Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp’s Adventure – Disneycember

That little puppy sounds like an awkward grown man, doesn’t he? Doug takes a look at Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp’s Adventure to see if the rest of the film is this uncomfortable.

About Doug Walker

Creator of 5 Second Movies, Nostalgia Critic, Bum Reviews and more.

24 comments

  1. glad you liked this one. but about the age thing, dogs age faster the humans, Scamp and Angel are teenagers in dog years, the whole one year in human, seven in dog is a myth. it’s more like ten to twenty dog years for the first two human ones and slows down to four for the rest of the dog’s life. it also depends on the dog’s breed.

    • Informative, but do we really to apply real world logic to a kids’ cartoon about dogs who speak the Queen’s English? There is such a thing as entertainment for entertainment’s sake, you know.

      Just repeat to yourself, “It’s just a cartoon, I should really just relax.”

      • well, Doug was taking it seriously first. and we can assume it works that way in the Lady and the Tramp universe since Lady went from a puppy to her first heat in a few months in the first film.

        • The Real Silverstar

          JOKE (n):

          1. Something said or done to evoke laughter and amusement.
          2. A mischievous trick; a prank.
          3. Something not to be taken seriously, a triviality.

          -Dude, you make it too easy.

  2. Wow, I was not expecting such a positive review of this one. While I find the animation to be really lovely and very similar to the original, the rest I find jarringly divergent from it. The original film was kind of low-key and understated, whereas this one was just too loud and goofy. I never found Scamp to be a particularly likeable character, either. I understand he’s young, but he’s so douchey and arrogant. Angel is okay, though kind of bland and generic. Too many annoying minor characters in my opinion. I don’t mind Tramp’s growth and maturity, mind you. I feel that his development from the first film to the second feels more organic than say Simba’s or Ariel’s, who were just shells of their former selves. And kudos to Jeff Bennet for matching Tramp’s original voice fairly well. But LADY, what have they done to you, girl?!

    What I really appreciate about the original film is how the animators showed everything from the dogs’ point of view. It was really bold and unique for the time. We were always situated at the dogs’ levels. Adult humans were almost only shown from the legs down (apart from a few Aunt Sarah scenes, as well as Tony and…I wanna say his partner was Joe?). You really felt drawn into the dogs’ world, looking at the human world from their point of view. And at times it was quite frightening – Lady escaping from the pet shop and nearly being run over by the huge cars, and subsequently running into the stray dogs in the alley. The climactic chase with the dog catcher’s carriage. The rained-out streets Trusty and Jock were wandering down which seemed so vast and disorienting. Pretty banal, everyday things to us humans, but from a dog’s level, really scary and threatening. But this film’s perspectives are so inconsistent. Sometimes, we’re at the dogs’ levels, and sometimes we see Jim Dear and Darling and other humans depicted entirely. The constant shifting between these two points of view makes it hard for me to be drawn in.

  3. Keep using that generic public domain music, Doug!

    • Do you realize he is using it so the video wouldn’t get copyrighted?

    • The Real Silverstar

      If you know a way he can use licensed music without getting a strike from the copyright bots, clue us in. Anyone who thinks making videos like these is easy has obviously never tried to make one.

    • First, I don’t get why you’re ragging on Doug for using public domain music when just about everyone on the internet does the exact same thing. Second, you do understand that licensed music costs money and that Doug would have to pay for the licensed music or risk getting a copyright strike, right? Professional musicians would also need to be paid for their services. I’m sure that Doug makes enough for a living, but he’s not a billionaire who can afford to hire an orchestra to individually score all of his videos, so if you know of a way that Doug can use licensed music without it costing him anything, please share.

      • “Doug would have to pay for the licensed music or risk getting a copyright strike” … more like he’d just have to get the copyright strike; there’s never been any way for people to legally license music for YouTube because YouTube doesn’t care about doing things legally, just doing what won’t get them sued.

  4. THANK GOODNESS! HE DIDN’T HATE IT! I personally think it’s better than the original because the new characters are more relatable, the songs are better, the animation is much better, the romance is better, and it focuses more on family than just a simple romance. The original is good too but I just ADORE this movie. So does this mean he considers this movie to be good or just okay like some of the others he’d reviewed? Also, Scamp and Angel could be teenagers, therefore still puppies. As for Buster, he’s either a pedophile or meant “My girl” as in his daughter or something. I don’t mind Scott’s voice because it’s pretty youthful sounding, along with Alyssa as Angel.

    • The Real Silverstar

      “THANK GOODNESS! HE DIDN’T HATE IT!”

      And even if he did, so what? That would be his opinion, which he’d be entitled to. One’s well-being shouldn’t hinge on whether or not a content creator shares your opinion on something.

      I come for the entertainment factor and to hear what these folks have to say about the entertainment they review, but I don’t build my mindset around their opinions; if I agree with them, cool, if I don’t, no big whoop.

      There’s no law saying that online personalities have to like or dislike something just because you do, nor does your world view have to change because someone on the internet has a differing opinion on a piece of work.

      • I know he’s entitled to his opinion, I always have to say that to people who complain about him on a website called Fanpop. I’m just showing that I’m happy that he didn’t hate it. Trust me, there are plenty of movies he has bashed that I personally love (Whether it be me thinking they’re genuinely good or guilty pleasures) and I’m still a fan of his. I may not agree with him all the time but I love his videos. I’m not going to hide my joy from him being positive about something I like but that doesn’t mean I think he should agree with everything I think because he is entitled to his opinion. I mean, there are even things in this review I disagree with but I’m fine with that because I do accept different opinions. So chill out!

  5. 3:41 Whoa, those ladies have some serious bow skills.

  6. You may think Doug is liking these. Don’t worry, the Double Hit of Cinderalla 2 and Hunchback of Notre Dame 2 will stop that immediately. With Peter Pan 2 likely to follow (Espicially when he learns THAT ONE somehow got a cinema release.)

    • Hate to break it to you (That’s a lie, I look forward to it) but he reviewed Peter Pan 2 (Actually called Return to Neverland) last year and he thought it was a good movie.

  7. Snorgatch Pandalume

    It’s been so long since I saw the first one I forgot it’s set around 1900. I thought it was set in the same period it was made.

  8. I didn’t know they made a Lady and the Tramp II. O.O Leave it to me to not have seen one of the only good DVD sequels. -_-

  9. I’m glad Doug found so many positive things to say about Lady and the Tramp 2, but, personally, I would have to disagree. I guess my main problem with the movie was that it was mind-numbingly predictable. At every point in the film, you knew exactly what each character was going to say, do, or be. Scamp would be the revel, Buster would be the bully, the junkyard dogs would be the comic relief, etc. It had zero original thought.
    Also, the animation tried very hard to look like the original, but, I have to agree with Nostalgia Chick here – it’s fascinating how the animators did not get the source material and its stylistic choices. Even though I was a kid at the time and could no get why it seemed off, it was very irritating. Faces, faces, too many faces. In fact, this family had a kid – why couldn’t this be an opportunity to refer to the style of the original? Have the dogs and the kid see the world from the same perspective, etc.
    Maybe, as a standalone movie, it would have worked, but, as a sequel to one of the most iconic Disney animated movies, it was painful.

  10. I thought this was just okay. The movie, not the review. This was more insightful than anything in the actual movie. It’s just forgettable for me. Well, “Lady And The Tramp” isn’t one of my favorite Disney movies. I still liked it more than you.

  11. thatchickwithlonghair

    Looks cute. :3 This was way more positive than Lindsay’s review. XD

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.