Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Another scary aspect of the mainstreaming of global warming denialism Previous entry: Stars on Ice sponsors deem Olympian Johnny Weir not “family friendly” enough to join tour

Friday Genius Ten “Girl Germs” Edition

The quick news story to kick off this Friday’s Genius Ten: Turns out The Princess and the Frog had lackluster box office, and now the blame game has begun.  One could point out that perhaps the problem is that the movie came out in the midst of the worst recession in the U.S. since the Great Depression.  Perhaps many parents thought to themselves, “Instead of ponying up the cash to see this movie multiple times, we could just put the kids in front of TV to watch The Little Mermaid or Cinderella or Beauty and the Beast for the umpteenth time, since all these movies have exactly the same plot and aesthetic.  And we’ll buy Princess when it comes out on DVD.” 

But who wants to consider factors like that when you can always resort to straightforward sexism?  No, Disney has decided that girls suck, and what they need to do is stop making movies centered around them.  They’ve retitled the upcoming Rapunzel movie Tangled and have made the prince the center of the story, and they’ve shelved The Snow Queen, with its scary, female-centric title.

Of course, Disney did this once before, making Aladdin to break up the supposed monotony of female-centric fairy tale films.  It did great box office, but it was riding the Beauty and the Beast coattails.  And in the subsequent years, what character did they make a killing merchandising from that movie?  Oh yeah, the love interest Jasmine.  Because the Disney Princess brand is making them a killing!  But the idea that female money spends as good as male money is something Hollywood has never wanted to hear.  The funny thing is that the Disney aesthetic is associated with little girls in the public mind, so no matter how butch they try to make Tangled, it’s going to be all about the little girls. But at least the executives can sleep better at night, having convinced themselves they avoided the hellish emasculation of making their money selling fantasies to little girls.  Apparently, the fact that those fantasies are utterly sexist wasn’t enough to stop the smarting.

Genius Ten’s original song is chosen for this story, of course.  Leave yours in comments.  Or make fun of this story.  Or say whatever you like, Genius Ten’s should be considered open threads.

Original song: “Princess” by Datarock

1) “Pieces of the People We Love”—-The Rapture
2) “Meeting Paris Hilton”—-Cansei De Ser Sexy
3) “Shake A Fist”—-Hot Chip
4) “Watch The Tapes”—-LCD Soundsystem
5) “Girls In The Back”—-White Rose Movement
6) “Must Be The Moon”—-!!!
7) “In One Ear & Out The Other”—-Fujiya & Miyagi
8) “Hearts On Fire”—-Cut Copy
9) “Grip Like A Vice”—-The Go! Team
10) “Count Souveneirs”—-Junior Senior

Videos and a cat pic under the fold.

Molly has been a real lovebug lately.  I sat on the couch yesterday to finish reading Carole Joffe’s page-turner Dispatches from the Abortion Wars: The Costs of Fanaticism to Doctors, Patients, and the Rest of Us, and Molly jumped up on the couch, crawled inside my blanket and purred as loud as I have ever heard a cat purr.  I didn’t get a picture of that cuteness, but I did get her snuggling my feet while we watched “The Shield”.

Molly

I can’t tell if she loves me, my blanket, or if it’s the combination that’s so intoxicating.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 11:15 AM • (81) Comments

Yeah, boys will never watch a movie with the word “princess” in the title!  Lord knows I’d never watch any movie like The Princess Bride - it must suck!

Comment #1: genesic  on  03/12  at  11:57 AM

Had I a daughter, I can think of only two fictional princesses to whom I would expose her:  Xena and Wonder Woman.

Comment #2: damnedyankee  on  03/12  at  12:04 PM

Or could it be that Disney just continues to make schlock even by kid standards and the best version ever of the Princess and the Frog story has already been done by Rabbit Ears TV - with Robin Wiiialms as the frog and Teri Garr as Princess- watchable by kids and adults.

And holy crap Amanda, not sure how she managed to sneak out of the house and get to NYC in the ten minutes since I saw her on my bed, but will you kindly return my cat?

Comment #3: phylosopher  on  03/12  at  12:09 PM

I’d bet that The Princess and the Frog still did better box office than Treasure Planet and the other Disney Boyventure cartoons.

The Sleeping Beauty era is over, Disney needs to back away from flat “princess” titles: Belle and Jasmine were both intelligent, spunky heroines and their story was combined with an enjoyable action/adventure story that could appeal to little boys as well. And Robin Williams returning to his “Mork” days didn’t hurt, either.

I’m sure that the titular Princess in the most recent effort had more than a little fight in her, but all they showed in the commercials was her in the wedding dress/evening gown, and I think a lot of parents are going to shy away from taking their little girls to that because they expect it to be boring and a pain in the ass in terms of reinforcing that their daughter needs to dress like that every day.

Comment #4: Mighty Ponygirl  on  03/12  at  12:33 PM

I’m sure they made their money back in princess canopy tent-castles and princess Halloween costumes and princess-themed diapers and princess strained peas and princess cough medicine.

Comment #5: norbizness  on  03/12  at  12:34 PM

Damnedyankee: That’s unfortunate, because it means you’ve never read Patricia Wrede’s Enchanted Forest Chronicles. Princess Cimorene was my childhood heroine.

I actually liked The Princess and the Frog... I mean, I cringed at some of the rampant voodoo exoticism, and at the bit where she basically gets everything she wants as a reward for giving up and going “Fuck it, I’m going to stay a frog,” but at least Tia’s obsession throughout the movie is “I’m going to own my own business” and not “someday my prince will come.” And that is why the prince likes her.

Parents of tiny childrens must have been really down on going to the movies lately, since nearly every college-age girl I know went to see The Princess and the Frog... huh.

Comment #6: thecynicalromantic  on  03/12  at  12:37 PM

Treasure Planet had a girl doing her best laconic British ship captain impression in a supporting role, though, which was pretty awesome.

Also, damnedyankee; Princess Leia.

Comment #7: NBarnes  on  03/12  at  12:38 PM

Taking a family of 4 to the movies costs like $40 now.  And it’s an enormous hassle, to boot.  With HD TVs and DVDs, there’s really not much reason to go to the movies.

