101 Dalmatians (1996) User Reviews

Great children entertainment.

[Boba_Fett1138 · 6/10 · 22 October 2005]

"101 Dalmatians" is perfectly good clean children entertainment. It's has a fun feeling and atmosphere and some great characters.

John Hughes his writing style is notable in this movie. The characters and the humor are similar to his other movies such as the well know movie "Home Alone". The humor is slapstick like at times (especially with the villains Jasper and Horace) which works very effective for a fun children movie like this one.

Of course everything is terribly predictable and nothing that happens in this movie comes as a surprise. It's simple fun and entertainment. The humor is simple but it's good and works effective.

Glenn Close is perfectly cast as über-villain Cruella De Vil and portrays a highly memorable character. She truly is the highlight of the movie and steals the show. She also seemed to had lots of fun playing the over-the-top villainous but oh so fun character. Also good are the more slapstick like, stereotypical villains Jasper and Horace played by Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams. Another fun villain role is played by John Shrapnel who is perhaps best known for his role in "Gladiator".

The fun and perhaps also a bit underrated musical score is done by Michael Kamen. It quite honestly is one of his better works.

Children will enjoy watching this movie and I can know, since I actually saw this movie back in the cinema, when I was still a child myself.

6/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Good clean fun

[dav7nine · 6/10 · 9 November 2004]

Watched this curled up in bed with girlfriend, probably the best place...

Good clean family film, good stuff. I always think it's great how actors do these family films... Glenn Close is great as the villain, and I was surprised to see Mark Williams (of Fast Show fame) in it. Hugh Laurie is good as well. As are all the dogs and other animals for that matter.

I haven't seen the Walt Disney version, but I would imagine that's probably more of a classic than this.

One for all the family.

5/10 (for me).

Colorful, Cute & Clichéd

[ccthemovieman-1 · 6/10 · 1 July 2006]

This is one of those movies that truly is - and I don't mean to use the cliché - entertaining whether you are a kid or an adult. The dalmatians and other animals are a lot of fun to watch.

Glenn Close must have had a lot of fun making this film, playing the evil "Cruela De Vil." Just as much fun, maybe more, were the two bumbling dog-nappers - Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams, I believe - idiots who were genuinely funny in their stupidity. Their dialog was hilarious.

There are nice colors in here, too, so a widescreen DVD is good to have if you enjoy this movie. I didn't find the surround sound to be much.

Speaking of clichés and such, there are some drawbacks here that were a little annoying to me, like overdoing the intelligence of the dogs, making them almost human-like with their abilities to understand English. In fact, it's taken to the absurd level level of some of the animals being smarter than humans. Please....give me a break! Also, you get the quick "film romance" in which two people (Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson) barely meet and already they are in love, getting married in no time. Please....give me a break!

Still, recommended if you want a want 103 minutes of a "cute" story and don't take any of it the least bit seriously as if anything in here could really happen.

Disney does it again

[dillon09 · 4 May 2000]

As an animation student, I frequently cringe when they make a live action version of an animated film, as they rarely live up to their cartoon counterparts. This is not one of those films. I loved it, the Dogs, pongo and Perdy, were outstanding, and even with computer stand ins, and Hensons creature shop, you'd be hard pushed to see the joins, the exceptions being the Wood pecker at the door and the two Racoons giving each other a high five. Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson were great, Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams were brilliant as the bumbling lackeys, but the star of the show had to be Glenn Close as Cruella DeVille. I never knew animated characters could have real life twins, but Glenn Close was Cruella's, delightfully over the top, with more ham than a bacon butty. If you liked the cartoon you'll love this version as well. The only thing I wondered about in the whole film was how many takes it took them to get some of the animal shots, this certainly contradicts the old adage of not working with animals and kids.

Ok for little kids

[mitsubishizero · 6/10 · 20 May 2019]

There's not much to say other than it's a live action remake of the cartoon. The obvious difference is that the animals don't talk. Instead they communicate by their actions and sounds which's interesting. With that being said it's ok. It goes without saying but the best part of this movie is Glenn Close as Cruella Da Ville. She just yucks it up whenever she appears on screen. You can tell she was having fun making this movie. If you have little kids they'll like this movie fine and I think most adults were be able to sit through it just fine. take it for what it's worth.

Glenn Close is the ideal Cruella

[wilsonskye14 · 7/10 · 30 May 2021]

It's no surprise that Glenn Close was incredible in her performance as Cruella de Vil. She's so in tune with the cruel and malicious nature that comes with this infamous Disney villain.

I'm genuinely surprised the film has such a low rating. It's not perfect, but I believe it's a fun film for all ages to watch.

Cute, but very silly at times, and not as good as the original

[grantss · 5/10 · 19 May 2015]

Cute, but very silly at times, and not as good as the original.

The original 101 Dalmatians, released in 1961, was an animation classic. Adorable characters, nice story, happy ending. Mostly meant for kids but had something in it for adults too. It wasn't perfect though: after a wonderful opening act it did lose some of its charm and substance and degenerated into a caper towards the end.

This 1996 remake of 101 Dalmatians takes the same plot, almost to the letter, de-animates it and throws in more silliness. There are a few positive things added, mostly in dialogue in the first few scenes, and I thought the real dogs were quite cute, even compared to the animated ones, but most of the changes are for the worse.

One big positive of this remake, however, is Glenn Close's portrayal of Cruella De Vil. Suitably intense and menacing.

Overall, very little reason to watch this if you've seen the original. And if you haven't, then watch the original instead...

Not as good as the animation, but well worth watching!

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 1 April 2009]

There is a lot to enjoy, especially Glenn Close's near-perfect performance as Cruella DeVil. She was absolutely brilliant here, truly evil, and was clearly having a lot of fun. Hugh Laurie made a memorable appearance as Jasper, and some of his lines are very funny. The scenes in the mansion, were inspired, I think by the Home Alone franchise, and for this sort of film it did work. Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson are more subdued but deliver very human portrayals of the Dearlys. Joan Plowright was fine also as the nanny. And Michael Kamen's music was lovely. However, I much prefer the animated version to this, and here's why. The dogs were very cute, but nothing they did was particularly interesting. Also the Twilight Bark sequence was lost, and that's what made the animation so poignant. It also isn't as entertaining as the animated version. All in all, an entertaining film, that just lacked the ingredients that made the animated version a masterpiece. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Pointless remake

[Smells_Like_Cheese · 4/10 · 8 August 2004]

101 Dalmatians, the ultimate Disney animated classic about none other than PUPPIES! It was clever, sharp, witty and just a wonderful movie and created one of Disney's most memorable and classic villains Cruella DeVil. So when I had heard about the live action version I wasn't too interested, this movie came out when I was 11 years old for goodness's sake, but I just didn't want to see what was already a perfect movie being made into a live action one, but my grandparents had bought it and we watched it together. I remember seeing it and really didn't like it, but as I grew up, it was on TV one day so I figured since I'm a little more grown up to give this another chance and still I'm not too thrilled with this new take on the "tail", lol, get it? Eh, my lame jokes, gotta love them.

Roger Dearly is an American computer game designer, who shares his home in London with his pet dalmatian, Pongo. One day Roger takes Pongo for a walk, and the dog sets his eyes on a beautiful female Dalmatian named Perdy. After a frantic chase through the streets of London, Roger and Pongo discover Perdy likes Pongo; and Perdy's owner, fashion designer Anita Campbell-Green, is taken with Roger when they meet in St. James Park. Romance blossoms between both human and canine couples and Roger and Anita walk down the aisle. Anita works for Cruella DeVil, a sexy fashion maven with a great love for cigarettes and fur. Anita becomes inspired by her dogs and designs a fur coat made with spotted fur, causing Cruella to leap on the idea of making garments out of actual Dalmatians. When Cruella learns that Perdy has given birth to fifteen Dalmatian puppies she offers the couple a decent price for the newborn puppies, but the couple refuses. Flying into a maniacal rage, she fires Anita and vows to get even. She has her henchmen, Jasper and Horace, steal the puppies and deliver them to her ancient estate, but the puppies escape and now must find their way home.

So I absolutely adore Glenn Close, she's one of my favorite actresses of all time and always delivers very on the key performances, now she was a great choice for Cruella, but I think it was just the whole idea of the movie that dragged her down, the whole cast as a matter of a fact is too good for this movie. It's just not as fun as the original animated classic, I think the reason the animated movie is so much better is because it was just more special and personal as it was hand drawn and a classic for so many kids who grew up with it. Maybe I am being stubborn where I'm just more for the original, but honestly this movie is just kind of pointless and not really for the kids nore the adults. I'd say it's not like it's the most horrible movie in the world, but it's just not worth it to go out of your way to watch it.

4/10

Great film for the family.

[zulmafeliciano · 7/10 · 25 January 2021]

It's a sweet film which will surely be of great joy to both kids and parents alike. Recommended.

