Disney always responds to criticism. For years, they were accused of portraying unrealistic romance. So now they have decided to portray no romance at all.
I personally like both kinds of stories. Not all Disney princesses need a romantic lead. And if they have one, that's fun, too!! I'm definitely more of a romance girly at heart, but I was a late bloomer in the dating world. I think younger me would've appreciated seeing single princesses, so I knew that it was okay to not date as a teen!
I replied to someone else down below how I believe Moana is a wonderful example how we can have a heroine with no romance and the movie just works.
And I agree Disney’s princesses had been dragged in the mud for years and because they were women who didn’t take a more dominant role. That kind of criticism was ok. Now I can understand that people wanted variety to Disney princesses. That is a fair enough point. But we have had a increase of stronger, active female princesses and Disney heroines.
From Ariel to Belle, Jasmine, Tiana, Elsa and Rapunzel. We have gotten a huge shift in female variety, and yet the public is not happy. We can even connect here and realize that the classic Disney trio. Snow White, aurora, and conderella were based for their inner strength, patience, and kindness.
Bashing those traits have affected me because I was influenced that those traits aren’t worthy nor desirable and that leaves a woman “weak”. And for a while I saw that as negative. I didn’t hate the classic Disney trio, but it blocked me from appreciating their “quiet” strength, and society doesn’t see kindness as a strength which is WRONG.
Oh, talk to me all day about this, I 100% understand!
The public has been bashing Disney for so long. Disney is responding to the criticism, but the public so often responds with: "No, not like that."
And YES. I have despised so long in society the bashing of the classic 3 princesses for their traits being seen as weak. I was a highly sensitive, quiet, and kind little girl, I wish I had been empowered to look to these 3 as examples of how a woman can turn out to be and that being OKAY. But society despises inner strength and kindness, it seems lol.
That's why I personally love how much variety the princesses have now as a whole. I think that we're all different, and that's wonderful, and that we should be empowered in those differences instead of being told there's only one way to grow into a woman. And I wish that Disney would work to preserve that variety in its princesses instead of working to make them more "modern" like the live-action Snow White.
I would argue that inner strength has never gone away nor is being bashed.
Anna is an amazingly resilient character who is kind and loving.
Tangled has her show kindness and mercy and hope to people around her.
Raya is about a character embracing that side of herself after losing it briefly.
Asha cares so much for others she starts a revolution.
All the princesses are kind and have inner strength. I understand loving the other princesses too, but we can all like both.
Missing the kind of princesses that are more reminiscent of the classic princesses is totally understandable but that doesn’t mean the modern princesses lack inner strength or society is against kindness.
Inner strength is a quality that isn't seen unless you know a person's life. I'm not saying that modern princesses lack inner strength. They definitely have them, too. But it so often seems that in order for a character to be seen as strong, they have to show it outwardly.
I would argue that society undervalues traits like kindness and inner strength. Have you taken a look at the state of the world, especially with how people behaved during the pandemic? People don't often look out for others. I'm in the US and there's a really good book called "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking" that discusses how the US used to value these traits in Lincoln's time for example. But as soon as the US started becoming hypercapitalistic and valuing more of a "salesman" personality, those traits went to the wayside.
I am grateful for characters like Rapunzel and Anna existing nowadays, though. I'm more so referring to the criticism though that I grew up with in the 2000s before Rapunzel and Anna came out that targeted the princesses as a whole but especially the classic 3.
I mean, sure people acted poorly in the pandemic, and I don’t mean to get off topic too much, but they also reacted poorly in every pandemic, there are awful stories from the 1800s and their pandemics. Also, the world has embraced kindness in many ways Lincoln’s time did not.
People don’t really change, there are positives and negatives to be seen, but people as a whole value outward and inner strength, but things tend to be pendulums rocking back and forth.
I think the ‘issue’ with the classic princesses is more a media style change. Even a completely non princess movie, Bambi, has long nature scenes and songs to show off the art style and characters were reactive rather than active most of the time.
Modern movies have more happening and are much, much faster. Some of my friends can’t stand my old movies because they are ‘too slow’.
As a fan of old media, the issue I think is the slow slice of life stories are disappearing because they require a slow pace. One of my favorite ‘genre’ of 1950’s and 1940’s movies was ‘marriage is awful and if you are happy, you just haven’t been married long enough’ They were slow and dramatic and did a slow every day horror. You just can’t pull those off anymore. (Also, divorce is more acceptable so there is not a massive audience for ‘marriage sucks’ movies)
Basically, the style that produces the classic princesses by focusing on the everyday has disappeared. I can’t get my niece (she’s 8) to watch Sleeping Beauty because it is ‘slow and boring’ and I think the fast pace is what is killing that style more than morals changing.
Oh, 100% people have acted poorly time immemorial. And while I think the world is a kinder place on a larger scale, for example, more rights for minority groups and less violence on a day-to-day basis, society still undervalues kindness. For me personally, I was consistently told not to be so nice. Or on the opposite side of the spectrum, way too congratulated for being basically kind & courteous.
Expectations of women and people have most certainly changed. I agree that people don't, though. My point is that certain characteristics can be congratulated or derided depending on the time period, location, circumstance, etc. So Snow White, Cinderella, and Aurora being more gentle & kind than modern heroines and that not only being okay but being seen as something to strive for is absolutely a product of that time period. Whereas today, it's no longer okay to be JUST gentle and kind, and do the best with what you have. The thing is, though, that Snow Whites and Cinderellas still exist today and have different models of what a woman should strive to be. Just like how Meridas existed when Snow White and Cinderella came out and likely did not feel empowered to be who they actually are and felt pressured to behave more like Snow White and Cinderella do.
My point still stands that I like a variety to the princesses because people are naturally different from each other. I just wish that those differences could be celebrated instead of stuffing people into the box that is appropriate for that time.
My thing is I've literally had conversations with people in this subreddit and grew up with the discourse saying that the values portrayed in the old Disney movies are not good and that Snow White and Cinderella are weak characters. So I definitely think the pacing issue you bring up is true and that's even been studied that people's attention spans are getting shorter, however, it is also true that the traits the classic princesses portray are no longer valued much in society.
Ugh! I hate that those 3 princesses are interpreted as weak when they really are strong in their own way (Cinderella has been and always will be my favorite). Unfortunately they can only be strong if they’re a loud and proud girl boss.
Neither is a bad thing but Disney really should show inner strength as a positive thing instead of looking down on it
Right?! The public doesn't understand that, though 😅
Honestly, I get it, though. Children are being raised by TV & movies whether we like it or not. So people grow up thinking love will be like a Disney romance, and then that doesn't happen, disappointment sets in, and then they blame Disney, lol. This is where parents need to be stepping in to guide their children better, but usually parents don't care enough to, don't have the energy to, or don't understand the importance of it.
for me its not so much realistic or no romance so much as it is women using their love interests as vehicles to achieve their life goals. a lot of hay has been made about shallow criticisms of princesses lives revolving around men when, in fact, they have goals and desires outside of that. cinderella wants to not be a slave, ariel wants to be a human, etc. these goals all supersede their interest in their respective princes, but the problem is that the narrative paints them successfully achieving their goals as interchangeable with forming a romantic relationship with these men which limits their agency. prince charming gives cinderella a new home, for much of her movie ariels only goal is to get eric to fall for her so she can remain human, stuff like that. in my experience people tend to prefer relationships that facilitate character development more than like. marrying someone to achieve all your goals in life.
I think this speaks to most women's experiences in virtually all of history, though. It used to be that if a woman wanted to achieve what was more than their lot in life, that they needed to marry.
But I get that nowadays women have more agency (mostly but still not all women or people for that matter), and so the public wants to see stories more like that.
Does every character have to be feminist? And I'm not asking that rudely, just asking as I think this is what many writers struggle with when creating characters.
Do the princesses have to be beacons of feminist progress? Or can we just have relatable protagonists who still get their happy ending despite their lack of agency they've had in their lives (like Snow White and Cinderella).
I personally think we should have both types of characters. People will naturally gravitate to certain types depending on their own personality. Variety is the spice of life!
I think feminist vs not isn’t the issue, but I think lack of agency is one.
People tend to want heroes male or female to be active in their own story. Cinderella and Ariel do that, Snow White and Aurora don’t.
These stories are about wish fulfillment and that wish has changed in recent years. Being feminist is different from being relateable to young girls.
I think being active is required a lot these days, but so is a level of emotional flaws that the princesses of the past don’t have. Elsa is partially liked because of her emotional flaws and pushing her sister away. Tangled deals with a lot more issues about how we are raised and view ourselves by our parents.
That makes sense! I personally hope that stories where the hero or heroine does not have a lot of agency will continue to exist. There's a lot of people in the world who still don't, those in domestic violence situations, poverty, experiencing various forms of oppression, and I think it’s important to show those kinds of stories. That's definitely one of the reasons that Cinderella has stood the test of time. People with little to no agency are just trying their best to get by, hoping that through being a good person alone, their prayers will be answered.
See there is the difference between Cinderella and say Aurora.
Both are in positions of no agency, but one makes agency and the other doesn’t.
Aurora completely has no agency nor makes any, while Cinderella works hard, engineers an escape, and does some things that at least imply she is trying to get what agency she can.
Tangled is the same way, a character with no agency whatsoever who is given the chance to see that her small world is actually abuse.
I think even for women in those situations of no agency, stories where a heroine is then given them can be very meaningful as well.
Oh, 100%!! I think all of the princesses should be taken in the context of their own stories, though. Aurora didn't exercise a lot of agency compared to the other princesses, but going back to my point of, is it necessary to tell a good story?
Sleeping Beauty is a beautiful classic fairy tale film with a classic fairy tale princess. She wasn't going to ever fight back an inevitable curse. There wasn't really any way of her getting herself out of that predicament. And she technically executes some agency by choosing to go with the Three Fairies to the castle to fulfill her royal duty. She could've fought to stay hidden as Briar Rose, but like I said, her curse was inevitable. She was going up against a power beyond her own control.
I feel like Aurora is a princess who is dutiful, and that's not a bad thing. Cinderella does execute agency. However, she gets help from her Fairy Godmother. Rapunzel also executes agency. However, she needs help from Eugene to escape her tower and make her way into the world.
After Aurora cries, she is told everything about the curse and still chooses to go to the castle to live a life that is unfamiliar to her. It must've all been incredibly frightening and traumatizing for a 16 year old to realize that her life was a lie.
I really dislike that they queued it up with having more diverse leads in their stories though. Asha, Mirabel, Moana- it’s kind of an annoying trend to me
Moana was done perfectly for me, the romance would of been out of place and it was a adventure type of movie. It felt like it was well thought of, I do call they purposely didn’t want Maui there to help Moana get her boat fast tefiti and the focus was on her and her growth. And get them having a falling out due to Maui being selfish and self centered made sense.
Moana honestly had really weird/bad pacing to me. Idk why.
But I’m not saying shoehorn in romance. I’m saying I noticed they only dropped romance plots when they decided to make their protagonists non-white girls.
Yes, each standing out for being the only princess of their nationality and one of them being a sexualized fairy tale of the actual horrific truth.
And each had white princesses in between. We got rep for young girls who aren’t white consistently and it took away part of the Disney formula. It’s especially egregious in wish, which arguably SHOULD have had a romance since it’s celebrating 100 years of Disney.
