Home on the Range (2004) User Reviews

Ineffective, almost humourless, and not so well written Disney fare

[Beta_Gallinger · 5/10 · 7 January 2009]

It has been nearly five years since the release of this recent traditionally animated Disney flick, made in a CGI-dominated time, and I definitely didn't even hear about it at the time of its release. It clearly didn't turn out to be a box office smash, which is probably why I never heard about it (unlike "The Incredibles", the hugely successful CGI-animated feature released the same year), and I don't think I knew about it until I saw it mentioned in a book about animated films a couple years ago. After seeing "Home on the Range", I can definitely see why it tanked.

In the old west, Maggie, Mrs. Calloway, and Grace are three cows, all with very different traits, who live on a dairy farm in Nebraska called Patch of Heaven, owned by an elderly widow named Pearl Gesner. Pearl owes a lot of money, which she unfortunately can't pay, so it appears she will soon lose her farm, and it will be auctioned off! So, the three cows decide to set out to try and save their home. They must track down an outlaw, a cattle rustler named Alameda Slim, who uses a false identity to claim many properties in the state, and hypnotizes cows with his yodeling! On their adventure, they meet others on the same mission, to try and stop Alameda Slim, and due to the different traits of the three cows, they don't always get along, with conflict between Maggie and Mrs. Calloway, which obviously won't make it easier!

Others have already mentioned the lacklustre plot of this film, and I'm going to have to agree wholeheartedly. The plot pretty much completely failed to interest me, since it's very simple and forgettable, and the real lack of humour doesn't help. I only rarely found amusing moments, and kept a straight face for almost the entire thing. For example, there's some weak slapstick, which may appeal to kids, but probably not many others. I found that the funniest parts involved Alameda Slim's dimwitted nephews, parts such as them not being able to recognise their uncle after they've seen him put his simple disguise on, but they are very minor characters. Not only is the plot forgettable, so are the gags and most of the characters. Basically, the film was put together fairly simply, and probably could have been more focused. I found myself indifferent to pretty much everything about it, and I'm sure I'm not alone.

It looks like this film marked the end of a very long era, the era of traditionally animated theatrical Disney movies, which began in 1937 with "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" and went on with the company long after Walt Disney's death in 1966. Through those decades, so many classics were made in the franchise, so it's unfortunate that they couldn't finish with a much more noteworthy picture. Instead, they finished with a dull one, one which is probably much more appealing to kids than adults, unlike probably most of them, which can be fun for all ages. "Home on the Range" reminds me a lot of "Rock-A-Doodle", a 1991 animated film from Don Bluth, and not one of his more popular efforts. Both are lacklustre animated films with anthropomorphic animals, ones which are basically for the kids, and I've personally found to be very unmemorable.

IMDb says the budget was over 100 million...

[MLDinTN · 5/10 · 5 April 2005]

where did it all go because it certainly wasn't spent on the animation. It was just your regular Saturday morning cartoon animation. I guess most of the money must have been spent on the stars who played the voices. Since Rosanne's been out of work lately, she probably asked for a pretty penny to do this.

It didn't have any fun songs that stand out in my mind. Plus, the plot was very generic. And it needed more animals. The main animals were cows, a rabbit, and a horse. There's also a goat, pigs, buffalo, and chickens, but they weren't shown a lot. One of the reasons people liked the story of Finding Nemo so much was all the different animals used to tell the story.

FINAL VERDICT: I guess 5 year olds will like it, but I didn't think it was too great.

The Moose Hole - Review of Home on the Range

[JAKastner · 6/10 · 2 April 2004]

It's the end the trail! After nearly eighty years of loyal traditionally animated service, the Walt Disney Company has decided to call it quits, at least for the foreseeable future. You might be asking, `Why now? Why not years ago?' … First off, this isn't the first time that the staple that made the Walt Disney Company what it is today has faced an almost certain death. In 1986, Disney Feature Animation Studio was on its way out the door with The Black Cauldron and The Great Mouse Detective underperforming at the box office and leaving the talented artists little hope … That's until new management came in, cleaned things up, and, with the help of Roy Disney, brought the animation unit back to its former glory with such hits as The Little Mermaid, Beauty & the Beast, Aladdin, and The Lion King. Yep, that Michael Eisner sure knew what he was doing … Who would have thought that the man who kicked started animation up again at Disney would be the one to kill it? That's the word of the day folks … business. With computer animated features clearly outranking traditional ones, its just common business sense. But one has to wonder, with both traditional animation and Pixar out of the picture, what is Eisner thinking? … If he's doing that at all.

