DVDizzy Forum

I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and it got me thinking... We were all devastated when Newman replaced Menken and it turned out the music was the least of PatF's problems. Oh, the irony.

Mooky wrote:I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and it got me thinking... We were all devastated when Newman replaced Menken and it turned out the music was the least of PatF's problems. Oh, the irony.

What do you mean? Are you saying the music is the only good thing about it?

Oh, no, it's just that many people have noticed that PatF has some serious story issues... We took as given that the story will be flawless just because a renowned storytelling/directorial team was at the helm. On the other hand, Newman's music was expected to be the weak link of the movie and he delivered a mighty fine soundtrack. It just goes to show you should never assume anything before you actually see the finished product.

Siren wrote:Watching these clips of Charlotte...I know who she reminds me off....a young Blanche Devereaux. Now that I realized that, I can't help but think, that was the animators' and writers' intentions

Contains MAJOR spoilers...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDiR9MXlNZU

Hahahaha!!!! I have ALWAYS thought this! I mean, when Charlotte called her father "Big Daddy," I was like "Hey. Blanche calls her father Big Daddy too". They really are quite similar, except I don't think Charlotte slept around. Lol.

I can see a bit of Dorothy in Tiana and now that I think about it, Louis has some similarities to Rose. Haha!

Can Mama Odie be Marie, then!?

I'm so excited! I finally get to go see this on Monday!!

tsom wrote:

Siren wrote:Watching these clips of Charlotte...I know who she reminds me off....a young Blanche Devereaux. Now that I realized that, I can't help but think, that was the animators' and writers' intentions

Contains MAJOR spoilers...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDiR9MXlNZU

Hahahaha!!!! I have ALWAYS thought this! I mean, when Charlotte called her father "Big Daddy," I was like "Hey. Blanche calls her father Big Daddy too". They really are quite similar, except I don't think Charlotte slept around. Lol.

I can see a bit of Dorothy in Tiana and now that I think about it, Louis has some similarities to Rose. Haha!

I don't think she slept around either, but was was man crazy like Blanche

Mooky wrote:Oh, no, it's just that many people have noticed that PatF has some serious story issues... We took as given that the story will be flawless just because a renowned storytelling/directorial team was at the helm. On the other hand, Newman's music was expected to be the weak link of the movie and he delivered a mighty fine soundtrack. It just goes to show you should never assume anything before you actually see the finished product.

Just my personal opinion, but I didn't find any serious story issues at all with the film. I admit the pacing was rather brisk and tight, and sometimes went by a bit too quick, but I think it suited it more for the theme's overall tones. I find a whole lot more plot holes in Beauty and the Beast than I did in PatF.

PrincePhillipFan wrote:

Mooky wrote:Oh, no, it's just that many people have noticed that PatF has some serious story issues... We took as given that the story will be flawless just because a renowned storytelling/directorial team was at the helm. On the other hand, Newman's music was expected to be the weak link of the movie and he delivered a mighty fine soundtrack. It just goes to show you should never assume anything before you actually see the finished product.

Just my personal opinion, but I didn't find any serious story issues at all with the film. I admit the pacing was rather brisk and tight, and sometimes went by a bit too quick, but I think it suited it more for the theme's overall tones. I find a whole lot more plot holes in Beauty and the Beast than I did in PatF.

Funny you mention that, Tim. Beauty and the Beast is a film HIGHLY celebrated by fans as one of the best and flawless films in history, while they criticize Princess and the Frog for feeling cheap and being god awful.

Yet, Beauty and the Beast has too many glaring flaws, like cheap character models in some scenes, continuity issues, story issues and recycled animation. So much so that the commentary on the DVD keeps mentioning these flaws.

I've seen Princess and the Frog multiple times and I've yet to notice any plot holes or flaws in animation. The only ones criticizing it are those that are either animation snubs or fans that hold the fab four in an extremely high pedestal.

What I am saying is that no Disney film is flawless, and that even the most celebrated of them have glaring issues.

