Login
It has a few moments of charm, but mainly it’s the beginning of the major problems the studio would encounter in the Bronze era. The Sword in the Stone, or Disney-does-King-Arthur, should have easily been a slam dunk, and maybe if the material had been tackled a decade prior it would have turned out better. As it exists, The Sword in the Stone suffers from too many cut corners, too many episodic moments that don’t add up to much, and a general feeling that it ends just as the story appears to be going somewhere.
Revisiting this was caused a bit of heartache. I loved this movie as a kid. I watched it so damn much I’m surprised that VHS tape survived. Watching it now, the only moments that captured my attention were mainly revolving around Merlin and his duel with Mad Madame Mim. Everything else left me as indifferent as the animation.
That’s the major problem with the film, a general sense of indifference and lack of care. Arthur’s voice, comprised of three different actors, changes from scene to scene, and more than once during the same scene. Characters frequently fly off model. The whole thing just looks sloppy, bordering on ugly.
Only Merlin retains his appeal. As envisioned here, Merlin is a wise sage, but prone to stuttering fits and flighty moments. His sidekick, a talking owl named Archimedes, provides numerous moments of peanut-gallery commentary and insight. His crotchety nature balances out Merlin’s more bubble-headed moments, or his cunning insights while training Arthur for his inevitable destiny. Merlin’s best musical number, “Higitus Figitus,” is little more than gibberish as he shrinks down the contents of his cottage to fit into his traveling bag.
After this moment of whimsy and ingenuity, The Sword in the Stone turns anemic as it drifts from one moral lesson to another. Merlin transforms Arthur into a variety of animals, uses these transformations to stick him into life-or-death situations in which he must learn valuable lessons that will aide him once he becomes king. These moments are cute and occasionally fun, if nothing more. They feel borrowed over from latter day Looney Tunes, especially a scrawny, hungry wolf that chases after Arthur during the first act.
After experiencing life as a fish and a squirrel, Arthur is turned into a bird and lands in the cottage of Mad Madame Mim. Once she appears, the film finally wakes up for an enchanting duel between the dark sorceress and the noble wizard. Mim’s mania and grotesque energy is much needed, and feels more authentically realized as a character from Arthurian legend than the forgettable band of knights and lords we’ve met up to this point. Much more of this was needed instead of the family-friendly banality on display.
It’s never truly terrible, it’s mostly just forgettable. Which is the bigger sin? The Arthurian legends are populated by an overabundance of colorful characters, and not enough of them are present here. This Arthur has no character. He’s just a scrawny kid who stumbles about, exhibiting little of the traits he will eventually come to possess. If for no other reason, watch it for Merlin, Archimedes, and Mim. The Sword in the Stone isn’t the worst film in the Disney canon, it’s….fine, I suppose.