The story follows a group of cows out to track down a criminal in order to collect the reward money to save their farm from being auctioned off to the highest bidder. Maggie is one head strong woman. She's rude, crude, and let's everyone know about it because she's doesn't give a hoot about what they say. She would rule the west … if she wasn't a cow. Unfortunately for her, Maggie's former home was auctioned off after the notorious Alameda Slim took off with their prized cow herd and left the owners with next to nothing. And just when things begin to look on the way with Maggie finding a new happy home at Patch of Heaven dairy farm, the bank declares foreclosure on the farm, leaving the owner three days to pay off the $750 in order to keep the farm. Unwilling to lose another home, Maggie leads a small group consisting of Mrs. Calloway and Grace, the other two bovine residents of the farm, to search for the cow thief but they aren't the only after the larcenist. There's also Buck, a horse with high aspirations but too much enthusiasm to back it up, and Rico, the mysterious bounty hunter who has a dark secret up his sleeve, as well. In the end, it's an all out of for truth, justice, and the bovine way! The story for Home on the Range is another prime example of a plot that looks interesting on paper but clearly doesn't go anywhere once it is projected onto the big screen. The problem is that there is no emotional investment in the characters. Granted this is a children's film and it's not intended to be rocket-science or anything like that but one can make the argument that this is a family film and if the adults don't get anything out of it, who's to say that this isn't anything more then a modest diversion.

What's becoming more of a rare oddity is the use of big name stars in animated features to drive movie-goers and though none of the cast of Home on the Range is necessarily going to have people lining outside the door in giddy anticipation, they are well-known … just how well-known depends on who you talk to. Roseanne Barr, famous for her hit television show Roseanne and more recently for her two cancelled TV programs, headlines the cast as Maggie the cow (Is there any use in inserting a joke here? All the good ones seem to have been used up). Here you have to be wondering what the cast director was thinking when they picked her up? The loud, obnoxious, and crude Roseanne was bad enough but a PG-rated version of her is even worse, if that can be imagined just from this description. Sure the kids may get a chuckle here and there from boorish antics but then so what? Cuba Gooding, Jr. voices the over ambitious Buck the horse but once again the audience is given a character they really don't care about. Buck is treated mostly as a joke with no clear sense of the justice system or what it takes to be a hero. If there was more of that in him, maybe we'd care a little more every time he seems to fail but we don't. The only real highlight in the voice cast, at least from a more mature perspective, would have to be Steve Buscemi, who makes a slight appearance voicing a pint-size partner of Alameda Slim. Why is it that this man seems to work no matter where he is placed?

Overall, Home on the Range is a disappointing and undeserving conclusion to the end of Walt Disney traditional animation and only showcases further evidence to why the genre is heading to the grave in the first place. How can traditional 2-D animation compete with the likes of Pixar with trap-holes like this? Not just on the level of visual graphics but at the story and character development levels as well. With Range, the audience is thrown head first into the plot and rushed to a predictable and dispassionate conclusion with no real emotional investment placed with the characters or the actions they take within the course of the film. Even the villain is a pathetic show … Yodeling? Who's the genius that thought that brilliant idea up? This isn't to say that all of Home on the Range is a pointless effort. The musical score as well as the songs are enjoyable highlights but, as with most other films, if the only amusement you find is the music then save your money and buy the soundtrack. All in all, Home on the Range marks the end of a roller coaster ride for traditional animation at Disney … One only wishes it could have ended on a better note then this.

My Rating: *** out of 5 (Grade: C-)

Cows aren't funny

[mjaxelrad · 2/10 · 6 April 2004]

This is the most dispiriting Disney release since the dark days of the Black Cauldron. The laughs were strained and ill-timed. While the string of quality Disney movies carefully crafted humor aimed at adults as well as children, this one relied almost exclusively on belch jokes and inappropriate (not to mention inane) sexual innuendo. Seemingly undecided whether it was to be Emperor's-New-Groove-goes-country or South-Park-in-the-West, it miserably fails its audience both young and old.

While Judi Dench and Jennifer Tilly struggle in vain to carry the film with some attention to character, it never ceases to amaze that Roseanne -- purportedly a former stand-up comic -- has such leaden delivery and a complete lack of comic timing. Obviously, unless she is bellowing at another character, there is simply no way that her talented co-stars can create any rapport. From her first words on screen, Roseanne sinks this movie like a stone.

A total waste of some talented co-stars.

Please, please, let this be the final death rattle of the Eisner era. It is bad enough that Michael Eisner has ruined practically every character through badly-thought-out and badly-realized straight-to-video sequels, but to completely destroy the bedrock of the Disney empire -- animated theatrical releases -- is unforgiveable.

This one only gets a 2 out of 10.

An enjoyable Disney movie

[GEM-20 · 7/10 · 11 January 2005]

I really took a chance when I bought the DVD of "Home On The Range" because I had not seen it. It is not my normal practice to buy something that I am totally unfamiliar with. However, I was happily surprised. This movie was wonderful! My kids and I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Roseanne provided a funny voice to one of the cows. Love her or hate her, the casting was perfect, like Ellen DeGeneres was for "Finding Nemo".

