DVDizzy Forum

Using the recent convo in the Hannah Montana thread as inspiration, what's so bad about Disney sidekicks? I think some of them play an important part in their respective films. They could be the main character's conscience, give advice and/or provide encouragement to the main character. They could be the main character's shoulder to lean on they end up being the heroic one in the story. They could also provide the comic relief which may or not come at the best time (I'm looking at you Gargoyles). Timon and Pumba in my opinion come in at just the right time. Sure some of their humor may be a bit juvenile but looking at the events that just happened before Timon and Pumba first appeared, I think some comic relief was needed at that point.

What do you have to say about sidekicks?

The only time I don’t like the sidekicks is:

1. When they’re annoying.
2. When they don’t do anything important or, if they’re only point is to be comic relief, when they aren’t funny.

The whole idea of sidekicks didn’t really come around until the renaissance films, when these side characters popped up with nothing else to do but lighten the mood and sell plushies. The early ‘90s films weren’t as bad (Sebastian, the trio from B&tB, Genie, and even Timon & Pumbaa all had their own roles in their films, and their own storylines/character arcs). They seemed more like older films, where there was no real concept of “sidekicks,” just lesser characters.

On the other hand, you then get characters like Terk from Tarzan who…don’t play any role at all, except to lighten the mood. Unfortunately, s/he doesn’t even do that well. Same with the Gargoyles, the trio from Pocahontas, and so on. Over time, they just look like a barrier to otherwise decent, serious films.

Still, they weren’t all bad in the '90s. Mushu was a bit of a throwback to the Genie, and he did have his own storyline. More recently, I definitely think Ray has a pretty significant role in TP&TF. The sidekicks don’t play much role in Tangled, but at least they are funny and charming there.

Overall, I never quite got the uproar about these characters either. Except for a few really irksome ones, they never really bothered me. From what I've read, others on here don't like them because they're loud or because they rely on lowbrow humor.

Four words. A Guy Like You.
I mean, the Gargoyles ruined a perfectly dramatic scene with that song! Forget Marry the Mole, A Guy Like You should have won the Razzie!

Disney's Divinity wrote:The only time I don’t like the sidekicks is:

1. When they’re annoying.
2. When they don’t do anything important or, if they’re only point is to be comic relief, when they aren’t funny.

This pretty much sums it up, for Disney or any other movie.

Example:

good sidekick/character- Jiminey Cricket


Bad sidekick/character- Loius the failigator, Gurgi, Terk
Boomer and Dinky, Gorgoyles, mice from Cinderella, farting alien thing, etc.


Get the picture?

I think some people see sidekicks, typically the talking animal type as another cliche that makes most modern animated films seem more like kids' stuff.

Understandably so. Except with Disney, the studio has had a long complex history with sidekicks. Some of their better sidekicks went on to better things: Jiminy Cricket and Tinkerbell have become unofficial spokespeople of the Disney brand. Sometimes though, the sidekicks become so superseding that they make the main characters props in their own stories. It happened most famously when Goofy, Donald, and Pluto "outgrew" Mickey. Donald himself became a victim of the sidekick syndrome when Chip and Dale and Buzz-Buzz showed up. Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty seem to be more about everybody except the leading heroines.

All of that is probably what called for recent attempts to make Mickey a more aggressive character again, and for Disney's modern princess to ignore the "damsel in distress" bit. For the most part in the fairy tale features, the direct companions have served as crucial plot points without stealing the show from the heroines.

The only good sidekicks are sidekicks who actually play a significant role in the story.

Otherwise, they're useless.

I really don't think Dinky and Boomer served any purpose at all. The only thing they ever did was help bring Widow Tweed to Tod and after that...Absolutely worthless. I wouldn't say the gargoyles are that bad but they still distracted from an otherwise serious film.

Say what you will about Meeko, but the most crucial thing he did was steal John Smith's compass which in turn helped Pocahontas realize her destiny and helped prevent the war.

Jiminey Cricket was definitely crucial to the plot of Pinocchio. If he hadn't found out about Pleasure Island's little secret, it would have been too late for Pinoke.

And if Abu didn't steal the lamp, Aladdin would still be in that cave.

I like 'sidekicks' when they're not cramped in just to play the 'sidekick role'. You see, Timothy Mouse and Jiminy Cricket played a huge role in the lives of the main characters Dumbo and Pinocchio. Without them, the main characters would have developed very differently and the stories would have ended in a totally different way. In other words, they are an integral part of the story and they are there because the story needs them.

Now, since the 1990's, sidekicks have been forced into the movies just to sell more dolls and Happy Meals. The Gargoyles from Hunchback of Notre Dame were thrown in at the last minute by the executives to appeal to the kiddies. The animal characters in Pocahontas played no role at all. They were just there because the formula dictated them being there. Same with Louis the alligator in Princess and the Frog, whose only role was to be loud and obnoxious and to ruin every good moment in the movie. Luckily, Pascal and Maximus in Rapunzel were silent characters. Pascal wasn't really needed and one could argue about Maximus, but at least they didn't ruin the film.

Goliath wrote:Luckily, Pascal and Maximus in Rapunzel were silent characters. Pascal wasn't really needed and one could argue about Maximus, but at least they didn't ruin the film.

At first, they weren't going to give Rapunzel any sidekicks. But she needed someone, not Gothel apparently, to keep her sane thru her 18-year confinement.

I wish Quasimodo only had Laverne and Victor. Hugo spoils the Quasi and Gargoyles scenes. The makers should have had Victor and Laverne put a stop to his "A Guy Like You" song instead of going along with it. It seems out of character for Laverne and Victor to go along with Hugo's song considering they didn't approve much of things Hugo did and said up to the song.

