Pocahontas and Smith - No true love?

[BelleGirl]

there's always NEW WORLD to watch if ur upset with poca2. it handled the loss issue better than poca 2.

Agreed,this should be like the History and Disney's Pocahontas be... Disney (altought the New World was incredibely boring but it's a history movie).
BelleGirl-They had a hobby to capture people and almost kill them and then rescue then and Pocahontas and John never met before she rescued him.
Siren-I"m sure that in history she didn't sang with birds,and she also didn't looked like a super model,she was a naked little girl.

O.k, what sources did you read Ariel's Prince? Just curious.

[I Love Bambi]

Disney made a huge mistake if you ask me. The sequel on Pocahontas destroys the first movie completely! In the sequel she chooses another man and not John Smith! How weird is that? weren't they suppose to be soul bound?

It just puts the first Pocahontas in a whole different light! It seems John does not love Pocahontas at all in the sequel and there relationship is ruined. So was the love they first felt for one another fake? Was it just hormones?

Okay I have to chill, im so flussterd by this ending that im going to drink a cup of tea to think it over.

*changed the spelling mistakes*

Typical Disney sequel-no continuity with the original.

[Super Aurora]

I denaile all the sequels exept Cinderella III,Melody,Kiara and Jane dosn't exiset in my opinion,also the TV shows,Ariel never met HCA and Jasmine was never a snake.
So yeah,Pocahontas and John Smith are togather in my opinion and i don't care about Rolf or the sequel.
About Enchanted-(spoiler):
Giselle and Edward were never meant to be togather,she thought he was the Prince from her dream but it was actually Robert.
(spoiler end).

You are so damn ignorant.

[Voiceroy]

The whole relationship is what the movie was about!

The movie was more than anything about getting past prejudice, discovering other cultures, seeing what more is out there to learn about.

Funny...I thought all of these themes were overshadowed by the none-to-subtle environmentalist propagandistic subtext about being more aware of the evil we humans have done to "mother spirit" earth, what with Grandmother Willow and the whole "colors of the wind" crap. I mean, they ask advice from a talking/singing tree, for crying out. It's not that trees haven't talked in animated films/cartoons before. But in this one, they preach:

But, Grandmother Willow, what is my path?
How am I ever going to find it?
Your mother asked me the very same question.
She did? What did you tell her?
I told her to listen.
All around you are spirits, child.
They live in the earth, the water, the sky.
If you listen, they will guide you.

That's pretty much pantheistic philosophy in a nutshell, as the underlying theme of a Disney movie.

Strange how three people saw the same movie and yet we all came away with a different impression.

[Beast_enchantment]

Pocahontas is my second fav disney movie (after BATB ) but the second one was just terrible - i didnt care for John Rolfe and considering That John Smith was Poca's path in the first movie, i don't think her character would have run off with another guy just like that. Also, i didnt like the way they turn John Smith into an A**HOLE! - i agee with the original post. it ruined what the first movie stood for. although more historically acurate han the first, i try to forget it ever excisted.

[BelleGirl]

Oh man! You've all just comfirmed for me that I'm right in refusing to watch any direct-to-DVD sequel. Even if "one of the better ones" annoys people so much, I shudder at how bad the worst must be.
I think there are plenty of ways to make a woman have a change of heart and choose another man, without having to turn her first suitor into an a**hole. They could each go their way, separating as good friends who once had something beautiful together but have grown apart throught circumstances.

[271286]

If someone claims the thing between Pocahontas and John Smith (Talking about Disneys Pocahontas and John Smith) wasn't true love they obviosly haven't seen the If I Never Knew You scene... That says it all...

To me sequels doesn't really count... Especially not Pocahontas II... Uff for an awful film!!

[Voiceroy]

If someone claims the thing between Pocahontas and John Smith (Talking about Disneys Pocahontas and John Smith) wasn't true love they obviosly haven't seen the If I Never Knew You scene... That says it all...

Sure, if you believe that animated characters can experience "true love".

[Clochette]

Sure I do. That's the point of animation, isn't it? the word means "to give something a soul". If you don't believe it, why do you watch them at all?

[BelleGirl]

If someone claims the thing between Pocahontas and John Smith (Talking about Disneys Pocahontas and John Smith) wasn't true love they obviosly haven't seen the If I Never Knew You scene... That says it all...

Sure, if you believe that animated characters can experience "true love".

I guess in the same way as animated characters can experience "true joy, happiness and sorrow". And in the same way any fictional character can - within the context of the their fictional surroundings. Imagination is a wonderful thing.

[Voiceroy]

Sure I do. That's the point of animation, isn't it? the word means "to give something a soul". If you don't believe it, why do you watch them at all?

I was being facetious and literal at the same time--it wasn't meant to be taken seriously. (I suppose it's my fault for not including an emoticon to show I was kidding.) But something that isn't "real" can't experience something that's "true"--it's fantasy, nothing more. What my wife and I share is "true love". Animated characters can only give off an impression that causes the audience to experience an emotional feeling, but that emotion shared between two animated characters is nothing more than a facsimile of the real thing. Sorry to burst anyone's bubble, but it's just not the same.

Also, you're going to have to show the source for your definition of animation. Animation or more specifically to "animate" means to give "life" to something as it pertains to an animated character, but to say that it gives a "soul" to something...well that's an entirely different kind of meaning, and a purely subjective one. And if you're referring to the fact that in some instances it refers to giving "spirit" to something... sorry, but that would be too literal a definition. In the case of animation, "spirit" would mean to energize or make lifelike. That's not the same thing as giving something a soul.

[Clochette]

The Latin "animare" is mostly translated with "to breathe life into", but it comes from "anima", "soul", and so I think, my translation is also ok. But I'm German, and in German "Seele" could also be "spirit", so maybe my feeling is wrong.

But yes, I do think that unreal characters can experience "true" feelings - and I think, it's just a question of believe - my believe in those unreal characters can make them real.

[BelleGirl]

I think that the sequel would have worked better if Disney had followed history more CLOSELY with that one. In true life Pocahontas met and married John Rolfe in Jamestown(where she was held captive for randsom) and had a son with him before she ever went to England, and all the time she really believed that John Smith had died. When she finally met him again, she had a shock and could not speak for a while.
True fans of the original movie and the first relationship would have understood that there was no way Pocahontas could have gone back to her 'first love' in such a situation, and probably historians woud be less disgrunted.
If a sequel had been made along these lines, it would have made more sense, have a potential for good drama, and I would probably watch it, but alas...