DVDizzy Forum

Really, they shouldn't base the movie's medium on whether the previous princess film (be it hand-drawn or CG) was a success or not. Besides, they said they'd do a hand-drawn film every two years. I sure hope they didn't lie about that, or... well, many Disney fans will be disappointed, I'm sure.

Why shouldn't they? Tangled made money.

SWillie! wrote:Why shouldn't they? Tangled made money.

So did Princess and the Frog. Even if it wasn't as much as hoped to have earned, it still earned money.

DisneyJedi wrote:

SWillie! wrote:Why shouldn't they? Tangled made money.

So did Princess and the Frog. Even if it wasn't as much as hoped to have earned, it still earned money.

You just answered your own question. I know you love traditional animation (trust me, so do I. I'm spending 30K a year to study it), but you have to be able to see things from a business point of view.

SWillie! wrote:

DisneyJedi wrote: So did Princess and the Frog. Even if it wasn't as much as hoped to have earned, it still earned money.

You just answered your own question. I know you love traditional animation (trust me, so do I. I'm spending 30K a year to study it), but you have to be able to see things from a business point of view.

Princess and the Frog was a much weaker film than Tangled also. Not to mention it was Disney's first fairy tale venture in years. Had Tangled been released before PatF, I doubt it would have made as much as it did. Had PatF come second, I'm sure it would have made more than it did, although, nowhere near as much as Tangled due to it being a much weaker film.

Princess and the Frog was a much weaker film than Tangled also.

The critics ranked TP&TF pretty much on the same level as Tangled, so I don‘t think most people outside UD think it‘s a much weaker film (since we‘re discussing audience incentive).

Had Tangled been released before PatF, I doubt it would have made as much as it did. Had PatF come second, I'm sure it would have made more than it did

I agree with that. Even with the Fab Four, there was a climbing arc from Mermaid to The Lion King. Success begets success, I guess.

Well, Princess and the Frog would've earned more money, if Disney went with releasing it nationwide over Thanksgiving break like they did with Tangled last year instead of going with their stupid 'Let's give it a limited release over Thanksgiving break and then release it nationwide two weeks later' plan!!!!!

Really, do they WANT to revive hand-drawn animation or not?! Seriously, Disney! You've gotta up your game if you're gonna do what you gotta do!

DisneyJedi wrote:Well, Princess and the Frog would've earned more money, if Disney went with releasing it nationwide over Thanksgiving break like they did with Tangled last year instead of going with their stupid 'Let's give it a limited release over Thanksgiving break and then release it nationwide two weeks later' plan!!!!!

Really, do they WANT to revive hand-drawn animation or not?! Seriously, Disney! You've gotta up your game if you're gonna do what you gotta do!

It's not mostly that. It's mostly b/c they had to SMACK Princess and the Frog right before the MOST SUCESSFUL MOVIE OF ALL TIME----Avatar and Alvin 2. (I can't wait to see Disney complain about how Winnie the Pooh "failed". Gee, maybe it's because they put it RIGHT during the ending of the most famous movie series of all time. )

Plus, Christians (no offense to fellow Christians, I'm one too, but I was still cool with it) were complaing about the voodoo (because God-forbid, Disney can't add magic to the movie like they did to the others ) and blacks were compaing about their Princess becoming a frog for pretty much the whole movie, so those took lots of money too.

BTW: With the CAPS, I wasn't yelling, I did it for emphasis.

Well, it shouldn't be too hard for Pooh to recoup its budget, given how much that cost to make.

disneyprincess11 wrote:
Plus, Christians (no offense to fellow Christians, I'm one too, but I was still cool with it) were complaing about the voodoo (because God-forbid, Disney can't add magic to the movie like they did to the others ) and blacks were compaing about their Princess becoming a frog for pretty much the whole movie, so those took lots of money too.

I sadly have to agree with you. I have a few "Family Friendly" Facebook groups and I remember when i was pushing PatF, I got the response, "But it has Voodoo in it!" A lot of Christian parents didn't want their kids to see it becuase of that. Personally, while I'm normally one to complain about elements added to films I don't feel need to be there (sex, violence, language), I even thought that was much ado about nothing! I think it did have a negative impact on the film.

