[#MovieReview] #Disney Animation Marathon Review Part 21: "#TheFoxandtheHound" - An Undeniable Masterpiece That Deserves More Recognition [#Podcast Episode Introduction]

"Reel Friends in Tokyo" is a movie review podcast hosted by personalities Mako and Oma. In this note, we delve into the hit movies, masterpieces, and even cult classics featured in the podcast, exploring behind-the-scenes stories, personal deep dives, and supplementary information for our listeners from our unique perspectives.

Each time, we summarize the key points of the talk and discussion from the podcast, our own unique observations, honest talk that sometimes goes off-track, and personal movie reviews into an article. Whether you are a listener or not, please relax and enjoy.

You can listen to the latest episode of the show here ↓

Chapter 1: The Problem of Being Too Unknown

1.1 A work that forces you to be prepared for the question, "What's that?"

When trying to talk about **The Fox and the Hound**, the first thing you cannot avoid is this phrase: "What's that?"

Even though we are talking about Disney, the conversation stops. There are no princesses. There is no magic. There is no development where emotions are pushed through by musical numbers. This work is placed in a position surprisingly far from the generally shared "Disney-ness."

The reason for its low recognition in Japan is clear. First, the title is too plain. "Fox" and "Hound." It is not symbolic or poetic; it is just words that list the relationship as it is. The visuals are also plain. There is no castle, no exotic atmosphere. What is depicted is just a forest, a farm, and hunting—landscapes that are too close to reality.

Furthermore, what is decisive is that this story is not an "adventure tale." It does not save the world. It does not defeat evil. The characters grow, but the scale does not expand. Rather, as they grow, the world is divided by their positions and roles. As a Disney work, it is quite unusual and quite unfriendly.

1.2 Why is this work "hard to choose"?

What many audiences are looking for in Disney is a story they can feel safe with. If you work hard, you will be rewarded; if you are right, you will be saved; and in the end, you can laugh in the same place. When measured against that frame of expectation, this work is too unsettling.

Here, I would like to quote the words of the 19th-century British thinker John Lubbock.

Borrowing these words, many people go to Disney works looking for "dreams." But what this work offers is not a dream. It is a premonition. And a very unpleasant one at that. Friendship may not last. Growth may destroy relationships. Making the right choice may not necessarily guarantee a happy ending.

Such feelings are too sincere for entertainment. That is why this work is hard to talk about. It doesn't get people excited. It's hard to get into rankings. As a result, it has been relegated to the position of an "unknown Disney work."

1.3 Low recognition and perfection are unrelated

But I want to make it clear here: low recognition and the perfection of a work are completely different things. Instead of asserting itself flashily, this work is the type of movie that quietly enters the viewer's life.

It does not give intense catharsis while watching it. But it stays with you after you finish watching. A few years later, you suddenly remember it in a completely different context. When you become estranged from a friend from your student days, when you can no longer communicate due to differences in work or status, or the moment you realize you can no longer return to the same place, this story suddenly stands up with clear outlines.

This is a movie that touches those layers of memory. It is natural that it is not popular. But that is not a flaw. Rather, it can be said that it is a work intentionally designed to have intense meaning only at certain phases of life.

That is why I assert: the reason this work has low recognition is not because the work is inferior. It is just that the viewer has not yet reached the point where they need this story.

Chapter 2: Synopsis

2.1 Friendship contains its end from the beginning

The Fox and the Hound is unsettling from the very start of the story.
A mother fox living in the forest loses her life to a human hunt. The orphaned fox kit, Tod, is accidentally rescued by a human woman, Widow Tweed, and raised on her farm. At this point, the film clearly draws a line. Nature and human, wild and managed, the protector and the hunter. That boundary remains unshaken from the beginning.

Around the same time, a hound puppy named Copper is also being raised by human hands. Tod and Copper meet as young beings unaware of their positions or roles, and they foster a friendship simply by playing together. What matters to them is not their species or their roles. It is only whether they are having fun or not.

But the audience knows. They know the fact that once they grow up, the fox and the hound will be placed in an adversarial relationship. The story proceeds without hiding that inevitable future at all.

