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

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

Of all the Disney sequels I’ve reviewed so far Lady And The Tramp 2 seems to be the closest in spirit to the original. Now that’s not saying a ton seeing how I thought the original was only okay, but to be fair, I think it was meant to be kinda a smaller movie anyway. As soon as its sequel starts you’d swear you were in the exact same film: the animation is really top notch and looks eerily similar to the original. I don’t know why they throw all their effort into these Lady And The Tramp films – they’re just DOGS walking around, why would you make them look this good? But they do, and it’s beautiful to look at. The story itself ranges from generic, to actually kinda okay, but again, for a Lady And The Tramp movie, it’s not like I’m expecting anything spectacular here. The film takes place not even a year after the original: Lady and the tramp still had puppies and they seem to be a happy family, but one of them seems to get into a lot of trouble. That being Scamp, voiced distractingly so by Scott Wolf. Yeah, look at this thing, you’d expect a cute little kid voice to come out of it, something high pitched. But instead, what do we get? *twenty year-old puberty voice* “But I want to run wild, and free, like a REAL DOG!” GOD does that Not fit. *twenty year-old puberty voice* “I go wherever I want, do whatever I please!” You KNOW the only reason they went with this voice is so they can get a semi-celebrity in there and it just doesn’t work. But thankfully the rest of the voice actors aren’t that bad. As he wants to run away from home and join a bunch of junkyard dogs one of them, named Angel, played by Eliza Milano, takes him under her wing and shows him the ways of the outdoors. But things get tricky when Scamp doesn’t know where he belongs: in the home life or the outdoor life. It looks even trickier when it looks like Angel wants a home life, and even had a home life, but has had her heart broken many times before, AND even trickier when the leader of the junk yard dogs has it in for his father. Yeeeaaahhh sounds like a semi-reversal of the first film and not really too interesting – but, actually they did quite a bit with it. The pacing in this film is a lot slower than other Disney sequels and it’s very welcome. Much like the original there’s this real elegance and color to it: the backgrounds are just glowing! And when a character goes through something they don’t just say a line and then run away: they actually kinda sit there and let the moment sink in. The songs are actually rather fitting too – Okay, there’s an occasional lame lyric here and there but the style matches the time period perfectly. There’s even a Rag Time in it. And for these types of songs they’re actually done pretty well. Does it all work? No. There’s definitely the clichés that you can see coming, and certainly a groaner line here or there, and, I really didn’t get what age everybody was supposed to be. I mean, okay, Scamp is suppose to be a puppy but they get an adult voicing him. Well okay, maybe he’s still a little kid, but, Eliza Milano voices the other “maybe” puppy; they don’t really make it clear she’s a puppy, maybe she’s just a small dog, but there’s clearly a romance blooming between them. So okay, maybe she is a puppy, but then she talks about how she’s been in and out of five families. FIVE FAMILIES?? You can’t be that young and go through five families! But okay, give them benefit of the doubt: maybe she is, maybe she is still a puppy. The leader of the Junkyard dogs, CLEARLY AN ADULT, has the hots for her, always calling her ‘His Girl’ – How does this Work??? So yeah, little scenes like that and kinda a phoned-in climax make it lame at some points. But truth be told, I was actually kinda impressed with how much it felt like the original Lady And The Tramp: They DO try to make you feel something, they DO show the dilemmas the characters are going through, they Do take the time for it. I can’t really say it’s great cause I don’t think the first film or this one were meant to be really great – They’re supposed to be small, elegant, pleasant little movies. And okay there’s definitely problems that hold me back from liking it as much as the first one – – I mean the first one DID have a little more of an edge to it – but I think if you’re someone that actually wanted to see a sequel to Lady And The Tramp, this’ll do you fine. If this is a story you for some reason really wanted to see continued, I say check it out: it might be an adequate spinoff to dig your paws into.