Whaaat?!? Don't you disrespect "Beauty and the Beast", pap64 and Tim! Don't you derogate or deride! You're talking about my favorite movie and I've got friends on the other side!!!

(Sorry, I love this song to death )

But yes, I agree, BatB does have some glaring mistakes in it... Oh well, it still doesn't stop me from enjoying it.

Mooky wrote:Whaaat?!? Don't you disrespect "Beauty and the Beast", pap64 and Tim! Don't you derogate or deride! You're talking about my favorite movie and I've got friends on the other side!!!

(Sorry, I love this song to death )

But yes, I agree, BatB does have some glaring mistakes in it... Oh well, it still doesn't stop me from enjoying it.

Don't get me wrong, I do respect BatB for what it has done, I just think that's it overtly praised by many Disney fans because I notice so many glaring animation issues and a few story mistakes with it. I think my main problem is that it seems like many Disney fans I always run into think that Disney only exists in 1989-1994, and criticize the hell out of any of the Walt era films, or the ones from 1996-2002. I know what you mean though. I love Sleeping Beauty and it's one of my favorites, yet I still recognize that it has some story issues, but in spite I love the film because it has such colorful characters and amazing artwork and music.

I know I'm definitely the odd one out, but personally I enjoy Disney's films from 96 to 2002 a whole lot more than any of the Renaissance era films. I enjoy the Renaissance films for their story, but I personally never was able to connect with Ariel, Belle, Aladdin, or Jasmine. If anything, they grate even more on my nerves now because of how arrogant they sometimes are and throw whiny hissy fits, and yet they still get what they want. I simply respect characters like Hercules, Tiana, Naveen, and Cinderella because I sympathize a lot more with their struggles and see genuine change in their characters, while the other ones from the Renaissance era simply annoy me and they change very little from that.

I'm in the same boat as Tim here. I LOVE Beauty and the Beast and has many strengths. But like Tim said, fans are so hung up over the fab four that they see every film that came before and after them as inferior when they all have their flaws.

I think that's what happened with Princess and the Frog. People expect it to be EXACTLY like the fab four or at worse, like Disney's own films. The truth is that you can't expect lighting to hit the same place twice and Disney was a genius. You can't emulate his style.

If you see The Princess and the Frog as its own film, then it becomes highly enjoyable, damn good even. I just refuse to see it as being highly inferior or as one of the worst movies in the Disney canon.

PrincePhillipFan wrote:I think my main problem is that it seems like many Disney fans I always run into think that Disney only exists in 1989-1994, and criticize the hell out of any of the Walt era films, or the ones from 1996-2002.

Oh, I very well know what you mean. I personally love Disney's '70s movies (a decade of underrated gems, as I like to call it) and it pains me to see when people proclaim it the worst Disney decade. And for the record, all three of my favorite Disney films happen to be part of Fab Four, but I'm certainly not blind to their flaws nor do I think they're the best movies Disney has ever done.

pap64 wrote:I think that's what happened with Princess and the Frog. People expect it to be EXACTLY like the fab four or at worse, like Disney's own films.

But really, can you blame them? Disney purposely used trademark scenes from the Fab Four (ugh! Whoever coined this term should burn in hell) to help sell PatF. And whether you agree or not, most people do see those four films as the pinnacle of Disney animation. So no wonder people's expectations were high. My expectations were high. And I think I said it once before, they didn't let this movie breathe on its own. They put Tiana in the Princess line months before the movie was released and used it as a main selling point. The animation featurettes were almost always filled with references to "Fab Four".

pap64 wrote:If you see The Princess and the Frog as its own film, then it becomes highly enjoyable, damn good even. I just refuse to see it as being highly inferior or as one of the worst movies in the Disney canon.

