What about the Frozen national tour?
I'm guessing they'll reschedule dates.
The cold never bothered me anyway
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
At least, it didnt cancle now
Too old for this
Drat. I hope they will come to London eventually though, it would have been much easier for me to go and see it (not right now of course, but then again, going to the movie theatre at the end of the street is not possible either).
Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.
The New York Post article about this had a few telling quotes. 1) “Its weekly grosses peaked at $2.6 million, but by February were averaging about $1 million.“
This means the musical used to be good and went downhill. Not coincidentally, after Frozen II came out. Frozen II failed to bring back the audience that kept leaving.
But the New York Post article also pointed out that "the stage adaptation received unenthusiastic reviews from key critics and was shut out at the Tony Awards."
Frozen on Broadway was a success at first, but critics didn’t like it, it didn’t win any Tonys and the audience left in bigger numbers after Frozen II, and the lockdown caused by overreacting governors was the nail in the coffin.
Thing to note is that at the 2018 Tonys, Frozen was nominated in three categories: Best Musical, Best Book of a Musical, and Best Original Score Written for the Theater. However, it is important to note that revivals have their own category, Best Revival of a Musical, and are ineligible for Best Book. Therefore, the pool of nominees is even further limited. Only four original musicals were eligible that season for either Best Musical and/or Best Book: The Band’s Visit, Frozen, Mean Girls, and Spongebob Squarepants. In fact, those were the only four nominations in both categories. To put it simply, Frozen was nominated by default for just existing.
Frozen II was a success at the box-office, but critics didn’t like it, it didn’t win any relevant awards (Oscars included), and it was pulled up from theaters earlier than the first moviue due to increasingly less numbers per week.
This is not good for Jen Lee. The Frozen Broadway musical was her only solo success. To recap: the first Frozen was more John Lasseter’s baby (from behind-the-scenes materials, he was the one who pushed for Elsa to be a protagonist, and also came up with Elsa's sexy walk, among other things), Ralph Breaks the Internet was not liked by much of the fandom, Wrinkle in Time was a bust, and Frozen II was an abomination. And the musical didn’t do as well as many might've thought financially, and these lockdowns gave Disney an excuse to cut their losses...but it also means Jen has no solo successes now. If Raya and the Last Dragon isn’t a hit, then it'll beg the question, why is Jen Lee the CCO of Walt Disney Animation Studios with her track record?
The cold never bothered me anyway
I dont think Raya and the Last Dragon will be a hit, also Disney may not give big expectation on it, we all know it talk the southeast asian princess, colored princess always performed poorly at box office and merchandise. Disney made it for openning the southeast maket(it still a small market now but full of hope in future), just a marketing test.
Jenifer Lee became CCO less than two years, normally an animation making time requires a least four years, she still has time to prove herself.
Mathematically, frozen 1 and frozen 2 had different box office growth curve, it fit the difference between original movie and sequel, I never saw a sequel had box office growth curve same as a big hit original movie. It is not a problem unique to frozen sequel.
The reasons of frozen musical failure are complicated, I think we dont need to complain that frozen2 fail to get more audiences for musical, cause anyway the movie audience and musical audience are not exactly coincident.
Lasseter was not the director; Lee and Christopher Buck were. While undoubtedly he held a creative influence on the film, coming up with some of the details leaves a lot of the other work necessary in establishing the tone and narrative trajectory of the film. There's a difference between someone driving a car and someone in the sideseat suggesting spots on the map. Blockbuster movies in general are always collaborative works, given that they require such massive crews.
Edited by Tuckerscreator on May 16th 2020 at 12:29:12 PM
Too old for this
Frozen 2 may not have been liked by critics but it sure performed extremely well at the box office, and the merchandise seems to still be flowing around. I don't know what Jennifer Lee's prospects are, but the Frozen franchise still seems to be in good health in any case.
Edited by C105 on May 16th 2020 at 11:03:26 AM
Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.
Given Rotten Tomatoes gives it a score of 77%, Frozen 2 WAS liked by critics. It just wasn't loved like the previous film.
Disasturbator
> then it'll beg the question, why is Jen Lee the CCO of Walt Disney Animation Studios with her track record?
You really find a hobby besides scapegoating people,it's getting tiresome
New theme music also a box
The use of "colored" there really sets off my alarm bells. :|
Second, Disney movies starring royals of color have done great. Moana made back more than 3 times its budget, Black Panther made a billion, the Aladdin remake made a billion. Raya will be fine, assuming movie theaters get back in shape once the quarantine ends.
I am not native english speaker, if some words offend you, I feel sorry.
Moana was good, but I dont think it could be called a hit. Additionally, in my mind, the best result of raya is close to Moana.
Black Panther? I said princess...
Aladdin, I always curious about why Aladdin could be thought as Disney princess movie, I mean, the main charactor was man...Also, the merchandise of Aladdin remake showed poorly, anyway, it was live-action movie.
