elicopperman Max Fleischer and his studio were always trying to push the envelope through innovation when making their animated films, whether by creating rotoscoping (animating live-action footage), the rotograph (mixing live-action with animation), or the stereoptical process (their version of the multiplane camera). So when they made the transition to feature length animation, one would expect greatness out of their ambitions. Unfortunately, due to the success of Disney's Snow White & the Seven Dwarves, Paramount gave the studio an 18 month production schedule and forced them under contract to make a film similar to the Disney classic. What followed was their 1939 adaptation of Jonathan Swift's Gulliver's Travels, which despite doing well financially, was seen by many as a lackluster Disney knockoff, and I have to agree with the consensus on this one.The biggest problem with Gulliver's Travels is that the story lacks much momentum. As it's about an explorer who helps a small kingdom that declared war after an argument over a wedding song, there isn't much weight or substance to be found. In fact, the whole movie feels like a short cartoon that was stretched to 76 minutes, not helped by how overly long some scenes go on for. Besides, the mere fact that the two kingdoms on the island declare war over a song makes this whole ordeal feel rather....well, ridiculous. There are some humorous moments here and there and the film certainly tries to add suspense with small fight scenes, but the stakes feel so underplayed and safe that it's hard to gain much excitement out of the already paper thin story.If that's not enough, most of the characters aren't that memorable either. Gulliver is the giant human who wants to declare peace with the nations and that's it, the prince David and princess Glory have even less believable chemistry than Snow White and the prince (heck, they barely even speak, they mostly just sing), and Gabby is the comical town crier with a short and obnoxious temper. Although King Little and King Bombo have their hysterical rivalries and contrasting beliefs, there isn't much development given to them to really care for either of their sides, thus making them come off as the one dimensional opposing good and bad sides with nothing else. When Bombo's spies Sneak, Snoop and Snitch are the best characters in the film from their physical comedy and pratfalls alone, there's a problem.Now where the film fails in both story and character, it does succeed in its animation quality....for the most part. It's amazing that the crew crafted this film under an 18 month period, because the settings, backgrounds and environments look stunning and gorgeous to the eyes from their structure and colors. The effects animation is also top notch as well, showing a lot of rich craftsmanship that can only be admired by cel animation fanatics. The character designs and animation of the villagers do resemble a more simplified and cartoony aesthetic common back in the day, and the animators certainly had fun bringing them to life. However, given that Gulliver was animated with the process of rotoscoping, his movements are so real that the contrast between him and the cartoony rest feels very jarring. Snow White may have been animated the same way, but Disney's animators were able to make her look more stylized and alternated with more imaginative movements, whereas Gulliver falls into the uncanny valley and comes off too real to be animated.Lastly, if you're not convinced that this film is a Disney knockoff, then the musical numbers will certainly prove otherwise. I will admit, All's Well, It's a Hap-Hap-Happy Day and Bluebirds in the Moonlight are quite catchy and entertaining. They all have a very upbeat tempo and optimist nature that makes them hard not to sing along to....too bad the other songs sound way too much like diet Disney songs. Faithful/Forever just screams imitation of Snow White and the prince's song, and it becomes painfully obvious just how much Paramount demanded competition with Disney. The others aren't worth caring for, as they fade into the background and become boring and slow to even listen to. I think Leonard Maltin was right, this film might've favored better with Popeye the sailor in the role of Gulliver. At least then, Maltin says, "we could have had some of Jack Mercer's mutterings to liven up some of the slow spots." Overall, while Max Fleischer's Gulliver's Travels does have mostly strong animation, some enjoyable songs, and bits of entertainment value here and there, it suffers from a weak story, underdeveloped characters and a failed attempt to copy the success of Disney's timeless classic Snow White & the Seven Dwarves. Considering that Walt Disney was Max Fleischer's biggest rival, it only makes the film all the more grating to even watch. I know some people have a soft spot for this movie, and by all means love it as much as you want, but this film only proves that not everything from the Golden Age of American Animation was....well, golden.

Kirpianuscus first, for its innocence. because it is a real animation film for children. sweet, lovely, testimony about a time . in same measure, it remains a delight. for a form of simplicity and beautiful songs and the wise use of Jonathan Swift classic novel. for a kind of romanticism, graceful, delicate, fragile and seductive. sure, it is easy to criticize it. if you ignore the period who defines it. because it is a manifesto against war but, in same sense, it is inspired use of childhood colors, flavors and joy. and this is the only detail important.

zardoz-13 The second feature-length animated film "Gulliver's Travels" gave Walt Disney something to think about after the Mouse House had released the first animated feature "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs." The imagination and expertise that the Fleischer studios poured into this 76-minute Paramount release is almost as good as Disney's Dwarfs. Indeed, the night watchmen and several other characters resemble the dwarfs with their bulbous noses. This adolescent adaptation of Jonathan Swift's classic tale substitute slapstick for satire. The scenes where Gulliver grasps the anchor lines and drags the navy away are fantastic. The musical numbers, some of which received Oscar nominations, are worthy of a Disney. The weakness of "Gulliver's Travels" is its anemic characters. The beautifully roto-scoped Gulliver is a bland character while most of the supporting characters behave in a goofy manner. Not only are the characters weak, but also you don't care that much about them. The war between two small kingdoms about to be bound in wedlock is restrained until the latter half of the action. Gulliver spends a great deal of time out cold allowing the natives to lash him down fast. Animation addicts who haven't seen "Gulliver's Travels" are missing a real treatment.

bkoganbing Paramount's animation department never got the same acclaim as Walt Disney's or Warner Brothers or MGM. But Max Fleischer who created the Popeye cartoons for Paramount made his bid for immortality with this animated version of Gulliver's Travels with radio announcer Sam Parker voicing Gulliver and radio singers Lanny Ross and Jessica Dragonette as the Blefuscuan prince and the Lilliputian princess who in fact are a love match and would like to rule peacefully if they're fathers can keep from reuniting old animosities.In the Jonathan Swift book it was which end of the eggs do you crack, the big or the small end. Here it is the song with the same music and the same lyrics save for one word, Faithful for Lilliput and Forever for Blefuscu. Mankind does go to war stupidly over some trifles and sad to say still does.The song sung by Ross and Dragonette received one of the two Oscar nominations for this film for Best Song. The songs were written by Paramount contract team, Leo Robin and Ralph Rainger. The scoring of the film netted the second Oscar nomination for Victor Young.I have a feeling had this been done over at Disney or Warner Brothers some additional zip would have been in the film. It moves way too slowly. The closest treatment of Swift's satire to what he had in mind is probably in the film that Ted Danson did as Gulliver back in the Nineties.