I doubt anyone here sees it as a failure. It's a good movie, it just happens to carry a heavy weight of being the first of its kind and yet having to conform to previous Disney standards. I'm sure there were naysayers back when TLM first came out that thought it could never measure up to "Cinderella", "Sleeping Beauty" or "Lady and the Tramp" and look at it now. In time PatF will be recognized as a Disney classic, I'm positive about that.

pap64 wrote:I'm in the same boat as Tim here. I LOVE Beauty and the Beast and has many strengths. But like Tim said, fans are so hung up over the fab four that they see every film that came before and after them as inferior when they all have their flaws.

I think that's what happened with Princess and the Frog. People expect it to be EXACTLY like the fab four or at worse, like Disney's own films. The truth is that you can't expect lighting to hit the same place twice and Disney was a genius. You can't emulate his style.

If you see The Princess and the Frog as its own film, then it becomes highly enjoyable, damn good even. I just refuse to see it as being highly inferior or as one of the worst movies in the Disney canon.

As much as I love the four movies, I saw TPatF as the movie it is and I was not disappointed. All of the Disney movies have their strengths and weaknesses, and while Aladdin and The Lion King are my first and second favorite Disney movies I don't let my opinions get in the way of facts. The best Disney animated movie would have to be Pinocchio or Snow White and the Seven Dwarves and not one of the fab four.

I wish The Hunchback of Norte Dame and Tarzan had more love. They were great movies and they are a couple of my favorites too yet they seem to be overlooked by the fab four. I doubt Hercules is underrated because that movie has a lot more recognition and popularity than all the other post-fab four films.

Going back to the numbers a bit, the movie has gone back to the seventh spot. BUT, it has remained a float and will hit 80 million by Monday. It keeps earning over 3 million per day, and will earn over 10 million by the end of the weekend.

The movie is still playing in over 3,000 theaters so it will likely keep playing well after its release on DVD and Blu-Ray.

I also noticed that in my area it's still pretty heavily advertised (other than myself singing it's praises almost everywhere I go ). I watched a add that I haven't seen on TV before saying it's Time Magazines number one movie of the year, which oughta grab some attention. Is this even released world-wide yet?

Mooky wrote:I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and it got me thinking... We were all devastated when Newman replaced Menken and it turned out the music was the least of PatF's problems. Oh, the irony.

Actually, to me, it is the worst of it's problems. The Princess and the Frog has just as many story problems, what some may consider annoying side kicks, and an underdeveloped villain as any of the Disney Renaissance films. The music was soo good in almost every Renaissance Film that people were quick to overlook/dismiss these flaws that stand out in Frog without the show stoppers.

Well at least I'm sure thats one of the reasons I noticed the flaws more (it took a lot more watches for the Disney Renaissance flaws to become apparent as I was so taken with the music upon every viewing).

singerguy04 wrote:I also noticed that in my area it's still pretty heavily advertised (other than myself singing it's praises almost everywhere I go ). I watched a add that I haven't seen on TV before saying it's Time Magazines number one movie of the year, which oughta grab some attention. Is this even released world-wide yet?

It apparently already hit 100 million thanks to world wide numbers, but I can't find the data anywhere.

Europe will supposedly get the film in February.

I wonder, though. Why doesn't Disney releases its DACs simultaneously? A Christmas Carol was released worldwide right after North America, and it already has over 300 million.

pap64 wrote:I wonder, though. Why doesn't Disney releases its DACs simultaneously? A Christmas Carol was released worldwide right after North America, and it already has over 300 million.

Because it takes a long time to dub, market, and prepare a foreign film going to theaters. And Disney has to do this for, at most, 40-or-so languages.

Dragonlion wrote:

pap64 wrote:I wonder, though. Why doesn't Disney releases its DACs simultaneously? A Christmas Carol was released worldwide right after North America, and it already has over 300 million.

Because it takes a long time to dub, market, and prepare a foreign film going to theaters. And Disney has to do this for, at most, 40-or-so languages.

True, but so did Christmas Carol, and that was released quickly (unless the international versions settle for subtitles, which is easier to make and release).