(We do the opening for the Nostalgia Critic before we come to him in his room)
Nostalgia Critic: Hello I'm the Nostalgia Critic. I remember it so you don't have to. Let's talk a little history. (the crowd boos) Shut up! You're gonna learn something!
(A picture of Anna Leonowens is shown)
NC (vo): In 1862, Anna Leonowens was given the opportunity (a picture of Mongkut) to teach the many wives and children of Mongkut, the King of Siam. She accepted and later wrote a series of memoirs about her experience called "The English Governess and the Siamese Court." The memoirs were...controversial to say the least. Many saying she exaggerated or downright fabricated her influence on the King, and that she reduced a man who was a Buddhist monk for 27 years into a cruel, extreme, even violent monarch. Years later, Margaret Landon wrote a fictionalized, or...
NC: (finger quoting) "...even more" fictionalized version called...
NC (vo): ..."Anna and the King of Siam," again reinforcing Anna as the revolutionary and Mongkut as the harsh, eccentric ruler. Thailand finally said, "Hey! We've had it up to here with your bullshit! We're going to write our own version for English readers, which will later become Mongkut the King of Siam, and our writings will be placed in the Library of Congress for all you readers to see the truth. Maybe then, America will know the true history of our beloved ki--(suddenly interrupted by a picture of the stage play)--goddamn it!" (Clips from the 1956 movie play) Rogers and Hammerstein's "The King and I" came out, glorifying Landon's book, making her story more popular than it's ever been. So the controversy about one side telling the story continues from here on.
NC: But then another adaptation came out, this time in animated form under the same name, The King and I.
(Clips of the animated movie play)
NC (vo): Animated by Warner Bros. and released in 1999, this movie surely would offer a new outlook on history and myth. Not unlike something like The Prince of Egypt did: Taking a relatively famous tale, but updating it with modern dramatic storytelling while still coming from a different but respectful point of view.
NC: (Taking out Mongkut The King of Siam) Perhaps Thailand's dignified look on their beloved King will finally come to light. So tell me, how does this look back on history begin?
(We start off with a stormy night as a dragon attacks a ship. Anna and her son Louis are huddling together)
Louis: What is it, mother?
Anna: A dragon!
(NC throws the book out and without looking, shoots it with his gun, making pages rain down)
NC: This is the King and I.
NC (vo): Did I see that right? I mean, did I REALLY see that right?! A dragon?! We're starting off the King and I with a FUCKING DRAGON?! What band of bum-diots produced this cinematic idiocy- (Rankin/Bass is credited)
NC: Oh gee! Now it makes sense!
NC (vo): (Clips from Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer) Rankin/Bass; the same animation team who made those stop-motion specials that put more emphasis on the stop than the motion. (Clips from Frosty the Snowman) And produced a whole slue of what I like to call "awkward-mation." The cartoons that were never good, but you were just so fascinated by how strangely they moved that you have no choice but to keep watching. (Animated King and I clips) This film doesn't even have that distinction. It has good animation.
NC:...To an extent.
NC (vo): It's good Warner Bros. animation trying to be good Disney animation resulting in BAD Warner Bros. animation.
NC: But honestly, I'm probably getting ahead of myself. Let's look at how this film begins.