Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Movie Preview: The Princess and the Frog

Ok, so call me late to the party. I don’t follow kid’s films much, nor do I follow Disney. So I missed a bunch of the controversy that is The Princess and the Frog. Perhaps you missed it as well.

The film will be released in December of this year. Here is a trailer.



If you think I might have problems with this film, you should hear what friends of mine mentioned when they heard about this film. The more we thought about the film the more issues came up.

The story originally went like this:
A prince from a fictional African nation comes to New Orleans to listen to jazz. While here he meets a spoiled brat rich White girl, and her Black maid. Both girls find him attractive. Somehow he comes afoul of a bad Voodoo priest that turns him into a frog. He gets the Black girl to kiss him, turning her into a frog. They both go to a good Voodoo Priestess and get changed back to humans, fall in love somewhere along the way, and live happily ever after.

Thus Disney gets to cash in on the influx of positive Black films, the popularity of President Obama, and make a claim at being racially sensitive.

Except there are problems. First the name of the Black girl has changed from Maddy to Princess Tiana. This is odd since America has no royalty. And why would royalty work as a maid?

Photo found at http://www.ugo.com/movies/animated-hotties/?cur=princess-jasmine&morepics=1
Second, this is billed as the first Black Disney princess. Hello, did anyone watch Aladdin? The entire movie is filled with Black people. Princess Jasmine was the first Black princess, it’s just that everyone seemed to skip over the permanent suntan she and every character had. But as a friend mentioned, this will be the first American Black princess, which goes back to what I said above.

Third the film is situated after the Civil War and the 13th Amendment. But it is a period piece around the late 1800’s to early 1900’s. This means that Jim Crow and segregation were in full effect. Meaning that the prince would never have seen or spoken to Tiana, and if he did she likely would have been hung for her boldness. That was how the South was those days.

And of course this says nothing of the fact that a prince would never speak with a commoner in those days. Even now it is highly unlikely, and generally occurs due to other circumstances like Prince Edward fighting in Iraq.

Lastly, a White Southern woman of that time period would never be seen after a Black man, at least in public. Even if he was a prince. Her family would have disowned her, and likely killed or given extreme suggestions to leave to the prince.

What is effectively happening is that the South is being romanticized yet again. Facts are being thrown out the window so Disney can make money. And our youth are losing a piece of the truth and history of the nation yet again.

Add to this the fact that the animators at Disney seem to be very lazy of late. Princess Tiana looks remarkably like several other Disney princesses, just with a tan. She is hardly distinct, or drawn with any relative connection to any racial group.

But the film has a huge list of top names. Oprah Winfrey, Terrance Howard, John Goodman, and Keith David head the leading voices in the movie. Tiana will be voiced by Anika Noni Rose, who seems to be a singer (never heard her sing) and actress (she has been in several plays as well as the movie Dreamgirls). I really can’t recall her in anything, but I’ll blame that on being older.

Expect to see lots of hype about this movie. It goes with the trend right now to show a lot of Black people in things. Like the background of ads, or as additional characters in television shows. It’s the Obama effect. A limited effect where you get to see more people of color without them gaining any real importance or positions of leadership in anything.

Because if Disney really cared about being racially sensitive, or even aware, they could have added Black characters into movies for decades. They even could have promoted Aladdin as such. But instead they played down the thought of leading, or secondary characters, as anything but White. Up until now. [Though I should note that Lilo and Stitch did have a full cast of people of color – and were intended to be seen as people of color.]

Honestly, I don’t find the fact that this is a film focused on a Black character from Disney as a positive. It’s not like they never knew the color black was in their coloring inks. It just emphasizes that with the Civil Rights Movement, and decades of laws and action, it has taken nearly half a century for Disney to acknowledge African Americans. It just reminds me that taking all the people of color in front of and behind the cameras all add up to less than 10% of the people in Hollywood.

Perhaps I’m too sensitive, but that is my nature. At least I’m honest about what bugs me. At least I try to look at America’s past with open eyes to the good and the bad. At least I’m not trying to profit on the back of President Obama, like this is one big marketing experiment.

