Pocahontas (I) (1995) User Reviews

This movie has some slight flaws, but it is magical.

[cjd-16 · 8/10 · 25 April 2007]

This is by far the most under-rated Disney movie of all time. Sure it wasn't perfect, but it is MUCH better than a 5.6.

The story is absolutely engrossing. There are so many good and realistic things going on... a man learning about all the little things he has missed in life, an Indian princess striving for adventure and guidance amongst her steady and safe society, and a full-blown war between civilizations who both believe that the other is made of savages. I appreciate that this story is a realistic depiction of war, with two disagreeing sides, neither of which is necessarily right or wrong.

The animation in this movie is absolutely spectacular. And it is spectacular in the best way: with a basis in cinematography. The animation is not only spectacular because of the details in the backgrounds and the characters, but even more so because of how beautifully it is used. Scenes such as when Pocahontas and John meet in the mist are the kind of simple beauty that more movies need. When you hear the song "Listen With Your Heart", you can practically feel the breath of the surrounding forest. Fantastic stuff.

Another big high point is the music. Everyone's heard the show-stopping "Colors of the Wind", but the others are worthy of praise as well. "Steady as the Beating Drum", "Just Around the River Bend", "Savages", "Listen With Your Heart", "Mine, Mine, Mine", and the deleted "If I Never Knew You" ALL fit perfectly. Musically, this movie is on par with Aladdin, The Little Mermaid, and The Hunchback of Notre Dame, and just a tick behind "Beauty and the Beast" and "The Lion King".

So if all these things are good, why only an 8? Two words... the ending. Everything leading up to it is so engrossing, and "Savages" builds up such an intense conflict drama, and everything is falling apart. This was the chance for Disney to turn this movie into a classic, and with what had to happen, they easily could have. But they completely failed. After "Savages", the scene that should have been the most intense and dramatic climax in their history ended almost instantly. It was too fast, there was almost no drama like their should have been, and the dialog was awful... captured none of the epic feel that it should have. Such a shame that such a great film was wrecked by such a horribly executed ending.

I also wasn't a fan of the constant distractions of the animal sidekicks, and of course there are the matters of historical accuracy and non-stereotypical depiction of the Indians, but as an avid animation fan I was willing to overlook these issues and give it a chance to be a good film in a non-contexted world. Some may be put off by this, but since when have animated films been historically accurate? So, honestly, those who are put off by things like "People in the dynasty when Mulan lived weren't praying to ancestors yet" should probably not expect to like this movie.

Out-of-context, I give it an 8/10 because everything up till the ending was completely magical, and had some of the best moments in all of Disney history, but the ending fell flat. I still want to watch it over and over again, because the rest of the movie really was fantastic. With a proper dramatic ending, I really do think that it could have been nominated for "Best Picture" like the Disney people thought it would. As is, it's a great entry into the animated classics canon. Definitely recommended even though it falls well short of the greatness achieved by the early 90's films.

A couple of minor flaws, but this is a beautiful film!

[TheLittleSongbird · 8/10 · 17 February 2009]

Why on earth is this movie rated so low? It's even rated lower than some of the DTV sequels. That shouldn't happen. It is historically inaccurate, but why should that be an issue? All I want is a visually stunning film with great music, and that's what I got. The animation is splendid. America looked so rich in colour, and the colours were so bright. The songs are sometimes the weakest element of an animation. Here it is the main reason why this movie is so memorable. "Colours of the Wind" is one of the most beautiful songs I've heard, and I've sung it before. Pocahontas's singing voice is none other than the Broadway singer, Judy Kuhn, who was absolutely terrific. When I was 12, I tried to sound like her. The incidental music is also definitely the most lyrical of the Alan Menken scores. The weakest element of the film, is actually the character development. The protagonist, voiced by Irene Bedard, is very well done, but most of the other characters are not as effective. Mel Gibson has a singing voice, but his speaking voice is too monotonous to my liking, and Ratcliffe isn't a very likable or memorable villain at all(one of Disney's blandest villains actually), despite enthusiastic voice work from David Ogden Stiers. But Meeko and Flit are great fun, and Grandmother Willow was good too. Don't say this film is racist. Some of the imagery is fantastic in the songs of war and animosity, and the film has a great love story and message. The ending was actually quite effective and poignant. In conclusion, one of the least memorable of the Disney movies, is so worth watching. 8.5/10. Bethany Cox

Disney's romanticised take on the Pocahontas tale!

[pritol · 7/10 · 22 December 2021]

As with all Disney films, this was a warm and charming movie with some fun set piece sing songs, and your stereotypical big baffoon baddies and your clean cut and heroic good guys!

It's a family film and it doesn't get too hung up on being historically accurate. It does romanticise the tale of Pocahontas, and she is tied very much to the land and her people, and has a heroine's role at the end, as supposed to just being a Princess looking for Mr Right.

She does of course meet a man at the end, but it's not your typical Disney ending. Much like Mulan, this was a period when the role of Disney Princess was changing.

It's worth mentioning the animation, it is fantastic with the shape and movements of the key human characters, absolutely flawless.

Another triumph for Disney in the '90s...