Ms. DeVil's opus

[lee_eisenberg · 5/10 · 10 September 2017]

Prior to 1996, Stephen Herek had directed three of the most dissimilar movies: "Critters", "Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure" and "Mr. Holland's Opus" (he also directed "Don't Tell Mom the Babysitter's Dead", which I haven't seen). Therefore, it was a surprise to see him direct a live-action adaptation of "101 Dalmatians".

Since we already know the plot, the movie itself isn't that much of a treat. Even so, you gotta love Glenn Close's over-the-top performance as the fur-obsessed Cruella DeVil. Close plays her more as a self-aggrandizing megalomaniac than an evil thug. The rest of the cast isn't as impressive in their performances, but we see some good people here. We all know Jeff Daniels. Joely Richardson is the daughter of Vanessa Redgrave; her sister Natasha married Liam Neeson but died in a skiing accident in 2009. Joan Plowright is a classically trained actress who was married to Laurence Olivier from 1961 until his death. Hugh Laurie is best known as TV's Dr. House. Mark Williams is now known as Ron Weasley's dad in the Harry Potter movies. Tim McInnerny is now known for the role of Lord Robett Glover on "Game of Thrones".

It'll be an OK thing to let the tykes watch if you need to keep them entertained for a brief period. The "Home Alone"-style mishaps rained upon Jasper and Horace will hold their attention. I doubt that anyone else will enjoy it that much.

Get yer spots on!

[Mister-6 · 8/10 · 29 December 2001]

I've noticed something about John Hughes' movies: he started out writing about adults with child-like tendencies ("Mr. Mom", "National Lampoon's Vacation"), went on to actual teenagers ("Sixteen Candles", The Breakfast Club"), devolved down to pre-teens ("Home Alone", "Dennis the Menace") and then babies ("Baby's Day Out") and now that he's exhausted all the ages of man (except the elderly - don't give him any ideas) he's moved on to the animal kingdom with "101 Dalmatians".

You know the basic storyline if you've seen the 1961 Disney animated original - Roger and Anita (Daniels and Richardson) meet and marry then their respective dalmatians Pongo and Perdita have 15 puppies which are coveted by the despicable Cruella DeVil (played con brio by Close) who will have them at any cost to make a puppy fur coat.

What's new this time around? The fact that it's all live action, for one, and the formidable assistance of computers helps create the illusion of dogs and other creatures acting with almost human precision, plus the fact that instead of precocious voices for all the animals they act out voiceless against the human baddies, especially Horace and Jasper (Williams and Laurie), as if the animal kingdom were all channeling Macaulay Culkin.

And, of course, since Hughes wrote the script, you know this won't be Shakespeare - slapstick malice is at the forefront with cute but noble good guys, ugly and dumb bad guys and lots of adorable animals.

But not just dalmatians, mind you: there are all manner of dogs - sheepdogs, bulldogs, terriers, etc. Not to mention horses, sheep, raccoons, rabbits, chickens, pigs, cows, birds and even a mouse in one instance. All of them banding together to bring the dalmatians, all 101 of them, together safely.

Director Herek brings everything together with assurance and all the actors make sure you know that this is a story that is first and foremost for the kiddies. Especially Close - complete with claws on her gloves and a different wardrobe for every scene, she not only chews the scenery but nibbles on it with every tooth in her head and savors the taste like a connoisseur. Bless her.

This isn't the kind of movie that can be successfully analyzed. You either like it or not, depending on what kind of tolerance you have for kiddie slapstick. I like that, so I liked "101 Dalmatians".

Seven stars, plus half a star for Close's diabolical work...and a half star more for the donations from the animal world.

The power of the pooch.

[mark.waltz · 7/10 · 1 April 2023]

Most remakes of classic movies are completely unnecessary, but when it's done right, a big bravo goes to the creative talents behind the scenes who saw something fresh to explore to remake it, and for John Hughes, this remake of the Disney animated classic succeeds on many levels. It's the performance that for many Glenn Close will always be remembered for, just coming from the triumph of playing mad Norma Desmond in the stage version of "Sunset Blvd.", and while it's a campy performance, with shades of Tallulah Bankhead coming out, it's a great one, and she's obviously having a great time being dolled up in outlandish furs and barking out orders to "kill the puppies now!"

