#antitangledtheseries

[marie95disneygirl]

Ariel Is a Far Stronger and More Feminist Character Than Series-Rapunzel—and It’s Time People Acknowledge That

I decided to also write a defense post about Ariel, my favorite princess.

It honestly frustrates me to no end how Ariel is constantly mischaracterized as "weak" or "anti-feminist" when in reality, she’s one of the strongest, most independent princesses Disney has ever created. She had an abusive and controlling father who tried to crush her dreams and limit her world—and she still found the courage to fight for freedom, for love, and for her own voice. And yet, Ariel is so often torn down, while series-Rapunzel is bizarrely praised for treating love like a prison and her partner like a burden.

Ariel wanted to live on land long before she met Eric. Her dream of freedom and exploration wasn’t driven by romance—it was hers alone. But when she did fall in love, she was allowed to embrace it fully. She saw marriage as liberation, not a cage. She never once treated Eric as her enemy, or as someone holding her back. In fact, her love gave her the strength to break free from her toxic family dynamics and finally live life on her own terms. That is empowering. And that is exactly what the original Rapunzel/ Petrosinella tale was about too—a girl escaping an abusive parental figure through love and marriage, not in spite of it.

But somehow, Disney decided to completely trash that message with series-Rapunzel. Suddenly, marriage is framed as a prison, and Rapunzel—a girl who spent 18 years locked in a literal tower—has nightmares about being with a man who would literally die for her. Instead of escaping an oppressive environment, she stays with her abusive parents because they’re “her real family,” while pushing away the one person who actually supported her and gave her a way out. And people applaud this? Call it feminist?

Ariel was also traumatized—she lived under constant fear, was gaslit by her father, and punished for being different. But she never turned that trauma into cruelty. She never lashed out at Eric, never used him as an emotional punching bag, never called marriage a trap. Meanwhile, Rapunzel in the series treats Flynn like a villain just for loving her. And yet, people constantly excuse her toxic behavior because she’s “traumatized”—while simultaneously blaming Ariel for wanting to escape her father’s control and painting her as “selfish” for leaving. Why is Ariel’s rebellion villainized and Rapunzel’s coldness glorified?

Not only that, but series-Rapunzel only stops fearing marriage after she learns Flynn is secretly a prince. So we’re just okay with that? We’re okay with her subconsciously believing he isn’t good enough until he turns out to be royalty? That’s classicism, plain and simple—and it gets even worse when you remember her so-called “best friend” mocks Flynn for his poor background and Rapunzel says nothing.

Meanwhile, Ariel fell in love with a human prince while having nothing to offer him. She was voiceless, homeless, and desperate—but still believed in love and fought for it. She didn’t care about class, about status, or about control. She just loved him, and believed that love could save her. And you know what? It did.

And the best part? Ariel doesn’t go back. She’s not punished for choosing love. She doesn’t get forced to stay under the sea with an abusive father just because of blood ties. She’s allowed to leave, to grow, to change, to live. That is what real empowerment looks like—not staying stuck in trauma, not rejecting love out of fear, not mistreating your partner because you haven’t healed.

Ariel is stronger than series-Rapunzel. Full stop. She didn’t let trauma turn her into an abuser. She didn’t need someone to be rich or royal to love them. She chased her dreams, fought for her freedom, and still had enough heart left to believe in love. That is not weakness—it’s power. It’s strength. It’s real feminism.

Honestly, it’s a miracle Disney didn’t use the Hans Christian Andersen ending for the live-action remake—because punishing Ariel for loving a man would have fit too neatly into their new narrative: that women can only be strong if they reject love, softness, and vulnerability. But Ariel proves them wrong. She always has.

Ariel will always be the strongest and most feminist princess to me. And no amount of revisionist writing or false empowerment will ever change that.

[tangledmovielove]

One thing I realized over the holidays is that Rapunzel is called feminist and progressive in that stupid Tangled series for doing something that Ebenezer Scrooge was criticized for in A Christmas carol. Like Scrooge, she constantly postpones marrying her partner because something else was always more important to her. Only that instead of money, it's her absurd concept of freedom.

