DVDizzy Forum

May I add my comment to an old thread? I've recently done some reading about the actual history and especially on the veracity of Smith's accounts. Do you know he actually wrote a letter to Queen Anne in 1616, praising Pocahontas, when she, 'lady Rebecca'and her husband were about to come to England? He also mentioned in that letter how she rescued him (and the colony from 'utter want and confusion').

This letter alone is a testimony against some historian's claim that Smith only made up that story, and only after Pocahontas died "to profit from her fame". He would be really foolish to risk destroying his reputation by writing a fabricated story in a letter to the queen knowing he could be exposed as a liar at any time. In other words: what 'profit' was he to get from telling a lie? None!

Up to this day Smith still has a bad reputation as a 'braggart and a liar"with several historians. Others on the contrary state that he was most truthfull and honest. Fairly recent research seems to tip the scale in favour of Smith's veracity.
-----------------

O.k it's not a direct comment on the Disney movie 'Pocahontas'or the sequel, but I thought it was an interesting thing to mention.
For me personally this is important. For a long time I could not even watch 'Pocahontas' because I had a cynical approach to the story ("oh yes sure, Smith was a bad man and made it all up, and you expect me to feel anything for the main characters and their friendship"). Now my opnion has changed on these matters.

I wonder why the sequel doens't follow the real story a bit more: Pocahontas was already married to Rolfe and had a child with him BEFORE they went to England. That would have made a good story I think, especailly when she would meet John Smith again after many years!

as a fanatic poca fan, i agree with merman about the love between them being the angle its played at..hence it seem like a betrayal to most fans..of a romantic disney couple..

the sequel should be commended for sticking closer to the actual account.but the light in which it was portrayed was not realistic enough to the tone of the original film.it was not handled with reasons n respect thus coming off as pocahontas, a native who'd fall for the first english gentlemen in sight. u do not believe she lost her love for john and john came off as a selfish man...it shouldve been done in another way.say...play on the conflict of thinking john is dead further..how devastated pocahontas was....

but hey giselle and edward..OPPS

I was writing this as I was reading, so I just want to say that I agree with jwa1107, Ktrek, slave2moonlight, and Siren. And, the last point that akhenaten made, I made, too...but I just read his right now, right before I copy/paste my essay.

First, let me say that I enjoy the sequels to Disney’s animated classics. All of them. I don’t feel that they ruin the original films. But, in some ways, “Pocahontas II: Journey to a New World” does change my perceptions of “Pocahontas”.

The Merman wrote: So was the love they first felt for one another fake?

Have you ever been in a relationship that ended? Feelings change. Sure, traditionally, in Disney’s animated films, we don’t usually see a character with more than one significant other (even though recently that’s more common). As we all know, the real-life Pocahontas did end up marrying John Rolfe. I’m glad that Disney put some historically accurate information in these films. Depending on what mood I’m in, though, if I’m watching “Pocahontas”, I will think, “Pocahontas, don’t fall in love with him! He’ll turn into a jerk!” Sometimes, but not always, I’ll think like that. But, the love that Pocahontas and John Smith shared wasn’t fake- they did love each other. But life goes on, and Pocahontas wasn’t one to sit by the phone and wait for a phone call (figuratively, of course!)- no, she got right back into the dating pool with John Rolfe that’s my kind of girl!

The Merman wrote: I was just a bit shocked by the choice of Disney to change her man. I mean Disney never does this

“Enchanted” spoiler alert!

Giselle and Edward were in love (ish) once upon a time, but they each found someone better suited for them.

End of spoiler alert!

As someone who had dated a lot, I can say that just because you were in love at one point with someone doesn’t mean that you can’t stop being in love with someone. You may not stop loving the person, but you stop being in love. (There’s a difference.) This is almost going off-topic, but I was in love with a guy I dated starting at the end of my senior year of high school. Part of that love was probably that he initially treated me better than the other guys I had recently dated. But, as time goes on, people’s feelings change- the “honeymoon phase” stops, and you start to notice little things about the other person, as you get to know them better. I still love this guy as a friend- I’ll always care about him- but I’m definitely not in love with him. Looking back, I’m glad that I didn’t end up marrying him. Although he’s a nice guy, I don’t think we had enough in common to have a lasting relationship.
Pocahontas and John Smith didn’t choose to break up, but as toonaspie said, Pocahontas and John Rolfe fit better together. Knowing more about both Pocahontas and John Smith in the sequel, we can see that Pocahontas and John Smith probably would have broken up anyway, even just based on their personalities. They probably don’t hate each other, and they’re probably glad for their memories of when they were together, but Pocahontas surely is happy that she ended up with someone more compatible with who she is. John Smith, at one point, looked like a great choice of a boyfriend, but she didn’t have John Rolfe to compare him to. If she had met John Smith and John Rolfe at the same time and had a choice of who to date, chances are that she’d choose John Rolfe.

