The Rescuers Down Under aka Aventurile șoriceilor salvatori în Australia (1990)XviDAC3ro_sub-JVaLaMaLiNi.avi

The Rescuers Down Under aka Aventurile șoriceilor salvatori în Australia
(1990)XviDAC3ro_sub-JVaLaMaLiNi.avi

Animation | Adventure | Crime | Drama | Family | Fantasy | Mystery
Eagle | Boy | Poacher | Mouse | Albatross

The RAS agents, Miss Bianca and Bernard, race to Australia to save a boy
and a rare golden eagle from a murderous poacher.

Storyline

Cody, a boy from Mugwomp Flats responds to a distress call about a trapped
giant Golden Eagle called Marahute. Freeing her, he gains a close friendship
with the bird. However, Cody is soon abducted by the murderous poacher, Percival
McLeach, who is after that bird which is of a highly endangered species and
therefore an extremely profitable quarry. In a panic, a mouse Cody freed from
one of McLeach's traps sends a desperate call for help to the Rescue Aid Society
in New York City who assigns their top agents, Miss Bianca and Bernard to the task.
With transportation provided by the goofy Albatross, Wilbur, the agents arrive in
Austrailia and link up with the RAS' local field operative, Jake The Kangaroo Rat.
Together, the trio must race against time to find Cody, stop McLeach and save
Marahute. Written by Kenneth Chisholm

Quotes
Doctor: Forceps!
Nurse Mouse: Forceps!
Wilbur: Oh, what now?
Doctor: Spinal streculator!
Wilbur: Oh, that's gonna hurt.
Doctor: Artery router!
Wilbur: Mother!
Doctor: This is rusted tight. I wouldn't dream of using such tools. Bring me the
epidermal tissue disrupter!
Wilbur: The epidermal what?
[the nurses start a chainsaw]
[...]


Underappreciated Gem
3 November 2000 | by La Gremlin (Boston, MA)

I have always been one of the, maybe, eight or nine big fans of this movie and I have
only one small question about it.

WHY CAN'T THEY MAKE MORE LIKE THIS???

If you have not seen this movie yet, you must. It's the first Disney movie to use fully
rendered CGI backgrounds throughout and you definately get the sense that the animators
wanted to play with this new method. What I'm getting at is that some of you may want to
down some motion sickness medicine first.

There are *no* song and dance numbers. Reason being that this is a surprisingly dark,
more emotionally complex story for a Disney movie. They went out on a limb and chose not
to break the tone up too much.

This is the number two Lost Disney Movie (number one, without a doubt, is "the Hunchback
of Notre Dame", which I also love). It's own creators barely acknowledge its existance.
The very best evidence of this is on the new video release box's plot summary, where a
MAJOR character's gender is misidentified.

On the other hand, I sort of enjoy the idea of a "cult" Disney movie. Instead of marketing
"Down Under" to death, Disney can only be accused of the opposite mistake.

So, anyway, here I go again running to this movie's defence. I'll tackle the one major
critisism of it before I go. Many critics were expecting another "Rescuers". In my humble
opinion, these two movies are two entirely different animals. The original "Rescuers" is an
example of where Disney was in the sixties and seventies. "Down Under" is a time capsule of
late eighties, early nineties Disney. In other words, you can't really say that one is better
than the other as the only thing they have in common are three characters (what I'm getting at
is that this should be thought of more as "Rescue Aid Society: the Next Generation").

By the way, I've got an idea that I'm just going to throw out to the proverbial wolves here.
Why not make more "Rescuers" movies instead of sequels to Disney movies where follow-up
stories make no sence? They are sitting on one heck of a potential franchise here. Just
thought I'd let you know.

embeded romanian subtitle with avidemux

film language is english