Moana made 690 million worldwide. That’s a huge hit if you ask me.
It definitely should have made it to the billion-club, though.
If Moana was made by other company excpet Disney(Pixar) and got 690 million box office worldwide, I would called it was a huge hit.
While for Disney animation, I made a simple data calculation that the average box office of 3D WDAS movies from 2010 was 834 million(if including Pixar this value is 806 milliom), Moana didnt achieve the average rate.
In terms of quality, I dont think the Moana is weaker than Frozen or other billion-club animations, why it didnt achieve that was a intereasting market research issue. That is also the reason why I think the best result of Raya is close to Moana, they had same problem on market.
Would like to point out that box Office performance is not an indicator of movie quality or general movie reception for the simple reason that you generally have to pay the cost up from before you get to see the movie. Nor the aggregate rating, because there is insufficient weighting of "that was an okay 2 hours of my time" vs "I am searching my friendslist for people who want to watch it again tomorrow".
We'll likely never actually know the exact extent to which who was responsible for what in F1. There was, however, a great deal of disconnect in sensibility between the team for 1 and the team for 2.
As for whether colored princesses/princesses of color
sell, if we're looking at the number, it appears that yeah, they do, especially when you adjust for inflation and also keep in mind the wider market environment at the time. Tiana bottoms the list, but that was also a transition point for Disney as it was migrating from hand-drawn to CGI; Mulan sits squarely between Rapunzel and Ariel, Pocahontas is middle of the pack, and Jasmine at rank 5 is only beat out by Aurora, Cinderella, Belle, and Snow White.
Too old for this
I must say the order of this list is not what I'd have expected. Of course, adjustment for inflation means that the older movies will get an advantage (so Snow White being first is not that surprising, as are Jasmine and Belle to some extent), but for instance I'd have thought Rapunzel would have ranked higher.
Box-office can at least give an indication when it displays good numbers over an extended period of time. There is a difference between a movie taking over the box-office on its opening week-end, then dropping to fourth or fifth place after a few days, and a movie that only a long-awaited blockbuster manages to knock out of the top three one month or so after its release.
Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.
The advantage of older movies isn't really due to adjustment for inflation though, more just that for Disney to be the behemoth that it is today, obviously its first work was a really successful film. The only place where it would cause certain films to be at a disadvantage would be if that film had just come out and thus its box office run wasn't quite complete yet.
Compared the box office with old movies (last century) with new movies directly is meaningless, there are many factors to influence the box office, not only inflation.
I prefer to use merchandise to judge the popularity between old princess and new princess. If you incestigate the collaboration merchandise with Disney Princess, the most popular princesses are appeared to be Snow White, Ariel and Cinderella. Mulan, Belle, Rapunzel, Jasmine, and Aurora are second layer. Interestingly that Tiana is bottom in box office but not bottom in merchandise.
The merchandise is also impacted by many factors, for example, if the remaking movie of one princess is showing or will be shown, the merchandise of her will increase, such as Mulan and Jasmine. So I just talk the overall trend.
Of course there are many other factors, and I do point out that box office numbers themselves aren't a particularly good indicator of film quality being that even people who didn't like it obviously still had to pay. A fair amount of the high rank box office ones are from Disney's 90s Renaissance era, while Tiana kind of got shafted by the fact that it came out during a low point for the company as a whole.
Regarding merch, the only thing that I get from Google is this lovely example of why the "storytelling" framework for data analytics is complete bullshit. Basically, once you account for factors like Frozen having just come out, Snow White and Cinderella enjoying literally decades of popularity and "classic" status, and Ariel and Rapunzel kickstarting their respective renaissances, you end up with Merida, Belle, Jasmine, and Tiana roughly being similar to each other, with Aurora (another "classic" princess with decades of pop cultural osmosis) as being significantly better selling. This, on top of the inherently flawed methodology of the data set being limited to eBay sales, and not incorporating Amazon or Disney Store.
But this takes far more effort to explain than just "white and blonde princesses sell more than colored princesses/princesses of color". Sometimes I really do hate my chosen field of work.
Absolutely, I didnt statistic the data from ebay or other website, I know it is impossible for us to get the credibility detailed data from online-shopping website.
The sales data is controlled by Disney and they must provide it to cooperative business, so the better way to investigate that is: explore who is the first choice for collaboration merchandise in Disney Princess. If the collaboration merchandise only want three princesses, normally Snow White and Ariel will not be absent, the third one is unstable, Cinderella/Belle/Aurora all possible. If the collaboration merchandise want more than five princesses, they would consider add one or two colored princess.
Who watched the Zenimation on Disney+ ? I cannot use it in my country, is it a vedio clip with special sound effects?
I haven’t, but it sounds like a cash grab.
The older films' box office takes are padded by many rereleases, which don't happen much any more. There have been a few, like the 3D rerelease of Beauty and the Beast, but it's not really significant.