[Doylenf · 5 May 2001]

Perhaps there should have been a disclaimer at the start of the movie saying: "Loosely based on the true story of the Indian princess" and then there wouldn't be all this fuss about a Disney movie not sticking to historical facts. First of all, when you go to see "Pocahontas" knowing it's a Disney animated feature, do you really think you're going to see an accurate depiction of events? It's not meant to be a documentary--take it for what it is, a charming, completely enjoyable work of art with stunning visuals, great songs (by Menken and Schwartz) and an uplifting tale that has a message for kids and adults. What more could you want?

Definitely a must-see Disney film for the whole family. Should create an interest for kids to learn about the actual events if they are so inclined. As entertainment, it's top-grade Disney with a hauntingly beautiful score that would fit well into any Broadway musical. The songs are splendid: 'Just Around the Riverbend', 'Colors of the Wind', 'The Virginia Company' -- and the artwork combined with the music for the gold-digging number is outstanding.

Belongs up there with 'Beauty and the Beast' and 'Hunchback of Notre Dame' as one a serious film fan should not miss.

Wonderful musical from fictitious version of true story.

[Norway1 · 7/10 · 27 September 1998]

Though not entirely surpassing the Lion King this was some of the best music ever experienced in an animated musical. Pocahontas is the daughter of a chief who wishes to find her path in life. She feels it her duty to keep peace between her own people and the intruding British who are hoping to find gold as did the early Spanish explorers. She finds herself falling in love with one of these new visitors and uses this relationship in attempting to prevent a potential war. But can she stop the greedy settlers from their determination to find Gold, and can she convince her Father that they should try to live in peace with their new neighbors? You may be pleasantly surprised. Between the music and the animation Pocahontas is a classic Disney film that should be included in every video collection. Just don't expect to learn any hidden truths about American history. Take it for what it is.

It wasn't the hit that Disney was looking for, but I think this was still a decent movie

[Smells_Like_Cheese · 7/10 · 19 January 2004]

Disney studios had hit the jackpot during the "renaissance" with The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin and The Lion King. Beauty and the Beast was the first animated film to ever receive a best picture nomination during the Oscar season. They wanted to hit it out of the ball park again with Pocahontas. This is where Disney was starting to slide down a little bit again. Not to put this film down because it was wonderful, but there wasn't that special little spice that made the film a huge success like it's predecessors. The animation was just spectacular, the story(despite not being at all true to the story) was very good and the songs were beautiful. But why wasn't this the major hit Disney was looking forward too? I have several theories that I'll explain in just a moment.

British settlers of the Virginia Company sets sail to the "New World". Onboard the ship are Captain John Smith and the voyage's leader Governor Ratcliffe, who believes the local Native Americans are hiding a vast collection of gold and seeks to gain it for his own. In the local tribe in the New World, Pocahontas, daughter of Chief Powhatan, dreads being possibly wed to Kocoum, a brave warrior whom she sees as too "serious" when conflicting with her spirited personality. Pocahontas, along with her friends, the raccoon Meeko and hummingbird Flit, visit Grandmother Willow, a spiritual talking willow tree who alerts her to the presence of the Englishmen. She meets John Smith and shows him the "New World" as he realizes the peace and love the tribe brings, they both try to bring a bond between their groups, but it might be more difficult than they realize.

Why this film wasn't as big a smash as the studios wanted I think was due to the way the story was told. First off, I know that for Hollywood to keep the audience's interest they do need to have their own little twist on history, but why not keep more true to the story of Pocahontas? I suppose because her story wasn't enough to keep the kid's interest just like how they "sexified" her up. Although why does her nose look like Lord Voldemort? Seriously, can she breathe out of that thing? There is a massive stare fest between her and John Smith that felt more awkward than beautiful and romantic. There's also a lot of standing majestically which I thought made the characters look more like mannequins.

However, I still like Pocahontas a lot. It's not the Disney movie I watch more than a few times, but the animation is just absolutely stunning, some of Disney's best. The songs like "Colors of the wind" and "Drums of War" were great. Even the side animal characters were really funny and cute. I would still recommend Pocahontas, not just for die hard fans of Disney, but it's a terrific family film that I'm sure anyone could enjoy as long as you don't take it seriously like some other crazy people have, it's a movie! People need to check the size of their underwear, it may be time for a bigger size.

7/10

Beautiful... In Every Sense of the Word

[jaredpahl · 9/10 · 18 November 2015]

During the famed "Disney Renaissance", a period that started in 1989 with the release of The Little Mermaid and continued through the entire 1990s, Disney was creating modern classics with every film they released. In the midst of this revolution came Pocahontas, a rousing animated musical, directed by Mike Gabriel and Eric Goldberg. Pocahontas is something of an outlier in the Disney cannon. It is not a cutesy, kid-centric fairy tale a la Disney classics like Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs or Beauty and the Beast. What Disney's 33rd animated feature is, is a sensational movie musical, and one of Disney's most technically accomplished works.

Pocahontas, in typical Disney style, takes a well-known tale and molds it into an easy-to-digest story set to music. In this case, for the first time at Disney, the story is not entirely fictional. Here's where some people come down on Pocahontas. No, it didn't stay completely true to what really happened with John Smith and the real story of Pocahontas, but it would be a much lesser movie if it had. Pocahontas, the movie, is based on the legend of Pocahontas rather than the reality. The decision to romanticize the legend is a no-brainer. This is Disney after all. We expect strong archetypes and accessible drama.

The story begins with English settlers setting off for Virginia. Their leader, Governor Ratcliffe (David Ogden Stiers) comes in search of gold, John Smith (Mel Gibson) comes for the adventure of a lifetime. Back on the New World is Pocahontas, a young Algonquin princess voiced by Irene Bedard, who is set to be married to the tribe's dashing bachelor, Kocoum. It's all very predictable Disney stuff. The settlers are mostly just boisterous, gold-lusting, brutes, The princess is weary of getting together with the jock character, and there's only one man who understands her. We've heard it before. Even so, the story is handled with care and the familiar elements are welcome for the most part. The unfamiliar elements, chief of which is a surprisingly mature and complex love story between John Smith and Pocahontas, are where Pocahontas' plot stands out from its Disney siblings. There is more to this film than surface layer romance. Complimenting the dramatic story of betrayal and acceptance is a poignant message about coexisting peacefully with each other and the world around us.

The story is as moving as any other Disney classic, but what makes Pocahontas a notable Disney Renaissance landmark is its animation and music. Hand drawn animation had been around for a half century before Pocahontas, and stage musicals a hundred years before that. It's a wonder then, that somehow Pocahontas still manages to be a jaw-dropping example of both. I don't think the film gets the credit it deserves as one of Disney's best drawn films. The animators, led by the legendary Glen Keane, do things with animation that were game-changing, even by the high standard set by the world's leading animation studio. The character designs are expertly idealized, accentuating facial features and movement without ever crossing the line into cartoon. The backgrounds are even better. The untouched beauty of the American landscape is given scale, depth, and an expressionistic dynamism. It all comes together in the musical numbers.

Music is always a matter of taste, but for me, every song down the line in Pocahontas worked in a big way. I honestly cannot think of another musical that can make that claim. Every musical, animated or otherwise, has at least one dud. It's a rule. Pocahontas breaks tradition. The rhythmic "Just Around the Riverbend", the wonderfully wicked "Mine, Mine, Mine", and the grand, Oscar-winning spectacle that is "Colors of the Wind" are all rousing, bombastic, and sweeping pieces of music. The songs are up to the quality of the very best Broadway musicals, and the animation only improves the numbers. The explosively vivid colors and spacious movement that go along with the songs are artistry of the highest kind.

There is a surplus of talent and passion in every fiber of Pocahontas. When all the pieces come together, the story, the animation, and the music, Pocahontas is remarkable. It's a film of craftsmanship and quality. While kids will no doubt enjoy it, it's not made "for" kids. Like the best Disney movies, Pocahontas appeals to anyone who loves music and appreciates the warm touch of hand drawn animation. Add to the sights and sounds, some of which were enough to literally take my breath away from me, a timeless message of acceptance and stewardship of nature, and what you get is a classic, Disney or otherwise. Show this movie to your kids, watch it yourself, just see it. Pocahontas is in a word... Beautiful.

92/100

"I'd rather die tomorrow than live a hundred years without knowing you."

[utgard14 · 7/10 · 21 September 2015]

Disney take on the story of Pocahontas and John Smith. I just saw this for the first time since its initial release. My feelings back then were somewhat lukewarm but, to put that in context, my tastes were more narrow then and I was not really into Disney or anything that felt even slightly like a 'chick flick.' Now I'm happy to say I recognize what an enjoyable film this is. The animation is wonderful with so much beautiful imagery that it took me by surprise because I didn't remember that from my first viewing. The scene where John Smith first sees Pocahontas will take your breath away. The movie makes excellent use of lush colors. Some scenes are saturated with purples and blues -- it's really stunning. Pocahontas herself is gorgeously drawn. She's easily one of the most striking Disney Princesses ever. The score is evocative and lovely with one great song ("Colors of the Wind") and some other forgettable ones. The voice work is wonderful, especially Irene Bedard in the lead. There are nice touches of humor throughout with a talking tree and playful animals that seem to have stepped right out of Bambi's forest. The emotional stuff is where the movie really knocks it out of the park, whether it be the romance between Pocahontas and Smith or little brilliant scenes such as when Powhatan feels his wife's spirit in the wind.

The cause for much criticism and complaints about the film come, of course, from the history police. The movie is historically inaccurate, which should come as no surprise to anyone over the age of four. I'm never one to get all that worked up about historical accuracy in movies (let alone cartoons) anyway. You want to be entertained, watch this movie. You want to learn more about history, open a book. One charming reviewer here said the movie was guilty of whitewashing genocide. What a shocker that Disney didn't want to make an animated version of Soldier Blue! Look, it's a cartoon loosely based on people who lived and died 400 years ago. Unclench your fists, take a breath, and stop relying on Hollywood to educate your children and getting ticked off when they don't do it the way you want them to. It's a good animated film and I think everyone who isn't looking to get angry about as many things as they can before they die should see it.

I forgot just how beautiful this movie is...why is it so underrated??

[Awakening124 · 10/10 · 19 March 2009]

I haven't watched Pocahontas in maybe ten years, but I was feeling nostalgic one day and popped it in. I could not believe how truly BEAUTIFUL this movie is, in every aspect.

MUSIC: Aside from the songs everyone knows (Just Around the River Bend and Colors of the Wind) every single other song in the film is wonderful, with soaring harmonies and Broadway quality singing. Everything was masterfully written and executed. The music alone is reason enough for this to be adapted into a full out Broadway musical, but don't worry...the music is brilliant but it doesn't scream "MUSICAL!" like Hairspray or Mamma Mia.

