The end goal is to get the Trident. That’s the most important thing to Ursula as it is her ticket out of the exile. To get the Trident she needs to get to Triton and the best way to him is through his daughter, Ariel. We have to surmise that this Trident won’t work if it is stolen and that it must be willingly given for its power to be accessed the bearer. For some reason, it appears that this mythical fork is bound by some kind of oceanic legal standard. (you can read more about that in my very first post on this blog!)
So she makes a deal with Ariel. This deal is pretty foolproof too and heavily weighted in her favor. Ariel has to get true love’s kiss from a dude she hasn’t technically met. That means Eric has to know he is in love with her for the kiss to work…a regular smooch won’t cut it. It’s often tough to get guys to acknowledge they are in love after many years of dating let alone 3 days so Ursula should have been fine. However, she gets a little antsy and casts a spell on Eric. To me, this seems like overkill since she had Ariel’s voice already and apparently it’s the only thing Eric is in love with anyway. But this was her big moment and one can’t be too careful. So she plays a pointless charade which does help her complete her main objective, but also ends up contributing to her undoing. So I ask: why didn’t she just kill Eric instead of entrancing him? With him gone, there’s no kiss for Ariel and no one to pilot the ship into her gut. I mean, she had no problem having her cronies attempt to drown him once her plan was completed so we know she wasn’t against murder. And there couldn’t have been anything in the contract that would have legally inhibited her from it could there? Why would Ursula have put something like that in there in the first place knowing she would cheat if she needed too? But, we do have to hand it to Ursula, she was queen of the sea for the 5 minutes before she became calamari…or would it be a poor, unfortunate sushi roll?
Image Credit — fanpop.com
They were both so young when their parents died. I don’t think Elsa could have been more than 10 or 11. From that time until her coronation, Elsa was not running the country. Neither was Anna for that matter. While this character is never shown, there was most certainly a regent in charge of running the affairs of the Kingdom until Elsa was of age. This is all well and good and everything is copacetic with me until Elsa abdicates her recently coronated throne for a newly constructed fortress of solitude. It’s at this point that the throne would logically return to the regent until Anna became of age the same way it did for her sister. This is not the case. Anna, who is much more immature than her sister, somehow assumes control of the kingdom along with her random love interest from the Southern Isles. No one seems to be too upset about it either. Granted they are dealing with the realization their Queen is an ice witch, but still, that’s why they are paid the big bucks right? And then, when Anna decides to head out alone to find her AWOL sister, she hands over the throne, which wasn’t hers to give in the first place, to an unknown outsider. And again, no one bats an eye. So, are we to believe that if Elsa and Anna would have never returned to the castle, Hans would have been the new King? That doesn’t even make sense. But even he doesn’t even stick. He grabs some men and heads out but doesn’t publicly put anyone in charge. So while he is gone, who is running the show? That random group of guys that we later see fully accept that Han and Anna were secretly married before she died? An event in which they apparently don’t need a see a body to believe even occurred? You know, it seems to me that this ‘eternal winter’ is the least of this country’s problems.
Here is a question that I had and also GlueStick Mum shared in the comments of my last post. I think when you watch the scene of Elsa’s imprisonment, we assume that the manacles that adorn her hands were created by Hans. But there just isn’t time for these to be made. So who made them? While I have defended her father in the past, I can’t help but think that he had these secretly made as a last resort. Actually, scratch that. It was probably the trolls…I really think this was still all their fault.
Image Credit: disney.wikia.com
So this is my 45th post on this blog. When I came up with this idea a little over a year ago, I thought I might be able to come up with enough questions to last at least six months. I have had a lot of fun sharing my crazy and finding that there are a lot of other people out there that think the same way I do…not sure that is a good thing actually. That said, I believe that I am going to bring this blog close. I have a few more posts ready to go but plan to launch my last post on my 35th birthday, March 30. Ok, enough about that. On to today’s question…
* * *
Do ends justify the means? I think in most scenarios we verbally disagree but when the outcome is favorable, we tend to overlook what it took to get us there. I think this is the case in Cinderella. We see Cinderella and the Prince living happily ever after and feel pretty darn good about it all. And I am sure that the Fairy Godmother would point to that fact and say that she had done her job properly. But did she? Did she really?
Cinderella’s life up to the point she encountered the lady in question had been anything but a fairy tale. She was already being raised by a single father when she is thrust into a less than happy mixed family. Shortly after she loses her father and becomes for all intents and purposes a slave to a tyrannical step-mother and step-sisters. While we don’t know how long this went on, it appears that this occurred for quite some time. I’ll hazard a guess and say around 10 years.
