Hello friends, happy Monday! I hope you are all doing well. Today I’m back with the second half of the 1950s in my Disney Movies project, let’s get into it!

In the second half of the decade did Westerns ever take over. I had a hard time getting through all the history pieces and documentaries (as you’ll probably be able to tell from my thoughts as you read them), but I pulled through. There were a few gems that I enjoyed, but there weren’t very many from this time. Here we go with the last half of the 50s.

The Great Locomotive Chase: I have to say, I didn’t know what to expect with this movie because I had no idea what it was about. It’s not on Disney+ and I’m not really sure why, because there isn’t anything bad about it; it’s a part of American history that people might not know about, I know I didn’t know this was based on true events. When you’re watching it, it makes sense that this could be factual. This was based off events in history during the Civil War. To make a long story short, this was about a group of men who pretend to be southerners and for confederation in order to derail them (literally by train), slow them down and try and destroy their army in hopes to end the war. There were parts in the beginning where I was confused as to who these men were. It’s told to us what the plan is, but even still they could be really convincing and I had to double take if they were for or against the war. There was one guy who was definitely not about pretending, he was interesting to watch and memorable; the rest kind of just get forgotten. For the most part this was action packed, it could get boring at parts but it was an interesting way to learn of history. I wouldn’t watch this again since it doesn’t have a lot of appeal to it; once you’ve watched it, there’s no need to see it again. (1956)

Davy Crockett and the River Pirates: This is supposed to be a prequel to King of the Wild Frontier but without all the factual plots. This was made to show more of Crockett’s fun side, and I mean it does that because we see him joking around and just having fun in this. Even though this is supposed to be more lighthearted, this one was a lot more boring. I found myself not invested in any of the storylines or the characters. The plot sounded interesting, but it just wasn’t executed that way. In this film we find Davy with his friend, George needing a ride up the river to New Orleans. That’s where we meet Mike Fink, King of the River. Since Davy can’t afford to travel with Mike, Mike challenges him to a race and when Davy ultimately wins, he lets Mike keep his title and they become friends. Once they’ve been dropped off he ends up calling Mike back for his help in exposing Natives for trying to make claims that aren’t true. It had a decent plot but it wasn’t engaging enough. This also started with a sensitivity warning because of the way this depicted Natives and what the white man called them. In the end, I feel like this prequel wasn’t needed to be made into a film (as these scenes were taken from the TV show, it should have just stayed in the show, but I can see how Disney tried to make money out it by creating a full length film). There’s more of a chance I’d watch the first film than this one again, this one had nothing that interested me to watch again. (1956)

Secrets of Life: This is the fourth documentary in Disney’s True-Life Adventure series. In this one we focus on nature, especially flowers blooming, seeds growing, bees, ants and fish then ending it on volcanos (which if you ask me, felt so out of place). Let’s start with what I liked because this film was less than stellar. The way they shot the time lapse videos of all the flowers blooming was really cool to see, although you could tell that most of them weren’t filmed in the wild, but it looked like some sort of controlled room. Watching nature do its thing is so incredible sometimes, like seeing how the bees and the ants work. At one point the ants didn’t look real (and I wouldn’t be surprised if some of them turned out not to be) but it was really fascinating. This film, out of all of these in the series so far, felt like the longest because it just dragged on. This series is known for showing things over and over until we’re hit over the head with it, but this time around it felt even worse. What I also couldn’t stand was the personification of these plants and animals in the narration. It’s not the first time they’ve personified animals, they’ve done it in the past films too, but this one took it to a new level because they were talking about the reproduction of nature. So when it came to the bees and the fish reproducing they tried to put a human spin on it, which doesn’t work for animals. I’m sorry, but I’m pretty sure bees don’t do a “marriage dance” so that they can mate. It’s actually called a mating flight, so this whole sanctity thing they had going on was was not really educational. Aside from that, this had good, captivating parts, but it was also really slow. I feel like there are way better documentaries out there that take on nature a lot better than this. Would I watch this again, nope. Once was good for me. (1956) 

