We thought Disney was going on the right track with the Princess and the Frog, until we find out that their film is going to be CG-animated instead of the ever so beautiful 2D animation. Apparently, the Princess and the Frog didn't do well in the box office as Disney thought it would, and zaggy14 told me it's because of the male audience, or it may be because of Avatar. So anyway, this marks as Dsiney's 50th animated film, and you would think they would do something special about it. While the film wasn't as good as the Princess and the Frog, it did made Rapunzel as my new favorite Disney Princess, you know who you are. So let's discuss about the now-released film shall we?
-
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
Tangled
- Thread starter Dattebayo
- Start date
Kutie Pie
"It is my destiny."
Wait, did the movie JUST come out O_O?
Actually, I heard that even though The Princess and the Frog didn't do well at the box office, it had rather positive reviews with both critics and audience. In fact, I even heard that Tangled is their last CGI film and then they're going back to 2-D films, because that's where the famous Disney magic lies (and let's face it, Disney hadn't really been making great 3-D films, though Bolt was WAY better than the two previous ones, they should have just left it for Pixar). Their next 2-D film is the new Winnie the Pooh film coming out next year, if you haven't heard.
I have of yet to watch Princess and the Frog, so I don't know why I'm even mentioning it, but from many people, all I heard about the film were positive feedback, and it just makes me want to see it even more. Your last sentence proves it, Dattebayo. Disney is WAY better at making traditional animated films than 3-D. It's a shame that the last one before Princess and the Frog wasn't a very good one (Home on the Range eew >_>), but it's even much more of a shame the Disney Renaissance had to end at Tarzan. Why can't we have a second one? Princess and the Frog is the hope that 2-D will still survive in a world of 3-D, and I think that's true. (Actually, found that they have one other 3-D movie to go. FFFFUUUU-)
DreamWorks, had they decided not to go with 3-D films all this time, would have still been making 2-D films. In fact, maybe Shrek was originally going to BE in 2-D, but they decided to go ahead and try again at 3-D (anyone remember Antz by any chance?).
Also, found this on Wikipedia:
[QUOTE="Wikipedia's page on the Walt Disney Animation Studios]On November 24, 2010, Disney's 50th animated feature film, Tangled, the studios first fully-CGI fairy-tale, was released. Shortly after the film's release, Ed Catmull said that the "princess" genre of films was taking a hiatus until, "someone has a fresh take on it … but we don't have any other musicals or fairytales lined up." He explained that they were looking to get away from the princess era due to the changes in audience composition and preference.[/QUOTE]
But Disney, we've had almost ten full years without a new Disney princess! You can't do this to us!
Besides that, it's understandable. My Cinema History teacher actually told us today that we need more storytellers in the movie business, (preferably more females, blacks, Asians, et cetera) since all it is are just old white guys writing them right now.
Anyway, I'm rambling, to cut this short, I sincerely hope Disney will return to its old ways of bringing out 2-D films (with the occasional 3-D movie, they have been getting better). We would really appreciate it.
While it's true that the Princess and the Frog had positive feedback from critics, but it's the box office that matters for all movies in general, and I'm afraid that the box office failure is what sealed the 2D animation's fate. I'll be waiting for the new Winnie the Pooh movie to fail at the box office as well to prove my point.
Kutie Pie
"It is my destiny."
Not necessarily. If an audience wants more, box office or not, they'll do it. Money-wise, if you look at Princess and the Frog, the amount they received world-wide was enough to pay off the budget. And Disney can afford to make a new movie if one flopped (and they've had their share of flops, but still manage to crank out movies). Look at Chicken Little. Despite its flaws, they still made Meet the Robinsons, and even though that was better than CL, Bolt was better than Meet the Robinsons. One has to fail to improve, you learn on your mistakes, and that's what they did. And they've been working on Princess and the Frog since 2006, even AFTER they said Home on the Range (2004) was going to be their last 2-D film. They even tracked down and re-hired a lot of the animators who worked there to return to their old job. And it shows.
If they are to do more 2-D films, they won't be about princesses until someone comes up with a fresh idea. But until then, they'll come up with more ideas that may not involve a princess or a prince entirely. They've done this plenty of times, they have some clever minds inside those walls with wonderful animators.