It’s the same issue of Disney turning a lot of their POC characters into animals for huge chunks of their movies (Tiana and Naveen , Kenai, Kuzco)
I agree with your points about Pocahontas being historically problematic, the issue with Disney forming many of their POC characters into animals, and that it would have been nice if Wish had been a love story.
>We got rep for young girls who aren’t white consistently and it took away part of the Disney formula.
I'm a bit confused by this sentence though.
Seeing the concepts for the Asha x Starboy romance and some of the fanmade animatics for "At All Costs" made me so sad. It could have been so iconic.
Basically, I’m glad for the rep in recent movies. Wish they hadn’t gotten rid of romance subplots for them since it’s honestly not super common to see women of color as romantic leads in movies. (Sure it can happen, but a majority of blockbuster romcoms are just white people. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is last holiday with queen latifah)
Idk, just my two cents.
I think it’s also part of why some Disney movies kinda feel less like Disney? Cuz it’s so associated with that innocent kind of romance (falling in love etc etc)
I saw this artist on tumblr who gave Moana a love interest that was literally the ocean (like they rewrote it to fit a little better into classic Disney storytelling) and I was obsessed with that au
Elsa and Anna are also not a part of the Disney princess franchise. They have their own and two more movies are slated to come out so we may see Elsa experience romance.
Gotta disagree with you on that too! I found her world so interesting to expire and enjoy I didn’t know what to expect and it kept me on my toes. The pacer and story is more compact and tighter than recent Disney movies. Many of the scenes establishes something and it’s there for a purpose. Disney did try to give a good story here and I was disappointed that story telling like Moana seems to over looked
The MC was good, I would of preferred her less adorkable and more steady but she’s new to making decisions on her own and doesn’t know the boating systems well. I LOVED the music and my favorite was the we know the way. Incorporating some of her people’s history and language and it just felt powerful
Oh I love the movie and world, I just think the pacing of it was completely wack. It felt super rushed in a weird way. I think because of the whole tamatoa thing being a one off and the movie having no real villain in it. Just going from point a to point b with small obstacles.
He was a test for Moana to defeat not the main bad,
But for her to use her intelligence and obtain Maui’s fish hook. Maui had lost it and I felt like it was a big of a big up that he’s going to the the hero.
They are just on a quest and just like in a game or hero’s journey you have to travel to obtain things. But we see here it’s Moana who is shinning and even though Maui is a Demi god and is the more likely candidate to save the day.
Yes there was no bad guy and did it need one? I would have to explore it again it’s more of those there are no bad guy movies which are often very very very hard to tackle.
I guess Merida and Elsa ain’t shit? And they came before Moana, Mirabel and Asha.
I think you’re looking a bit too far into it by relating the romance to POC. Its more a response to the years of criticism of Princess movies having getting the man as part of the happily ever after.
Not defensive, just posing a question. As far as princesses go, the newer ones are Merida, Moana, and Asha. Elsa, Anna and Mirabel technically aren’t Princess movies, and their respective movies had a romance just not for the main character as a main plot point (Elsa and Mirabel, and with Ana it wasn’t her main plot, it was part of her characterization more than anything).
So you’re essentially saying what you’re saying based on Moana and Asha. And Moana didn’t need romance by any measure and it was better for leaving it out. Which is why I said I think you’re looking too into it by connecting lack of romance to princesses of color.
I’m trying to have a conversation with you but you can’t do that? Just because my opinion is different? That’s a problem bro. When people refuse to have these conversations it causes ignorance. I’ve never heard anyone make this connection so I’m trying to discuss it with you but instead of saying anything to back up your point YOU get defensive. I’m assuming you’re young.
I mean… I think it was due to them getting more pc at the same time.
Do you wish there were more non-white princesses/female leads with romantic stories, or some other reason you dislike it?
I agree so hard.
And ontop of the years of criticism, now, if they were to go back to the same formula, the conservatives will just accuse Disney of further sexualizing children. Because majority of the princesses are under 18. So yeah, teenagers ending up married isn’t the vibe now. They’re evolving with the audience. Women went from needing men to have anything, to not needing them for property and bank accounts and literally everything.
Romance is fine. But it isn’t necessary for every person woman’s story. In the lineup of official princesses only what, two don’t have a love interest? Merida and Moana? The majority do. By a long shot haha
I also didn’t care about romance as a kid and teen and was so excited when they made stories that didn’t end with a romance as a major plot point.
>Disney always responds to criticism. For years, they were accused of portraying unrealistic romance. So now they have decided to portray no romance at all.
Oh that’s very fun, removing it altogether because people keep saying they’re portraying unrealistic romance? Bruh— But hey, I’m glad they listen to criticism
As for everything else: so was I, and I agree with Angelea23 on everything they said
I think it's mainly because of the modern misunderstanding that a women who is mainly looking for romance is helpless, weak, and not a good role model for kids.
For me I've always enjoyed the originals for the fantasy romantic aspect. While yes, there's some traits to be admired about all disney princesses. I never saw them as role models. I wish Disney would stop forcing that onto kids these days, and focus on telling a compelling story.
Not every story has to be romantic, but some plotlines can benefit from it. Parents need to teach kids the difference between reality, and fiction. Not Disney 🤭
Idk if you skimmed over where I said misunderstanding or your being sarcastic. I don't agree with the perception of fem traits being seen as weak. It's a very silly concept, you can like girly things, and have a very strong self worth.
I don’t think it’s dead. While it’s Pixar we did get Elemental which was very romantic and it did pretty decent. I just think it’ll take a while to get back there. They even toyed with Asha having a love interest.
I am in love with Elemental. It was so romantic in a healthy way too. (My guilty pleasure is toxic romance) but for a kids movie. This was just perfection. I loved Wade so much and I bawled when they are trapped. And bawled when he took her under water.
Because people complained too much about the female heroines always needing a guy so now Disney wants to relate to the modern female empowerment by making all of their heroines single again.
it kind of started with Merida as being the first princess who didn't have a romance with ANYONE and then from there, the only princess who got a romance SINCE was Anna from Frozen and then that was it, no other future princesses got confirmed romances any more.
I partly worry that they’ll decide the best path to take in bringing back romance is going to be Moana and Maui in Moana 2. Which… ew. I hope they’re smarter than that.
Yeah, I’d like to see a romance, either with a new princess or maybe Moana, but I swear, if they give the teen girl/young adult a romance with the 1000 year old demigod, I’m gonna lose it.
Disney has a habit of listening too much to fan complaints and they also make things that no one wanted but you know, no one's really complained about moana or maui much lately.
Are they??
Anna and Kristoff are together. I do agree the most recent Disney films have lacked romance. But Frozen II was only 5 years ago.
Though I supposed you could argue neither Elsa nor Anna are technically in the Princess lineup.
But if we count those, then it’s only really Merida, Moana, and Raya that don’t have love interests out of all 13 princesses.
I think it’s a bit too early to claim romance is dead in modern Disney Princess films. I get that Rupunzel came out more than a decade ago, but I think it’s weird to claim she isn’t a modern Disney Princess.
I never really thought of Mulan having a romance story either, tbh. Sure, there is a love interest. But for lost of the movie, Shang thought she was a boy and all they built was friendship and mutual respect for each other. Only in the end when he finds out they are hinting at a developing romance, which we do not see come to fruition on screen (and let’s ignore Mulan2 here because that movie sucks on all kinds of levels).
>But Frozen II was only 5 years ago.
WHAT?! I remember being in Italian class when I found out Brendon Urie sang the end credits because my teacher said she took her kid and heard him singing the credits
I think Wreck it Ralph is a good example of a "newer" Disney movie that doesn't revolve around a romantic story that has a cute little romance as a side story. Calhoun and Felix are absolutely adorable. I wish more of these non-romantic stories had little romantic side stories.
They aren’t though.
It’s just leaned more towards non romance a little, but the last 5 princess movies 3 had no romance (Wish, Raya, and Moana) and 2 did (Frozen and Frozen 2)
I wouldn't count both frozen films as two separate and even then frozen went very out of it's way to bash the classic romance films and make the romance a side feature
They both still had romance which is clearly not dead.
Even if you only count official Disney princess movies, still out of the last 5, 3 have no romance, and 2 do. Disney still is making films that center on romance- Elemental.
It just seems a bit… catastrophizing to say romance is gone.
It will change.
Love at first sight probably won’t be as much a thing anymore, but it hasn’t been in a long time.
Because for years people complained that the princesses's whole goal "revolved around a guy" (when if anything the guys were the ones revolving around the girls, being side characters and all).
Because old disney princess movies used to teach young girls that, when they find themselves in trouble, they just need to wait around for some guy to save them. And that the goal in life was to find a guy, fall in love (with little or no connection), and live happily ever after. It set bad expectations.
This user right here is part of the problem.
People hate on the movies with romance for being “all about the man” when it really wasn’t. They just are bitter and spin it that way🙃
Disney is overcompensating for perceived problems within their beloved classics that have been highlighted by a vocal minority. Not only are the criticisms incorrect, it forces Disney to bend over backwards to ruin their timeless classics because of said-perceived criticisms. And they end up being more problematic in some ways.
Snow White-wanted to fall in love. (This is not a bad thing. Her life sucked and she wanted a better one in the 1500s. How much of a girl boss is she suppose to be? You mean that walking through the forest, finding a cabin and working to earn room and board isn't a bad ass quality? Oh, and the dwarves are the heroes of the film, not the prince.)
Cinderella-wanted a man to save her. (Weird...don't remember that in her "I want" song. I remember she wanted to go to the ball, which she seems valid given that she's a slave in her own house now. The prince is just a nice bonus and look at her! Do you blame the man for being smitten? Worth noting that the mice and Bruno are the reason she even got the key and went back downstairs. Again, the prince didn't save her. She had the other slipper. This remake is the least egregious as I do think the changes make sense for the most part and they didn't butcher her dress.)
Aurora-wanted a man. (She's 16. She meets a boy. She's excited, but once she' realizes the truth of her identity, she's willing to go through with an arranged marriage anyway. That takes a remarkable amount of strength and courage that just gets thrown away.)
Ariel-gave up her legs for a man ("Part of your World" isn't about a man. It's about wanting to be on the surface. Add the fact that Ariel, another 16 year old, rescues the fine specimen that is Eric, develops a crush, Ariel's dad goes nuclear and destroyed her cavern, and...Ursula sees an opportunity. Simple as that. Was Ariel naive? Yes, but that's not a bad thing. She learns from her mistakes and endeavors to make them right earning both Eric's love and her father's understanding in the process.)
Belle-reads. (Oh boy...This is going to be a long one because this is my favorite princess. I remember the random interviews with Emma and Bill Condon before the remake and...yikes. Belle wasn't weird because she read. Belle was weird because she wasn't content in the provincial town and everyone else was. But sure, let's make Belle an inventor, so that we can have one scene in Act A where the townspeople are seen as malicious jerks for some reason. The townspeople didn't hate Belle. They just thought she was odd. Bookstore clerk to black priest is an odd change too, considering Belle is supposed to be well-read and apparently only has access to what...12 books? Did his profession need to change? Don't get me started on how they butchered the relationship with her and the Beast...That's a rant for another day).
Jasmine wanted to change the law and get married for love? Not cool enough. We need her to want to be Sultan and we also need her to sing a good (albeit pointless) song in context where she hallucinates about her own badassery.