And all this time Cinderella takes it in stride. It’s not like there is someone out there that could come in and take her out of this horrible situation. No one with magical powers that could magically free her from her captors or at least change some random objects into a means of escape. Oh, wait….there is! Enter the Fairy Godmother. I bet she will have a plan to save her charge. I mean, that’s what she is there for right? So, what’s the plan FG? What? Ok, let me get this straight. Your plan is to make her a pretty dress, horribly uncomfortable shoes and call her an Uber so she can get to a party? And then what? That’s it? That’s your contribution? And when a persistent prince and industrious mice save the day, you can smile and think ‘job well done?’ Unfortunately it doesn’t work that way for me. If I had my druthers, I would get her bibbity bobbity booted out of the Fairy Godmother Academy.
Image Credit —> disney.wikia.com
In the past I have given King Stefan a pretty hard time about his decisions regarding his daughter. And while I still believe he made some less than desirable choices, there is another person who seems to get off scot-free when it comes to accountability for their actions: Merryweather the Blue Fairy.
I think we can all agree that Merryweather is probably the most cantankerous of the three fairies. She is abrasive and is often given to fits of complaining. When Flora first has the idea for them to sacrifice their powers in order to protect the princess, MW does everything in her power to not be a part of it. I don’t blame her though. With a personality like that, magic was probably the only thing that would make people want to be around her. But I digress.
Then, after nearly two decades of not using magic when they had almost beaten Maleficent’s curse Merryweather chooses to strike. It’s only one more day, but that is one day too long for the sprite. The day before the curse is moot, the three ladies all try to do their assigned duties: making a cake, creating a dress, etc without using magic. (I do question why these duties are assigned to these three instead of the King’s kitchen staff or tailors. And after 16 years, how these women couldn’t have figured out how to bake a cake…what did they do that whole time?)
Anyway, when they fail, while not overly excited about it, they all decide it will be ok…everyone except Merryweather. She cajoles the two other fairies to break out their wands to make everything better. This is bad enough, but she then proceeds to get into a magic battle because she wants the dress to be blue. Really? Is it that big a deal? Is it worth it after sacrificing for so long? This selfishness is what leads to the crow finding their location and everything going south. Now, should we let her off the hook because she helps solve the problem that she created by helping Prince Phillip save the day? I don’t think so. At minimum she should have her wand impounded and have a few years of community service…well, maybe just probation then with the 16 years of being an ordinary human being considered time served.
Image Credit –> disney.wikia.com
This question is not such an indictment as others have been but more of something for us all to ponder. Mother Gothel has been alive for hundreds of years. She survived a majority of those years by meticulously gardening a single magic flower. We have to assume that the magic within the flower did most of the heavy-lifting helping it bloom seeing as Gothel kept it under a wicker basket. However, that shouldn’t take anything away from her fortitude and endless watchfulness. But when the palace guards find this plant, ole MG must adapt. And boy does she ever. Her transition from caretaker of the flower to maternal figure of the flower child is nothing less than seamless. Yet, for all her determination, the flower now had something attached to it that could be overcome: a lifespan. As Rapunzel is a human, she will eventually die along with her magical gift and subsequently Mothel Gothel. So was this just something that Gothel accepted? Surely not. Maybe when she would leave for days at a time, she was out looking for another flower? That sounds logical…but what if….
[OK. Here comes the crazy]. We can assume that since the Queen passed on this gift to her daughter that it would be possible for Rapunzel to pass it on to her children, right? Well even if it didn’t turn out to work, it would have been a reasonable enough theory to test. And that being the case, did Mother Gothel miss an opportunity to extend her life indefinitely by pushing Flynn away? Would it have been better for her to try to have it ‘work out’ between Ryder & Rapunzel so that she could potentially harvest her future lifeline? Then she could do some sort of ‘future breeding arrangement’ with their family for generations to come. Well, that got a little dark. No more for tonight.
Image Credit —-> disney.wikia.com
When the Queen finds out she is not Miss America anymore, she immediately hires some random hunter to off her rival, Snow White. She doesn’t want anyone in the castle to know that it was her who was responsible for killing the beautiful princess and one would assume that a dude with a name like, The Huntsman, would be good at killing. Good plan? Not really. It is a big leap to go from hunting a buck to killing a chick. And, how did she find that guy anyway? Did she ask the mirror? That would make sense as he is her go to for advice… ‘Mirror, Mirror on the wall, I find me someone to kill my step-daughter….y’all.’
Regardless of how he was procured, he obviously wasn’t the right man for the job. But his failure is actually the perfect opportunity for the Queen. With Snow White out of the castle, she could easily finish the job on her own. So does she venture out into the woods and kill the princess stealthily at night? Nope. She contrives an extremely complex plan that involves magic, disguises and poison and has a exponentially higher potential for failure than it does for success. But even with all her planning, she didn’t think of one of the most important parts…the getaway! And to top it all off, she leaves an out too for Snow White with the whole true love’s kiss thing. I really do feel bad for the queen. After this debacle she can’t even comfort herself anymore with the thought ‘Well, at least I am pretty.’
Image Credit –> disney.wikia.com
I’m sure I’m not the first person to ask this question. Probably tons of posts out there in the blogosphere with answers galore but honestly I am too lazy to go find them. Plus I have found that those of you that comment on my posts are way smarter than most of the people out there anyway.