About the author


  1. Do you think those Italian chefs got in trouble for repeatedly serving candlelight dinners to dogs in the back ally?

  2. The one thing that always drove me crazy about this movie, even as a little kid, was what the fuck breed is Buster. I mean, its not important but seriously, he looks like a Rottweiler but hes the same height as Tramp, who is a little Terrier mix. And yet, they're both the same size as an adult Old English Sheepdog, who is a very large breed. It's like Disney sequels are insulting childrens' intelligence by not even having correct heights and weights for actual dog breeds

  3. In human terms I would say scamp is teenager 16-17 angel young adult 21-23 and buster idolised tramp Nd was younger so like 30ish which explains how similar in age scamp and angel appear and the fact that the gap between angel and buster is greater

  4. The first movie ended around Christmas time and Scamp and his sister's were newborn puppies. This film is set around Independence day and they're still puppies. They should be full grown by then.

  5. Honestly, Doug's problem with Scamp's voice is actually the same problem I have with Vanellope in Wreck-It Ralph.

    She's clearly meant to be a little girl. So why is she voiced by Sarah Silverman? That 40 year-old woman's voice doesn't fit the character! There are plenty of child actors out there who would've worked just as well.

  6. You know I think maybe the reason Scott Wolff voiced Scamp was because he and Alyssa Milano who voiced Angel dated and were even engaged in 1993 before calling it off. So maybe they thought that since the actors dated, it would make the romance between the two leads more believable. But that's just me. What do you guys think?

  7. I never thought Buster had the hots for Angel. I always thought he kind of saw her as a protégé, something almost like a daughter but not quite. I mean, "that's my girl" can be said without the romantic implications.

  8. I agree with Doug on the voice acting. If the animals are supposed to be represented as young, shouldn't they be voiced by a kid?

  9. wait
    so the girl has a clearly an adult have thw hits for her a small romanxe with the lead
    where have I seen this before
    oh right!
    Jack and the cuokoo clock heart!

  10. Just realized that this is actually a sequel and not the first movie… what is my life. So then which ones the first movie?! ahhhh

  11. The first part of the story sounds like the first arc of warriors minus wanting to have an owner and in warriors theyre cats

  12. TheGoldenDunsparce Unfortunately, while this trend of having male adult voice actors voice little boys is less used in media, some movies and video games still used this unfitting idea.

    For example: Shadow the Hedgehog is CURRENTLY being voiced by Kirk Thornton, six words: HE DOES NOT FIT THE ROLE. Seriously, the dude is 60 years old, and Shadow physically looks 15, David and Jason back then were perfect voices for Shadow because he looks young, I hope in the future, Sonic Team would replace Kirk with Johnny Yong Botch, He would definitely fit the role as Shadow the Hedgehog.

  13. I Think Scamp's on puberty, or preteen (so kind 12), Angel a full-teenager (Maybe 14) oh and Buster a Young Adult. This could explain why he have a Hots for Angel.

  14. Okay this one is actually pretty decent, its not good but its not really that bad. I don't know something about Scamp not knowing where he belongs is kinda interesting.

  15. Looking at the age thing. When considering that sexual maturity starts at 6 months and is fully reached at 12 months, we are looking at a scamp who is probably in his mid-teens by human standards. So now that we have removed the chances of pedophilia a little bit, let's look at age comparisons. Ok, she is most likely a toy breed, she will live 15-19 years. Medium Mutt breeds have a life expectancy of 10-15 years. Let's say Scamp is one year old and we assume that living in a nice house like that will get him to the full 15. He is at 6.67% of his total life. Using that number, we can find that she would need to be 1.27 years old to be within the same percentage, she is most likely older so let's bump her up to two years old, she would be at about 11% of her expected lifespan. Let's say that the Junkyard might reach about twelve…if that. 1year=8.3% of his life, but let's say he's about 3. That means he has lived 25% of his life. When comparing to humans (I used 90 years) that would be around a 3 year gap for Scamp and the pom and a ten-year gap between the pom and the Junkyard dog. So, if scamp were 18, she would be 21, and the Junkyard dog would be 31. And… I had too much coffee….

  16. Dogs are considered an adult at 1 year of age the average life span of dogs is 12 too 20 years if shes 2 and scamp is 10 months it be the same as a 17 year old getting the hots for 20 year old buster is a doberman witch are bigger dogs is 3 years old its a 24 year old over controlling douche hitting on a 20 year old and all of this information would go over a 9 year old's head which is why they didn't say anything about it

  17. Ummm, There are way too many faces to be anywhere close to the original! I mean the first movie was mainly animated from a dog's perspective of the human world, with faces not being shown a lot mainly the hands. legs, and feet.

