Admittedly, the story and themes have issues on their own even without the historical inaccuracy, but if they just changed the names and openly presented the movie as a work of fiction, it'd probably be remembered a lot more fondly.
@@madmouse1016 As one of those said kids, especially as our teachers had to clarify that Pochahantas was a child when meeting Smith during history, it kinda was weird coming back to this film with that knowledge
And this is why I'll take Avatar over this movie any day of the week. Because at least Avatar has the benefit of being a complete work of fiction, whereas this movie is being "based on real life events" which, given the magical talking tree and comedic animal characters in this movie, comes across as very insulting with how dumbed down and sugarcoated it is. It's like trying to make an animated children's movie about the Holocaust with singing dancing prisoners and comedic animal characters who help them all escape the concentration camps and live happily ever after! Or like trying to make an animated children's movie about the Titanic with talking animals who help everybody make it off the ship alive! Oh wait, that last one actually happened, TWICE! These real life events (including Pocahontas) are very horrible moments in history that do NOT have happy endings and should never ever be sugarcoated. If you want to teach kids what really happened, do it as an adult and tell them the whole truth because despite how uncomfortable the truth is, it's the best way to ensure it doesn't happen again.
They should have made Pocahontas live action, but with blue native Americans and a sifi setting with 3D affects. I'm sure that would have broken numbers
@@josephrowe849 well considering this was an actual historical event, this one would make the most sense to be live action to make up for the historical inaccuracies through out the animated movie and actually be educational.
Such a curiosity: in Poland, this film is incredibly cult, almost on par with The Lion King thanks to good dubbing and probably also the fact that Poles were somewhat cut off from what the story of the real Pocahontas looked like. No one here knows that such a figure actually existed. Few people are aware that the plot of this film is awkward and at times racist. For us, it's always been an anti-racist film. Like Cameron's Avatar, but animated.
@@justsomeguywholovesberserk6375I don't know for the whole of Europe but it's not the case in France and Belgium. It's really beloved but I wouldn't say it's cult. It's mainly the song"Color of the wind" that is cult
@@delireent.3960 I actually hate “Colors of the Wind” because it does EXACTLY what it’s complaining that Smith was doing. The entire song endorsed Pocahontas’s worldview and didn’t have her even really make a step towards understanding the other view. Not horrible by itself, but not exactly a great idea when you’re trying to get across the idea that people need to talk to each other and find common ground.
12:49---Maybe someone already said this, but the wind actually represents Mrs. Powhatan (whatever her name was). The chief tells Pocahontas in an earlier scene that whenever the wind blows, he feels her late mother's (i.e., his wife's) presence, so when Pocahontas makes her speech about how hatred is bad, and she chooses love, and the wind blows, Powhatan is remembering how much he and his wife loved each other, and it's like Mrs. Powhatan is telling her husband that their daughter is making a valid point and that love never dies because she's still with him in spirit.
Fun Fact: Everyone at Disney thought that Pocahontas was going to be a Better Movie then the One the other team of animators we working on the Lion King 😂❤ Imagine the Shock of the Heads of Disney Micheal Eisner and Katzenberg
Eh, it's probably because TLK was an animal movie. I'm not big on animal films myself, so I might've thought the same thing. NGL, I wish they'd made the film with humans in an African culture.
What's rich is that as soon as it became clear TLK was going to be special Jeffrey Katzenberg did a total 180 and ran to get out in front of it and act like he had been in its corner the whole time and its success was all because of him. I'm not saying he had nothign to do with it but watching Waking Sleeping Beauty it was pretty clear that he was self-promoting and felt that Pocahontas was going to be his prestige film that would win an Oscar (which it DID but just Original Song/Score not BEst Picture like he had hoped
Man! That definitely backfired in Jeffrey’s face. 😂 Imagine if The Lion King had gotten a Best Picture nomination instead of Pocahontas. That’d be even more humiliating for him.
@@OpticalSorcererIt's kinda just Hamlet with lions. Honestly, I'm the opposite. Humans don't really click with me, so Xenofiction like Lion King tends to be my preference.
My fiance is native (mohawk) and while not from the actual woman's tribe she does know the story and real events. She treats it as a standalone movie with just coincidental names as they dont look or act like their real life counterparts. She also thought the movie would be MUCH better if John and Pocahontas didn't speak each others language throughout the movie and fell in love through their actions as they spent time together
I just feel like if they had found a way to merge the best parts of Pocahontas and its sequel they really would have had something special, possibly even BatB level. New World is divisive among fans but I really like what it brings to the table in terms of expanding on Pocahontas' character by making her more relatable and inquisitive. Her parting with Nakoma is genuinely gut wrenching (more so than even the ending of the original film) and her chemistry with John Rolfe comes off as much more real to me, and showing her quietly falling out of love with John Smith who at the end reveals himself to be a little self-centered is such a bold choice for a kids film. They even found a way to make Ratcliffe cool for crying out loud. New World's budget was obviously much lower than its predecessor's and so it doesn't come off as the same scale, though. I really feel like between the two there was something great in there that was never really tapped into
It should be read as a compliment that Pocahontas' biggest problem is not the historical accuracy part but that it had so many interesting characters given little or nothing to do. Nakoma, Kockuum, Thomas, Powhatan, could have elevated the film by giving it more complexity but they had to center the film on two static characters who do nothing but talk about how they've changed or developed but have they really? But they were trying to make a historical epic without offending anyone and in the process wouldn't allow themselves to have fun making it and that's why it didn't connect with people
I really enjoyed her chemistry with John Rolfe more because despite being sexist (which is still an issue), he saw her as human. Being a diplomat, he is the perfect guy for Pocahontas, given his knowledge of things as well as his travels--plus I enjoy how his easily flustered personality compliments her confident one. But the story was of lesser quality, so most fans ignore it. Ideally, I imagine Pocahontas' love interest having Rolfe's intellect and tact with Smith's bravery and thirst for adventure. I'd also love if they used John Smith's concept art with his red hair and black shirt.
@@abrahamaytemo That's usually how it works with films about people from different worlds; the romance and conflict is put at the forefront. The characters were great, but their main roles were reacting to the romance and the conflict.
I wasn't even allowed to watch this movie as a kid because of how they twisted and sugar coated history. I did eventually see it, but I dont think I was missing out. The way they use actual historical figures, and an actual culture is just so gross to me, the only thing I like about this movie is Colors of the Wind, which I like to enjoy as its own thing.
@@eeveefennecfox So disliking one, single Disney movie, because it misrepresents and fantasies a real culture, and sugar coats / changes history in some real awkward ways, all for the sake of profit, means that I hate cartoons. Are you 10? Grow up.
As an adult, I know this movie basically took a kid, made her appear older and set her out to the world to a man named John, not once but twice and will never be touched again by Disney. However she was there during a time of turbulence in my childhood where my parents were separated and having been moved to a new city. Yes its pretty visually and had great songs (the ones not racist) and actually had merchandise at the time but less now. Sometimes its not the greatest works of art we may latch onto when we need it but a work of art at the right place and right time. Especially at the ending where they kind of both went their separate ways. Its not a traditional happily ever after but some faint idea they would meet again. (Until they did in Journey to a new world and at the time I loved and hated it)
@@rp2235RP That is true that's it merely calling them savages with context of not understanding one another but there's also the line "dirty redskin devils" which can be taken out of context and cause huge internet drama that Disney does not want. (Also possibly deleting the whole song if they do a live action to avoid said drama)
I didn't saw much of Pocahontas as a little kid. I didn't know what it was based on but something felt uncomfortably wrong as if they twisted a real serious non-family friendly historical event. I wasn't a native American myself and I didn't know much about history since I was around 5 but I could feel something's very off about it that I don't like other than it was boring and scary and often slept when seeing it on TV. I mean I enjoyed Prince of Egypt and Notre Dame watching them alone as a toddler even though I found them too dark, deep, intense and scary maybe because I love the beautiful visuals and songs. But I never get Pocahontas... I'm European and all I knew about the native Americans was that they got massacred by European colonists when I was a little kid which gave me the wrong impression that they are died off like the extinct mammoth which made me sad and I never heard that native Americans are still alive and well today until my pre-teens years although in lesser quantity. I rarely seen any native Americans on modern media at all other than modern actors doing the stereotypical red face which don't look legit and the modern native Americans that do show up don't specify that they are native Americans as they look like any other people in modern society.