I read here on IMDb that "Home On The Range" is the last Disney film to be done with traditional animation. Maybe there are faster or cheaper ways of making these movies, but a great history is coming to an end. Kind of sad… I recommend this movie. While it may not be a masterpiece, it is a delight that is better than most Don Bluth or Dreamworks films.

I would give it *** out of four. Fun and funny stuff!

Nice visuals, otherwise unexceptional

[florafairy · 11 April 2004]

While the film wasn't a total dud a la "Treasure Planet," it's certainly no "Little Mermaid," or even "Emperor's New Groove," which I consider the best of the latest crop of cartoons for its hip sensibility. "Home on the Range" suffers from an unoriginal and unfunny script, although it is not tediously poor or Saturday-morning-cartoon simple. To begin, there is an overabundance of plastic-playset ready characters (literally a whole farm full): the trio of bounty-hunting heifers played by Roseanne Barr, Judi Dench, and Jennifer Tilly; the yodeling cattle rustler Alameda Slim (Randy Quaid) and his three bumbling nephews; the wannabe-hero steed Buck (Cuba Gooding Jr-- who ok'ed that name?); two lascivious bulls; a buffalo bouncer; a peg-legged jackrabbit; and a whole farmyard of pigs, chickens, a goose, and a surly goat. Oh, and Steve Buscemi shows up too, as a caricature of himself in a purple suit and a pencil moustache. Estelle Harris and Patrick Warburton (so memorable in "Toy Story 2" and "Groove," respectively), had brief cameos as well. There's no time for any kind of character development (not even with a sacred Disney "I Want" song), and the thinnest of premises has the cows hunting for Slim in time to get the reward money to save their farm. I was surprised not by the simplicity but by the unnecessary, unfunny bawdiness of the script (the movie opens with a shot of the Barr cow's ample udders, with her voiceover dryly remarking "Yep, they're real. Quit staring." Crossdressing, pee, and fat man jokes follow.) Alan Menken wrote a few snappy but unmemorable tunes (none of which are sung by the characters, but by the likes of Bonnie Raitt and k.d. lang) and a Coplandesque score. The film redeems itself in its art direction, which bursts with Disney color and retro UPA-style angularity. Especially in the opening scenes, a multiplane effect is used to further flatten, rather than deepen, this storybook world. It's an interesting and visually engaging concept that works well for the story. Backgrounds are intricately detailed with drybrush effects that call to mind "Sleeping Beauty;" if that film's art director, Eyvind Earle, had been called upon to paint the rocks and buttes of the American desert, it would have looked very much like this. It's quite stunning, actually, and the best art direction since 1996's "The Hunchback of Notre Dame." I especially appreciated a background detail in the town scene: one of the buildings was actually only a facade, held up by supports like on a backlot Western set. Similarly, sooner or later, not just critics but parents too will demand the Disney animated features to show that they have something behind that venerable name. "Home on the Range" will tide us over for now, but a renaissance of Disney is getting to be overdue. The Disney animation department (what's left of it), like it or not, needs to take a cue from Pixar and strive for family-friendly originality if they hope to maintain the integrity of the brand. ***

An absolute disgrace

[Atreyu_II · 3/10 · 7 August 2007]

The 44th animated Disney "classic" is just one among other good examples of how Disney went downhill during these last years.

It's sad to see how Disney (which made so many timeless classics) declined that much. What happened to the traditional hand-drawn classics? All this CGI stuff only ruined Disney! "Home On The Range" isn't the worst Disney movie ever, but it is side by side with their worst movies.

This movie has lots of irritating moments, but the worst of all is a scene in a bar - one of the most ridiculous scenes in a movie! The "humor" of this movie isn't the classic humor which is really funny. What we see here is nothing but annoying, unconventional and pointless modern humor.

This movie has some nice backgrounds of the Old West, but only a few. The characters are very ugly in general and so terribly designed that it's impossible not to feel annoyed by them.

Stupid situations, terrible designs, very low picture quality, awful animation and boring songs are more weak points of this disgrace.

The characters in general are annoying. The only characters I liked were the little yellow birds, the little pigs and Rusty the Dog. But even these characters can't be compared with the beloved and legendary Disney characters of the great classics from the past.

Walt must be spinning in his grave!

[artcatcms · 1/10 · 9 April 2004]

Throughout my life I was raised on the beautiful animation from the 'wonderful world of Disney'. Even as an adult I continued to love the stories and wonderful animation that set Disney apart from the rest. But the recent years have seen a huge decline not only in the animation department, but in storyline as well. It now seems, with this movie in particular, to be caught in an avalanche of lousy animation, overused puns and cheap innuendo. It may amuse a 5 year old, but for anyone that ever appreciated the quality that was once a Disney trademark will be sorely disappointed! I had hopes with the beauty and quality of movies such as 'The Little Mermaid', 'Beauty and the Beast' and 'Aladdin', but those apparently were the last gasps of any beauty in artistic and story quality! This one must surely have sent Walt Disney spinning in his grave to see how the current regime has cheapened everything he worked so hard to build! The likes of 'Snow White', 'Pinnochio, 'Bambi' and those like it are apparently gone for good! How sad to see such a grand art form bite the dust! Shame on the animators of this one!

Hand-Drawn Animation: Put Out To Pasture?

[EmperorNortonII · 7/10 · 16 January 2005]

"Home On the Range" is the 44th animated feature from the Walt Disney Studios. It also seems to be the last hand-drawn feature in their long history. I'm sorry to see the format discontinued. Frankly, they could have had a better one to end the streak with. Not that "Home On the Range" is a bad movie. It's good, but not great. The art looks good, and a lot of voices were cast well. Roseanne Barr does well as Maggie the cow, and Cuba Gooding, Jr. is funny as Buck the horse. But other than that, there is nothing really special about the movie. As an animation fan, I hope we haven't seen the last of 2D animated features. As good as 3D computer animation can be, we should not forget the classic styles.

well...

[jackster12 · 2/10 · 31 August 2008]

I'm typing this as the movie is playing on DVD. And the kids seem to like watching it. But then, they're young and animation appeals in general.

Still, we try to watch with them... and I happen to love animation myself, having some background in cartoon-drawing. Everything Pixar? Fantastic. Old Disney? Sure, serve it up. Along with the Looney Tunes, old Tom & Jerry, etc.

This, though, is a sleepwalk of a feature in so many ways. Not in the animation, which isn't bad (though not much special, in context of what's out there). Nor in the music, which is decent enough.

The writing, however, is horrible. I can't imagine anyone characterizing this dialogue as "funny"... it's an endless stream of clichés. And the story line, while thin at the core, is unnecessarily complicated at the fringes. The twists don't feel like twists. They feel like fumbling shortcuts used to navigate a nest of tangled details.

I find myself astounded at how (a) such a venerable studio as Disney gets behind this kind of project (b) how they manage to attract so much high-profile voice talent and (c) how those actors stomach saying these lines, given that every one of them has acted in much better stuff than this pap. I guess a paycheck helps.

But still, ultimately this is a movie that shouldn't have been made.

P.S. One other thing... one can't help but feel like this is one of those animation movies meant to appeal to a demographic. Like, say, the vast swath of middle America that loves country music. It's worth noting that the other failed animated movies of recent years have all attempted to do the same kind of feel-good, blatant targeting.

Brother Bear... Fox and the Hound 2... there are others I can't think of at the moment. Why does it fail? First, because the movies by nature end up offering stereotypes of the demographic they're targeting. Second, because they end up being style over substance. The plot is just a vehicle to deliver the caricature. And last, because it's ridiculous to assume that great story lines don't transcend the cultural distinctions.

Do the studio marketers really think, for instance, that the Nascar set and Manhattan kids alike can't "get" Monsters Inc or Toy Story on a shared level? The only movie of recent years that seemed to beat that rap was "Cars." And that was because it was a good story, not stuck in being pedantic or playing to any one crowd.

A good laugh the whole way through.

[That70sHeidi · 10/10 · 28 December 2004]

I don't know what the other cranky reviewer was on, but both myself and my 65 year old mother laughed the whole way through. We even rewound to hear some of the jokes and asides a second and third time. We watched it completely through a second time when my 21 year old brother came in with his girlfriend, and we ALL sat and laughed.

The incidental background animation was tops, the yodelling scene was amazing and the casting of the voices was dead on. Everyone commented on how fun it was to guess the celebrity voices.

Frankly, this is an awesome film, and Disney should have done more of them instead of the boring waste of Mulan and Pocahontas.

If you liked this, you're not alone.

[gabrielle-04785 · 7/10 · 16 April 2023]

Ignore the hate if you fell in love with this film. I just watched it and I thought it was fine. Yes, it has it's issues, but I wouldn't consider it as a terrible film from Disney.

Home on the Range was kinda unique. It had nice animation and the characters like Maggie, Mrs. Calloway, Grace and Lucky Jack are pretty good.

The villain, Alameda Slim was pretty weak. He's so dang goofy it's hard to take him seriously.

Here are some things I would change about Home on the Range:

1. Have the characters be more interesting. Don't make them flat.

2. Delate some of the cow jokes. There are too many of them.

3. Make Slim a better villain.

4. The yodeling song could use some work with lyrics.

Overall, this is an okay Disney film. I wouldn't say it's bad, but it's okay.

Does have its good moments, but overall it is the case of too much dialogue, not enough action

[TheLittleSongbird · 5/10 · 23 September 2009]

Home On The Range wasn't a terrible movie, it does have its good moments. However, it just isn't a great one either. It does try hard, but is overall unexceptional. I am not criticising it just for the sake of it, this review is coming from someone who did see the movie, noticed some good bits, and not so impressive bits.

