Were Disney Movies Better In The 1990s? I SAY YES!

Since this is a topic about my personal feelings based off of examination of both the 90s and present Disney movies, it does not require any proof other than what I have observed and the pictures of the animation itself to show you what I see. This is a debate based off of my personal observation of Disney's newest movies VS 90s movies. My argument is that I do not believe the newest Disney movies are developed in a manner that is done as well as the 1990s movies. Note: I am not talking about movies before the 1990s such as 101 Dalmations and Jungle Book. I'm specifically talking about Disney's Renaissance, which was much better in my opinion than both pre-Renaissance and afterwards. Also, my argument was not about the SCENES being different from one another....my argument was that the ANIMATION had distinctions from one another. Meaning the way the cartoons were animated were distinctly different from one another. Look at the links above. These animated distinctions served to give the movie its own personal flare and emotion, setting the tone for its own movie. In other words the way Hercules was animated had its own distinct animated look in comparison to the way Tarzan was animated and Beauty and The Beast was animated. The picture you showed of Elsa and Anna feels like "reaching". If you honestly look at them, there is no STRONG distinction in the way they look besides their hair and clothes. They only have slight differences, which to me shows a lack of creativity on the animators part. Any time a person had to go through such great lengths to make arrows pointing out the differences....that means that the characters cannot be identified without closer examination. Which to me means that the characters were not that originally done. Ironically, their personalities are also too similar to be seen as distinct characters as well...to me this is a lack of creativity on the animators part. Either that or 3-D animators have not quite found a way to make characters distinctively different from one another like the 90s Renaissance has been able to do with 2-D animation. As far as Elsa's evolution, it didn't seem like she evolved over time. In the beginning, yes she closed herself off in her room as a child, etc but this was at the VERY BEGINNING of the movie. In most of the movie Elsa was in her ice castle. And then she suddenly realized out of the blue her love for her sister at the end. They hardly even rekindled their relationship throughout the movie. It felt more like a random change of heart than a transition. Elsa did not GRADUALLY change her heart towards Anna and her powers, she randomly finds these things out at the end of the movie. Anna only visited her one time to talk before being chased out. To be honest, Anna hardly had any interaction throughout the entire movie with her sister. There was hardly a sister story. Most of the story was spent on Anna and Kristoff's love development. In fact only 30 minutes out of 102 minutes of the movie was spent talking about Elsa, and fewer minutes were spent talking about Elsa and Anna's relationship. The movie ended up being quite messy as a result, because despite Disney "selling" this as a "sister story" it ended up being more of a romance story. Anna was the main character in this movie (Elsa the deuteragonist). Anna's evolution was lacking even more than Elsa. In the end she didn't even seem to have learned anything from her experiences. It felt like Hans betrayal happened, but it didn't seem to have any sort of affect on her character. She had no change of heart what-so-ever; no sense of self discovery, no evident regret...nothing. Anna's evolution was not readily evident (for someone who is supposed to be the main character). What kind of person did she evolve to become? What did she learn about herself and others? Who knows, because honestly her evolution was about as bad as Aurora's. Anything that she learned can only be ASSUMED by the viewers, but Anna herself never made mention or gave us hint of regret, change of heart, or self-discovery in this movie. Did Anna honestly learn from her mistake? Or did she just assume that Hans was a bad guy, but she somehow still believes in love at first sight? The movie leaves us with nothing. The creators of Frozen did a sloppy job with their characters' development. I don't feel like I learned anything about Anna throughout the movie that I didn't know from the beginning of the movie. Nothing was revealed about her. She remained stagnant throughout. You stated: "Anna also had to cope with the consequences of an unhealthy childhood. She was lonely enough to fall for someone upon just meeting him, and then learns throughout the film how to have a healthy relationship by interacting with Kristoff." It honestly did not feel that Anna learned throughout the movie that Kristoff was the one for her. In fact, she didn't even seem interested in him throughout the movie until Hans dumped her. Kristoff showed signs of love towards her more than she showed any signs of love towards him. Again, the creators of the movie did not do a good job of showing this transition. Her feelings for Kristoff were not evident until the end. While I will admit Do You Want To Build A Snowman was a good song to transition the movie (And so was Fixxer Upper) I felt Olaf's song and Reindeer Are Better Than People was unnecessary. The movie already had nine songs, longer than any Disney movie. What was the point in putting in those two unnecessary songs? Ironically, both of the characters were lacking integration in the movie. Olaf was just a useless character who failed to help in "evolving" Anna. He was just there...to be a joke. Kristoff, while being the lover, we never get any mention of his past after the beginning. He never even mentions he was there the day Anna was helped by the trolls! He was underdeveloped. But I guess that's what happens when the movie is nothing but music filled...Note, that I said the movie is only 102 minutes long...with all of those song numbers, what room does that give for character and story development? It felt like the movie broke out in song every 5 minutes. While I do believe character development is the most important part of a story, the other elements usually help us to connect with the story of the characters. They all are on the same "team". After all, cartoons are meant to portray art in formation. So the animation is just as important as the story and characters. Cartoons are meant to give us visual concepts even if they do not have a story. But at least when they do have a story, I appreciate a well developed story more than a sloppy one.