Disney Animation getting out of the "Princess" business

[Enchantâmes]

Of course not Lasseter, he's the best thing to happen to Disney in ages. :lol:

I'm talking about the directors of PATF who were the same directors for Little Mermaid and Aladdin, and Alen Menken doing the music (don't get me wrong, he's great but IMO a lot of his recent work like on Enchanted has been rather dull).

Enchanted was great, I don't know what you're smoking.

 

[_Scar]

I still laugh when people think PatF has already set it in stone that hand drawn animation is done... Merch sales people. Tiana is definitely popular.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

I wouldn't be surprised if Disney had few or no princess- based movies in the pipeline, but I wouldn't take that as indication that they're "out of the princess business." It's just a cyclical thing.

Good observation. If you think about the defining Disney princess films, they've come years (or even decades) apart in some cases. It was 13 years between Snow White and Cinderella, and something along the lines of 30 years between Sleeping Beauty and Little Mermaid. We don't need a new Disney princess every 12-18 months.

 

[JimboJones123]

Just like Princess and the Frog was supposed to usher in the rebirth of hand-drawn animation...

Yeah, I'd roll my eyes at racist America too.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

Good observation. If you think about the defining Disney princess films, they've come years (or even decades) apart in some cases. It was 13 years between Snow White and Cinderella, and something along the lines of 30 years between Sleeping Beauty and Little Mermaid. We don't need a new Disney princess every 12-18 months.

And don't forget that Walt also regretted using the title "Polyanna" because in hindsight it was blamed for turning off the male audience.

My personal view with P&tF was that it simply wasn't good enough to break through. The film was good, but as a Disney fan myself I found it hard to get excited about seeing it as the only selling point it really seemed to have was that it was a return to the hand-drawn animated musicals of the 1990s. The animation was nice but not particularly distinctive or spectacular, the songs were serviceable but not classics and, well, it just didn't exactly jump out as an animated epic on the scale of an Aladdin or Beauty & the Beast.

Hopefully Tangled is good enough and the marketing has got it right this time around. At first I thought the name change was stupid, but in hindsight it probably is smarter to go with something gender neutral. The animation marketplace is a lot more crowded now than it was in the early-1990s so you really need to position these films as best as you can to find an audience in the first place.

 

[rabbit1]

I'm amused that they've made this announcement the same week that a real life royal engagement was announced. I won't be surprised if the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton brings a resurgence of interest in princesses and royalty... at which time Disney will quietly retract this announcement and be back in the princess movie business again.

 

[ChrisFL]

I find it interesting that Tangled seems to have a very minimal ad campaign vs. TRON Legacy which is EVERYWHERE. I can't remember a Disney movie as hyped as that one.

Also, this might be wrong, but Tangled seems to be more Shrek-like in comedy style, anyone else get that impression from the previews?

 

[Tigger1988]

Also, this might be wrong, but Tangled seems to be more Shrek-like in comedy style, anyone else get that impression from the previews?

I must have missed the trailers full of bodily function jokes.

 

[Optimus Mouse]

I find it interesting that Tangled seems to have a very minimal ad campaign vs. TRON Legacy which is EVERYWHERE. I can't remember a Disney movie as hyped as that one.

I think that's probably market and delivery channel specific. I live in south Florida, and it's pretty much the exact opposite here. I see Tangled commercials quite frequently, but have only seen a handful for Tron.

 

[Tom]

I find it interesting that Tangled seems to have a very minimal ad campaign vs. TRON Legacy which is EVERYWHERE. I can't remember a Disney movie as hyped as that one.

Also, this might be wrong, but Tangled seems to be more Shrek-like in comedy style, anyone else get that impression from the previews?

Ii thought the same thing when I saw the previews. The animation looks and feels like shrek. And the white horse looks almost identical to the "Noble Steed" (donkey).

Overall it also looks like it has a slapstick sort of comedy to it.

 

[minniemickeyfan]

I find it interesting that Tangled seems to have a very minimal ad campaign vs. TRON Legacy which is EVERYWHERE. I can't remember a Disney movie as hyped as that one.

Also, this might be wrong, but Tangled seems to be more Shrek-like in comedy style, anyone else get that impression from the previews?

It's the opposite here-don't see much of anything for TRON, but lots for Tangled.
It will be only be Shrek-like if Disney stoops low and pokes fun at Universal.
My 14 year old girl is excited about Tangled-it doesn't seem to be as "princess" as people might think.

 

[Fable McCloud]

I'm personally tweaking to see Tangled. My BF is not a HUGE Disney Freak like me, and he's super excited to see it! He also saw Princess and the Frog with me and since its DVD release, has probably watched it more than I have, and I love that movie. He's already said that he wants a picture with Tiana & Naveen, along with Rapunzel and Flynn.


Either way, I'm excited and happy that both these ladies have been inducted into the princess line. Personally, I don't care if they continue to make fairy tales or princess films, I just want to see great Disney films, preferably with some kind of amazing musical numbers or songs.

 

[aladdin2007]

As goes for other animated films...Home on The Range (Sweating Bullets) & Emporer's New Groove (Kingdom of The Sun)..So it's common with them to change the title of there films.

Yep, but very dumbed down choices. Especially New Groove. And for some reason no one wants to call Rapunzel, Rapunzel. Its like Disney refuses to use anything with the name.
Dont know about the movie yet but the soundtrack was dissapointing to me, again not a new classic Disney song to be had, I thought anyway.