Comment #8: Amanda Marcotte  on  03/12  at  12:39 PM

Huh. My daughter loves the Disney movies; the way she refers to Aladdin is as “The Princess Jasmine Movie.” So… yeah. That is, in fact, the only way we could describe it that would persuade her to watch it. And the Tinkerbell movies are really not that terrible. Main character is a mechanic girl? Pretty cool stuff…

It’s also inspiring me to make a diceless role-playing game for little girls that would mostly involve dressing up in costumes and making stuff, with a dose of pretending to be fairies while making stuff. But my daughter’s too young to get her to test it out yet.

Comment #9: Matthew, Patron Saint of Affogato  on  03/12  at  12:40 PM

I’m sure they made their money back in princess canopy tent-castles and princess Halloween costumes and princess-themed diapers and princess strained peas and princess cough medicine.

Disney Consumer Products made a shitload of money for the company by marketing princess crap out the wazoo and positioning Tiana directly in the middle of the Princess Line for 3 to 6 year old girls, but the movie underperformed, so Walt Disney Animation Studios has to be punished.

That’s right, one division is heralded as heroes for undermining the success of another.  It’s a very fucked-up dynamic in mouse world.

Comment #10: Mnemosyne  on  03/12  at  12:46 PM

“Had I a daughter, I can think of only two fictional princesses to whom I would expose her:  Xena and Wonder Woman.”

Had I, I think I’d go with just playing her “Wear Clean Drawers” by the Coup.

“...Tell your teacher I said princesses are evil
How they got all they money was they kill people
If somebody hits you hit ‘em back
Then negotiate a peace contract
Life is a challenge and ya gotta team up
If you place house pretend let the man cleanup
You too busy with the other things ya gotta do
When ya start something now remember follow through

Later on you gonna blossom like a lotus
You’ll get into boys and the boys gonna notice
It don’t matta who ya do it with
just remember when I tell ya baby you the shit”

Comment #11: witless chum  on  03/12  at  12:51 PM

Disney : Where classic faerie tales go to die.

Comment #12: BlackBloc  on  03/12  at  12:52 PM

It would be interesting to see inflation adjusted box office returns for the last dozen or animated Disney films—traditionally animated ones, not the Pixar or Pixar-like computer animated ones.  I’ve been under the impression that traditionally animated films in general have been decreasing in popularity at the theaters without regard for whether or not they’re female centric.

Anyway, even if the film crashed and burned at the box office, they’ll doubtless do very good money in DVD sales like every other Disney movie does—not to mention the big bucks they’ll make in merchandising, as others have mentioned.  The (sad) fact that this is the first black Disney princess will guarantee at least some kind of market for the tie-in products, I would imagine.

Comment #13: robelanator  on  03/12  at  12:53 PM

I’m sure I’ve made my bias in this whole matter clear before (as in who signs my paycheck) but honestly, The Princess and the Frog is a really good movie.  It’s not Beauty and the Beast, but it ain’t Pocohontas, either.  It’s nice to see a kids’ movie where the heroine’s main motivation is to succeed in a job she loves (owning her own restaurant) and the romance is just the cherry on top of that.

The funny thing is that it’s kicking ass in France because they love princesses in France.  Tangled is actually going to be titled Princess Rapunzel when it gets there.

Comment #14: Mnemosyne  on  03/12  at  12:55 PM

It would be interesting to see inflation adjusted box office returns for the last dozen or animated Disney films—traditionally animated ones, not the Pixar or Pixar-like computer animated ones.

Actually, the dirty little secret is that all animated films are underperforming right now, including Pixar’s.  Finding Nemo was the high watermark at $339 million and they’ve all slipped from there.  Up did better than either The Incredibles or Cars, but it still couldn’t touch Nemo.

Comment #15: Mnemosyne  on  03/12  at  01:01 PM

I’ve basically given up on Disney in general.  There are so many huge problems with it, and very few redeeming qualities.  Even the movies that I used to love seem pretty horrible now that I think back on them.

Comment #16: bananacat  on  03/12  at  01:11 PM

Treasure Planet had a girl doing her best laconic British ship captain impression in a supporting role, though, which was pretty awesome.

You wouldn’t have known that from looking at the previews.

Comment #17: Mighty Ponygirl  on  03/12  at  01:13 PM

Damnedyankee: That’s unfortunate, because it means you’ve never read Patricia Wrede’s Enchanted Forest Chronicles.

‘Tis true.  Duly noted.

Also, damnedyankee; Princess Leia.

Considered it, but I wouldn’t want to risk her developing a taste for guys whose response to “I love you” is “I know.”  Plus, I’d eventually have to explain to her what a “Jar Jar Binks” is.

Comment #18: damnedyankee  on  03/12  at  01:21 PM

One could point out that perhaps the problem is that the movie came out in the midst of the worst recession in the U.S. since the Great Depression.

So did Avatar.

Comment #19: Amazing Larry  on  03/12  at  01:21 PM

Wait a minute, is Disney suffering from some kind of collective brain fart? Because last I heard, their most recent picture, ‘Alice in Wonderland,’ is doing mega-splendid wahoo business at the box office. And yes, it stars a female character who is actually, you know, allowed to kick butt and make decisions for herself and not fall in love with the requisite prince at the end. Maybe they should take a few pointers from that.

Comment #20: Mikage  on  03/12  at  01:25 PM

Different audience, Larry.  You maybe could have read the rest of the post, instead of cherry mining for quotes to uphold what? The idea that girls suck and Disney’s right to think their money doesn’t spend the same?

But I’ll reiterate: Princess is competing with TVs at home, and Avatar wasn’t—-in fact, if you don’t see Avatar in a theater, it’s beside the point, since without the 3D there’s no there there.  Avatar doesn’t require paying for 3 or 4 tickets, since most people are paying their own way, being adults.  And Avatar doesn’t require the headache inducing planning that is the family outing.

In a recession, family films are going to be hit harder.  That’s just all there is to it.  You can always throw a DVD in to entertain the kids.

Comment #21: Amanda Marcotte  on  03/12  at  01:26 PM

Treasure Planet had a girl doing her best laconic British ship captain impression in a supporting role, though, which was pretty awesome.

