Why do you think the Princess and the Frog underperformed?

[lacrosse_lady72]

I really liked it, and I was kind of sad to see that it wasn't a huge blockbuster. I think there were a few reasons:

1.) There are WAY more kids movies coming out now--a few a month most of the time. It's not the same kind of "event" it was back in the 90s.
2.) I can't imagine there was too much appeal for little boys.
3.) The echo boom is over and those kids were too old to want to see The Princess and the Frog and too young to have kids who wanted to see it. There are simply less kids of the appropriate age than there were in the 90s.
4.) The economy was pretty bad and movies are much more expensive than they used to be. A movie ticket during the depression was $0.25. Adjusted for inflation that's $3.82 today. Movies in my area are $12 now.

I remember hearing that 2009 was the biggest year for movies in attendance, and that they (idk who they are) think 2010 will be bigger.

 

[Sparx]

I loved it. I liked seeing a "modern" princess who didn't live in a castle.

I didn't even think about the princess being black.

I also felt that this movie didn't take the feminine cliche that disney LOVES in princess movies. Tiana wasn't a bad role model. The rest of the princesses just waited around to be rescued, or needed men to save them, or were completely helpless, Tiana wasn't. And the mom didn't die, I liked that.

 

[ilovejack02]

We were not going to watch it (we have boys), but my SIL bought it and we watched it, and we loved it! My DS was singing along with the song "Love is Wonderful" (?) and kept saying "Dad sing too" (I would have loved to see that, but my DH wasn't having any part of it). While it is a Princess movie, my DS loved the frogs and bugs.

I have a 7 year old boy who was happy to see it. As he said there is a villain in every princess movie lol and he enjoyed it along with all the animals, swamps, bugs etc.

We loved it as did all our friends and their kids.. even the boys.

Of course being from South Louisiana, that was a big draw for us too, voodoo is a big part of our Louisiana history and folklore and it while not a part of our everyday lives lol, its fun to see it in movies and read about.

 

[LiLIrishChick63]

it was kind of hard to believe a story being told set in America where there's a princess, that was kind of my issue.

 

[LiLIrishChick63]

I loved it. I liked seeing a "modern" princess who didn't live in a castle.

I didn't even think about the princess being black.

I also felt that this movie didn't take the feminine cliche that disney LOVES in princess movies. Tiana wasn't a bad role model. The rest of the princesses just waited around to be rescued, or needed men to save them, or were completely helpless, Tiana wasn't. And the mom didn't die, I liked that.

Pocahontas, Belle, and Mulan didn't fit those bills tho. they were pretty strong, independant women

 

[Sparx]

Pocahontas, Belle, and Mulan didn't fit those bills tho. they were pretty strong, independant women

Thats true, I was thinking about those, more the classic princesses like Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty.

 

[bumbershoot]

I think that the princess was not an established princess may have had something to do with it too.

Cinderella was not an established princess.

Really, most of the "princesses" aren't actually princesses. Pretty much, hmm, Ariel and Aurora, b/c they are daughters of kings.

I can go along with Pocahontas b/c she's the daughter of the Chief, so we can extrapolate to "King/Princess". But Mulan, Belle (though I should state that I've never seen the movie and could TOTALLY be wrong on that), etc...not princesses.

I have a 7 year old boy who was happy to see it. As he said there is a villain in every princess movie lol and he enjoyed it along with all the animals, swamps, bugs etc.

I am so glad to know there's another boy out there who likes that sort of story! My guys adds to his enjoyment b/c he's MADLY in love with the princesses as well. He's disturbingly young to be "loving" these "women", but he loves older teen girls, 20-somethings with a certain look, and Giada DeLaurentis (say her name and he blushes and smiles goopily). At just under 6. I mean, it took me until I was 9 to start crushing madly on boys and young men!

Anyway, DS is urging us to get the movie so we can see it.

it was kind of hard to believe a story being told set in America where there's a princess, that was kind of my issue.

That's actually the thing that makes me interested in seeing it. I want to know how they call her a princess. Also, the scene when the male frog ribbits and he says "that's new".



For those who saw it and didn't like it, that's not a marketing failure...after all, you SAW it. And since this article seems to have been made before the release of the DVD, taht means you saw it in the theater which means you paid for it.

I think it's silly for this article to come out just as the DVD/blu ray is released. The full story isn't known yet!


I didn't see it yet b/c we just don't really go to theaters. We will be buying the disc, but I'm not really excited about it....no reason I can pin down, just doesn't seem that interesting to me, except for finding out HOW she's a princess.

 

[JVL1018]

I have an 8 year old boy and a 10 year old girl.

My son had no interest in seeing it and my daughter was ehh about it.
Alvin and the Chipmunks came out at the same time-they were DYING to see that, as were their friends-so we went to see that instead.

If Alvin hadn't been out, we would have gone to see The Princess and the Frog right away just because there aren;t tons of kids movies out all the time.

I know a lot of their friends went to see the Chipmunks and skipped Princess & the Frog, especially the families that included boys, because that movie held appeal for both sexes, whereas a boy would probably not be that into a movie with Princess in the title.

That said, I wanted to see it, so we went a few weeks later and we all thought ti was really good.

 

[sissybells]

We went and seen this in the theatre. It was DD3 first movie ever at the theatre, we all loved it. I think it is by far the best princess movie I have ever seen. My DD absolutely loves Tiana. I love that it was done in original animation to match the other princess movies. She cannot wait to meet Tiana at Disney world. I hope she becomes a classic princess.

 

[ticktock]

Cinderella was not an established princess.

Someone mentioned their not being a market for princesses but there must be since WDW is totally redoing fantasyland to be more 'princess.'

