Flying Feet (1969) Poster

(1969)

User Reviews

Review this title
2 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Roland and Rattfink Race It Out
Zantara Xenophobe9 May 2011
"Flying Feat" is the first of three Roland and Rattfink shorts directed by Gerry Chiniquy, who directed many of the brilliant The Inspector cartoons. In this one, Roland goes off to college and wants to try out for the track team. The coach's top runner is a no-show, so he forces Roland into the race against the rival school's top runner, a continually smoking Rattfink. The outclassed Rattfink, naturally, attempts to cheat a victory.

This isn't a bad short at all. The pacing is fine, unlike many R&R shorts that would come later. It's just that the gags aren't quite as good as they could have been. The funniest moment comes when the starting pistol is fired and Rattfink grabs a hold of Roland's shorts. The other gags aren't great, but they at least aren't lame, either, so the episode finds itself in the middle of the pack. Still, it's worth seeing. Zantara's score: 6 out of 10.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Gone racing
TheLittleSongbird2 September 2020
While neither one of the best or worst Roland and Rattfink cartoons, 'Hawks and Doves' was a decent start for the series. Which is nice enough for curiosity value but the quality varied, while never falling into or close to the extremes of terrible or great. Didn't though care hugely for the next cartoon 'Hurts and Flowers' while not hating it, over-serious, too cruel (especially regarding Rattfink) and not enough laughs.

'Flying Feet' again is in neither extreme of terrible or great, and neither among the best or worst of the series. Despite having the lowest rating of the three Roland and Rattfink cartoons at this early stage, to me 'Flying Feet' was the best. It wasn't perfect or great and probably somewhere in the high middle of the series, but what were problems in the previous two cartoons were not so much if at all here and the things done well before are done well here too and perhaps even better.

Don't expect much originality here. This is quite a familiar scenario, a somewhat 'The Tortoise and the Hare'-like story, with not much fresh to it. No doubt as to how the cartoon was going to end.

The familiar ground feel can be felt in the gags, there are more of them than the previous two cartoons and they are amusing. They are though obvious and with not an awful lot special, due to feeling like they had been lifted out from other cartoons.

Having said all of that, which already makes it seem like 'Flying Feet' is being described as a bad cartoon (have already said it isn't), it is hard to be hard on it as there is a good deal done well. It is the best-looking of the three Roland and Rattfink cartoons at this stage, it is the richest colour-wise as it is quite vibrant on this front and it has the most vivid setting. It is not always smooth or fluid, but it doesn't look too limited and the colours are far more attractive than 'Hurts and Flowers' especially. The music is light-hearted and it doesn't come over as having too much of a heavy hand. The main theme sticks in the head for a while after.

Originality is not a strong suit, but the gags are still amusing (mostly centring around Rattfink trying to cheat) and the energy once the cartoon gets going is lively. 'Flying Feet' is the first cartoon in the series, and easily the closest of the three at this point of the series to be so, to (nearly) nail the series' style of verbal humour, so Roland's rhetoric and Rattfink's snideness. The two characters are more distinct than in the previous two cartoons, Rattfink is nowhere near as viciously cruel as in 'Hurts and Flowers', and they are equally interesting. Lennie Weinrib voices both characters well (making Roland likeable and not overplaying Rattfink's villainous personality), though in my view Pat Harrington Jr in the Inspector and John Byner in the Ant and the Aardvark cartoons, both voicing more than one character in their respective series, did better at making their characters more individual from each other.

In conclusion, not exceptional but still above average. 6/10
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed