REVIEW: "20.000 Weeds Under The Sea"

I trust most of you are familiar with the Italian Grandi Parodie series, where classic works of literature are recreated-slash-parodied with the various characters replaced with classic Disney characters. What is less well-known is that the American Gold Key books had their own series with this exact conept, called The Walt Disney Theater. The main differences were that there were much fewer installments, and the other one was that, well, there were a lot less good. 

And today, we're going to be looking at one of them: 20.000 Weeds Under The Sea., by the dubious team of Vic Lockman, Tony Strobl and Steve Steere. And… talk about an opening in medias res. Mind you, the opening narration box does a good job of explaining the context, but when I first happened upon this, I first wondered this was the second part of a serial tale and I went back to check the previous issue to find what I missed. Huh.  Also note that from the Jules Verne book's three main protagonists (outside of Nemo), this story cuts back to just two, dropping Professor Aronax's butler Conseil. Why not have, I don't know, Ludwig von Drake, or… somebody… to play the role? It's not like this story is limiting itself to Mickey Mouse characters, since we'll see Captain Hook later on. Then again, bickering about how unfaithful this is to the original novel might be a losing battle.

And a very nice panel is followed by a… not very nice panel. This is symptomatic of the usual problems with Strobl. Sometimes he's good… but then he immediately follows it with weird poses or drawings of allegedly moving characters who are completely devoid of motion.

Captain Hook is playing Captain Nemo! …Way to completely throw out Nemo's trademark moral ambiguity there, Lockman. Also, Mickey Aronax apparently knows Captain Hook as "a notorious pirate". This is another problem with the Walt Disney Theater stories: they're never clear on whether they take place in the same universe as normal stories. Some characters have different names and contexts in traditional Grandi Parodie fashion, and the story usually takes place in the past, but then some characters just pop up entirely identical to their usual selves. Like Captain Hook here. Are we to believe that this story happened to Captain Hook at some point before Peter Pan? Possibly before he even came to Neverland? That's an interesting angle for sure, but here it's just… odd, since they don't elaborate on it.

Credit where credit is due: the whole 'pirate submarine' concept is handled rather well in this story. It has nothing on Nemo's motivation for sinking ships in the original, but it's pretty in-character for Captain Hook. It's a little dark (we are left to assume the crews of the sunken ship are left to drown by the fiend), but I'm not complaining, far from there; Hook is supposed to be murderous.

As for the Scuttilus itself, Strobl does what he can, but it doesn't look particularly memorable, and (this is my main issue) it's just too small. The Nautilus was amazing not only because it was a submarine, but because it was an absurdly large, self-sustaining one. It also had a large crew, of which we see no evidence in this story. Where does Hook put all that treasure, anyway? At least a third of this thing must be taken up by the engine and air supplies, and then you have the sleeping quarters of Hook, Smee, and "guests" like Mickey and Goofy. 

Wait. Just when is this story taking place, exactly? The novel took place in the 1860's, but surely Captain Hook wouldn't call it "the new world" if it was so late? Unless it's just the fact that he's from the 18th century showing, but he can't possibly have lived that long without already having been in Neverland for some time, which shoots down my theory from earlier, which… gah!

Well, uh, Queen Victoria, folks! She's in that story! For some reason. And, ah, what is Her Royal Dognose Highness doing in the middle of the Atlantic again? …You're going to adress that, are you, Lockman? I should have known.

No it doesn't. This isn't a squid, it's an octopus. This matter aside, though, I do like this image. Especially how the Giant Not-Squid is apparently trying to bite the ship in anger (with teeth it's not supposed to have, being an octopus, but whatever).

And let it be known to future generation that Lockman, Victor, was responsible for a comic panel where a dognosed, "tee-hee"ing  Queen Victoria greets Mickey Mouse while Goofy's talking head is seemingly mounted on her wall. Really. Of all the weird conclusions.

So that was 20.000 Weeds Under The Sea. It's a pefect example of a failed experiment, which mostly failed because they assigned Vic Lockman to the project instead of, say, Carl Barks. It's not devoid of interest: for all that the story is odd and simplistic, it's nicely told; the art is pretty solid most of the time; and as far as they may be from the original Nautilus crew, it's nice to see relatively unsual characters Hook and Smee in a story. But it's simply not good. Lockman, Strobl, go read Donald Fracas and take notes: this is how you write a Parodie-type story that, in spite of using weird casting choices, having weird universe mixing, and being only tenuously related to the novel, is actually, genuinely fun to read. 

