RKerekes13-1 Some people probably know about the several Babes in Toyland movies made throughout the years: the original 1934 Laurel and Hardy version (which I haven't seen in its entirety yet), the absolutely HORRIBLE 1961 Disney version, the just okay 1986 TV version with Drew Barrymore, and this 1997 animated version. To me, it is probably the BEST Babes In Toyland movie that anybody will ever see! Moving right along, I saw both the 1961 Disney version and this version at a young age and looking back now, I feel that this version is far superior to the atrocity made by Disney. I'll be happy to explain why and how. (And just to prepare you, I will be comparing these two versions through this review.) One review on here pointed out how this movie exceeds the Disney movie in character development, music, songs, dialogue, etc., and I have to agree with them. But I'm not gonna copy what they said. I'm just gonna put it in my own words.First off, whereas the Disney version lacks a certain charm that makes it all around believable, this version adds a charm all its own which makes it entertaining, fairly believable, and enjoyable to watch.Secondly, the characters in this film are more what you might say well-rounded in interaction and personality, meaning that they keep it all well-balanced as they provide some crucial contribution to the plot. The Disney film, on the other hand, has its characters more, um... monotone and straight-to-the-point in a bad kind of way.Third, there's the romantic subplot of Tom and Mary. Now this is more a of a neutral comparison. In the Disney one, their romance is dead-straight on, while in this one, their romance is developed from secretive to clear. No comment there.Fourth, Barnaby. The Barnaby in the Disney film played by Ray Bolger (The Scarecrow in "The Wizard of Oz"!) comes across as just plain annoying with no sinister seriousness. The Barnaby in this film voiced by Christopher Plummer (Captain Von Trapp in "The Sound of Music"!) is fairly more sinister and serious with his motives, though I gotta admit, he does his share of annoyance, too.Fifth, comparing the songs in both versions, this version has songs which are all all-around worth listening to, while in the Disney version, some songs are better than others.Lastly, those who have seen all the Babes In Toyland movies probably know that all the movies' plots are different, but with that being said, I don't wanna spoil it for those who haven't seen this one. Forget all the other versions, ESPECIALLY the Disney one (!!!!!), get this version and watch it! It is, in my honest opinion, the most perfect Babes In Toyland film you'll ever see as long as you're living on this earth!

richard.fuller1 And oddly enough, omitted Mother Goose herself.This version of babes In Toyland didn't plagiarize, but obviously borrowed from Wacky World of Mother Goose, in which Jack and Jill were the hero and heroine, the villain was the Crooked Man (Hence Barnaby with the last name here as Crookedman) and the cat fiddling and the dish running away with the spoon all featured prominently, tho here they were minor supporting players.While no harm was done, I couldn't help but note this after watching Laurel and Hardy's version and recalling the '61 Disney offering as well.What this one also did was completely remove Mother Goose, which was interesting.Again, no harm done. They are all very delightful to watch back-to-back, I must say.Still, I can't help but note hair color in many of these cartoons, from Johan and Peewee in the Smurfs to various other offerings, where they are always fair-haired blondes and redheads.This one stands as about the first time I've seen both sexes covered; Jack was a redhead, Jill was blonde, Mary Contrary was a redhead and Tom Piper was blonde.So glad we are now a more racially open-minded society. Ah well.

fairies-2 This is animation at its best traditional "entertaining for kids and adults at the same time". There is so much in it, that I enjoy watching most of it with my son even for the 20th time in a couple of months. We both seem to get bored with one of the musical numbers. What hooked him initially was the opening train scene, which helped to get him into watching something other than Bob the Builder. Recently I loaned the disk to a friend whose toddler also went nuts for it. I highly recommended it. There is a part with goblins that might be scary for some kids, and there's a cat character that gets thrown around a bit more than I'd like to see presented as funny, and it's not as educational or ethnically diverse as it might be, but otherwise, it's great entertainment.

dkallem This mean-spiritied telling of a Christmas classic (!) is just plain bad movie-making--poor "acting," a confused and confusing plot, florid animation art, and a pack of goblin characters (what classic is this?) that will scare many a small child. Held to the Disney standard, this is a very poor stab at making movie magic.