Pocahontas II: Why It Is Soooo Bad
Cast in your opinions of the second movie...
New Follow Forum Follow Topic
TangledEpicForever
I thought up this one. Why do you all think the animation was done badly? As for me, it seemed they just threw the movie toghter like they were in a big rush. They did not take the time like the first movie to make the animation look realstic. And the orginal charcters from the first movie, looks totaly different in the sequel. The missed up on Pocahontas at certain parts of the movie. In this sequel she looks younger than in the fitst movie, why was that? And they also missed up John Smith as well, even though he was'nt in through the whole movie. They did the same to Meeko,Flit,Percy,Nakoma,Chief Powhatan, and Grandmother Willow. And last but not least the background looked way to fake then in the first movie.
7/13/2007 #1
NightOfAThousandDreams
I totally agree!!!! In the first movie, the scenery was beautifully done. It was almost as if I was actually in the movie. The waterfalls, the forest... And, the people actually look real!! In the second movie, it looked as if they had just drawn everything in a hurry. Pocahontas' eyes look more cartoonish, and where is her spirit? Also, John looks chubbier. Also, the people in there looked as if they were drawn to be in a Looney Toones show.
8/15/2007 #2
BreatheMeDeep
I found the animation to be the same. Although I agree that the first movie's scenery was very beautiful and quite 'magical,' I don't think that necessarily means the second one was bad. It's a new setting, it's London...it'd be weird of there were waterfalls and leaves swirling around in the narrow streets.
3/8/2008 #3
doodlegirll

In my opinion, looking back, it also seems like they tried just a little too hard to make it look a little more like 3D and less like the 2D Disney has always been so famous for (i.e. look at the water in the beginning when the ship is coming into harbor at Jamestown. It looks like melted plastic!)

I agree. It's like they randomly decided one day, "hey, we need to make the stupid critics happy, so we need to make this. You make a script, you draw it up, and I'll put the publicity together!" and it's like they seriously handed the animation and script writing to random strangers on the street. I can totally see a newspaper ad in the classifieds or something saying "WANTED: A random person with no talent who thinks they can write a good Pocahontas 2 script for Disney! Also needed: random animator." It was almost like they gave the task to people who didn't know these characters at all. The animators that worked on the first movie truly knew Pocahontas and John; they knew exactly how they would react in certain situations, and how they would act around each other. As stated in the "Making of If I Never Knew You" featurette on the 10th anniversary DVD, "...these animators truly knew these characters. They knew how to put that little glint in the eye..." I believe in my heart that no one but the original animators could have done as good a job.

As a writers, we, too, have to know our characters, front and back. We have to know their personalities; every single thing about them: their likes and dislikes, their dreams and their fears. It's a part of being the writer. It's the same way with an animator assigned to a particular character. By knowing, truly knowing, their characters, the animators are able to add little details that would otherwise be overlooked, and physiologically things, too, like how they walk compared to their personalities, how they talk, how they handle stress, etc. That's just how it is.

And yes, I agree, Pocahontas looks younger in this movie. If you also notice, in the first movie, her hair was outlined in blue hues. In this movie, it's red. It's almost like they're trying to make her, I don't know...darker? It's like they were trying to make her less like the Pocahontas we all know and love and turn her into someone who could fall for someone as egotistical as ROLFE. I mean, our Pocahontas would never even give a guy like that a second glance. I mean, come on, remember Kocoum?! Geez!

What I really dislike about this movie is the fact that they murdered the characters, Pocahontas especially. They made her a little more callous, and a bit more snippy. They made her question herself, when the first movie showed that Pocahontas was not someone who needed to question herself. She knew who she was, and she knew what was right, thus leading her to saving John's life. It's as simple as that.

I can only hope that Disney has realized their mistake, and regret what they have done, as it seems it's much too late to correct the wrong they have done so many people.

~Robin

9/19/2008 #4
doodlegirll

But look at the leaves that represent Pocahontas's mother, though. In the first movie, they're brightly colored with golds and pinks and reds. In the second movie, it's almost as if they're dead with browns and dark reds and tans. It's almost as if they were symbolizing Pocahontas's broken spirit...

~Robi

9/19/2008 #5
katalina0525

Hello, I've been Pochontas obsessed ever since the day I saw it in the theatre (which was when I was like, 4, lol). Yes, I also disliked the second movie very much, and I feel the need to add something here. The difference in animation was the first thing I noticed as well. I have found that Disney often does that with their sequals; they throw it all together so that it looks horrible. (Look at Mulan II, The Little Mermaid II; same deal) Actually, I think the word I'm looking for is "cheap". The animation looked cheap, and they included almost no detail or scenery. That was part of what made the first movie so magical. The trees, the water, the leaves...everything was just drawn so detailed to the point where it almost looked real. The second movie does not have that AT ALL.

