Old Fashioned ‘Princess and the Frog’ Conservative at Heart
by Christian Toto
The new Disney feature “The Princess and the Frog” is old school in more ways than one.
The animated film, number one at the box office over the weekend, uses hand-drawn animation to tell its magical story. It’s a technique most audiences grew up watching, but one pushed to the boundaries of animation thanks primarily to the computer wizards over at Pixar (“Toy Story,” “Up.”)
The film also relies on a conservative message – one featuring hard work, perseverance and the reality of the American dream.
It’s a far cry from recent kid’s films with their slams against the U.S. military (“Monsters vs. Aliens”) and the decadence of humanity as a whole (“Battle for Terra”).
“Frog” stars Tiana (voiced with elan by Anika Noni Rose) as a young woman who dreams of opening her own restaurant. She doesn’t scratch lottery tickets or beg and borrow from her second or third cousin to make it happen.
She works, and works, and saves every penny possible for a down payment on her dream.
And if that means skipping fun social events, so be it. It’s what her daddy would want her to do.
Naturally, “Frog’s” story doesn’t end there. We get a nicely choreographed romance between Tiana and Prince Naveen – both in frog form! And the Disney film features a number of great supporting players, from a jazz loving ‘gator named Louis to a peculiar firefly named Ray who steals the film.
It’s a pleasure to take in hand-drawn animation again, and it’s even more enjoyable to watch a film celebrate American values without equivocation.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
36 Comments
Ah good to know,!
I am talking my 4 year old to this tommorow as part of our monthly Daddy date outing, her first big screen movie, wish me luck
I should tell the females in my family that they have a new movie to watch!
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Big Hollywood, Michael Chavez and , Mr. Pink. Mr. Pink said: Old Fashioned ‘Princess and the Frog’ Conservative at Heart http://tinyurl.com/ygk3lz3 [...]
I couldn't agree more. My 11 year old leaned over during the movie and said, "I like the message in this movie." I called it "The Disney Princesses Meet Ayn Rand."
I'm thinking I've found something to watch instead of Avatar.
I didn't see the film, but judging by its title I don't agree with making fun of the French like that.:)
Glad to hear it. When I first read about it, they were writing about all the complaints over every loving detail that might possibly be interpreted as racist or unworthy of a black princess, and I was thinking it would be completely lame. Who wants to see a PC fairy tale? Unless they think blacks are an alien species, then they should just make her story a good fairytale, just like the other princesses. But when I saw the preview, it actually looked funny and cute. Plus, I love hand-drawn animation. I like the way they move better than all the CG stuff.
You hear that a lot, but it's not really true. Well, it is true if you limit yourself to major theatrical releases, but it ignores the fact that hand-drawn (well, at least 2D) animation still dominates on TV. And, of course, since I'm sure that the Anime kids will be around to point it out if I don't, hand-drawn still rules in Japan. But anyway, it's nice to see Disney back in the hand-drawn game.
*Chuckles*
Yeah 2D animation still exsists but I have to question the "Hand Drawn" remarks. I could be wrong but are they really going back 10 years or so to drawing on all those cells? Don't get me wrong that's cool if they did but what I've seen happening in the animation industry is everything is being done in computer. Sure it's still a 2D animation, and based on individual drawn "key frames" but the animation is done in computer.
So yeah if we're bing picky is it really hand drawn when all the non-storyboard (and even those now a days!) and concept art is done in computer?
If you're talking about animation in general, you're mainly correct, as I pointed out above ("well, at least 2D") . However, I the specific case of The Princess and the Frog, it really is hand-drawn. They dug all the animation desks out of storage, and all the art was done on paper. Yes, some of the really boring, creativity-free animation scut-work was done by computers, but it fits my definition of hand-drawn.
I loved this movie. In addition to the hard work theme, I liked Mama Odie's whole bit about getting what you need, not what you want, and how that contrasted with Dr. Facillier's black magic to make all your earthly wants come true. And in the end, if you do the right thing, what you want and what you need can come together.
That frog is obviously a homosexual. Possibly one of those nasty teabaggers
I thought the black babes didn't like the teabaggers?
I predict that next year on Christmas Day, you'll see it at least 8 times on DVD
Saw it last weekend with the kids. It was nice to go to a movie theater and not wince or cringe or groan or roll my eyes at the political messages. Ahhhhhh…….
It's as basic as a Disney movie gets, but in some ways, that's what's so great about it. (And not too much stupid singing either!) Daddy/daughter dates are awesome.
My brother, a Disney animator, worked on this film in character design and story boarding. He's an "old time" animator, only buying a MAC when it was absolutely necessary. He told us it made him feel real good to be in the audience at one of the opening runs and observe children and families enjoy the show so much.
A lot of Anime is now done on computers such as Blood: The Last Vampire. A lot of the stuff from Production I. G. is done only on computers (they were one of the companies that first started using computer graphics in Anime) however they do it in a way so it doesn't look like it's CG animation like Pixar's films. The thing is that there are good and bad ways to animate something with computers and some people know how to do it right and some people don't. Hand-drawn doesn't really rule in Japan since they are getting away from it, it's just that they usually know how to do it right when they are using computers.
Now that's really cool. That explains the art style I've seen in stills. Lighting and such in computer animated stuff was always too perfect and unison.
I want to see this even more now.
I wish you could still get a copy of "Song of the South."
But it's mainly 2D animation from drawn artwork, which "hand-drawn" is a common stylistic shorthand for. As we discussed above, "2D animation" is often a more accurate term. 2D animation is more common in Japan than 3D, although the latter is more common than it used to be.
Are you really implying that companies like Pixar produce the kind of animation that they do because they don't know how to do 2D animation with computers? It's a stylistic choice, not incompetence!
http://www.google.com/products?hl=en&q=song+o...