@BBWahoo Oh my- As someone who researches Nazi's, that sentence gave me a damn stroke. I can't even look at a photo of Goebbels without feeling uncomfortable and that just made me die inside, props for that.
I have to say, native americans were incredibly violent towards each other's tribes. I'm not a fan of villainizing only the colonists when these tribes were scalping each other
@@nohomo4774 They were all different folks, with their own cultures and, of course, their own animosities, they had war with each other, they killed other native people. I'm saying that because you're missing completely the point. When people say "colonialism is bad," they aren't saying that because native people live in an absolutely perfect utopia and do no wrong. They're saying that because people from another land appeared in the native american's continent (where they have lived for thousands of years), massacred them, striped them of their culture and rights, treating them as sub-human. These actions lasted hundreds of years and have very clear consequences in the present days. It's just ignorant to make a comparison, honestly.
It’s sad because the animation and the songs are very good, and if they didn’t use names of real people, the movie would be at least average and wouldn’t be shit on as much. I always felt like Brother Bear did the Native American thing a bit better and I remember it more fondly. Yes, it does have flaws, but idc it’s a very good and underrated in my opinion
I liked Pocahontas as a child . I thought it was a cozy love story. I didn’t know about the real history of Pocahontas until I was an adult. I have seen the sequel once but I didn’t like it. Now I actually still like the first one better even though the movie has it problems. 🙂
I think we can agree “Colors of the Wind” at least has aged well and its message is still very poignant and relevant today. Heck, I feel like the song is more relevant than “You’ve Got a Friend In Me”, which came from another animated film released the same year as Pocahontas. “Colors of the Wind” teaches everyone to not view certain ethnicities as the stereotypes they’re often labeled with and to explore their cultures and learn from them, which, during the time of the Black Lives Matter movement and the current discrimination of African Americans, even people of different sexualities like lesbians, gays, and trans, is definitely needed, where compared to “You’ve Got a Friend In Me”, it just sounds like your typical friendship song and has the same messages you’d find in any other friendship song. So “Colors of the Wind” is definitely the superior song and is still great to listen to in isolation from the film.
i watched Pocahontas for the first time in years last week and the movie does have strong points of having good visuals and great songs like Colors of the Wind but the historical inaccuracies and its mediocre plot bring it down a ton as well as having a boring villain in Governor Ratcliffe.
They just needed to change the names marketed as fiction. Because it was a gorgeous movie, and the songs are some of the most meaningful songs Alan Menken has wrote.
And what's weird is that in previous production, the animals talked and etc. I just feel like it's very weird how they really tried to say this was a portrayal of a real person. Especially a person who had such a complicated and serious situation, it's not meant for a fairy tale. Just keep all of the characters fictional.
@@BratzRockAngels right kinda like what they did with Titanic. There were real people and the events of the titanic were real. But Rose and Jack are fictional characters. Coulda done something like that
The Fact that it romanticizes a relation ship between Pocahontas and John Smith is already bad, John Smith was in his late 20's meanwhile Pocahontas was 11
...Honestly Pocahontas and her friend Nakoma had a more interesting relationship/storyline than Pocahontas and John Smith... Like two friends, Pocahontas is an idiot, Nakoma tries to stop her from being an idiot and gets the chief involved which sets off a huge chain of events that ends up with her secret love being killed and Pocahontas' love also almost being killed.....way more interesting to me even as a kid than John and Pocahontas prancing around in nature.
I watched Pocahontas as a kid and loved it and still do. Tbh i don't care about the movie being historically inaccurate, I view it like i view all Disney films as fiction.
Me neither. In fact, it's pretty much the best way to promote acceptance towards Native Americans and their cultures. And you're hearing that from someone who's 1/4 Native American like his dad.
I get your point, but the thing a lot of teens and 20's lack is imagination. It didn't have to be historically correct, us 80's and 90's kids just wanted good animation, a good soundtrack, and a good story. I feel like when people do deep dives, they forget it's just a movie. None of it is real. As long as the kids were entertained, that's all that matters.....
