Has anyone heard about Disney's new 2-D movie in the works? They announced over a year ago, but I recently just went out looking for any new info, concept art, trailers, etc. The movie is, "The Princess and the Frog" (formally, "The Frog Princess") which will feature Disney's first African-America "princess." On one hand, I don't think there should have been as much hoop-la about it as there was, but I AM excited. She will be a whole new, fun personality with a completely new look that I'm really excited about.
When the news was first announced, there was some buzz about how "late" it has been and that Disney should've done this a long time ago, but I don't agree. I mean, it wasn't until the 70s that America saw a huge growth in ethnic pride, and I think it's reasonable that Disney didn't start making movies featuring predominately non-whites until the 1990s (In the 1980s, Disney focused on live-action films, and children animations were not as popular. The only hit was "The Little Mermaid" done in 1989). From then on there was "Aladdin," "Mulan," "Pocahantas," "Hunchback of Notre Dame," "Lilo & Stitch," and even "Hercules" with Megara (the other half of Disney's animations featured animal characters). It wasn't because Disney was opposed to featuring non-white protagonists that they have not yet featured an African-American one, but rather Disney has usually reinvented familer stories (aside from "Lilo & Stitch"), and there are few widely known tales featuring black protagonists. As well, I'm sure Disney would have wanted to do their first "black" animation "right" and up to the caliber of beloved films such as "Cinderella," "Aladdin," or "The Little Mermaid."
So, this was Disney's original plan for the movie:
There once lived a girl in New Orleans during the 1920s named Maddy. She was a chambermaid and her and her mother worked for a rich plantation owner who lived in the French Quarter. Maddy was in service to a spoiled, white debutatte, and despite her position she had big dreams. One day she meets a frog who insists he is a prince if she would only grant him a kiss...
Some of the other characters included a voodoo preistess who acts as Maddy's godmother, a voodoo male doctor who becomes the villian, and the prince is white.
Upon the debute of this information, there was criticism saying that it was a bad image for African-American girls to be in such a low position. As well, it was overly sterotypical to have voodoo characters, the villian should not be black, it was sending the wrong message to have a white prince (that black men aren't good enough), and the name Maddy sounded like a slave name. After the backlash, Disney went back to the drawing board and revamped the story, making Maddy into Tiara, her chambermaid position into a rich heiress, and the white prince into another ethnicity. They said they would reconsider the voodoo roles but they were still going to incorporate it into someone character. Disney has also been criticsized for white-washing history including race relations. Here are some of my thoughts on the issue:
I don’t think the original initial plot was that racist. Many other Disney Princesses have begun from “humble” backgrounds, so the original plot of Maddy being a chambermaid wouldn’t have been racist but rather just the opposite, because it shows that Disney isn’t treating an African-American heroine differently from other heroines. I honestly think this was the original view that Disney had, and they simply underestimated the sensitivity that many people still have about race relations (even from an earlier time period). Once they realized the extent of the sensitivity, at least they made the right decision to revamp the story, and hopefully just as good. I just hope it won’t be a re-hash of earlier Princess movies, just because I would like Tiara to have her own unique story, different from other ones, yet still reminiscent of the “Disney Princess legacy.”
As far as Disney white-washing history, this has always been true. They frequently simplify and romanticize different time periods, locations, and cultures. It has frequently been that the hero/heroine and their immediate circle (of friends or family) are portrayed as being more enlightened than the “common” people around them. This usually creates the common conflict where the protagonist is seen as misunderstood or even ostracized by the rest of society before they are redeemed by the end of the movie (Beauty and the Beast; Hunchback of Notre Dame; Aladdin; The Little Mermaid; etc.). I think a voodoo character (whether as a villain or an aid to Tiara) would be really good, since it keeps with the fairytale theme. To me, they are a standard character to the particular time period and an aspect of the culture the story is being portrayed in, just like a “witch” or “fairy godmother” is a stock character in Medieval or European stories.
I think it’s only because of present perceived race relations that the race of every character and their relationship to the protagonist (in this case, the princess Tiara) is being called into question. I don’t think it should be about portraying any one race in a positive or negative light, but that the story is about different people in general. At the end of the movie, no doubt African-Americans will be portrayed in a positive way, if only because the heroine is African-American. If there is an African-American villain, this should not be seen as trying to confuse children into saying that African-Americans are bad, except that people are people and they can be good or bad, regardless of race. As far as the race of the prince, I don’t think it’s that important. I think Disney usually chooses the race based on the society in the movie. In the Hunchback of Notre Dame, they were able to put multiple races (Caucasian and darker gypsy) because that was a reasonable make-up of Paris in that time period (where it wouldn’t have been too outlandish for this two people to meet). New Orleans, in the 1920’s and how Disney is portraying/exaggerating it, it was relatively multi-cultural compared to say, Mulan’s China, which was more-or-less homogeneous.
To a degree, there WILL be stereotypes in the movie, but that’s because fairytales often have stock characters who are exaggerations of a personality or role in society. It’s not meant to say anything in particular about someone, but helps create the nostalgia of old tales and fables. Not all the characters are supposed to be “real” people but often represent one personality trait (and thus are very simple). Usually only the main characters are more complex and are meant to be identified with (and actually, in earlier times, even the protagonists were 2-dimensional, such as Sleeping Beauty or Snow White, who represented “purity” or “innocence” with little character development). I don’t think it should be thought of as narrow minded, but is usually what creates nostalgia. If that isn’t our tastes anymore, then Disney should respond to this preference by changing how they create their character. However, because the “Disney Princesses” have done so well, especially the older ones (Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, & Snow White compared to Mulan or Megara), Disney probably thinks the nostalgia formula will work well.
In any case, I’m really excited for the movie! I’m hoping that Disney will be FINALLY be making a QUALITY 2-D animated film after many years of cheap sequels and full-features that relied on over-exaggerated characters to carry the film (this is only for the 2-D department. Their 3-D movies have been wonderful). The concept art has been truly great (especially that of Tiara; I loved all the different ways they played with her hair design!). In the past 10 years, Disney’s animation 2-D techniques have gotten better, more fluid and more expressive (though sometimes TOO expressive… “Ariel’s Beginning” anyone?), and now if they have a great story line it will make for a wonderful film!