ANIMATION: Drop. Dead. Gorgeous. Every single frame is such wonderful eye candy, and the camera work serves the sweeping storyline extremely well.

STORY: Dramatic (with it's humorous moments of course), romantic, and it carries a very important message of peace, maturity, and fighting against ignorance and prejudice from BOTH sides. This is possibly the Disney movie with the greatest message for kids.

HISTORIC ACCURACY: Yes, Disney changed the true story quite a bit, but if you look to Disney for accurate re-tellings of historical events you have a serious PROBLEM. This movie is more 'Inspired by' than 'Based on' and since the true story is about a 13-14 year old falling in love with 30-40 year I think we can all appreciate that they took some liberties with a KIDS' MOVIE.

All in all, I really don't get why this isn't revered as a classic right along with The Lion King and Beauty and the Beast.

It has its songs, its attempted humour and its out of this world ideas but it fails to be anything too fantastic.

[johnnyboyz · 6/10 · 3 June 2007]

Pocahontas was the first Disney film that I'd seen in quite a while and I had forgotten the enjoyment and magic that Disney films can often give you. Although I've probably seen most Disney films over the years, it was interesting to revisit this particular title after so long and view it with a more adult mind.

One thing that you notice right away is that Pocahontas is not as epic as previous Disney films. There isn't a lot of animation and that cliché 'every effort is put into every drawing and thus; every frame' seems to have fallen through the net this time round. Because of this; the animation looks not only dated but it makes some of the characters (namely the lead heroine Pocahontas herself) "kinda' funny lookin'." That feeling that this is not as epic as previous instalments is also present. I don't know if Disney were going for the whole neo-realistic look or something since this is based on a true story (something Disney rarely do) but the actual drawings do fall a little flat. Hey, maybe they were putting all their animation effort into Toy Story from the same year; you never know.

The film is clever and at the same time interesting at the start. We spend enough time with the sailors across their voyage and the protagonist is pretty obviously presented to us as John Smith since not only is he the one that saves a fellow sailor from drowning (Voiced by Christian Bale, no-less) but he's also voiced by Mel Gibson – more than enough evidence to suggest this is the leading man. Also, we get a peek at the native American's way of life which, unless you've studied pre-colonial America, is going to look pretty alien to you. This is the film giving us an even amount of time with either 'side' and is dangling a proverbial carrot in front of our faces, tempting us to make a link with either the sailors or the natives.

The film is, overall, a very sophisticated story about friendship, trust and ultimately: love and the fact it's between two people from very different backgrounds and ways of life is all the more pleasurable. Even though it is a true story, Disney takes the material and makes good with it. What I didn't like though, was the fact that the animals whom are supposed to act as the films comic relief are actually more annoying than funny. I appreciate that it's 'just for kids' but where a proper love story is unfolding, two bumbling animals in the shape of Meeko (Pocahontas' racoon) and Percy (The English governor's dog whom he doesn't even realise is missing towards the end) attempt to ruin what it is that's going on around them. The fact they don't talk means that their actions have to make up for any amusing dialogue they might have had and when you have to rely on actions to make you laugh, you have to rely on slapstick and that really misses the mark in this film.

The songs are impressive in their own right; like I said before, they're not as epic as previous films and consist of characters running through forests or boating down rivers with not much happening around them and with the same shades of colours and shapes used consistently. This is not like The Lion King (I Just Can't Wait to be King) or Aladdin (Never Had A Friend Like Me) where lots was going on and, arguably, better songs were presented to us. The willow tree was also something I had a bit of a problem with. Although acting as the mentor for Pocahontas, I felt that it broke too far from reality and wasn't even used that much anyway. I feel the film would've worked better had this character been a really elderly native American whom Pocahontas could've trusted but again, the prospect of a talking tree in a Disney film gets the kids in.

Even if I was a little let down by the climatic battle scene since I didn't really 'feel' anything (when I felt I was supposed to have many emotions raging at once), the film sticks to its roots and has the ending that many of us probably wouldn't have liked to have happened. This is a strong Disney addition and shouldn't be overlooked.

On a side note, if you liked this then check out 'A New World' (2005). It's another Pocahontas film and funnily enough, stars Christian Bale as well.

As long as you don't mind that your children are watching almost 100% fiction and not real history, it is entertaining

[planktonrules · 3/10 · 2 September 2006]

I am an American History teacher and this is the sort of film that causes people like me to grumble and complain because the film bears almost no similarity to the actual story of the founding of the Jamestown colony. But, it is because of this and how widely the movie was loved and accepted that I actually use it in my class discussions--teaching kids that much of our history is distorted or even completely fictional. Like George Washington's "wooden teeth", the "fact" that everyone in Columbus' day thought the Earth was flat and Betsy Ross making the very first American flag (all fiction, by the way), this film is a great example of bad history. Now understand, I am NOT an America-basher or live to destroy our national heroes--I just don't like it when something sacred like our history is treated with such blatant disrespect and cynicism.

While my list would be HUGE, here are a few of the problems with the story: the girl's name was "Matoaka" not "Pocahontas" (this was a nickname, not her real name), she was about 11 or so and Smith an older man and so the romance in the Disney film is either disgusting or false (fortunately, there was no romance according to all but the Disney account), the whole head getting smashed like a pumpkin incident probably never occurred (Smith spoke of this for the first time 17 years after the fact and it was never recorded elsewhere before this--plus Matoaka publicly showed contempt for Smith--something that makes no sense if the story was true), Matoaka was kidnapped by the British and she did not willingly join them (as seen in POCAHONTAS II), and the natives were not "tree-hugging hippies"--but real 3-dimensional people (for good and bad).