By the way, aside from its traitorous betrayal of the original, have you, by any chance, noticed anything wrong with it? No, not the fact that it's god-darn insane. (Well, that too, but you know what I mean.) Still don't see it? It has nothing to do with weeds whatsoever. I don't get it. It's an incomprehensible… non-pun. "Weeds" doesn't even sound much like "leagues". Why choose this out of all the doubtful homophones that Lockman could have… Wait. Doesn't weed have another meaning in modern slang…? Oh. Oh. Now I get it.

REVIEW: "Wonders of the Deep"

So, I told you that I would also be reviewing non-comics Disney here, which pretty much amounts to:  cartoons. Thus, here is one.

Here is 2015's Wonder of the Deep. For those who don't know, this short is part of a new wave of CG Mickey Mouse cartoons that premiered last year. More or less following the Epic Mickey craze, these shorts have redesigned all the characters in a "pseudo-retro" way that echoes the design of the 20's but is still unmistakably modern. The episodes, if you ask me, are of varying quality; there are some good gags and visual ideas, often very good voice acting, and sometimes nice background, but there are some other gags that are really gross and I'm not really keen with the redesign of most of the characters. You can watch Wonders of the Deep here where Disney posted it for you to (allegedly) enjoy.

"Hello there ! Welcome aboard the Ducktilus ! Join me as we dive twenty thousand

leagues under the sea !"

The short pleasantly starts in Ludwig von Drake's new submarine. It is a really good surprise to meet Ludwig here, and despite the limited animation he's still one of the most pleasant characters to look at, and moves in his characteristic manner. He can't, of course, be voiced by the late Paul Frees, but Corey Burton, who took over since Frees's passing, has if you ask me improved since House of Mouse (at the time, he gave Ludwig a slightly too high-pitched voice compared to Frees). Ducktilus is an easy pun, but not an insufferable one.

P.S.: I think this is a good place to mention that I am a big Ludwig von Drake fan.

He hires, of course, Mickey, Donald and Goofy as his crew. The utter emptiness of the ocean (though it is a nicely-shaded one, I'd like to point out) does not strike them as being particularly thrilling, which leads them to make the depressed mimicries seen on the second picture here. It's my main problem with this series's art style: the character models are not especially ugly, but they keep stretching them in disgraces ways. Yuk.

"Professor ! I thought we were going to explore 'the Woooonders of the Deep' !"

So, Mickey "sarcastically" reminds the professor that he's not here to stare at the water, and… see what I meant earlier about the eerie mimicries ? And it's far from being the most egregious example. Happily, we get this funny part from Ludwig von Drake, brought down only by another Mickey Weird Face:

(ominous music playing in the background)

"Oooh… so you really want to see wonders ?"

"You bet I do !"

"Weeell…"

"…what are we waiting for ? PREPARE TO DIVE !"

If it was not for Mickey's weird face, this sequence would be flawless. Burton's acting as Ludwig makes it all the better. Anyway, dive they do, and they begin to come across interesting fishes, such as a "dogfish". (Are there such things, or is it just a play on catfish ?)

GOOFY: "Momma ?"

Like in Camping Out, there is a distinct play on Furry Confusion here, and I do appreciate it, but good lord, those designs. That dogfish is the stuff of nightmare.

The above is, you guessed it, a "tiger shark". Once more, it's a little easy a wordplay, but it's still worth a chuckle.

So, they get as deep as they can and meet those comparatively realistic abyss-dwellers. But Mickey still wants more, he wants to get to see mermaids, or a kraken. Ludwig answers that the odds of seeing a kraken are of around 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000…

LUDWIG: "…zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero,

zero, zero, zero, zero…"

MICKEY: "Awww, gee."

"CLONK !"

Uh, oh… What do you think that switch commands ? 

CLONG !

LUDWIG (muffled): "…zero, zero, zero, zero, zero…"

LUDWIF (bubbling): "…zblero, zblero, zblero, zblero…"

MICKEY, DONALD, GOOFY: "The professor !"

