Cast
View All
Sebastian Cabot
as The Narrator/Sir Ector (voice)
Karl Swenson
as Merlin (voice)
Junius Matthews
as Archimedes the Owl (voice)
Martha Wentworth
as Madam Mim / Old Lady Squirrel (voice)
Norman Alden
as Kay (voice)
Rickie Sorensen
as Wart (voice)
Ginny Tyler
as Little Girl Squirrel (voice)
Alan Napier
as Sir Pellinore (voice)
Richard Reitherman
as Wart (voice)
Robert Reitherman
as Wart (voice)
Barbara Jo Allen
as Scullery Maid (voice) (uncredited)
James MacDonald
as The Wolf / Pike / Tiger Mim (voice) (uncredited)
Tudor Owen
as Knight in Crowd (voice) (uncredited)
Thurl Ravenscroft
as Black Bart (voice) (uncredited)
Jack Albertson
as Knight in Crowd #1(uncredited)
Crew
Director
- Wolfgang Reitherman
Producer
- Walt Disney
Reviews
Kamurai
Decent watch, probably won't watch again, and can't recommend.
Now it's been a while since I've seen this one, and now I remember why. There just isn't anything in the well in which to return. Sure all the magic is amusing, and the animal adventures are cute, as well as a nice reminder of how good we have it as humans, but I really feel like we ruined that squirrel's life, and I'm sad about it.
The actual story of the sword in the stone is very short, because it's not interesting: it's all the adventures that Arthur has growing the kingdom, establishing rule over (what would be) England, and his adventures as an adult king (most of which were his knights') to include warring with neighbors.
While the jocks versus nerds analogy through the movie is interesting, it feels polarizing, and the message of education / knowledge is mixed throughout the movie. Future references to the (1963) present just dates the movie and aren't all that funny, and it tells the audience that just because you have knowledge, doesn't mean you can use it. Then in the 3rd act, we start a controversy over having knowledge / skills can be used to better or worsen things, and other than inspiring Star Wars, I don't know what the point of it was.
My favorite part was when Archimedes got to laugh: he seemed like he really needed it.
Jul 11, 2020
CinemaSerf
"Arthur" - rather unkindly nick-named "Wart" is a stable boy with grand ambitions. He wants to be the squire to a bold and chivalrous knight. Those plans are soon up in the air, though, when he has a chance encounter with "Merlin" in the forest and is soon the wizard's pet project. You see, the wise if scatty old man knows the true identity of the young man, and is determined to prepare him for what's to come. What now ensues isn't so much an Arthurian legend, more a compendium of fun and colourful escapades at "Wart", his boss "Sir Ector" and his scholarly tutor "Archimedes" have some messy and sometimes scary escapades. I quite enjoyed this. It's quickly paced and makes no bones about it's intention to entertain rather than do any educating of it's own! We've got suits of armour, dragons, magical dishwashers and, of course, "Madame Min" and the characterisations are engaging and mischievous. It's written with light-hearted comedy in mind, takes in easy on the moralising, and I found it a joyful production to watch for eighty minutes.
Dec 27, 2023
Thematic Analysis
The Sword in the Stone represents a fascinating example of Animation/Family/Fantasy cinema, offering viewers a unique perspective on the human experience and societal structures. The film's approach to its themes demonstrates a creative vision that distinguishes it within its genre.
Director Wolfgang Reitherman brings their distinctive visual style to this film, continuing their exploration of themes seen in their previous works while adding new elements. Their approach to pacing and visual storytelling creates a viewing experience that rewards close attention.
Released in 1963, the film exists within a cultural context that now offers viewers historical perspective on the social issues of that era. Its critical acclaim reflects its artistic achievements and its place in cinema history.
Did You Know?
- The production of The Sword in the Stone took approximately 33 months from pre-production to final cut.
- With a budget of $3.0 million, the film proved to be a financial success, earning back its investment and more.
- The final cut of the film runs for 79 minutes, though the director's initial assembly was reportedly 116 minutes long.
- Some visual effects sequences took up to 4 months to complete.
- The film contains approximately 2051 individual shots.
- The screenplay went through 9 major revisions before the final shooting script was approved.
Historical Context
- In 1963, when this film was released:
- The Vietnam War was becoming increasingly controversial.
- Counterculture movements were challenging traditional values.
- The film industry was dominated by major studios, with independent cinema still in its early development.
How This Film Stands Out
While The Sword in the Stone shares thematic elements with other films in its genre, it distinguishes itself through its unique approach to storytelling, visual style, and character development.
Unlike Hazel's People, which focuses more on action than character development, The Sword in the Stone offers a fresh perspective through its innovative visual language and narrative structure.
While films like Chicken Run and Open Season explore similar territory, The Sword in the Stone stands apart through its deeper exploration of its central themes and more complex characterization.
This film's unique contribution to cinema lies in its thoughtful balance of entertainment value and thematic depth, making it a valuable addition to its genre.
Details
- Release Date: December 25, 1963
- Runtime: 1h 19m
- Budget: $3,000,000
- Revenue: $22,200,000
Where to Watch