But even if it wasn’t historically accurate, it’s weird to romanticise a adult and a child relationship. As well as make a love story between a coloniser
Despite this movie being very problematic, the music and animation are well done. “Colors of the Wind” & “Just around the riverband” are some of the best Disney songs ever
in norway pocahontas has become a generational sensation and phenomenon because of the amazing video you can find on youtube called "pocahontas dubben" which is some dudes who made a funny norwegian dub of john smith and pocahontas getting to know each other and the colors of the wind song. all the time i see scenes from that song, i just quote the pocahontas dubben. and alot of people in norway does too.
Pocahontas’ face (among everyone else’s in this movie) was just not very expressive…I know the intention was to make it more realistic looking, but the emotion is completely gone…like compare any of her facial expressions to that of Ariel’s…Ariel may be look a lot more cartoony, but her facial expressions are a lot more human ironically enough
The scary thing is my parents (and I as a child) used to think this was good representation of Native American cultures (which is ridiculous in so many ways)
It is indeed good representation of Native American culture because it ditched the original story and focused on the culture of the Powhatans. And that's coming from someone who's 1/4 Native American like his dad. Pocahontas is indeed a masterpiece worth a better reputation.
@@Thomasmemoryscentral well if they have to do a remake they have to be historically accurate meaning portraying Pocahontas as her actual age (10 years old), actually show the tension between the settlers and native Americans and show that Pocahontas was forced to convert into Christianity and married off to John Rolfe.
I remember this being my first movie ever , and being entranced. And I barely remember anything about it other than the musical numbers. It was basically Frozen , if it took fewer risks that pissed people off. Sure you only know it's hit song , but that's the only part worth remembering.
When my boss's grand-kid was at work, this was the only thing that could hold the kid's attention. (The kid was under a year old at the time. He had favorite songs and he liked the music. But he could've cared less about the story.) I ended up watching the movie with him/playing with him. And... yeah is is probably the one renaissance movie that aged the worst. The instrumental arrangements and illustration are gorgeous. I hate that it's tied to a story like this.
No wonder Disney refused to do a live-action remake of this movie. Also FUN FACT: The animals were supposed to talk, and Pocahontas was supposed to have a turkey sidekick named Redfeather instead of Meeko. And he would have been voiced by none other than the late great John Candy ! Sadly, due to his passing in 1994, his character was removed and all the animals remained silent.
I've always found it weird how all Radcliffe wanted was to dig for gold when there were forests full of trees, which were in high demand in England back then. He could have became rich by building a lumberyard instead of sending his settlers on a fruitless mission to mine for gold that wasn't there.
Prob cause it was the most “market research” movie of the Renaissance era….. Native American influence films were super popular in the early 90’s… which gave the opportunity to the team behind The Lion King a chance to shine…..
Fun fact: Pocahontas is designed after the Barbie Doll. It's cheaper to use a mold that already exists, and the company planned to use the Barbie Doll mold for Pocahontas merchandise. They just had to change the die in the plastic and change "the doll's" face. Have you noticed the Pocahontas merchandise of the time looked suspiciously familiar?
Pocahontas is the best film Disney ever made. You didn't make a single argument just keep saying this was bland or boring or talking about the real story which is not the one this movie is portraying, it never wanted to be the real story and never should have. Pocahontas is just perfect on it's own as a Disney film, just like Anastasia is a perfect animated film on it's own despite it's historical inaccuracies. And the crappy sequel doesn't exist. We all agreed long time ago that that stupid movie isn't canon. and we don't care about it.
Even worse is than anastasia is the inaccurate movie not pocahontas Pocahontas has on it's poster An American Legend Comes to Life Whereas Anastasia had on it's poster "Discover the adventure behind the greatest mystery of our time" which is more scorning to history than pocahontas's legend based intent. Also pocahontas's real name is Matoaka and pocahontas is a terrible name meaning "ill behaved child" One of the few critics who rightly reviewed both movies is Gene Siskel mentioning the inaccuracy of Anastasia and understanding that Pocahontas movie is a legend
I can only disagree on several points, the main one being historical inaccuracies - If we're going down that route, basically all of Disneys movies are inaccurate across the board, whether looking at the sad story of Anastasia or something like Pocahontas - It's not meant to reflect the history because our history as humans is terrible - Beauty and the beast would have ended *very* differently if it was remotely accurate to its historical time-period. I didn't watch it as a child for its accuracy, I watched it to be entertained and sent to 'another world' for a short time, a place where you *can* paint with all the colours of the wind. Was Pocahontas their strongest film? No, but I do think it's better than it's being given credit for here, both in terms of story and of course, art. Many of the characters *are* one dimensional, but they don't exactly need a tonne of depth in a kids movie . . The bad guy is bad because he is bad is good enough for like ten year old me, I didnt necessarily need to know that say, Frollo was thirsting hard after Esmerelda, I was pretty done with him when he was killing people in the streets and trying to throw babies into wells. TLDR: Pocahontas is better than people give credit for, just because they don't like its alternative-fictional take on a historical event. Especially when considered from the perspective of someone that wouldn't even know the name or event at all without the movie.