And just like Scrooge, Rapunzel chooses something abstract and distant (her strange concept of freedom) over something real and tangible (Flynn’s love). In A Christmas Carol, Belle leaves Scrooge because she realizes she deserves more than being neglected for his obsession with wealth, and similarly, Flynn deserves someone who values him for who he is, not someone who dismisses his love or sacrifices for her own self-centered ideals. Flynn is portrayed as being selfless and caring, and for him to stay in a relationship where he is consistently belittled, rejected, and taken for granted is emotionally damaging.

And I think it once again proves a toxic double standard in our society: Scrooge is of course criticized for this behavior and looses Belle forever and there is no redemption of their love because what he did for years is of course unforgivable. But when Rapunzel does the exact same thing, she is celebrated by feminists for being progressive.

The idea that marrying someone you love after months or even a year of being together is somehow stifling is completely nonsensical. If someone genuinely views marriage as a prison, they’re either with the wrong person or not ready for a relationship at all—because deep down, they’re likely considering breaking up or even cheating. True love means wanting to marry your partner, not rejecting them out of fear that marriage will strip you of freedom.

This attitude is a massive red flag and suggests Flynn isn’t the right person for Rapunzel, or worse, that she doesn’t fully love him. How could someone be truly happy with their partner if the very idea of marriage continues to scare them, even after more than a year? Portraying this dynamic as love is deeply misleading—it’s not love at all, and Flynn deserves so much better.

Instead of celebrating the idea of freedom within a loving partnership—where both individuals grow and support each other—the series frames Rapunzel’s independence as something inherently incompatible with marriage. This not only misrepresents the dynamics of a healthy relationship but also sends a discouraging message about what true commitment entails. Flynn’s unwavering devotion is brushed aside, and his willingness to support her dreams is ignored, reducing him to a passive figure in their story.

By focusing on Rapunzel’s internal conflict while sidelining Flynn’s perspective, the series fails to honor the balance and reciprocity that defined their relationship in the movie. Marriage should not be portrayed as a threat to freedom, but rather as a union where both individuals flourish together. In neglecting this, the series turns what could have been a beautiful conclusion into a disappointing misrepresentation of love and partnership.

Marriage isn’t supposed to be a threat to freedom. It’s meant to be a partnership where both people thrive together. By failing to show this, the series misses the chance to give their story the meaningful ending it deserved.

[tangledmovielove]

I can’t believe how badly Tangled: The Series treats Flynn Rider. His entire character seems to have been dismantled and warped, and it’s honestly heartbreaking for anyone who loved him in the original movie. Flynn was once a brave, intelligent, and resourceful guy with a complicated past. He put his life on the line for Rapunzel and opened up to her in ways he’d never done with anyone else. And yet, in the series, he’s treated like a punching bag—both literally and emotionally!

Let’s start with the way everyone around him constantly insults him. Rapunzel, who supposedly loves him, just stands by while he’s mocked, belittled, and treated like he doesn’t matter. It’s not just a one-time thing, either; it’s a constant barrage of disrespect from people she cares about. And Rapunzel herself contributes to it! She even draws his face on a punching bag as a joke, which is so cruel and out of character for someone who claims to love him. Who does that to someone they care about?

And it gets even worse. She travels back in time to try and “fix” his personality, as if he’s a problem to be solved, not a person with his own journey and growth. Rapunzel goes to these lengths to change who he is, yet shows no remorse or guilt afterward. In fact, her actions suggest that she sees his entire personality as an inconvenience—something to be “improved” to fit her ideal. That is not love; it’s manipulation. The Flynn we saw in the movie was willing to sacrifice everything for Rapunzel, but in the series, she can’t even respect who he truly is.

The worst offense of all is her rejection of his marriage proposal. In the original movie, they both sacrificed their safety and freedom for each other, and Rapunzel was ready to face any danger just to be with him. Now, the series tries to tell us that marriage would somehow “trap” her, as if committing to Flynn would hold her back. It’s painfully inconsistent, especially when we remember that she was willing to face literal prison for him in the movie. Why is marriage suddenly such a burden to her when Flynn was ready to give everything for her happiness?

Flynn is shown as if he’s just there to revolve around Rapunzel’s life, with his own dreams and desires barely acknowledged. He’s treated like a follower, an accessory, a background character whose feelings and opinions don’t matter. Rapunzel barely considers his perspective, often putting everyone and everything above him, which makes it seem like she’s only with him because he admires her so much—almost as if she enjoys having someone to worship her without actually respecting him in return. It’s sad to watch a character who was once confident and heroic be reduced to a supporting role in his own life.