Well, C.C.C. (Contrived Cartoon CoincidenceTM) causes Ludwig to be standing at that point on the exact spot from which he can be blasted out of the Ducktilus. A tidbit predictable, if I might say. However, the running gag that he keeps computing without even noticing is pretty hilarious. Also, note that the three yell "THE PROFESSOR !". Shouldn't Donald be yelling "UNCLE !" ?

Ludwig then proceeds to get swallowed by this swimming clam that just happened to… wait a minute, swimming clam ? This is ridiculous ! A clam doesn't swim, a clam remains nicely at the bottom of the ocean. For that matter, a clam doesn't swallow anthropomorphic ducks, either, but that's besides the point. The point is, contrary to the cartoonish "tiger shark" and others, I'm not sure this particular mistake was intentional from the writers. Anyway, the clam proceeds to jump in a dark pit, and later to get eaten by a kraken.

So, Donald and Mickey go inside said pit to get the clam (and the professor) back, and I'll grant you that those custom-made diving suits for Donald and Mickey, adapted to their beak and ears, are pretty funny. In the pit, they find these charming mermaids:

It's love at first sight, and off they go to dance with their new fiancées, with a random and obnoxious pop song playing in the background. But what's this ? Goofy exposes to the audience that "air deprivation can cause hallucinations", and we see that the tube that gives the two heroes air was blocked. Turns out, obviously, that those mermaids never existed in the first place. But do I need to tell you why this is a ridiculous concept ? Well, you know, before you lack so much air that you get hallucinations, you notice that you are beginning to have a hard time breathing. Which Mickey and Donald did not. Meh. Anyway, what do you think is there instead of the mermaids, then ?

A kraken, of course. And a blue one. (I mean, in real life, those things are pink, right ?) He is pretty ugly too, though it's a little more forgivable because he is supposed to be a horrible monster.

Long story short, he swallows them, Pinocchio-style, and we get this rather disgusting shot of the inside of the Kraken's belly. Whenever this series shows viscera from the inside (which, for some reason, it does surprisingly often), it's always as these blueish, purplish, palpitating… things. Yuk yuk yuk.  

Of course, they escape, having on their way discovered that the professor's clam (from the inside of which he is still heard "zerozerozero-ing") had been swallowed by the beastie. They also find the time to stick in a Pinocchio cameo:

PINOCCHIO: "Why does this keep happening to us ?

Then, back at the submarine, Ludwig von Drake is freed at last (By the way, how was he breathing the whole time ? Did he get hallucinations, too ?):

LUDWIG: "…zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, zero, three, two, one."

LUDWIG: "Hey ! There's still a chance ! Who wants to find a kreaa-ken ?"

And then, there you have it. If you want my overall opinion (of course you do, that's what you're reading this review for) about this episode, whenever Ludwig von Drake shows up they make a good, worthy use of the character, but their treatments of Mickey, Goofy are a bit shaky and they are really bad at designing pleasant-to-look-at cartoon characters. 

REVIEW: "The Sorcerer's Apprentice"

So, as we know, it all started with a mouse. 

« A rabbit ! RABBIT ! »

Yes, I hear you, Oswald. See you next review. Anyway, they say it all started with a mouse, so despite my preference for Duck characters, let’s start with a mouse story, shall we ?

Here is 1953’s The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, written by God knows who and drawn by talented mouse artist Paul Murry. As the title implies, it’s an adaptation of sorts to the 1940 Fantasia segment, though it does take some liberties that I’m going to pin point as we see them. The first being, obviously, that the characters talk in this version, since Paul Dukas’s music can’t be there to fill the soundtrack.Another difference that you can see in this (beautiful) opening splash panel is that, in spite of all the talking, Yen Sid is never named: he’s just The Sorcerer. You can’t blame Unknown Writer, however, since Yen Sid’s name just started as a joke between the animators and never really caught on until Kingdom Hearts.

Second big difference is, here, we don’t begin with Mickey already working at Yen Sid’s: we witness the process of him suddenly thinking about the Sorcerer and getting the idea of postulating to be his apprentice. It’s executed rather well, though it does raise the question — where does Mickey come from ? Why is he randomly hanging around the Sorcerer’s castle when there’s no village or anything in sight, if it was not purposely to come to the castle ?… Yeah, I’m overthinking this. Globally this little intro is pretty enjoyable, and emphasizes Mickey’s mischievous, childlike nature rather well.

Ladies and gentleman, Yen Si… I mean the Sorcerer. The butterfly he creates is much more of, well, a butterfly than the glowing… thing we see in the movie, but it’s not necessarily a bad thing, since the time’s somewhat loose printing quality wouldn’t have allowed for the colorful nuances the movie’s butterfly was made of. Also, Murry's butterfly is very cute if nothing else.Also, notice that broom in the background. Foreshadowing, fellows. I don’t know if Unknown Writer or Paul Murry is responsible for it, but whoever it is, I congratulate him. You can actually enjoy some more foreshadowing  in the first splash panel, as you can see the well that Mickey’s going to use to fill the tub, later.

So anyway, Mickey’s hired and starts doing chores as he should (including chopping wood, a minor addition to the cartoon) and this happens. You know, you can always assume it happened offstage in the movie version, but I think that this scene was somewhat missing in said version. Yen Sid leaves his hat on the desk with no instruction, Mickey uses it… and Yen Sid blames Mickey for that ? Sure, he did not verbally allow Mickey to take it, nor had Mickey any reason to believe he had such right, but Yen Sid did not warn Mickey, either, or told him not to mess with his stuff. Here, the sorcerer gives Mickey a fair chance, making him more likable. When it comes to the art, still nice shadowing.

Did I mention the shadowing was awesome already ? Yes I did, but since it’s getting more and more awesome as the story progresses, I’m going to be repeating myself. And it’s nice that it is, since the artistic beauty of the thing was much of the original cartoon’s appeal; the exact same script, but drawn by a less talented artist, would have made a dull story that was trying to cash on a movie that it can’t rival, while this story is really trying. Also, Mickey’s thought balloon is totally right: why doesn’t he ? The cartoon doesn’t dive into this question at all and the comic doesn’t really make it the centre theme, but one could argue that the point is not to have the tub filled, but to have the apprentice deserve what he’s going to learn… to avoid having him feel that magic comes easy. This is supported by later changes.

So Yen Sid goes to the village, instead of going to sleep upstairs as in the original. I think this is a mistake of sorts: Yen Sid going to sleep emphasized his humanity in a way you rarely see in cartoons — ‘yes he’s got tremendous powers, but he’s still a physical living being with physical restrictions’ —.  Nice to learn there is a village though, must be where Mickey is from.

That’s still excellent art on the water, but here’s the second change I’m not please with: this narration box is all we get of Mickey’s iconic dream sequence where he commands to the skies and stars. It might not have rendered well in comic form, so I can understand why they cut it, but meh. It’s technically speaking the best-looking part in the short, and that was Walt Disney’s personal opinion, too !

WHACK ! BANG ! OUCH ! Contrary to the original version, Mickey « murdering » the Broom happens onscreen, like it was supposed to be before they cut the scene and redid it with the shadows. And I think they were right in deleting it the first time; it does look a bit disturbing to see Mickey Mouse actively hacking a walking, moving being in half, like that, whack.

Yen Sid is back, awesome art is awesome, « Aba-Ka-Zow-GOOM-Bah » sounds a bit silly a magic word in the mouth of a realistic character such as Yen Sid.

What was I saying earlier ? Yen Sid could have easily kept the tub filled instead of blasting its water away with the rest of the flood, if the point was to get the tub filled. But the point is to get the tub filled by Mickey, you see ?

Culmination of Yen Sid being made into a nice guy here: instead of spanking Mickey with the broom, we get this hope-filled ending that echoes Mickey’s wishes at the beginning.

Thus ends The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, which I might call something of a hidden gem; hidden for two reasons. First, Paul Murry’s regular Mickey comics tended not to be all that exciting, as GeoX pointed out once or twice. Second, the cartoon’s popularity actually contributes to making the story more obscure, since it’s so much more famous than its comic adaptation; the poor thing really has no way to shine by itself. And that’s a shame. Hearing me at IDW ? Probably not, but if you are in spite of all probabilities, here’s a tip: reprint that presto.