And about Rolfe. I dont care if Pocahontas really married him in real life. She BELONGS with Jonh Smith! Lol now if they would've put more of an effort into making the audience hate him, then maybe I would be ok with Rolfe. But if you ask me they did absolutely nothing to make me hate Smith. I still like him so much better. Rolfe is just too stuck up to me. Lol and he's ugly.

In my opinion, overall, they should have just left the first movie alone.

12/3/2008 #6
NightOfAThousandDreams

but you know disney...make crappy sequals in order to bring in the money! :)

3/9/2009 #7
J'aime ma vie

I agree with you. Completley. I felt like the people who made the cheapquel hadn't seen the first movie at all, and they definitley didn't know the characters - the writing showed that. Since when does John Smith speak in corny puns and tacky one-liners? How is he the proud, swashbuckling sailor he was at the beginning of the original movie, and why does it seem that his experiences in Virginia and his time with Pocahontas had NO influence on him whatsoever? How does he NOT want to help Pocahontas when she was more than willing to die for him? Why is he such a j*** who only lives for adventure and glory? They screwed his character up horribly in this movie. I think they ruined his character beyond recognition, and that it was even worse than the character treatment Pocahontas got, even though her's was pretty bad, too. Like you said, they made her cynical and bitter, always questioning herself, letting people walk all over her and think for her. The things she says and does in the cheapquel are the very things that she'd NEVER do. Obviously the writers and animators didn't know the characters like the ones who worked on the first movie. It was devastating to see Pocahontas and John Smith, and a beautiful, true, love, ruined by the cheapquel. I also agree that Pocahontas NEVER would've fallen for John Rolfe. She had no interest in Kocoum, who is basically the Native American John Rolfe! She wouldn't have given him a second glance!

Also, Powhatan: he was only in the movie for five minutes, but since when is he used for comic relief!?! That's not the Powhatan I know - his character was murdered, too, going from the wise, fatherly chief willing to do anything to help his people to the comic relief. FAIL. Even Ratcliffe's character was murdered somewhat - the original movie made it clear that the real villian was the prejudice between the two peoples. Even though Ratcliffe was a bit of a villian, the writers and animators of the original movie still humanized him; he was simply someone who didn't want the people at court hating him anymore, someone who wanted to prove himself no matter what the cost was - he was basically human, even though he was a fraud, even though he was self-absorbed, even and wanted to resort to cruel tactics to get his way, the writers and animators still made it clear that he was somewhat human. In the second movie, he's completley demonized, and all the characteristics that made him human are completley gone. And I know I've said this before, but this is the one other thing aside from the destruction of the Pocahontas and John Smith love story that makes me hate the cheapquel even more: WHY was Ratcliffe even in the cheapquel, anyway? Surely John Smith and the other Jamestown settlers would've said SOMETHING about their experiences at Jamestown and about how Ratcliffe was an incapable govenor. And with all those witnesses testifying against him, who WOULDN'T believe them? I just don't buy that they would've kept silent about that. At all.

I also agree that the animation was horrible. The scenes all looked like pages from a coloring book and the colors were very dull. On some parts, John Smith's face is completley unrecognizable; they made him look like a young, prepubescent teenage boy, and nothing like the handsome, grown up capitan from the first movie. Also, on some parts, his face is just two dots and a line - complete laziness on the part of the animators. The expressions and emotions that were beautifully portrayed on the character's faces in the first movie are gone too. They show no emotion in the cheapquel; like you said, the glint in their eyes, the very thing that made each character so distinct, is gone. Additionally, with the first movie, the animators did research on how to animate the Native Americans - obviously, no research was done here, you can tell, because all the Indians, with the exception of Pocahontas, wear those stupid headband things with the feathers sticking out of them. Clearly, the animators just got lazy, and you can see it in the scenes where John Rolfe's shirt sleeves blend in with the snow. FAIL.

