i got the opportunity to watch this wonderful movie twice on its opening day here today, and i must say, im impressed with the way the story worked out.there's just so much going ons that you won't feel "OH THIS IS EXPECTED NEXT",scene by scene it just dazzles you with something new yet sentimentally familiar.
there were nods to cinderella and peter pan and even miyazaki's works but PATF can be considered original and fresh.for those that feel theyve seen too much from whats shown on tv specials and yutub,trust me,there's lots more to offer.
all the characters were great.it was a nice ensemble.
tiana is a very well developed character.she had issues and depth hardly seen in a princess.
charlotte was a hoot.wished they had more scenes with her.
ray is as everyone else said, unexpectedly charming.
songs worked.
the score while not very interesting on the soundtrack,complemented the scenes well.
the shadow demons were scary.didn't think disney would be brave enough to do that now.which is cool.
now the bad stuff.
i thought the art direction could've been better.some of the animated characters seemed off design wise to the environment.especially the miscellaneous characters.they seem like splashed out of plunk toot whistle boom and some looked kinda like flash animation.and no matter how much they denied it, computer animation was abundant for easy illusion tricks(weeds,moss) and environment.
songs sort of rushed into sequences.
overrated,underdeveloped villain.
all the pretty dresses were worn for the shortest time,what a waste.in fact, i think tiana can rival belle as having change the most outfit in a disney feature.
if its any indication, the children in the theatre laughs alot and even adults cheered and enjoyed the jokes. one lady even shouted NO! when something bad happened to a character, which is rare in my country.
it may not be the little mermaid, but its carving a niche of its own in the disney pantheon. im hoping for future projects, disney would be more bold in exploring trickier hand drawn animation like the ones in pinocchio and fantasia with bolder colors and designs.
RATING 3.5 / 5 (pocahontas still reigns )
btw, here's some trivia i thought of when watching this movie
disney characters that changed form.
1)kuzco
2)kenai
3)ariel
4)tiana
5)naveen
6)beast
disney characters with interracial affairs
1)john smith - pocahontas
2)phoebus - esmeralda
3)milo - kidagakash
4)ariel - eric
akhenaten wrote:
disney characters with interracial affairs
4)ariel - eric
Isn't that more like inter-species?
What do you think about the affair between Kermit the frog and Miss Piggy? (o.k they're from Jim Henson, but today they seem to count as a sort of Disney characters)
Goliath wrote:Since I've seen the ABC "Dreams come true"-special, which showed a lot of clips from PatF, I'm not interested anymore. Even from those short clips, I could see I've seen all these characters and situations before, in previous, better films.
No offense, but save for a few reviews, people seem to be very impressed with the film. The word I keep hearing is "surprised". They keep saying that the movie surprised them in that it was much better than they expect it. That the story is good, the romance is great and that the characters are enduring, even those that looked like they had the potential to be annoying.
Not saying that you will share the same thoughts, but from everything I've seen the movie is much stronger than it appears to be and that film clips don't do it justice.
As for the Time article, I am honestly surprised. I have yet to see the film, but it must be really good in order to dethrone the emotionally packed and overall satisfying Up in the animated canon.
I agree, pap. The trailers and clips I saw did personally make me interested in the film, but looking back at them now, I really don't think they're a good indicator of what this movie was. Even Dusty was completely underwhelmed and not expecting much from the movie from the clips he saw, but wound up loving it. Speaking of which, he needs to get on here at some point and write his own review.
One thing I left out in my review, but wanted to mention is that I'm glad that it seems like Tiana and Naveen had equal time, and equal character development and learned the same lesson through one another. I was very worried it was going to be too one sided and just all about Tiana, but I was pleasantly surprised at how much time was devoted to Naveen and his emotions. He's a very different kind of Disney prince I've never seen before.
I hope they'll keep him more in the parks with Tiana after the Jubilee, but I sort of doubt it know Disney merchandising. Even Aladdin is pretty much nonexistant in appearance and on merchandise compared to Jasmine, even when it's his title movie.
Oh Goliath, films are about human experiences and emotions, of course you'll see things similar to what you have "already seen", otherwise we humans couldn't relate, but they still made something new. The film felt new when I saw it, and I'm rather critical, as you know!
Hello everyone! I missed you! Yet a break from UD was really good for me, I think. I took off for school. If you wanted to know, I was in a play, Goodnight Desdemona, Good Morning Juliet, a comedy about an assistant English professor who grows through her journey entering the world of Shakespeare. I played the great part of the evil, but in this play, funny, Iago, and it went great, the whole show was fun and audiences loved it. It was wonderful.
