Friday, 11 December 2009 marked a momentous occasion for the animation industry, namely, Disney's glorious return to classic, hand-drawn animation. (I should mention that this day also marked the end of our four-month, 45-film Disney Animation Marathon event, starting with the earliest Disney animated film on 26 August and working our way through the entire canon, almost all of which, we are just a little startled to learn, we own on DVD.) Since its previews first aired, The Princess and the Frog had been advertised heavily as a classically 2D-animated film, Disney's first since Home on the Range in 2005. Naturally (and as has been made abundantly evident here on the blog), I was thrilled and couldn't wait to see it. I should mention, however, that Disney's more recent 2D animated films have not gone unnoticed by me, and I feel even the weakest of them has a lot of generally ignored positives. What bothered me most of all was how Disney seemed to be throwing up its hands (and throwing out its light tables) and shifting all its attention to making sub-par 3D films, when their sister company Pixar was handling that medium just fine. They surely must have thought that Pixar's movies were so successful because of the style of animation, when really Pixar's strength is storytelling and character development, and understanding making quality films with heart designed exactly for their target audience. (I still feel like Toy Story and Monsters, Inc. would be as successful if they were hand-drawn, the stories and characters are just that strong.) So, if this new offering, Disney's 45th (or 49th, depending on what you consider canon) animated film, was successful, it could mean any number of things for my future career aspirations. It had been ages since I bought a Disney soundtrack ahead of time and listened to it before even seeing the movie, though I admit I limited myself a little this time so as to avoid any MAJOR spoilers. And finally, the day came, and Julie and I went to a first-run theater on opening night, which only the biggest and most exciting film releases merit. I promise I won't spoil anything on this post, but I will say this:
*ahem*
EVERYONE within reach of this blogvoice must see this movie forthwith, and by any means possible! It was the most fun I've had in a movie theater in I don't know how long, and it was classic Disney at its absolute finest. I hesitate to award the label "favorite," of course (that honor still belongs to Aladdin), but in so many ways it returns to the classic art form, the brilliant storytelling, and the charming characters of Disney's past. The story is enough of a twist on the well-known story to make it interesting, new and original, while still staying true to the spirit of fairy tale storytelling. The early 1900s New Orleans setting lends itself quite nicely to a diverse display of characters, colors, light and locations, including a take on classic Mardi Gras, a riverboat under sparkling stars and the mystical bayous of Louisiana. The voice acting is excellent as well, featuring Tony Award-winning Anika Noni Rose (also seen in the film version of Dreamgirls) as Tiana, Bruno Campos as Naveen and Keith David as the suave and sinister "Shadow Man," Dr. Facilier, not to mention the awesome supporting cast. There are appropriate themes and some deeper lessons than expected present, and a surprising emotional element. (I'm not even going to try and deny that I cried at one point.) It had everything the classic Disney film formula calls for: A beautiful, strong female lead (a princess to boot), a charming, rough-around-the-edges prince (read: frog, for a lot of it), a fabulous, striking villain, and a strong set of secondary characters (which include, yes, talking animals). Then of course, the soundtrack by Disney/Pixar favorite Randy Newman is a glorious blend of several styles of appropriate music. It's been so long since I've had new Disney music stuck in my head, and I am loving it. I predict already that "Ma Belle Evangeline" is destined to be one of Disney's most treasured love songs, despite (or perhaps because of) the fact that it's sung by a toothless Cajun firefly. This movie was at times funny, sweet, colorful, exciting, just the right amount of frightening, and now and then even heartbreaking.
In the end, we both loved this movie, and I was all for turning right around and seeing it again, it was just that good. And of course, we're not the only ones who feel this way. It seems to be getting glowing reviews from all over the place.For the record, the fact that Tiana is the first black Disney princess has little to no interest to me whatsoever. There were some issues raised in the film regarding class distinction and such, but they had little to do with the overarching themes and overall storyline. Her race as far as the story goes is practically immaterial, and all I cared is that she's a charming, vibrant, beautiful addition to the Disney Princess canon.
Go see it!
Wellllll... OK.
ReplyDeleteI'm SO glad to hear it was great. I'm excited to see it.
ReplyDeleteI just have to tell you that when we were in WDW a couple weeks ago, we watched the show (on the RIVERBOAT, no less, AWESOME!) and it was seriously incredible. My 4 year old can STILL be heard breaking into song over lunch "Goin' down the Bayou!!"
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to see it this Saturday :)
I'm glad you liked that movie! Aladdin is my favorite too :)
ReplyDeleteDrew, I saw this... and I didn't love it. Actually. I kind of felt like its target audience was pretty young, and it didn't cover the breadth of ages most Disney movies (and especially Pixar movies) manage to. Although the animation was pretty impressive.
ReplyDeleteSilly boy, your assessment of the target audience is right on! Its intended demographic is exactly that of all the greats, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and The Lion King, which is evident from its depth of theme, quality of art and strength of character development. I know I'm not always the target audience for a movie, but I try to get out of it what I can, and this movie had tons of stuff even for me (though of course I am an animation aficionado and snob). It's cool you didn't love it though, to each his own! I'm just glad you went to see it. :)
ReplyDeleteIn fact, confusing target audience has been one of Disney's biggest problems with some of their more recent animated films (i.e. Treasure Planet and Atlantis). Bravo to them for getting that aspect back on track.
I meant to read your review of this movie a long time ago, but never got around to it because of school and what have you. Anyway, I LOVED the movie as well. I thought that it had just the perfect amount of every bit of Disney charm, which you have stated so perfectly in your blog. I also really loved Ma Belle Evangeline. It was such an irresistible love song, and I listened to it over and over for several days after (thanks to you, of course).
ReplyDeleteSome people mentioned to me that they thought the villian in the movie was too dark and scary, but I thought he was just right. I'm pretty sure that it has been so long since the old classic Disney movies that people just don't remember how creepy some of those bad guys can be.
I know you said that you were not interested in the race factor, but I was. I thought it was interesting that the prince was neither white nor black, and therefore was able (if he chose) to be with either girl-- white or black-- without creating a racial controversy. I'm guessing that Disney didn't do that on accident. Either way, it is not a big deal; it just made me think a bit.
But good movie, all around. I can't wait to see it again, hopefully next time with a handful of children with me. :)
Interesting perspective on the race issue, Vanae... Amazingly, there were a lot of people who actually WERE upset that Naveen wasn't black, whether it was because Tiana should have ended up with a black man, or because Disney should have made the prince black too. In that sense, I think it just didn't matter.
ReplyDelete