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 to 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.
Maybe we have Scar all wrong. If you watch The Lion King, you can easily come away with the view that Simba’s uncle is a devious usurping murderer. And this would not necessarily be incorrect. Yet, I do question if we are not presented with a somewhat lopsided view of the Royal family that predisposes us against the dark-haired lion. Mufasa, King of the Pridelands, is seen presenting his heir to resounding cheers and hoof-stamping from his subjects leading one to believe that every animal supports his rule. But we obviously know this isn’t true. I’m not talking about Scar…I’m talking about the hyenas. This group, characterized for their low intellect and ravenous appetites, have been banished from the lands and forced to live in an elephant graveyard. We know nothing about why or when this happened, only that Mufasa and team do everything to make sure this segregation continues to occur. But does he really have that right?
Hyenas are carnivores and therefore a competitor to the Circle of Life story that Mufasa bases his whole worldview around. The hyenas also eat the antelope and when they die become grass that is eaten by the antelope. Yet for some reason, they are not allowed to live in the lush, gated community that is the Pridelands. Why? They are doing what comes naturally to them, yet Mufasa does not allow them to mingle with the other local residents. We see cheetah’s in the opening sequence, so this wasn’t a sentence based on their diet. So what was it? When we look for an answer here, the obvious thing one could point to would be what the pridelands look like after Mufasa dies and Scar & The Hyenas take over. But that could be more a case of poor leadership vs. the fault of the hyenas.
So with that question swirling in the clouds of your mind, let’s revisit Scar. Say what you want about him, but one positive thing that he does is reach out to a disenfranchised group of underdogs that results in them having the same access as every other animal. Sure his motives may have been purely self-serving, but what politician doesn’t have ulterior motives for good works? And does the ends justify the means? When Scar’s obituary came out after he was digested by those he helped to free, I hope that it would mention that for a brief moment, Scar brought a little equality and pride to these lands.
Am I the only one who has an endless amount of questions about Ursula? When you first meet this octo-witch, you kind of take everything about her at face value. But when you start to dig a little deeper, the water gets more and more murky. First of all, she used to live in the palace. Did you catch her mentioning that when she was spying on Ariel? She didn’t just visit the palace, she lived there. Was she part of Triton’s council? Was she in politics? She obviously has to know something about the Oceanic legal system as she was able to best Triton with a legal document. For some reason, she ends up getting banished. I think we can all assume that her exile had something to do with her spells and general evilness. But none of that bothers me as much as the fact that she is part octopus. All the other half human creatures in Triton’s kingdom, that we see anyway, are half-fish. You don’t see any other shark-boys or seal-ladies floating around. Are we to assume that Ursula was changed into her current self by some sort of irreversible spell? Or could it be that she was an anomaly in the kingdom. A mutant of sorts. Could it be that she was looked upon differently her whole life because she had something different going on down below? Maybe she also ate her feelings which lead to her less than healthy physical state. Her appearance is definitely an issue she struggles with regardless of if it was enchantment or genetic. She didn’t seem too keen on merpeeps who want to change something about their physical appearance. Could it be jealousy? Remember the ugly merpeople she makes pretty only to have them become part of her living garden? I know every movie needs a villain but maybe she is not the one who is truly at fault here. What about the merparents out there that are obviously not educating their children about the direct link between the rash of local disappearances and a visit with Ursula? Maybe she is doing the ocean a favor by weeding out the stupider merfolk. I we could chalk this up to survival of the…unfittest?
I don’t think fans of the movie Frozen are going to like this question but I am going to ask it anyway. Recent Disney movies have trended towards more character development so I typically hold them to a different standard from their predecessors. When you look at most relationships between Disney Princesses and their Beau’s, all have something in common: true love. They also typically have something else in common: the two love birds have no apparent similar interests besides being in love with the other. Sure, most of these movies are quick snapshots into the lives of these characters and usually feature a flurry of activity like fighting dragons, wicked sorcerers or even snow monsters. These characters are so busy trying to stay alive, they don’t have time to share that they enjoy collecting trash from sunken ships or prefer to eat bugs over meat…yet they somehow fall in love. Now, I get that besting a catastrophic occurrence can bond survivors, but I really don’t understand why when Disney had a chance to pair two characters together who were so obviously a good match, they chose instead to fall back to their old ways. So I ask, why didn’t Elsa & Kristoff get together?
To help solidify the validity of my question, I have put together a few proofs that Disney made the wrong coupling. First, Kristoff is a young man that from birth has been connected with ice. Not sure why as a boy he was working as a ice harvester, but it is something that he apparently both enjoys and excels at enough to stay employed in through early adulthood. And this not just a job for him, it’s his passion! He really loves the stuff. When Kristoff first visits Elsa’s ice castle, he is in a state of euphoria. He sighs and says ‘flawless…I’m gonna cry.’ Then when he is told to wait outside by Anna, he replies ‘oh, come on! It’s a palace made of ice. Ice is my life!’ It’s his LIFE. And although she doesn’t say it in the movie, it’s always been Elsa’s life too even though she hasn’t been able to enjoy it until now. I don’t know of two previous Disney love interests that could say they both shared such an identical affinity for a particular thing like these two do. But, they don’t end up sharing a harrowing ordeal, so of course they could never end up being the other’s true love. It does make me wonder though if Anna transforming into ice at the end had anything to do with securing Kristoff’s affection…I guess that would have one upped the ice dress huh?
Not sure how this film got into our collection. It was not one that I grew up watching so I know that I didn’t buy it for my kids. Most likely it was one of their grandparents that slipped it in when I wasn’t around. Regardless, The Artistocats has quickly become one of my daughter’s favorite Disney movies. It does, like most Disney movies, have some catchy tunes and fun characters but I must say I get bored a little to quickly with it. That being said, there is one thing that always kind of bugged me. If you don’t know the story, Duchess is a ‘long-haired purebred white Turkish Angora cat‘ who lives with her three kittens and a rich retired opera singer who is slightly mental. I say that because the old woman plans to change her will to leave all her money to her cats when she dies.
Duchess is a single parent. This is not necessarily a major plot point unlike most Disney movies, save for the fact that it opens her up to finding love at the end. However, this fact raises some major questions with me as to who is the father of her three kittens–two of which look nothing like her? Do we need to call Maury? Her daughter, Marie, is the spitting image of her while Toulouse is completely orange and Berlioz is completely black. I am not a cat expert, so I had to do some Googling on this one and I wasn’t pleased with the results. One site I found said that if kittens from the same litter look markedly different, it is often because they have different fathers. Oops! Looks like the cat might be out of the bag for ole’ Duchess. She acts so prim and proper and talks about being a lady when it seems that she might have been on the prowl in the not too distant past. Another theory is that the father could have potentially been a mixed-breed cat which could explain the sibling differences. Yet, I don’t see how Duchess could have encountered such a cat. She is a pure-breed and would most likely only be surrounded by other purebreds for the purposes of breeding. So such an encounter with that type of cat would had to have been on the sly. I mean, she only ends us meeting Thomas O’Malley, ‘The Alley Cat,’ because she is kidnapped. But, who knows? Maybe this wasn’t the first time she had met Mr. O’Malley…Toulouse does bear a striking resemblance to him after all…