Skip to main content

Disney Sundays: The Emperor's New Groove (2000)


         In the first few years following the Disney Renaissance, I admire how much the studio was trying to do something different. It’s as if they were gambling every time on the next Aladdin or The Lion King, but turned it up to ten. Dinosaur was their first foray into CG, next week’s was their attempt at  a classic action-adventure, and The Emperor’s New Groove was a buddy comedy. Disney does a buddy comedy! Unless it’s Roger Rabbit (which was also quite dramatic), that shouldn’t work! The Emperor’s New Groove kinda does in some places, but in others it doesn’t.
          Kuzco, the teenage Emperor of an Inca kingdom wants to build a new summer palace on the top of a hill that’s home to a peasant called Pacha. At the same time he’s fired his senior advisor Yzma who also happens to be a mad scientist, and as revenge she tries to poison him. However because of a mix-up, Kuzco is given an elixir that transforms him into a llama instead. While trying to dispose of him, Yzma’s henchman Kronk loses Kuzco who winds up with Pacha. So the vain and selfish Emperor needs Pacha to make it back to the palace, all while avoiding being hunted by Yzma and Kronk.
          There are some really good things in The Emperor’s New Groove, but you have to go through a lot of shit to get to them. Foremost is Kuzco himself. There’s never been a more selfish asshole of a lead in a Disney movie. He’s pretty unlikeable which is the point, but I get the feeling the intent was he’d be someone the audience would come around to. Or even who they’d like despite his personality because he’s so funny. But the problem is, he’s not funny enough. He’s voiced by David Spade, an actor you either hate or tolerate. Personally, I really don’t find him funny. I’ll admit though he got a laugh out of me a couple times in this movie, but generally he wasn’t entertaining enough to make his douchebaggery justifiable. He also narrates the story for part of the film which is okay but doesn’t factor in any character development. By the time he’s telling the story he’s supposed to be feeling remorse and empathy but in his voiceover seems to be of the exact mindset he was at the beginning. This tool also has him making fourth wall breaks where he addresses the audience, the film in general, and makes adjustments ….like he’s a G-rated Deadpool. 
          The story once it gets going is very straightforward, you know exactly where it’s going to end up. You know the moral and the happy ending, but at least it’s set in a unique environment. Kind of, but not really. Though the conceit is it’s set in Peru (judging by the protagonists’ name) at the height of the Inca Empire, there’s no real connection to that fact in the plot. All the characters have modern sensibilities, and a lot of the technology and culture is very anachronistic. In some ways Hercules even was a better representation of its era because of all the references to Greek mythology. There’s no references here, and you could supplant these characters and this story in just about any other civilization in any other realm of history and not lose much. And though sometimes the modern sensibilities work in the humour’s favour, other times the comedy really shows its age. When Pacha’s kids are on screen they’re definitely trying to pander to a current young demographic with their attitude and dialogue. Particularly their back-and-forth in bed stands out as an old kids cliché. And speaking of dialogue, when the jokes are done, the writing is pretty poor. There are more than a couple contrivances and at one point, I’m not kidding, they literally call out their own plot hole (it’s actually kinda funny though). Kuzco’s character growth never feels believable even when it’s supposed to be genuine. I think this is because not only is he such an extreme kind of jerk who’s established from the start, but he fakes out Pacha a couple times, so you don’t buy it when he really is supposed to be changed. There are moments in this movie when, being Disney, they try to be sentimental, but it’s too much a shift in tone. Every time the soft music comes up and it holds on a character I expect the film to pull the rug out with another joke. If Disney’s trying to have it both ways, equal parts comedy and drama, this far-fetched style is too eccentric to pull it off. 