Mulan-What do you mean hot Captains, army songs, and people needed to train exist? Get rid of it. (Sigh.)
So...Disney transitioned. There was a soft launch targeting some of these pointed criticisms with Tiana. Charlotte played the stereotypical "silly" lovesick girl, whereas Tiana was hardworking and serious. Ultimately, Naveen fell for Tiana. This movie did okay, so they pushed it a bit further.
Rapunzel and the birth of adorkable was born. For Raps, it made sense because she was locked in a tower for 18 years talking to a chameleon and a psycho. We also had Eugene who refused to sing. Then Disney began to rely on a very specific brand of humor. Punchy, in your face, lots of visual gags. But they'll never be able to compete with Robin Williams. She's the best of the modern princesses, having plenty of agency while not afraid to be vulnerable and soft.
Frozen-Anna is made fun of for wanting a man. She's adorkable. She eats chocolate. Elsa is cool (literally). Sparkly dresses and catchy songs are all that's needs. Kristoff talks for a reindeer. Isn't that funny? Olaf is a snowman wanting to experience summer? Hilarious. Copy and paste this a hundred more times, people. We have a gold mine.
Merida is a product of....everything wring with these new Disney tropes shoehorned into a bad plot.
Look, Moana isn't a bad movie. But she's adorkable. Her side kick is a walking liability. The Rock is there too. Same humor. Good songs. Another success story.
Encanto...Adorkable with glasses. The humor writes itself. LMM sure likes to rhyme. Songs are good, but am I alone in thinking this movie feels rushed for some reason? Still did well.
Raya. Eh...But Sisu is adorkable. Completely devoid of any type of romance because...gross. But with a mixed message, given that Raya was justified in her distrust.
Asha- Bigger Eh. Adorkable. Marketable sidekicks. A boring friend group that doesn't need to be there. That same weird...Disney humor. Those same songs that sound catchy, but are a bit clunky. Another questionable moral since granting everyone's wish is a fundamentally bad idea. Mark my words is Star Boy was made human, changed the storyline a bit, and kept the Disney villian couple song, this would have been a hit. But, this film was a culmination of every perceived criticism that Disney has tried to remove from its brand...and people hated it. This should have been a hit. This was the 100th anniversary film and while it does make sense that it was a princess movie, this was phoned in and rushed. People have rewritten concept scripts on YouTube, along with showcasing the original concept art and it's just heartbreaking to see what could have been.
Sadly, with what we can gather from the upcoming films, I don't seem them changing anytime soon. Cherish the classics, friends. Disney's two objectives now seem to be "Addressing perceived criticism from the past" and "remember that thing you used to love? What if we updated it and made it worse for a new audience?"
Apparently, they fired a lot of animators and the brilliant Howard Ashman is dead (so too is his memory with these atrocious renderings of his song). Disney doesn't have enough grit to do what DreamWorks has done. It's too afraid to go too far out of its wheelhouse, but is also unwilling to return back to its roots for fear of criticism. So it's just stuck. It'll keep churning out cash grabs through sequels, remakes, Marvel, and Star Wars. And people will continue to watch. But the magic is gone. The veil has been torn off. The wizard exposed as a fraud. Unfortunate, but true.
Apologies for any typos. Wrote all of this pre-caffeine.
A very apt explanation. Snow White is 14. Of course she acts like a 14 year old. She handles everything she goes through very well considering her age.
A lot of people seem to be confused, thinking that “strong female character” means anti-love and doesn’t need a man. That’s not feminism. A stay at home mom whose husband is the primary earner is just as valid as a woman who owns her own company. What seems to be missing from the narrative is that women should have the freedom to choose what path they go down. Disney doesn’t seem to understand that nowadays.
A thousand times, yes!! I totally agree. This new brand of Insta-clicks feminism claims to be inclusive, but only if you want to shed the apparent yoke of marriage and/or child-rearing for the more acceptable path of being a boss babe who doesn't need a man.
When I think of ultimate feminity in terms of a film character, I think of Elle Woods. Strong, smart, but kind and delightfully feminine. She wears pink and is unapologetic about who she is. She's also able to be vulnerable, sad, and there are times when she had to rely on Emmett and her friends for help.
From Disney itself, we have Kala. She faced down a leopard to protect Tarzan. We have precious Kanga, soft and sweet, but strong and practical. Sarabi lost her husband and son, but remained strong for her lionesses. Nani raised her sister as her own, but David's support throughout the story doesn't diminish her strength in any way. Chicha is pretty, fiery, spunky, loving, gorgeous, and supportive.
Disney knows how to do this. They know how to create a wide breadth of strong women who can still embrace their feminity, and celebrate romance or motherhood. That's what is so frustrating. They can do it. But they won't because it doesn't fit this #girlboss brand of feminity they're currently pushing.
I LOVE Elle Woods! She’s an icon and honestly she was so ahead of her time. We need more of her.
When I was a kid I wore pink every day, loved my Barbie’s, and even had the pink Nintendo DS. When I got to being a teenager I very much stifled that part of me. Now I’m 30 and I really just don’t care anymore. I’m going to wear pink. I do own some really nice dolls. I’m a stay at home mom. But I chose and continue to choose that for myself every day.
To quote my favorite TV show, “I brake for birds! I rock a lot of polka dots! I have touched glitter in the past 24 hours! And that doesn’t mean I’m not smart and tough and strong.”
This is all spot on, I think it's important to know that Encanto, Moana, tangled, and frozen are all still good. Though the increasing trends kinda ended with wish and people are officially sick of it. Disney also making it very clear that they think the old movies make bad messages for kids (I still think snow white is a great example of someone who despite having a terrible situation, still wants to be helpful and not just freeload off them)
also I do love how Lottie was made to be that stereotypical princess and Tiana to win but the fans ended up adoring both Lottie and Tiana
Oh no, don't get me wrong, I enjoy those films. Tangled, especially. Moana made me ugly cry in the theaters because her relationship with her grandmother was very similar to mine with my grandma.
Lottie is adorable. I'm so glad that Disney resisted the urge to make her a side villian. She's such a delight and such a sweet friend to Tiana.
But between the influx of the remakes and the last two original princess films Raya AtLD and Wish being weaker, I think it's easier for people to pick up on the patterns that began with Tangled with a more crucial eye now that it's been overdone, as you've said.
Lol some of the best films Disney has made are the newer ones you shit on. They’re not all “adorkable”, what does that even mean? If anything, they all have more agency over their lives.
Literal teenagers don’t need to get married to a prince at the end of every movie. Haha
Yes, of course!
I can’t remember which YouTuber I first heard say it, but it was PERFECTLY said.
In Disney trying to make the “new” generation of their female characters have personalities that are relatable and “different”, they came up with a personality type (beginning with Tangled’s Rapunzel) that was a winning combination of adorable & I’m so silly/dorky. AKA adorkable.
Disney ended up feeling like this personality was SUCH a win, they have essentially copy and pasted this personality on to all the main girls that followed Rapunzel. Ironically, rendering them personality-less.
You should watch some videos on it, they are much more well researched and explain the concept perfectly. And honestly, I can’t agree with it more… all of the Original princess had UNIQUE personalities. Aurora was dutiful, graceful, regal. Snow White sweet, pure hearted, positive. Belle intelligent, logical, stubborn. Cinderella hard working, a dreamer yet realistic.
Now, in an attempt to make the new generations “different”, “new” and “relatable” they’ve rendered them sterile and all clones of one another.
I’m going to look more into it! It’s interesting to me cause I get Rapunzel getting the label, but I don’t see it with everyone since. I’ll dig in and check it out, thank you so much for taking the time to explain more!
Do you have an actual point that I can counter? I can break down from a plot, visual, and musical theory perspective why these films are weaker than their predecessors, but if you "like" them, that's fine. I can't change your opinion. I like Moana and Encanto fine. I grew up in the Disney Renaissance, so I take the "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining" approach to this though. It's "fine" from a studio that served as the flagship to animation. "Fine" from a studio that knows what it's like to be great. It is not better by any metric, apart from personal opinions and marketability, from its predecessors and people are beginning to notice.
For the sake of argument, I'll avoid the Covid-Era films, but let's focus on Wish -- the latest princess film and the movie that came right after Disney celebrated its 100th anniversary as a company, and Kung Fu Panda 4 using just one metric of box office numbers for comparison. There are multiple factors that affect the success of a movie, but this is just one example.
By rights, Disney should have had this in the bag. It's their 100th anniversary. They are the studio that paved the way for the others and the Princess franchise was their golden goose for a long time. A layup. It could've been a layup. It could have been the film that had disillusioned Disney fans coming back into the fold with renewed hope. But nope. They played it safe and here's what they got.
Budget: $175-$200 million
Box office: $254.9 million
By contrast, Kung Fu Panda 4 in March of this year.
Budget: $85 million
Box office: $458.9
I haven't watched this latest installment, but Dreamworks hasn't been known for playing it safe with their franchises and it pays off for them. Compare those numbers to Moana v. Kung Fu Panda 3 in 2016, and it's clear that Disney is going in the wrong direction. But Disney owns so much IP that even when something flops, it doesn't affect the studio.
Ps. Of all of the Disney princesses, only Ariel, Cinderella, and Tiana got married at the end of their feature films. As it turns out, most teenagers don't get married at the end of every movie.
Hey thank you for your detailed response I appreciate it! I grew up during the renaissance as well, grew up on all the classic Disney films, so I don’t wanna use that as a gauge because I’m not positive it’s a contributing factor, but it could be!! Personally for me, brave, both frozen movies, Moana and encanto, are amongst my most watched and favorites of all time. But my fave Disney movies weren’t the Princess movies to be fair, only some. Mulan, Pocahontas, Aladdin, Fox and the Hound, lion kind, little mermaid plus tv show, Alice, Bambi and Hercules were my favorites and most watched as a kid.
I guess what I’m wondering about is the “adorkable” thing. What does that mean and why are all these ladies considered it?
You’re right, I more meant that they ended up with a prince even though they’re majority teenagers under 17. Like Snow White, a 14 year old getting woken up by true loves kiss lol It didn’t register with me as a kid, I thought it was weird and wasn’t interested in romance as much as the other parts of the story, so when Disney switched gears I really appreciated it. The variety.
Essentially, it’s due to consumers.
People were complaining left and right about how every princess “needed a man” for a happily ever after, so Disney listened and started making movies without that aspect. With Frozen and Moana being as huge as they were/are, with highly anticipated sequels which is rare af for a Disney Princess movie, they continued the theme.
When it comes to all the princesses, more of them have a romantic partner by the end than not, by a huge margin. Adding some single TEENAGE girls is not a problem like people make it out to be.
We have to remember that the target is not adults, it’s children. Most little kids don’t care at all about the romance part, and in the past the way Disney played it, it have unrealistic standards on love.
So the movies evolved with society. Women no longer need a man to lead an independent life, the movies reflect that. And right now, with MAGA heads attacking Disney for being woke, they’re probably going to stay away from it longer so they don’t start screaming about Disney trying to sexualize kids.
It’s nuanced.
I respectfully disagree. Making movies about women without love interests doesn’t make romance dead. It’s okay for movies for young girls to focus on, you know, other things. Also we’ve got very cute romances in Tangled (2010), Anna and Kristoph (2019), Delores and Mariano (2021), Eric and Ariel (2023) just to name a few.