See I can see why you say that, but first Anastasia was not made from Disney, it was made from fox. Second the movie Anastasia was brought up during a time before we know that she did not survive. Then Pocahontas was a story between an ADULT and CHILD I think it’s inheritely creepy to romanticise even if they are fiction in the new movie.
@@hiim4212 I'm not sure what it being 20th century fox has to do with anything when it comes to the main point, so irrelevant. Sure, that one example is not *strictly* Disney. We definitely knew by 1997 that the 17 year old girl and her family was murdered or forced to flee into exile. We knew by 1926. And while 17 is not exactly a child, that's still pretty messed up. I also mentioned several other things aside from Anastasia to illustrate my point about real history being mostly irrelevant to childrens fiction. Could they have picked a better event to portay, or made up one entirely? Sure, I agree. I did also mention however, I would never have even heard the name or the event without the movie though, which I better understood as an adult, than a child just watching an interesting movie.
I will always say that the music and the backgrounds are what make this movie, like the orchestra is so pretty and the sweeping landscapes of North American forests have only really been done here and not really again and it’s a shame that the story is just so eh
I've always had on and off feelings about Pocahontas. I don't hate it, there are elements I like. Certain characters and visual/musical elements. And while the message is muddled with the inaccuracies, its still an important message to me about peace and love. While Pocahontas and John Smith were the first interracial Disney animated couple, they aren't the best example because of the historical inaccuracies. Luckily the next film had a better interracial couple with Esmeralda and Phoebus in The Hunchback of Notre Dame. Speaking of which, I feel that The Hunchback of Notre Dame is the better example of what Pocahontas could've been. Based on a serious source and all. But Hunchback could get away with all its changes because its fiction. If Pocahontas didn't add the romance and stayed true her age in 1607, it could've been better here and there
It’s ironic because I really liked it as a kid, but since I was living in Europe, we are not aware of the true story of Pocahontas. And it was ironic that they tried to make this the best movie ever while the side project, The Lion King would be considered the greatest animated movie ever.
Everybody can say what they want about Pocahontas, but personally I am in love with John Smith. Especially when he’s just staring at Grandmother Willow in that close up shot at 10:14
Speaking of the emphasis on trees this film is drilling into our heads, the amount of animation this was done to make this film happen CAME FROM TREES.
I loved this movie and always will it worked for me it connected me to Nature and so much kind things that i don't think any other Disney princess Could do.
Oscars and the box office are not an indicator of quality. Despite its flaws, The Hunchback is still a better movie. It has a better protagonist and a better antagonist. Even the issue of racism is better shown there, because it is more ideological racism.
@@saskia3691 An Academy Award is recognized “excellence for artistic & technical merit for the film industry”. Those awarded have reached the pinnacle of their respected profession. Pocahontas was awarded🏆Hunchback was not😕
@@FabledRomance Pocahontas and The Hunchback had the same composer. The Hunchback was simply too dark for children and caused controversy for its too adult plot, which is why many parents did not go to the cinema to see this film with their children - fuel to the fire was added by the fact that the advertising campaign for this film focused on gargoyles and colorful colors, which was confusing. Pocahontas, even when it touched on mature threads, was still family friendly. Hunchback no. It was a risky project, so it wasn't that much of a success (although it still paid off, unlike Atlantis or Treasure Planet). Don't get me wrong, I really love Pocahontas movie and I'm not saying it didn't deserve the awards it got. But in my opinion, The Hunchback is better and the awards don't have to prove it.