2.2 Growing up is the reorganization of relationships

Time passes, and Tod and Copper grow up. With growth, their world does not expand; rather, it becomes fixed by their roles. Tod is returned to the forest as a wild fox, and Copper is trained as a hunting dog. The friendship that was once innocently forged is gradually torn apart by the difference in their positions.

What is important here is that no one betrayed anyone. There is no malice. Their choices are, in a sense, correct. Tod has no choice but to live as a fox, and Copper has no choice but to live as a hound. This is not an ethical conflict, but a structural one.

This structure applies directly to human society as well. Growing up is not about gaining more freedom. In many cases, it is a process where roles are assigned, expectations are shouldered, and the number of places one cannot return to increases. This film does not blur that reality at all.

2.3 The cruel perspective held only by the audience

What makes this story cruel is that Tod and Copper foster their friendship without knowing the future. They do not know the rupture that will eventually come. Only the audience knows.

Here, I would like to recall the following words by the philosopher Spinoza.

It is precisely because they do not know the future that they are free. However, the audience is not free. We must continue to watch their innocent time while anticipating the ending. This asymmetrical perspective forms the emotional core of this film.

If you only follow the synopsis, it is an extremely simple story. Meeting, parting, and walking their respective paths. That is all. But within that simplicity, growth and rupture, friendship and roles, and freedom and inevitability are packed without excess or deficiency.

While pretending to tell a story, this work presents the very structure of life itself. That calmness and sincerity will reveal themselves more clearly in the following chapters.

Chapter 3: Goodbye to the Love Story

3.1 The moment Disney once removed romance from the main axis

There is one point that cannot be avoided when discussing this work.
Romance barely exists in this film.

To be precise, it is not that there are no elements of affection for the opposite sex or pairing. But it is not placed at the center of the story. The golden pattern that Disney has polished for many years—"falling in love, trials, and getting together"—is intentionally pushed to the sidelines here.

In its place, friendship is established. And not just any temporary friendship. It is a friendship that is known from the very beginning to be inevitably destroyed by growth. The pairing of a fox and a hound is not a coincidence of cuteness. They are set up as beings who cannot remain in the same world.

The friendship depicted here is not something that can be protected through effort. It is not something that persists just because you care for the other person. Rather, it is portrayed as a relationship that breaks down even when neither party has done anything wrong. This coldness is not only un-Disney-like, it is quite exceptional.

3.2 The cruelty inherent in the theme of friendship

Compared to romantic or family relationships, friendship has extremely weak social guarantees. There are no contracts, nor is there any institutional backing. Whether it lasts depends heavily on environment, time, and circumstances. This film does not romanticize that instability in the slightest.

The ethicist Aristotle states the following about friendship in his "Nicomachean Ethics."

However, he also states that friendship only persists when both parties share the same virtues and way of life. In other words, if one's way of life changes, the friendship naturally dissolves. That is exactly what is happening in this film. Tod and Copper have not become enemies. Their paths in life have simply diverged.

From this perspective, the story of this film is by no means a tragedy. Rather, it is realistic to an extreme degree. Friendship is noble, but it is not omnipotent. It is far too fragile to bear the weight of one's entire life. The fact that Disney depicted this reality head-on is what makes this work so extraordinary.

3.3 Why this choice strikes so deep

The reason this film leaves many viewers with an inexplicable pain is that friendship is not denied. The friendship truly existed. It had meaning. It was not a lie. That is precisely why its end is so painful.

Here, I would like to recall the words of the author and theologian C.S. Lewis.

It is unnecessary for survival, but essential for enriching life. That is what friendship is. This film does not deny that unnecessary but very real thing until the very end. Just because it broke does not mean it was meaningless. This attitude prevents the film from ending as merely a bitter story.

The choice not to depict a romance must have been a huge gamble for Disney. But as a result, this work succeeds in depicting growth and parting head-on. By stripping away the sweetness, the remaining emotions are sharp and linger in the heart for a long time.

It is not a story that says goodbye to friendship.
It is a story that quietly affirms a world where one cannot live on friendship alone.

Chapter 4: The opening hook is amazing

4.1 The resolve to kill a parent at the very beginning

This film grabs you by the collar right from the start. The scene where the protagonist Tod's parents are attacked by hunters is dropped in with almost no preamble. You could call it cruel, but the point here is not just to show a shocking image. By placing this event at the beginning, the film declares to the audience that it is a serious story. It is not a work to be watched with a smile. It is a work to be watched with the premise that something in your heart will ache.

If we use the motif of "death by hunting," Bambi inevitably comes to mind. However, in the case of Bambi, the buildup to that point is long, and the audience's concentration is easily dispersed. In contrast, this film fixes the center of gravity of the story from the start by showing a core part of it immediately. The existence of Tod carries "loss" from the beginning. It makes you understand that in one stroke through the visuals. This is quite clever as a composition.

Ethically speaking, this is also a technique that does not allow for the audience's moral indifference. It refuses to let you consume it without thinking. It forces you to realize that you are not watching a story about cute animals, but a world governed by violence. In other words, this introduction is not cruel; it is sincere.

4.2 The opening blow determines how the story is read

The effect of the opening shock is not merely to raise the tension. It causes every casual scene that follows to take on a different meaning. This is because the audience learns right at the start that "people die in this world." In other words, every cheerful scene from this point on becomes a form of happiness viewed by someone who already knows the ending.

In the field of religious studies, there are discussions regarding this "perspective of having already known the end." Those who know the end cannot innocently enjoy the present. This applies not only to religious eschatology but to human experience itself. From the moment one realizes the possibility of loss, happiness simultaneously harbors fear. That is why, in this film, even the early scenes of cute friendship feel somewhat heart-wrenching.

I believe this effect is less a simple storytelling technique and more a technique for leading the audience's emotions to an ethical place. It does not make you cry comfortably. It does not make you laugh comfortably. It leads your emotions in a direction that makes you question, "Is this really okay?" In that sense, this opening is not just a hook; it is the very philosophy of the film.

Here, if I may borrow words from literature, a famous passage by Ernest Hemingway fits perfectly.

Tod is broken from the very beginning. And he has no choice but to live while carrying those broken places. This work hands that reality to the audience in an instant at the very beginning. That is precisely why every single story beat from here on out cannot simply be dismissed as just cute.

Chapter 4: The opening hook is amazing

4.1 The resolve to kill a parent at the start

This film grabs you by the collar right from the start. The scene where the protagonist Tod's parents are attacked by a hunt is depicted with almost no preamble. While shocking, the important point here is that surprising the audience is not the goal itself. Through this blow, the film clearly declares that it is a serious story. It says: This is not a cute animal movie. This is a story about a world where the act of living is adjacent to violence.

As a work that also depicts death by hunting, one inevitably thinks of Bambi. However, in the case of Bambi, the run-up to that point is long, and it takes time for the tone of the story to settle. On the other hand, this film presents a part of the core at the very beginning, instantly fixing the center of gravity of the story. The existence of Tod carries loss from the start. It hammers that premise home through visuals rather than explanation. This structural decision is extremely calm and cruelly honest.

From an ethical perspective, this is also a method that does not allow for audience indifference. It does not let you consume it as "cute" or "fun." It forces you to understand that you are now looking at a reality where violence defines the world. The cruelty depicted here is not sensationalism, but the very structure of the world itself.

4.2 The opening blow determines how emotions are read

The greatest effect of the opening event is that it changes the meaning of every scene that follows. The audience learns at the start that "death occurs in this world." As a result, the cheerful scenes of friendship depicted thereafter can no longer be accepted as innocent happiness. Precisely because they are fun, one senses that they will be lost.

In religious studies, the perspective of those who have known the end is often discussed. Those who know the end cannot fully enjoy the present. This is a structure that applies to human experience in general, not just religious eschatology. From the moment one knows the possibility of loss, happiness inherently contains fear. This film forces that state upon the audience.

Here, the words of Ernest Hemingway come to mind.