I thought the music could have been better, I was a little scared that the voodoo aspect would frighten the little ones we wanted to take, but they were fine.

I think it was just the marketing.

HUH?

"Cinderella is a well-known classic folk tale embodying a myth-element of unjust oppression/triumphant reward. Thousands of variants are known throughout the world.[1

The Cinderella theme may well have originated in classical antiquity; The Greek historian Strabo (Geographica Book 17, 1.33) recorded in the 1st century BC the tale of the Greco-Egyptian girl Rhodopis, which is considered the oldest known version of the story.


Another version of the story, Ye Xian, appeared in Miscellaneous Morsels from Youyang by Tuan Ch'eng-Shih around A.D. 860.


Several different variants of the story appear in the medieval One Thousand and One Nights, also known as the Arabian Nights, including "The Second Shaykh's Story", "The Eldest Lady's Tale" and "Abdallah ibn Fadil and His Brothers", all dealing with the theme of a younger sibling harassed by two jealous elders.


The earliest European tale is "La Gatta Cenerentola" or "The Hearth Cat" which appears in the book "Il Pentamerone" by the Italian fairy-tale collector Giambattista Basile in 1635. This version formed the basis of later versions published by the French author Charles Perrault and the German Brothers Grimm.

One of the most popular versions of Cinderella was written by Charles Perrault in 1697. The popularity of his tale was due to his additions to the story including the pumpkin, the fairy-godmother and the introduction of glass slippers.

So the version Disney adapted has been around since 1697. All the other Disney princesses are borrowed from old folk or fairy tales or were based on real people (though of course PC'ed and Disnified). Princess Tiana was not, she is a PC construct created from whole cloth with the embarrassing mangling of the European folk story The Frog and the Princess used as the plot device.

It may be entertaining in a Pop culture sort of way but it is a travesty in regards to classical folk tales. But that's nothing new for Disney, look what they did to The Little Mermaid.

 

[lillygator]

thank you, I think that poster was a tad confused.

 

[spaceacewannabe]

There are always a TON of movies that come out around the holidays that I mean to see, and this year I didn't get to ANY of them---although this wouldn't have been my top choice. I agree with a PP that there are just a lot more kids' movies, and another PP who said Alvin & the Chipmunks just had more mass appeal.

The thing about Tiana being a black princess is interesting. I commented to my sister when it came out that they finally have a black princess and she becomes a frog for much of the movie. Hmm.

 

[JenM]

The princess crowd is a select audience and the studio is not going to be able to market this to a general crowd. So it gets less attention.

And that was exactly the problem. I just read an article this week that this is the reason Disney recently changed the title of their upcoming animated version of Rapunzel to Tangled, and the marking will focus heavily on the prince's action sequences as well as the princess starring in the film.

I haven't seen it yet, but I bought the blu-ray this week and I'm probably going to watch it tonight or tomorrow. I've heard nothing but good things about it.

 

[lillygator]

see I don't have boys, but Rapunzel as a title is fine with me, one I recognize.

 

[PlainJane]

I was disappointed by the movie. The songs were just OK. The story line and supposed twists were also very obvious. The entire time I was guessing correctly what was going to happen next or even 20 to 30 minutes later in the movie.

 

[Planogirl]

I will eventually see this on video but I just wasn't interested when it was in the theaters. I like animated films but there's a lot of them out there nowadays so maybe it's just not as special. Plus Disney's had some pretty mediocre stuff for a while now.

It's too bad that it underperformed though. It would have been nice to see Disney animation come back strong again.

 

[TDC Nala]

I don't think it was racial. My nephews weren't interested in it. They though it sounded too girly. Didn't appeal to a big enough audience apparently. These days you have to appeal to a wider audience than just little girls. And it wasn't marketed heavily at all, much less as something that would appeal to whole families.

 

[TeresaNJ]

I saw this with my husband, brother and sister-in-law, and we all loved it. The music is amazing, and the story is classic Disney. I encourage everyone to see it.

 

[MickeyMomOfThree]

I was surprised it didn't do better too. We went opening weekend and even my DD15 who hates all thins family lately wanted to go. We all loved it and she even cried (surprised herself!) I bought it the day it cam out because they wanted it so bad. Wonder why they didn't market it more?

 

[NotUrsula]

I think Disney believes that the problem is related to racial bias. The other day I was in a WalMart and noticed something interesting: there were several little girls' shirts on the clearance rack with images of Tiana on them, but an entire rack of new PATF merchandise was also out there, and not a single one of those shirts had her human image on it -- she was a frog on every one. That tells me that the marketing for the video release is being shifted away from an image of a black girl to one of a race-neutral green frog. I can see how the merchandising may be affected by racial bias, but I don't think that attendance at the film was. I think it was more about the marketing, which didn't seem to have a crisp focus at all. They REALLY should have played up the music in the advertising, and they should have held the release until AFTER Christmas and tied it in with Carnival.

I loved the movie. Being from just outside New Orleans I wondered where on earth Charlotte got her atrocious accent , but the swamp sequences were primarily done with local voice talent, and for once they got the Cajun accents right. (Dennis Quaid, are you paying attention?)
The difficulty I had with the film was the whole idea of anyone getting married in St. Louis Cathedral on Mardi Gras, but I guess you'd have to be local for that to be beyond suspension of disbelief.

The Voodoo segments were actually rather frightening for most of the younger kids I saw it with, but the animation of that part was excellent; really good imagery. I don't think having hand-drawn animation hurt the film -- I think that Marketing just didn't know what to do with it. I remember that Mulan was much the same, and I've always thought that that was one of Disney's most under-rated films.