The Princess and the Frog - MiceChat Reviews

[Aladdin]

Just have to say a few things respondig to what DD wrote.

Really, the way caucasian and cajun americans are portrayed should be offensive to me, especially the 3 backwoods people who like they stepped out of another movie, "Deliverance." Charlotte was portrayed as a white dizty blonde, HOW stereotypical it that. You said that this looks like Disney does this to "capitalize on stereotypes, but OVERTLY - for subversion". You could reason away anything with logic like that. It just sounds way over-analytical.

I don't understand your point about not showing any of Tiana's "other" friends. I don't see a problem with that. The story begins with Tiana's and Charlotte's friendship in the movie. It also shows the relationship between her and her mother and father, there is only so much room in the movie, for so many characters. And most of the other princesses don't have any childhood friends at all, they tried something different with Tiana.

By the time Tiana is a princess, she's already serving food and the credits are rolling. In no other princess movie is the princess not treated like a princess by everyone around her throughout the film (except villains, of course).

Some of the princesses don't have contact with others, except the villains.

Well, Cinderella didn't have it easy, certainly no friends, cruel stepsisters.
Snow White - had evil step mom, but Snow worked hard and cleaned up the dwarves cottage cooked for them,
Princess Aurora only had the 3 fairies, couldn't stay with her parents, basically grew up adopted her entire childhood. and wasn't allowed to have any friends,
Belle, the sing "Hello", but then say she's so peculiar, not exactly complimentary.

Cinderella was a hard worker
Snow White was also hard worker, something in common with Tiana
Aurora grew up without any childhood friends
Belle - one of the articles acuses Princess and the Frog as promoting bestiality, well then so does Beauty and the Beast - and the "peculiar" daughter of an odd insane inventor. - some of those articles are just looking to make their own "interpretations" of the story, rather than take the story/fairy tale for itself.

You also mentioned the relationship between Tiana and Naveen, although not as detailed as Beauty and the beast, Tiana and Naveen's relationship is certainly better formed than Snow White and her prince or cinderella and her prince charming (who she only danced with one time).

As for Tianna being a frog a good portion of the movie, I really don't see how this varies from some other movies: Kuzco was a Llama even more of the movie. All the characters in the Beast's castle were something than they really were for the entire movie, and in Sword in the stone the main character was several different animals. Tiana's not the 1st main character to be something else during the movie. Again this point just puzzles me how it's ok in ALL those other Disney movies, but it's WRONG in Princess and the Frog.

[DuffyDad]

...

[DuffyDad]

...

[flynnibus]

well... when someone wants to be the victim.. they'll find a way.

[Radiobarry]

I still haven't seen the film yet. Anyway, I've just attempted to quickly scroll through this thread, and have determined that such a thing cannot be done! I wonder if the internet had been around at the time Gone With the Wind or Citizen Kane had been released, if we would have seen such a lengthy and thorough dissection.

[aashee]

I liked the movie. I'm not in the mood to get blasted for dissecting it so I'll leave it at that.

[DuffyDad]

...

[Radiobarry]

Originally Posted by aashee

I liked the movie. I'm not in the mood to get blasted for dissecting it so I'll leave it at that.

The last time I dissected something involving a frog was in eighth grade science class.

To each, their own.

All I did was just make a comment on the length and breadth of the discussion regarding the film here. No explosives were used.

[flynnibus]

Originally Posted by DuffyDad

Thankfully, it still has not ceased to amaze me how easy it is for some people to throw quick, one-liner jabs out at whole people they've never met but reduce to stimulus/target via the Internet. It apparently makes them feel clever. Intended solely to hurt, not to explore, I only always hope that in face-to-face communication, these same people are not so quick to put people in boxes or on scales, judge and punish.

Not to hurt - to summarize. I could elaborate for pages, but there is no reason to. Those who seek to find the sliver in anything - will - regardless if that sliver they seek is positive or negative. For every point in this discussion you've brought up, it doesn't matter what the impression others got from the same thing.. you've found that sliver that got to you and will be as you want to see it.

And as for 'quick' - I did read the entire thread (it's not necessary to respond to every post) and I've seen your heightened sensitivity in other threads prior. Nothing 'quick' about my post - just concise.