I can't stay long, I'll probably be more around during Christmas break. But I recently went with Tim (PrincePhillipFan) to New York City to see The Princess and the Frog, so even though it's a little late, I thought I'd post my thoughts, and wonder if you'll agree! I had a great, great time with Tim, it was great of him to ask me, and it was a great thing to see the movie with him.
After getting low expectations from seeing what I thought was not top-quality animation, lame jokes, eye-roll worthy characters, and rather un-Disneyness, I saw the film and...it was GREAT! It was magical and fun and yes, touching and emotional. I think I almost cried at some parts, and nothing was cheesy (unless intentionally!). I enjoyed it very, very, much!
The film had quite beautiful and good, very Disney animation. The animated special effects were actually spectacular, the water-like magic did not remind me too much of The Swan Princess at all. They did their own. The thing that did bother me most, though, was the animation shortcuts. Mostly some lacking of frames it seemed in some parts and how things moved across the screen. Especially like when Spoiler the leaf with Ray in it gets put on the water, it didn't look animated, but like a static leaf dragged across the screen, and when it went into the fog, it looked like it just got shrunk smaller and smaller to look like it went further and further away.End Spoiler
The film is set more modern than many Disney animated films, yet I did feel the humor and some elements may have been too modern. They could have looked more at what 1920's humor was like.
But that's our modern world for you. The fast jokes, expressions, and editing, like jabbing shots, for our attention spans or maybe a more powerful feeling, I don't know. It's not like the Disney films of old taking their time. There's a part with a cat dragging itself away that seemed way too wild and weird and modern, and not befitting a Disney film either, but that was one instance.
This film didn't feel like the past Disney fairy tales, or even past Disney films (accept myabe a tiny bit like The Rescuers at times, for obvious reasons). It feels like Disney did something new. Accept that it was a fairy tale. Even I occasionally felt a little bit like "it's another fairy tale, but they tried to put it in a different disguise." Yet, after seeing it I am very glad this is part of the Disney canon! It could become a classic.
It was also a very well-balanced film. I think every character gets their due. Dr. Facilier was a great villain, not very much like any past one, and he had problems of his own and you felt bad for him sometimes. Mama Odie was not scary to me! Though her nose looked rounder than I remember it...but she was not annoying or anything, she was great (except I still didn't like her "This gonna be good" line, interrupting a dramatic magical moment for a split second). Ray wasn't annoying or too stereotypical or stupid either, and I did indeed feel sad and just about tearful when his moment came, and he did that moment well, I might add! He held onto his beliefs, too. He was kinda smart in a way. Prince Naveen was wonderful, though he came in a little stereotypical and unfunny, as well as too fast, in his first introduction. His joking and band fiasco with Lawrence was ehhh kind of eye-rolling, and speaking of, Lawrence was even a good character except his terrible monkey-like design, but this movie says it don't matter what you look like...even though fairy tales are traditionally supposed to look idealistic and perfect.
Charlotte may have been my favorite character, I don't know, but she was a fabulous character. She was funny, and while some probably would be annoyed by her over-the-topness, she's supposed to be over-the-top, and she also had doubts, and kindness, other sides. That was another thing I meant by well-balanced. I thought the white people would be too self-interested and bad, but they had hearts like everyone else (except maybe the businessmen, the Fenner Brothers).
It may have been a little too-balanced, however, as Tiana seems to get a little lost among the other great characters. She's almost too much like the rest of them, and other times she's almost too serious to be as fun and likeable as them. Yet, she was still a great new princess. It's just funny how less-doing Snow White, and even Aurora, felt like they had more presence in their films to me. I really didn't like how Tiana did so, so much work, she didn't even get any sleep it looked like for some days. Even the building of her restaurant looked too much for only two people to do. I do wonder if one of the reasons I like Cinderella is because her happy ending includes escape from so much work.
I didn't care for the hillbilly characters at all (neither did I care for such ones in The Rescuers), and didn't feel they did much for the story (except for Tiana and Naveen's characters in their scene with them).
In the end of course I thought "so it don't matter what you look like" yet they're happy ending is still when they are hot humans? What is this Beauty and the Beast? I kid, I kid. But you know, this film lived up to what it said. Tiana and Naveen were just as delightful, lovable characters as frogs, though, actually, I may have liked them more as frogs, perhaps because that is when they go through their journey to grow and become better people. When you see Naveen as a human again it's almost weird and off-putting. Where's the frog I loved? But it still did a great job of keeping the message it doesn't matter what you look like, better than other films have attempted. It felt like it was still them when they were frogs.