Westward Ho the Wagon!: This was something; it wasn’t the best nor was it the worst either. This movie isn’t on Disney+ and I don’t think it’s worth the 5$ to rent it (which is what I did so I could continue with this project). There aren’t many reviews of this movie because of its obscurity, but most of them all say the same thing: it was boring. And it really was that; the plot is very slow going for a full length movie, half the time I didn’t even know what the plot was. For the first hour it’s watching these cowboy settlers travel up the Oregon Trail, then they meet native Indians and of course there are fights between the two. Then it ends with them coming together because one of the white men is able to help an Indian boy who falls ill. I can see that they were trying to show cultures coming together but it’s hard to appreciate what they were trying to do when the movie is dry to watch and the acting is wooden. I get that this is also supposed to represent a time in history but I’m very unfamiliar with the Oregon Trail so how much of this was really accurate is hard to say. I feel like this was a very neat and tidy version of the truth. With that said, what impressed and surprised me was the fact they had actual native actors who played the two main Indian characters; I feel like that was progressive for the 50s, so the film had that going for it. Would I watch this again, nope, plus it’s too hard to find without paying for it. (1956)

Johnny Tremain: Another movie that isn’t on Disney+ and again, I’m not really sure why as this was another of what I like to call Disney’s historical movies (after further googling, apparently this was never meant to be a feature film, which explains why you can watch parts of this film on Disney+ in a short film called The Liberty Story). This film depicts Boston between 1773 and 1775 seeing the events that led up to the American Revolution. We follow a young man named Johnny Tremain, who is a fictional character (I had to Google if he was real, he’s based on a character from a book by the same name), as he works as an apprentice for a silversmith. When he hurts his hand, he’s out of work as no one wants to hire a one-handed man. It’s because of his hand that he finds work as a messenger for the Sons of Liberty where he secretly informs members of times/dates of meetings. As the film progresses we see how this group play into the events leading up to the Revolution (the Boston Tea Party, Paul Revere’s Midnight Ride, the Battles of Lexington and Concord) and how Johnny finds himself drawn into all of the action. I think it’s me because I’m getting a little tired of watching all these period pieces on American history. Disney sure went through them in such a short period in the 50s. As for this film, it really didn’t feel any different than say, the Davy Crockett films, although this one had less adventure and more war. The plot was alright, it covered a lot of ground in history and from what I’ve read, covered it accurately. If you’re into history, this was a really well done film, but if you’re not, this film drags on. That’s not to say this wasn’t interesting, because it was, but the first half was definitely more captivating than the second half. When the film takes on more of a historical role and we see Johnny doing different things through the different events, the film loses its storytelling a bit and goes right into factual mode, which made this boring to watch. We no longer feel for Johnny as a character because it felt like he no longer had a story. I know I wouldn’t rewatch this, but seeing it once was good because it paints a picture of history for the viewer from the eyes of a teenager. (1957)

Perri: This was Disney’s fifth True-Life Adventure film, with the added title of ‘Fantasy’ at the end, since this blended documentary with imaginary. To me, I think this was the worst one yet in the film series. It was extremely boring for most of it, and the added effects were to make it more interesting and captivating for the viewer, but it was just so cheesy. I guess for the late 50s it was a bigger deal, but watching this decades later, it was comical at best. The premise of this one is following Perri, a female squirrel, from her birth all throughout her life as she encounters different animals, some friend, some foe, different environments, and of course finding a mate. Aside from this being very slow storytelling, they really dragged out the story of a squirrel’s life, I just couldn’t get into being the squirrel. This was different from all previous films because this took camera angles pretending to be the squirrel, which really made it feel less like a documentary and more like Disney telling us how the squirrel felt, when how could they know that? There were also a few scenes that I couldn’t tell if they were real or not (they probably weren’t authentic) because we see the flying squirrel and then Perri, who is not a flying squirrel, tries to be like it and of course it fails, so to me I’m like did that squirrel really do that, or did whoever creating this film throw a squirrel off a tree to make it seem that way for the benefit of the story? There were a few instances like that, so this whole film felt fake (which I guess is why they added fantasy, but at that point just make it a fantasy without the doc part. I read this film was based off a book… at that point can we even call this a documentary if they had to ensure certain things happened?). Then the ending with Perri’s dream sequence was something else, and where the cheesiness lied. You had animals floating in and out and I’m not really sure what the point of it was, other than to be extremely random. I couldn’t stand the narrator either, he spoke in rhymes way too much for me to want to take seriously. The only thing I got out of this was the sound a squirrel makes. I had no idea they made this chirping like sound; I hear it all the time but I just assumed it was a bird. That was probably the most interesting and useful thing I got out of this. I won’t be rewatching this, if I’m being honest this has no watchability the first time. (1957)