Tod is already broken at the start of the story. And he has no choice but to live while holding onto that broken state. This film hands that fact to the audience without a moment's hesitation. That is why any peaceful scene depicted after this does not end as just cute. Everything rises up as happiness established upon a broken world.

Chapter 5: The knack of making cheerful scenes feel sad

5.1 The perfection of animation that makes cuteness possible

In the early part of the story, the scenes where Tod and Copper play innocently are, frankly, very good. The way the animals move, jump, tumble, and direct their gazes—all of it avoids excessive deformation while retaining the vitality of living creatures. The animation techniques for animals that Disney has cultivated over many years are demonstrated here with extremely high precision.

What is important is that these depictions do not function merely as a source of comfort. The audience naturally smiles. It feels like watching children play from a parent's perspective. But at the same time, there is a nagging feeling somewhere. It's cute. It's fun. But this relationship won't last long. That premonition permeates every corner of the visuals.

The cheerfulness depicted here is a happiness that can only be enjoyed by those who do not know the future. Neither Tod nor Copper knows what kind of beings they will become. They are just happy to be together. They are living in a time where that is enough. This ignorance is not stupidity. Rather, it is a necessary condition for living.

5.2 The structure where the title destroys happiness

However, the audience is different. The audience knows the title. The Fox and the Hound. The moment these two words are placed side by side, one can imagine where the relationship will end up. That is precisely why we cannot wholeheartedly celebrate their happy time.

This is where the overly descriptive and overly complete title comes into play. There are no metaphors or decorations. It is just words that present the relationship. That casts a shadow over the entire story. The more enjoyable the scene, the more the audience's heart tightens. Because we can see the end behind the smiles.

In the context of religious studies, this is close to the time before the expulsion from paradise. Those who do not know sin can be happy, but those who have an external perspective can no longer fully assimilate into that happiness. The audience is placed in a position of having seen the snake from the beginning. Therefore, this cheerfulness is directly converted into sadness.

5.3 The awesomeness of establishing happiness and tragedy at the same time

The greatness of this work lies in the fact that it establishes happy scenes and tragic premonitions at the same time. It does not lean toward one or the other. It doesn't make you feel at ease just because it's cute, nor does it push you away just because it's sad. That balance leaves the viewer with complex emotions.

This brings to mind the words of the philosopher Søren Kierkegaard.

Tod and Copper are living forward. But the audience is forced to understand backward. This gap in perspective is what creates the emotional intensity of this work. Happiness certainly existed. But when looking back on it later, it is always accompanied by pain. This work depicts that kind of happiness without any deception.

It is precisely because there are cheerful scenes that this story becomes cruel. And it is precisely because it has the resolve to accept that cruelty that this work quietly transcends the framework of being for children.

Chapter 6: The choice not to have a clichéd happy ending

6.1 The ending of choosing separate paths

The end of The Fox and the Hound does not lead to a typically Disney-esque "miraculous reconciliation." As an audience, we inevitably hope for it. We wonder if the two, who have grown up to be enemies, will understand each other at the very last moment and return to the same place. But this work intentionally betrays that expectation.

What is depicted in the ending is not a complete restoration of the rift. Tod returns to the forest and chooses to live as a wild fox. Copper chooses to live with humans as a hound. The two do not deny each other's existence. They do not say their friendship was a lie. But they quietly accept that they cannot live in the same place.

What is important here is that this choice is not depicted as a "compromise" or a "defeat." Both are the result of accepting the roles given to them, and in that sense, it is an honest decision. This work depicts head-on the reality that sometimes life can be destroyed if friendship is prioritized.

6.2 The ethics that happiness is not singular

This ending is quite unusual for a Disney film. This is because it does not consolidate the form of happiness into one. Usually, it is presented as "happiness" for everyone to gather in the same place and share the same values. But this work acknowledges that there are multiple forms of happiness.

Here, I would like to refer to Aristotle's ethics. In his "Nicomachean Ethics," he argued that human good is not a single act, but is established as a way of living as a whole. To live well is not to choose the same actions, but to do one's best under each respective set of conditions.