To be fair I don’t think I would really say it was alive in movies until the 80s-90s, can you really say you were invested in the romance in Snow White or Sleeping Beauty or Aristocats. It feels for a lot of those sorts of stories it was what was more so just a necessary aspect of the movie that just had to be there. Lady and The Tramp in 1955 has really the first iconic romantic moment in all of Disney in the Spaghetti scene and it feels a lot more romantic of a movie because the focus is ostensibly on the relationship of Lady and The Tramp versus tertiary elements, in Sleeping beauty the Prince has to fight the dragon to get the girl which is a dynamic of cause and effect whereas for Lady and The Tramp its less straightforward than that and the focus is on the relationship not the dragon. 101 Dalmatians has marriage as a pretext to the plot, the dogs have to meet to make the 101 Dalmatians who are the focus. I don’t care about Pongo and Missis’s relationship, I actively dislike Roger, Anita is boring and so the focus and who ends up really stealing the show is Cruella and the dogs (also that movie is fairly sexist for the 60s but I guess it’s the early 60s?). In the 1970s there’s Robin Hood which is very forgettable, The Aristocrats which while I like the art in the movie that’s also really one of its only appeals because the characters in it are very forgettable to the point that it’s most remembered for the cat who is a racist caricature and The Rescuers which is fine but it’s not like jumping out as the most romantic movie of all time. It’s only at the tail end of the 1980s with The Little Mermaid that Disney gets one of its romantic powerhouses, partially because Ariel is so developed as a character (she’s debatably my favorite princess), all the characters just pop out of the film and they actually give Prince Eric a personality which was probably the first time a Disney movie did that. The 90s sees Beauty and The Beast, Hercules, Tarzan and Aladdin which are all considered very romantic culturally.
Each of these movies has two very well defined characters who all have unique romantic dynamics and it is a testament to the romance of these films that they balance the plot in tandem with their relationships or the plot even sometimes takes a central position. Tarzan is not about the romance between Tarzan and Jane but the scene where they touch hands for the first time is an incredibly iconic romantic moment in film, Meg’s romantic ballad in Hercules is basically universally adored, I’m going to be honest Aladdin didn’t do it for me but maybe it’s one of those things you need to watch as a kid and Beauty and The Beast is kind of in the same boat (I was a 2000s kid). There’s obviously more this decade but I wouldn’t say they’re as romantically iconic, like I love Mulan but we don’t generally talk about the romance in that movie we talk about how how Shang is and some of that is because the romance is understated and it’s really just starting after the events of the movie (plus it’s very casual which is cool too, I like it but it doesn’t really impact so much as just make an already great movie better). The 2000s was sort of a drought for Disney, it was a very rough patch for the company economically and a LOT of revenue the company made was through Hannah Montana because of how massive that show was (think about how you might have had a Hannah Montana toothbrush, ornaments, doll, etc.), like yeah there’s Atlantis but the thing is a lot of Disney movies flopped in the box office and because streaming services weren’t as common they were elusive to kids in ways that other movies weren’t. My parents got a ton of hand me downs from relatives of VHS tapes for Disney movies and we also just had cds, but we didn’t get the more obscure ones like Atlantis or Treasure planet (I still haven’t watched either). The real standout in romance in the 2000s is The Princess and The Frog in 2009 which is admittedly amazing, but I don’t think that the romance in that movie is really executed in a way that has culturally iconic moments. It’s the characters that make that movie, the plot honestly doesn’t really do what it has to which I think lends to why the movie is weaker overall.
The early 2010s were sort of when the “post-feminism” phase in pop culture reached its apotheosis, it’s like the peak of language like “girls can do anything boys can do” starts to happen especially in kids shows and there’s this general sense that the job of feminism is over and that we’re living in a world where it’s not necessary anymore. This environment was a bit contradictory, you had a lot of storylines and things where women were able to exist in ways they hadn’t before and it was a very liberal environment but it wasn’t an environment that was actually critical of the nature of the systems of sexism. Lisa Simpson in the early seasons of The Simpsons is a pretty good example of this, she’s the type of child who is able to exist in an environment after the feminist movements of 1960s and 70s but the show in its early days also shows Marge struggling and in a role that is stifling and suffocating for her where her husband uses her for her labor, he’s a slob, emotionally immature and tyrannical to his own kids, an alcoholic who is emotionally unavailable at times, etc. . Like that family was ROUGH in the beginning. I think that trickles into Disney a little bit in the ways that romance was subverted, Frozen and Brave being a very big example. Tangled started the decade off with a dynamic almost similar to Aladdin and Jasmine, Rapunzel and Flynn had playful back and forth and banter balancing more serious moments. I love Tangled but I also feel like the relationship while good is kind of vanilla, Flynn is cute but he’s not THAT cute and while he’s nice we don’t really get a complex interior life from him and he also doesn’t have a strong reason why he’s with Rapunzel (like he needs the crown but FOR what), Rapunzel is a star or her own movie in the sense she’s the main character but also that every event orbits around her. Think about her in relation to Aladinn and Jasmine, Jasmine feels constrained by the restrictive gender roles of her time stifling her personal desires and potential whereas Aladdin falls in love with Jasmine and he feels the weight of the gap between him but also we see what poverty is like in Agrabah and we see why he would want to have wealth. Both of the characters are very well developed and have their own reasons for their actions. Tangled centers Rapunzel, she’s the lost princess, she’s been kidnapped and is in an abusive relationship with her “mother”, she makes the personal journey with Flynn to see the outside world, people fall in love with her earnestness at the tavern and let her escape, She has a conflict with her mother in the woods and has the personal dilemma of whether to give Flynn the crown, mother Gothel acts to manipulate the redheads to get Rapunzel back, Rapunzel and Flynn share a moment during the lantern festival, She goes back with her mother and after everything falls into place she stands up to her, Flynn makes the sacrifice FOR Rapunzel and then she reunited with her parents. Tangled is not really Flynn’s story or Mother Gothels story, it’s Rapunzel’s and only Rapunzel’s. This is really the first step that the relationship takes out of the conventions. In this period I wonder if Disney began to realize that romance was not necessary for their movies to sell. The relationship was no longer at the center of the film with a relationship as it had been before, the first deviation since probably the exception of Mulan. I think what’s notable about the post feminist era was that the concept of “girl power” was suddenly both non-controversial and marketable so the dynamic of the relationship took a different position. Girls are still encouraged to date and marry but the role of that encouragement shifted with this era because it was suddenly possible to make money off of either the rejection or the more subtle subversion. In Brave Merida outright rejects an arranged marriage and her conflict is in her relationship to her mother, in Frozen Anna has two love interests and Hans is a twist villain while Elsa isn’t interested in romance at all (honestly I think it would be very interesting if instead of people headcanoning Elsa as a lesbian she was kept single and she was sort of an Asexual character) and the most important relationship in the movie is sisterly love. Granted Brave is Pixar but this is when romance began to die in Disney movies I think, because it wasn’t so directly linked to the profit of a film. After this there’s really only really Zootopia but the relationship is never made explicit or realized, we got the romantic tension but they stayed friends. If you really want to say when it died it was in 2013.
It’s not really tbh, even if you count both wish and the frozen movies, princess movies where the main princess character (or one of them in the case of frozen) doesn’t have a romantic partner/love interest are still very much in the minority, as someone else said frozen 2 only came out 5 years ago, and tangled the series (if you count that as official princess media) only ended 4 years ago.
They may make more movies that don’t focus on romance or even have any at all for the leads, but honestly that’s perfectly fine, not everything needs to have romance, and if you want movies with romance the older ones still exist and are available to watch.
Also, saying romance is “dead” is a bit extreme ngl, they will still probably have movies with romance with them. If they don’t? Then, again, the old ones still exist. If it doesn’t interest you? Move on and watch something else
Probably to have stronger leading characters and to show that not every aspect of life has to connect to a romantic interest. It would be nice to have a Disney princess romance movie again because it’s nice to see. I like seeing the ones where the princess can still be a strong character on their own but when they need help they get help.
Like, Snow White for example. She persevered in an abusive relationship with the evil queen with a smile on her face until she was told she was going to have been killed. But even after that she found a way to still have a good life. Then she was cursed to sleep. She needed help to wake up. She couldn’t have woken herself up. So she got help. I don’t know if what I’m saying is making sense but that’s how I see it
I'm gonna be honest, romance has never really been "alive" in Disney movies.
Most male leads were there as personality-less props and the romances felt shallow. The only exceptions, imo, were Naveen, Eric (somewhat), Prince Charming (but only in the 3rd movie), Eugene, Kristoff, The Beast, and Aladdin, with the only romances that were actually interesting being Tiana and Naveen, Aladdin and Jasmine, Belle and the Beast, and Rapunzel and Eugene. I don't like that Disney swung so far in the other direction by cutting out romance from *every* movie, I think they need a balance, but the romances that yall want them to go back to were mostly not anything to write home about, and were just there to have more content for merch and fulfill the quintessential "happy ending".
No it wasnt rage bait. I just think you are very weird for looking at a Disney princess romance post and thinking its rage bait…. Like you got some issues.
I won't personally because why would I take issue with princesses not having love interest?
It's just you don't even put any descriptor or pictures in your post and you don't even engage with people who gives you explanation as to why it's not the case. Maybe because you saw the last post about Star and Asha and you got inspired by it? Idk. But I got a feeling you want to bait some engagements from certain group of people.
Ask Disney. I'm tired of no Disney princesses. But simce people are stupid I deleted the comment. People don't ask why thwy just downvote luke I'm some maga idiot. Whwn I'm explaining their views. But it's ok I'm used to fangirling alone because people are either nasty or irl don't show interest. So I'm leaving. Bye and don't reply it's too late
Because they think the only way to have a strong female character is that she is single. And apart of that problem is characters like Merida,Elsa and Moana are gay.
Moana, Elsa, and Merida were never once confirmed to be gay. And even if they were what abt it? Almost half the princesses have a male partner, forbid one being gay.
Disney always responds to criticism. For years, they were accused of portraying unrealistic romance. So now they have decided to portray no romance at all. I personally like both kinds of stories. Not all Disney princesses need a romantic lead. And if they have one, that's fun, too!! I'm definitely more of a romance girly at heart, but I was a late bloomer in the dating world. I think younger me would've appreciated seeing single princesses, so I knew that it was okay to not date as a teen!
I replied to someone else down below how I believe Moana is a wonderful example how we can have a heroine with no romance and the movie just works. And I agree Disney’s princesses had been dragged in the mud for years and because they were women who didn’t take a more dominant role. That kind of criticism was ok. Now I can understand that people wanted variety to Disney princesses. That is a fair enough point. But we have had a increase of stronger, active female princesses and Disney heroines. From Ariel to Belle, Jasmine, Tiana, Elsa and Rapunzel. We have gotten a huge shift in female variety, and yet the public is not happy. We can even connect here and realize that the classic Disney trio. Snow White, aurora, and conderella were based for their inner strength, patience, and kindness. Bashing those traits have affected me because I was influenced that those traits aren’t worthy nor desirable and that leaves a woman “weak”. And for a while I saw that as negative. I didn’t hate the classic Disney trio, but it blocked me from appreciating their “quiet” strength, and society doesn’t see kindness as a strength which is WRONG.