Old Yeller: I was really curious and excited to finally watch this movie after years of knowing about it but never seen it. This tells the story of a family in around 1870 after the Civil War, their father has gone off to sell their cattle and has left their oldest boy, Travis in charge. While he’s away, a stray dog shows up causing havoc but the youngest boy, Arliss claims the dog as his. Despite Travis hating this dog (I didn’t blame him) they keep it. As the story progresses we see how good a dog Old Yeller actually is and how useful he can be, especially fighting off other prey. That soon catches up to Yeller as he gets sick from one of their bites and has to be put down. I know this movie is a classic, and I can honestly say that I enjoyed it. The pacing was slow at first but it wasn’t too bad because there was always something happening. The characters, well I had a hard time with them because they were all so whiney to start, but they do eventually grow on you. I even couldn’t stand Old Yeller in the beginning because he was so disruptive but as the film went on, we really got to see how special a dog he was. Now, I knew before watching the story of Old Yeller and how it ends, so maybe that’s why this didn’t hit me as emotionally as it did everyone else. The only thing I didn’t know was how it happened. Because I had this information I felt like I kept asking, is this it, is this it? Because Yeller gets into quite a few scraps, this feisty dog. It was beautiful to watch Travis grow fond of Yeller, from not wanting him at all to not knowing what he’d do without him; it’s a special bond and they captured it really well. Would I rewatch this? Probably not, I can see it’s rewatch-ability, but it’s not for me to watch again. I saw while researching this has a sequel so I’m interested to see what that is about, possibly Yeller’s puppy that they acquire near the end of this film perhaps? Last thing, Fess Parker makes his, what feels like his 100th appearance in a Disney film this decade. The guy has been in every live action basically. I actually looked this up because I was curious, apparently he had a contract with Disney to play these roles that are very similar and he couldn’t take any outside roles, so he ended up leaving Disney for good. How fascinating and explains a lot. Anyways, this film was worth the watch (finally!). (1957)

The Light in the Forest: Oh look, another western to star Fess Parker. This film isn’t available on Disney+ but you can find a low quality of it on YouTube for free. This film felt like most of the other period pieces that Disney has done this decade. I had a hard time figuring out what the plot was; this opens on a scene where they’re all just talking but nothing is really making sense and it just continues in that form. We’re left to put pieces together as to what happened to the main character, True-son/Johnny. The premise of this is that the white men want their son, Johnny, back after the Indians stole him from his parents many years ago. My first question was why they waited so long? Like their son was stolen when he was a child, he’s basically a man now and he was left to be raised by the Indians, I feel like there was ample opportunity to get him back. Because now they question why he doesn’t want to go back home and they force him to be a white man, when he doesn’t want that. The film goes back and forth between his identity as an Indian and as a white man, I have to say the portrayal is not good for either side. Apparently this film is based on a book by the same name, and it’s claimed that this is a work of fiction but based on things and events that actually happened. I mean, I’m not shocked that these would be things that happened in real life, but there was just something about this film that was boring and not worth watching. Too much dialogue, scenes with dead space, the plot had some merit to it, but the acting left much to be desired. You could tell Parker was tired of these roles because his acting was so dead, like he didn’t care. This holds some historical value to it, but there are probably better films out there for that. (1958)