          But what does this movie do right? Well John Goodman’s likeable enough as Pacha, even if his scenes are all shared with such an irritating partner. Their relationship is fine, again except when it tries to be heartfelt, but Pacha’s just not that interesting. He makes the scenes with Kuzco bearable but as the other half of this film’s integral double act, he could have been much more interesting. His wife is voiced by Wendie Malick who’s good, but deserved to be in a better Disney movie. Tom Jones comes out of nowhere as Kuzco’s personal singer, as does John Fiedler -the voice of Piglet -as an old man Kuzco has thrown out a window (yeah, not good when there’s a fine line between your “hero” and Longshanks from Braveheart). The animation though is pretty fast-paced, which is really good for the comedy, the high-energy slapstick at times feels like something out of Looney Tunes. Indeed, the film is at its strongest when it’s really putting effort into this off-the-wall absurd brand of humour.
          Which leads me to the saving grace of The Emperor’s New Groove: Eartha Kitt and Patrick Warburton as Yzma and Kronk! These two are fucking hilarious -every time they’re on screen they get a huge laugh! This movie really should have been about them -it was a buddy comedy, but focussed on the wrong pair. Yzma’s not that bad a villain; hell you kinda want her to be Emperor, because Kuzco was a dick and by the films’ own admission, no one really liked him. Her design is great (everyone refers to her as “scary beyond all reason”), she’s enjoyably mad, and what happens to her in the end is too funny to spoil. Kitt’s really giving her all to the character, playing up every one of her irritated reactions and fiendish glee. As for Kronk? Well he’s basically a slightly funnier David Puddy from Seinfeld. Yeah, he’s a typical idiot, but Warburton gives him such an enthusiastic naiveté you can’t help but love. And his consciences were scene-stealers too. Technically he’s an evil henchman, but he’s probably the nicest and most well-intentioned if moronic henchman I’ve ever seen. Yzma and Kronk have a ton of funny one-liners, all the best scenes, great chemistry, and are a couple of Disney’s funniest characters. Considering they’re the only parts of this movie people really remember and quote, I think if the film had shifted focus to them maybe after Kuzco got lost, and just gone balls to the wall comedy, this could have been an interesting parody of a Disney movie told from the villains’ point of view, that would’ve been a hell of a lot more funny and memorable. Although the story was predictable, a few of the detours were funny and unexpected, a number of jokes both verbal and physical hit well. I really thought the movie was strong in the couple scenes it went full-on farce, where all four major characters would be in one setting trying to avoid each other.  These spurts of great comedy were terrific and reminded me why I found this movie fun as a kid.
          So is The Emperor’s New Groove good? I think it depends on what you’re looking for. It is Disney doing a buddy comedy, which is a little jarring. You’re not going to find any wonder or Disney magic in it, only a standard to boring story, basic visuals, and nothing ground-breaking or challenging. And apart from an end theme called “My Funny Friend and Me” (sung by Sting) there aren’t any songs to enjoy either. But for what is, it’s not bad. There are a lot of weak elements to sift through but you do get some very good laughs particularly out of Yzma and Kronk who really make this movie. It’s definitely not one of the great animated comedies (or even that good in general) -it’s got nothing on the first two Shrek films or The Lego Movie -but I also can’t say it’s not entertaining or worth your time.

Next Week: Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001)


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

Back to the Feature: New York, New York (1977)

New York, New York  is a two hour forty minute musical movie largely about a toxic relationship and I understand why it was Martin Scorsese’s first big flop. Some have blamed its poor reception on the kind of movie it was, of a style and tone Scorsese wasn’t known for, but I find that hard to believe. Even after only five films, he’d proven himself an extremely versatile director, and Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore  found an audience. Sure this jazz musical love letter to New York City was following up Taxi Driver and its’ far more cynical take on the city, but then it’s also ‘from the director of Taxi Driver ’ which itself was a big hit. Was it a matter of public appetite for musicals, or mere word of mouth and early critical reception that dissuaded viewers? Irrespective of that, I was stunned to discover this movie was the origin of the titular song, which I’d assumed was much older (it’s definitely got the sound of something that might have come out of the Jazz sce...