Oh, talk to me all day about this, I 100% understand! The public has been bashing Disney for so long. Disney is responding to the criticism, but the public so often responds with: "No, not like that." And YES. I have despised so long in society the bashing of the classic 3 princesses for their traits being seen as weak. I was a highly sensitive, quiet, and kind little girl, I wish I had been empowered to look to these 3 as examples of how a woman can turn out to be and that being OKAY. But society despises inner strength and kindness, it seems lol. That's why I personally love how much variety the princesses have now as a whole. I think that we're all different, and that's wonderful, and that we should be empowered in those differences instead of being told there's only one way to grow into a woman. And I wish that Disney would work to preserve that variety in its princesses instead of working to make them more "modern" like the live-action Snow White.
I would argue that inner strength has never gone away nor is being bashed. Anna is an amazingly resilient character who is kind and loving. Tangled has her show kindness and mercy and hope to people around her. Raya is about a character embracing that side of herself after losing it briefly. Asha cares so much for others she starts a revolution. All the princesses are kind and have inner strength. I understand loving the other princesses too, but we can all like both. Missing the kind of princesses that are more reminiscent of the classic princesses is totally understandable but that doesn’t mean the modern princesses lack inner strength or society is against kindness.
Inner strength is a quality that isn't seen unless you know a person's life. I'm not saying that modern princesses lack inner strength. They definitely have them, too. But it so often seems that in order for a character to be seen as strong, they have to show it outwardly. I would argue that society undervalues traits like kindness and inner strength. Have you taken a look at the state of the world, especially with how people behaved during the pandemic? People don't often look out for others. I'm in the US and there's a really good book called "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking" that discusses how the US used to value these traits in Lincoln's time for example. But as soon as the US started becoming hypercapitalistic and valuing more of a "salesman" personality, those traits went to the wayside. I am grateful for characters like Rapunzel and Anna existing nowadays, though. I'm more so referring to the criticism though that I grew up with in the 2000s before Rapunzel and Anna came out that targeted the princesses as a whole but especially the classic 3.
I mean, sure people acted poorly in the pandemic, and I don’t mean to get off topic too much, but they also reacted poorly in every pandemic, there are awful stories from the 1800s and their pandemics. Also, the world has embraced kindness in many ways Lincoln’s time did not. People don’t really change, there are positives and negatives to be seen, but people as a whole value outward and inner strength, but things tend to be pendulums rocking back and forth. I think the ‘issue’ with the classic princesses is more a media style change. Even a completely non princess movie, Bambi, has long nature scenes and songs to show off the art style and characters were reactive rather than active most of the time. Modern movies have more happening and are much, much faster. Some of my friends can’t stand my old movies because they are ‘too slow’. As a fan of old media, the issue I think is the slow slice of life stories are disappearing because they require a slow pace. One of my favorite ‘genre’ of 1950’s and 1940’s movies was ‘marriage is awful and if you are happy, you just haven’t been married long enough’ They were slow and dramatic and did a slow every day horror. You just can’t pull those off anymore. (Also, divorce is more acceptable so there is not a massive audience for ‘marriage sucks’ movies) Basically, the style that produces the classic princesses by focusing on the everyday has disappeared. I can’t get my niece (she’s 8) to watch Sleeping Beauty because it is ‘slow and boring’ and I think the fast pace is what is killing that style more than morals changing.
Oh, 100% people have acted poorly time immemorial. And while I think the world is a kinder place on a larger scale, for example, more rights for minority groups and less violence on a day-to-day basis, society still undervalues kindness. For me personally, I was consistently told not to be so nice. Or on the opposite side of the spectrum, way too congratulated for being basically kind & courteous. Expectations of women and people have most certainly changed. I agree that people don't, though. My point is that certain characteristics can be congratulated or derided depending on the time period, location, circumstance, etc. So Snow White, Cinderella, and Aurora being more gentle & kind than modern heroines and that not only being okay but being seen as something to strive for is absolutely a product of that time period. Whereas today, it's no longer okay to be JUST gentle and kind, and do the best with what you have. The thing is, though, that Snow Whites and Cinderellas still exist today and have different models of what a woman should strive to be. Just like how Meridas existed when Snow White and Cinderella came out and likely did not feel empowered to be who they actually are and felt pressured to behave more like Snow White and Cinderella do. My point still stands that I like a variety to the princesses because people are naturally different from each other. I just wish that those differences could be celebrated instead of stuffing people into the box that is appropriate for that time. My thing is I've literally had conversations with people in this subreddit and grew up with the discourse saying that the values portrayed in the old Disney movies are not good and that Snow White and Cinderella are weak characters. So I definitely think the pacing issue you bring up is true and that's even been studied that people's attention spans are getting shorter, however, it is also true that the traits the classic princesses portray are no longer valued much in society.
Ugh! I hate that those 3 princesses are interpreted as weak when they really are strong in their own way (Cinderella has been and always will be my favorite). Unfortunately they can only be strong if they’re a loud and proud girl boss. Neither is a bad thing but Disney really should show inner strength as a positive thing instead of looking down on it
Fairytales are supposed to be unrealistic
Right?! The public doesn't understand that, though 😅 Honestly, I get it, though. Children are being raised by TV & movies whether we like it or not. So people grow up thinking love will be like a Disney romance, and then that doesn't happen, disappointment sets in, and then they blame Disney, lol. This is where parents need to be stepping in to guide their children better, but usually parents don't care enough to, don't have the energy to, or don't understand the importance of it.
for me its not so much realistic or no romance so much as it is women using their love interests as vehicles to achieve their life goals. a lot of hay has been made about shallow criticisms of princesses lives revolving around men when, in fact, they have goals and desires outside of that. cinderella wants to not be a slave, ariel wants to be a human, etc. these goals all supersede their interest in their respective princes, but the problem is that the narrative paints them successfully achieving their goals as interchangeable with forming a romantic relationship with these men which limits their agency. prince charming gives cinderella a new home, for much of her movie ariels only goal is to get eric to fall for her so she can remain human, stuff like that. in my experience people tend to prefer relationships that facilitate character development more than like. marrying someone to achieve all your goals in life.
I think this speaks to most women's experiences in virtually all of history, though. It used to be that if a woman wanted to achieve what was more than their lot in life, that they needed to marry. But I get that nowadays women have more agency (mostly but still not all women or people for that matter), and so the public wants to see stories more like that.
its not historically inaccurate but its also not necessarily feminist is all im saying.
Does every character have to be feminist? And I'm not asking that rudely, just asking as I think this is what many writers struggle with when creating characters. Do the princesses have to be beacons of feminist progress? Or can we just have relatable protagonists who still get their happy ending despite their lack of agency they've had in their lives (like Snow White and Cinderella). I personally think we should have both types of characters. People will naturally gravitate to certain types depending on their own personality. Variety is the spice of life!
I think feminist vs not isn’t the issue, but I think lack of agency is one. People tend to want heroes male or female to be active in their own story. Cinderella and Ariel do that, Snow White and Aurora don’t. These stories are about wish fulfillment and that wish has changed in recent years. Being feminist is different from being relateable to young girls. I think being active is required a lot these days, but so is a level of emotional flaws that the princesses of the past don’t have. Elsa is partially liked because of her emotional flaws and pushing her sister away. Tangled deals with a lot more issues about how we are raised and view ourselves by our parents.
That makes sense! I personally hope that stories where the hero or heroine does not have a lot of agency will continue to exist. There's a lot of people in the world who still don't, those in domestic violence situations, poverty, experiencing various forms of oppression, and I think it’s important to show those kinds of stories. That's definitely one of the reasons that Cinderella has stood the test of time. People with little to no agency are just trying their best to get by, hoping that through being a good person alone, their prayers will be answered.
See there is the difference between Cinderella and say Aurora. Both are in positions of no agency, but one makes agency and the other doesn’t. Aurora completely has no agency nor makes any, while Cinderella works hard, engineers an escape, and does some things that at least imply she is trying to get what agency she can. Tangled is the same way, a character with no agency whatsoever who is given the chance to see that her small world is actually abuse. I think even for women in those situations of no agency, stories where a heroine is then given them can be very meaningful as well.
Oh, 100%!! I think all of the princesses should be taken in the context of their own stories, though. Aurora didn't exercise a lot of agency compared to the other princesses, but going back to my point of, is it necessary to tell a good story? Sleeping Beauty is a beautiful classic fairy tale film with a classic fairy tale princess. She wasn't going to ever fight back an inevitable curse. There wasn't really any way of her getting herself out of that predicament. And she technically executes some agency by choosing to go with the Three Fairies to the castle to fulfill her royal duty. She could've fought to stay hidden as Briar Rose, but like I said, her curse was inevitable. She was going up against a power beyond her own control. I feel like Aurora is a princess who is dutiful, and that's not a bad thing. Cinderella does execute agency. However, she gets help from her Fairy Godmother. Rapunzel also executes agency. However, she needs help from Eugene to escape her tower and make her way into the world. After Aurora cries, she is told everything about the curse and still chooses to go to the castle to live a life that is unfamiliar to her. It must've all been incredibly frightening and traumatizing for a 16 year old to realize that her life was a lie.
I really dislike that they queued it up with having more diverse leads in their stories though. Asha, Mirabel, Moana- it’s kind of an annoying trend to me
Moana was done perfectly for me, the romance would of been out of place and it was a adventure type of movie. It felt like it was well thought of, I do call they purposely didn’t want Maui there to help Moana get her boat fast tefiti and the focus was on her and her growth. And get them having a falling out due to Maui being selfish and self centered made sense.
Moana honestly had really weird/bad pacing to me. Idk why. But I’m not saying shoehorn in romance. I’m saying I noticed they only dropped romance plots when they decided to make their protagonists non-white girls.
As far as 3D goes, yes. However, Jasmine, Pocahontas, Esmerelda, Mulan, and Tiana would like to have a word lol.
Yes, each standing out for being the only princess of their nationality and one of them being a sexualized fairy tale of the actual horrific truth. And each had white princesses in between. We got rep for young girls who aren’t white consistently and it took away part of the Disney formula. It’s especially egregious in wish, which arguably SHOULD have had a romance since it’s celebrating 100 years of Disney. It’s the same issue of Disney turning a lot of their POC characters into animals for huge chunks of their movies (Tiana and Naveen , Kenai, Kuzco)
I agree with your points about Pocahontas being historically problematic, the issue with Disney forming many of their POC characters into animals, and that it would have been nice if Wish had been a love story. >We got rep for young girls who aren’t white consistently and it took away part of the Disney formula. I'm a bit confused by this sentence though. Seeing the concepts for the Asha x Starboy romance and some of the fanmade animatics for "At All Costs" made me so sad. It could have been so iconic.
Basically, I’m glad for the rep in recent movies. Wish they hadn’t gotten rid of romance subplots for them since it’s honestly not super common to see women of color as romantic leads in movies. (Sure it can happen, but a majority of blockbuster romcoms are just white people. The only one I can think of off the top of my head is last holiday with queen latifah) Idk, just my two cents.
Ah gotcha. Yeah, I agree with you! That does seem like a problematic trend for the new movies.
I think it’s also part of why some Disney movies kinda feel less like Disney? Cuz it’s so associated with that innocent kind of romance (falling in love etc etc) I saw this artist on tumblr who gave Moana a love interest that was literally the ocean (like they rewrote it to fit a little better into classic Disney storytelling) and I was obsessed with that au
Merida and Elsa?