As the hero and heroine, Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson are terrific, both getting their share of bumps and bruises as they first encounter each other with their instantly smitten dalmations, desperate for some doggy loving. Joan Plowright is as warm as cocoa on a winter's day, making the viewer just want to hop through the screen and hug her, and adopt her as their surrogate grandmother. The buffoonish Jasper and Horace are delightfully portrayed by Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams, nearly identical to the crooks in the "Home Alone" movies, but these characters were created first. An absolute crowd pleaser, it's great fun for adults and children alike, with certain elements very appealing to a certain group of men who love their humor over-the-top and outrageous. You won't want to turn away because every detail of this film is worth catching and embedding into your mind.

needs the animal voices

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 11 December 2014]

Roger Dearly (Jeff Daniels) is a struggling American video game designer living in London with his pet dalmatian Pongo. Anita Campbell-Green (Joely Richardson) works for fur-loving fashion designer Cruella De Vil (Glenn Close). Cruella becomes obsessed with Anita's dalmatian prints and designs a fur cape. Pongo sees Perdy the dalmatian and drags Roger to chase down Anita with Perdy. Roger eventually marries Anita. They get pregnant while Pongo and Perdy have 15 puppies. Roger refuses to sell Cruella the puppies and she fires Anita. Jasper (Hugh Laurie) and Horace (Mark Williams) are De Vil's criminal henchmen who overpower Nanny (Joan Plowright) and kidnap the puppies.

This movie is missing the voices from the animals. That's really half of the charm of the animated movie. This is a lesser remake for no good reason. Making Cruella a fashion designer is a good improvement. It makes more sense to have her as Anita's boss. However, that's the only improvement from the animated version that I can see here. Glenn Close tries hard to be a cartoon villain but I do miss her cool car. A real version isn't the same thing. And the CG is not advanced enough to make the animated dogs real. The kids are better off watching the cartoon.

Out of the box

[1fortheroad · 13 July 2002]

As a very young child, I grew up on the 1961 101 Dalmatians. I loved the show, and I remember thinking that it was one of Disney's best. So when the 1996 live-action remake came out, I had my doubts that anything could be as good as the original. I was wrong. This movie is absolutely fantastic! It is beautifully written and the dogs are so cute and loveable... but I think the thing that ties it all together is the casting. The characters were brought to life in a totally believeable way--from Jeff Daniels as the Dalmatian-loving, Cruella-hating Roger Dearly, to Ms.DeVil herself, played to perfection by the unbeatable Glenn Close. All of the actors fill the shoes of their characters, the comic timing is just right, and everything about it spells a Disney masterpiece.

Not as good as the cartoon

[cricketbat · 6/10 · 11 October 2018]

This version of 101 Dalmatians is not as good as the cartoon, but it works for kids.

Fun For The Whole Family

[Chadderbox041277 · 7/10 · 4 January 2002]

Absolutely adorable "live-action" version of the classic animated Disney tale. Glenn Close gives a stand-out Golden Globe nominated performance as the ultimate villain - Cruella DeVil. Fun atmosphere, lively costumes and of course, the puppies make this fun for the whole family.

Awful, waste of a good cast. Stick to the cartoon.

[halon8 · 1/10 · 17 October 2010]

So I settled down on a Sunday evening to what should have been a pleasant Disney film. Boy, was I disappointed.

This live action version takes the basic elements of the original, but strips out all the charm. There's no cat. There's no scene where the puppies disguise themselves as labradors.

Cruella is a mean business woman, who's annoyed that one of her employees (Anita Dearly) wants to get married and have children. Because obviously, you can't mix a career and having a family. The undertones of 'career bad, motherhood good' are just unnecessary in a modern children's film. Cruella is more pantomime than actually scary.

The lack of original charm isn't replaced with anything else. It's just boring and predictable.

This film has an amazingly talented cast, which is completely wasted here. The jokes are just not funny. Most of the film is taken up with lame, unoriginal slapstick. Part of the first sequence has Roger Dearly accidentally trying to steal Perdy because he has mistaken her for Pongo. That's right. He loves his dog so much, he can't even recognise him. The screenwriter obviously has either never had pets or just assumes children are stupid.

The dogs are cute, but have no personality. The puppies have very little screen time at all.

If you liked the sequels to Home Alone, you might like this movie. If you liked the original cartoon or any recent children's films that actually have a good storyline, you'll be disappointed. I'm afraid most of the reviewers here are giving this movie a pass because 'it's a child's film and you can't expect that much'. Well I do expect better from Disney and I wouldn't subject my children to this film. Try the book instead.

Enjoyable live-action remake ...