If you can ignore all this, you are left with a heavy-handed and preachy film with a lot of New Age mumbo-jumbo about nature and talking trees and all that crap. Pleasant to the eye--but about as deep as Paris Hilton's personality. Bland and only mildly entertaining---and guaranteed to tick off anyone who cares in the least about the truth.

Even better 10 years later!

[irishgrl-1 · 10/10 · 12 June 2005]

Recently I started watching this again with my 4yr old son and fell in love with it all over again! The music is outstanding (I especially love the "Colors of the Wind") and the entire movie is a visual treat! I know many have complained that the movie is a European version of an event and demeaning to American Indians, but from what I've read, Russel Means (voice of Powhatan) was happy with the final product and its portrayal of Native Americans. Whether or not it is historically accurate, it is great entertainment and I believe the overall message of peace and acceptance between peoples is timeless good advice. All in all, a great addition to the Disney catalog of movies.

A mature animated Disney feature, and a beautiful film

[TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews · 7/10 · 9 November 2007]

This is somewhat unique, for a number of reasons. Perhaps most importantly, it is, as my summary states, mature. Gone are the talking animals, the show-stopping musical number(as were a staple of the Disney cartoons of the time), and the themes, the tone, is more serious. This is the only Disney animated feature actually based on a true event. There is still humor that the children can laugh at, and it's still much more simple and easy to take in than a lot of entertainment, but this has things for the grown-ups, as well. This seems to have lead to it being somewhat overlooked and less popular with kids. Another difference is how realistic the look is. The characters, the movements, faces, everything, it all looks far more real than other animated pieces. The animation is magnificent. The colors are used well, and quite subtly, in key sequences. The acting is good, and Bedard and Kuhn, the speaking and singing voice of the title character, respectively, are both excellent. Gibson isn't a bad singer, and he fits the character of Smith, both in attitude and voice. The majority of the actors lending their voices to the Indian characters are actual Native Americans, which is definitely an impressive and note-worthy detail. The music is great. Characterization is nicely done. For a film that's about an hour and fifteen minutes, sans credits, we know more about these people, and understand them better, than you'd expect. The plot is well-written, but of course it is a fictional recounting of the actual story(this is Disney, after all). The pacing is marvelous, it never really drags. The DVD extras are a mixed bag... not all are well-produced or aesthetically appealing(or even introduced properly). The multi-language reel, though, is well-cut and well-done, both idea and execution get high marks... although as much as I dislike Danish dubbing, I'm not sure that I was as relieved as I was insulted that the Danish voice was not part of it; the Swedish and Norwegian were! Also, the interactive adventure can amuse, and may inform. I recommend this to anyone willing to watch Disney, especially the more mature audiences. 7/10

Probably the worst Disney movie of the 1990's

[joebrian55 · 5/10 · 22 December 2012]

I'll be honest, Pocahontas is the Disney movie of the 90's that appeals to me the least.

For nearly a year, I've heard some negative statements about the movie from a couple of the teachers at my high school (they both teach history, keep in mind).

In the past, Disney has been known for their adaptations of classic literature... but a historical figure was obviously not the best choice for their next movie after the immense success of The Lion King, and it shows.

While the artwork is good, the music is good and such, the story is very weak and predictable. Note that this sort of plot has been used by various movies, including Avatar and Dances with Wolves. And on top of that, this film is a grossly inaccurate representation of Native American history, with the conflict between the British and Natives toned down to be little more than a simple fight between two sides that almost never happens thanks to Pocahontas saving John Smith. However, I do give the movie credit for casting First Nations actors to voice the Natives, such as the late Russell Means as Chief Powhatan and Gordon Tootoosis as Kekata.

Sure the backgrounds and character designs for the humans are realistic and look great, but the story is also important for an animated movie, and in the case of a movie based on history or culture, historical and cultural accuracy.

Fortunately, the film has a good message, "Everyone is different and people are people no matter how they look", but Disney has not always been good at teaching that to children, like The Fox and the Hound, which had a good message but in this case, it was not clear on target audience. On top of that, there should be better ways to teach children that it's OK to be different.

So really, I don't know whether to recommend it or not. Maybe it would be best to watch it with children and explain some things about it later so that children aren't mislead by this movie.

A mature Disney romantic drama

[aurelie_ledoyen · 3 May 2005]

I read the poster's comments (the one from Paris) and had to laugh, because I completely understand him. I went away for school in Europe in '95 when the film came out, and when I came back Pocahontas was the rage. You know, the way all Disney films were back then-there were commercials, songs on the radio, stuffed animals, etc....until the NEXT Disney movie came to dwarf it until a lame sequel or TV series came out. So let me tell you, I was skeptical about Pocahontas.

I saw this a year after it came out and instantly fell in love with it. It's a mature Disney animated feature- (in my opinion) even more mature than Japanime films I have seen. The love story seems very real-there is a sort of chemistry between the leads that you can feel.

The soundtrack is one of my favourite parts about the movie. Every song matches perfectly with the spirit of the time and place..a new world in the 1600's.

Finally..whoever had the idea to cast Mel Gibson(and Christian Bale) is a genius. Love those voices!