At this point, it’s clear Flynn deserves better. His love and loyalty are brushed aside, his sacrifices ignored, and his personality demeaned by the very person who once loved him deeply. The Tangled movie showed us a romance built on mutual growth, respect, and sacrifice, but the series has thrown that away for a dynamic that feels toxic and unfair. Flynn deserves a partner who genuinely respects him, who values his thoughts and opinions, and who doesn’t see him as a “fixer-upper” or a prop. Rapunzel doesn’t deserve Flynn if she can’t respect him as an equal.

For all the fans who loved Flynn’s character in Tangled, the series doesn’t do him justice. He’s a complex character who’s more than just a sidekick, and his love story deserves to be one that honors his sacrifices and respects his identity.

I’ve had it (emotional time)

Just… here’s a “Keep reading” if you want to actually see this hell-whole of a post because . .  . if you enjoyed the episode: fantastic. It does actually hurt me inside when we can’t all agree on whether or not an episode is good or not, so if you want to avoid my rant about Eugene’s character in this show, go right ahead. Basically below is a lot of internal screaming and ranting about how Eugene isn’t treated right as a character and he deserves more time and blahblahblah. So … yeah. TL:DR not a fan of this episode.

Weiterlesen

[marie95disneygirl]

🌹 Cinderella Was Stronger Than Series-Rapunzel—and That’s the Truth 👑

You know what? The more I reflect on it, the more convinced I am that Cinderella is a far stronger, more empowering character than Disney’s version of Rapunzel in Tangled: The Series.

Both Cinderella and Rapunzel endured severe, prolonged trauma. Cinderella suffered years of emotional abuse and forced servitude at the hands of her stepfamily. Rapunzel was kidnapped as a baby, isolated, and emotionally manipulated by Mother Gothel. The trauma both girls experienced is undeniable. And yet, only one of them rose above her trauma with grace, kindness, and strength.

🕊️ Cinderella saw marriage as liberation—not a prison.

Cinderella didn’t see marriage as the end of her independence. She saw it as a path to freedom—which, historically, is exactly what it often was for women trapped in abusive homes. Marriage to a kind man was one of the only viable exits for women like her in the time period these tales are set.

She didn’t mistreat her prince. She didn’t panic at the thought of commitment. She didn’t belittle love or loyalty. She was kind, selfless, and hopeful—despite everything she had endured.

Compare that to series-Rapunzel, who treats Flynn—who literally died for her—with doubt, disrespect, and emotional distance. She rejects his heartfelt proposal not once, but repeatedly. She views marriage not as a sacred union with someone she loves, but as a trap. She even has nightmares about it. It’s only when she finds out that Flynn is secretly a prince that her tune magically changes—suggesting her love for him was conditional. If he were a commoner, was he simply not good enough?

That’s not romance. That’s classism.

🤐 And what’s worse? She enables the toxic behavior of her friends.

Let’s not forget how Rapunzel says nothing when her toxic friend Cassandra belittles Flynn for his background, his past, and his worth. He’s mocked for being poor, for being traumatized, for being vulnerable—while Rapunzel, the supposed “strong woman,” stands by in silence. That’s not strength. That’s complicity.

Flynn had trauma too. He grew up abandoned, had to build a false identity just to survive, and never had a place in the world until Rapunzel. Yet the show never treats his trauma with the same weight or empathy. It’s always her pain, her “growth,” her “freedom.” His needs are secondary. His love becomes background noise to her endless soul-searching.

🚩 Double standards and modern revisionism

People bend over backwards to excuse Rapunzel’s toxic behavior because she’s “traumatized,” but completely ignore Cinderella’s trauma. They act like any criticism of Rapunzel’s actions is misogynistic, while turning around and mocking Cinderella as weak or “unfeminist” for not escaping her abusers on her own.

But you know what? Cinderella was stuck. That was her reality. Just like Rapunzel was stuck in a tower. And she bore her suffering with courage and hope. She never became bitter or cruel. And when love came—when freedom came—she embraced it without shame.

So why is that considered weak?

Because modern media has twisted strength into rebellion for rebellion’s sake. It praises rejection of commitment, distrust of love, and fear of partnership—especially when it comes to marriage. And it tells women they’re only “strong” when they push men away.

But that’s not feminism. That’s not empowerment. And it’s definitely not love.