Haven't a lot of Christians been boycotting Disney for years though? I doubt the same people who haven't been buying since The Lion King's paganistic shaman values really had that much of an impact here.

milojthatch wrote:

disneyprincess11 wrote:
Plus, Christians (no offense to fellow Christians, I'm one too, but I was still cool with it) were complaing about the voodoo (because God-forbid, Disney can't add magic to the movie like they did to the others ) and blacks were compaing about their Princess becoming a frog for pretty much the whole movie, so those took lots of money too.

I sadly have to agree with you. I have a few "Family Friendly" Facebook groups and I remember when i was pushing PatF, I got the response, "But it has Voodoo in it!" A lot of Christian parents didn't want their kids to see it becuase of that. Personally, while I'm normally one to complain about elements added to films I don't feel need to be there (sex, violence, language), I even thought that was much ado about nothing! I think it did have a negative impact on the film.

LOL!I'm a christian,and I did not react like that.Besides, Walt Disney Animation Studios is not a cookie-cutter film studio.It is a pop-culture institution. But what if Snow Queen had the Christian elements like in the original?Atheist parents will complain, "It has Jesus in it!"
I don't think PATF deserved that kind of controversy.HBOND deserved it because religion was the motive for Frollo to keep Quasi and kill Esmeralda.Disney can get away with subliminal religious messaging,but nothing like in HBOND.So how are they going to pull The Snow Queen off?

Disney's Divinity wrote:Haven't a lot of Christians been boycotting Disney for years though? I doubt the same people who haven't been buying since The Lion King's paganistic shaman values really had that much of an impact here.

Ok, that's EVEN MORE stupid than PATF!

Candy-Bonita95 wrote: HBOND deserved it because religion was the motive for Frollo to keep Quasi and kill Esmeralda.Disney can get away with subliminal religious messaging,but nothing like in HBOND.So how are they going to pull The Snow Queen off?

yEAH, i AGREE WITH THAT. (SORRY 4 THE CAPS). I'm rushing to go to bed.

Anyhoo, yeah. Like Frollo was like, "Dear Mary, send Esmerelda to hell if she doesnt do it with me! Amen". So, I can see how people complained.

Candy-Bonita95 wrote:

milojthatch wrote: I sadly have to agree with you. I have a few "Family Friendly" Facebook groups and I remember when i was pushing PatF, I got the response, "But it has Voodoo in it!" A lot of Christian parents didn't want their kids to see it becuase of that. Personally, while I'm normally one to complain about elements added to films I don't feel need to be there (sex, violence, language), I even thought that was much ado about nothing! I think it did have a negative impact on the film.

LOL!I'm a christian,and I did not react like that.Besides, Walt Disney Animation Studios is not a cookie-cutter film studio.It is a pop-culture institution. But what if Snow Queen had the Christian elements like in the original?Atheist parents will complain, "It has Jesus in it!"
I don't think PATF deserved that kind of controversy.HBOND deserved it because religion was the motive for Frollo to keep Quasi and kill Esmeralda.Disney can get away with subliminal religious messaging,but nothing like in HBOND.So how are they going to pull The Snow Queen off?

I'm a Christian too and I think it's silly. I'm not saying all Christians felt that way, I'm just explaining my experience. I was trying to not come off as mean before, but I'll just come right out and say it. By "Christian," I really mean Bible-belters. Good 'old boys. Born Agains. Got it? I'm not even saying everyone like that felt that way, but being very frank on this, my experience has shown me that many people like this didn't want to see this film becuase of the VooDoo and/ or the fact that the princess was black. Person after person that I've talked to either online or in the real World, this has been the trend I've seen.

Was it the only reason? No. But it was a big one.

Good gravy. I'm Catholic, and yet I don't see how voodoo in a movie is a problem. If anyone needs to be smacked upside the head, it's those people who take things so seriously. Because religious people can be total morons.

When I was younger this family that used to go to my church (and the mother even babysit me for a while) boycotted Disney. I never understood why. These days I think they realize how stupid the idea was and don't mind Disney at all.

My very Christian family's biggest complaint regarding the movie was how boring it was

Somehow my boyfriend thinks its just as good as Tangled

Victurtle wrote: Somehow my boyfriend thinks its just as good as Tangled

Well, I liked Frog more than Tangled, so .

Victurtle wrote:
Somehow my boyfriend thinks its just as good as Tangled

Maybe becuase it is?