MovieChat Forums > The Princess and the Frog (2009) Discussion > Am I one of the few that think this was ...

Am I one of the few that think this was Better than Tangled?

posted 11 years ago by SamRobbeAdams2589
69 replies | jump to latest

Hi All,

I find it perplexing how many people go on about Tangled being a near perfect film whilst hitting out at how much of a 'flop' the stunning The Princess and the Frog was...

Now - I cannot fathom why that is.

TPATF is such a beautiful film - well directed, great songs, fantastic plot and it was essentially a film that mirrored the 90s Disney feel. Whereas I found Tangled to be juvenile and not half as engaging - whilst feeling not at all like Disney. The animation fell short in my opinion also.

Overall - I still personally think 2D animation is what Disney should be sticking to in regards to their classic canon films. Whilst their 3D/ Computer generated animation output should be under the Pixar brand. To elaborate - Chicken Little through to Tangled, I feel are more so Pixar in their aesthetics.

Now with films on the horizon such as Frozen - I fear that 2D animation is being disregarded when really the market calls for it - how many other studios are using 2D? Hole in the market anyone!

I am also concerned that these titles are boring. Why not just call them - The Snow Queen or Rapunzel? It feels so stagnant at the moment with these so called genderless titles... A huge WTF is needed there. Genderless? Do not make me laugh.

Does anyone share my thoughts or am I ranting to the wrong crowd?

[–] LadyMiraculous 11 years ago

Actually, I also prefer this over Tangled. :)

"A Decepticon never retreats" -Starscream (G1)
[Formerly CosmosX9]

[–] jname96 11 years ago

OP, I agree w/ everything you said, LITERALLY.

I admit, Princess and the Frog was not on the exact level as the Disney Renaissance, but it was much warmer, funner, and memorable than Tangled overall! "Tangled" had awful, unforgettable songs, and no interesting characters. PATF at least had really nice memorable songs, much more interesting characters, and a better look.

I admit, I'm also just "old school" when it comes to animation, cuz I grew up during the Disney Renaissance, but you make a valid point about how the official Disney Canon should only stick w/ 2D. I was surprised that they included their "computer animation" films like "Bolt" and "Chicken Little" as part of their canon. I think it's fair to say, those movies don't even seem to FIT in the canon, ha! But then again, there's also a lot of 2D flops in the canon too, but I digress.

Anyway, I totally agree that it's ridiculous for no animation studio to fill the hole in the marketplace, of 2D animation. It may not be as popular as computer animation right now, but it still has a market. It still sells on DVD, etc... many 2D animated films still sell just as well. The difference is: there's no NEW ones, in that genre! So people just keep buying the old stuff.

Lastly, I also cannot STAND these politically correct titles!!! OMG! "Tangled", "Frozen"????? It is laughably transparent, and deflects from the artistic efforts of Disney. It's sooooo clear it's a marketing ploy. It's a blight on their "ART"!

[–] SelenaQP 11 years ago

I admit, Princess and the Frog was not on the exact level as the Disney Renaissance, but it was much warmer, funner, and memorable than Tangled overall! "Tangled" had awful, unforgettable songs, and no interesting characters. PATF at least had really nice memorable songs, much more interesting characters, and a better look.

THIS!

[–] SelenaQP 11 years ago

Certainly not! I prefer this film over Tangled as well. I can't fathom either why Tangled got better reviews and hype. It's seriously overrated and I agree with everything you said especially Tangled being juvenile and not being engaging.

[–] afsana_bahar 11 years ago

You're definitely not alone in that aspect! Count me as another one that prefers TPATF over Tangled.

[–] tard_288 11 years ago

Disney has to rename these films to be 'Genderless' because of the huge and giant Disney Princess back lash. I willing to bet good money that if Disney had called it 'Rapunzel', it would have made half the amount of money.. How is any parent going to be able to convince their son to see a movie called 'Rapunzel' or 'The Snow Queen'. There is going to be a BIG 'ewwww, that is a girly movie'... No little boy is going to want to see a movie about a Princess!! That is the lesson Disney learned after The Princess and the Frog.. So for the marketing of Tangled, they showed the chase scenes, showed Rapunzel beating Eugene up with her hair... There is no mention of the long hair girl being a princess..

You have to wonder if they had renamed Princess and the Frog to be something else and changed the marketing campaign to emphasize the frogs and Mama Odie, we may not be having this discussion today.. This might have gotten some of those little boys to see it and fall in love with Ray, be scared by Dr. Facilier, and laugh with trumpet-playing Louis....

It is just the way of things now. Tangled was suppose to be Rapunzel, Brave was suppose to be the Princess and the Bow, and Frozen was The Snow Queen... You have to market to the everyone.. The little girls will come and you have to give the little boys a reason to come... Show the chases and show the scary ghost bear.. For Frozen, I am sure there will be more chases through the snow and comedy relief from the one antler reindeer and snowman..