💔 What Tangled: The Series really told us

It took the only major decision Rapunzel ever made in the original fairy tale—to marry the man she loved—and turned it into a fear, a flaw, a failure.

“When he asked her if she would take him as her husband, she thought, ‘He would rather have me than old Frau Gothel.’ She said yes and placed her hand into his.” — Rapunzel, by the Brothers Grimm

That was her strength. Her clarity. Her power. And Disney rewrote it into uncertainty, rejection, and punishment for the man who loved her.

Meanwhile, Cinderella made the exact same choice. And no one praised her for it. In fact, they mock her for marrying a prince. They mock her for “waiting for a man” to rescue her. When in truth, her choice was her liberation.

What makes this all the more frustrating is how Disney actively rewrote the historic truth of these fairy tales to push a modern yet deeply patriarchal message: that marriage is a prison for women but a dream for men. In doing so, they completely inverted the purpose of stories like Rapunzel and Cinderella, which originally framed marriage as a woman’s path to freedom from abuse. And to make that twisted message work, Disney had to rewrite Rapunzel’s class status, too—suddenly she’s a long-lost princess, meaning she can afford to reject marriage without risking her safety or livelihood. She’s given privilege, wealth, and freedom by birthright, and she only stops treating marriage to Flynn as a nightmare once she learns he’s secretly a prince. That’s not romantic—it’s classist. The message is clear: Flynn isn’t “good enough” unless he’s royal, and Rapunzel is allowed to view his love as a burden until his bloodline “justifies” her respect. This is worsened by her toxic friend Cassandra constantly mocking Flynn’s poor background, while Rapunzel stays silent. Yet somehow, people defend this behavior by saying Rapunzel is “traumatized,” completely ignoring that Flynn is traumatized too—and never treated her this way. Ironically, Cinderella endured the same trauma as Rapunzel, and never became cruel or emotionally abusive. She stayed kind, never blamed her trauma for mistreating others, and embraced love and marriage as a form of liberation. And yet she’s still labeled as weak or “unfeminist” by people who praise series-Rapunzel as “strong” simply for rejecting love and commitment. It’s a disgusting double standard. These same critics claim anyone in Rapunzel’s situation would have rejected a proposal—while mocking Cinderella for “not escaping sooner,” ignoring how trauma and historical limitations actually trapped her. The truth is, this isn’t about empathy or understanding trauma. It’s about selectively demonizing romantic women like Cinderella and celebrating coldness and distrust in characters like series-Rapunzel. And it reveals something dark: a cultural shift that increasingly hates marriage, love, and romance—especially when it’s a woman’s choice.

If loving someone and committing to them is “weak,” then maybe modern media has lost sight of what true strength even looks like.

Cinderella didn’t just survive trauma—she transcended it. She never let it turn her into someone cruel, cold, or afraid to love. That’s real power. That’s what a heroine looks like.

And it’s about time we stopped pretending otherwise.

[marie95disneygirl]

"Marriage as a Prison": How Disney's Modern Narratives Betray Historical Truth and Undermine Emotional Equality

In the original Tangled movie, the relationship between Rapunzel and Flynn Rider (Eugene) was one of Disney’s most emotionally grounded and mature romances. It was a story of two individuals from vastly different backgrounds—an orphaned thief and a long-lost princess—learning to trust, open up, and build a bond rooted in equality and respect. The campfire scene, in particular, remains one of the most poignant moments in modern Disney animation. In it, neither character forces the other to reveal anything, but both choose vulnerability. Rapunzel listens—truly listens—to Eugene’s painful backstory. Her response isn’t pity, but a quiet and powerful validation: “I like Eugene Fitzherbert much better than Flynn Rider.”

That moment matters. Not just because of what it says in-universe, but because it transcends fiction. It affirms the value of emotional transparency, and it portrays love not as a transaction or a battle of power, but as mutual recognition.

But then came Tangled: The Series, and with it, a complete rejection—if not a mockery—of everything that scene stood for.

The series takes that emotional honesty and turns it into a punchline. In its very first episode, Flynn once again opens up about his traumatic childhood—only to discover he’s been talking to Pascal, a frog. “Pouring my heart out to a frog” is framed as a joke. But it isn’t funny. It’s a gut-punch to viewers who remember what the original movie taught us about compassion, empathy, and love. And even worse, the real Rapunzel, who once met Flynn’s pain with empathy, is now absent—both physically (having run away without telling him) and emotionally (withholding her own vulnerability and truth).