  18. Maybe Angel is at that age where it's okay for adult dogs to hit on her and have romantic feelings for a puppy? I did look up the "age of consent/puberty" on dogs, and it said that whether it's male or female, a puppy reaches it's puberty age at 6 months; mostly it's around a year. Plus, a year to humans is equal to 7 dog years.

  19. If it was like, teen dogs the Scamp voice would work. But I'm pretty sure they wouldn't be able to show a teenage dog distinctly enough for it to work

  20. According to the wiki, Angel is at least partially the same breed as Scamp. So unless she was bred with something smaller, she's probably a puppy too.
    It is technically possible as well that because Scamp was bred by Lady and Tramp, he's just a smaller dog and isn't going to grow much more. He might be closer to adulthood than babyhood, which would explain his voice actor. For my part, I always figured he was meant to be a teenager and not a kid given the plot of the movie is kinda icky if he's a baby.

  21. Some of the songs from this movie are addicting to listen to sometimes. Although, years ago Shadyvox did covers of two of these songs and I've been looking for them for years, does anyone know where they could find them?

  22. 6 Reasons I Hate Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp's Adventure
    1. They made Scamp kind of annoying and that was not voiced by a kid but voiced by adult instead
    2. The Original Characters were unlikeable such as Lady was barely got Any Screen Time and Tramp lies about his Past to his son
    3. Creepy Romance there was a one that pissed me off was when Scamp and Angel eats Spaghetti it doesn't feel like "Bella Notte" from the original film
    4. Crappy New Characters such as Buster he's a Lame and Poorly villain and Angel she's a Bratty character plus when her face looks at Scamp (Before they eats Spaghetti) it took me a Nightmare (This is why I hate her more than Scamp)
    5. I'm NOT Fine when people enjoyed this movie I DON'T GET IT !
    And 6. I Don't Own it Anymore
    These are my reasons why I hate this movie so much and this is My Second Least Favorite Disney Sequels

  23. Sine it’s been proven there in America, then it makes sense because Americans are really really really rejective

  24. There's a part where the other female junkyard dog who is an adult dog says she has a case of "puppy love" for Scamp so yeah the age thing is all weird

  25. I guess it kinda makes sense that the main junkyard dog likes angel even if she was a pup because once dogs are a year old they can technically breed although it's not at all recommend

  26. This movie is somewhere in the middle of the road for me. I've seen much worse than this, and Buster made for a decent villain.

  27. Is it just me, or does the animation look really fluid? Most direct-to-DVD stuff tends to look really cheap and have inconsistent frame rates, even if the animation looks refined and polished.

  28. This was the movie I watched over and over and over, over ALL OF THE OTHER FILMS THAT I HAD. I liked this better than the first, but that's only because I grew up with dogs, I loved dogs, and I still love dogs. This frickin movie, is great to me. It so weird, but like the songs are my favorite. They're cheesy as hell tho.

  29. Concidering Lady is a smaller dog, scamp is probably almost fully grown. Hes a mixed breed and its not like he will grow as big as tramp but only his sisters remaining Ladys size, they are not different breeds. And scamp is almost as big as lady already. And Angel looks like a pomeranian of some sort so shes an adult size too. Figure their human age would be 20 ish?

  30. Scott Wolf isn't a bad actor at all, but him voicing something that's meant to be young whereas he was in his late 20's at the time this movie was made? I just kept thinking that he was way in over his head for this role.

  31. There are a few things I felt you overlooked.

    In the original, all the characters were clearly dogs. They behaved as dogs and the people around them didn't expect anything else. Much of the movie would make sense even if the dogs didn't speak.

    In the sequel, you get the feeling that they're kinda humans trapped in a dog. Scamp get punished for "bad" behaviour that is actually not that bad considering he's a dog. Lady did far worse as a puppy herself!