Disney is doing a film about a Black woman. It’s about time. Now let’s hope it’s good.

10 comments:

M. Vass said...

Comment as found at Black and White Blog, where I am co-author.

Kozispoon Says:
May 2nd, 2009 at 11:00 pm e
Uhh, Princess Jasmine isn’t black. Last time I saw the film, it was based off of Saudi Arabia?

M. Vass said...

Kozispoon,

Actually that is my point. Saudi Arabians are Black. Or to be exact, Negroids. Just like all Arabs, those in North Africa, the rest of Africa, and a few other places.

Just because Disney didn’t advertise it, used White actors voices, and most people are unfamiliar with the background of the actual story it’s based on (or the 4 classifications of human beings for that matter) does not change the facts.

And what about every other point I made about the film?

M. Vass said...

Comment as found at Black and White Blog, where I am co-author.

RodimusBen Says:
June 8th, 2009 at 10:40 pm e
This shouldn’t really come as a surprise. Disney has never had any qualms altering history when it suited their needs. At least these characters are fictional; in Pocahontas, the radically altered characters are passed off as real historical figures!

No, nothing new from Disney here. Just an attempt to look socially relevant. Having said that, I AM excited that they are finally producing a new traditionally animated film in years; I believe it’s thanks to animation god John Lasseter that Disney is giving another chance to hand-drawn animated film.

M. Vass said...

Comment as found at Black and White Blog, where I am co-author.

narmolania Says:
June 21st, 2009 at 10:40 am e
I dont get it why they are making such a huge thing about a “black princess” its just the americans that are doing the whole “Omg! Black princess! Finally!!!” What about when they did mulan? Shes not white, shes asian. Me and my friends were just happy that a new Disney movie would come, that was DRAWN. Thats what mos of us are selebrating. not the fackt that shes black. (And the fackt that it would be rasis if she was a maid… How about sinderella? she was a maid in her own house. I think thats just wrong.)

The only thing I just want to say, finally Disney, finally, a drawn movie, not some crapy ass 3D where everyone looks like they are toys. It works on robots, it works on toys, but when its supposed to be people. What can I say? We all get the perfect complexion.

M. Vass said...

Comment as found at Black and White Blog, where I am co-author.

Jen Says:
August 4th, 2009 at 12:54 am e
Jasmine is not black or Negroid. She is Arabian, and according to anthropolgy this means she is Caucasion. Skin color has nothing to do with it; bone structure and area origin does.

People automatically assume that if you are Caucasion you are “white”. This is not the case. You can be white, tan, olive, etc.

People should remember that this is a cartoon aimed at young children and just enjoy the show. Who cares is the main character is pink, purple, black or white? If it keeps you entertained, then the film has done its job.

M. Vass said...

Jen,

I disagree. Jasmine, and Arabs, are not Caucasoid. The facial characteristics, bone structure, and skin are directly akin to Africans more than Europeans. But I am no expert, and coulds be wrong.

And you are correct that White does not mean Caucasoid. Italians, Greeks, and others are not “White” and yet are Caucasoid.

Moving beyond that, all cartoons (in theaters) are not simply creations for kids. They are made by adults, with references for adults that go to the theater with their kids. Disney films are renown for the fact that images, actions, and words contain double entendres. It is most evident in films like Lilo & Stitch, but it was in Aladinn to no small degree.

As for who cares about the characters skin color? Disney. Look at the advertising campaign. If color is not important to them (and thus the products and themes they promote) why are they making a fuss about the “first Black Disney princess”? Why has every princess to date (except Jasmine and an Asian princess) been White? Why has it taken 76 years?

Yes the film may entertain. It might be very good. But that does not remove the other issues the film may contain. Just as the controversy with Transformers 2 did not end because the film brought in $300 million (which I will never understand why). Just as curerent television won’t show the complete version of What’s Opera Doc? though it is universally considered a classic. Entertainment of even the highest, or lowest , quality does not alter the meanings and issues contained therein. And these ideals are definitely passed on to the children watching, if only at a subliminal level.