 

[DisneyYorkian74]

My personal view with P&tF was that it simply wasn't good enough to break through. The film was good, but as a Disney fan myself I found it hard to get excited about seeing it as the only selling point it really seemed to have was that it was a return to the hand-drawn animated musicals of the 1990s. The animation was nice but not particularly distinctive or spectacular, the songs were serviceable but not classics and, well, it just didn't exactly jump out as an animated epic on the scale of an Aladdin or Beauty & the Beast.

My thoughts exactly...

Maybe if "The Princess and the Frog" had been on the same level as far as quality goes, then Disney would have had another animated blockbuster on their hands last year.

The musical aspect of "The Princess and the Frog" was also disappointing... Although understandable, the music was too focused on the style of Jazz and New Orleans.

And we shouldn't forget Disney's MAJORLY poor decision on the release date... Release the movie after Thanksgiving and 2 weeks before the "Alvin" sequel and you're just begging for a box-office disappointment. (Not to mention the huge snow storm P&tF had to battle with during its 2nd box-office weekend)

Disney made a couple mistakes with P&tF that handicapped its box-office performance and it's too hasty to point the finger or place more importance on any one of those mistakes more than another.

All that being said "The Princess and the Frog" still managed to gross over $100 million and accomplish a box-office feat that was extremely rare for any 2D animated movie to do in the 00's.

 

[wm49rs]

Between domestic and foreign box offices, PatF actually pulled in over $267 million, and that doesn't take into consideration the DVD sales (which have pulled in almost $70 million). I don't think the success (or title) of that particular movie has much to do with Disney Studios not making any new "Princess" movies in the immediate future......

 

[Optimus Mouse]

And we shouldn't forget Disney's MAJORLY poor decision on the release date... Release the movie after Thanksgiving and 2 weeks before the "Alvin" sequel and you're just begging for a box-office disappointment. (Not to mention the huge snow storm P&tF had to battle with during its 2nd box-office weekend)

Similar to their decision to release Tangled the week after the Harry Potter opening. Hopefully the holiday weekend will pull enough people into the theaters to split the box-office between them.

 

[redshoesrock]

My thoughts exactly...

Maybe if "The Princess and the Frog" had been on the same level as far as quality goes, then Disney would have had another animated blockbuster on their hands last year.

The musical aspect of "The Princess and the Frog" was also disappointing... Although understandable, the music was too focused on the style of Jazz and New Orleans.

And we shouldn't forget Disney's MAJORLY poor decision on the release date... Release the movie after Thanksgiving and 2 weeks before the "Alvin" sequel and you're just begging for a box-office disappointment. (Not to mention the huge snow storm P&tF had to battle with during its 2nd box-office weekend)

Disney made a couple mistakes with P&tF that handicapped its box-office performance and it's too hasty to point the finger or place more importance on any one of those mistakes more than another.

All that being said "The Princess and the Frog" still managed to gross over $100 million and accomplish a box-office feat that was extremely rare for any 2D animated movie to do in the 00's.

Wow...well, I see things entirely differently. Personally I thought the music was a great asset - and I couldn't of been the only one since two of the songs were nominated for the Best Song category of the Academy Awards. I loved it, but that is music that already appeals to me, so to each their own. Disney also moved the release date from Christmas Day to two weeks before *because* of the Alvin sequel; they didn't want to compete directly against it right out of the gate, which IMHO was the smarter move. As to why it didn't do better, that's a larger issue. It's possible that the word "princess" might of turned off the young male demographic, but I believe the word "Disney" had more to do with it. If you look at the box office from the animated theatrical releases from Disney (not Pixar) over the last decade or so, PatF was right on track with what Disney gets from an animated theatrical release. The reason is because Disney has put out so many average and "meh" releases they get the same audience again and again and again; they're not branching out. Whereas with Pixar, they've not yet brought out a release that the general public considered "meh", so a lot more of them will come out for the Pixar film as opposed to the strictly Disney film. It's going to take a couple insanely great Disney films back-to-back or close enough to each other (like LM and BatB did) to fully right this ship.

 

[MCC1]

I find it interesting that Tangled seems to have a very minimal ad campaign vs. TRON Legacy which is EVERYWHERE. I can't remember a Disney movie as hyped as that one.

Also, this might be wrong, but Tangled seems to be more Shrek-like in comedy style, anyone else get that impression from the previews?

Almost exactly my reaction when I saw the trailer, hope it is not the case - but it tinged of forced hipness...

 

[imagineer boy]

The thing is, they don't have to have princesses for fairy tale movies. Look at Pinoccio!

 

[MarkTwain]

The Animation Guild Blog has a reputation for attracting the commentary of informed animators around the industry, often leading to some pretty smartly written opinions. Basically, the consensus there was that this article was just the LA Times interviewing Disney with their own skewed view of Disney's current lineup, and then selected quotes from the interview to best support it. Here's one anonymous reader's comment on the article that I summed up the article pretty well:

It sounds a LOT more like LA Times is trying to create "Will Princess & Frog happen again?" [MarkTwain: in terms of being a box office flop] (for no other reason than it was "supposed" to happen right about this point in the script), and took some comments out of sensationalized context. Strong words, considering it hasn't even opened yet.

Disney and Catmull certainly want to play up the "It's not your average Disney film!" spin to head off people complaining about the style, and working in the idea of making "newer" films -- But "We don't currently have any on the docket" is NOT the same as "We've barred them at the door": "Yes, we have no bananas" is not necessarily the same as "The government has banned bananas by law."

Ed's comments about "We wanted to try something new..." are almost immediately followed in every single citation by the Times reporter spinning it as "Pack it up, folks, it's over!" That sounds a lot like an article that's frustrated it's not quite getting the story it set out to write, and hoping they can still patch it together in the edit.

They phrased it better than I could.