Animation Source Forums

Secret of NIMH • Legacies of NIMH Prologue

2017-01-19T15:54:13-06:00

Mrs. Brisby took in a deep breath-and exhaled. It was a wondrous thing to breathe with ease, without any trace of fear or anxiety.
The nightmare she had been living since Timothy first came down with a fever was finally over. And the most miraculous thing of all was that she, a simply field mouse, had woken herself up. But not without a little help.
One of her blessed helpers sat with her now. She and Justin shared a sun-warmed rock atop a hill. Down below the dawning sun cast a warm glow over the Fitzgibbon farm.
“NIMH will be here soon,” she reluctantly broke the peaceful silence.
“And they’ll find nothing but an old rose bush,” he replied, a small measure of pride warming his voice. The other rats had already left for Thorn Valley, Justin temporarily staying behind to tend to the Brisby family.
“How are you feeling, Mrs. Brisby?” Justin turned his upper body to her. Although his smile was still in place his eyes were worried.
“I’m fine,” she replied genially. “A little light-headed but I’ve certainly been through worse.”
She had hoped to get a chuckle out of the rat but he remained silent. Last night was a blur of memories, the farmer’s house, Nicodemus’ death, Jenner, the cave in that nearly killed her children.
That moment had been unbearable, her throat closing, her heart stopping and her entire body going cold. She had been determined to save her children or be buried with them.
And then the Stone was before her, beckoning and warm and Nicodemus’ words echoing in her ears: Courage of the heart is very rare. The Stone has a power when it’s there.
Touching the Stone had felt like dipping her hands in fire but the pain hadn’t repelled her. Instead she clutched it tight and a burning presence weighed down her bones. The presence had seemed to challenge her, she felt dared and mocked. But then peace flowed through her veins, acceptance, and something voiceless whispered what she needed to do. When her children were rescued the presence vanished and she was left drained, her consciousness slipping away.
When she awoke she was in her bed, her three children snuggled around her and Timothy safely in his own bed. She found Auntie Shrew in the kitchen, fixing tea before she went on to her own home. “The rat that carried you in here is waiting outside,” she said with a note of dislike in her tone.
And now Mrs. Brisby sat with her friend, ignoring the pang of grief that told her he would be gone soon.
“How are you hands?” he asked, eyes trailing to her paws that rested on her knees. She couldn’t hold back a wince, lifting her hands, palms up. The fur had been singed, the skin bright red, proof she had wielded the Stone’s power.
“They sting a little, but its fine,” she reassured, “I’ll have Teresa help me bandage them when she wakes up.”
Justin wordlessly took her hand, careful to avoid the burned flesh. “You are really something else, my lady.”
She smiled at him, feeling a blush rise. Justin was far kinder than she would’ve imagined considering his harsh origins. She would sincerely miss him.
“Thank you,” she replied, “Not just for what you said, but for everything. You saved my life; I wouldn’t be here without you.”
He returned her smile, “You don’t give yourself enough credit. You single-handedly saved the rats of NIMH last night, as well as the lives of your children.”
Mrs. Brisby’s eyes fell to the gray stone, “I wasn’t able to save Nicodemus.”
Justin told her not to blame herself for his death but guilt still plagued her. Nicodemus had been wise and kind; he had felt like a father to her even though she had only known him for a short time. She would always be grateful he gave her closure for Jonathan’s death. But he only died because he had helped her and she would always blame herself for that.
Justin’s soft sigh broke her from her thoughts, “I need to be going; they’ll need my help settling into Thorn Valley.”
Mrs. Brisby nodded, fearing a sob would escape her. “You will be safe won’t you?”
He winked, “Of course, you are looking at the new leader of Thorn Valley. You don’t have to worry about me, Mrs. Brisby.”
“Elizabeth,” the word fell off her tongue without her permission.
Justin, having stood up now halted, his hand still holding hers, “Pardon?”
“You should know my first name, it’s Elizabeth.”
“Elizabeth Brisby,” he tasted the name. “It suits you perfectly.”
“Just, I-” she couldn’t express her gratitude and fondness through words. “Do you think you’ll ever come back?”
His smile was apologetic, “Probably not, Mrs-Elizabeth. Thorn Valley is our new home; we no longer have a place in this farm.”
She wasn’t asking if he’d ever more back to the farm, she was asking if he would come back to see her.
“But I do hope I’ll see you again,” he added, his black eyes holding a tender light.
“I do as well,” she replied, “But just in case…”
Ignoring the twist in her gut she removed the now cool Stone from around her neck, offering it to Justin who looked both confused and interested.
“Keep it,” she urged. “I no longer need it, and it’s all you have left of Nicodemus and-and Jonathan.”
Justin’s throat moved as he silently swallowed, but he accepted the Stone with a formal nod.
“And,” she added, a shy smile rising. “It can be something to remember me by.”
“How could I forget you?” Justin asked. But before she could reply he pulled her into a gentle hug.
“You are my hero, Elizabeth Brisby,” he breathed in her ear, “And it was a blessing to know you.”