As for them righting this monstrosity, no more Disney cheapquels are being made. The division of DisneyToon that made the cheapquels was shut down in August 2007, so it's good that no more cheapquels will be made. However, it seems like Disney is trying to pretend that they don't exist. For example, you can find the original Disney movies in the store, but you can only buy the cheapquels online, and the Disney store online only sells a few of them. It's like they FINALLY realized, "Oh, we screwed up, people don't like these movies, so let's chuck them all into the Disney Vault and only make them available via the Internet!" Also, after doing some reading, I'm pretty sure that the cheapquels aren't considered canonical, as DisneyToon is a completley separate company from Walt Disney Pictures - the company that makes the animated movies in the Walt Disney canon, and only two sequels (The Rescuers Down Under and Fantasia 2000) are apart of the Disney canon. Also, the Disney Princess line acknowledges Pocahontas and John Smith as the couple and completley ignore John Rolfe, and just look at the Disney store, when you go to the Disney parks, on the Disney Cruise Ships - they NEVER reference the cheapquels or pay homage to them, they only do that to the original movies, not just becuase people hate the cheapquels, but because they aren't canonical.

So even though a Pocahontas III isn't going to be made where they reunite Pocahontas and John Smith, I think Disney is reversing their mistake with the cheapquels by shutting down DisneyToon, shoving all the cheapquels into the Disney Vault, and by recognizing that the cheapquels aren't canonical and that they shouldn't be.

6/30/2009 #8
An Unknown Foreign Beauty

I really hate Pocahontas 2 movie. I agree that they killed the story. I hate Rolfe in funny dress & ponytail. Pocahontas lost her real self too. I really hate the animation . They all were acting like robots without any reality & emotions. I thaink Disney should make another Pocahontas 2 to correct their mistakes. They should throw away their horrible movie.

5/26/2010 #9
An Unknown Foreign Beauty

I really agree with you that Disney should stop making harrible sequels to hurt the real movie fans.

5/26/2010 #10
Mamoru4ever

I was 4 years old when Pocahontas came out and I have always loved this movie, I'm a product of an interracial couple so I the themes in Pocahontas hit me on a more personal level and the love between John Smith and Pocahontas is still one of the most romantic couplings that I have ever seen because sure they don't end up together at the end but when you watch the ending and see them wave goodbye to each other, you have some idea that they will one day see each other again giving you the hope that they are forever.

When I first saw the sequel I was seven and it made me think that Pocahontas was a s*** (even though I didn't know the word for it until much later). What was Disney thinking? If they wanted to go all historically accurate then they should have been worried about the 1st movie. The only thing that Pocahontas II is accurate about is that she goes to England and marries John Rolfe (not necessarily in that order), the fashion were a cross between the 17th and 18th centuries in most parts, Queen Anne would have never been at the side of King James at all during Parliament or as an equal to be listened to, London is swampy and dirty in that time period but the movie portrays it as a beautiful thriving village with a river that is so clear you can see your reflection in it. The only thing that Disney just proved with this sequel was that it was more inaccurate than the first and that there are ways that the fans can be annoyed

9/5/2010 #11
Mamoru4ever

I was 4 years old when Pocahontas came out and I have always loved this movie, I'm a product of an interracial couple so I the themes in Pocahontas hit me on a more personal level and the love between John Smith and Pocahontas is still one of the most romantic couplings that I have ever seen because sure they don't end up together at the end but when you watch the ending and see them wave goodbye to each other, you have some idea that they will one day see each other again giving you the hope that they are forever.

When I first saw the sequel I was seven and it made me think that Pocahontas was a s*** (even though I didn't know the word for it until much later). What was Disney thinking? If they wanted to go all historically accurate then they should have been worried about the 1st movie. The only thing that Pocahontas II is accurate about is that she goes to England and marries John Rolfe (not necessarily in that order), the fashion were a cross between the 17th and 18th centuries in most parts, Queen Anne would have never been at the side of King James at all during Parliament or as an equal to be listened to, London is swampy and dirty in that time period but the movie portrays it as a beautiful thriving village with a river that is so clear you can see your reflection in it. The only thing that Disney just proved with this sequel was that it was more inaccurate than the first and that there are ways that the fans can be annoyed

9/5/2010 #12
psychic chick

Hi I really like Pocahontas and hate hate hate Pocahontas 2. And I think they made Pocahontas a little OOC. I hate how she dumped John Smith and chose John Rolfe (I think John Rolfe is ugly) and they try to make John Smith act like a j*** so the audience will hate him. And I liked how Percy and Mekoo kept fighting in Pocahontas.

7/19/2011 #13
NitemarWalker

I don't agree I enjoyed the movie quite a lot my favorite part is the ending I love Rolph and don't get why so many ppl bash him

9/7/2013 #14
Forum Moderators: NightOfAThousandDreams
Rules:
  • Forums are not to be used to post stories.
  • All forum posts must be suitable for teens.
  • The owner and moderators of this forum are solely responsible for the content posted within this area.
  • All forum abuse must be reported to the moderators.
Membership Length: 2+ years 1 year 6+ months 1 month 2+ weeks new member