Goliath wrote:estefan wrote:Way to respect other people's opinion there, Goliath, especially on a medium as subjective as film.
It has nothing to do with opinions. It's about judging films. Judging story, structure, pacing, editing, characters/character development, music, songs, technique, animation etc. You will not find one single film historian, film critic or even someone who's working in animation themselves who will agree with RudyMatt. Because of all the reasons I just listed.
estefan wrote:The Princess and the Frog was very acclaimed, so Matt's opinion isn't that odd, by any means.
Yes, it's very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very, very odd. I doubt that even the people who actually worked on
Princess and the Frog would hold that opinion. Remember we're not just talking about whether or not it's a good film here. We're talking about RudyMatt's preposterous claim that it's the best Disney film *since
Sleeping Beauty*. For that to be true, it would have to be better than, in chronological order:
One Hundred and One Dalmatians
The Jungle Book
The Rescuers
The Little Mermaid
Beauty and the Beast
Aladdin
The Lion King
The Hunchback of Notre Dame
Mulan
Tarzan
Fantasia 2000
Lilo & Stitch
The idea is ludicrous; and I even left out films with *I* thought were better than
Princess and the Frog, but which many people would likely disagree on:
The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh
The Great Mouse Detective
Oliver & Company
Pocahontas
Hercules
The Princess and the Frog is the best Disney animated feature film since Sleeping Beauty. It isn't ludicrous.
You will not find one single film historian blah blah blah who will agree with him blah blah blah...
You have no idea who I am. Or my gender. My race. My background. As for a "single film historian" well -- I'll just say, yes, you have them here and no, I am not alone in my praise for PATF.
You gave me a list, so let's get to it...
Better than 101 Dalmatians? Yes, because PATF doesn't used recycled animation and the ending is satisfying, unlike 101 Dalmatians, which uses recycled animation and has a marvelous 1st and 2nd act, but then has an abrupt and unsatisfying ending.
Better than The Jungle Book? Yes, because the film doesn't use recycled animation, characters don't go off model sequence to sequence, voice quality doesn't change sentence to sentence, and there aren't long passages of awkward stilted dialog.
Better than The Aristocats? Yes, because while The Aristocats has a killer soundtrack, it has a lazy screenplay and declining production values, leading to...
Better than Robin Hood? Yes, because PATF doesn't use recycled animation again and again and again and PATF has a tight story - it isn't a collage of scenes that simply end with a coda "such and such returned and just straightened everything out" etc etc etc. Robin Hood is almost as loose as Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. Some dig that, I think it was lazy.
Better than The Rescuers? Yes, because PATF doesn't have struggling production values and doesn't have a screenplay that ends like an episode of Scooby Doo.
Better than Fox and the Hound? Yes, because PATF doesn't look like it was shot through a haze of fog, and doesn't have terrible songs, and terribly unfunny supporting characters. Characters don't jump completely off model whenever Glen Keane shows up to anmate some violence.
Better than the Black Cauldron? Yes, because PATF has actual character development and characters you care about and empathize with.
Better than Basil of Baker Street/Great Mouse Detective? Yes, because PATF actually has a production budget, wonderful songs, and doesn't look like an episode of DuckTales.
Better than Oliver and Co? Yes, because Oliver and Co. is an incredibly ugly film, with trite sitcom writing...time will be kind to PATF. Time has gorged on Oliver and Co.
Better than The Little Mermaid? Tough one - PATF has better animation and production values, PATF has a wonderful script (the writing never seems to approach Saturday morning status, while Flounder's dialog seems to be directly lifted from Saturday morning dreck), both films are heartbreaking in their sincerity, both films have exceptional music, with the edge in songwriting going to Mermaid...it is a close battle, but PATF takes the day with the "Bayou" montage, one of the most unexpected and magical things ever seen in Disney animation outside of the Fantasia films.
Better than Rescuers Down Under? Rescuers DU has amazing f/x and character animation of Marahute, Jake, Wilbur, Johanna, and MacLeach. It has tremendous ambition and scope, and a dark humour that I think is unappreciated. I think Bernard and Bianca somehow get lost in the shuffle, and the animation for the two leads isn't up to the standards of the original. Incredible muscial score. An unappreciated film, and a very good one - but it's no PATF.
Better than Beauty and the Beast? PATF has it all over Beauty and the Beast in terms of production values, and the cheap sitcom writing returns as does recycled animation and blatant cribs from previous Disney films (Gaston is a riff on Braum Bones from "Legend of Sleepy Hollow" as is the opening song, which shows Belle aping Ichabod, walking through town with her nose stuck in a book while everyone sings about how odd she is. Same exact thing as "LoSH"). Beast was rushed through production, the film suffers for it. Beauty and the Beast has wonderful songs, but the movie is not the equal of PATF in any other aspect.
Better than Aladdin? The loosey goosey animation style that first reared its head in the 80's grows to full blossom here. All attempts at caricature of movement disappear in a goo of rubberhose animation curves. Great songs, solid story, very very dated in its 1992 improv humour.
Better than The Lion King? PATF doesn't have painfully trite sitcom writing, trademark Katzenberg pop culture references all over the place, and bombast trying to obscure a lack of real character depth.
Better than Pocahontas? PATF underperformed, but not because it was trite, shallow, one-dimensional in characterizations, and kind of insulting in its banality. Pocahontas made $40 million more, but was stopped dead in its tracks and is now a sort of also-ran in DFA history precisely because it was trite, shallow, one-dimensional in characterizations, and kind of insulting in its banality.
Better than Hunchback? Hunchback is glorious in production values and music. One word - gargoyles. Demographic formula trite sitcom b.s. writing almost fatally cripple the film...like Jar Jar in Episode I, so are the Gargoyles to Hunchback. Advantage PATF.
I will continue, if need be, or do you really need me to explain how stupid the cross-dressing ending of MULAN is, or how unsatisfying the 3rd act is of LILO AND STITCH, how HOME ON THE RANGE and DINOSAUR actually make ROBIN HOOD look good...
Yes, PRINCESS AND THE FROG is the best animated film since SLEEPING BEAUTY. Not ludicrous. Its just how things turned out. Who knew PATF would be so good and so complete a movie? It's not PATF's fault that the townspeople in BATB look like walk-ons from some Italian saturday morning cartoon. It's not PATF's fault that the writing for secondary comic characters is so low-IQ and so pandering in Mermaid, Beast, Aladdin and The Lion King. Like what you want, don't hate on PATF for being as good as it was. And don't call the idea that PATF is a better film than anything released under Miller or Eisner "ludicrous". The guy running the show has multiple screenwriting Oscar nominations under his supervision. Disney has never received an nomination or an award for screenwriting. Maybe that needs to change, and judging by how god-awful the Tangled trailer is, something that needs to change ASAP.
......okay what is that? sound like a character off of a nickelodeon show Rocket Power