Thankfully that Wizard of Oz like concept where, unless I'm mistaken, Tiana's journey was just a dream (?), and people she knows are bayou residents, this film didn't seem to have that. The characters and events you loved were real. Also, I liked better how this film didn't have the whole "kiss to find your real true love" idea, but was clever in sticking to the original story's rule of kissing a princess.
The songs were not something amazing I'd listen to outside of the film, but they were good for the film and worked within it. I don't like how the songs have those stage-like ends where the characters seem to stop for applause, but I suppose it makes sense in this time they lived in, songs were like that in those times?
I do wonder if the film would have been more dramatic and powerful, as well as more like the older Disney fairy tales, if Tiana had been a chambermaid and wanted to become princess of jazz. It was indeed light-hearted though, and so, felt nice and warm-hearted.
So, this film was wonderful, I will be seeing it again with the friends and family who want to go with me, and maybe Disney is back...but with something new, and maybe it didn't feel as powerful to me or I don't love it as much as the past films, but you may love it more because I'm so critical, or I love more traditional Disney, but I still liked it a lot, I'll be buying it when it comes out, and I feel it could be a Disney Classic (that actually earned the title!). Go have yourself a good, magical time and see it! And support Disney traditional animation!
Last edited by Disney Duster on Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
i agree with u.the leaf and several other things looked flat and manipulated to give the illusion of movement.this is economical but i miss the minute detail given into making CG or delicately painted objects in the 90s (e.g pocahontas' canoe)
You know, I heard that this was based a little on E.D. Baker's "The Frog Princess", but after reading reviews of it, the only thing it seems to have in common is a swamp and the kiss turns the princess into a frog with the prince! The prince and princess even have completely different names from the Disney film, like Princess Esmeralda! That's not really being based on it at all!
So, is it really based on someone else's treatment of the fairy tale of The Frog Prince, or is it all their own treatment of that tale like we thought before?
And you were right akhenaten, the prettiest, most interesting and iconic costumes were seen briefly, but, I kind of liked that because, well it makes them more special, and also it means it wasn't about marketing pretty dresses, but making a good movie!
And I was also worried kids would be too scared of the "friend of the other side". It reminded me how I didn't like the use of voodoo as the magic in the film. But it was okay...I liked the magic effects a lot afterall!
Speaking of, their was a scene of Tiana where we got to see her turn into a frog in some previews I saw...but in the film we don't see her transform, just her point of view. I wish we had seen the scene of her transforming. Anyone know what's up with that or where to find it?
And there you go, Goliath. Someone who was overly critical of the film before its opening enjoyed the film to a great extend. Don't know if that will change your mind, but at least it shows that the movie has more value than the clips give it credit for.
I am personally excited to see the film now that even a die hard Disney fan like Duster has enjoyed it.
Anyway... with the release one day away, I wonder, when is the excitement going to kick in?
Will it be opening day, with UDer's reviews, or will it be Saturday, when we get more reviews from movie critics... or will it be the day when we find out it's opening weekend Box Office returns, to find out if it's a sucess or a flop.
I admit that I dubious about the film's financial success. Yeah, the merchandise is selling greatly, interest in the film is up and reviews have been more than favorable, but I am still concerned if that will be enough for people to brave the cold, the holiday shoppers and see a classic animated film.
YAY! I just found out, Princess and the Frog started in Puerto Rico today! We don't have to wait forever for it!
Also, I noticed that 2009 has been the year of the misleading trailers and ads for Disney films. Up was sold as a wacky adventure film starting a cranky old guy. But in reality its a very moving and emotional film about self fulfillment.
Then there was A Christmas Carol. The film was presented as being a comedy featuring crazy Jim Carrey antics. But the actual film was very powerful in its portrayal of the three spirits and was more serious than funny.
Looks like its the same case with Princess and the Frog. The movie is sold by Disney as being classic Disney in every way. The film itself looks to have new twists to the classic formula, making it endearing.
SmartAleck25 wrote:Which ones are you talking about, Goliath? Is the romance bad, music, flat characters? I don't know, I usually refrain from reading reviews, cause you can't judge a book (or movie, in this case) by its cover. Up surprised me very much, I ended up LOVING it. I hated the trailers and even tried to prevent myself from seeing it. But it blew me away. You could try the same thing, even in the amount of clips you have seen. Here's hoping for the best!