The Merman wrote: I mean she was ready to die for him! I mean I would not die and defy my father

They say that “love is blind” for a reason. At the moment, she loved him very much. Time hadn’t gotten in the way of that, and they didn’t know each other too well. Infatuation definitely played a part in their love.

slave2moonlight wrote: I don't buy into that idea that you can have several relationships and have truly been in love in every one of them. Or, to put it better, I believe there is such a thing as lasting love that is strong enough not to be altered by time and separation, and that's the only love I am willing to call "true love.”

This is where “in love” versus just loving comes into play. I still love (as in care about) many of the guys I’ve dated, regardless of whether or not I was at one point in love with them. Before Bobby, I was really in love with one and a half guys (I mean, one was a whole person…), but the other guys I dated weren’t chopped liver- I enjoyed their company, but I knew that I wasn’t going to marry them or anything, versus the other 2 guys- I thought that I was going to marry them, at some point in our relationships. Especially early on in relationships, (a) you don’t know too much about the person, and (b) you’re blind to little things- you’re infatuated. So, he talks with his mouth open? No big deal- he has such pretty eyes. But, a few months later, some reality sets in and his chewing with his mouth open becomes disgusting. (I’m just making up an example half-based on truth.) So, if John Smith hadn’t been injured, how long would it have been until John and Pocahontas started noticing the little quirks in each other that would drive them crazy?

The Merman wrote: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*

The first time I watched the movie, I couldn't sleep for many nights! Pocahontas is one of my favoutite movies, and the secuel destroyed its magic complitely!!! I hated it!

[img]http://www.ultimatedisney.com/images/m-p/poca39.jpg
[/img]

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).

I can see why Disney won't make another sequal, Pocahontas dies after a few years of marrying John Rolfe. Reality is overrated !

Jack Skellington wrote:I can see why Disney won't make another sequal, Pocahontas dies after a few years of marrying John Rolfe. Reality is overrated !

Oh,but they will make a sequel!.
In Pocahontas III,Pocahontas will kill John Rolf and takes drugs,becouse Disney can ruin their films more!.

Ariel'sprince wrote:In Pocahontas III,Pocahontas will kill John Rolf and takes drugs,becouse Disney can ruin their films more!.

You can hardly blame Disney for history. Does the fact that the events of Pocahontas II are based on history not even matter to you? Would you rather Pocahontas II would have completely fabricated lies just to keep everybody happy?

ichabod wrote:

Ariel'sprince wrote:In Pocahontas III,Pocahontas will kill John Rolf and takes drugs,becouse Disney can ruin their films more!.

You can hardly blame Disney for history. Does the fact that the events of Pocahontas II are based on history not even matter to you? Would you rather Pocahontas II would have completely fabricated lies just to keep everybody happy?

Yeah,i do.
Who cares what really happend? did you know that the real Pocahontas was a naked little girl and she rescued John Smith becouse she was bored? or that John Smith was actually an hairy old man? and i"m sure that real Pocahontas didn't sang with animales.

Ariel'sprince wrote:

ichabod wrote:You can hardly blame Disney for history. Does the fact that the events of Pocahontas II are based on history not even matter to you?

Who cares what really happend?

Historians.

Jack Skellington wrote:Reality is overrated!

But so hard to escape from, sadly.

As for my thoughts on the fictional Disney Poca and Johnboy...well, sometimes the best way to prove you love someone is to let them go.

Scapsta

Escapay wrote:

Ariel'sprince wrote: Who cares what really happend?

Historians.

Historians don't watch Disney movies,and if they do-they'll be more concert that Pocahontas is talking to tress,sing with birds and look like a hot super model then if she ends up with Smith.

Ariel'sprince wrote:

Escapay wrote: Historians.

Historians don't watch Disney movies,and if they do-they'll be more concert that Pocahontas is talking to tress,sing with birds and look like a hot super model then if she ends up with Smith.

There's a wonderful cinematic device called artistic license, which allows filmmakers to get away with seemingly inaccurate and impossible things in their films, in order to enhance and support the story/theme/message. Disney never said that they were setting out to make a completely historical fact-based retelling of the Pocahontas story, they simply used the story as a basis for something bigger, and it often flew over the audience's heads. We don't watch Pocahontas expecting a history lesson, and anyone that does really didn't understand the film's purpose.