    The original had a kind of more serious and adult feel over quite ordinary matters. The sequal had a much more goofy feel I don't really think fits

    The original revolved quite much about the humans and their family expanding

    In the sequal, the humans are nearly a bit… robot-like at times, where Lady and Tramp are seen as the true masters of the house

  32. How did Lady give birth to pedigree spaniels as well as mongrel dogs? I think she’s been going behind Tramps back

  33. I…always really loved scamp's voice 😅

    Found it charming but I was a little kid and I loved scamp's character so much.

  34. You could be that young and gone through five families. Shitty families take in and drop dogs within months, it’s possible

  35. Here are my thoughts on this movie:

    If you wish to go into this movie with hopes of seeing something very much in the spirit of the original Lady And The Tramp, prepare to be disappointed. Because while it has the same setting and designs, it’s a dramatically different product. The classy sophistication and nuanced Dogs-eye view of the world aren’t here. This is something more for the Disney Channel crowd than fans of the classic. The pacing is faster, there’s a heavier focus on slapstick, plus the misunderstandings between dogs and humans aren’t a focus anymore. Not to mention, the songs and music are more in tune with something like High School Musical, which doesn’t fit a movie set in the early 1900s at all! It actually makes quite the whiplash! There’s one or two songs that sound old-fashioned enough like the Junkyard Dogs’ song, but most of the numbers are more suitable for a 21st century musical. It’s strange how Disney chose this specific movie to be heavily modernised for a new generation, because that’s the staple of what it is; a turn-of-the-century period movie. Disney channel songs are not going to slide comfortably into the aesthetics of a film like this.

    What makes me really convinced by this sequel’s lack of interest in the original, is how the characters of Lady And The Tramp have such small parts for this sequel despite their names being in the title. Sure, Tramp has a running father-son plot in the film, but he’s a very different character now; playing the role of serious parent, very rarely showing that cool charm that we loved about him before. And Lady barely appears at all – contributing hardly anything as a character, being a very hands-off mother. This film likes the brand name appeal of the title it’s taking its inspiration from, but doesn’t seem that bothered about being a faithful sequel.

    Heck, much like Lion King 2, this sequel creates its own backstory into its narrative: the idea that Tramp was originally best friends with Buster, but betrayed him by no longer wanting to be a street dog. Where was Buster in the first film? I never saw him! Before he met Lady, Tramp wasn’t tied down to anyone at all, human or dog. He bounced between communities at his pleasure. He never even introduced the Junkyard Dogs to Lady while touring the streets, so they obviously weren’t that important. I do get that the movie wants to create some kind of rivalry between Tramp and Buster, but it’s done in a way that ignores its canon.

    With Jim Dear and Darling’s baby no longer being a narrative focus, this sequel’s romance becomes a bigger plot line; and while Angel and Scamp’s relationship isn’t exactly mature or deep, it’s certainly a cute kind of puppy love that will make audiences go “Aww!” There’s a lot of time spent on their chemistry, and even though their romance isn’t as compelling as Lady and Tramp’s scenes together in the first film, you can maybe see some charm to their innocence. I also totally understand why kids would love this film; it puts them in Scamp’s shoes by letting them fantasise about running away from home to a messy place filled with toys and no rules. I completely get why children would find that appealing, as there’s an age where there are so many limitations and restrictions, but they have such free spirits and wild imaginations.

    However, I’ll admit that one of the film’s biggest flaws is Scamp himself though. He’s a spoiled brat who spends most of the Movie whining, being cocky and only thinking about what he wants. Yes, puppies can be annoying, but there’s a point where a young character becomes too irritating. A line needs to be drawn when writing these kinds of characters if you want audience empathy. I understand why some people might like him; he’s very bouncy, youthful and has a cute design, plus he does heroically save Angel in one scene. But he’s always rubbed me the wrong way. I never felt sorry for him, and thought he lacked the natural fun charm of his dad. Scamp’s character does serve the film’s message of appreciating your loved ones and the safe, warm home that they provide you with, but I’ve just wished that they used a character that wasn’t too annoying to spend time with.

    I felt very differently about Angel; she’s a far more likeable character than Scamp. She can stand up for herself with a feisty attitude, but she can also be one of the more sympathetic and compassionate junkyard dogs. She sees the uncorrupted innocence of Scamp and genuinely wants to protect him from the harsh life of being homeless – but she’s also not afraid to point out how ungrateful he’s being. For example:

    Scamp: ”Gosh, I didn’t think they’d miss me that much.”
    Angel: ”You didn’t think they’d miss you? I can’t believe you’d run away from a home like this.”