Ralph Breaks the Internet almost won the "Best Animated Feature" at the Academy Awards Hollywood Ratings ain't worth anything. Hunchback of Notre Dame is appreciated and loved today, meanwhile Disney is intentionally trying to forget Pocahontas. Hmm, I wonder why?
as a child, I was never aware that Pocahontas was a historical figure. I was in my teens when I learned that she was based off of a real person. Then the internet happened, then I read more, then my childhood was ruined. Though personally, Pocahontas is still one of the films from the renaissance that I still go back to from time to time. The music played a big part in the magic of the film.
I think I was about 5/6 years old when Pocahontas came out. Absolutely loved it at the time and learned a lot from the main lead. But as an adult it's definitely flawed and problematic overall. Strangely I always knew the historical version was completely separate and didn't see much issue. This film would have had a big backlash if released today. Just from the historical academic community alone (similar to Jada Smith's Cleopatra).The voice actress of Pocahontas is also pretty critical of this film.
It had great animation, music, characters, and themes. It's too bad Disney did historical fiction instead of a 100% original, fantasy story inspired by colonialism (similar to ATLA).
It also doesn't do well at the fact that it ships John Smith and Pocahontas who in real life He was a man in his late 20's meanwhile Pocahontas was a child
@@justsomeguywholovesberserk6375 Yeah, removing any histotical events/characters would've been the best route for this. IDK how this gets all the heat but "The New World" doesn't, though; they also have her with him in that film.
The actual story of Jamestown is also pretty interesting too (though it's not a happy ending) and they had a chance to really dive deeper into Native American culture with the film. Instead they did this bland shit
@@pisscow6395 Fun Fact: Disney and Jeffrey Katzenberg had low expectations for the Lion King, but they expected Pocahontas to win best Picture😂😂😂. Why because Beauty and the Beast was nominated for Best Picture..
It's sad because Native American girls feel like they have no one else to feel represented by and I fear we'll probably never get a proper Native American Princess unless we fight for it. Also I blame this movie for the main reason why Pocahontas is being popularized as a slur white people use to discriminate against Native America women. And the sugar coating of Colonialization in the sequel will always make my blood boil, the fact that Disney made a sequel to this abomination at all tells me they don't care if they butcher entire races and cultures or not. Not surprising since we got whatever the hell that was in the first Peter Pan. But holy crap it feels like their discrimination against Native Americans get worse every year.
Loll get over yourselves you woke snowflake. Representation doesn’t matter. That’s just pure identity politics. Also the historical accuracy thing is a NON ISSUE. As long as the story, character, and animation is well done, that’s all that matters. Now I do think Pocahontas is the least good Disney film of the Disney Renaissance, but I still like it, and I do not see anything morally or ethically wrong with it. If I had kids, I’d personally prefer to show them Pocahontas than degenerative groomer garbage like Turning Red or Strange World.
I don't hate Pocahontas because it has a good message, great animation, and a nice soundtrack. While I don't really understand why they took a real story and mushed it to fit the narrative in this movie, I still, at the very least, respect was Disney was trying to do.
Honestly, I think if there's one movie that could benefit from a live action, it's gotta be Pocahontas. Just about everything in the movie is based in reality, there's more readily available information about Pocahontas/Matoaka then there probably was in the mid 90s, and a longer movie (close to 2 hours) would help develop the plot and characters better. I honestly think that there are alot of salvagable moments from Pocahontas that can be used for the grounds of a remake. Call me whatever you want, but I think it's totally doable.
Almost nothing in the movie is based on reality. And that's an unfortunate side effect of this movie. It honestly has some of the most beautiful music and animation of any Disney film. If it just wasn't disrespectful to the real Pocahontas's life, it would be a classic.
@blinkowarner3117 I didn't mean how much the story aligns with reality. I mean how much of the setting in the movie is based in reality (ships, muskets, trees, plants, people,). I know the story itself is almost a complete fabrication of what really happened, and in some ways it seems off-putting and perhaps disrespectful, but in other ways it shows perhaps how it should have happened (Pocahontas refuses to go with John Smith to England, the English realize they shouldn't be destroying the New World and its people). Honestly, the biggest gripe I have is how submissive and trusting Pocahontas seemed of John Smith. I'd think he'd have to serve her a lot more to gain her trust instead of just being a chiseled blonde-haired and blue-eyed Englishman.
I highly doubt they'll do a live-action remake since Pocahontas wasn't really that popular and not to mention all the bad criticisms it received from several people.