These, of course, are unauthorized copies, and you never know about their quality. One could almost justify getting a bootleg copy since Disney no longer offers it. That gets to the reason they do not (political correctness, natch.) That was actually the point of my post. I am all for this new movie, but just hate to see great movies like Song of the South banned.
BOOM Shakalaka!
No I wasn't talking about 2D vs 3D. I was talking about the hand-drawn vs computer animation. In Japan I think they do computer animation better, I'm not saying that Pixar couldn't do it, but they have their style, they do good work, Monsters inc. was a beautifully done and a very good movie but I'm not big on their style since I have spent way too much of my life watching Anime and that is what I love and companies like Production I. G. can use a computer to capture the style I want make the art beautiful. It personal taste.
Can you give a specific example of the Japanese computer animation you are comparing Pixar with?
Like I said I'm not talking about 2D vs 3D just animation, is it drawn by hand or is it done on a computer? That's what I'm talking about. I'm talking about animation done on a computer, Pixar does their films on a computer, and other than some of the older stuff Production I. G. does all their stuff on a computer, I think one of them does it better, that's all. Now if you want to get into the 2D vs 3D debate, I don't like 3D animation it's a matter of taste it's not like there is a wrong answer here.
Had a "girls' nite out" last night with my three year old daughter. She had picked out this movie for us to see together. As we walked into the theater, the manager gave us two tickets for the price of one child's. This was due to the heat not working in the theater. He expressed concern that my little daughter would be too cold. I assured him of her sturdy nature, and in we went. After the movie, we ventured back into the wintry outside, I looked down at my daughter as she described her favorite part with her warm little hand clasping mine. This movie was a great time for two gals about town. Thanks again to Disney for the memories.
Any Pixar movie = 3D computer animation = apples.
Blood: The Last Vampire = 2D computer animation = oranges.
OK then I would have to say I don't like 3D Computer animation. All it is to me is the animated equivalent of giving a small child something shiny to distract them.
Still though I was talking about computer vs non-computer animation and the fact that Japan is going more and more into using computer animation,
Doesn't ANYONE read the old fairy tales to their kids anymore and if you are a rare person who did/does, don't you care that this story ( well, truth to tell, most Disney full length cartoons do muck it all up, but they used to stick closer to the original stories ) is so mucked about with, as to me worse than "loosely based" on the original ?
Many fairy tales and legends find the same story told different ways in different countries. I don't see anything odd about Disney taking the outline of a fairy tale and doing their own spin on it. I just saw the film tonight and thought it was quite good.
There are something close to 700 different written versions of CINDERELLA, but not a one of them, except CINDERELLA and the later Bowdlerized versions,
is called that and most are pretty close to each other. The ancient Greek myth, CUPID AND PSYCHE is Cinderella and Beauty and The Beast combined, long before those two fairy tales were separate entities.
What I object to and have done since I was a child, is Disney's mucking about with well known and loved fairy tales and children's stories. I asked if anyone else was ever bothered by that. You aren't so all well and good and I'm glad you enjoyed the film.
I won't ever watch it, as from the clips I've seen of it, there is nothing in it of the original, other than the slightest vague hint of the story.
Each to his or her own, I say.
It's possible to enjoy both. Walt's Pinnochio is a far cry from Collodi's odd, violent original (in which Pinnochio kills the nagging cricket with a hammer, who then returns as a ghost to "scare him straight," gets his feet burned off sleeping next to a fire, is nearly cooked (literally), is adopted by the Blue Fairy who later dies…it's a hoot! I still cherish the Disney version, though. In the original Frog Princess I believe the princess, forced by her father to endure the frog in her bed after it rashly promising it anything it wants after it rescues her golden ball from a well breaks the spell not with a kiss, but by hurling it against a wall.
I am very well aware of the original "PINNOCHIO" and don't mind the changes that Disney made to that story. I also know that the very dark "BAMBI" was also radically changed as well.
Disney's CINDERELLA is somewhat modified, using the later Bowlerized version as a jumping off point, which doesn't upset me, though I do much prefer ( and did so too, as a very little child ) the original version, where the blood dripping out of each step sister's cut off toes, on one, and heels of the other, talk to the prince, as they, in turn ride behind him, on his horse, while going to his castle.
"SNOW WHITE" is pretty much in tact, re the Disney film.
As to the original THE FROG PRINCE, you've mixed up two of the earliest versions. The first one, where the spoiled princess hurls the frog into a wall, is not the same one where she agrees to allow him to sleep on her pillow. And unlike the original CINDERELLA, earliest version of THE FROG PRINCE is almost completely unknown to most.
I'm a fairy tale "nut", so I do know about these variations.
My point being that this new Disney movie is SO changed, that I just will never be able to watch it. There's no previous version where the princess turns into a frog, the action certainly doesn't take place in New Orleans, and there is NO "royalty" in America; to name but a few of the things that I have gleaned from seeing the coming attraction clips, that disturb me.
My question was if anyone else was bothered by all of the changes and evidently, nobody else is.
The most of the sex and gruesomeness of the original fairy tales was later mostly expunged from the stories, long after the originals were told, because they were no longer tales solely for adults and were being told to an audience of children. But as Bruno Bettelheim explained in his book "THE USE OF ENCHANTMENT" and in his lectures, even the remaining gruesomeness, that remained, were lessons that children needed. He was a fascinating man, BTW, and I was lucky enough to have heard him lecture and to have later met and talked with him.
Anyway, as I said earlier………………….each to his/her own.
[...] Reviews: Christian Toto at Big Hollywood Hollywood, STFU. movieguide.org Christian [...]
Gems form the internet…
[...]very few websites that happen to be detailed below, from our point of view are undoubtedly well worth checking out[...]……
You must be logged in to post a comment.