I used to watch the Sword in the Stone quite a number of times as a kid, and I know why later on in my years. It's actually quite a fun little movie considering its a quasi-history lesson on how Arthur (aka 'Wart') became King of England. It includes Merlin, and his 'educated Owl' Archamedes, and a whole lot of wacky adventures trying to get Arthur, who can't read or write, into a mode of thought higher than how he's been raised. For a Disney film, as well, it's also quite the quotable film at times, with some lines and situations still sticking out in my mind years later. For example, the sequence involving Arthur and Merlin as squirrels in the trees, and a small lesson in love (or lack thereof) a lady squirrel presents in the face of danger. Or the story involving Arthur as a bird, trapped in the clutches of Madamn Mim (maybe one of the funniest sequences in any Disney movie).

So, as one can figure from what I've described (if you haven't seen the film yet),it's fairly over-the-top, loaded with silly-songs (one of which a true charmer involving Merlin's proclivity for organizing a packing up of his house) and little lessons for kids. But it actually is also funny for adults too, I'd guess, or at least funny to watch along with the kids. It may not be in the absolute peek of the period in Disney films (one may try to look to the Jungle Book or Winnie the Pooh for that, or the underrated Aristocats),however I sometimes come back to this film in my mind. It has a catchy attitude that made being in the 'dark ages' as fun as possible- Archamedes in particular is maybe one of the great side-characters in any Disney film.

Alakazam!

"The Sword in the Stone" is a film that most children will enjoy. However, if you were to ask 100 random kids what their favorite Disney cartoons were, I would probably have a heart attack if even a single kid said "The Sword in the Stone". It's enjoyable enough to watch--but also lacks anything endearing that would make it truly memorable. While there's really nothing to hate about the film, there really isn't a lot that stands out either. The animation is 1960s style Disney-- which means a rougher style due to cost-cutting measures. Instead of huge armies of animators, many were fired and the use of Xerox machine was introduced. It saved money but also gave the films a slightly rougher look. The music is also enjoyable but nothing in it is memorable. And as for the story, it's nice...and nice is a term you don't use with a film that is a classic. Overall, worth seeing but nothing more.

The king has died and no one can agree on the right king for England. A miraculous sword appear in London stuck in an anvil and stone. It comes with an inscription proclaiming the man who pulls the sword will be the new king. Many try but nobody succeeds. The Sword in the Stone becomes forgotten as the land fall into a dark age. Merlin the wizard has plans for the young orphan Arthur.

The animation is classic hand-drawn style. It has an old-style charm that is reminiscent of TV cartoons of that era. It's educational at times. It's pretty light weight humor. The story is pretty thin. It doesn't put in enough time for a compelling villain. It also suffer for not having a beautiful princess or an interesting lead. Arthur is too flimsy to be a compelling child character. Merlin and Archimedes are really the only fascinating characters. It's also missing any great songs. The best part of the movie is the transformational battle between Merlin and Mim.