Also, it's a bit narrow-minded to think historians don't watch Disney movies, or that they expect them to be historically accurate. After all, The Last Temptation of Christ wasn't exactly following the Bible and some theologians offered positive reviews about its message and its themes, rather than cite and critique its inaccuracies from a book that people are divided on the veracity of anyway.

Scaps

Also consider the fact Disney had Native American and historian advisories for Pocahontas. They gave Disney the real story and Disney romanticized it, like so many before.

And she didn't save him because she was bored. It was part of a ritual. Smith was fed a feast, and then they went to club him. It was a tradition for a girl or woman who should she feel pity for the person, to "save" him. And then Smith becomes part of the tribe.

I still don't see how Pocahontas 2 ruined it for me. It was by far, not the best sequel, but not the worst either.

And yes, Pocahontas "talked" to animals. All tribes did. They had a spiritual connection. In all truth, she may have had a pet raccoon, for the Powahattan tribe often had many. And Grandmother Willow is also based on stories by the tribe of how she had a special willow tree in which a spirit(s) lived in it and she would seek council. Grandmother Willow came directly from the Native American advisories Disney hired for the movie.

Ariel'sprince wrote: Who cares what really happend? did you know that the real Pocahontas was a naked little girl and she rescued John Smith becouse she was bored? or that John Smith was actually an hairy old man? and i"m sure that real Pocahontas didn't sang with animales.

Ariel's prince,

Smith was 'hairy' indeed, because he had a beard, but old? He was about 27 or 28 at the time! He was born around 1580.
How did you get the idea she rescued him because she was 'bored'? I've read a biography that explicitly states that she met and befriended Smith before he was taken prisoner by her tribe. So I guess she rescued him because of their friendship (unless this biographer gave wrong information about that)

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

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

Maybe. it's been some time since I saw 'The new world". "Pocahontas II" I've never seen and I'm not planning to.

"The New World'was pretty to look at but also very vague so that it did not make you much wiser about historical events. I cannot remember capt. John Smith doing much of anything in that movie! In reality he seemed to be quite active and resourcefull in obtaining food for Jamestown settlers and keeping some kind of peace with the Powhatan tribe.

Well, I also pretend there is NO Pocahontas 2, otherwise I would lose it compilitely!!! However, they didn't have to make Pocahontas fall in love with Rolf, in my opinion. Although the real Pocahontas DID marry him, Disney's Pocahontas loves John Smith and she will always love him. After all, the real Hercules never married Megara, Adersen's Ariel dies in the end of the story and V. Hugo's Quasimodo and Esmeralda die too.

In addition, the real Pocahontas was only eleven years old when she met John Smith. Also, she wasn't quite beautiful...

Maria wrote:Well, I also pretend there is NO Pocahontas 2, otherwise I would lose it compilitely!!! However, they didn't have to make Pocahontas fall in love with Rolf, in my opinion. Although the real Pocahontas DID marry him, Disney's Pocahontas loves John Smith and she will always love him. After all, the real Hercules never married Megara, Adersen's Ariel dies in the end of the story and V. Hugo's Quasimodo and Esmeralda die too.

In addition, the real Pocahontas was only eleven years old when she met John Smith. Also, she wasn't quite beautiful...

I wonder if that's true she wasn't quite beautiful.. I've seen various portraits of her and in some she looks beautiful, in others plain (a double portrait with her son Thomas) and there are various versions of an engraving, one in which she looks nice and another one in which she look so weird with course lines in her face, I begin to wonder if this is really how she looked like or was this some kind of caricature?

Maria: The 'real' Hercules, Esmeralda and Quasimodo were all fictional characters, not historical figures. So I think your argument does not really fly.

Maria wrote:Well, I also pretend there is NO Pocahontas 2, otherwise I would lose it compilitely!!! However, they didn't have to make Pocahontas fall in love with Rolf, in my opinion. Although the real Pocahontas DID marry him, Disney's Pocahontas loves John Smith and she will always love him. After all, the real Hercules never married Megara, Adersen's Ariel dies in the end of the story and V. Hugo's Quasimodo and Esmeralda die too.

In addition, the real Pocahontas was only eleven years old when she met John Smith. Also, she wasn't quite beautiful...

I wonder if that's true she wasn't quite beautiful.. I've seen various portraits of her and in some she looks beautiful, in others plain (a double portrait with her son Thomas) and there are various versions of an engraving, one in which she looks nice and another one in which she look so weird with course lines in her face, I begin to wonder if this is really how she looked like or was this some kind of caricature?

Maria: The 'real' Hercules, Esmeralda and Quasimodo were all fictional characters, not historical figures. So I think your argument does not really fly.

akhenaten wrote: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.