Yeah, I actually would rather have seen the movie about her. (Not exactly a “girl”, though… the language threw me, because while the main character was definitely a boy, an adolescent having a coming-of-age adventure, the captain was decidedly an adult woman.)

Comment #22: Alara J Rogers  on  03/12  at  01:47 PM

It things like this that cause me to worry about Disney’s buying of Marvel.  Most assume Disney just wants the IP rights, but I could easily see them making their opions felt with the writers (the whole Captain America/Tea Party thing could be the start of it).

Comment #23: Robert  on  03/12  at  01:49 PM

Taking a family of 4 to the movies costs like $40 now.  And it’s an enormous hassle, to boot.  With HD TVs and DVDs, there’s really not much reason to go to the movies.

That is certainly my rationale. My daughter isn’t old enough for movies yet, but when she is the only theatre I will take her to is the Dollar Theater. Same experience and we just have to wait 3 months.

Comment #24: Olivia  on  03/12  at  01:49 PM

Mnemosyne, the plot of The Princess and the Frog does sound good compared to the usual Disney princess fair. So do you think it was just the cost of going to the movies like Amanda says, or was it a marketing failure on Disney’s plot? I know all the trailers I saw for it told nothing of the main character wanting to own a restaurant.

Comment #25: Olivia  on  03/12  at  01:54 PM

I have two great nieces (my oldest nephew’s daughters) and they have been consumed by the Disney Princess Machine. My wife & I try to avoid buying them any of that crap, but we do usually take them to Disneyland when they get to come see us. They get excited when they get their pictures made w/the characters at the park (Tinkerbell was particularly awesome for some reason) and we get out of having to buy cheap crap just because its pink & has Cinderella on it.

Comment #26: Mark  on  03/12  at  01:56 PM

Amanda, My cat does the blanket thing too. Is the blanket Ffeece by any chance? Our cats seem to prefer fleece.

Comment #27: Mark  on  03/12  at  02:02 PM

Y’all come off as a buncha Grinches.

Comment #28: Eric_RoM  on  03/12  at  02:02 PM

Y’all come off as a buncha Grinches.

Because we prefer entertainment that reflects our values and the values we’d like to impart on our children?  Well, sorry if that steals your Christmas for you, Eric, but you’re going to have to learn to live with it.

Comment #29: damnedyankee  on  03/12  at  02:12 PM

Girls have been getting salmonella from kissing frogs.  http://www.oregonlive.com/news/index.ssf/2010/02/salmonella_outbreak_frogs_prin.html

Comment #30: Ms Kate  on  03/12  at  02:22 PM

My Friday Random Ten:

1. Make a Circuit with Me - The Phenomenauts
2. Words And Guitar - Sleater-Kinney
3. Metal School - Spoon
4. i sold my organs - Meho Plaza
5. Still Dope (feat. Empress Starhh) - DOOM
6. When the Other Foot Drops - Sharon Jones & The Dap Kings
7. Soul Clap - Jean Grae
8. Apartment Story - The National\
9. Mean Streets - Raekwon, Inspectah Deck, Ghostface
10. Mano Dayak - Tinariwen

Way random this week…

The complaints about P&F;‘s box office from Disney are ridiculous, anyway. The movie did just fine at the box office.
http://boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=princessandthefrog.htm
It made $222 million worldwide on a $105 million production budget. They can afford to make another one that doesn’t make ANY money and they’d come out even. (I realize there are other costs, but they certainly made a respectable profit).

I don’t know how you feel about Pajiba (pajiba.com) in general, but several of the reviewers there have made the point that executives seem to miss completely: No one makes good movies for women. Twilight was an out-of-nowhere success because it was for an underserved audience, not because it was any good. What if we were making really GREAT blockbusters that appealed to a female audience? There’s gold in those hills.

Not that there aren’t plenty of great movies out there for everybody, but I get the feeling that if you’re a mainstream-inclined woman you’re only supposed to want to see really crappy rom coms and your boyfriend’s favorite action movies.

Comment #31: JoeBlubaugh  on  03/12  at  02:34 PM

The Princess and the Frog made me downright sad. My manfriend and I went to see in in theatre because we like cel animation, and we both came out feeling like it was good, but could have been legitimately great. Anytime Disney get something sort-of right (like giving the princess Life Goals and Motivation), they turn around and get something completely wrong (the awful portrayal of Vodou). It seems bizarre and counter-intuitive for Disney to think that their dough comes out of movies—it doesn’t, not anymore. It’s merchandise, and what sells better than Disney Princesses?

Comment #32: Menshevixen  on  03/12  at  02:38 PM

I work at a movie theater and have for many years now. I have two points to make:

1) I can tell you for a fact that movie attendance, for all movies has been very steadily declining for a very long time now (starting around the time gas hit $3 a gallon). So that is definitely a factor.

2) I’m not sure why this hasn’t been mentioned yet, but of the people that did come to see Princess and the Frog, very, very, very few of them were white. (Personal anecdote: My 5 year old, white cousin is in a huge Princess phase, dresses up as a princess, has all the toys/movies, everything. And her mother (who is very big on encouraging the Princess thing) didn’t take her to see it.) When the vast majority of the race that comprises 79.8% of the population just happens to not see a movie, it’s not going to do well. And I would have thought Disney would have known that going in.

Comment #33: Ruby  on  03/12  at  02:45 PM

But I’ll reiterate: Princess is competing with TVs at home, and Avatar wasn’t—-in fact, if you don’t see Avatar in a theater, it’s beside the point, since without the 3D there’s no there there.

For me movies almost always compete against themselves.  I am always questioning, “Is this a movie that I need to see right now?”, “Is this a movie that will be enhanced by seeing it in a theatre?”  Avatar is a good example of this. Without the 3D glasses that movie will be exceptionally pointless but a traditional animated feature is not going to be better than it is on my tv at home.  Actually scratch that, it will probably be a far better experience at home because there won’t be dozens of children talking, jumping around in their seats and throwing popcorn.

Quite frequently my partner and I want to see a movie in theatres but just end up putting it off until we can watch it with some friends or family who have 60” plasma screens.