M. Vass said...

Comment as found at Black and White Blog, where I am co-author.

Logan Calder Says:
August 5th, 2009 at 7:40 pm e
I am no expert, and I do not know if there is a difinitive answer that is accepted by all, but I read that it is only A,B,C…. Asian, Black, Caucasian - and that the Middle East was included into Caucasian, so technically, I think she is correct.
They make “a fuss” for the same reasons that everything in America is politically correct without substance…appeasement. Respect isnt something you can demand, it is earned. When it is demanded, you get appeasement.

M. Vass said...

Comment as found at Black and White Blog, where I am co-author.


Danielle Says:
August 15th, 2009 at 9:05 am e
Arab’s are not Black. Tiana works in a restaurant and is an actress, not a Princess until after she marries the Prince. The Prince meets Tiana when he is a frog and thinks she is a Princess because she was in costume. In New Orleans many races of people interacted together, even back then. The South is very romantic, and still is.
Disney’s job is not to teach history but to entertain. They base their stories on history and make them “entertaining” for children. The movie was in the works long before Obama came on the scene. I have stock in Disney and hope to get profit from all Princesses, Black or not.

M. Vass said...

Danielle,

As I have stated before, I believe you are incorrect. Arabs are Black (not to be confused with African American or Caucasoids).

I do not doubt the interactions of various people in New Orleans today. I severely doubt that things were as pleasant or openly interactive back in the 1800’s, and even most of the 1900’s. Slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation kind of prevented that.

I have never felt the South was romantic. It has been romanticized, but that is not the same thing. And most of that re-imaging of the South avoids the obvious factual daily activities that comprised life in the South. Share-cropping, slaves, and oppressing people never makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside. But that is me.

You are correct that it is not Disney’s job to teach. Because they have shown in many films their complete disregard for the facts that is history. But all movies are not meant to be correct or honest. And all children’s movies do contain themes that are meant to impart a thought in children, even if that is a subliminal aftereffect.

Still, some things are blatant and wrong. Sugar-coating reality is a pasttime in America that endures to this day. It’s part of the reason that African American history in this nation is not taught in schools and unseen except for 30 second commercials in the shortest month of the year.

Will this film make money? Tons of it. Will it help the Disney stock? Definitely. Will it entertain children? Oh yeah, and it will almost assuredly be the biggest Disney film among African American audiences ever. And on that level the film will be a success.

But that does not detract from the fact that I wish it didn’t take Disney the better part of a century to recognize that African Americans exist, or the contributions we have made to this nation.

Anonymous said...

Princess Tiana is the first African American princess. Jasmine is Arabian, not black. Her skin may be dark but her features and hair texture are closer to that of the Caucasoid race.

Tiana actually has African American features that make her unique among the the other Disney princesses. Her short round nose, full sultry lips, and deep chocolate tone are things that are unique to her, and only her.

Maybe the reason why everyone made a big deal about Disney creating a "black" princess was because African Americans have been viewed in such a negative way from the moment they were forced to come here to be slaves. No other race had to endure that in America. African Americans went through it for us. So here we are today living in an America where anyone who wants be American can come here and be treated just like everyone else. Like shit.. -_-U

Anyway.. having coming from such a dark history, and then being idolized as a princess in an industry that for years has produced Caucasian princesses is a big deal.(Also Mulan isn't a Disney princess its not even a princess story =/)

I'd also like to add its not Disney's job to educate people or be historically correct, they never made that claim (at least not to my knowledge) It is a company that started with a man who had dream to entertain people. I mean.. would you hire a ballerina and expect her create a cure for cancer? Or expect the scientist that could probably do it, to dance 3 hours on stage with a too-too? No that ballerinas job is to dance, and Disney's job is to make entertaining movies.

In my eyes Disney is a ballerina, and the movies they make are the stories she tells when she dances. some of them are sad, some are funny, some make me happy and some make me angry, but.. they are all beautiful.

There is a true art to movie making (and even more so for cartoons) that some people don't understand and that's why they can criticize it without a second thought. But I dare them to do Disney's job and do half as well.

p.s. I loved the movie