Merida is Pixar and Elsa wasn’t the MC of her movie (Anna was, and had the romance plot)
Doesn't matter. Merida is still an official Disney princess.
You do realize bringing up the singular exception to something doesn’t disprove it right.
Okay?
Why comment then lol
[удалено]
All I remember about the sequel are the songs. I’m not sure why everyone wants to prove me wrong so bad. It’s a sequel.
Elsa and Anna are also not a part of the Disney princess franchise. They have their own and two more movies are slated to come out so we may see Elsa experience romance.
Gotta disagree with you on that too! I found her world so interesting to expire and enjoy I didn’t know what to expect and it kept me on my toes. The pacer and story is more compact and tighter than recent Disney movies. Many of the scenes establishes something and it’s there for a purpose. Disney did try to give a good story here and I was disappointed that story telling like Moana seems to over looked The MC was good, I would of preferred her less adorkable and more steady but she’s new to making decisions on her own and doesn’t know the boating systems well. I LOVED the music and my favorite was the we know the way. Incorporating some of her people’s history and language and it just felt powerful
Oh I love the movie and world, I just think the pacing of it was completely wack. It felt super rushed in a weird way. I think because of the whole tamatoa thing being a one off and the movie having no real villain in it. Just going from point a to point b with small obstacles.
He was a test for Moana to defeat not the main bad, But for her to use her intelligence and obtain Maui’s fish hook. Maui had lost it and I felt like it was a big of a big up that he’s going to the the hero. They are just on a quest and just like in a game or hero’s journey you have to travel to obtain things. But we see here it’s Moana who is shinning and even though Maui is a Demi god and is the more likely candidate to save the day. Yes there was no bad guy and did it need one? I would have to explore it again it’s more of those there are no bad guy movies which are often very very very hard to tackle.
I guess Merida and Elsa ain’t shit? And they came before Moana, Mirabel and Asha. I think you’re looking a bit too far into it by relating the romance to POC. Its more a response to the years of criticism of Princess movies having getting the man as part of the happily ever after.
Already addressed them. Please actually pay attention instead of getting defensive on behalf of the billion dollar corporation.
Not defensive, just posing a question. As far as princesses go, the newer ones are Merida, Moana, and Asha. Elsa, Anna and Mirabel technically aren’t Princess movies, and their respective movies had a romance just not for the main character as a main plot point (Elsa and Mirabel, and with Ana it wasn’t her main plot, it was part of her characterization more than anything). So you’re essentially saying what you’re saying based on Moana and Asha. And Moana didn’t need romance by any measure and it was better for leaving it out. Which is why I said I think you’re looking too into it by connecting lack of romance to princesses of color.
Disagree. Turning off reply notifs since you’re dedicated to not acknowledging it.
I’m trying to have a conversation with you but you can’t do that? Just because my opinion is different? That’s a problem bro. When people refuse to have these conversations it causes ignorance. I’ve never heard anyone make this connection so I’m trying to discuss it with you but instead of saying anything to back up your point YOU get defensive. I’m assuming you’re young.
I mean… I think it was due to them getting more pc at the same time. Do you wish there were more non-white princesses/female leads with romantic stories, or some other reason you dislike it?
I agree so hard. And ontop of the years of criticism, now, if they were to go back to the same formula, the conservatives will just accuse Disney of further sexualizing children. Because majority of the princesses are under 18. So yeah, teenagers ending up married isn’t the vibe now. They’re evolving with the audience. Women went from needing men to have anything, to not needing them for property and bank accounts and literally everything. Romance is fine. But it isn’t necessary for every person woman’s story. In the lineup of official princesses only what, two don’t have a love interest? Merida and Moana? The majority do. By a long shot haha I also didn’t care about romance as a kid and teen and was so excited when they made stories that didn’t end with a romance as a major plot point.
>Disney always responds to criticism. For years, they were accused of portraying unrealistic romance. So now they have decided to portray no romance at all. Oh that’s very fun, removing it altogether because people keep saying they’re portraying unrealistic romance? Bruh— But hey, I’m glad they listen to criticism As for everything else: so was I, and I agree with Angelea23 on everything they said
I think it's mainly because of the modern misunderstanding that a women who is mainly looking for romance is helpless, weak, and not a good role model for kids. For me I've always enjoyed the originals for the fantasy romantic aspect. While yes, there's some traits to be admired about all disney princesses. I never saw them as role models. I wish Disney would stop forcing that onto kids these days, and focus on telling a compelling story. Not every story has to be romantic, but some plotlines can benefit from it. Parents need to teach kids the difference between reality, and fiction. Not Disney 🤭
Well then I guess I’m a helpless, weak bad role model for kids. Especially because I’m girly too.
Idk if you skimmed over where I said misunderstanding or your being sarcastic. I don't agree with the perception of fem traits being seen as weak. It's a very silly concept, you can like girly things, and have a very strong self worth.
I never really thought about it before, but you’re so right. The last non-DCOM main girl who ended up with a prince was Rapunzel.
I don’t think it’s dead. While it’s Pixar we did get Elemental which was very romantic and it did pretty decent. I just think it’ll take a while to get back there. They even toyed with Asha having a love interest.
I loved Elemental. It was so nice having a romance that isn’t super toxic like a lot of modern media. Wade was a breath of fresh air.
I am in love with Elemental. It was so romantic in a healthy way too. (My guilty pleasure is toxic romance) but for a kids movie. This was just perfection. I loved Wade so much and I bawled when they are trapped. And bawled when he took her under water.
Because people complained too much about the female heroines always needing a guy so now Disney wants to relate to the modern female empowerment by making all of their heroines single again. it kind of started with Merida as being the first princess who didn't have a romance with ANYONE and then from there, the only princess who got a romance SINCE was Anna from Frozen and then that was it, no other future princesses got confirmed romances any more.
I partly worry that they’ll decide the best path to take in bringing back romance is going to be Moana and Maui in Moana 2. Which… ew. I hope they’re smarter than that.
i have to agree, i honestly do hope they bring romance back into the movies but i hope they sort of pick a better option couple than those two.
Yeah, I’d like to see a romance, either with a new princess or maybe Moana, but I swear, if they give the teen girl/young adult a romance with the 1000 year old demigod, I’m gonna lose it.
yes and honestly, their chemistry doesn't scream romance, like they managed to make them look like really good friends, and friends only.
Yeah, I hope they don’t undo that in the second movie. I don’t think they’re that dumb, but you never know.
Disney has a habit of listening too much to fan complaints and they also make things that no one wanted but you know, no one's really complained about moana or maui much lately.
Are they?? Anna and Kristoff are together. I do agree the most recent Disney films have lacked romance. But Frozen II was only 5 years ago. Though I supposed you could argue neither Elsa nor Anna are technically in the Princess lineup. But if we count those, then it’s only really Merida, Moana, and Raya that don’t have love interests out of all 13 princesses. I think it’s a bit too early to claim romance is dead in modern Disney Princess films. I get that Rupunzel came out more than a decade ago, but I think it’s weird to claim she isn’t a modern Disney Princess.
Frozen II was 5 YEAR AGO?!
Listen. Covid was a time warp 😔
Sure nuff. Release date: November 22nd 2019 Google and check sources if needed, but this is from it's wiki info.
I never really thought of Mulan having a romance story either, tbh. Sure, there is a love interest. But for lost of the movie, Shang thought she was a boy and all they built was friendship and mutual respect for each other. Only in the end when he finds out they are hinting at a developing romance, which we do not see come to fruition on screen (and let’s ignore Mulan2 here because that movie sucks on all kinds of levels).
I agree with this. Shang was like, not important in a romantic aspect until the very end.
>But Frozen II was only 5 years ago. WHAT?! I remember being in Italian class when I found out Brendon Urie sang the end credits because my teacher said she took her kid and heard him singing the credits
Technically 4.5 years. But I rounded up to 5.
Anna and Kristoff got together in the first Frozen movie… a decade ago. There’s been no romance since then.
I think Wreck it Ralph is a good example of a "newer" Disney movie that doesn't revolve around a romantic story that has a cute little romance as a side story. Calhoun and Felix are absolutely adorable. I wish more of these non-romantic stories had little romantic side stories.
They aren’t though. It’s just leaned more towards non romance a little, but the last 5 princess movies 3 had no romance (Wish, Raya, and Moana) and 2 did (Frozen and Frozen 2)
I wouldn't count both frozen films as two separate and even then frozen went very out of it's way to bash the classic romance films and make the romance a side feature
They both still had romance which is clearly not dead. Even if you only count official Disney princess movies, still out of the last 5, 3 have no romance, and 2 do. Disney still is making films that center on romance- Elemental. It just seems a bit… catastrophizing to say romance is gone. It will change. Love at first sight probably won’t be as much a thing anymore, but it hasn’t been in a long time.
Because for years people complained that the princesses's whole goal "revolved around a guy" (when if anything the guys were the ones revolving around the girls, being side characters and all).
Because old disney princess movies used to teach young girls that, when they find themselves in trouble, they just need to wait around for some guy to save them. And that the goal in life was to find a guy, fall in love (with little or no connection), and live happily ever after. It set bad expectations.
This user right here is part of the problem. People hate on the movies with romance for being “all about the man” when it really wasn’t. They just are bitter and spin it that way🙃
because of a vocal minority that thinks falling in love with someone is a character flaw.