[–] jname96 11 years ago

^ dude, we know that already.

We're saying: it's still stupid as heck. They never bothered renaming Cinderella, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, or The Little Mermaid, and they did fine in the long run.

[–] schmidtkenn11 11 years ago

So not true. I was a little boy and Sleeping Beauty was (and still is) my favorite movie (not just animated, either). I fell in love with Aurora at age 5! Who wouldn't??

"He carries illegal weapons, drives fast cars & wears clothes obviously designed by a homosexual."

[–] starchild438 11 years ago

I agree. Much better than Tangled. While Tangled was nice, this one had better messages. (Segregation, working hard to active, enjoying life). It also had beautiful art work (especial the deco style in her dreams). Plus, it had the unique Creole American culture. Oh, and better music. I don't usually like his stuff, but I like what he did with this one.

[–] nichijou 11 years ago

It's not the 3D vs 2D issues, I just like PATF more than Tangled.

Yeah Tangled was 'cute' but it just didn't do anything for me on a emotional level.

Not saying it was predictable, but it was predictable. (I know every Disney animated film is on some level, but Tangled was just.. nothing new. PATF was a new setting, new idea (make both protagonists into a different species for once) newer time period etc.

I just...
I like PATF's characters more.

Sorry not sorry.

Naveen and Tiana were my OTP in 2009, soooo no offense but as an avid shipper that officially makes PATF better than Tangled for me.

Oups my Tumblr is showing~

ya ever drink Baileys from a shoe?

[–] SelenaQP 11 years ago

Yeah Tangled was 'cute' but it just didn't do anything for me on a emotional level.

Same here.. doesn't nearly have TWICE the humor, warmth, and heart as the older movies.

[–] jname96 11 years ago

I just rented Tangled on DVD this weekend again (it's free at my library)--I couldn't finish it. I've seen it before, yes.

I think the problem is this: it tries to be "contemporary", but it loses its "magical/time period" feel in the process, you know?

You don't feel like you're in some magical European kingdom anymore.

THAT's the problem.

[–] LadyMiraculous 11 years ago

Plus, PATF had more stakes and took a lot more risks, 'Tangled' was a lot more generic, and tame to say the least.

"A Decepticon never retreats" -Starscream (G1)
[Formerly CosmosX9]

[–] SelenaQP 11 years ago

I think the problem is this: it tries to be "contemporary", but it loses its "magical/time period" feel in the process, you know?

You don't feel like you're in some magical European kingdom anymore.

I agree. I feel like it modeled too much after Shrek.

[–] matt-baen 11 years ago

I agree - however, I think Princess and the Frog could have been a lot better with two fixes: 1) set it in a mythical quasi-medieval kingdom (keeping the princess black of course) rather than 20th century America, 2) reduce the time the princess spent as a frog. Still, it worked better story-wise than Tangled.

[–] jname96 11 years ago

"set it in a mythical quasi-medieval kingdom (keeping the princess black of course) rather than 20th century America"

No way! I thought it WAS clever, how they worked the royalty into AMERICA. In some unintentional way, they gave us Americans hope to marry royalty, ha. In other words: it was unique!

Plus, 1920s New Orleans has NEVER been done in 2D animation, so again--unique.

If I could change anything about PATF, it would be to make the villain's motives more clear and defined. It felt forced and uninteresting. Someone commented once that they over-complicated the concept and plot of this movie, and it's true. They were just kind of all over the map, trying to "Explain" things. It made it weaker and less interesting.

I do agree, that less focus on the frogs would've been nice.

Also--if they followed the original concept of the "Frog Prince" fairytale more, it would feel more "classic", you know? Which always helps.

[–] SelenaQP 11 years ago

1) set it in a mythical quasi-medieval kingdom

Then it would probably make the film less original.

[–] TwinkiePon 11 years ago

For me, they're actually about equal.

I love, absolutely LOVE, that PaTF was done in 2D animation and returned to the tried and true musical, fairy tale formula, but with new ideas (such as taking place in a more modern time, in America and explaining the magical aspects with voodoo). When I was watching it in the theater, I felt like I did when I was 7 years old watching The Little Mermaid for the first time. It was a truly magical experience and all I could think the whole time was: "Disney is BACK!" And this one succeeds where most of their "talking animal" movies frankly weren't that interesting (ie: Oliver and Company, Aristocats, 101 Dalmatians, Brother Bear). Also the part where Charlotte is dancing with Naveen (or Lawrence as Naveen) I thought was very reminiscent of Sleeping Beauty at the end when Aurora and Phillip dance together. The songs were lively and engaging and it was refreshing to see jazz and gospel mixed together to make it feel like Louisiana (okay, I've never BEEN to Louisiana but this movie makes me feel like I am there when I watch it).