Statistics: Posted by CourageoftheHeart — Thu Jan 19, 2017 3:54 pm

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-04-02T11:34:47-06:00

About the Dr Valentine being "not a real life form" business… I think there had been misunderstanding. What I was saying was that I had the following idea to fix the plothole of the first movie's neutral NIMH being apparently run by an evil mad scientist:

This idea was that Dr Valentine was meant as a subversion of the "Obviously Evil Mad Scientist" cliché - he looks like the guy you think would be the bad guy in a comic or a cartoon, but he's actually benevolent, as well as empathic towards his test subjects, as demonstrated when he pats a young Martin's head in the flashback. He just happens to look weird. Note that the only people from whom we are told that he's evil are the Lost Mice (and Jenny), who are naturally inclined to dislike him, since they're the one being tested on (and that's nothing inconsistent compared to the first movie, where Nicodemus similarly considered the animals to be "tortured").

My second idea, following this one, would have explained why the NIMH laboratory suddenly looked like Dracula's castle. It was that another trope, the Fisher King Land trope (read about here: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FisherKing), was into play here: when benevolent-Dr-Valentine was in charge (during the events of the first movie), NIMH looked fine. But when Evil!Martin took over, NIMH turned dark to reflect its new master's personality, in accordance with the trope. It's a slightly unrealistic note compared to the mostly magicless world in which the movies appear to be set, but first, it's not totally unprecedented magically speaking since we have the Stone, and second, at least it is an explanation for the apparent plothole that fixes the continuity.

Oh, and I have a third idea to explain the "dumpster expedition" that seems to be contradicting Nicodemus's philosophy: the fact that Jenner was considered a serious threat by Nicodemus in the first movie suggests that he was not alone. He had allies within the rat community, not quite as ruthless as him, and who never took part in Jenner's evil doing, but who still shared Jenner's opinion that "borrowing" stuff from humans was the right thing to do if they wanted to preserve their society. Especially with Nicodemus gone, the two factions probably had to compromise when they finally arrived to Thorn Valley.
It could something like this: the "pro-Jenner" wanted to keep taking human stuff to Thorn Valley to make life easier. The "pro-Nicodemus" argued that it was wrong to steal, and the "pro-Jenner" (seeing how everybody knew Jenner had turned insane and evil in the end, which probably drew some allies away, making the "pro-Nicodemus" into the majority), probably couldn't totally reject that. But they said: "fine, fine, stealing is evil, but we can pick things in the trash, right ?". Justin, Mr Ages, and generally all those who had the moral clarity required to understand what you have all argued above (about how that wouldn't be right either), tried to explain to the rats all of this, but most of them wouldn't understand the subtle morality at play, and said that the "pro-Jenner" had a fair point. The "pro-Nicodemus" didn't want that, but they didn't want a civil war with the remnant pro-Jenners either, so they let it be for the moment.

Statistics: Posted by Scrooge MacDuck — Sat Apr 02, 2016 11:34 am

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-03-03T09:04:34-06:00

nose dive wrote:

I don't believe Bluth was in charge.

That has long-since been common knowledge. It is an established fact that Don Bluth hasn't been involved in any sequels to his productions, including The Secret of NIMH, Land Before Time and An American Tail, just to name a few.

Statistics: Posted by BaltoSeppala — Thu Mar 03, 2016 9:04 am

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-03-02T22:07:39-06:00

I don't believe Bluth was in charge.

