movies/tv DISNEY DEBATES: Is Pocahontas really that bad?

[TBD 17,228]

On 4/19/2017 at 2:38 AM, K.Rool Addict said:

 

Do you guys really care about a fictional adaptation of a real life historical event having some "creative liberties"?

Sure, as a history lesson Pocahontas fails, but that wasn't really the point of the movie(as far as I am aware). It was an animated film with plenty of fantasy elements meant to entertain the viewer; historical accuracy =/= entertainment quality

I'm not gunning down the movie if that is what you're thinking..I'm just saying it always good to know the historical event based on the character Pocahontas. Hell most of the Disney's movie is based on the "horror" fairy tales shorts stories with no happy ending. but i'm not worrying too much about it.  

[blackstarraven 142]

Is it "THAT" bad? I don't know... how bad is that bad?

Is the movie bad? no.. its still better then most every other animated film you can compare it to that was not Disney "Golden Decade" Level.

And all the Disney stuff takes liberty...
Something to consider. While not based on a real person. Alladin is based on a story. from 1000 and 1 Arabian nights.

 

 

And Aladdin... Is Chinese.

No really. The opening line in the story is "Once appone a time a young Chinese boy named Aladdin." Its also set in China... but the place has a Sultan and every one is Muslim... (It was being made up on the spot in the book mind you)

Point is.. ya none of them are going to be exactly right....

now that being said...

 

Was it Good? Meh..

 

Like I said its better then comparative non-Disney stuff at the time. its comparable with Anastasia (Not a Disney movie) Which is also a BS movie about a real (Dead at the time) Person.

Its not bad.

But its not good.

Its bad by Disney Standards. But Bad Disney is like Bad Shakespeare... Its still Shakespeare. Its still better then any one else writing plays at the time... so kind of like Romeo and Juliet... (I don't care its the worse Shakespeare play...)

[EpicEnergy 22,082]

I liked that movie, and I don't think it's bad.

[Sonic Shimmer 4,116]

It's not a terrible movie but it's definitely not one of Disney's most memorable. Yeah, it's a massively inaccurate portrayal of history but when is Hollywood history ever accurate?

[Northern Star 1,023]

I don't understand the "its historically inaccurate" comments. It's a cartoon made by Disney, marketed probably for children. Its not a "Hitler Era" History channel documentary, no one* would go to a theater, watch it, buy it on VHS, and buy the merchandise if it was.

The politics comments I find interesting...how in 30 years, so much can change.

Otherwise I think it's a fine movie. Not bad, but not great either...to me it felt like it was rushed or restarted half ways through. 

[TheRockARooster 47,310]

I haven’t seen it and can’t form an opinion on it.

[Evil Pink One 12,986]

I watched it as a kid and it was boring..(kids point of view)(a dumb kid)

[Astralshy 23,571]

I've seen it a long time ago. Definitely not the best Disney movie, but I never thought it's really bad.

[ExplosionMare 18,007]

I always liked the movie. There’s not too many Disney Princess movies I don’t like.

[Clawdeen 12,110]

I liked the movie growing up.

[Castle Bleck 19,167]

On 2015-10-07 at 2:25 AM, Pathfinder said:

Also, while Ratcliffe works as a villain, using money as a motivation seems...cheap...pardon the pun. I can believe easier if the villain is more small scale; like a poacher or mercenary. Not someone as well-off as Ratcliffe was.

To be fair, he ups his game in the sequel.