The modern equivalent is home video — first VHS, then DVD, and now streaming.
If you lump in how many VHS tapes The Little Mermaid sold, it would rank a lot higher.
One other quibble with the list: if they're going to include Kida they should also include Princess Eilonwy. The Black Cauldron grossed $21.3 million in 1985, $50.7 million adjusted for inflation.
Edit: They missed a gag in Wreck It Ralph 2: showing Kida and Eilonwy locked out of the princess suite.
Edited by alanh on May 30th 2020 at 1:50:33 AM
So who else has seen the Frozen II "Making Of" documentary series on Disney+?
I've seen it, and, honestly...it wasn't all that great.
I loved watching the team get emotional when they saw their projects coming together (finishing "Into The Unknown", etc). It was hilarious watching random guys rub rocks together for sound design. And I loved looking at the Disney offices and all the merch, posters, art, etc. The actors/workers were very charismatic and believable. They seemed to legit enjoy their work and were happy to help.
But for a documentary that promised to be a look into all the hard work, collaboration, blood, sweat and tears, it took to make Frozen II, it came off more as a look into the very final stages of "Show Yourself" and a few unfinished animation clips. So little of the actual movie making process was shown and it was extremely misleading and frustrating. Some areas I'd like to elaborate:
They didn’t even discuss the public outtakes / deleted scenes they’ve already released / planned to release like “Get This Right”, “Seek The Truth”, “Unmeltable Me”, etc (they did mention “See The Sky” but nothing else).
They did discuss the intended emotions / themes of the songs they kept in. They talk about how Show Yourself was supposed to make you feel empowered and satisfyingly wrap up the story, how "The Next Right Thing" was supposed to make you feel just as emotionally raw as Anna, etc. So I can give them credit for that. But again, these explanations became few and far between once they got into the “lesser” songs. Nor do they explain why certain songs were added to the story; for example "When I’m Older"’s entire existence was justified with “kids really liked it”. “Lost In The Woods” was an 80’s rock ballad because they kinda just wanted to make a 80’s song, etc.
Like the songs, Disney was very comfortable showing off the animation process, but only unfinished clips, models, skeletons, etc of shots that were actually used in the film and nothing else. But, I did have fun watching animators physically act out character movements, record them, and then animate them (ex: that poor girl who recorded like 5 shots of her own face singing, all super imposed on bobbing reindeer shaped bubbles for "Lost In The Woods").
The most new/deleted content they showed were storyboards and sketches of "Show Yourself" where we got to see alternate backgrounds of Ahtohallan and young Iduna and and "See the Sky" which was a dance-off type thing between the Northuldra / Arendelle soldiers.
Story is an area where this documentary was severely lacking. They showed no alternative scenes or storylines like “Hard Nokks” or the secret library. Nor did they go into the intended messages/significance of the story elements they did use, like why they chose to trap the Enchanted Forest in mist, why they spared Arendelle, why Elsa abdicated, why they chose a dam for the physical boundary they needed to destroy (even though apparently it was loosely based on a real-life dam that hurt the real-life Sami people), etc.
They also don’t dive into any character motivations (outside of the context of the songs: Elsa in "Show Yourself" and "Into The Unknown", Anna in "The Next Right Thing", and Kristoff in "Lost In The Woods").
They very explicitly refused to discuss any changes they made to the script. In episode 5 they spend a lot of time emphasizing the importance of audience feedback...but refuse to show any actual feedback (they even talk about how they gave out questionnaires but don’t even show us a blank one). This was very blatant because they spent a lot of time looking directly at the camera going on about how important feedback was, how being willing to change was important, how they did change things, and how change impacted a lot of the movie (ex: cutting songs and simplifying things for children), but refused to show anything. The one (1) change they did show was the prologue, so we see young Anna and Elsa playing before we see Agnarr’s flashback, but that was pretty much it.
They do show a black sand beach which greatly inspired the Dark Sea, but otherwise they don’t show the research it took to properly replicate the Enchanted Forest (like plant life and ecology) nor any of the locations Elsa and the gang briefly passed through on the way to the forest.
Most egregiously of all, they completely omit the Sami community and their contributions to the film. They don’t address them by name or even acknowledge the Northuldra are based on them. Nor do they mention the apparent collaboration they did with the Sami community to accurately replicate their culture. The closest they get to acknowledging them or their hand in the creation of Frozen II was that the subtitles described "Vuelie" as a “yoik”. Which does not count, since no one even says it out loud. This is just flat out disrespectful.
Basically, they went there, copied the Sami culture, took whatever they had to take, inspiration and ideas, asked them to sign some papers (so they wouldn’t complain later in terms of legal action), and used what they wanted.
Edited by dmcreif on Jul 5th 2020 at 12:08:43 PM
The cold never bothered me anyway
The Broadway musical will not reopen
. It had been underperforming compared to the Aladdin and The Lion King musicals. They're going to reuse the sets for overseas productions.