Statistics: Posted by nose dive — Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:07 pm

Secret of NIMH • Re: Bit of a silly question/ observation

2016-02-05T04:52:20-06:00

Locked on request

Statistics: Posted by Troll Berserker — Fri Feb 05, 2016 4:52 am

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-01-29T07:11:45-06:00

Scrooge MacDuck wrote:

Still, it is a rather odd opinion that you have; more than a few people consider that the songs of, for instance, Beauty and the Beast are one of the best things to like there.

That is your observation, and your opinion. I acknowledge it without agreeing with it. It is not odd at all...it is simply odd from the point of view of someone who enjoys staged singing and dancing numbers in live-action or animated movies. Just as many other people (I dare say more than otherwise) prefer the movies for their dramatic and comedic qualities as opposed to seeing things that should be confined to the theatrical stage (and, frankly, I prefer dramatic and comedic plays to musicals...which I generally find annoying and distracting).

Quote:

Though I can understand your point of view (correct me if I'm wrong, but I gather it's: "those movies I cited are still good because they've got other qualities, but they don't need the songs to be good and they'd perhaps even be better without them"), I still don't agree with it.

Your interpretation here is now closer to the mark. However, while you are free to disagree with it, I still disagree with your opposite viewpoint. Nevertheless, it's simply a difference in tastes. On that, I think this particular tangent of the conversation has run its course, and doesn't need to be dragged out any further. So let's just leave it where it is now.

Statistics: Posted by BaltoSeppala — Fri Jan 29, 2016 7:11 am

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-01-28T14:13:22-06:00

The "twisting" was unintentional. Still, it is a rather odd opinion that you have; more than a few people consider that the songs of, for instance, Beauty and the Beast are one of the best things to like there. Though I can understand your point of view (correct me if I'm wrong, but I gather it's: "those movies I cited are still good because they've got other qualities, but they don't need the songs to be good and they'd perhaps even be better without them"), I still don't agree with it.

Statistics: Posted by Scrooge MacDuck — Thu Jan 28, 2016 2:13 pm

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-01-28T12:49:04-06:00

Scrooge MacDuck wrote:

Will I dare to mention a couple of films I consider very good, that contain such songs ? Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, The Jungle Book, and as a matter of fact, you say "before the 1990s", but but why excluding such movies as Aladdin or The little mermaid ? Don't you think them to be good animated movies ?

In Pinocchio and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, none of the characters are performing musical numbers like you'd see in some Broadway (or off-Broadway) musical. The songs they sing, and even the incidental dancing, are integral parts of the stories, and far more natural behavior for either a character or a real person. There is a substantial difference between breaking into song from sheer emotional exuberance, and doing some practiced musical number with a choreographed dance routine. A substantial difference. And if you cannot understand what that difference is even by observing those movies (and the others you mentioned), then nobody will ever be able to educate you on the obvious differences.

Further, you have once again, as in each case before, mischaracterized what I have said about movies with musical numbers in them. I never said I thought they were good (nor have I ever said any worse than that in most cases). I said I have found the musical numbers to be completely and utterly ridiculous and useless, and irrelevant to the actual story. That I hate the musical numbers. That is not the same thing as not considering a movie "good".

Stop twisting or misrepresenting what I say.

Statistics: Posted by BaltoSeppala — Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:49 pm

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-01-28T12:29:41-06:00

"Most animated movies that existed before the 1990s, with but few exceptions, did not have musical numbers in them. They may have had songs...but those were sung by off-screen voices that, presumably, the characters could not see or hear. Those songs were designed to set the mood or convey a message in furtherance of the plot. That is 100% different than characters in the movie breaking into a song and dance number. Such things do not happen in real life."

Will I dare to mention a couple of films I consider very good, that contain such songs ? Pinocchio, Alice in Wonderland, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, The Jungle Book, and as a matter of fact, you say "before the 1990s", but but why excluding such movies as Aladdin or The little mermaid ? Don't you think them to be good animated movies ?

Statistics: Posted by Scrooge MacDuck — Thu Jan 28, 2016 12:29 pm

Secret of NIMH • Re: What is it that makes NIMH 2 so abysmally bad?