Do keep in mind that Disney is a business, and they'll continue to make money no matter what movie they produce, be it 2-D or 3-D. And trust me, we aren't done with 2-D animation just yet. Give it time. I bet you anything within several months, we'll hear reports of a new 2-D film in the making.
And don't say that about Winnie the Pooh. G-rated movies usually are looked over in this day-of-age, and I dare-say they tend to be the better movies. For example Curious George. It may not have done as well at the box office as they hoped, but all that really mattered was that the storyline was good and the animation was good. And it's a pleasant film to watch and look at, you can tell they really put a lot of effort into it. Same with Princess and the Frog, they took their time with this movie, and it paid off well with positive reviews.
So it's still too early to tell how Pooh will do in his new movie. Judging from the trailer, it looks WAY way better than the Heffalump movie. And personally, I'll go see it, with or without my little brothers. And maybe you should as well so you can judge it for yourself.
Mr. Mudkip
Banned
The Princess and the Frog did poorly because the protagonist was black.
Kutie Pie
"It is my destiny."
I blame the blue cat people.
Though a lot of religious groups went after this movie because the movie said that voodooism is black magic and not a religion. Makes you wonder if anyone went after Hunchback of Notre Dame for having a religious atmosphere, and most likely some did, but that was the 90s, and this is the 2000s. Things are WAY more into political correctness now than they did then >_>.
Well, setting the serious conversation aside, I think Tangled looks good. Rapunzel seems like an interesting character. She seems younger than she actually is, probably because of how sheltered she is. I'm looking forward to seeing how her relationship with Flynn goes. I kind of like romances where one character is a bit of older than the other. I heard they were the same age, but maturity-wise... she's just more child-like. So anyway. Yeah. I heard from a friend and from MSN's review that it was good. I'll probably see it over Christmas break.
Okay, I haven't seen Tangled yet, but I am going to see it around Christmas. I've heard it's actually a great movie. And I actually barely reacted to the name changed.
As you should know, Disney is releasing a new 2D movie next summer, and it will be great.
But first, I am going to go see Tangled. I will say more afterwards.
As you should know, Disney is releasing a new 2D movie next summer, and it will be great.
But first, I am going to go see Tangled. I will say more afterwards.
Manchee
extra toasty
I saw this movie yesterday, and she does seem a lot younger because of being in the tower for so long. Plus her hair really gives her a child-like look imo. Towards the end she does look a lot older though, but I'm not going to spoil anything.
Aside from the cliché princess bits of it all, it was a cute movie. The main villain in this reminded me a lot of the lady from Snow White. The end was eh, just because of how predictable it was, but parts of this were still really well done ^^ I enjoyed it~
Angeltripper
♥ Ace ♥
i really dont like tangled. i havnt watched it, but itsdisney princesses. it sound so F*CKEN RETARDED!
Kutie Pie
"It is my destiny."
Can't judge a book by its cover. Disney has made good Disney princess movies, and they're enjoyable to watch even if they are dumb and/or predictable.
Belle says hi, by the way.
Last edited:
Princess movies are one of the reasons why Disney is so popular. It's people like you the reason why they're retiring the genre, now it won't be the same even if they do go back to 2D animation.
Wow, shallow much?
I saw it like last week. I was great for what it was. It's definitely not Beauty and The Beast or anything, but it was better than expected. You guys should give it a try. It's funny also.
Jb
Tsun in the streets
As much as i'd hate to ammit it, this is probally right, Most, if not all "Disney princesses" beside Pocahontas were White bar Mulan, and to put out a bunch of crappy 3-D between 2000-2008, just to randomally say "lets go back to the roots, but make the princess black doomed the movie from the start, for starters most parents don't want there little white girl going to mavie about a poor black protanganest living where you expect black people to live.
Kutie Pie
"It is my destiny."
Jasmine is Arabic, don't forget her, and though she isn't exactly a Disney princess, Esmeralda was a dark-skinned Gypsy. Well, okay, Jasmine DOES look a little paler than other Arabians, but she is still of Arabic heritage. And she is a little darker-skinned compared to the other princesses.
*COUGH* Anyway.
Okay, so you're considered racist if you make a Disney princess black, and then you're called racist again for not seeing the movie. That's what I'm getting from this o_o. I figured it was because there's use of voodooism involved.
