Review of The Rescuers Down Under (1990) by Jacob B — 19 Jul 2017

The Rescuers Down Under is not a bad movie. It just didn't make a lot of money because the film got lost in the winter rush. Perhaps not simply because of a small amount of marketing but also, more likely, because people were expecting another masterpiece following The Little Mermaid.

The Rescuers 2 may be noted for having the least amount of attention within the Disney Renaissance to date. Yes, this is the Disney Renaissance movie that's more underrated than Hercules. While it does have some uneven quality and the there's only one primary Australian character within the film.

The humans are American. What is it with Disney and having everyone in their movies, even if its a real-life setting, speak in American accents? Anyway, aside from those criticisms, the movie as a whole is actually not bad.

I can imagine how groundbreaking the animation must've looked back then since it was the first digitally animated movie. And it stands the test of time pretty well. Not as well as Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and The Lion King but it's still nice to look at.

Those flight scenes were pretty fun as well. I think a decent amount of people who watched it might consider spending their money on a 3D re-release. The guy voicing McLeach seems to be having the time of his life voicing him and John Candy is.

..better-than-average at voicing the brother of the albatross from the first movie. The animation for that giant rare eagle is amazing. It looks realistic but still manages to appeal to the younger crowd, however limited its screen time may be.

While we may probably never get another Disney sequel that's part of the Classics, aside from the other two of course, I think this one is still worth your while. And it's not like most of Disney's movies require a continuing story.

The era of direct-to-video Disney sequels everywhere is gone now.