2016-01-23T10:37:59-06:00

Scrooge MacDuck wrote:

I can see why "that word Cobaye" confused you; I don't know if I mentioned it already (I think I did), but I am French, and although my English is pretty good (if I can say so myself), I just made a mistake here. Cobaye is the French for Guinea Pig… I just thought it also existed in English, I don't know. It rarely happens to me.

Well you may wish to be a bit more careful when responding or posting in general. Mixing languages causes exactly the kind of confusion you saw in my last post.

Quote:

Anyway… I enjoyed reading this counter-review of my review, and it was nice of you to spend time writing it.

It's a subject I'm interested in, and a topic I have been participating in (and started), so naturally I was bound to reply. But thanks nevertheless. I'm glad to help keep the discussion going.

Quote:

—> Musical numbers. There's no denying that the songs in Secret of NIMH 2 are bad, they are utterly, utterly bad. However, it's all a matter of taste, but as long as they're well handled I like musical numbers in animated movies; I don't know what you mean by "great animated movies of the past", I guess we don't have exactly the same tastes (it seems that I like movies slightly more comical than those you do), but more than a half of Disney movies have musical numbers in them.

Most animated movies that existed before the 1990s, with but few exceptions, did not have musical numbers in them. They may have had songs...but those were sung by off-screen voices that, presumably, the characters could not see or hear. Those songs were designed to set the mood or convey a message in furtherance of the plot. That is 100% different than characters in the movie breaking into a song and dance number. Such things do not happen in real life. And, even though animated movies are fictional and often fantastical reflections of the real world (to varying degrees), they still do reflect the real world. And in the real world, unless people are on stage, they simply do not randomly break into song and dance routines on the street, in school, on the job, etc. Because the very notion is patently ridiculous. (Need I refer to the utter stupidity, for example, of the High School Musical movies? Dear God, I hope not.)

But you cannot possibly discern my tastes in movies, animated or otherwise, from any posts I have made on this topic. My saying that I hate musical numbers in animated movies doesn't equate with any inference that I don't like comical movies. In fact, I like good comedies. But there are also plenty of lousy, low-brow comedies out there too, which stink.

Quote:

—> The Shrew: I guess it's once again a case of me not having read the books, and that such a misunderstanding could happen is the reason I put that disclaimer at the beginning of my post. Based on the first movie only, I saw her mainly as a gossip, a weak-minded old gossiping hag; analyzing my own opinion here, I think that it's also that I analyze her more as a anthropomorphic being and you more as an animal.

Then you're misinterpreting me again. I don't analyze her more as an animal because I already know she is, in fact, an anthropomorphized, animated version of a real shrew as well as a feisty, acerbic old(er) woman. I know quite well what she is as an animated character. If I were to analyze her in terms of being an animal, I would describe my view of her in terms of a real-world shrew...which I never did.

Quote:

—> Dr Valentine. I'm sorry, but although your other answers to my points were well-written and arguments, the answer you give is simply not an answer. It's your right to ignore NIMH 2 as non-canon (it is very obvious to see why any sane human being would do just that), but when analyzing NIMH 2 on its own, you can't just answer to every issue by saying: "it's not canon to the first one". If the answer to all the issues of this movie was just "it's non-canon so there is no need of even thinking about it", this topic, my first post, your answer and the present post would not even exist. So please, elaborate.

The answer I gave is most definitely an answer. I said that he's not a real life form...in other words, not a real human. You said that "he looks evil, but you don't choose your looks". He's a fictional animated character. It is utterly impossible for a fictional character in an animated movie, drawn, colored and animated by real humans, to choose what he looks like. The artists and animators choose that. Obviously.

I also said that he's very poorly designed and completely unrealistic. Because early in the movie he goes around in a sinister way, with those sunken eyes and ratty hair of his, skulking in the bushes around the farm looking for the escaped rats...in an extremely unscientific manner. And during the rest of the movie, he's a cartoonish buffoon. In the first movie, and in the first book, the scientists are portrayed very realistically, and without the cartoonish and buffoonish physical characteristics and behavior. They are intelligent and serious...even (in a few instances) sympathetic. The differences are obvious.

Statistics: Posted by BaltoSeppala — Sat Jan 23, 2016 10:37 am