They couldve done this by not using Pocahontas, who was a pre-pubesent child, and use a fictional woman. Although it kinsa underplayed the horrors of colonisim during that time they couldve made it less bad.
Just occurred to me the whole 'his wound is so bad he has to return to England to get treated' excuse doesn't make sense, when the voyage takes probably about 2-4 months, depending on weather and ship-model. He'll either be dead or healed on his own by the time they arrive 🙄
Whatever anyone says, I still want to give Disney credit for this movie - trying to make an animated family movie that also had a serious message and dealt with our collective history was a worthy goal, even if they didn't succeed with it, and I wish more American animations studios would try it.
Seriously Disney could’ve told stories about Hansel and Gretel or red riding hood or Rumpel still skin or the little match girl or Three little bears, or Goldilocks, or Jack and the beanstalk Lindstedt, Disney made Pocahontas. I was actually cheering for Kocohum. .
As a kid at the time I wanted to see every Disney movie in cinema, except this one 😂 Even as a kid this movie just simply did not look fun to me at all 🤷♀️
I didn't know this movie failed,when I was a kid,I must've watched this a billion times,whenever pochontas sings the backgrounds are so stunning,there's no way disney can recapture those moments with live action,it's just impossible to get those beautiful colors that only animation can provide,if they ever try a remake of this movie,I dare them to capture the beatiful backgrounds again,bet they can't
Fair enough, I always hated it as a kid because I'm Native American and the story was just...ick. but I knew about the real Pocahontas before I even saw the movie
Pocahontas was one of the most amazing films visually. Story...eh. it's obvious rewriting history for the white appetite. I firmly believe had they not named it Pocahontas (based on actual history events) the film would have thrived. It could have been Disney's foray into animated dramas.
I wonder why the same controversy isnt around the Film Anastasia. Anastasia like Pocahontas Was a real person who met a terrible fate being shot to death at age 17 along with her whole family. Or is there outrage and I missed it ?
I honestly don’t understand why people get so caught up about historical accuracy. If a spark of history inspired great art, who cares?! Even as a kid I understood that it was a MOVIE and that to get the facts, I would have to read a history book. No-one revises for a history exam by watching movies! I spent my childhood reading so much more about that time in history BECAUSE of the movie. The beauty of the movie and the music make it an actual masterpiece.
I disagree here. Regardless of historical accuracy, it would have still been great if the characters were more interesting, and they just aren’t. The movie is still boring and the one lacking in all the magic of the Renaissance era. It is no where near a masterpiece.
@@captainmarvelwilson508 Taste really is different! I rewatched this recently, wondering if it was just nostalgia that made me hold it in such high esteem. But no, as far as I’m concerned, it’s perfection! Pocahontas’ free-spirited yet elegant character. Even the subtle animations on Meeko and Percy make them hilarious! Seriously, you didn’t crack a smile at Percy’s singing in Mine Mine Mine? Or have every hair on your body stand up during Colors of the Wind? 🤯
So finding gold was a priority for early James town that's actually part of the reason they strugled so badly that first year. They brought a bunch of people who were skilled miners and no where near enough farmers. Although that being said the movie still exaggerated how important it was to them over survival.
Long story short, what would kids and their parents more likely want to see in cinemas? a. A film about a literal Lion King based on Hamlet? Or b. A highly inaccurate romanticized fluff based on the dark history of colonialism? For those who answered b., I’m guessing you thought I was referring a. to that realistic remake, so I don’t blame you in that case.
A lot of people do like pochahontas. I don't understand it because I just do not find it to be entertaining, but to each their own. At least I can see some of pochahontas's appeal, like colors of the wind and the artistry of the animation itself...which sounds eerily similar to why many like frozen now that I think about itm
What do you think of the fun favorite side characters Nakoma and Wiggins? Because I think that the best of them all three is my favorite Grandma Willow.
It's just wild to me that a film which goes out of its way to be bland and overly-serious feels the need to lightly condemn Kokoum and position him as the love interest we're meant to root against for possessing those very same traits. The irony certainly isn't lost on me.
He called John Smith "One Of The Most Generic Basic English Names Ever!" finally someone who said what I have been saying for years and I don't bloody care if it's because he's historical🤣🤣🤣