Comment #34: hypatia  on  03/12  at  03:03 PM

Amanda wrote:

But I’ll reiterate: Princess is competing with TVs at home, and Avatar wasn’t—-in fact, if you don’t see Avatar in a theater, it’s beside the point, since without the 3D there’s no there there.  Avatar doesn’t require paying for 3 or 4 tickets, since most people are paying their own way, being adults.  And Avatar doesn’t require the headache inducing planning that is the family outing.

In a recession, family films are going to be hit harder.  That’s just all there is to it.  You can always throw a DVD in to entertain the kids.

I’ll certainly agree that movies that compete with television, now that so many people have 42” HD TVs, are going to be hurt.  But for parents, there’s really less planning that goes into taking the kids out to see a movie than there is in finding a babysitter for the times when the adults want to go out.  It’s just not that hard to say, “OK, movie’s at 2:30, we’re leaving at 1:45.”

Comment #35: Dana  on  03/12  at  03:20 PM

Up did better than either The Incredibles or Cars, but it still couldn’t touch Nemo.

Wow, being a toddler-parent can really give you tunnel vision. Between the Cars merchandise everywhere and the fact that my son would happily watch it four times a day every day if I let him, I assumed that Cars was wildly successful.

Eric, I find it interesting that you think parents who want their children’s entertainment to reflect their values are grinches, but a corporation that decides an entire gender doesn’t deserve its own entertainment gets a pass.

Comment #36: Av0gadro  on  03/12  at  03:21 PM

I saw the movie, and yeah it was good.  But it wasn’t great.  This was not the Lion King- a massive epic made for little kids or even Mulan (remember that movie?  Made tons of freaking money?  Started a woman doing things?).

Lackluster box office I think is a summation of the following:

1. It was marketed as a “Princess Movie”.  The fact that it wasn’t was besides the point.
2. With very few notable exceptions, ALL animated Disney movies make more selling the DVD/VHS than in the theatre, probably for the reasons outlined below.
3.  All “Family friendly” fare is suffering poorly right now at theatre, probably because of the recession.
4. We have plenty of racist people that weren’t going to watch it even if it was the reincarnated movie of The 10 Commandments. 
5.  We have plenty of parents that wouldn’t take their boys to watch anything with the word “Princess” in it for fear that their balls would drop off or something (as far as I know, all the little boys I know who went to it thought it rocked.  It had a trumpet playing Alligator in it- they thought it was the coolest thing EVAR!).  In that sense, I don’t mind that they’re changing “Rapunzel” to “Tangled” though it does make me sad that they’re shifting the focus.  If you have to, leave the women a bit hidden until the people come in.
6.  Finally, and probably most importantly, it was not a great movie.  It was an okay one, and the not-greatness had nothing to do with the race or gender of the characters.  It was just okay.  The pacing was slow in parts, it had too many songs, and it was just missing some of the sparkle that Disney movies are known for.  Why can’t the lackluster (and by “lackluster” we mean “we’re looking at a worldwide release of over 222,000,000 dollars, leaving us a net profit of only about 105,000,000 dollars, boo hoo) release just be explained by the movie just not being that good?

Comment #37: Antigone  on  03/12  at  03:23 PM

I know I’m a minority, but I HATE Beauty and the Beast.

HATE IT! HATE IT! HATE IT!

I hate it because the original is a story about the girl.  Alan Menken and Howard Ashman were wonderful, but they couldn’t get their minds around a female-centric story (despite Ariel) and created Gustav and made the stupid movie about the Beast being in competition with Gustav. 

It’s now about boys fighting over a girl.  The fact that Belle likes books is really totally irrelevant, since the story isn’t about her anymore.  It’s about boys fighting over a girl, not a girl saving a boy.

It’s worse than tacking a wedding onto the Little Mermaid, b/c instead of just making a sad morality tale a “happy ending”, they gutted the basics of the story.

As for Princess and the Frog—I thought it was great.  I enjoyed the fact that John Lassiter from Pixar now runs the studio and picked up on all sorts of Pixar-type in-jokes throughout the film.  It was a good time and the kids liked it…well until the firefly died.

Seriously.  Stop killing things, Pixar.  It’s not okay.  Nobody had to die in Toy Story.  Nobody had to die in Monsters Inc.—though you flirted with making Sully think Boo died in the worst part of that flick.  Ever since?  Fuck!  Knock it off.

Though now it looks like Pixar’s misogynist traits are coming to the forefront.  I’m sure their new male lead will come dashing to the rescue.  It’s not like he’s going to go up the tower, impregnate Rapunzel, get caught by the witch, blinded and thrown out to the desert like in the original.

Nor that Rapunzel, harlot, slut, and pregnant teen, will be cast out as well to birth her twins and eventually find her prince and heal him.

No.  The prince is now the star of the tale and the rest will be jammed into a stereotypical rom-com set up followed by the happily ever after.

And as if they won’t still make Rapunzel part of the Princess marketing scamola.

Comment #38: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/12  at  03:33 PM

Most of the review I read said it wasn’t an amazing movie - serviceable, yes, but nothing special, and anyone I know who went to see it says the same thing.  But THAT couldn’t possibly be the problem, could it?  Nope, it’s gotta be the lady bits.
I remember that whole thing a couple years ago where that Jodie Foster movie (I think it was called The Brave One?)underperformed at the box office and set off a huge “people don’t see movies with female leads” bomb…  Of course, the movie was terrible and uniformly panned by critics and audiences…  And of course, it’s not like a movie with a MALE lead was never a resounding flop.
When are studios going to wake up and realize that people like to go see good movies?  The Little Mermaid and Beauty and the Beast did great, because they were great movies, and word gets around when something is good. 
The Lion King made more money than Brother Bear because it was a much better movie, not because people can relate to lions and not to bears.

Comment #39: nico  on  03/12  at  03:37 PM

Argh!
I love Princess and the Frog!  And so does my son!  Frak you sideways, stupid Disney!

Comment #40: lonespark  on  03/12  at  03:39 PM

I’m not sure why this hasn’t been mentioned yet, but of the people that did come to see Princess and the Frog, very, very, very few of them were white.

See, this is what I was afraid of.  The reaction of “Let’s just not make movies about girls anymore” is stupid and evil, but the alternative and unsaid reaction actually includes “Let’s not make moves about black people anymore—unless they’re the servants.”

The other part is the bigotry that’s so out in the open now that Johnny Weir can’t be in Stars On Ice b/c he skates “too gay”.  It’s not family friendly for boys to be anything but rough and tumble, so you can’t possibly take a boy-child to a movie with “Princess” in the title, b/c he might catch teh GAY!

Comment #41: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/12  at  03:42 PM

Ehh,  we just watched the Sondheim take off on fairy tales of “Into the Woods” instead.  netflix.

Comment #42: phylosopher  on  03/12  at  03:50 PM

Sorry, but mark me down as another who thinks that this (The “underwhelming” performance) is more due to race than gender.

Little boys simply are not interested in these types of movies, and really haven’t been in a long time. You could give them male leads, make them absurdly macho, or whatever, and it would come across with a meh. I’m sure that Disney understood this going in. So it’s no shock to anybody. The only animated movie as of recently I think to really have a strong boy “grab”, would be Cars. Even something such as The Incredibles really has no legs. Other movies come and go, but again, they don’t leave the huge cultural mark as the “Princess” movies do for little girls.

Why? I suspect that little boys are more interested in watching serial animated TV shows (especially anime/pseudo-anime), than sitting around and watching a two-hour movie. I might be wrong on this, but this is just my impression from looking at the overall culture.

Comment #43: Karmakin  on  03/12  at  04:09 PM

What age are you talking about, Karmarkin?  I know not every family encourages their son to love Tinkerbell and The Princess and The Frog, but if you’re including Pixar, Wall-E and Up were huge hits with the wee boys I know.  Especially Wall-E, ye gods.

Comment #44: lonespark  on  03/12  at  04:19 PM

There’s probably something to the argument that Disney has marketed itself into a corner by aggressively branding its animated movies with female leads as “Disney Princess” movies and promoting the message that they’re only for very young, very feminine girls.  It used to be that Disney movies were among the few children’s movies with female leads that could draw a mixed audience, and now it’s going to be an uphill battle to get anyone outside the Disney Princess demographic to see them.

Really, though, I think “The Princess and the Frog” did disappointing box office primarily because it’s about black characters.  Yes, I really do think there are sizable numbers of white parents who would rather sit through “Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeaquel” than a movie about a black woman.

It’ll do solid merchandise and DVD sales for years to come, though, so I don’t know why Disney’s marketing department is whining so much.

Personally, I thought it was a very, very good movie, and would’ve been a great movie if it’d had better songs.  Why would you set a movie in New Orleans, at a time when New Orleans musicians are desperate for work, and hire Randy Newman to write all your music?  I like Randy Newman in the right context (i.e., Toy Story), but c’mon.  Otherwise, the animation was lovely, Tiana was cool, the sidekick characters were surprisingly not annoying, and I have to confess I have a weakness for cheesy voodoo-sploitation.

Comment #45: Shaenon  on  03/12  at  04:27 PM

Hmmm - I think that’s you’ve hit on soemthing, lonespark.  What age kids are we talking about?  I mean are girls interested in “princess stuff” beyond first or second grade anymore? Feel free to call me old-fashioned, but it does seem all kids are growing up much faster, but esp. girls. Or maybe it isn’t growing up but just not having traditional kid interests anymore.  I have occasion to be around a bunch and observe them at the sports venues (mostly sisters waiting in the building for brothers who are practicing - though there are a couple girls on the team) I haven’t seen a single girl with doll that I can remember beyond one toddler who drags one by the hair.  No fashion dolls either.  They seem to congregate and whisper about boys - at ages 6-11.  So could it just be a shrinking audience? 

You’re right about films like Wall-E and UP - much chronologically wider appeal.  I can see a preschooler watching Wall-E, but my middleschooler also liked it, and even the male adult who went with them to UP liked it.

Comment #46: phylosopher  on  03/12  at  04:33 PM

1. The original storyline of Rapunzel (I’m not saying the script, I’m saying the fairytale) was never about the girl but the hero. There are plenty of fairytales where girls do all the adventuring, but Rapunzel is passive.
2. I’m glad they didn’t blame it on race, actually, since this was their first African princess.
3. Rapunzel, like Jasmine, will end up being the real focus after the initial release. (there are always video sequels)

Comment #47: Samantha Vimes  on  03/12  at  04:47 PM

Fun and generally awesome retelling of the Rapunzel story: Rapunzel’s Revenge.  I’d go see this as a movie.

Comment #48: damnedyankee  on  03/12  at  05:03 PM

Well, when you look into “traditional” fairy tales at all, they’re generally pretty fucked up. I mean, apart from the fact that Rapunzel was promised to the witch before she was even born, or the fact that the witch kicked Rapunzel out when she asked “why her clothes were getting so tight” (answer, because the prince had knocked her up) or the fact that when the prince was thrown out of the high tower by the witch her was blinded on his way down by the thorns (that’s going to be a gruesome scene to animate).

I think, given my experience with kids, they deal with reading or hearing about gruesome shit pretty well. I read a bunch of 2nd graders the original Aschenputtel (cinderella) where the sisters are chopping off their own toes and birds are pecking eyes out and people are getting sealed into nail-lined barrels and rolled down hills and they were hanging on my every word. You put that same 2nd grader in a movie theater showing Coraline and the second the false mom whips out the buttons and wants to sew up Coraline’s eyes, they freak the shit out.

Also, I think that the purity balls are taking their cues from Allerleirauh.

Comment #49: Mighty Ponygirl  on  03/12  at  05:25 PM

Shaenon wrote:

Really, though, I think “The Princess and the Frog” did disappointing box office primarily because it’s about black characters.  Yes, I really do think there are sizable numbers of white parents who would rather sit through “Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeaquel” than a movie about a black woman.

It seems just as probable to me that fewer white girls asked their parents to see the movie, if not more so.  Parents generally take their kids to movies the kids ask to see, and if fewer white kids asked, fewer white families would attend.

Comment #50: Dana  on  03/12  at  05:26 PM

A large part of Disney’s problem with their films of late has been a combination of a lack of good non-formulaic plots and a marketing campaign which is a bit aggressive about hawking merchandise and only targets an extremely limited portion of the US movie going population….even among the kiddie set.  This not only means many kids and their parents end up being disinterested, but even turned off. 

Moreover, I don’t know how it is in other areas, but growing up in the 1980’s, Disney cartoons was considered something one grew out of upon entering kindergarten/first grade and if one still had an interest and was dumb enough to be open about it….made one ripe for bullying and teasing about being a “baby”. 

Why? I suspect that little boys are more interested in watching serial animated TV shows (especially anime/pseudo-anime), than sitting around and watching a two-hour movie. I might be wrong on this, but this is just my impression from looking at the overall culture.

Anime’s greater popularity compared to Disney films is not limited to boys IME….though they tend to be more open/vocal about their love of it.  In the high school anime club and later conventions after college….there were plenty of female fans spanning all age groups.

Main reasons for this preference from everyone I talked to in those settings was mainly that most anime had far more sophisticated and compelling engaging plots than was available in most Disney…or other US made cartoons.  Considering what I saw of many of the most popular anime titles that’s very sad…...especially when I am hearing this from elementary school/junior high aged kids and that IMHO…they’re correct.

Comment #51: exholt  on  03/12  at  05:33 PM

For those of you for whom price and hassle are the problems in showing movies to kids, consider investing in a digital projector and using a blank wall of a room as the screen. It’s about $300 for the projector, but you can plug it into your laptop and show DVDs on it and run the audio through your stereo. We have an eight by five foot “screen” on the wall of our living room and we don’t have to pay for cable. This has the extra added bonus of meaning we don’t have cable, so watching video becomes a special experience and therefore less common. Even better, our child won’t be exposed to Disney products and their nasty patriarchal values in our house.

Comment #52: felagund  on  03/12  at  05:47 PM

exholt:  That might be because in Anime, you actually have female main roles to go watch.  How many American cartoons have female main roles?  Very, very few.

Comment #53: Crissa  on  03/12  at  05:49 PM

Wasn’t there just a report out that women (and presumably girls) now make up 53 percent of the movie-going audience?

Comment #54: louC  on  03/12  at  05:50 PM

Wasn’t there just a report out that women (and presumably girls) now make up 53 percent of the movie-going audience?

shocking considering the totally different % of the population that they make up… </snark>

Comment #55: kodiak  on  03/12  at  05:56 PM

Why would you set a movie in New Orleans, at a time when New Orleans musicians are desperate for work, and hire Randy Newman to write all your music?

Because Pixar just staged a coup and took over Disney Animation entirely.  Using Randy Newman was hawking back to “Toy Story”, Pixar’s 1st big movie.  There were lots of little Pixar-y touches to put the “new boss in town” stamp on the movie.

Karmakin, do you actually know any boys?  And if I hear that BULLSHIT 80s meme that girls will see boys shows but boys will NEVER EVER EVER get cooties by watching girls I will scream.

Yes, the whole post in nothing but ALLCAPS.  It will be ugly.  So stop it with the “boys don’t like girls” shit.

Boys like good stories.  So do girls.  The only boys who are afraid of a movie that has a princess in it are cowardly little tykes who have been told the slightest show of emotion will turn them TEH GAY and that means straight to HELL.

And Rapunzel is NOT rescued in the original.  The prince is blinded and wanders around hopelessly until he runs into her, after she’s birthed their twins on her own.  She cries, her tears mend his broken eyes, and then they live happily ever after.

That’s not being rescued by the prince.  She and the twins were poor but fine.  Princy was the one in big trouble.

Comment #56: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/12  at  06:03 PM

exholt:  That might be because in Anime, you actually have female main roles to go watch.  How many American cartoons have female main roles?  Very, very few.

Agreed.  The plot bar for Disney and most US cartoons targeted for the elementary school kids is set so low that even the popular anime titles look great by comparison. 

Most kids I knew growing up tend to go through their Disney phases between toddler-hood until around 7-8 years old at the latest.  Sadly enough, their parents seem to be more into the latest Disney cartoons than they are because it presents an overidealized rose-colored portrayal of childhood they want for their kids….however unrealistic silly it may seem to more rational adults….or especially the kids themselves.

Comment #57: exholt  on  03/12  at  06:32 PM

It’s simple:

The space once occupied by traditional animated Disney movies is now occupied by Pixar.

Comment #58: Ben D.  on  03/12  at  06:40 PM

I wouldn’t chalk it up to the recession entirely either because during economic downturns people want escapism, movies continued to do very well in the Great Depression for example.

Comment #59: Ben D.  on  03/12  at  06:41 PM

In a recession, family films are going to be hit harder.  That’s just all there is to it.  You can always throw a DVD in to entertain the kids.

Sorry, Amanda, but you really need proof for that assertion rather than “it’s just so”.

Comment #60: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  03/12  at  06:54 PM

Not to mention the fact that there is anime actually targeted at girls/young women. And not the kinds of things people would think of. From the FMA movie DVD insert:

It can be said the popularity of the series seriously exploded when it became an anime. First, it was broadcast on the MBS network on Saturdays, in a block with <u>Mobile Suit Gundam SEED</u> at 6:00 pm. It was here that a new customer base had been developed by <u>SEED</u>, centered on young women from their early to middle teens. As the next show in the block, <u>Fullmetal Alchemist</u> fit the needs of what that customer group wanted very well.

That’s not really surprising, though, considering that the FMA manga is written by a women. (Actually, a while back, to prove a point, I tried to come up with 20 female manga-ka* either off the top of my head or by looking up series I’d heard of repeatedly and finding out who wrote them. This is what I came up with.)

Really, it’s not hard to have large female audiences when you, you know, actually let women write comic/TV shows/movies.

<small>* Because it was specifically manga-ka I was looking for, that excluded series’ that were anime/novel first.)</small>

Comment #61: Ruby  on  03/12  at  07:09 PM

I wouldn’t chalk it up to the recession entirely either because during economic downturns people want escapism, movies continued to do very well in the Great Depression for example.

In my experience, it’s gas prices. People won’t drive somewhere do something they could do at home when gas is really expensive.

Comment #62: Ruby  on  03/12  at  07:11 PM

@nico #39: I loved The Brave One. Then again, I’m a sucker for anything with Jodie Foster in it. She really is cool.

Comment #63: catfood  on  03/12  at  08:10 PM

Mighty Ponygirl, that was a deeply fucked-up story on a number of levels. And it kinda sucked, too. Can you tell me who is reading this?

Comment #64: felagund  on  03/12  at  08:12 PM

I don’t get it, the movie made over $100 million and there are still DVD sales to start counting.  I didn’t see it in theaters because a) I was broke b) It reminded me of every other Disney princess movie.  I miss Mulan…Mulan was the best. 

It all boils down to movies (and this applies to pretty much all of society) with female leads being held to a higher standard.  If Treasure Planet flops at the box office, and if I remember correctly, it flopped bigtime, it wasn’t because it had a male lead, no, there must’ve been some other reason.  But if any movie with a female lead flops, then it’s the woman’s fault and it’s time to stop making movies with female leads.  Then when you have a big success like Alice in Wonderland, which I adored, no one says, “Well, it succeeded because of the female lead.”  No, it’s Johnny Depp, or the well-known story, or some other reason.

Comment #65: Foxling  on  03/12  at  08:29 PM

I always love these threads, because for much of my life I’ve felt like I’m one of the few women in America who didn’t (and doesn’t) love Disney princess movies as a child. Quite the contrary, I think they’re poor excuses for children’s entertainment and send really bad messages to little girls (“Beauty and the Beast” is one of the worst offenders, in my mind, for basically being an allegory about the power of twu wuv in transforming an abusive boyfriend/husband). I didn’t see “The Princess and the Frog,” but I suspected from the beginning that it wasn’t going to fare well at the box office for a variety of reasons. Generally speaking, little girls who have been socialized into loving Disney Princess crap probably aren’t going to be particularly interested in a depiction of a strong, empowered female lead, and I don’t think we can ignore the elephant in the room which is the question of race. I don’t have any raw statistics to back this up, but my hunch is that a majority of the girls who fall into the Disney Princess demographic are white, and they may not be receptive to a black heroine.

Comment #66: Sadie Morrison  on  03/12  at  08:31 PM

I don’t have any raw statistics to back this up, but my hunch is that a majority of the girls who fall into the Disney Princess demographic are white, and they may not be receptive to a black heroine

I’m not sure if the litle white girls are not receptive to a black heroine, I think their parents may not be so receptive. 
These types of movies get the majority of their theater audience from families with small children, this movie was so clearly marketed as a “princess” film that it probably alienated little boys (and their parents) who might have wanted to see it.

Comment #67: CParis  on  03/12  at  08:54 PM

The space once occupied by traditional animated Disney movies is now occupied by Pixar.

Bzzt!  Pixar now runs Disney.  After their distribution deal ended, Disney was trying to cue up it’s own computer animated division.  There was much animosity between the two, partially b/c John Lassiter wanted to do his own Toy Story 3 and Disney owned the characters and insisted on a straight to DVD version done by their local crap animators.  They were just about to terminate the deal when…

...somehow Pixar came out the winner.  Disney bought them outright, but the Pixar CEOs were put in charge of Disney Animation.  They killed the planned Toy Story 3 straight to DVD.

This isn’t a case where you can say Pixar is different from Disney.  Pixar IS Disney.  And Pixar has yet to make a female lead in any of their cartoons.  Pete Doctor, who just won an academy award seems to think b/c the house is still in the movie Up, Ellie is still in the movie.

No, Pete.  You killed Ellie in the first reel.  She’s dead.  There are no other women in the movie till the throwaway mom at the end who is totally overshadowed by Carl filling in for the all-important Dad role.

THAT’S why it’s so disturbing to hear “Disney” say they aren’t going to have a female lead.  They fucking mean it.

Comment #68: Caren-Sun-blocking Creator of Animorphic Pancakes  on  03/12  at  09:43 PM

It seems just as probable to me that fewer white girls asked their parents to see the movie, if not more so.  Parents generally take their kids to movies the kids ask to see, and if fewer white kids asked, fewer white families would attend.

I can only go off the anecdata, but in all the families I know with young girls, the girls were begging to see “The Princess and the Frog” months in advance, thanks to Disney’s nonstop marketing on the Disney Channel and Radio Disney.  This included kids as young as two; it was a little scary, albeit less intense than Hannah Montana fever.  I don’t think most kids in the primary target age range are especially aware of race.  I do think the race of the characters turned off some parents and maybe some older kids.

Still, the movie did well at the box office, just not as spectacularly as Disney was hoping its big return to traditional animation would do.  It’ll be a solid DVD seller for decades to come.

Comment #69: Shaenon  on  03/12  at  10:50 PM

THAT’S why it’s so disturbing to hear “Disney” say they aren’t going to have a female lead.  They fucking mean it.

Pixar’s next movie after “Toy Story 3” is “The Bear and the Bow,” a fantasy with a female lead, directed by a woman animator.

Comment #70: Shaenon  on  03/12  at  10:51 PM

“If Treasure Planet flops at the box office, and if I remember correctly, it flopped bigtime, it wasn’t because it had a male lead, no, there must’ve been some other reason.  But if any movie with a female lead flops, then it’s the woman’s fault and it’s time to stop making movies with female leads. “

http://xkcd.com/385/

Comment #71: paul  on  03/12  at  10:55 PM

If racism was a factor - and it very likely was - I think it was probably that of the parents and not the kids.  Kids, left to their own devices, are pretty color blind IME, and only later begin to soak up racist attitudes from their parents and other adults.  Kids love Jasmine, Mulan and Pocahontas - I’m sure most little girls would see the Princess and the Frog preview and see only a pretty lady in the pretty dress.

Comment #72: nico  on  03/13  at  12:15 AM

“Mighty Ponygirl, that was a deeply fucked-up story on a number of levels. And it kinda sucked, too. Can you tell me who is reading this?”

It’s not that much more fucked-up than most original fairy tales, though the RCC reworking it as Saint Dymphna doesn’t score it any points.  Hell, there’s one variant where it’s a princess whose brother has fallen in love with her, so she has a servant chop off her hands (his favorite of her features) and give them to him before fleeing the kingdom.

Comment #73: preying mantis  on  03/13  at  01:56 AM

Just when you can’t think Dana can get any goofier, he blames little girls for being racist jerks and overriding the wishes of their non-racist, colorblind parents. Good one, Dana!

Ruby @33 got it right. Yes, Disney and Pixar et al are sexist, but why the reluctance to point out that, hello, this is a movie where the main characters are black? Of course Disney isn’t going to SAY that. It’s far more acceptable to say “female characters don’t sell” than to accuse your white audience of not wanting to see a movie about black people. The former is just a Recognition Of The Facts Of Life. The latter will cause the people who give you money to flip their shit.

Comment #74: mythago  on  03/13  at  02:03 AM

Little girls (and boys) will often reflect the views of the dominate voice in the society where they are raised, without being racist or having racist parents. If what they are predominantly exposed to is: white girl in a pink ball gown=real princess and therefor the most desirable and prettiest then they are likely to reflect that in their choices, across color lines. Look at the student film “A Girl Like Me” which replicates the “doll test” done by Dr. Kenneth Clark in the 1940’s. My attempts to provide links have flopped thus far so I’ll just say that the film is easy to find and is on the Media That Matters website.

  Of course there are kids who love Mulan and Jasmine just as much as they love Cinderella and Belle, just as there are girls who don’t give a hoot about princesses at all.

Comment #75: HooksInMyHead  on  03/13  at  04:19 AM

I always thought The Princess Who Kicked Butt would make a great Pixar cartoon.*  If they did stories about girls who kicked butt, that is.  Or any stories that starred girls at all.

*For one thing, my princess-centric niece loved it. For another, it’s as funny as hell.

Comment #76: Blue Jean  on  03/14  at  12:07 AM

How on earth is Disney moving away from *(#$&*($#*(& princess movies a bad thing? If Disney were abandoning the girl market, I might agree, but they’re not.  Disney owns the girl market from preschool (Playhose Disney) to elementary age (Princess franchise, Fairy franchise) to preteen and middle school (Hannah Montana, Cheetah Girls, High School Musical, Wizards of Waverly Place.)

The move away from princess movies is being accompanied push to promote the Disney Fairies franchises. There have been two full length fairy movies in 2 years and there is another one coming out this fall.  Disney has greated a huge on-line website “Pixie Hollow” dedicated to the franchise. They’ve added face character meet-n-greets to the park for the major fairy characters. 

I personally am cheering the move away from the Princesses and towards the Fairies. They’re awesome. The franchise features major characters of every skins and body type. The lead is Tinkerbelle, but her friends include women color (fairies of color?). Iridessa is an African-American fairy. Silvermist is an Asian American fairy.  The franchise supports non-thin body types—Fairy Mary is a group leader and is distinctly fat.  There are male fairies, but they’re mostly cast in support roles. Not all of the fairies are perfectly pretty.

All of the fairies have jobs. Tinkerbelle is a tinker fairy—a mechanic and an engineer. Most of the rest of the fairies are nature spirits who are responsible for changing the seasons.  All of the goals of the movies are accomplished through cooperative efforts of the characters.


I’m perfectly happy to see Disney de-emphasize the Princesses franchise and push the Fairies franchise, because the Fairies franchise are MUCH more in line of the goals most parents have for their daughters today and the values we hold for them.

Comment #77: Dawn  on  03/14  at  11:18 AM

Amanda, you’re great, but every problem isn’t a nail. Disney’s problem is that, apart from their Pixar acquisitions, nearly every movie they’ve made since The Lion King has been crap, and even five-year-olds of both sexes recognize this—to their credit.  (Truth be told, a lot of stuff they made before LK were crap, too.)

Comment #78: Infamouis Amos  on  03/14  at  08:46 PM

That’s “a lot of stuff they made before LK WAS crap.” Sorry for the subject-verb disagreement.

Comment #79: Infamouis Amos  on  03/14  at  08:48 PM

Quite the contrary, I think they’re poor excuses for children’s entertainment and send really bad messages to little girls (“Beauty and the Beast” is one of the worst offenders, in my mind, for basically being an allegory about the power of twu wuv in transforming an abusive boyfriend/husband)

I like Disney movies when I was a kid, but I have changed my mind after analyzing them as an adult.  I already hold a special dislike of Beauty and the Beast, but I never thought of it the way you described it.  It is so true about abuse thing, and that makes it even worse.  The thing that I hate about it is the double standards.  The beast needs to fall in love, but of course his love must be the most beautiful woman in the town.  We can’t expect a man to every love an ugly woman or even a mediocre one.  At the same time, the woman is expected to love not just an ugly man, but an actual beast.  It is expected of her to look past physical appearance and see his inside (which wasn’t so great either), but she’s a woman and it’s her duty to put up with all his crap for love.  This affected me profoundly when I was a conventionally pretty teenager and many boys hit on me, but I felt bad for having standards.

Comment #80: bananacat  on  03/15  at  12:25 PM

Even worse, catgirl, she’s supposed to overlook his beastliness because he has lots of money!  And a huge palace!  With servants! 

OK, the movie isn’t that bad, and does do something to address the issue; Gaston may be the handsomest guy in the province, with lots of admirers, but he’s still a jerk.  There’s the hint that Gaston is only attracted to Belle because she seems to be the one woman in town who’s not interested in him. 

Beast, on the other hand, is an outcast.  A rich outcast, yes, but still an outcast.  Unlike Gaston, though, he doesn’t expect her to be grateful for his interest in her, much less accept him without question.  And he does make an effort to see to what she wants, as when he gives her the library.  He does help her and her father too, while Gaston tries to kill the Beast and send Belle’s father in the insane asylum.  So there’s a lot of mitigating factors.

Disney’s Hunchback of Notre Dame changes the story too.  I was afraid that Esmerelda would end up with the Quasimodo (because they wouldn’t put the real ending where they both die into a kid’s picture) but she ends up with the handsome Phoebus instead, while keeping Quasimodo as a friend.  The book’s ending is more of a downer, but the movie’s is sweeter.

Anyway, Scott Mendelson has more on The Princess And The Frog and why Disney is machoing stuff up.

Comment #81: Blue Jean  on  03/16  at  09:09 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.