[dwpollar · 6/10 · 10 March 2001]

1st watched 9/23/1998 - (Dir-Stephen Herek): Enjoyable live-action remake of Disney classic. Glenn Close has the best lines and does a tremendous part of Cruella Deville. This is definitely her movie from beginning to end with the dogs being there for the kids to enjoy.

A soggy doggy-bone...but Close gives it some kick

[moonspinner55 · 3/10 · 14 October 2007]

Disney in the recycle bin. Young couple in London are frantic after a fur-wearing sadist named Cruella DeVil dog-naps their litter of Dalmatian puppies. The Disney Co. Retooling their 1961 animated feature "One Hundred and One Dalmatians" as a live-action comedy-adventure--an effort not wasted on Glenn Close, who gets to chew up the scenery as the outrageous, black-and-white-haired Cruella. Writer John Hughes, adapting his screenplay from Dodie Smith's book, can't do much with the grown-ups, Roger and Anita, who were bland before and are still bland (especially with Jeff Daniels and Natasha Richardson in the roles). I struggled to make it through the animated "classic", which was slapstick-heavy with little adult appeal, and Hughes can't seem to improve upon it. The laughs are few, and the plot goes around in circles, culminating in a tired chase and rescue. Even so, Close pulls out all the stops; she's well in the spirit of her character and is marvelously aided by terrific make-up and costuming. She gives this soggy doggy-bone the only kick it has. *1/2 from ****

It's Disney, so it's not bad.

[saminwigton · 6/10 · 11 April 2002]

Making a live action film with animals is one of the well known don'ts in entertainment. That and working with kids. They also have a habit of being rubbish films (Homeward Bound anyone?). Anyway, I liked this film, well written, well acted and funny. 6/10.

Glenn Close's performance doesn't save the remake's incoherent plot and unfunny humor

[gavin-thelordofthefu-48-460297 · 4/10 · 26 November 2011]

I think this is one of those films from the 90s I saw as a kid, but when years have passed, I took one more view of this film again. Besides I knew it couldn't be possibly worse than the earlier movies that the late John Hughes made in the classic 90s.

Boy was I wrong. Never have I been so disappointed in this mediocre remake, but I don't think it's the worst movie ever made. Let me point out the stronger points.

The cast is pretty tolerable. Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson did alright as Roger and Anite Dearly. Joan Plowright also did alright as Nanny. Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams did very good as Jasper and Horace, I think, but arguably the best performance throughout the entire film goes to Glenn Close who did such a compelling job as Cruella De Vil.

The visuals are very amazing that looked exactly like the Disney cartoon and successful details the look of London, Roger and Anita's house and Cruella De Vil's mansion. Gotta give the director some credit for doing such a great job for visualizing them perfectly. That's it for my praise.

The reason why I became so disappointed is because the screenplay was made by the late John Hughes who also wrote screenplays for such great films like the first two Home Alone films, the National Lampoon movies, Pretty in Pink, Breakfast Club and many more, but his career went downhill in the 90s when he wrote screenplays for such great disappointments like Dennis The Menace, Baby's Day Out, Just Visiting, the Miracle on 34th Street remake, and Flubber. In here, his screenplay has pathetically contrived dialogue and inconsistently unfunny humor that seemed too childish.

The story is unbelievably predictable. It potentially has some great atmosphere in some of the scenes, but since this a remake of one of the greatest Disney films ever made, we all know what's gonna happen next and the second half becomes repetitive.

If young kids want to see this mediocre remake of a Disney classic, be my guest, but only if they enjoy Glenn Close's performance. Otherwise, even that doesn't save this remake from it's incoherent plot and unfunny childish humor.

4/10

Fine, fine film. As good as the animated version, but different!

[mallard-6 · 9/10 · 1 September 1999]

Incredible as it may seem, this film is every bit the equal of the Disney animated version of the same title. And it is DIFFERENT from the Disney version. This is a rare accomplishment, in a medium where remakes and sequels are so often weak.

The film is made by Glen Close, whose appearance as Cruella DeVil is fascinating! She is even more evil than her animated namesake. But the rest of the casting of the film is also incredibly strong. No problems with anyone.

The dalmations are most excellently employed. Virtually seamless integration of live action and computer animation. And also, the hosts of animals (live and animated) in the film do NOT talk (a cloying and sentimental habit too often indulged in by Disney Studios et al).

The film is an adult's movie that children should also enjoy! The VHS version was good, the DVD version even better.

Campy, fun, cute...