As has been said before, sidekicks can work if they're well-written and don't interfere with the main characters. Gargoyles come to mind as some of the worse sidekicks. While Timon and Pumbaa, Jiminy Cricket and Ray are some of the better ones, in my opinion.

And I guess I'm in the minority who likes Flit and Meeko and find their antics funny. Without them, I think Pocahontas would have been incredibly dull and you can also see it as Eric Goldberg's own touch entering the film. Or maybe I just like them, because the raccoon is my favourite animal.

"I wish Quasimodo only had Laverne and Victor. Hugo spoils the Quasi and Gargoyles scenes. The makers should have had Victor and Laverne put a stop to his "A Guy Like You" song instead of going along with it. It seems out of character for Laverne and Victor to go along with Hugo's song considering they didn't approve much of things Hugo did and said up to the song.I wish Quasimodo only had Laverne and Victor. Hugo spoils the Quasi and Gargoyles scenes. The makers should have had Victor and Laverne put a stop to his "A Guy Like You" song instead of going along with it. It seems out of character for Laverne and Victor to go along with Hugo's song considering they didn't approve much of things Hugo did and said up to the song."

I do agree with you on that. Victor and Laverne are really not all that bad. They are not really obnoxious and in some ways fit in a little better. I think in many ways, Hugo was the poster boy for everything people didn't like about the gargoyles. Take him out of the movie and i don't think the other two would be as hated as they are.

avonleastories95 wrote:Four words. A Guy Like You.
I mean, the Gargoyles ruined a perfectly dramatic scene with that song! Forget Marry the Mole, A Guy Like You should have won the Razzie!

no Marry the Mole is an awful SONG. Which is what the Razzie was about.

A Guy Like You is a GREAT song... the setting and the characters in question are out of place and make no sense, but the song is catchy and well written. Marry the mole was not.

One of the reasons I always disliked Cinderella was because of those mice. More than half of the story seems to be a cat and mouse chase. If I wanted to watch that I would put on Tom and Jerry.

I've never liked Mushu. He is far too irritating and takes over the screen when he is a part of the scene.

The gargoyles were horrible.

But I do like Abu. It makes sense for Aladdin to have a monkey to help him survive in the city. Genie is not a sidekick in my opinion. He is a full blown character integral to the movie.

Flounder and Sebastian (and even Scuttle) didn't annoy me. Most real pets/animals (like Rajah, Pascal, Maximus, and Abu) don't bother me. I like when animals act more like animals.

Semaj wrote:

Goliath wrote:Luckily, Pascal and Maximus in Rapunzel were silent characters. Pascal wasn't really needed and one could argue about Maximus, but at least they didn't ruin the film.

At first, they weren't going to give Rapunzel any sidekicks. But she needed someone, not Gothel apparently, to keep her sane thru her 18-year confinement.

Rapunzel needed another character to interact with so the audience could have something to grasp about her personality outside of the relationship with Gothel. Such complete isolation is extremely difficult to work with in a film like this without going overboard on exposition or boring the audience to death. They also wanted to give her moments of self-doubt and needed someone to boost up her self-confidence; Pascal suited that role well. They actually considered having her paint faces on pottery or something so she could have imaginary friends to talk to and thus avoid the "stereotypical sidekick," but that made her feel a tad insane and pushed the story into a much darker direction than they wanted to go.

Stereotypical or not, a good sidekick works well if handled well; there's a reason Disney keeps going back to them.

enigmawing wrote:

Semaj wrote: At first, they weren't going to give Rapunzel any sidekicks. But she needed someone, not Gothel apparently, to keep her sane thru her 18-year confinement.

Rapunzel needed another character to interact with so the audience could have something to grasp about her personality outside of the relationship with Gothel. Such complete isolation is extremely difficult to work with in a film like this without going overboard on exposition or boring the audience to death. They also wanted to give her moments of self-doubt and needed someone to boost up her self-confidence; Pascal suited that role well. They actually considered having her paint faces on pottery or something so she could have imaginary friends to talk to and thus avoid the "stereotypical sidekick," but that made her feel a tad insane and pushed the story into a much darker direction than they wanted to go.

Stereotypical or not, a good sidekick works well if handled well; there's a reason Disney keeps going back to them.

Couldn't agree more. A good sidekick can really enhance a film. Pascal and Maximus were two of the best sidekicks in quite sometime.

Besides, Rapunzel talking to painted pots is way too Castaway.

4th Life of Thomasina wrote:Besides, Rapunzel talking to painted pots is way too Castaway.

I was actually tempted to put up a photo of Wilson in my last post!

Terk i guess her role evaporates after a few minutes, but I love "Trashin' the Camp"

Pocahontas Trio-Percy and Meeko actually make the film's theme of racial equality very obvious. Call it useless, but it helps little kids understand.

Mushu and Cricky-Cricky is a staple of Grandma, but nothing more. Mushu isnt really helpful at all, though he does send the troops up the mountain. They also both help Mulan kill Shan-Yu. His best moment: "YOU MISSED! HOW COULD YOU MISS!? HE WAS THREE FEET IN FRONT OF YOU!!!!"

I like Mushu, because he's got personality, provided by Eddy Murphy. Percy, Meeko, Tantor, Terk etc. were bland characters.

PatrickvD wrote:A Guy Like You is a GREAT song... the setting and the characters in question are out of place and make no sense, but the song is catchy and well written. Marry the mole was not.

Agreed.