish, cartoon style about them. This puts a visual line in the sand between the characters that becomes more and more obvious as the movie goes on. The kings are acting foolish and the people from the village are acting on their behalf. The spies and Gabby, the man who finds Gulliver all have the most cartoonish movements and are the most comic-relief type characters. The animation style provides for a visual representation of the character's personality, subtly hinting that real people should be more reasonable and intelligent, lest they look like the dwarfish, ignorant people.Another element that draws attention to itself is the repetition of Gulliver's line "Oh my." Oddly enough, he only says it at times where the plot is thickening, such as when the prince comes back for the princess. He doesn't seem to find it odd that people not much bigger than ants are clothing him and dancing for him for no reason other than he's a giant to them. This may be surprising, but considering Gulliver's character, it could just be a part of his kind-hearted nature. This distinction between "Oh my" being something surprising, and Gulliver's "Oh my" meaning something is about to happen, becomes more concrete as the movie goes on. Thus, when an "Oh my" is heard from Gulliver, the audience knows it should pay attention to this point in the plot, as it is important to the overall storyline.The most notable animation achievement is the realism behind Gulliver. Nowadays, amazing things can be done with 3D animation, making characters look more realistic, but for some reason, they still have an unnatural feel to them. This comes down to the motion of the characters, which this movie nailed with Gulliver. His movements look like that of a human being, jerky at times, possibly slow, but always realistic in those flaws. Nobody moves swiftly across the floor with little bounce, or keep steady, fluid motion, and this lack of fluidity is captured in Gulliver. Good examples of this include when Gulliver steps over the town and during the first shipwreck scene. Before he steps over the buildings, he pauses slightly as if to gain balance and keep going. This slight pause is what separates him from the CGI of today. When Gulliver's ships wrecks and he's drowning, his head comes above water a few times, but his arms are seen flailing, wildly, but with purpose, as if in an attempt to get air. Their movement is almost random, but meaningful. This level of realism within Gulliver is still astounding today, almost seventy years after the film's production.The director Dave Fleischer has something to do with this animation style. At that time, he was a great director of many cartoons, most notably Popeye. Gulliver had a huge step toward realism and it continued on in Fleischer's work. A few years later, he went on to direct the Superman cartoons, which are still held in high acclaim for their animation style and techniques of realistic movements and absorbing story lines.Though this movie may have been forgotten by many, its animation style, subtle repetition of elements and straightforward storyline all lend to this movie's timelessness. Normally, people look to the future for the latest and greatest, but Gulliver is a shining example of what the past can teach the future.