You are viewing rhjunior

Mar. 4th, 2012 @ 01:03 am Double ouch
About this Entry
pestering
From:Monfang Howlett
Date:March 4th, 2012 11:14 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
HAH! That's epic. Great job finding that.
From:galadrion
Date:March 4th, 2012 12:03 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Well, the names could probably be debated, but in modern society, most of them would probably sign as "John Smith". Whom I notice wasn't included in this, but then, the man was hardly a prince... or even a gentleman.
[User Picture Icon]
From:maxgoof
Date:March 4th, 2012 12:30 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Upper left: Eric (The Little Mermaid)

Middle right: Phillip (Sleeping Beauty)

I believe Middle left was just names Prince Charming (Snow White).

Upper left is from Cinderella, but I don't believe he was ever actually named anything but The Prince.

Same with Beast.
[User Picture Icon]
From:tomyironmane
Date:March 5th, 2012 04:58 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
1.) no fair using IMDB/Google

2.) Cinderella's was Prince Charming, and Snow White's was just "Prince"

3.) IMDB (because I was far more lost than even you were to start) checks tells us that his name IS, in fact, "Beast" which makes sense, because when she finally breaks the spell, the castle becomes un-cursed as the magic that had previously given him such things as personality and character leave him and he is literally unmade, leaving only a soulless husk with all the personality of a Ken doll. That's why when Disney sequel hacks made a Beauty and the Beast sequel, they went back and used a period of time from the middle of the first movie.
[User Picture Icon]
From:pogo101
Date:March 4th, 2012 03:48 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Hey, what about Flynn Rider (Eugene Fitzherbert)? Poor, charming and good-looking.
[User Picture Icon]
From:zarpaulus
Date:March 4th, 2012 05:57 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Also a sleazy, womanizing thief.

Though I am pretty sure that the guy in the original Grimm tale was a prince. And Rapunzel was just a noblewoman.

I guess the real message is that medieval fairy tales support outdated value systems.
[User Picture Icon]
From:kire_duhai
Date:March 4th, 2012 08:28 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
The proper term is "scoundrel" - which has among its ranks the like of Han Solo, so I wouldn't pick on 'em too much, hehehe. =P

-Kire Du'Hai
[User Picture Icon]
From:brombear
Date:March 6th, 2012 03:04 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Scoundrel...or "scruffy looking nerf herder"....I like the latter better...
[User Picture Icon]
From:mousesquisher
Date:March 6th, 2012 11:22 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Who are you calling 'scruffy looking'? >:I
[User Picture Icon]
From:nefaria
Date:March 4th, 2012 05:22 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
You're also supposed to be part of an aristocracy. If you're just a commoner, no girl 4 U.
[User Picture Icon]
From:kire_duhai
Date:March 4th, 2012 07:25 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
To be fair, at least four (probably five) of those characters are from movies that were very clearly written for little *girls*. They were side characters at best.

Aladdin may have gotten far with the girl with the lie, but he got farther when he came clean. And the wealth and fame was more of a turn-off for Jasmine than appealing traits.

The Beast guy (not going to speculate on a name) didn't get anywhere with Belle with his wealth or fame. He got her attention when he started giving a crap about her instead of himself. Essentially, what got his curse lifted was him ceasing to be such an A-hole.

But Charming, Cinderella Dude, and Philip, were more or less just plot devices. Well, Phil might have at least shown some bravery and persistence in getting the girl, but he was still pretty shallow. Same goes for Erik, I suppose.

Also, they're based off of *fairy tales*, which show a distinct focus on royalty. What do you expect them to teach you about courtship?

-Kire Du'Hai
[User Picture Icon]
From:gothelittle
Date:March 5th, 2012 08:30 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Agreed here. :) The focus on all of these movies is the girl. Plus the message delivered by Beast was quite different than the others... and you could make the case that Prince Eric's main accomplishment was proving through determination and bravery that you can win over your girl's well-meaning racist father. Which isn't really a bad thing to teach someone especially in this day and age.

Plus, as noted above, the picture left out "Flynn" Rider (Eugene Fitzherbert), whose lesson was that not everyone becomes a scoundrel for the same reason and almost any man will straighten up when confronted enough times with a frying pan...

...And my personal pet peeve, Prince Naveem, whose lesson was that the love of a hard-working woman will transform a lazy ne'er-do-well into an upright and hard-working man willing to do everything to make all of her dreams come true.
[User Picture Icon]
From:rhjunior
Date:March 5th, 2012 02:09 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
don't lose the point in all the chaff; feminists complain about "poor role models" for girls in these classic movies... but boys get ones that are just as bad, if not worse.

No, Rapunzel is not a "Disney Classic," you don't earn the title classic till the children who saw it are old enough to have watched it with their children or even grandchildren.

Let's look at those "exceptions to the rule---" Flynn Rider (callow jerk reformed by a woman's love), Naveen (callow jerk reformed by a woman's love), Aladdin (somewhat callow diamond in the rough, reformed by a woman's love), Beast (callow jerk with a body hair problem reformed by a woman's love)...

Not a much better message.

Two REAL exceptions: Tarzan and Pacha, from the Emperor's New Groove. Tarzan wasn't rich or famous, and he wasn't "reformed by a woman's love." The girl decided she damn well liked him the way he was, and joined HIM.
And Pacha-- he wasn't handsome, rich, famous or powerful. he was a poor llama herder with two kids, a wife and a bun in the oven... and you saw that he and his wife did love one another deeply.

Which goes to show that the best characters and role models and movies come out when the moviemakers break formula.
[User Picture Icon]
From:tomyironmane
Date:March 5th, 2012 05:16 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Disney HAS been improving their scriptwriting, haven't they? Or at least cranking on a new formula. I bring your attention back to one Mr. Eugene Fitzherbert, however. It seems, if I want to make issue about it, that we're teaching women it's okay to beat the fish sauce out of a fellow with a cast iron skillet, under the guise of slapstick.

I'm just saying, what kind of movie would we get if we reversed the genders of the roles (and used a little bit of a rewrite/recast to make the plot and voices make sense)? Probably a box-office bomb that would land our whole production company in seven different kinds of bankruptcy, as well as legal trouble. Ever notice that a Disney Princess is allowed to clock anyone who is portrayed as "deserving it" while a Prince tends to almost be a nonentity? (And woe unto anyone who lays a FINGER on a PRINCESS! >.<) Also I keep getting this Woody Allen vibe for the male lead in this hypothetical movie, which just tends to annoy the hell outta me...
[User Picture Icon]
From:gothelittle
Date:March 5th, 2012 07:40 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
I have to disagree with your definition of "Disney Classic". You listed Tarzan, for instance, which came out in 1999. Few who saw it as children are old enough to have their own children. I was in my early 20's when it first came out.

Movies like Beauty and the Beast were Disney Classics the moment they came out. Some movies earned their title over the test of time, though they weren't highly regarded when they first came out, like Fantasia. Others have never really earned the title.

Tangled is *definitely* a Disney Classic. I could tell the moment I watched it for the first time. Most women have their own "Disney Princess", the heroine that they claim as their own, as a Catholic might claim a patron saint. I know I bear the closest resemblance to Belle, but in truth Cinderella is my Disney Princess. (Don't crowd me with Cinderella merchandise, though. I prefer others when it comes to picking out a doll or avatar.) My mother's Disney Princess is Pocahontas. My 'older-younger' sister used to think hers was Ariel (red hair!) but now we know it is clearly Mulan.

My daughter, my little almost-three-year-old girl, *is* Rapunzel.
[User Picture Icon]
From:kire_duhai
Date:March 6th, 2012 05:16 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
"Most women have their own 'Disney Princess', the heroine that they claim as their own, as a Catholic might claim a patron saint."

...Kuh-REEPY.

And I can't really explain why. It's just one of those weird girl things I never wanted to know.

-Kire Du'Hai
[User Picture Icon]
From:Nyxilis Mistwalker
Date:March 6th, 2012 02:55 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
I think it's a natural part of it really, most girls have a princess fantasy at some point but most boys on the flip side usually have a hero fantasy to. It's what kids do.

Also, like how the debate on what and isn't classic is as old as time. The debate is itself a classic. Is it classic because it's popular, will go down in common terms, or because people tell me it is? I think what makes Tangled the classic is folks like my mother who only collects the Disney ones she wants to see time and time again and that one is now there.

Though, on a side note really. Disney has so many more boy & girl hits out there not even touched. Rescuers, Robin Hood, Aristocats, and Lady and the Tramp. None fitting the usual male archetype of above. I do agree with the person who mentioned above, that most of these are based off of old stories which have a royalty slant. Unless you want to cast that entire element out in really what would be a complete rework that's what you're stuck with.
[User Picture Icon]
From:rhjunior
Date:March 6th, 2012 04:23 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Aristocats, lady and the tramp, aladdin, and Tangled all hit the OTHER lazy stereotype: the raffish rogue reformed by Twue Wub(tm). Girls, you know what you get when you marry a "diamond in the rough?" You get a HUSBAND who's a diamond in the rough and who STAYS that way.
From:gwr_gwir
Date:March 8th, 2012 04:00 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Then quickly thereafter, an ex-husband who's a diamond in the rough and stays that way.

Unless they're too blind to see that, or they're masochistic.
[User Picture Icon]
From:houndofloki
Date:March 9th, 2012 06:15 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Ugh, the "rogue reformed by love" stereotype is probably my biggest pet peeve in children's entertainment. It's an incredibly negative message for both girls and boys.
[User Picture Icon]
From:rhjunior
Date:March 9th, 2012 09:04 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Mind, I got nothing against a character being reformed... but shake up the formula a little.
[User Picture Icon]
From:houndofloki
Date:March 9th, 2012 06:24 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Oh yeah, redemption in and of itself can actually be a really GOOD theme for kids. It's when they tie it exclusively to "true love" that it's problematic. It has to be personal and come from more then that. Even though it was a silly comedy, the Emperor's New Groove actually handled that theme really well. The Lion King did, too (he loved Nala, but also went back because he remembered his obligations to his home and family). Disney hits and misses quite a lot so far as messages go.
[User Picture Icon]
From:crazyredemu
Date:March 5th, 2012 01:13 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Aladin didn't get anywhere via money cause she still loved him as after wards....he got him self a suger momma lol
[User Picture Icon]
From:rhjunior
Date:March 5th, 2012 01:58 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
And in passing may I note how FRUITY they all look in this picture?
[User Picture Icon]
From:crazyredemu
Date:March 5th, 2012 03:02 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Yea but this is fan art right? Fan art doesn't count against something.

What I want do know is if there is any princesses that fell for a normal guy.....any at all?
[User Picture Icon]
From:talonotw
Date:March 5th, 2012 04:06 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Well, if you count the 'unofficial' princesses, Kida from Atlantis and Esmerelda could count. Of course, counting those unofficial princesses brings that to two out of SIXTEEN, and they're still only from the movies that broke the formula.
[User Picture Icon]
From:crazyredemu
Date:March 5th, 2012 06:17 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Esmerelda was a gypsy hardly anything close to a princess, she's more like Aladdin.
I don't think that guy from Atlantis was anywhere near to normal but he is far closer to any of the others I can think of off hand.
Wait, Mulan fell for a military guy, he was mostly normal.
[User Picture Icon]
From:gothelittle
Date:March 5th, 2012 07:46 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Well, Mulan fell for a military guy, but she wasn't a princess, just a noblewoman. Cinderella was also a noblewoman, but she fell for a prince. Let's see...

Pocahontas was a princess technically, as her father was the tribe leader, and she fell for Capt. John Smith.

Prince Eilonwy fell for a pig-herder.

Rapunzel was a princess and she fell for an orphan who became a thief for a while.

The rest of them were either princesses who fell for a prince, non-princesses who fell for a non-prince, or non-princesses who fell for a prince. :)
[User Picture Icon]
From:zarpaulus
Date:March 6th, 2012 02:44 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
There was Atlantis: The Lost Empire, princess fell for a geeky archaeologist.
[User Picture Icon]
From:kire_duhai
Date:March 6th, 2012 05:24 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
"Eilonwy fell for a pig-herder."

Assistant pig-keeper.=) And a quick aside - Whatever good things Disney has done, they should *suffer* for ruining anyone's chance at making a decent film of those books without thinking of their lousy cartoon.

May the wrath of the Sons of Don fall upon them. -fistshake-

-Kire Du'Hai
[User Picture Icon]
From:Nyxilis Mistwalker
Date:March 6th, 2012 02:40 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
I say that speaks to the power of Disney and certain other media companies. Today leprechauns are pretty much defined by the way Disney portrayed them ages ago than the small sliver of insignificance they held prior.

Though, at the same time, some never did get wholly defined that way. Disney's Alice is really one in a vast pool and is considered that way when you bring it up. And some of the much older ones do show their wear and tear with the generations.