The animation does have its good points, the opening in particular is absolutely stunning, with lovely pastel colours. But there are other parts where it is merely okay, where there are some dull backgrounds and some awkward character animation, Rico especially. I am probably the only person who thinks this, and that is fine, but Alan Menken's music was a disappointment. It isn't as beautiful as Beauty and the Beast, as catchy as Little Mermaid, as dazzling as Aladdin, as lyrical as Pocahontas or as powerful as Hunchback of Notre Dame. Instead at best, it is forgettable, and I do think it is Menken's poorest effort. Out the songs, all of which are pleasant but unmemorable, the only one that stood out for me was Slim's Yodel Song, and the main reason for that was the embeddement of classical music favourites like William Tell(Rossini) and Ode To Joy(Beethoven).

The movie does start off very well indeed, and I did like the idea of the plot. Sadly, the plot came across as rather thin, there are a number of scenes where very little happens, though the scene in Echo Mine was fun. Overall, the film's main problem is too much dialogue not enough action. speaking of the dialogue, there are one or two bits with Slim mostly where you raise a laugh, but in general, despite Roseanne Barr's evidently enthusiastic voice over, Home On the Range is rather devoid of humour.

The characters are a mixed bag. Slim as a villain isn't bad at all(one of the better characters), he is humorous at times, and there are occasional moments of inspired dialogue, my favourite being about his yodelling. His identical henchmen are unimpressive, and perhaps even unnecessary. Rico is underused, the cows are fine but Buck was a tad annoying at times, not always though. One of the better aspects of the movie was the voice cast, with Randy Quaid evidently relishing his role as Slim, and Roseanne Barr and Judi Dench are very good, despite their meagre material. Cuba Gooding Jnr is okay, he has been better, but Jennifer Tilly and Steve Bushemi are given little to do.

Overall, Home On the Range is okay as an animated film. It does have its good moments, but my general impression is that it is one of the least remarkable Disney films. 5/10 Bethany Cox

home on the range

[torillaface · 1/10 · 22 January 2007]

The critics were right about this movie that it wasn't worth the time or movie to see it. This movie might have been one of the reason to shut down this ink animation dept. What was the purpose of this movie? Was it based on cows or Rosanne Barr? They should have featured her in a live action movie. There was not much of a story and it didn't make sense. A yodeling outlaw riding a bison stealing cattle right from under ranchers who don't have enough sense to take care of them. There is not one cow hand, cowboy, or cow dog in sight. Thank goodness, there are no predators either. Maybe this is a reason why the cows follow this outlaw like sheep, they never heard howling before nor are they ever sang to like one of the cows was by the old lady of pleasant valley.

Not prime grade beef, but still a nice selection of ground chuck

[filmbuff-36 · 6/10 · 24 April 2004]

With Disney fazing out their hand-drawn animation studios in favor of the computer animation brand, one must accept the quiet passing of their traditional style with a mix of both admiration and frustration. A nod of respect for 44 motion pictures of varying degrees of quality followed by a note of sadness at the demand for bottom-line economics over artistic dedication.

As a swan song, "Home on the Range" is not the best send-off from the Mouse House. If "Lilo and Stitch" or "Brother Bear" had ended up as the final 2-D animated piece from the studio, it might have finished the tradition on a slightly higher note. Not that this latest one isn't entertaining, but it lacks the drama to bring about the end of an era on a high note.

The time is the 1800s. The place -- the Old West. Cattle drovers roam the land with their livestock, thieves and other miscreants terrorize the countryside and homesteaders try to eek out an existence in the middle of the wilderness. It is here that local farmer Pearl has set up her own his little paradise appropriately titled "Patch of Heaven."

Among the animals on the farm, the cows clearly command the most respect. They include prim and proper Ms. Caloway (voice of Judi Dench) who does not tolerate recklessness, the air-headed Grace (voice of Jennifer Tilly) who spouts kooky Zen tidbits at inappropriate moments, and cocky Maggie (voice of Roseanne Barr), a headstrong show cow and the latest addition to the farm following misfortune at her old home.

Times are not good for Pearl, with the bank threatening to foreclose on her farm if she doesn't come up with $750 within three days. Not wishing to lose another home, Maggie convinces Ms. Caloway and Grace to aid her in hunting down cattle thief Alameda Slim (voice of Randy Quaid). The three heifers find competition in a conceited and ambitious stallion named Buck (voice of Cuba Gooding Jr.) who is anxious to make a name for himself by being the mount of legendary bounty hunter Rico (voice of Charles Dennis).

The various parties continually cross paths in energetic vignettes, with Western clichés both adhered to and skewered as only a cartoon could do. The cows want Slim to collect the reward, Slim wants the cows to raise money to buy land cheap at auction, and Buck wants to impress Rico with his abilities to track and fight crime. Traps are set, alliances are forged and action ensues.

"Home on the Range" is certainly lively, and is often times quite humorous, but it suffers from a lack of creativity given the potential of the premise. For a cartoon about cows hunting down cattle rustlers, everything seems so formulaic. There are very few surprises and the characters seem to just go through the motions of the typical Disney animated fare.

Where it does succeed though is in the performances. Barr is delightfully acid-tongued as a cow with a tendency for showing off. Her timing is great and comments pointed, which only makes one wonder where she has been for the last few years.

Dench brings Mrs. Caloway a Victorian-era sense of composure and sophistication that is amusingly out of place in the Old West. Never mind how she got that British accent out there in the first place, Dench's ability to bring dignity to the role is a welcome plus.

Tilly is a strange choice for Grace but acquits herself admirably. She's both empty-headed and idiot savant, often at the same times, though her character is typically pushed to the background in favor of Maggie and Caloway's bickering.

The rest of the cast is likable as well, with Gooding Jr. lively as the horse full of himself but with his heart more or less in the right place. Quaid can be amusing at times as the yodeling villain, and even Steve Buscemi shows up in a small but memorable role as a slimy fence for Alameda Slim's stolen property named Wesley, whom Slim appropriately mispronounces as "weasely."

But despite the good performances and lively action, there's not much else at which the movie excels. The characters are all generic and based on archetypes. Who is Pearl and why should we care about her? Just because she dances around with her animals and they live in peaceful harmony with each other, we're supposed to just automatically sympathize with her plight?

Also, what does Alameda plan to do with the land when he gets it? The answer to these and other questions -- we don't know. The filmmakers just want us to accept the plot as is, which may present a problem to the older members of the audience.

But the kids will probably love it. It's simple and fun, and loaded with some lively country music performed by the likes of k.d. lang and Tim McGraw that is sure to bring a smile.

Compared to some of the lesser Disney offerings, "Home on the Range" is certainly a step up due to it's glib approach to Western convention, but as the coda to an animated legacy dating back to "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs," one wishes that the studio had chosen a beefier prize before putting their dynasty out to pasture.

Six out of ten stars. Not a bad cartoon, but as Disney's animated swan song, it's a bit of a disappointment.

It's not a step down for Disney, its a tumble down the stairs

[Avwillfan89 · 1/10 · 2 November 2012]

From the moment the film starts, we know it's not going to be good, but the more I watch it now, the more cringe-worthy and unwatchable it gets.

Everything from the animation style to the characters and to the plot, is just an absolute train wreck. There is nothing redeemable about this picture. Pending loss of property, kidnapping of the cattle and Pearl's and the dairy cows' relationship as "family" makes me want to retch out of pity for how much fuss they're kicking up over nothing.

Even as a child when I watched it the first time, I had to skip some parts because they were just too silly for me. When you compare it to Finding Nemo for example, a much more dramatic picture with depth, lovable characters and outstanding dialog, you'll see what I mean.

It's not even one of those "so bad it's good" movies. Just plain unbearable.

Lazy and lacklustre film

[bob the moo · 10 March 2008]

Having only just moved to her new home, Maggie the cow is shocked to learn that it is to be shut down and auctioned off – more than likely meaning the chop for all the animals. With cows Mrs Caloway and Grace in tow, she sets out to try and save the farm by claiming the reward for bringing in an infamous cattle rustler. Ignoring the sheer improbability of this, they set off only to find that several other parties (animals and humans) have similar ideas.

I came to this film as one of many animated films on during the Christmas period and given the genre perhaps had reasons for looking forward to the usual star cast, kiddie friendly laughs, subversive adult humour and solid plot with a moral at the base of it. Sadly though this genre is no longer one that can be judged based on your Shrek's, Toy Story's and so on but now needs to be approached with caution given how many weak copies there now are out there. It is a shame to have to point the finger at a Disney product for this crime but I couldn't shake the feeling that the planning for this film involved watching the good Pixar films and saying "let's make one of those but without the effort or cost".

And so the film was born and it appears the effort and cost has been removed, perhaps making a more profitable film due to lower overheads and a "look kids it's another animated film" marketing strategy that writes itself, but what it doesn't produce is a good film which is what Home on the Range stands as testimony to. The story is a very simple adventure that doesn't really have much to it beyond the basic description above and I was surprised by how plodding most of it was. The laughs are few and far between and the delivery generally seemed to lack energy. The animation is pretty basic looking and seems to have been made by a rather lacklustre committee, which is ironic when you think about what the significance the film holds within the legacy of Disney.

The voice cast has names but it feels more like actors being "the voice of" rather than playing characters. As a result they tend to just play on their voice rather than develop characters. Roseanne is Roseanne but with weak material (meaning she is just loud and not funny). Dench takes her money and I doubt very much if this film will ever be mentioned when discussing her body of work, and nor should it be. Tilly at least plays up her part and has quite a "fun" voice. Quaid, Gooding Jnr and Warburton are so-so even if small turns from Buscemi and Weaver are quite fun.

Overall then a pretty lacklustre product across the board that seems to be content to just take the success that simply being in a genre that we had gotten used to being good. It might amuse young children with its big bright shapes and loud noises but older children and certainly adults will find little to entertain.

2D Films Can Compete

[gcrokus · 7/10 · 25 May 2004]

To say Home On The Range is a little dated looking is not entirely fair. We just are not used to seeing two-dimensional cartoon characters. So to some this film may run to tastes remindful of Saturday morning cartoons in years past. But there is a little more here than just how anthropomorphism is projected on the big screen.

Where Home On The Range does not measure up is in the laughs department. There are some awfully funny scenes in the more recent Shrek II, and one of those (involving an arrest scene) is of the two funniest I have ever seen in an animated film (the other is in Finding Nemo, when Ellen Degeneres speaks whale). And in that regard Home doesn't quite hit the mark.

The plot revolves around saving the farm. The animals living thereon (humans cannot save farms very often) contrive to do this through the usual convoluted methods. And it is somewhat interesting how this is developed. Interesting enough for your children, that is – there is not much here for the more adult crowds.

Cuba Gooding is the show stealer in the voice department. But the yodeling we hear by the cattle rustler early on is a close second.

There are some surprisingly neat looking scenes, and not many cartoons of yesteryear had characters drawn as sharply. Two dimensional film is not done by any means.

All in all this is a C+ effort. There are some sharp moments (watch Buck the horse run around the barn, check out the Rico (a decidedly un-Western sounding name) character, and listen to everything Jeb the goat says. They are the scene stealers.

Disney disappointment.

[wheelofhawk · 2/10 · 16 April 2008]

The story line is too thin, the dialog is boring and there are no jokes or great moments in it. I never laughed once. The target audience must be lower than 8 years old, this is a baby-sitter with no character. It's even worse than Chicken Little, and it doesn't even try to be funny. Normally, it would be an enjoyable animation, but coming from Disney Studios, I'd say this is very disappointing.

If I have to be positive, I can say that my eyes didn't start bleeding. Judy Dench saved the day. She earns this movie 2 points / 10. It's difficult to find 10 lines to say about this movie even if they're all negative.

Solid, but Forgettable Fare

[dbborroughs · 7/10 · 5 April 2004]

The tale of three cows going to save the farm is a pleasant way to spend 75 minutes. Although far from the best of Disney's animated features, its equally far from the worst. Its very funny, especially if you get all in jokes and spoofs that it contains. The music is very good, but won't win any awards. The voice acting isn't stand out, but its nice to have Roseanne actually be funny again. Definitely worth seeing if you have kids since both you and they will laugh and have a good time. My only regret about the film is that twenty minutes after its done you're ready for another movie. That isn't a bad thing except with movie admissions these days I'd like a bit of a filling meal. Three stars, lots of fun for the entire family.

Worst. Disney. Animated. Feature. EVER.

[JTurner82 · 1/10 · 14 June 2007]

HOME ON THE RANGE is rock-bottom Disney animation. It's amazing to believe the studio that produced memorable classics could turn out a movie as bad as this (yes, it's worse than HERCULES and TREASURE PLANET). The wire-thin storyline, which involves barnyard animals on the trail of an outlaw who can hypnotize animals by singing (huh?) is needlessly stretched out for 76 minutes (which is 70 minutes too long) with forced, unfunny gags, frantic but lifeless sequences and lame characterizations. The animation, usually a high point in a Disney feature, is both pedestrian and unappealing to look at. Alan Menken supplies the music, but like the movie, his tunes are banal, insipid, and unappealing, even weaker than his work for HERCULES. Failed Disney cartoons don't have to be this horrific; case in point: THE BLACK CAULDRON and ATLANTIS-THE LOST EMPIRE fell short financially and were flawed, but both movies made an attempt to be something more complex and adult-oriented than typical Disney fare (I actually liked both of those films). This film, on the other hand, is a big step backward, and the hectic, pedestrian execution ultimately cripples it. It's disheartening that this may be the last traditionally animated feature we may see from Disney, and even more unfortunate that they chose to go out with a flop as insidious as this. Uncle Walt would surely turn over in his grave if he found out his studio ever produced this film.

Surprisingly good...

[Theshapeshifter · 9/10 · 20 January 2006]

I don't see just why it is that people don't like this film. It has good music, good animation, and funny dialogue, but it is fairly sappy. I thought that it was fairly good, even though the plot is just a wee bit weak. Fortunately, the plot is peppered with many humorous events and turns which clear any and all flaws up. The plot is that of a small farm out in the Old West, which is set to be foreclosed. All seems lost until two cows who live there, and one who just moved in, decide to do the only thing that can be done to save their home, catch a notorious criminal, who is known for stealing cows. With some massively amusing high-jinks and many plot twists, this film, while redundant at times, is not to be missed. Take it from someone who knows animation, this movie, while having received a multitude of bad comments and scorns is good, but watch it yourself and YOU be the judge. YOU must decide whether or not it is good, but I found it enjoyable.

Nothing special. Just really enjoyable.

[Will_Scarlet · 7/10 · 27 April 2004]

In my opinion the reason that many movie-goers will be dissappointed by this film is because they would expect something more of the last Disney film to be animated in the traditional way. Instead, they are only given a reasonably enjoyable film. So if you want to enjoy it, don't get your hopes up that this will be something of the calibre of Beauty and the Beast of The Lion King. You may be pleasantly surprised. What makes the movie most enjoyable is its characterization, and the actors and actresses behind the characters. The jokes brought on by Roseanne Barr's crass in-your-face humor are refreshingly adult and witty, and Roseanne proves to be a capable comedienne. She can be wildly funny one moment, and remarkably sad in the next. Dame Judi Dench's presence as a cartoon cow is puzzling, but she brings out her character's dryer, more contained sense of humor perfectly. Some of her physical characteristics are even visible in her character's face. Cuba Gooding Jr. is perhaps the only truly unexciting thing about this movie. His character's presence does not slow it down, but the character itsself is handled all wrong. For one thing, the African-American element is overdone to the point where it becomes irritating, and, sadly, it seems to be one of the only things defining his character. Jennifer Tilly, however, after her unnusual, but remarkable performance as the mystic Madame Leota in "The Haunted Mansion," returns to her typically innocent slightly "ditzy" type of character. My personal favorite, however, is the villain, who may very well be Disney's most original villain. Though this movie is enjoyable, there is not much of a sense that this will be lost as CGI takes over. The animation of the surreal American West is beautifully captured here, and characters are visually presented in the square single-toned colors of the Disney shorts of the '50s. But, despite this, an interesting cast of characters, and a score by Disney music veteran Alan Menken, the context of this movie stops it from being truly memorable. 7/10, with points for originality.

A rare dud from Disney

[Tweekums · 5/10 · 16 January 2020]

This Disney animation is in the old west; a cattle rustler by the name of Alameda Slim has been stealing the cattle from all the local ranches forcing the land owners to sell up. When this happens to the Dixon Ranch the only animal left, a show cow named Maggie is sold to Pearl; the kindly owner of a farmstead called 'Patch of Heaven'... unfortunately soon after she arrives the sheriff visits to tell Pearl that the bank is about to foreclose on her loan if she can't come up with $750 in three days. Maggie, along with fellow cows Mrs Caloway and Grace, try to come up with a plan to save their home. Maggie's plan is to enter a show for the prize money but when they hear that the reward for bringing Slim to justice is $750 they decide that they will capture him. Also after the reward are bounty hunter Rico and Buck, the sheriff's horse who idolises Rico.

I was rather disappointed by this film; it may be described as 'Disney's 44th Animated Classic' on the DVD box but it is quite a way behind the other 'Disney Classics' that I've seen. The story is okay but for the most part the jokes aren't great... occasionally they are out of place in a Disney film such as Maggie pointing out that her udders are real or the supposed comedy of animals belching. The songs are okay but nothing one is going to find oneself humming afterwards. The action, towards the end of the film, is moderately exciting at least. The characters are ok for the most part, but again nothing special. Some of them felt like inferior versions of characters I've seen in better animated films/shows. The animation is decent enough and the voice cast is solid, with some quality actors providing their distinctive voices to their characters. Overall I wouldn't say this is a bad film; it is just disappointing when it comes from such a renowned producer of animation... one for completists.

The Kids Loved It

[VTNJGirl · 21 April 2004]

So, it wasn't too bad. The kids, 4, 7 and 11, loved it. It was a bit jumpy and confusing, but we got some laughs out of it and the kids left smiling. That's pretty much the goal of going to a Disney film anyhow, even though it reminded me more of Warner Bros. and Looney Toons. And its not so terrible for Disney to try something different. It just takes some getting used to. Frankly, I just forgot that it was Disney and watched the show.

But nobody has mentioned the violence. Just like Looney Toons cartoons that we grew up on, this movie was so full of violent acts that I lost count early on. It disturbs me to see cartoon characters suffer such debilitating injuries and the next thing you see they have completely recovered and carry on. What kind of message does this send the kids? "Go ahead and jump off that cliff, you'll walk away"....."Isn't it funny how that man's teeth are falling out of his mouth....."

But if you don't mind Looney Toon violence, the rest of the movie is OK. Hokey, but it's supposed to be. We, the adults, did wish there had been a bit more character development, especially around Pearl, the owner of Little Patch of Heaven, and Buck, the ridiculously macho horse. Loved the voice of the Buffalo and agree that the horse that Buck encouraged to run away was also a great voice. Liked the music too, although it was a bit overwhelming at times.

So enjoy, and remember: its for the kids, not you.