From this perspective, the choices made by Tod and Copper are both good. It is not that one is right and the other is wrong. It is simply that their conditions of life are different. This film presents this ethical pluralism as a story without explaining it at all. That attitude is surprisingly mature.

6.3 The courage to affirm not being together

Many stories about friendship place value on "still being together." But the path this film chose was to affirm "not being together." The friendship remains. The memories remain. But their lives do not intersect. This sense of distance is all too close to real life.

Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman viewed human relationships since the modern era as "liquid." Relationships are not fixed and easily change shape due to changes in roles or environments. What is important in that context is not to try to force relationships to be fixed. The ending of this film embodies exactly that.

The parting depicted here is not a rupture. It is the setting of a sustainable distance. If they were to force themselves to be together, one of them would break. Understanding that, they take their distance. This judgment is a kind of kindness that can only be understood after becoming an adult.

Because it rejected a sweet happy ending, this story does not lie. Even if everything does not wrap up neatly, life goes on. The way it continues can be different for everyone. The fact that Disney was depicting that obvious truth head-on in that era is, looking back now, almost unbelievable.

Chapter 7: A work you should rewatch precisely because you are an adult

7.1 This is not a story of growth, but a story of divergence

This work is not a story that celebrates growth. To be precise, it neither affirms nor denies growth itself. It simply, calmly depicts the irreversible divergence that growth brings. The time and emotions shared in childhood were certainly true, but that does not guarantee the future. Growth is not just the expansion of possibilities, but also the process by which the paths not taken are finalized.

Many stories depict growth as a straight line. If you work hard, you reach heights, and past relationships are preserved even as they change shape. This film quietly discards that fantasy. Relationships are not always preserved. In fact, it is sometimes more natural that they are not. In that it depicts that reality without making anyone the villain, this work is strangely mature.

Here I would like to quote the words of philosopher Hannah Arendt.

Forgiveness in this story is not about forgiving the other person. It is not about forgiving the past. It is the forgiveness of accepting the changed relationship as it is. The quiet sense of distance depicted in the final part of the film embodies exactly that attitude.

7.2 Things that were not visible in childhood

If you watched this work as a child, many elements might have passed you by. It might have left only a somewhat vague impression as a story about cute animals playing and eventually drifting apart. That is by no means a misreading. It was just not necessary yet.

As an adult, this story suddenly takes on concreteness. Schooling, employment, marriage, moving. At every milestone in life, people who were once close gradually become distant. We later understand that this distance is not the result of someone's betrayal or negligence, but simply the result of choices. This film gives words to that understanding.

Sociologist Pierre Bourdieu showed that human choices are largely defined not only by individual will but by the structure in which one is placed. No matter how sincere you are, there are times when you cannot remain in the same place. What this film depicts is precisely that structural parting.

7.3 The reason it is worth rewatching now

This work does not comfort the viewer. But it does not betray them either. Instead of giving sweet hope, it offers a perspective for coming to terms with reality. Friendship is precious. But you cannot live on that alone. Even so, it does not mean the friendship was a lie. In fact, there are very few stories that make these two things coexist.

The poet Alfred Tennyson once wrote the following:

This film does not depict the sentimental side of these words. It portrays the fact that having loved and formed a friendship continues to quietly support one's life thereafter. Even if you are no longer together, that time does not become meaningless. It remains not just as a memory, but as a part of how you live.

It is not flashy. There are few legendary scenes that are constantly retold. However, when you reach a certain point in life, this work definitely takes on meaning. That is why I want to say: this is not just a hidden masterpiece for children. It is a quiet, sincere film that you can only truly face once you have become an adult.

Podcaster Mako (@_macobana) brings the movie discussions that couldn't be fully covered on the main channel "Pocket ni Numa wo" (#PokeNuma) to a dedicated channel in the solo podcast program "#YomoyamaKobanashi" (#MakoBana).

There is no end to the movies I want to talk about!

Episodes will be released weekly or bi-weekly.

Please share your thoughts by tweeting with #ReelPal .

The tweets we receive may be featured on the show.

Click here for the theme talk submission form↓

For direct messages, please send them here↓

yomoyamakobanashi@gmail.com

Thank you for your continued support of the show.