Chip 'n Dale: Rescue Rangers (2022)
May 20, 2022 7:53 PM - Subscribe

"Decades since their successful television series was canceled, Chip has succumbed to a life of suburban domesticity as an insurance salesman. Dale, meanwhile, has had CGI surgery and works the nostalgia convention circuit, desperate to relive his glory days. When a former cast mate mysteriously disappears, Chip and Dale must repair their broken friendship and take on their Rescue Rangers detective personas once again to save their friend's life."

It's a mix of live action, computer animation, and cartoon animation. Directed by Akiva Schaffer of The Lonely Island. It's on Disney+.
posted by Pronoiac (19 comments total) 4 users marked this as a favorite
 
This is *so* much better than it needed to be.

It’s actually…kinda good.
posted by hototogisu at 3:35 AM on May 21 [4 favorites]


I enjoyed this very much. As an 80s and 90s cartoon aficionado I felt very much this movie's target audience. In general, I dislike 'stunt' voice casting, and I did feel that Andy Samberg and John Mulaney sounded slightly TOO much like Andy Samberg and John Mulaney at times, but they did a good job in the end and that's all that matters. I love traditional cartoon animation and I thought the traditionally animated parts were beautiful - nice and smooth and true to the original series. (There's nothing worse than animated characters who look just slightly 'off' from their original design - Disney's run of horrible straight to video sequels, I'm looking at you.)
posted by unicorn chaser at 6:34 AM on May 21


This had no business being that cute and clever and funny.
posted by The Adventure Begins at 9:24 AM on May 21


This is effectively the sequel to Who Framed Roger Rabbit?
posted by leotrotsky at 5:16 PM on May 21 [2 favorites]


Yes. A good one, at that.
posted by a box and a stick and a string and a bear at 5:20 PM on May 21 [3 favorites]


This was so good. I resent how much I liked it because that means Disney gets me and has successfully comoditized my childhood, but oh well. Bonkers in the best way.
posted by kittensyay at 8:45 PM on May 21


The more I hear about the cameos in this movie, the crazier it sounds. Apparently R. Crumb's Mr. Natural is in there! I'm surprised Disney would sign off on the character's inclusion, and I'm really surprised Crumb would allow it. I'd be fascinated to hear how the heck they made that happen. What does Mr. Natural do in the movie? Does he just go by in the background or does he have any dialogue?
posted by Ursula Hitler at 12:44 AM on May 22


I had a lot of fun! Way more than I was expecting.

At the same time, there's something really distressing and sad, thinking about my beloved childhood cartoon characters falling on hard times and being endangered. I cried out, "Not Flounder!"
posted by meese at 7:00 AM on May 22 [1 favorite]


This was good and I had lots of fun watching it. As a film, it's no Roger Rabbit, but as an exercise in pure nostalgia, I think it was a worthy sequel. There were lots of bits that I wasn't expecting, and I hope whoever negotiated all the rights gets a huge bonus this year because they did an amazing job.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 7:53 AM on May 22


I was shouting “what the fuck” and “how did they get to make this” at the screen every sixty seconds - in a good way!
posted by adrianhon at 1:53 PM on May 22


I watched with my son last night. The story was just ok, but the references and callbacks were fun. I think Disney was able to get away with a lot of them through parody use.
posted by Fleebnork at 3:22 PM on May 22


What does Mr. Natural do in the movie? Does he just go by in the background or does he have any dialogue?

I think you'll just have to watch the movie to find out.

I'm finding it difficult to tell people why they need to see this movie without spoiling it. After all, the plot is pretty basic, the acting can be a little wooden at times, and I feel like most of the appeal of the movie is that "what the fuck" and "how did they get to make this" aspect that can only be enjoyed if you're watching it.

Like, imagine how it would have felt if you were a baby boomer going to see Who Framed Roger Rabbit for the first time without knowing anything about the Daffy Duck-Donald Duck piano fight, or basically anything at all about the movie. Rescue Rangers isn't as good of a film as Roger Rabbit, but it's almost as enjoyable a movie.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:36 PM on May 22 [1 favorite]


I want to see E.T. versus Batman
posted by qxntpqbbbqxl at 12:19 AM on May 23 [1 favorite]


Mod note: One deleted: combo of "I'm not interested in this film" plus Mulaney derail. (Generally, please don't drop into discussions to say you don't care about the show / film / book, etc.; just stick to threads about offerings that you would like to actually discuss. Also, let's not turn this into a John Mulaney discussion. Feelings about him / his recent wtf choices are absolutely valid, but do not actually have to do with this film. Thanks.)
posted by taz (staff) at 1:01 AM on May 23 [4 favorites]


i want to see the "Gadget and Zipper" spin-off series where they combination repair shop and daycare and raise strong competent ... offspring (what the hell do you call their kids) ... while solving the occasional mystery.
posted by jazon at 7:21 AM on May 23 [3 favorites]


Erik Voss’s Easter Egg video. Pretty complete, but he just just does not get how fucking weird it is to have Mr Natural show up.

He does point out the Bobby Driscoll references, which are even more subversive.
posted by 1970s Antihero at 4:58 PM on May 23 [3 favorites]


Lego Miserables. I died. Definitely have to watch it again to catch all the references. Those of you who said this was better than it had any right to be were so correct; I'm glad you said so here because I might not have watched it otherwise.
posted by kitten kaboodle at 10:10 PM on May 23 [2 favorites]


He does point out the Bobby Driscoll references, which are even more subversive.

The Bobby Driscoll reference was dark as hell!
posted by unicorn chaser at 3:28 AM on May 24 [1 favorite]


Thank you, 1970s Antihero. That video gave us a tour of all the cameos, which is mostly what I was interested in. Basically this movie sounds like a really dark SNL skit that was stretched to feature length and released by Disney, against all odds. Many years ago the Air Pirates got into a lengthy and expensive lawsuit for daring to depict Disney characters as sad, washed-up, druggy pervs. Now Disney's making movies where Peter Pan is as dissolute as any Air Pirates character. It's a wacky world.

As for the Mr. Natural cameo, I have a few hypotheses for why Crumb allowed it. One, he was a huge Disney fan growing up and he couldn't resist the prospect of having one of his characters in a Disney film now. Two, he read the film as anti-Disney, he bought the "subversive" angle, and he wanted to be part of it. Three, he was just kind of done with Mr. Natural as a character, they offered him a good amount of money, and he said screw it. Knowing Crumb, it may well have been some weird combo of all three.

Cracked (of all places) points out that it's, um, deeply problematic for the Disney corporation to release a movie where the big bad is a copyright flouter who happens to be based on Bobby freakin' Driscoll. It's the kind of hiding-in-plain-site fucked-upedness people usually don't notice for decades (like the "dickless" EPA guy being totally in the right in Ghostbusters,) so good on Cracked for spotting it now.
posted by Ursula Hitler at 10:15 PM on May 24 [1 favorite]


« Older Podcast: The Besties: The Slee...   |  Shining Girls: Series 1 - All ... Newer »

You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments