Ten years later: Home on the Range
Thursday, April 10, 2014 at 7:01PM 
Tim here, to celebrate, and by “celebrate”, I mean “lament” the ten-year anniversary this month of the film that more or less killed traditional animation at Disney. Back in April, 2004, all that anybody could talk about was anything else imaginable other than Home on the Range, a Western comedy feature the voices of Roseanne, Judi Dench, and Jennifer Tilly that during its opening weekend only managed to scrape itself up to the #4 spot at the box office. This was to be expected. Disney had already announced prior to the release of Brother Bear the previous fall that once they cleared out the pipeline, they’d be abandoning 2D animation forever, and given the quality of most of their work in the 2000s, nobody could really be terribly offended by that decision for any strong reason other than nostalgia. Let me put it this way: I, in 2004, was easily the biggest Disney lover I knew. And even I didn’t bother watching it until a good year and a half later.
I would love nothing more than to say, at this point, “this was a terrible injustice done to a great movie, because…” and that’s really not accurate. Still, Home on the Range is certainly better than its still-unchanged reputation would have it; the fact that Disney’s very next film was the outright toxic Chicken Little certainly helps to make it look that much better, as does the 2009 release of The Princess and the Frog, which took away the pressure for the earlier film to be The Very Last Traditional Disney Film.
It’s a goofy lark with a collection of characters that don’t all feel like they belong in the same universe, let alone the same narrative (Roseanne’s snotty anachronisms and Cuba Gooding, Jr’s antics as a kung-fu addled horse especially jar with the jokey sweetness of most of the movie), so anyone seeking any kind of emotional gravitas had best keep looking. Like The Emperor’s New Groove, from earlier in the decade – a film that has been largely redeemed in the ensuing years thanks to an appreciative cult and the rise of Patrick Warburton as one of everybody’s favorite voice actors – Home on the Range is strictly an exercise in cartoon gags, frequently adopting very un-Disneylike tones in the pursuit of whatever absurd joke makes sense in the moment. This is all about silliness, from the random plotting (the entire story hinges on a rustler whose yodeling hypnotizes cattle), to the all-over-the-place dialogue, to the bright and flat aesthetic.
It’s this last part that actually serves to distinguish the film, and if there’s any strong argument to be made that it deserves better than it’s gotten in the last decade, that’s where the argument starts. Compared to many – most! – Disney films, Home on the Range is surprisingly unattractive; it’s also one of the most singular, unique visual experiments that studio has engaged in since the 1960s. It is, in essence, an attempt to marry the hugely non-realistic lines and flat surfaces of limited animation of the sort best exemplified by United Productions of America in the ‘50s with the fluidity, depth, and detail of Disney animation of the ‘90s.
It’s not an entirely successful experiment: in particular, the collision between the two-dimensional characters and the involving CG backgrounds made with Disney’s Deep Canvas technology is one that the film never comes remotely close to resolving.
That being said, it’s enough of a one-of-a-kind look, not just in Disney’s canon but in feature-length animation generally, that I couldn’t bear to give up the whole movie. It’s weird, but in a very determined way that suits the zany comedy just right. Almost every character in the film seems to be made up of straight lines and acute angles, which lends it a sense of quick sketches without the weight and body of so many animated figures, and that in turn gives it a frivolous lack of seriousness that most theatrical animation has lacked for hoard on a quarter of a century now.
The film’s look is more that of a TV cartoon or a comic strip than anything else, done with the technical control of Disney animators at the height of their power (if not their inspiration). It’s not great art, but it’s different enough from most of what had gone before it to be at least moderately interesting; given the almost complete absence of traditional cel-style animation in the decade since, it’s even more unique-looking now than it was when it was new. I would never try to proclaim that this deserves more attention than the great Disney musicals of the ‘90s, but it deserves more attention than none at all, as proof that even in its lowest hour, the apparatus of Disney animation was still trying to do new and interesting things with its medium.
Reader Comments (7)
what a fascinating look back. I actually saw this in theaters on opening night for reasons I can't fathom now since i skipped Brother Bear altogether. but i remember nothing about it. seriously nothing. so this was like seeing it for the first time
Two excellent songs on the soundtrack is about all that I remember. "Will the Sun Ever Shine Again" and "Little Patch of Heaven". This was indeed a fascinating read though. I can't imagine anyone else giving such thought to this film.
The only reason I watched Home on the Range was because I was working at a (terrible) video store that year and I'd seen so much of the catalogue that it came down to choosing between this and some Jennifer Aniston mediocrity (there were approximately 27 of those released on DVD that year), or you know, playing Solitaire for 2 more hours.
I don't necessarily remember anything about it but I did enjoy it enough to be annoyed that it was so roundly dismissed.
I admit I was really disappointed that Home on the Range was Disney's last "hand drawn" animated movie. It's cute, but also so... forgettable. So was Brother Bear. (except for certain visual effects)
I'm glad at least Princess and the Frog were released afterwards. I found that film 100 times better. Not a masterpiece, though, but entertaining.
Atlantis and Treasure Planets are highly underrated and The Emperor's New Groove was the funniest Disney I've ever seen. Lilo&Stitch was also great.
Chicken little was... not bad at all.
And there's Meet the Robinsons that didn't have a great critical acclaim either, but I found that surprisingly good.
But now with this HUGE success of Frozen, I don't think they'll make films like Home on the Range or other classical "hand drawn" movies again. Which is sad because I grew up with them and they are also part of the reason I study graphic design/illustration.
Though Hope dies last.
Sonja & Tim - I have to side with Tim here. I think Chicken Little might be one of the very worst animated films I've ever seen. yikes. I despaired for Disney when it came out.
Well, I agree CL is probably the worst animated Disney movie. It's still not the worst animated movie. At least internationally.
I could (but I refuse) to name some really really REALLY bad german animated movies. Be happy you don't know them... What a waste of paint and time.
Great article! I almost feel like giving Home on the Range a second chance. I was raised by Disney fanatic parents and am one of the two people in the world who genuinely loved Brother Bear, so even though I was 14 and an annoying teenager when Home on the Range came out, off I went to see it. I'm a HUGE Disney fan and the next Disney film I saw after that was Tangled. I didn't even see the Pixar ones in that period (Cars, Ratatouille) until a few years later, I was so traumatised by how horrible HotR was. I remember watching it with my mum so clearly and the two of us kept looking at each other not believing that that was an actual Disney movie.
I kinda want to watch Chicken Little now and see how bad it is...