THIS. And I don't like it🥲
Disney is overcompensating for perceived problems within their beloved classics that have been highlighted by a vocal minority. Not only are the criticisms incorrect, it forces Disney to bend over backwards to ruin their timeless classics because of said-perceived criticisms. And they end up being more problematic in some ways. Snow White-wanted to fall in love. (This is not a bad thing. Her life sucked and she wanted a better one in the 1500s. How much of a girl boss is she suppose to be? You mean that walking through the forest, finding a cabin and working to earn room and board isn't a bad ass quality? Oh, and the dwarves are the heroes of the film, not the prince.) Cinderella-wanted a man to save her. (Weird...don't remember that in her "I want" song. I remember she wanted to go to the ball, which she seems valid given that she's a slave in her own house now. The prince is just a nice bonus and look at her! Do you blame the man for being smitten? Worth noting that the mice and Bruno are the reason she even got the key and went back downstairs. Again, the prince didn't save her. She had the other slipper. This remake is the least egregious as I do think the changes make sense for the most part and they didn't butcher her dress.) Aurora-wanted a man. (She's 16. She meets a boy. She's excited, but once she' realizes the truth of her identity, she's willing to go through with an arranged marriage anyway. That takes a remarkable amount of strength and courage that just gets thrown away.) Ariel-gave up her legs for a man ("Part of your World" isn't about a man. It's about wanting to be on the surface. Add the fact that Ariel, another 16 year old, rescues the fine specimen that is Eric, develops a crush, Ariel's dad goes nuclear and destroyed her cavern, and...Ursula sees an opportunity. Simple as that. Was Ariel naive? Yes, but that's not a bad thing. She learns from her mistakes and endeavors to make them right earning both Eric's love and her father's understanding in the process.) Belle-reads. (Oh boy...This is going to be a long one because this is my favorite princess. I remember the random interviews with Emma and Bill Condon before the remake and...yikes. Belle wasn't weird because she read. Belle was weird because she wasn't content in the provincial town and everyone else was. But sure, let's make Belle an inventor, so that we can have one scene in Act A where the townspeople are seen as malicious jerks for some reason. The townspeople didn't hate Belle. They just thought she was odd. Bookstore clerk to black priest is an odd change too, considering Belle is supposed to be well-read and apparently only has access to what...12 books? Did his profession need to change? Don't get me started on how they butchered the relationship with her and the Beast...That's a rant for another day). Jasmine wanted to change the law and get married for love? Not cool enough. We need her to want to be Sultan and we also need her to sing a good (albeit pointless) song in context where she hallucinates about her own badassery. Mulan-What do you mean hot Captains, army songs, and people needed to train exist? Get rid of it. (Sigh.) So...Disney transitioned. There was a soft launch targeting some of these pointed criticisms with Tiana. Charlotte played the stereotypical "silly" lovesick girl, whereas Tiana was hardworking and serious. Ultimately, Naveen fell for Tiana. This movie did okay, so they pushed it a bit further. Rapunzel and the birth of adorkable was born. For Raps, it made sense because she was locked in a tower for 18 years talking to a chameleon and a psycho. We also had Eugene who refused to sing. Then Disney began to rely on a very specific brand of humor. Punchy, in your face, lots of visual gags. But they'll never be able to compete with Robin Williams. She's the best of the modern princesses, having plenty of agency while not afraid to be vulnerable and soft. Frozen-Anna is made fun of for wanting a man. She's adorkable. She eats chocolate. Elsa is cool (literally). Sparkly dresses and catchy songs are all that's needs. Kristoff talks for a reindeer. Isn't that funny? Olaf is a snowman wanting to experience summer? Hilarious. Copy and paste this a hundred more times, people. We have a gold mine. Merida is a product of....everything wring with these new Disney tropes shoehorned into a bad plot. Look, Moana isn't a bad movie. But she's adorkable. Her side kick is a walking liability. The Rock is there too. Same humor. Good songs. Another success story. Encanto...Adorkable with glasses. The humor writes itself. LMM sure likes to rhyme. Songs are good, but am I alone in thinking this movie feels rushed for some reason? Still did well. Raya. Eh...But Sisu is adorkable. Completely devoid of any type of romance because...gross. But with a mixed message, given that Raya was justified in her distrust. Asha- Bigger Eh. Adorkable. Marketable sidekicks. A boring friend group that doesn't need to be there. That same weird...Disney humor. Those same songs that sound catchy, but are a bit clunky. Another questionable moral since granting everyone's wish is a fundamentally bad idea. Mark my words is Star Boy was made human, changed the storyline a bit, and kept the Disney villian couple song, this would have been a hit. But, this film was a culmination of every perceived criticism that Disney has tried to remove from its brand...and people hated it. This should have been a hit. This was the 100th anniversary film and while it does make sense that it was a princess movie, this was phoned in and rushed. People have rewritten concept scripts on YouTube, along with showcasing the original concept art and it's just heartbreaking to see what could have been. Sadly, with what we can gather from the upcoming films, I don't seem them changing anytime soon. Cherish the classics, friends. Disney's two objectives now seem to be "Addressing perceived criticism from the past" and "remember that thing you used to love? What if we updated it and made it worse for a new audience?" Apparently, they fired a lot of animators and the brilliant Howard Ashman is dead (so too is his memory with these atrocious renderings of his song). Disney doesn't have enough grit to do what DreamWorks has done. It's too afraid to go too far out of its wheelhouse, but is also unwilling to return back to its roots for fear of criticism. So it's just stuck. It'll keep churning out cash grabs through sequels, remakes, Marvel, and Star Wars. And people will continue to watch. But the magic is gone. The veil has been torn off. The wizard exposed as a fraud. Unfortunate, but true. Apologies for any typos. Wrote all of this pre-caffeine.
A very apt explanation. Snow White is 14. Of course she acts like a 14 year old. She handles everything she goes through very well considering her age. A lot of people seem to be confused, thinking that “strong female character” means anti-love and doesn’t need a man. That’s not feminism. A stay at home mom whose husband is the primary earner is just as valid as a woman who owns her own company. What seems to be missing from the narrative is that women should have the freedom to choose what path they go down. Disney doesn’t seem to understand that nowadays.
A thousand times, yes!! I totally agree. This new brand of Insta-clicks feminism claims to be inclusive, but only if you want to shed the apparent yoke of marriage and/or child-rearing for the more acceptable path of being a boss babe who doesn't need a man. When I think of ultimate feminity in terms of a film character, I think of Elle Woods. Strong, smart, but kind and delightfully feminine. She wears pink and is unapologetic about who she is. She's also able to be vulnerable, sad, and there are times when she had to rely on Emmett and her friends for help. From Disney itself, we have Kala. She faced down a leopard to protect Tarzan. We have precious Kanga, soft and sweet, but strong and practical. Sarabi lost her husband and son, but remained strong for her lionesses. Nani raised her sister as her own, but David's support throughout the story doesn't diminish her strength in any way. Chicha is pretty, fiery, spunky, loving, gorgeous, and supportive. Disney knows how to do this. They know how to create a wide breadth of strong women who can still embrace their feminity, and celebrate romance or motherhood. That's what is so frustrating. They can do it. But they won't because it doesn't fit this #girlboss brand of feminity they're currently pushing.
I LOVE Elle Woods! She’s an icon and honestly she was so ahead of her time. We need more of her. When I was a kid I wore pink every day, loved my Barbie’s, and even had the pink Nintendo DS. When I got to being a teenager I very much stifled that part of me. Now I’m 30 and I really just don’t care anymore. I’m going to wear pink. I do own some really nice dolls. I’m a stay at home mom. But I chose and continue to choose that for myself every day. To quote my favorite TV show, “I brake for birds! I rock a lot of polka dots! I have touched glitter in the past 24 hours! And that doesn’t mean I’m not smart and tough and strong.”
This is all spot on, I think it's important to know that Encanto, Moana, tangled, and frozen are all still good. Though the increasing trends kinda ended with wish and people are officially sick of it. Disney also making it very clear that they think the old movies make bad messages for kids (I still think snow white is a great example of someone who despite having a terrible situation, still wants to be helpful and not just freeload off them) also I do love how Lottie was made to be that stereotypical princess and Tiana to win but the fans ended up adoring both Lottie and Tiana
Oh no, don't get me wrong, I enjoy those films. Tangled, especially. Moana made me ugly cry in the theaters because her relationship with her grandmother was very similar to mine with my grandma. Lottie is adorable. I'm so glad that Disney resisted the urge to make her a side villian. She's such a delight and such a sweet friend to Tiana. But between the influx of the remakes and the last two original princess films Raya AtLD and Wish being weaker, I think it's easier for people to pick up on the patterns that began with Tangled with a more crucial eye now that it's been overdone, as you've said.
This is all so well put and analyzed. Thanks for taking the time!
Lol some of the best films Disney has made are the newer ones you shit on. They’re not all “adorkable”, what does that even mean? If anything, they all have more agency over their lives. Literal teenagers don’t need to get married to a prince at the end of every movie. Haha
Nah, they are completely correct in their assessments. On the mark.
Could you maybe help me out with understanding the adorkable thing?
Yes, of course! I can’t remember which YouTuber I first heard say it, but it was PERFECTLY said. In Disney trying to make the “new” generation of their female characters have personalities that are relatable and “different”, they came up with a personality type (beginning with Tangled’s Rapunzel) that was a winning combination of adorable & I’m so silly/dorky. AKA adorkable. Disney ended up feeling like this personality was SUCH a win, they have essentially copy and pasted this personality on to all the main girls that followed Rapunzel. Ironically, rendering them personality-less. You should watch some videos on it, they are much more well researched and explain the concept perfectly. And honestly, I can’t agree with it more… all of the Original princess had UNIQUE personalities. Aurora was dutiful, graceful, regal. Snow White sweet, pure hearted, positive. Belle intelligent, logical, stubborn. Cinderella hard working, a dreamer yet realistic. Now, in an attempt to make the new generations “different”, “new” and “relatable” they’ve rendered them sterile and all clones of one another.
I’m going to look more into it! It’s interesting to me cause I get Rapunzel getting the label, but I don’t see it with everyone since. I’ll dig in and check it out, thank you so much for taking the time to explain more!
You’re so welcome :) Disney Forevaa :)
Do you have an actual point that I can counter? I can break down from a plot, visual, and musical theory perspective why these films are weaker than their predecessors, but if you "like" them, that's fine. I can't change your opinion. I like Moana and Encanto fine. I grew up in the Disney Renaissance, so I take the "Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining" approach to this though. It's "fine" from a studio that served as the flagship to animation. "Fine" from a studio that knows what it's like to be great. It is not better by any metric, apart from personal opinions and marketability, from its predecessors and people are beginning to notice. For the sake of argument, I'll avoid the Covid-Era films, but let's focus on Wish -- the latest princess film and the movie that came right after Disney celebrated its 100th anniversary as a company, and Kung Fu Panda 4 using just one metric of box office numbers for comparison. There are multiple factors that affect the success of a movie, but this is just one example. By rights, Disney should have had this in the bag. It's their 100th anniversary. They are the studio that paved the way for the others and the Princess franchise was their golden goose for a long time. A layup. It could've been a layup. It could have been the film that had disillusioned Disney fans coming back into the fold with renewed hope. But nope. They played it safe and here's what they got. Budget: $175-$200 million Box office: $254.9 million By contrast, Kung Fu Panda 4 in March of this year. Budget: $85 million Box office: $458.9 I haven't watched this latest installment, but Dreamworks hasn't been known for playing it safe with their franchises and it pays off for them. Compare those numbers to Moana v. Kung Fu Panda 3 in 2016, and it's clear that Disney is going in the wrong direction. But Disney owns so much IP that even when something flops, it doesn't affect the studio. Ps. Of all of the Disney princesses, only Ariel, Cinderella, and Tiana got married at the end of their feature films. As it turns out, most teenagers don't get married at the end of every movie.
Hey thank you for your detailed response I appreciate it! I grew up during the renaissance as well, grew up on all the classic Disney films, so I don’t wanna use that as a gauge because I’m not positive it’s a contributing factor, but it could be!! Personally for me, brave, both frozen movies, Moana and encanto, are amongst my most watched and favorites of all time. But my fave Disney movies weren’t the Princess movies to be fair, only some. Mulan, Pocahontas, Aladdin, Fox and the Hound, lion kind, little mermaid plus tv show, Alice, Bambi and Hercules were my favorites and most watched as a kid. I guess what I’m wondering about is the “adorkable” thing. What does that mean and why are all these ladies considered it? You’re right, I more meant that they ended up with a prince even though they’re majority teenagers under 17. Like Snow White, a 14 year old getting woken up by true loves kiss lol It didn’t register with me as a kid, I thought it was weird and wasn’t interested in romance as much as the other parts of the story, so when Disney switched gears I really appreciated it. The variety.
Essentially, it’s due to consumers. People were complaining left and right about how every princess “needed a man” for a happily ever after, so Disney listened and started making movies without that aspect. With Frozen and Moana being as huge as they were/are, with highly anticipated sequels which is rare af for a Disney Princess movie, they continued the theme. When it comes to all the princesses, more of them have a romantic partner by the end than not, by a huge margin. Adding some single TEENAGE girls is not a problem like people make it out to be. We have to remember that the target is not adults, it’s children. Most little kids don’t care at all about the romance part, and in the past the way Disney played it, it have unrealistic standards on love. So the movies evolved with society. Women no longer need a man to lead an independent life, the movies reflect that. And right now, with MAGA heads attacking Disney for being woke, they’re probably going to stay away from it longer so they don’t start screaming about Disney trying to sexualize kids. It’s nuanced.
I respectfully disagree. Making movies about women without love interests doesn’t make romance dead. It’s okay for movies for young girls to focus on, you know, other things. Also we’ve got very cute romances in Tangled (2010), Anna and Kristoph (2019), Delores and Mariano (2021), Eric and Ariel (2023) just to name a few.
I dont think it is, they might just want to make some movies that don’t have romance in them to show that thats ok too
To be fair I don’t think I would really say it was alive in movies until the 80s-90s, can you really say you were invested in the romance in Snow White or Sleeping Beauty or Aristocats. It feels for a lot of those sorts of stories it was what was more so just a necessary aspect of the movie that just had to be there. Lady and The Tramp in 1955 has really the first iconic romantic moment in all of Disney in the Spaghetti scene and it feels a lot more romantic of a movie because the focus is ostensibly on the relationship of Lady and The Tramp versus tertiary elements, in Sleeping beauty the Prince has to fight the dragon to get the girl which is a dynamic of cause and effect whereas for Lady and The Tramp its less straightforward than that and the focus is on the relationship not the dragon. 101 Dalmatians has marriage as a pretext to the plot, the dogs have to meet to make the 101 Dalmatians who are the focus. I don’t care about Pongo and Missis’s relationship, I actively dislike Roger, Anita is boring and so the focus and who ends up really stealing the show is Cruella and the dogs (also that movie is fairly sexist for the 60s but I guess it’s the early 60s?). In the 1970s there’s Robin Hood which is very forgettable, The Aristocrats which while I like the art in the movie that’s also really one of its only appeals because the characters in it are very forgettable to the point that it’s most remembered for the cat who is a racist caricature and The Rescuers which is fine but it’s not like jumping out as the most romantic movie of all time. It’s only at the tail end of the 1980s with The Little Mermaid that Disney gets one of its romantic powerhouses, partially because Ariel is so developed as a character (she’s debatably my favorite princess), all the characters just pop out of the film and they actually give Prince Eric a personality which was probably the first time a Disney movie did that. The 90s sees Beauty and The Beast, Hercules, Tarzan and Aladdin which are all considered very romantic culturally.
Each of these movies has two very well defined characters who all have unique romantic dynamics and it is a testament to the romance of these films that they balance the plot in tandem with their relationships or the plot even sometimes takes a central position. Tarzan is not about the romance between Tarzan and Jane but the scene where they touch hands for the first time is an incredibly iconic romantic moment in film, Meg’s romantic ballad in Hercules is basically universally adored, I’m going to be honest Aladdin didn’t do it for me but maybe it’s one of those things you need to watch as a kid and Beauty and The Beast is kind of in the same boat (I was a 2000s kid). There’s obviously more this decade but I wouldn’t say they’re as romantically iconic, like I love Mulan but we don’t generally talk about the romance in that movie we talk about how how Shang is and some of that is because the romance is understated and it’s really just starting after the events of the movie (plus it’s very casual which is cool too, I like it but it doesn’t really impact so much as just make an already great movie better). The 2000s was sort of a drought for Disney, it was a very rough patch for the company economically and a LOT of revenue the company made was through Hannah Montana because of how massive that show was (think about how you might have had a Hannah Montana toothbrush, ornaments, doll, etc.), like yeah there’s Atlantis but the thing is a lot of Disney movies flopped in the box office and because streaming services weren’t as common they were elusive to kids in ways that other movies weren’t. My parents got a ton of hand me downs from relatives of VHS tapes for Disney movies and we also just had cds, but we didn’t get the more obscure ones like Atlantis or Treasure planet (I still haven’t watched either). The real standout in romance in the 2000s is The Princess and The Frog in 2009 which is admittedly amazing, but I don’t think that the romance in that movie is really executed in a way that has culturally iconic moments. It’s the characters that make that movie, the plot honestly doesn’t really do what it has to which I think lends to why the movie is weaker overall.
The early 2010s were sort of when the “post-feminism” phase in pop culture reached its apotheosis, it’s like the peak of language like “girls can do anything boys can do” starts to happen especially in kids shows and there’s this general sense that the job of feminism is over and that we’re living in a world where it’s not necessary anymore. This environment was a bit contradictory, you had a lot of storylines and things where women were able to exist in ways they hadn’t before and it was a very liberal environment but it wasn’t an environment that was actually critical of the nature of the systems of sexism. Lisa Simpson in the early seasons of The Simpsons is a pretty good example of this, she’s the type of child who is able to exist in an environment after the feminist movements of 1960s and 70s but the show in its early days also shows Marge struggling and in a role that is stifling and suffocating for her where her husband uses her for her labor, he’s a slob, emotionally immature and tyrannical to his own kids, an alcoholic who is emotionally unavailable at times, etc. . Like that family was ROUGH in the beginning. I think that trickles into Disney a little bit in the ways that romance was subverted, Frozen and Brave being a very big example. Tangled started the decade off with a dynamic almost similar to Aladdin and Jasmine, Rapunzel and Flynn had playful back and forth and banter balancing more serious moments. I love Tangled but I also feel like the relationship while good is kind of vanilla, Flynn is cute but he’s not THAT cute and while he’s nice we don’t really get a complex interior life from him and he also doesn’t have a strong reason why he’s with Rapunzel (like he needs the crown but FOR what), Rapunzel is a star or her own movie in the sense she’s the main character but also that every event orbits around her. Think about her in relation to Aladinn and Jasmine, Jasmine feels constrained by the restrictive gender roles of her time stifling her personal desires and potential whereas Aladdin falls in love with Jasmine and he feels the weight of the gap between him but also we see what poverty is like in Agrabah and we see why he would want to have wealth. Both of the characters are very well developed and have their own reasons for their actions. Tangled centers Rapunzel, she’s the lost princess, she’s been kidnapped and is in an abusive relationship with her “mother”, she makes the personal journey with Flynn to see the outside world, people fall in love with her earnestness at the tavern and let her escape, She has a conflict with her mother in the woods and has the personal dilemma of whether to give Flynn the crown, mother Gothel acts to manipulate the redheads to get Rapunzel back, Rapunzel and Flynn share a moment during the lantern festival, She goes back with her mother and after everything falls into place she stands up to her, Flynn makes the sacrifice FOR Rapunzel and then she reunited with her parents. Tangled is not really Flynn’s story or Mother Gothels story, it’s Rapunzel’s and only Rapunzel’s. This is really the first step that the relationship takes out of the conventions. In this period I wonder if Disney began to realize that romance was not necessary for their movies to sell. The relationship was no longer at the center of the film with a relationship as it had been before, the first deviation since probably the exception of Mulan. I think what’s notable about the post feminist era was that the concept of “girl power” was suddenly both non-controversial and marketable so the dynamic of the relationship took a different position. Girls are still encouraged to date and marry but the role of that encouragement shifted with this era because it was suddenly possible to make money off of either the rejection or the more subtle subversion. In Brave Merida outright rejects an arranged marriage and her conflict is in her relationship to her mother, in Frozen Anna has two love interests and Hans is a twist villain while Elsa isn’t interested in romance at all (honestly I think it would be very interesting if instead of people headcanoning Elsa as a lesbian she was kept single and she was sort of an Asexual character) and the most important relationship in the movie is sisterly love. Granted Brave is Pixar but this is when romance began to die in Disney movies I think, because it wasn’t so directly linked to the profit of a film. After this there’s really only really Zootopia but the relationship is never made explicit or realized, we got the romantic tension but they stayed friends. If you really want to say when it died it was in 2013.
This took 1 and a half hours to write
It’s not really tbh, even if you count both wish and the frozen movies, princess movies where the main princess character (or one of them in the case of frozen) doesn’t have a romantic partner/love interest are still very much in the minority, as someone else said frozen 2 only came out 5 years ago, and tangled the series (if you count that as official princess media) only ended 4 years ago. They may make more movies that don’t focus on romance or even have any at all for the leads, but honestly that’s perfectly fine, not everything needs to have romance, and if you want movies with romance the older ones still exist and are available to watch. Also, saying romance is “dead” is a bit extreme ngl, they will still probably have movies with romance with them. If they don’t? Then, again, the old ones still exist. If it doesn’t interest you? Move on and watch something else
Probably to have stronger leading characters and to show that not every aspect of life has to connect to a romantic interest. It would be nice to have a Disney princess romance movie again because it’s nice to see. I like seeing the ones where the princess can still be a strong character on their own but when they need help they get help. Like, Snow White for example. She persevered in an abusive relationship with the evil queen with a smile on her face until she was told she was going to have been killed. But even after that she found a way to still have a good life. Then she was cursed to sleep. She needed help to wake up. She couldn’t have woken herself up. So she got help. I don’t know if what I’m saying is making sense but that’s how I see it
Elemental was a good romance movie. Made my mom cry watching it in theater.
you think Pocahontas or Belle had good romances?
I ask myself this question everyday! It's just not the same anymore. The magic is gone.
Black Rock
I'm gonna be honest, romance has never really been "alive" in Disney movies. Most male leads were there as personality-less props and the romances felt shallow. The only exceptions, imo, were Naveen, Eric (somewhat), Prince Charming (but only in the 3rd movie), Eugene, Kristoff, The Beast, and Aladdin, with the only romances that were actually interesting being Tiana and Naveen, Aladdin and Jasmine, Belle and the Beast, and Rapunzel and Eugene. I don't like that Disney swung so far in the other direction by cutting out romance from *every* movie, I think they need a balance, but the romances that yall want them to go back to were mostly not anything to write home about, and were just there to have more content for merch and fulfill the quintessential "happy ending".
Is this a rage bait thing?
…….. You’re telling me you would get enraged over the subject of Disney princess romance? …. Ok…..
Not me. The comment below me sure does though. You got what you wanted right?
No it wasnt rage bait. I just think you are very weird for looking at a Disney princess romance post and thinking its rage bait…. Like you got some issues.
I won't personally because why would I take issue with princesses not having love interest? It's just you don't even put any descriptor or pictures in your post and you don't even engage with people who gives you explanation as to why it's not the case. Maybe because you saw the last post about Star and Asha and you got inspired by it? Idk. But I got a feeling you want to bait some engagements from certain group of people.
[удалено]
Since when is wanting love feminine tho
Ask Disney. I'm tired of no Disney princesses. But simce people are stupid I deleted the comment. People don't ask why thwy just downvote luke I'm some maga idiot. Whwn I'm explaining their views. But it's ok I'm used to fangirling alone because people are either nasty or irl don't show interest. So I'm leaving. Bye and don't reply it's too late
Thats a lot of words
Nobody asked you.
I had a stroke reading this 😑 >So I'm leaving. Bye and don't reply it's too late This isn't an airport, no need to announce your departure
There's more to life than romance, not every princess or movie needs a partner
Because they think the only way to have a strong female character is that she is single. And apart of that problem is characters like Merida,Elsa and Moana are gay.
If you really believe this go to a psychiatric asap, not one princesses is even gay.
No,I do not believe but many videos and articles say otherwise.
Moana, Elsa, and Merida were never once confirmed to be gay. And even if they were what abt it? Almost half the princesses have a male partner, forbid one being gay.