At first I was a little put off by Tangled - I liked it, but the CGI aspect was a bit hard to swallow after they did such a good job on PaTF, however again, it's a great story with great characters and I have to disagree with whoever said it had "awful songs" - I listen to that soundtrack WAY more the PaTF - I especially love "I See the Light" and performed it at a church celebration once. Again, the return to a fairy tale setting with a princess was just what the little girl in me wanted to see. They had great characters with good character development and wonderful acting. Was it as dark was PaTF, no, but I think after a movie like that, Tangled was just the kind of lighthearted movie needed to follow it up.
Also, I remember when I was a kid asking my mom why there were no blonde princesses (I'm blonde) and she's like "Oh, there's Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty" - well when you grow up with spunky, independent princesses like Ariel, Belle and Jasmine and then watch Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, you end up a bit disappointed in blonde princesses with personalities about as interesting as watered down oatmeal. So, still, I was like "No, where's MY princess!" As well as, Rapunzel was always a favorite story of mine.
So after years of wanting and wanting and wanting, I finally got my blonde, spunky princess who is also ARTISTIC - LIKE ME!! :) Maybe it's a little biased of me, but I love Rapunzel.

I watch both these movies over and over and I love Disney's return to fairy tales and am looking forward to Frozen - their take on "The Snow Queen".

[–] stayprettystockholm 11 years ago

well when you grow up with spunky, independent princesses like Ariel, Belle and Jasmine and then watch Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, you end up a bit disappointed in blonde princesses with personalities about as interesting as watered down oatmeal.

As someone who also grew up with them all, seeing the same "spunky" and (pseudo) "independent" heroines is pretty tiring, as they're basically every single fictional heroine ever made now. Always. It got boring fast. You never see classy, strong, unselfish, feminine characters like the cool, older princesses anymore, sadly. I hate how much hate the old ones get while the more self-absorbed "I dont need a man to make ME happy!" cardboard heroines get all the praise (aside from Ariel on the man part- which reminds me, why is Ariel praised for obsessing over a guy but the old girls are called passive and boring for loving a guy? Disney double standards). Sure, they each have some good traits, but they're hyper-exaggerated (the always-right Mary Sue Belle is probably the most boring Disney character I've ever seen, and while I like Tiana, she is a flat character too). I wish today it was still socially acceptable to LIKE romance, being gentle, letting the guy be the guy instead of competing with him, etc. Little girls deserve heroines like that. Not every girl is a tomboy, a free spirit, a Mary Sue, or adventuruous. Many of us Cinderellas or Janes or Eilonwys.

The old princesses have a lot more personality than many of these newer ones, especially bossy Snow. Lol. I also think people confuse Aurora's lack of screen time with a lack of personality. Although all three of them remind me strongly of Audrey Hepburn, I'd say Aurora is most like her, which is funny considering they did base her looks off of her, too. I wonder if they intentionally made her shy, ethereal, romantic, and obedient personality like her too.

I also think Rapunzel is more like them than you'd think- she's very girly like them, is a big dreamer, is talented at the domestic arts, is naive, etc. I consider her to be like a mixture of Ariel and them. And let's admit it: all the heroines had help from a guy. Belle, Ariel, Jasmine, Rapunzel, Mulan, Merida got rescued by a guy exactly like the old ones, who were actually in far better positions to be rescued, as none of them could help it, especially Snow and Aurora who physically unable to save themselves.

Also, while she isnt an official princess, we had Eilonwy, who was a snippy little girl. I think people partly hate Cindy and Aurora because to be blonde is to be cursed anymore.

Though you're dressed in rags, you wear an air of queenly grace

[–] jname96 11 years ago

^ Great points, I agree: this knee-jerk "feminism" nowadays of "spunkiness" is a STEREOTYPE in of itself.

That being said, what do you think of Pocahontas? I think she sounds like a good antidote to your quibbles. She's romantic, open, strong--without being obnoxious or self-righteous about it. Sure, she tells John to respect nature, but she's always noble and tactful about it.

[–] Nala8201 11 years ago

"well when you grow up with spunky, independent princesses like Ariel, Belle and Jasmine and then watch Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty, you end up a bit disappointed in blonde princesses with personalities about as interesting as watered down oatmeal. So, still, I was like "No, where's MY princess!"

I asked myself the same question as a young girl. Except it was, “where’s the Black princess”? For a while, I didn’t think we’d ever get one so I settled for Jasmine (since she was the closest at the time). I laugh at myself now. The things we think as kids.

Never did it occur to me that a little blonde girl would be having the same issue. (No sarcasm or cynicism intended).

Just goes to show how sheltered we can be as people.

At least now we both got we wanted