That flight scene is animated so beautifully! I loved it

Not bad for a Disney sequel. Considering I don't like the original film all that much, I wasn't expecting anything from 'The Rescuers Down Under'. For the most part, I was right. However, relatively speaking this is decent. It does feel like a retread for the majority, but there's enough new stuff to at least appreciate minorly. It's also good that Bob Newhart (Bernard) and Eva Gabor (Miss Bianca) returned, even thirteen years on from 'The Rescuers'. John Candy is a terrific addition, arguably giving the most memorable performance across both productions as Wilbur. This one does have improved comedy and a solid score, to be fair. The story just isn't thrilling enough and feels too similar to the one featuring six-year-old Penny. It isn't anything terrible though, which is a positive given what I mentioned higher up.

Walt Disney delivers a rather pathetic and unimpressive animated film in The Rescuers sequel, The Rescuers Down Under. This time RAS dispatches a team to rescue a child in Australia who’s been kidnapped by a poacher looking for a rare breed of eagle. The story is complete garbage and doesn’t make a bit of sense. Still, the cast features some great talent, such as George C. Scott, Bob Newhart, and John Candy, who give it their all in their performances. But as strong as the performances are, they can’t make up for the poor storytelling and senseless plot. The Rescuers Down Under is a lazy and unremarkable Disney film that’s poorly made.

It's a nice movie, really good animation and engaging story.

I had never seen it and I enjoyed it more than the previous one. The story is interesting and entertaining.