Yet whites also know that if any given princess isn’t pleasing, in a few years another will be created. This is the first and most likely last black Disney princess. After all, while Disney repeatedly makes white princesses, it has yet to create more than one princess from the same minority ethnic group. In that light, it’s important to get Tiana right on the first (and probably only) shot...

What total crap. This is exactly what I'm talking about people finding what they want to find in stuff. 'Disney repeatedly makes white princesses' - it does? Could it have anything to do with the setting of most traditional fairy tales in Europe? Could that possibly have something to do with it? Or should we follow the author's inferrance that Disney is making all the white princesses and only creates token minority ones once. What total garbage.

Originally Posted by DuffyDad

My goal was really just to put forward the idea that people who did think it was worth being critical about this film did, in fact, have a right to post their re/views. It is possible that someone else in the MiceChat community was struggling with a similar experience of the film and just wanted to talk it out. The original environment was very hostile to that process, and now it seems to be becoming so again

And no one stopped anyone from doing so and people were posting their reviews/comments. Its just you got upset that no one replied to your comments and took it as 'hostility'. Then when people do reply and don't agree, you see that as 'hostility' again. Kinda gets back to my original post again...

[DuffyDad]

...

[ALIASd]

Originally Posted by DuffyDad

Or the charms of Philip, Eric, or Aladdin - even the "street rat" thief is a more worthy prince than Naveen! I'm still waiting for the MiceChatter who finds Naveen in the swoon-worthy league of these guys...anybody?

Just like to inject some quick background on the Disney guys:

legendary Disney animator Milt Kahl hated the princes, calling Philip boring and bland but what the studio dictated. 'The Little Mermaid' co-director John Musker explained at the 12/19 "The Art of The Princess and the Frog" event that Eric was name-checked as GEN-Eric at the studio's first preview by animaton pros & general public audience members. Aladdin was inspired by a proven box office commodity, Tom Cruise. And at the same 'TP&tF' event Naveen supervising animator Randy Haycock introduced his 14-year old daughter who proved to be a major influence in his character's physical appearance, as were the WDAS female employees who also chose Bruno Campos voice over two other actors in role contention.

Naveen's look came directly from men's glamour photos and vintage advertising from the period, and from Miss Haycock's appreciation of the Jonas Brothers. Take another look at those eyebrows...

[animagusurreal]

Originally Posted by DuffyDad

Wow. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your post, and took so much time replying to it, as you graciously did with mine. And then this. Just a swath of general agreement as long as it dismisses me, and another blanket agreement with posts as yet unread as long as they, too, dismiss me, which is presumed. The idea that anyone may actually post that they can relate to what I was feeling is implied as nonsensically unlikely. Wow...ouch. Nice fake, though. I honestly felt like you were listening and responding with heart. Boy did you get me! Kudos and congrats. Getting away from this stupid screen. Now. My heart and my eyes ache. Thanks, though, Animagus. Your post really did help me. I sincerely mean that.

That line wasn't meant as a slight against you or your post in any way. I saw Coheteboy's first reply to you and agreed with most of what it said. Ordinarily, I would have quoted that and posted in a seperate reply, but I was in a hurry, so I tacked it on to the end of my reply to you, originally saying "I also agree with Coheteboy's reply above." However, by this time, more replies had been posted, including at least one from Coheteboy which I didn't have time to read. So I hastily explained which reply of his I was referring to, but then so he wouldn't think I disagreed with the other (I could neither agree nor disagree with it as I hadn't read it) I added that line about how I "imagined" I'd agree with that too - imagined, because I didn't know, because I hadn't read it . I was referring to Coheteboy's replies alone, not "any and all replies other than yours." Sorry if there was any confusion .

[Coheteboy]

Originally Posted by animagusurreal

Unfortunately, I spent so long writing this that I don't have time to edit it into something coherent, so here is my overlong, disjointed, rambling response. Also, apologies if I reference things that you said in the other PatF thread - they're sort of mixing together in my mind right now
　
- First of all, I want to say that I appreciate how you have explained your thoughts and emotions on the subject.

- I recall you mentioned liking Tiana as a character. Winding up in an actual palace living off of Naveen's parents wouldn't have been a happy ending for her. If you want that as a happy ending, you have to start with a different character. Also, I agree with Coheteboy that

Spoiler

Naveen is no longer disowned by his parents once he marries Tiana. She at least gets to vacation at the palace, I'm sure .