So let’s first take a look at the curse. The enchantress states that he had to love someone and earn their love in return. What type of love was required for this curse to be broken? You would hope that if one was going to curse another for the rest of their lives for a small infraction, the least they could do is give some specifics?
Unfortunately she does not, but I am guessing that it wasn’t a family or friend type love that is necessary. Otherwise, why couldn’t he have just figured out how to love Mrs. Potts? Or Lumiere? Just because they are enchanted, did they lose the right to be loved? Of course not. Or maybe the issue here was that none of them loved the Prince? What does that say about the servants in this castle? Maybe they should have all been cursed after all.
And then there is Belle. When she arrives, everyone thinks that she could be the one to break the spell. I don’t think she is the first person there so what besides her beauty makes her more of a option than anyone other visitor? I mean, why couldn’t Maurice fill the role? When he arrived, the Beast didn’t even give him a shot. Locked him up right away. You would think that if you are trying to get someone to fall in love with a beast, someone with a nickname of ‘crazy, ole Maurice’ would be your best bet…but I digress.
The main question here though is not what is needed to break the curse, but what actually did. As Belle weeps over the Beast’s dying body she sobs ‘I love you.’ But what kind of love is it? I could understand the normal kind of brother/sister/friend love. Stockholm Syndrome aside, I could see a closeness forming between those two. And if that was all that was needed, then I should just stop typing. But I think we all agreed that it was something more. So, I ask you, was Belle IN LOVE with the Beast? I mean she kisses him 5 seconds after seeing him as a human…and this ain’t no friend smooch. And if she is, what does it say about a woman who falls in love with a giant monster?
Image Credit: fanpop.com
So let me get this straight…an extremely powerful sorceress comes in, places a curse upon your newborn and the best you can come up with is to hide your child away and wait it out? Did they not see how this was probably the worst decision they could have made? OK, let’s say that it works. Let’s say that they aren’t stupid enough to bring Aurora out of hiding the day before the curse ends and she makes it past her 16th year without pricking her finger. What’s to stop Maleficent from visiting again and making another curse? Or even just turning into a dragon and destroying everyone in the castle? Don’t they see they are treating a symptom and not the disease? Why didn’t the King gather his army to mount an offensive during those 16 years when he wasn’t spending time with his daughter? Surely an army with thousands of men aided by the three fairies could have defeated one witch, right? Regardless, even though Maleficent lost in the end, there is no doubt that she got her revenge and then some for being left off the guest list.
Image Credit —> disney.wikia.com
It’s said that revenge is a dish best served cold. But I would assume that for a starving lion settling for a warm hornbill snack would be retribution equally satisfying. Revenge is an extremely important aspect to Scar’s usurpation of Mufasa’s throne. And keeping Zazu locked in a rib-cage watching everyone and everything die around him is definitely a fitting reprisal for past scorn received. But how long was this possible? Surely hunger would have gotten the best of the aging lion and Zazu would have disappeared in one bite. I mean, when Scar wasn’t starving he tried to eat him and that was when there was plenty of food in the pride lands. So, I guess I will pose the same question about Zazu as he did about the mouse: ‘didn’t Scar’s mother ever tell him not to play with his food?’
Image Credit: nocookie.net
I’m not what you would call a prudish parent. I definitely wouldn’t fall too much on the liberal side either. But when I was watching Alice in Wonderland yesterday, I kept thinking to myself ‘how is this a kids movie?!?’ First of all, the heroine is a young girl who is more focused on dreaming of a world of absurdity than paying attention to her studies. Ok. That’s pretty normal. She then chooses to venture deep, deep into a hole underground by herself. I am all for adventure, but she even states out loud that she is choosing to do something she knows she shouldn’t. When she gets to Wonderland…all bets are off. She eats things that say ‘eat me’ and drinks things that say ‘drink me’ having no idea who or what put them there or wrote those signs. There are an untold number of strangers she encounters and seems to have no problem both talking to or following their advice. One is a hooka-smoking caterpillar who blows smoke letters into her face as they converse. Then she goes to a party with a pair of crazy dudes completely unchaperoned and allows them to make her drinks. Definitely not safe. All in all, she pretty much goes against everything that I have and probably will eventually ever teach my daughter. And in the end, there are no consequences for Alice. Not even a cheesy, ‘love is the answer’ to wrap it in a nice package.
Then there is the Queen of Hearts. This woman is different than the majority of other Disney villains as she has numerous people murdered over the course of the film. She just doesn’t only try to kill Alice, she flippantly sends many people to get their heads cut off. There is one scene before she even appears on screen where characters are discussing her predilection for decapitation and graphically use red paint to drive the point home. Huh? Queue the nightmares for my little dreamers…
Ok, so I get that all of this is in the book the movie is based on. But that doesn’t make it any better, does it? If we used that logic then we shouldn’t be upset or surprised if we don’t soon see Disney’s 101 Shades of Grey coming to a theatre near you!
Image Credit —> nerdlikeyou.com