In 1985, Disney attempted to do a PG-rated swords-and-sorcery animated tale based on a good source material--Lloyd Alexander's CHRONICLES OF PRYDAIN. The resulting movie had a lot of winning things going for it--for one, the animation was impressive for its time, showcasing an early mixture of CG effects. A massive underscore by Elmer Bernstein (which remains one of the best for a Disney movie) substitutes singing characters here. In addtion, there are at least some well-defined (and created) characters, notably the young, inexperienced "pig-boy" Taran, the terrifying Horned King (voiced superbly by John Hurt) and of course the two "comic" characters, Gurgi (a Gollum-like character with a childlike innocence and more loyalty--and an equally cuddly voice) and Creeper (a great baddie sidekick for a villain).
And yet the movie is considered Disney's greatest failure. It is understandable to see why: for one, the movie flopped at the box office (in fact, it took more than 10 years after its theatrical debut to finally arrive on home video). Second, in trying to compress the five-volume "Chronicles of Prydain" into one movie, the story comes across as a little too overplotted and frustratingly leaves questions one is likely to have about its characters (and magic rules) unanswered. The third reason is that aside from the aforementioned quartet of Taran, the Horned King, Gurgi, and Creeper, the characters aren't as well defined or memorable as they could be. In particular, Princess Eilonwy (whose bitchiness from the novels has been noticeably toned down for the film) comes across as an underdeveloped heroine--her abrupt shift from berating Taran's boasting about who got them out of trouble to a quasi-romantic love interest felt jarring to me. The same, frustratingly, feels true for many of the other characters, even if some of them (Fflewdurr Flamm, an elderly minstrel whose harpstrings happen to snap every time he lies) are actually quite likeable and/or interesting (a trio of batty witches who hold the titular object).
But even with its flaws, THE BLACK CAULDRON is by no means Disney's worst animated feature (that prestigious title belongs to HERCULES and probably HOME ON THE RANGE). True, it is problematic, but I nonetheless enjoyed the movie and applaud the animators for painting a grim, gothic fantasy setting through art. If only the plotting and characters were better developed, it would've been a classic. I would definitely recommend reading the books to get a full experience on the universe Disney was struggling to portray but by all means try out the movie as well. It has a lot of high points and there are some great animation effects (notably when an army of skeleton warriors comes alive), even though it probably isn't one of Disney's best.
A word of caution to parents: this is probably not a good film for children to watch. THE BLACK CAULDRON was clearly rated PG for a reason--not anything in the way of graphic violence or profanity, but there are lots of scenes which do come across as nightmarish, especially those involving the Horned King.
As far as the DVD release goes, it's a bit sparse on the extras, but the slide-show feature on its production origins and spin-offs warrants the purchase alone. The visual transfer is well done (aside from a few film scratches and one period of dirt filter) and it sure beats watching a pan-and-scan version. The real star of the DVD, though is the Dolby Digital 5.1 sound mix. THE BLACK CAULDRON was originally mixed for six-track Dolby Surround, and the music by Elmer Bernstein comes across as brilliant and the dialogue separation is impeccable.
So there you have it, my impressions of this flawed yet grossly undervalued entry to the Disney animation cannon. True, it's far from perfect, but as long as you don't compare it to the books (and acknowledge that it was created at a time when the studio was in something of a slump), THE BLACK CAULDRON is enjoyable and leaps and bounds above the weakest animated films ever made.