detested the movie from the get-go. i'm steadily liking it more but still not crazy about it. i can stand when a movie has plotholes, or it plays it safe, but PATF does both and that's a lethal combination for me.

I was crazy over it, but then realized it kind of sucked and moved on

Not a fan of TPATF. They killed off the only character I loved in this movie.

I'll always have a soft spot for this movie. I was the movie that got me into Disney. I didn't like it the first time around, but I re-watched it and I went crazy for it.
I watched it pretty much every day, and showed all of my friends who hadn't seen it yet.
Good times, good times. I watched it again yesterday for the first time in a long time (or should I say, in forever?) and it was magical. I don't even mind the plot holes.

I've never been into it.

Yeah, I had my phase of adoring it and obsessing over it once it first came out. Then I disliked it, then I liked it again.

I kinda have this "phase" thing with almost every new Disney movie though. All of them I'll like at first, but then I'll watch them again and notice their flaws.

I still love the movie, but I'm not as crazy about it as I was.

I was crazy about it before it came out... until I actually watched it!

@princesslullaby Than why do you like Frozen? It plays it safe and has even more plot holes than The Princess and The Frog does.

Anyway, this movie is brilliant and I will always ADORE it!

@Kataralover- I don't think Frozen plays it safe. I think it thinks outside the box and takes creative risks.

Not really. It has things that have been done before. The only things is does is "surprise" everyone by making Hans evil. Sisterly love saving the day, which people says Disney hasn't done, has been done. They did that in Secret of The Wings. Heck, that movie is pretty similar to Frozen in some ways. An optimistic blue-eyed blonde that has a sister with white hair and snow powers, and thinks a lot with her heart. Boy, that's familiar. Plus, it's not the first time that the focus has been on sisters, we've seen that in Lilo and Stitch. I won't even mention the whole it having princesses in it because that's kind of typical for Disney. Frozen is very formumatic. Anna is basically a MUCH less developed and even more awkward version of Rapunzel. Elsa is basically just a non-complex and personality stricken version of Elphaba from Wicked, which figures because she's voiced by Idina Menzel. Sven is an unfunny and personality stricken version of Maximus. Kristoff is just a jerky, undeveloped, and unattractive version of Flynn.

The Princess and The Frog, in my opinion, took more risks than Frozen, not a lot, but more. It was gutsy to for one make the film a 2-D animated film, especially since computer animated films have been dominating the animation world since the Disney Renaissance ended. Unfortunately, that's mainly why it did so poorly, because a lot of people are prejudice against hand-drawn films and consider them to be kids stuff. But I digress. It has a new style for a Disney Princess film because it's the most modern that a Disney Princess film has ever been. It's set in the 1900's, not exactly completely modern, but it's still pretty modern for a Disney Princess movie. The time period and setting allows for some different visuals that the other Disney Princess films haven't used, such as cars, newspapers, and so forth. This, in my opinion, was pretty risky because people seem to prefer Disney films, especially princess ones, to be set in a time far, far away and a long time ago. Along with that, Tiana is the first black princess, just getting that little risky trivia out of the way, so I can point out others. It allowed the film to talk about how people during that time did have prejudice against them. In my writing class we were asked to give an example that involved either racism, sexism, or class discrimination, and I used the example where Tiana is told that "A little woman of her background would've had her hands full trying to run a big business like that." It doesn't go into too much detail because it is Disney and a fairy-tale. I think this movie, while it isn't one of the most risky Disney movies (definitely not on the same level as The Hunchback of Notre Dame), does take more risks than Frozen.

I'm not trying to force my opinion onto you, I'm just saying.

But Kataralover, those are all your opinions. You can't tell me "not really" like it's fact.
BTW, all of these things you're listing have been done before by movies. None of the movies/characters you're listing are original- Rapunze's character has been done a million times over. Elphabas has too. So has sisterly relationships in movies. NO movie is original. What makes a movie unique is figuring new and special ways to present it, which Frozen did. Elphaba was ostracized for different reasons than Elsa was. The sisterly relationship between Anna/Elsa is WAY different than Lilo/Stitch. You can't just say on the basis that Anna and Elsa are sisters that it's unoriginal because Lilo and Stitch did it first.
Is Ariel particularly original? No, a girl that wants to escape her life and accomplish her goal is not particularly original. There was a Little Mermaid movie before Disney's. But Disney used songs, score, their type of animation, a way of character developing Ariel and bringing her to life to make her unique.
I will admit that Anna is not a new character, but she has things about her that make her special. I am of the camp that find her more fleshed out than Rapunzel. Elsa, while not having a lot of character depth, is a pretty unique character for Disney. As I recall, Elphaba decided to take control of her powers and accept her "evilness". We don't see this with Elsa.
The traits that are 'original' in Princess and the Frog are all surface and setting traits, rather than plot or character uniqueness. To me, Princess and the Frog didn't take any real creative risks besides maybe the setting and having it in 2D or making Tiana black isn't a creative risk for Disney, it's just a risk.
Your opinions are not fact and neither are mine, but trying to name movies before Frozen that are more original will not work as a good argument because no modern movie is original. It's all been done before.
I will agree that it takes risks about sex/class/race, but it doesn't really touch on that too much at all. And touches on it very lightly when it could be outright talking about racism (and before you say Disney can't do that, take a look at HOND).

I'm not claiming my opinions as fact and if it seemed that way I apologize for that. In my opinion, Frozen doesn't really take creatives risks and I was just naming things that people said made Frozen different when it has been done before. And while you do have a good point about Elsa, I actually think she would have benefitted better by accepting herself as evil because her character and the movie is hurt by her not being the protagonist or the antagonist, which would have been a lot more interesting. I'm aware that a nothing is original anymore and I'm usually not nitpicky about it. However, with Frozen is doesn't really develop anything. The Princess and The Frog at least developed it's characters, even though I think Naveen could have been developed better. Neither one, in my opinion, took any creative risks. But Frozen definitely has more plotholes than The Princess and The Frog. You could argue that The Princess and The Frog took a creative risk with having VooDoo magic, especially since a bunch of crazed christians (I'm also a christian but I will admit there are some crazy ones) who complained about there being VooDoo magic. Frozen has a lot more flaws than The Princess and The Frog, even with the plotholes aside. The characters are not all that great (the only characters I like are Anna and Olaf), there is no character development, it's rushed, the romance is horrible, the ending and the climax are lackluster, and the comedy is really forced. Just my opinion.

I think PATF was a little offensive about Voodoo rather than creative. I think PATF's plotholes are much worse than Frozen, but that's my opinion. Yeah this just all comes down to opinion in some sense. What it sounds like to me is that you think in an aesthetic, setting, and inclusion sense, PATF is more creative. However, I focus on plot, story, and uniqueness of characters. A hard working black woman and a play boy prince to me is not a creative character. A girl who can't control her powers and suffers from anxiety/depression and her cooped up sister trying to rescue her is more creative to me.