- The "lesson" of Tiana's hardworking nature is a reflection of our economic woes - again, aimed at everyone in the audience. Back in the 1930's, Disney gave the world The Three Little Pigs (with the lesson of being like hardworking Practical Pig and building your house of bricks before you had fun) and had Snow White suggest that you "Whistle While You Work".

- Tiana is a self-made American pull herself up by the bootstraps woman. She doesn't need any animals to get her ready for work - she can do it herself.

- Ariel borrowed all of her dresses, plus that rag Scuttle dressed her in. The only clothing she owns is a pair of seashells. Cinderella also "borrowed" her dress from the Fairy Godmother, in the sense that she had to give it back at Midnight. I'm guessing that Tiana got to keep that leafy green dress

Spoiler

that she got at the end when she transformed back.

- I have to ask - do you pity Emeril Lugasse or Wolfgang Puck for "serving other people food?" Do you see them as being in some sort of lowly, unfortunate position?

- Disney has always gone out of their way to show that their heroines marry the prince not for money or status or power (all the things that the villains are after), but for true love.This was shown with Cinderella not realising that she was dancing with the prince ("The prince - I haven't met the prince"), and even moreso in Sleeping Beauty, where Aurora is actually depressed that she can't marry random-guy-in-the-forest because she has to marry a prince (not realising, of course, that they're the same person). The difference is that when Cinderella finds out that her man is the prince, she is shocked and somewhat exited about it, whereas Tiana could care less about Naveen's title. I can kinda see what you're saying about how this moves away from little girls' expectations of a princess movie. Kind of like how (bear with me, here), in the Transformers movies, Sam Witwicky is supposed to represent "us" and how cool it would be if we could hang out with giant robots, but in the sequel he just wants to go to college and can't stand hanging out with the robots - that works against it. I could see the same thing possibly happening here for little girls who are excited at the idea of being a princess, only to find that Tiana is disinterested in it.

- How do you tell a story that at once seems like a natural extension of a decades old tradition (the classic Disney fairy tales, which themselves were an extension of centuries-old tradition) and yet still have the film feel fresh and new? Films like Little Mermaid and Beauty and Beast succeeded because they found this balance. I don't think PatF quite has - but it comes close. Then again, in a post-Shrek-and-Enchanted world, how do you present a sincere, non-satirical Disney princess without seeming old hat? Disney's solution was to have Tiana be utterly disinterested in the traditional princess dream. She winds up getting it anyway, but she isn't totally defined by it. Charlotte, meanwhile, is a comical princess wannabe. No matter how many times they reference the plot point that she's princess-for-a-day, I can't imagine little girls playing her as more princess-like than Tiana.

- One of the things that I think makes PatF feel differentfrom previous Disney fairy tales is that, in the context of the movie, the fairy tale already exists. Naveen isn't THE Frog Prince. He's A frog prince. This is the result of not being set a long time ago in a land far, far away, but 20th Century America. (I enjoyed the setting nonetheless, and at least it wasn't set in the "hip, culturally relevant" present, like DCA ).

- I think we can safely assume that Tiana's mother or Tiana herself made her first costume. Having it get messed up (not because she was "clumsy," but because she was upset) was a plot device to get her into the princess dress and have her be alone in Charlotte's room so frog Naveen could mistake her for a princess. I think it might have been simpler, plotwise, to have her show up in the princess dress to begin with, but maybe they wanted to underline her disintrest in being a princess. (I.e., she only wound up in the dress because her other one got messed up).

- I think you've been a bit unfair to poor Naveen . I think he's a reaction to the (justified) criticism that the princes are the most boring characters in the classic Disney movies. They're not so much characters as trophies. In one post, you compared Naveen to Gaston. I see Naveen as being in the same vein as Prince Edward from Enchanted, and the actor who played him said that the Disney princes were so boring, he based his performance on Gaston! . Outside of Disney, Warner/Hanna-Barbera did something similar with Fred Jones from the Scooby-Doo franchise. He started out as a dull "normal guy" who acted in contrast to paraonoid Shaggy, but in more recent years, he's become an egotistical, delusional goof. Getting back to Naveen - he starts out the way you describe him - lazy, womanizing - but over the course of the film, he saves Tiana from the frog hunters (parallel to The Beast saving Belle as a turning point, though that was a much more dramatic sequence) he learns to mince, and teaches her to dance (parallell to "Something There"). What's missing is the "Ballroom Scene" so to speak. The scene that takes them from "you're not so bad after all" to "I'm madly in love and I can't live without you.")

Spoiler

Anyway, the "Little Golden Book" version spells out that Naveen also works hard at turning the sugar mill into Tiana's restaurant. And his expression when Charlotte is kissing him should tell you that he's all for Tiana and his womanizing days are over.

(By the way, if you ever want to see a really womanizing prince charming, see the musical "Into the Woods" The intention is to show both of them learning something from the other - he learns how to work and she learns how to have fun. (It reminds me a lot of The Lion King 2, where Kovu teaching Kiara to hunt, and Kiara teaches Kovu how to have a good time).

- In one post, you referenced Tiana "sacrificing" something for Naveen. What did she sacrifice? Transforming into a frog in the first place was unintentional, and

Spoiler

she got her human form and her restaurant in the end. She didn't take Facilier's bargain, but that was probably just a trick anyway.

- In answer to the question - "Why couldn't Tiana stay human throughout the movie?" Because the natural conclusion of the story is the frog prince changing back to his human form, human Tiana would have had to fall in love with Naveen WHILE HE WAS STILL A FROG - which I don't think would have been any better received. I think it was a less awkward solution to make them both frogs, in addition to providing Tiana motivation to go along with Naveen to find Mama Odie, and providing a new "twist" on the old story.

- When I first saw Ray in the teaser trailer, I was concerned he'd be the typical "dumb hick" type. But he wasn't like that at all in the movie. He calmly untangled Tiana and Naveen's tongues. He was a sweet and passionate (albiet delusional) romantic. He councelled Tiana reasonably and rationally when she was upset about Naveen. "Evangeline" is my pick for the Best Song Oscar, though I suspect it will go to the (also deserving) "Almost There" instead. And, since neither Tiana nor Naveen intended to fall in love, (unlike, for example, with "Kiss the Girl", where Ariel wants the prince to kiss her) I think it was genius to have their hearts melt over a song that was not about them.

- I think Randy Newman's score is the strongest aspect of this movie, and I adore it . I also like Newman's music in general - I just hear that snippet of "I Will Never Get Over Losing You" in the Toy Story 3 previews, and I start getting all misty-eyed. Most of the critics, however, agree with you. Even the Nostalgia Critic, in his guise as the Bum Reviewer, said "They go into the swamp looking for someone. Maybe they'll find Alan Menken...pleeeeeease let them find Alan Menken." I'd like to add that Menken is one of my favorite composers of all time and I look forward to hearing his work on Rapunzel.

- I liked Louis. I liked how passionate he was about his jazz, and the jovial bounciness of him. While I don't see much similarity to Tic-Tock (other than the species and general Disney look), I will admit his neurosis is awfully similar to Rex in the Toy Story movies. Also, I agree that he could have been more integral to the main plot -

Spoiler

but he did scare those brokers into letting Tiana buy the sugar mill.

- Also, I think some of the differences you noted from the Disney classics are a result of a culture clash with Pixar. Lasseter was a huge influence on this movie, and he (and his studio) have never made a princess movie before. Their heroes are typically workers. The first thing Woody does in Toy Story is call a staff meeting. Monsters, Inc. is all about the workplace. Finding Nemo is about being a parent (not a "job" in the same sense, but I imagine a whole lot more work ). Bob Paar works in an insurance office. Remy defines himself by his work - "I'm a chef!" WALL-E is a garbage man. Even Princess Atta from A Bug's Life seemed more like she was the new manager of the family business than a glamorous princess ("Under new management," as Hopper quips). (Her little sister Dot was a princess too, but same thing - more the cute little kid type than a glamorous princess). One of PatF's morals - that success is meaningless without "love" - is very similar to the moral of Cars.

- Also, these are the people who brought us the delusional toy who thinks he's a space ranger, the sharks who don't eat fish, the rat who wants to cook, etc. After seeing the film, I got the feeling that part of them would rather have spent more time with the alligator who wants to play jazz and the firefly who's in love with a star than the main prince and princess.

- I agree that Facilier lacks a personal vendetta against the heroes.
Again, I think this comes back to the Pixar influence and their lack of experience with princess stories. While they've done some villains (Hopper, Syndrome), they typically have antagonists instead - characters who are jerks and do bad things, but aren't the embodiment of pure evil that Disney villains are. Also, (again with the exception of Hopper and Syndrome), the movies don't typically focus on them as much as Disney movies do - we don't even find out that Waternoose and Stinky Pete are bad until their respective movies are almost over. (Which, by the way, is completely appropriate to those movies. This is not a knock against Pixar ).
　
- Regarding your reference to Mama Odie as a "mammy" stereotype, I didn't see it that way at all. She was more like a wise Master Yoda to me. She blasted those shadows pretty good with her magic torch, and while she didn't transform Tiana and Naveen back, I believe she could have - note that she turns JuJu the snake into several animals - but unlike Facilier, she didn't want to give them an easy solution, she wanted them to do it for themselves, which resulted in Tiana and Naveen realizing that they loved each other.

- Regarding the difficulty of telling a fairy tale - any fairy tale - in a PC age, I suggest reading this short story by Margaret Atwood (this is on some random BLOG I ran across on Google. I originally read it in a college literature textbook.)

There Was Once Hanan

- And here's an "alternate reality" look at how (I think) the princesses of the Disney Rennaisance could have been spun as "racist" by the media, if their heroines had been "the first black Disney princess" (but all other aspects of the characters and movies remained exactly as they are now).
(Note: the following are not my opinions, but satirical imagined media comments).

The Little Mermaid - EXTRA! EXTRA! Disney's first black princess spends most of the movie as a half-fish (read: not entirely human) and then, when she finally gains a fully human form - through a deal with the "devil," no less - she loses her voice!

Beauty and the Beast - EXTRA! EXTRA! Disney's first black princess shuns her handsome human suitor and instead falls in love with a grotesque and abusive monster (the first Disney princess not to get a human prince - well, he's human at the end, but only for about a minute). Worse, the Beast has imprisoned (read: enslaved) Belle, leading to a disturbing historical parrallell with the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemming.

Aladdin - EXTRA! EXTRA! While Disney's other princesses got handsome and wealthy princes, Disney's first black princess winds up with a pennilless theif.

Mulan - EXTRA! EXTRA! Disney's first black heroine is not actually a princess - but a cross-dresser!

And, as a bonus, Enchanted - EXTRA! EXTRA! Disney's first black "princess" loses her prince and royal title to a supporting character, and instead marries some lawyer who let her sleep on his couch!

- Lastly, I agree with everything Coheteboy said in his post immediately following DuffyDad's bullet point list. (Haven't had a chance to read the others since then, though I imagine I agree with them, too).
　
　
　
　

Very well said!

I think I want to just mention that I'm not trying to brush off Duffy Dad's viewpoints. I just don't agree with them. If you make it about race, then you won't find the good underneath. You never will.

The origins of the Frog Prince is German, from the Brothers Grimm. Would it not be fair for all the Germans to cry racist at Disney for turning one of their beloved fairy tales into an "american" tale?

I also understand that Disney picked up the rights to another version of the story and adapted that as well but I can't remember what it was or where it came from. If I remember, I'll post it.


Princess and the Frog is a very American retelling of the story. I don't believe race should have anything to do with it. If it was marketed to you as such, it wasn't marketed that way to me. Actually, I was very disappointed with the marketing overall, which might be a reason why people aren't flocking to the theaters. Good word of mouth is what's keeping the film chugging along.

This movie should not be about "why didn't the character do this or this or that?"... if the only motivation for your asking is because of race. It should be for the story first and foremost, and I think the story is fantastic. The romance could have been handled better, but that's more of an execution and direction issue, not with the story.



Duffy Dad, you mention that you can't ignore the history of your background. You mention Dr. King. Wouldn't Dr. King support this film? Isn't that his dream? For people of any color be depicted together as one? I think your attitude is the opposite of what he's striving for. If I'm misunderstanding you, I apologize, but that's the impression that I get from reading your dialogues.

And in response to an earlier jab, I wouldn't like Princess and the Frog better if Tiana was "white". I have a feeling YOU would though.

[AmbuhVee]

This thread is turning from debate to heated argument. This movie doesn't offend me in the least. (Then again, I'm not any of the stereotypes showcased in the movie...except blonde. But we get that all the time.) BUT, I can say that Tiana is hands down my favorite princess. She's hard working, she's got a good head on her shoulders, she's beautiful, and she follows her dreams. I can't see any of the other princesses being better role models than Tiana is, and kudos for that.

[DuffyDad]

...