First of all, I've seen too much animation in those clips that I have literally seen before in previous films. I mean that the facial expressions, gestures, body language etc. are not just *similar* to those of characters in previous films, but they're exactly copied!
And these characters, I've seen them before! The pompous, arrogant prince who thinks he's the most handsome man on earth (remember Gaston?), the girl who wants to prove that she's capable of more (all the 1990's Disney heroines), the supposedly "funny" sidekicks, like the crocodile (he is an obnoxious, irritating loud-mouth) and the "sassy" grandmother (like Mother Willow and Mulan's grandma) etc.
The music and songs, from what I've heard, is below average. And the integration of CGI-animated backgrounds and objects and hand-drwan characters is only slightly better than the horror that was Tarzan (looked like a computer game).
It's just that the whole atmosphere of the film and its emphasis on easy comedic effect is something that has made me lose all interest in the film.
Goliath wrote:And these characters, I've seen them before! The pompous, arrogant prince who thinks he's the most handsome man on earth (remember Gaston?), the girl who wants to prove that she's capable of more (all the 1990's Disney heroines), the supposedly "funny" sidekicks, like the crocodile (he is an obnoxious, irritating loud-mouth) and the "sassy" grandmother (like Mother Willow and Mulan's grandma) etc.
I would agree with you about some of your points (I'm not a huge fan of Randy Newman and agree that there could have been better songs, but they work well enough in the film), but I would have to quibble about Tiana and Naveen being the same as before. Tiana to me sets her apart differently from the other princesses in that she doesn't want adventure for herself, but to make believe her father's dream. Part of it is to prove to the others who laugh at her that she can make this dream, but she's mostly doing it for the memory of her father than herself. And unlike Ariel and Jasmine whose adolesence brattiness just wore me thin often with their whinings of "I'm not a child any more! I can make my own decisions!" is nowhere in Tiana's character. I find her to be rather strong, but not all "GRRRL Power!" like the princesses I found to be in the early 90 films.
Naveen is also very far from Gaston. Gaston prides himself on being the most handsome creature in creation and all the town adores him. Naveen is just a guy who lives life to the fullest, likes to have a big party, and enjoys the company of women. He occasionally sees himself as "all that," but is not compulsively annoying as Gaston with his whole physique. Naveen is basically just a smug little rich boy who likes to have a good time and lots of fun, in contrast of Gaston who wants only Belle and have the whole town kiss his feet. I find Naveen has a bit more common I'd say with Edward, but at the same time, he's a completely different character as well in that he learns to have self-control with his life and learns that something is really missing from him, unlike Gaston and Edward who are rather cariactures with the IQs of rocks.
Well, of course I haven't seen the film yet, so I'm only telling what I think based on the excerpts I've seen so far. I will check it out in theaters, though. I'm only not excited about it anymore...
Goliath wrote:Well, of course I haven't seen the film yet, so I'm only telling what I think based on the excerpts I've seen so far. I will check it out in theaters, though. I'm only not excited about it anymore...
Don't get me wrong, I completely understand where you're coming from. Before I had seen the film myself I had some of the assumptions you had about the characters, but was pleasantly surprised when they turned out to be different characters than I had expected to be. While there have been a good number of clips out there, I think a lot of it doesn't show the heart and true emotional moments of the characters in the film that we have seen. While the film has a lot of humorous moments, Disney seems to be hyping that up to the nth degree in all their previews than anything, and not giving much indication to some of the heart in the film.
I've been waiting since 2006, and now this movie is coming out TOMORROW!!!!
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
There are midnight showings in my city, but I'll go later in the afternoon.
OMG I KNOW! ME TOOOOOO!!!! lol
I'm jealous that theaters are doing midnight showings in your area, there may be in Chicago but i also have to work at 6am tomorrow... I also have auditions for Cats (my community theatre is doing it) at 3:30pm.... so i probably wont be able to see the film until 8pm or so. I'm super excited though!
I think the reason why Disney makes their previews and commercials not so revealing of the characters is because they want people to be curious enough to see the big picture of the flim. Even though it might make some of you a little wary of the characters' silliness, it's probably just a way of them trying to reach out to kids. They have to entertain both the kids and adults, something a lot of these people say TPatF does well.
I can't wait to go see it tomorrow at the big theater to find out myself! I'm confident that I will be surprised.
I'll have to wait a week to see this with my family, because my sister will be home from college for the holidays by then. Plus, it wouldn't be fair if we went without her.
)