White Wilderness: This is the sixth film in Disney’s True-Life Adventure films and the only one not on Disney+. This sparked my curiosity as to why this one wasn’t there, since it’s a documentary film in a series of them. Once you Google this film, you’re led to pages on controversies on lemming mass suicides and now you’ve got my attention. So this film propagates that the lemming species are prone to mass suicides by diving off a cliff into the ocean. After reading a few articles it’s very clear that lemmings do not do that, in fact Disney fabricated that whole scene by throwing these critters off a cliff, but not into an ocean, but a river. Now, as I move through these “documentaries” it’s becoming clearer and clearer that most of the things they film aren’t actual true life, but a staged set for what Disney want their viewers to deem as real. I’ve come to take these films with a grain of salt in their accuracy and try to enjoy them, but it’s hard. The music is obnoxious at best, the narration tries too hard, watching the animals can be fun, but these films have really lost their lustre. These films start with my attention but slowly over the course of the hour just lose my focus because I know it’s not really “true life” and I don’t care anymore. These films are shot well, but the fact that they’re seen as documentaries when they really aren’t, doesn’t sit well with me. Now that the veil has been revealed I can’t watch these the same way. (1958)

Tonka: This Western is about a horse named Tonka. It’s exactly how I thought it was going to be (and maybe that’s why I didn’t hate it as much as I thought I would, my expectations were low). Although, this was longer than I expected, which was disappointing because this didn’t need to be as long as it was. There were scenes that really dragged and for the most part it was just a really boring film. We meet Tonka when White Bull tries to tame and train him to be his. Once he does so, his cousin steals Tonka and abuses him so White Bull sets him free… only so that he can be captured by the US Calvary where he’s used to fight in the Battle of the Little Bighorn (which was a real battle, the story of Tonka is fiction and based on a book). I didn’t hate this film as much as I did others before it but there was nothing about it that made me compelled to watch it. Sure, the horses were nice to look at but the plot felt like it was all over the place; half the time I lost the point of the plot because it would get bogged down by things that didn’t really matter. The only thing I truly felt for was Tonka the horse, the other characters were so bland and one dimensional caricatures of people that it made it hard to care about them. This film falls into the non-memorable Disney Westerns from the 1950s because they all start to look and sound the same; no rewatching here because it feels like I’ve already watched this narrative a few times. (1958)

Sleeping Beauty: It feels so long since I’ve watched an animated film and it was such an enjoyable experience! After watching so many live action, western period pieces this was such a nice refresher in the world of Disney (it also restored my faith in this project). Anyways, after watching this… I don’t think I’ve ever actually seen this movie before. I know the premise, but everything felt new and I had such a joy of a time watching and finding out what was going to happen next. The premise of this is that the king and queen of this kingdom have had trouble having a baby, but once they do, the evil maleficent comes to put a curse on princess Aurora; on her 16th birthday she’ll die by pricking her finger on a spindle. The three good fairies try to reverse the curse and instead of her dying, she’d fall into a deep sleep until true love’s kiss. In order to keep her safe until after her birthday, Aurora’s parents decide to let the fairies take the princess away and raise her in the forest without magic so the evil Queen can’t find them. When the time comes to bring her back to the kingdom, Aurora has seemingly fallen in love with a peasant boy (when she should be marrying the prince) and it’s not long before maleficent’s goons find her. I have to say, this film felt like nothing really happened yet it was still captivating and entertaining. You have one event that happens, then years go by, then another, some more time passes. It’s like decades pass as if no time at all, it made for some jumpy pacing, but it worked. I never felt like I was missing anything though, if anything we never really got any background into this kingdom or world so we’re left to take everything at face value, which isn’t a bad thing and like I say, worked really well here. I also have to say, I didn’t realize that Aurora wore a blue dress for most of the movie. Every time we see her depicted outside of the movie, it’s always pink, so I thought that was interesting and something I never knew. This definitely has rewatch-ability. (1959)

The Shaggy Dog: I wasn’t prepared for this movie to be in black and white, since all the previous movies have been in colour, but that didn’t effect my feelings on this film, I just thought it was interesting. I’ve seen the remake they did in 2006 and I assumed this would be somewhat following the same line… and it didn’t. The premise of this is that Mr. Daniel’s is a mailman who hates dogs, like he loathes them and all his youngest son, Moochie, wants is a dog. Turns out his oldest son, Wilby, finds himself cursed… and starts to turn into a dog. As he turns into a dog, he learns of illegal things his new neighbours are into and uses his new form to sniff them out. This was something else. This started off interesting and I was invested, but as we got further into the story, I had such a hard time following the story because there were too many plot holes for this to make any sense. Like what happened to the actual dog when he turned into, Wilby kept his personality when he changed, but the dog just disappeared and it was weird. Then the way the father just changes his attitude towards dogs and his son becoming a dog was so out of left field and didn’t make sense. The things they made the dog do, like wear clothes, drive, made it hard for me to watch because it was so unbelievable, which I know it wasn’t made to be believable, but it was just so weird. The plot started off easy to follow and then it just went off the rails by the end. This should have just stuck to Wilby turning into a dog without the illegal plot because that just added to the mess. Overall, this was probably supposed to be funny and lighthearted movie but I just didn’t enjoy it and I won’t be rewatching this again. (1959)

Darby O’Gill and the Little People: I had to look up what the plot of this movie was because I thought it was something completely different. That’s what happens when you drift away from a movie. That’s not to say this was boring, but it was a bit weird. This one played on Irish folklore, which was cool, and for the time it was made, the graphics were probably really good, but they came off as really cheesy now. So I originally thought that this new guy, Michael, was brought in to be betrothed to Darby’s daughter, but that’s not the case at all. Instead, Michael has come to take Darby’s job because Darby got too carried away trying to chase and capture the king of the leprechauns. When he does he tries to show that he has, all Michael can see is a rabbit. The town thinks Darby’s a bit out of his mind. But he doesn’t want his daughter to know he has no job, but of course she soon finds out from another source, which makes her angry. On top of this plot we’ve got the king leprechaun grants Darby three wishes and a fourth wish that can reverse all the previous ones. So the movie goes on watching Darby struggle with the wishes and his loss of a job. The story itself was definitely entertaining and the loopholes play mind games on the viewer and the characters, which was really fun. But it just wasn’t shown in a fun way. It’s probably just the era of when this was made, but it could be really dull at times and dragged for a bit. I feel like this could have been shorter, too. I don’t feel like I’d rewatch this. Maybe if there is or a remake was made I’d see if that was better. This just didn’t do it for me. (1959)

Third Man on the Mountain: This is the last Disney film from the 1950s and at least it was interesting. First off, this isn’t on Disney+ and I’m not really sure why, could deal with rights to who owns the film. But aside from that, this was based on a book that was based on true events, so take that with what you will. That didn’t make me love it or hate it any less. It was entertaining as a whole, but dragged on and was boring in parts. I feel like there could have been scenes taken away and it wouldn’t have made much of a difference to the overall story. This is about a young boy named Rudi, who is obsessed with climbing a mountain. He dreams about it, but his mother and uncle are very against it. They’re against it because it’s the mountain that killed his father. All Rudi wants to do it finish the job his father couldn’t do, by climbing all the way to the top. So this was his story of getting there, whether he had help or not. Of course there are a few side stories too, but like I said, some of them could have been cut out and it wouldn’t have dragged, nor made a difference. Nonetheless, this was still, at its heart a good story. Some of the characters were a little goofy, but that also made the film more memorable. You had your typical antagonist who was mean and crabby, but at least the protagonist wasn’t too cocky and all for himself. Overall, this was enjoyable, I just wish the acting could have been better; you could tell they were all acting so it was overacted. Aside from that, not a bad film. (1959)

Have you seen any of these movies? Let me know in the comments below!