Last edited:
I honestly don't think that was it. I think the biggest problem was that the heroine spent most of the movie as a frog. I mean, audiences were promised the first African-American princess, and... you really don't get that much of Tiana as a princess. That was unfair. I know it curbed my interest. Plus, I just didn't think the plot or the songs were as strong as those in the likes of Pochahontas and Mulan. Maybe race was a factor, but I think there are too many other variables to say for sure. I don't think it was the strongest one, in any case.
Penguinist Trainer
Well-Known Member
I saw tangled like a week ago, and I thought it was a very enjoyable movie. i liked the characters, and i liked rapunzel's child-like innocence. after all, she spent 18 years doing the exact same thing every day. so the wonder at feeling grass or running water felt very authentic.
overall, i thought this was a very fun movie to watch.
since we're also talking about the princess and the frog, i'll throw my 2 cents in.
i enjoyed the princess and the frog as well. i thought it was a good movie, and it's basically what i would expect in a disney movie.
in regards to the negative attention it received.
first, we have to consider that this movie came out while our economy is struggling. next, look at the main characters, you have a poor black girl struggling to make ends meet and you have a rich white girl who is as spoiled as they get.
next, you throw in the fact that the only way the poor black girl can be "successful" is by marrying the rich guy. that by itself is sure to cause some tension.
sure the last 2 poor princesses were both white, but they were also both happy right where they were. belle spent more time taking care of her "crazy" dad. and cinderella was perfectly content having animals for friends. both of their "happy endings" were based on magic and love.
tiana's happy ending was financially based. she wanted to open her own restaurant. that was her dream and her biggest motivator. not love, or magic, or living happily ever after. she was in it for the money.
that's is my reasoning why it got negative attention. as i said, this is most likely due to the fact that the economy was hurting when this movie came out, so it's not hard to come to these conclusions.
i honestly don't think it had anything to do with voodoo, or black magic, because there is almost always an element of evil in disney's movies.
Ursula used it
Maleficent used it
even the Queen in Snow White was known to dabble in the black arts.
as i said, i think the negative attention this movie garnered was due primarily for economic and racial reasons.
Now before I get a million flaming posts... I did say I enjoyed this movie. I'm just posting my theory about it.
overall, i thought this was a very fun movie to watch.
since we're also talking about the princess and the frog, i'll throw my 2 cents in.
i enjoyed the princess and the frog as well. i thought it was a good movie, and it's basically what i would expect in a disney movie.
in regards to the negative attention it received.
first, we have to consider that this movie came out while our economy is struggling. next, look at the main characters, you have a poor black girl struggling to make ends meet and you have a rich white girl who is as spoiled as they get.
next, you throw in the fact that the only way the poor black girl can be "successful" is by marrying the rich guy. that by itself is sure to cause some tension.
sure the last 2 poor princesses were both white, but they were also both happy right where they were. belle spent more time taking care of her "crazy" dad. and cinderella was perfectly content having animals for friends. both of their "happy endings" were based on magic and love.
tiana's happy ending was financially based. she wanted to open her own restaurant. that was her dream and her biggest motivator. not love, or magic, or living happily ever after. she was in it for the money.
that's is my reasoning why it got negative attention. as i said, this is most likely due to the fact that the economy was hurting when this movie came out, so it's not hard to come to these conclusions.
i honestly don't think it had anything to do with voodoo, or black magic, because there is almost always an element of evil in disney's movies.
Ursula used it
Maleficent used it
even the Queen in Snow White was known to dabble in the black arts.
as i said, i think the negative attention this movie garnered was due primarily for economic and racial reasons.
Now before I get a million flaming posts... I did say I enjoyed this movie. I'm just posting my theory about it.
Kutie Pie
"It is my destiny."
I'm going to have to agree with you there, though I have to see the movie myself. 2009 was a pretty bad year.
I know Ursula and Maleficent used witchcraft, but I think it was a little scarier in Princess and the Frog, at least at what footage I had seen.
Manchee
extra toasty
I always think that the older villains were creepier, just because of the style it all had and how the were portrayed. Maleficent is my favorite, with Ursula close behind, and they were both pretty conniving and weird. They seemed more obsessed with gaining what they want from the princess in their movie, and I think that aspect kind of got tuned down a little. Like in Tangled, the lady only has Rapunzel to stay young, which isn't very interesting imo. It's cruel, but not like Ursula was with tricking Ariel and stealing her voice.
I think other than the cliché-ness or Tangled, the only other thing I didn't like was that the villain was a little boring.