One aspect of this movie often overlooked is its dreamy editing. It is so consistent throughout and rivals many critically acclaimed films with great editing.

See it again, and remember: "You can own the earth and still, all you'll own is Earth until you can paint with all the colors of the wind."

One of the better modern Disney films

[c-corleis · 7/10 · 14 January 2006]

Yes, this is surely one of the better modern Disney films. The story is straight and well focused on the two main characters. We have some sidekicks here, the little dog and the raccoon. Both works very well, with loving little gags and without any tendency to crude jokes, that often seen in modern Disney-films, i.e. the stupid fart-joke in "The Lion King", which, in my opinion, disturbing this good movie too much. "Pocahontas" match the spirit of the older Disney classics well. I love especially the impressionistic, colorful sequences. It is a wonderful way to tell a story with colors, pictures and music rather than dialogue. A technique, that was first used in "Fantasia" and than pushed up to the utmost perfectionism in "Bambi", and later get lost in the most modern Disney movies. And there is another detail, that i like very much: The villain is not really a totally cruel villain. He had his own problems too, and he was more driven by the demand of his company to find gold under all circumstances. The film did not focus exactly on historical facts, but come on, it is a Disney film, and it had is dark and sad scenes too. As i know, this was only the third Disney-movie (after "Bambi" and "The Lion King") in which a important character died, which is not one of the villains. Fortunately the end of the movie is "not typical Disney". it was done very well in a wonderful closing scene, but without that the... but i will not spoil it for you! But some disappointments are here too: "Pocahontas" can't mess with the detailed Animation and deep characters of the older Disney films, especially Disney's "Big Five": "Snow White", "Pinocchio", "Fantasia", "Dumbo", and especially "Bambi" are invincible in the detailed animation and the characters. In "Pocahontas" all of this is far simpler done, perhaps to decrease the costs of the movie and not because the animators can't do it better. Overall, i give it 7 out of 10 stars and i hope, that modern Disney will come back to movies of this high quality in the future again.

John Smith

[PCC0921 · 6/10 · 9 October 2023]

I first wrote this review, after I saw Pocahontas (1995), in the theaters, back in 1995. This does include some 2023 proof-reading. This Disney film, tries to explain the historical story, about the relationship between the beautiful Indian princess Pocahontas (voice of Irene Bedard), and the British colonist John Smith (voice of Mel Gibson), as an animated, family adventure. When the ship, the Susan Constant, which is carrying John Smith, lands in the new world, cultures between the colonists and the native Indians, immediately begin to collide. When the Indian chief, who is the father of Pocahontas, declares war against the greedy English, Smith is caught in the middle and Pocahontas, has to save his life. Of course, they also fall in love. No surprises there.

In Pocahontas (1995), there is a definite lesson, implanted into this story, about the way native Americans, were portrayed in history. Also, it explains how prejudices can be very harmful and to watch-out, for suspect portrayals of them, in older stories or history books. The film does try to mend those wounds. The story in Pocahontas (1995), is fair to good. The story does have that typical, sad Disney conclusion and it is, no Lion King (1994). There is a slow pace in this film and the music, tends to be a little dull. The overall film doesn't match the normal, fun-loving standards of a Disney film. Even the color-scheme, used in the animations seemed a little bland. The fluid motion, witnessed in the Lion King (1994) and even in classics, like Pinocchio (1940), was not evident in Pocahontas (1995).

Pocahontas (1995), is entertaining for kids and there is a level of maturity, that can keep adults in the story. There are some very funny moments in the film too. It is an average animated film though and it had mixed reviews, when it was released in 1995. It is one of the more weaker Disney animated efforts, that were released in the late-1990s. However, Pocahontas (1995), is still a good enough film, that it does deserve a watch. It has an interesting level of cultural sensibilities/insensibilities, that helps to draw an interesting contrast, between the year the film takes place (1607), the year it came out (1995), and how we feel about these situations, almost 30 years after its release.

6.3 (D+) = 6 IMDB.

Mature love and great music

[realmofjohn · 9/10 · 19 October 2004]

Well when I watched Pocahontas back in 1995 I was only 12 years old, and I thought it was a nice movie, a bit too serious, but all in all a good movie. But now, almost ten years later I saw it again, and wow what a surprise I got... The movie is probably the only Disney movie with a REAL love story, the sneak around and tries to hide their love, and in the incredibly sad ending, they choose life over love (or something like that), which makes the whole thing mature and realistic. And the music, that wonderful music. "Colors of the wind" (fantastic singing by musical star Judy Kuhn) is probably one of the best Disney songs of all time. The other songs are great too. The only thing the film lacks is "classic" animation, these new things like; not seeing Pocahontas nose from the front, I dunno, I can't help thinking of this film with the animators (and style) from "The beauty and the beast". The voice acting is top notch by the way! I don't care that the movie is historicly incorrect, its just a damn good Disney film, that has crawled up to the top 5 Disney classics of all time in my book.

Agenda-driven fantasy with some lovely animation

[neil-476 · 7/10 · 21 May 2020]

The British arrive in Virginia, under the leadership of gold-mad Ratcliffe. Captain John Smith meets Pocahontas, daughter of the local chief, and their budding romance may be instrumental in staving off hostilities - or perhaps it may make things worse.

Disney's adaptation of the Pocahontas is a very loose adaptation indeed, and I don't just mean the comedy animal sidekicks or spirit-tree-Grandma. The story is greatly glamourised, not leasr in the character design of the beauty queen native American princess (who probably wasn't actually a princess). British leader Ratcliffe is clearly insane and all his men are sheep except Smith. The situation is clearly noble native Americans on the receiving end of violence and theft of land and resources from the vile British, which may explain why Mel Gibson was attracted to it. I'm sure there is some substance to this viewpoint, but this animated feature is very one-note.

There is some lovel animation, and Alan Mencken's score is good, but the songs are rather lacklustre, even the much-feted Colors Of The Wind. This is one of the more disappointing entries from Disney's renaissance years.

The greatest underrated Disney's gem !

[ghostofdaniel · 10/10 · 9 July 2004]

When this movie came out (in 1995), I thought : "Another one "big stupid kiddy Disney American colonialist propaganda movie" ! Nobody thinks no more about a love story between an Indian girl and a colonialist ! The indians were exterminated by the colonialists ! Not loved by them ! Everybody knows that !"

And I didn't watch such of silly movie, of course ! I'm not a stupid man !

BUT, there's a week ago, the daughter of my sister (9 years old), forgot that DVD in my home. I thought : "Let's see this stupidity, just to laugh at the most ridiculous Disney's movie !"

I watched it. And I cryed. This is the best Disney's movie, and maybe the best movie, I've ever watched !

How can you criticize it ? Have you lost your children soul ?!!

Of course, just after watched it, I thought : "Well, that's good. Better than I thought. But that's all".

But the next day, the song of the old "mother witch" remains in my mind ! I decided to watch it again, and again. Now, I've seen this movie about 20 times in one week. That's incredible, I think I'm a fan !!!!

For me, in general, the worst part of a Disney movie, was the songs. I've always hated them. For the first time, I found the songs were the best part of this movie ! I listened to every songs of this movie, and I think, they are all good, and even, great ! Also the music ! It's an Mozart's opera !

Graphics are good, but the editing is better ! The first encounter between Pocahontas and Smith at the falls is a pure master-piece ! And the movie's references are plenty ! The "3-voices song" of "savages", reminds me the "rumbles" of "West Side Story", and the final "goodbye" reminds me the final of Spielberg's "E.T.".

I don't know if this movie was done "for children", but I know I cry every time I watch it !

Thanks for Mike Gabriel, Eric Goldberg, Alan Menken, Stephen Schwartz, and the Disney Company to have kept their "children soul". I was wrong and they were right. And I'm happy of that.

Well, I quit you now, I need to watch this movie again... Goodbye ! :-))

10/10 !!!!!! of course !

Too straight-forward to leave any lasting impact

[CuriosityKilledShawn · 6/10 · 3 February 2015]

Disney hit a rut in the late-90s with a string of critical and audience failures that began with Pocahontas and lasted through Hunchback, Hercules, Dinosaur etc. It was also one of two historically- inaccurate movies starring "Mad" Mel Gibson that came out in Fall 1995 in the UK. Both of which I never got to see until much later.

From a technical standpoint there is nothing wrong with Pocahontas, as a matter of fact it's far more colorful, atmospheric, and grown-up than The Lion King, which came out a year before. But in the process it lost much of its younger audience and now only seems to appeal to adults. The story lets everything else down. It's so bland and generic when it could have had the moxie to go much further and be just a tad more complex. It certainly had the visual energy to back it up even it were to try and fail. Alan Menken's score is also horrible and totally inappropriate to the scenes he is supposedly enhancing. Songs come and go, some last only a few moments. If feels like instead of letting the visuals speak for themselves Disney decided that characters talking to each other (at the audience) as a means of delivering exposition was too obvious so instead this dialogue is sung. The songs are exposition. Rarely do they allow any visual storytelling to stand alone. John Smith's first encounter with Pocahontas at the waterfall being the best example of what the film could have been if only.

Despite being historically-inaccurate (why is she not topless?) it really only details the first half of the Pocahontas story. The second (and more tragic) half is (sorta) detailed in the cash- grab sequel that nobody remembers. I cannot imagine anyone being smitten by this film unless they are already familiar with Pocahontas as the stripped-down story is hardly likely to win over anyone new to this slice of romantic history.

The declining renaissance?

[C22Man · 5/10 · 11 October 2015]

So after a run of successful films and a monster hit with The Lion King, it was up to Disney to keep the goods coming. Sadly Pocahontas didn't turn out as the crowd pleaser the studio hoped it would and it ended their hot streak by being something of a critical disappointment. It's not difficult to see why however. This was a very different take in a number of ways and dealt with actual historical events for the first time, so people were ready to scrutinise the film if need be. Credit must be given to the team behind it for taking such a risk at their peak and though it has its good points it definitely isn't up to the standard of its predecessors.

I think most people are familiar with the story. A group of British settlers, amongst them is John Smith, come to new found land with dreams of finding gold and eliminating savages. Smith meets and bonds with one of the natives named Pocahontas, as they begin to see that both sides can get along and avoid bloodshed. Here is the issue I have with this story, it has been done to death. It's the typical white men invade the land, one realises his mistake and they all see that the inhabitants aren't savages. We've seen it numerous times before to the point where you know exactly what will happen, making it totally uninteresting. They needed to do something truly different or experimental for this story to be engaging, which they sadly don't.

This could be salvaged if the characters are interesting, but they're not. Pocahontas (Irene Bedard) is as bland as they come. They try to make her adventurous and free-spirited, but she has no personality and just comes across as a bit of a moaner. John Smith (a monotone Mel Gibson) is equally as bland. I know he's meant to be a normal guy, it's just that he's a complete bore and does almost nothing of note throughout. If your main characters are like this then it's not a good sign. The natives are simply okay and a lot of Grandmother Willow's (Linda Hunt) dialogue seems very out of place. Thomas (a young Christian Bale) is likable enough and Ben is quite funny thanks to Billy Connolly, but there's a dearth of appealing characters.

The villain is very weak too. Ratcliffe (Disney regular David Ogden Stiers) is another guy who is completely fuelled by greed and just wants gold. He has absolutely no character beyond that, he isn't funny or threatening and he's only there to provide a bit of conflict. Another issue I had was with the animal sidekicks. There were far too many 'cute' moments, where there's a bit of slapstick or they do something silly and it clashes badly with the relatively serious tone. Plus given the themes of nature I think the animals should talk and it would make sense, it's strange that a tree talks but the animals don't. The songs are pretty bland for the most part, not remotely memorable and there are a few too many that get in the way. Though I will say 'Colours of the Wind' is excellent.

You might think I hate this film, but I don't and there are some very good areas. For one the animation is simply incredible. It is easily some of Disney's best ever. I'm not sure what it is about the colours but they are so vibrant that they almost leap off the screen and the backgrounds are just beautiful to look at. Simple things such as the rivers and the trees are animated gorgeously, while there's lots of sky blues and pinks that create a lovely colour palette. It's clear that a lot of work was put into the visuals and it certainly pays off. The characters are drawn more to look like real people which is also nice. Alan Menken's score is very effective and sets a good mood when it appears. There's also a strong atmosphere at certain points, especially in the quieter scenes, that I wish ran through the whole film.

Even though I don't think Pocahontas is a particularly good film, I can see why others do and it does have things to admire. I respect Disney for trying something very different to their usual work and I think the animation is a massive strong point. However it suffers in its two key areas, with a story that was already stale when it came out and with characters that it is almost impossible to get invested in. Not to that mention some of the decisions to take with the story are questionable and it is all over the place in regards to its take on history. It is very much a mixed bag, especially given Disney's successes at the time, but it's certainly an interesting addition.

And you'll never hear the wolf cry to the blue corn moon...

[luizpaulon · 10/10 · 14 October 2007]

What can I say... When I was a kid, I didn't like Pocahontas. In fact, I was disappointed with this movie. Because, to me, they HAD to be happy ever after! The years have passed, and I'm 19, and I felt really stupid because I didn't like this movie. Oh my god. This movie wasn't made for children, It was made for grow ups. It's language... a child would never understand the message. A child would just enjoy the animation, Meeko and the songs. When I saw that movie again, 2 years ago, I understood why they couldn't be together, I understood the message of the songs and I understood the fact that this movie is one of the most brilliants animations crated. When I saw "Colors of the wind" I cried. When I heard "Savages!" I got chills. How Disney did that? Kids, don't watch this movie. Grow-ups, GO NOW AND WATCH. This movie teaches values that this world forgot, and we need more movies like that. 10/10

Two different worlds. One true love.

[Lady_Targaryen · 7/10 · 22 January 2006]

'Pocahontas' is far from being my favorite movie from Disney, but it is cool anyway. Pocahontas is the daughter of a Native American tribe chief. She is a free spirited and a beautiful young woman, and she knows every little place and creature in the forest she lives. She also has a big taste for adrenaline and for adventures, what makes her father worried as well her best girl friend. One day,her father promises Kocoum,a brave warrior from the tribe, that he will marry Pocahontas; she does not stay happy,specially because Kocoum is not a very charismatic guy. One day,walking in the forest with her two best animal friends Flit and Meeko,Pocahontas accidentally meets Jonh Smith.

Capt. John Smith leads a rag-tag band of English sailors & soldiers to the New World to plunder its riches for Governor Ratcliffe. Smith and Pocahontas starts to have problems because of their different worlds, but spite that, they fall in love with each other. The only problem is the war that is starting both from the native Indians and the British, and they will need to show both worlds that they are equals and should live in peace.

Definitely not their most exciting film.

[Animany94 · 5/10 · 16 February 2019]

The biggest problem with Pocahontas is that it's boring and predictable. How they managed to make a movie about colonialization and racism so boring is a mystery to me. And you can predict every step the movie takes from the romance to clash of the two parts and what triggers it.

The character development is one of the big sinners here, because the main characters and the villain are either boring or stupid. Mel Gibson's performance as John Smith just sounded monotonous and detached and his romance with equally dull Pocahontas just felt forced. And yet there are not very much more to them than that romance. But the way they ended it all was pretty well done. The villain was the generic money hungry white man. Ratcliff had some pretty cringe-worthy lines which made him sound really stupid. His singing voice is good, but the lyrics to his song-sequences are either just generic (Mine Mine Mine) or over simplified serious topic (Savages).

The animation is a highlight along with the songs. Colours of the Wind is an amazing song and delivers the most magic in the movie and Gibson's singing voice in Mine, Mine, Mine isn't half bad. But that is surface level aspects of a movie, and if a story isn't very engaging or exciting it ends up lackluster.

The list goes on, because aside from a couple of beautiful songs and eye-popping animation, Pocahontas has remarkable problems which makes it fall into the category of wasted potential.