[Cephyran · 6/10 · 13 September 2004]

This is a cute movie. The original Disney classic set up the story, and this live action version is just as fun and entertaining. Albeit, some details were modified for the sake of live action, but these story elements don't deter from the decency of the movie. Glenn Close is quite literally the perfect actress for the job of Cruella DeVil, and Jeff Daniels and Joely Richardson are a well-composed couple with decent chemistry. It's always neat to see other actors you recognize in movies you didn't remember them from, like Hugh Laurie and Mark Williams. They're more than entertaining as the bumbling lackeys who are given the responsibility of capturing the dogs. And though there is some violence, it's completely slapstick, so there's really nothing to worry about. I liked it as much as one can like a family movie. It's campy, fun, and appropriate for kids, so I'd recommend it.

A dog's breakfast of terrible nonsense

[CanadianCinephile · 1/10 · 20 November 2010]

Live action remakes of animated features almost always wind up being risky affairs. Disney's 101 Dalmatians, a live action version of its classic animated feature, goes well beyond risky and straight into idiotic territory. This jumbled mess of a film is only noteworthy for the animal acting and for an over-the-top Glenn Close performance that gets worse by the second. Unfortunately, even those rare elements of slight interest get glossed over by CGI and a ridiculous set of sequences that turns the minimalistic joy of the original into nothing more than chaotic clutter.

101 Dalmatians strips all the elements from the animated feature for the sake of laziness, it seems, and what we're left with is a completely unnecessary project that demonstrates Disney's unfortunate unwillingness to fully commit to a film with heart. This Stephen Herek-directed movie "updates" the formula and adds a couple of dumb chase sequences to fill time, giving us characters that we don't care about and putting them in situations that cheerlessly mangle the original plot.

Roger Dearly (Jeff Daniels) is a video game designer. He's an obvious update on the song-writing Roger out of the animated version and this proves problematic right away: there's no excuse for the famous and awesome Cruella de Vil song. In any event, Roger has a dog genius named Pongo. Pongo's pretty bright, but we have no idea what's going on in his canine head because there's no internal dog monologue. The key element that made One Hundred and One Dalmatians so fantastic is, alas, missing.

Roger meets Anita (Joely Richardson) in the park after a disastrous and apparently hilarious pair of chase sequences because one wasn't enough to set up things. They do what any sensible people do after getting thrown into a park's lake and get married immediately. Also, they both have Dalmatians and now Pongo has a lover. The cuddly dog scenes show us they love each other. Aww. Anita works for Cruella de Vil (Close) a bizarre fur-loving weirdo with designs on the puppies Anita and Roger's doggies eventually have. You know the rest.

Stunningly, this live action version of Dodie Smith's story was penned and produced by John Hughes. Yes, that John Hughes. How he managed to mangle such a simple story is beyond me, but he sure did a number on this one. For starters, this version sticks the humans squarely in charge of things and then jettisons them for the last act so that we get a musically driven dog's rescue sequence that eliminates the brilliance of the original because we can't hear what they're saying to each other.

The best parts of the animated version are, therefore, gone. The barking of the dogs becomes a bunch of noise and the overwhelmingly invasive Michael Kamen score keeps meddling and telling us what we're supposed to feel. As much as I dislike the premise of talking animal movies, Disney's remake could have used a voice or two from the kingdom of the canines.

Because the dogs lack voices and because we're focused on the dumb, boring humans, we don't really ever connect when the dogs go missing. The sequences that the animated version used to so lovingly attach us to Pongo and his family are gone, replaced by a grand "naming of the dogs" sequence that really only identifies the dogs by physical traits. This is another problem that could have been solved by having the dogs speak.

Of course, having animals speak in these sorts of movies usually suffers from the fact that talking animals generally look stupid. But Disney doesn't seem to have any concern of that because they use copious CGI anyway, "fleshing out" the actions of the dogs and other animals when the trained canines can't do the trick. The discrepancy here is abundantly and embarrassingly clear, as it's hard to mask the sudden appearance of a CGI puppy heading down a slide into the snow. The large group shots of the puppies also shine with the clumsy computer-assisted stuff.

In the end, 101 Dalmatians is a waste of time. While some may find value in the Glenn Close performance and some of the animal stuff, it wasn't enough for me. The movie is amazingly lazy, even by Disney's modern standards. The invasive score, the poor CGI and the bland performances from Daniels and Richardson make this a film to avoid like a creepy canine with rabies. And don't even get me started on the tragic absence of the beloved Sergeant Tibbs!