    I did feel sad that she’s gone from home to home, never once staying in the same family and feeling like she was never loved. I never cared about what would happen to Scamp, but I did want Angel to find a happy home.

    Buster makes for a decent antagonist, posing as a scary threatening dog, but also having the cunning smarts to manipulate the vulnerable Scamp. You can tell that he’s very prideful and possessive, which is why he’s so aggressive towards anyone who leaves him. And keeps calling Angel his girl, even though she isn’t. I just wish that he was given an actual reason for his motivations – because without one, he’s just a jerk for the sake of being a jerk.

    The junkyard dogs are the most forgettable characters in the film. They’re all very flat ad underdeveloped. I can’t even remember their names – they’re that mediocre and uninteresting. I didn’t get attached to any of them. I think that their lack of development takes away a lot from the film, as they’re supposed to be the heart of the junkyard dog community – the very culture Scamp’s adventure is set in.

    While it is quite a jump to see Tramp suddenly being a mature and sensible parent with strict disciplinary values when he was a far more relaxed and cool character in the original, I did emphasise with his struggles as a dad. Scamp is being a complete nightmare, a real ungrateful troublemaker; I can see why Tramp is struggling to be loving and responsible as a parent. It must be hard! Plus, Tramp has a history of families kicking him out, so he’s probably terrified of what Jim Dear and Darling would do if Scamp keeps acting up.

    Visually, Lady And The Tramp 2 isn’t half-bad looking. It doesn’t have the same magnificent animation quality as the original, but at least it doesn’t look like a cheap television cartoon like most Disney sequels. However, the energy and pacing have been amped up – so expect the animation to be sillier and more cartoony. There’s not really any intellectual creativity in the animation, because the movie wants to be as fast-paced and upbeat as possible. Yes, this wacky style might keep kids interested, but anyone can make a child focus on constant movement; it’s not exactly a challenging effort that deserves praise. Sure, there are quiet scenes now and again that are each handled with a calm tone, the animation overall is mainly very active and energetic. Not even in a comedically imaginative way, but most likely because they’re afraid of boring kids. I have nothing against physical comedy in children’s films – kids love slapstick! But they deserve good slapstick, not mindless antics.

    Now, I mentioned that the film’s original songs don’t exactly fit the movie, which I stand by. But they’re not exactly bad musical numbers – just not very interesting or catchy. I’ve actually forgotten them all already, and I’ve only just watched the film this morning! That’s really saying something! The songs are cute, harmless and have nice meanings to them, they’ll make some audiences smile, and they do their parts in the story just fine. But I personally wasn’t that bothered by them – none of them brought any strong emotions out of me.

    To conclude, I think that Lady And The Tramp 2 is a downgrade from what we’ve got from the original. It replaces sophistication, class and subtlety with over-the-top slapstick and safe Disney sequel cliches. I’d say it’s okay at best; a cute puppy love romance with decent moral values and nice art designs. It’s one of the more watchable Disney sequels, but it still retains most common criticisms made against Disney straight-to-video movies. I understand that this film has its fans and if you love this movie, then that’s totally fine with me. I’m not judging you. But I personally feel lukewarm about it, and don’t like how it abandons the good things that made the first film work; as if it’s ashamed of what it’s based on, and doesn’t trust that kids today will appreciate a slow pace or clever sentiments about the dog’s eye view.

  36. The original was my number 1 favorite disney movie. And I thought the sequel was decent. Not the first one, but a decent follow up to it.

  37. In my opinion the reason Disney makes these Lady and the Tramp movies so good is because it centres around Walt's childhood. Let me explain if you look at the houses and streets in the movie they it remind you of that victorian Americano age, since Walt was a child around that time probably he wanted to make a film that was personal to him and that is what the original and sequel feel like.If Walt was still alive he would've loved this movie.

  38. Maybe Angel and Scamp are supposed to be teens at this point (in human years). And as for the leader dog calling Angel his girl, is it really that uncommon for a douchy full-grown man to wanna hook up with a young teenage girl

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *