THE FOLLOWING REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS OF THE DISCUSSED FILM. READERS DISCRETION IS ADVISED.
Although 2010's Alice in Wonderland started a trend of Walt Disney making live action remakes of their animated classics, the official first film to go through this scenario was 101 Dalmatians.
PLOT
The 1996 adaptation follows Roger who is a video game designer, and Anita who designs outfits for the fashion establishment, House of DeVi, ran by Cruella De Vil. One day at the park, both Roger and Anita fall into the lake after their pet dalmatians, Pongo and Perdita chase each other. Overtime, the two begin such a close relationship that would lead to marriage. Some time later, Anita discovers that she and Perdy will be expecting to have babies soon. Around this time, Cruella receives a rug made out of the skin of a white tiger, recently stolen from a zoo. When she discovers that Anita's dog will have puppies, she desires to have them due to her obsession with fur. By the time they're born, she quickly offers to pay for them but the married couple turns her down as they have no intention selling them. This upsets her so much that not only does she fire Anita, but also vows revenge for being turned down. She sends burglars Horace and Jasper to steal them once both pairs of parents are out of the house, in which they succeed. Another dog sees what they did and alerts Pongo & Perdy of what happened. Pongo summons the Twilight Bark gossip chain to animals all over Great Britain, while his human owners alert the police and point Cruella as a suspect. Kipper the same airedale terrier who saw the burglars' van follows it to an abandoned house where not only Pongo's 15 but also 84 more abducted dalmatian puppies are being held captive. Another dog alerts Pongo and Perdy where they are, leading them to take off and save their children. With Cruella being pointed as prime suspect, she demands her accomplices to kill and skin them all tonight to make the fur coat she wants. Various animals who responded to the Twilight Bark get involved in the rescue. As raccoons distract Horace and Jasper after already sabotaging their vehicle, Kipper helps all 99 puppies sneak away. One named Lucky is left behind but Kipper returns to save it from the taxidermist Mr. Skinner. When Cruella discovers what happened, she plans to find them and do the deed herself. Horace and Jasper attempt to find them on foot after the engine of their vehicle is caught on fire. After they getting shocked by an electric fence, they give up and surrender to the authorities. All 99 puppies meet up with Pongo and Perdy at a farm but Cruella is able to track them down. The farm animals give them time to escape by dealing with the villain. After she falls into a vat of molasses, she is kicked by a horse so hard she lands into a pigpen. The authorities arrive and she is arrested alongside her minions. The four antagonists are even sprayed by a skunk she mistook for a purse. Considering that the other 84 puppies do not have a home, Roger and Anita decide to take them in alongside the 17 dalmatians they already have, taking care of 101 total. The film ends with the family living in a plantation after Roger's first successful video game.
THOUGHTS
I assumed that I recall watching this film in early childhood, like the many films from Walt Disney's catalog, but I was wrong as I didn't remember much of the story until recently watching it completely. I wasn't sure what to expect from this movie as it could've been a copy paste remake like The Lion King or attempt to establish new elements like The Jungle Book. It seems that this one was a mix of both as the main story is the same while various elements are highly different from the animated predecessor. Because of that, I think I was able to enjoy this film for being almost as fun as the prior film. My main reason why I enjoyed it is that it did feel realistic in this new interpretation. Having the animals not speak because that was how realistic they wanted it to be. While I appreciate the creativity that they're going for, I gotta admit right now that there many things from this story that I can't stop scratching my head about. First off, based on fashion alone, how come Cruella hasn't been questioned of missing animals? Her only color pattern is black and white like the tiger and with that in mind, she should've been questioned from the beginning. I know we're supposed to like Roger and Anita as we did before, but their relationship felt rushed in comparison and with that thought, it was hard for me to enjoy the chemistry of Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson. Also, why doesn't Anita call the cops when Cruella threatens her and her husband? Sure not everyone lives up to the threat but had she taken a precaution, she likely wouldn't be able to plan the puppy abduction. This leads to a big question I never ask about the animated film before until now: How has 84 other missing dalmatian puppies not on the news but a white tiger is? If they weren't actually stolen but bought by Cruella, we should know when that happened because it seems as if it did within the span of months before stealing the last 15. It makes sense not to think when passing by other animals but how come Cruella doesn't recognize dog tracks? If she did, she'd find them all and take as much as she can. It is funny that she meets her comeuppance but it felt like a deleted scene of Home Alone 2: Lost in New York. I assume this is what had to be done if John Hughes was producing. And lastly, how does no one in the neighborhood want any of the 99 puppies? Of course we want to get to the happy ending of all 101 being raised in a single home and it's true that not everyone is a dog person but how are Anita and Roger the only ones willing to take them in? This stuff didn't make sense to me. However, I believe you'll still find joy in this film after ignoring these flaws. As I go back to the goods, the main reason everyone still go back to this film after all this time is the scene stealing performance of Glenn Close as Cruella De Vil. The energy she puts for this psychotic portrayal of the greedy villain is honestly outstanding. The second she enters the room, you know things are gonna heat up. She is someone who doesn't care how far she'll go to get what she wants. As for Hugh Grant and Mark Williams, I honestly believe that they held up their own when playing Horace and Jasper as they pulled off being a dynamic duo with a slimy motive. In short, Stephen Herek gave us a remake that is never gonna be better than the predecessor but still remains entertaining on its own. If you're an animal lover and love the animated classic, I'm certain you'll enjoy this one too.
Comments