This version of Rapunzel, rewritten for the sake of “progressive storytelling,” actively distances herself from her partner. Marriage is now treated as a symbol of oppression and confinement—a loss of freedom—despite the movie itself having clearly shown that Flynn never sought to control her. His marriage proposal was not about taking her autonomy; it was about forming an equal partnership with the woman he literally gave his life to protect.

But in the series, that commitment is framed as selfish, and Eugene is subtly ridiculed throughout the show. Characters repeatedly insult him, his desires, and his worth. Rapunzel allows this behavior, and at times participates in it. His love and loyalty, which were once noble, are now played for laughs or dismissed as irrelevant. And all of this is somehow praised as “feminist.”

What this series truly promotes, however, is coping feminism—a warped, surface-level empowerment narrative where female strength is achieved by demeaning others, especially male partners. Instead of tackling real issues like trauma, healing, and equality in a meaningful way, it reinforces the ancient patriarchal notion that a woman’s individuality is automatically erased by marriage.

This is not just emotionally damaging—it’s also historical revisionism at its worst.

The original Rapunzel fairy tale—and Tangled’s medieval-esque setting—depicts a world where marriage was more than a romantic gesture. It was the only socially acceptable path for a man and a woman to be together. In that time period, a man who didn’t propose would have been viewed with suspicion; a woman who rejected such proposals indefinitely would have been scandalized. To pretend that a princess in that era could date casually or indefinitely without consequences is to deny the historical reality the story is supposedly set in.

This modern rewrite of Disney princesses, which constantly critiques older characters like Snow White, Cinderella, or Ariel for marrying young or desiring love, does not reflect progressive thinking—it reflects selective, hypocritical judgment. When critics endlessly mock older princesses for decisions that were both historically accurate and emotionally resonant, but defend newer ones for ghosting or gaslighting their partners, the message becomes clear: emotional connection and traditional values are no longer welcome unless they fit a very narrow ideology.

What’s worse is that fans who point this out—those who loved the original story and saw real meaning in it—are now regularly insulted, mocked, or dismissed as “regressive” or “conservative propaganda” for simply wanting respectful storytelling. Even when women themselves raise these issues, they’re accused of internalized misogyny or being “anti-feminist,” just for valuing commitment, equality, and emotional honesty in romantic relationships.

But let’s call this out for what it is: erasing the validity of genuine love stories in favor of shallow “independence” tropes isn’t feminism—it’s cowardice wrapped in progressivism. It doesn’t empower women to fear connection or to treat love as inherently suspect. It certainly doesn’t empower men to be vulnerable. It promotes detachment, distrust, and ultimately, a narrative where no one is allowed to grow, heal, or connect.

Disney once told a story where love was freedom, not imprisonment.

Now, it tells us the opposite—and it expects us to applaud it.

We don’t have to.

[marie95disneygirl]

The line at the end of Tangled was meant to be a joke

The line at the end of Tangled:

“After years and years of asking, and asking, and asking… I finally said yes.”

This is Flynn’s joke. He’s pretending that he was the one holding off on marriage, and Rapunzel was the one proposing repeatedly. It’s playful, ironic, and in keeping with his humorous narration style throughout the movie—it's a lighthearted twist.

➡️ It does NOT mean Rapunzel rejected him for years. ➡️ It’s NOT meant to be taken literally—just like many fairy tale endings that play with humor and happily-ever-after tropes.

But some people misinterpret this line the opposite way—that Rapunzel kept rejecting him. It’s a common misunderstanding, but in context, it's a play on Flynn’s reformed scoundrel personality and meant to be sweet and funny.

Then, in the short sequel Tangled Ever After, they do get married, and the kingdom celebrates.

In Tangled Ever After:

The setting, character designs, and even the side characters like the four little girls look exactly the same.

The kingdom is still celebrating. Nothing looks aged, and the environment has the same atmosphere as the first film. Nothing in the short shows a passage of years. No one has aged. The energy is identical to the ending of the film.

➡️ This strongly suggests the wedding takes place very soon after the events of Tangled, not “years later.” Maybe a few months at most.

The line “after years and years of asking” doesn’t align visually or logically with what the short film shows.

If Disney intended it to be funny, it falls flat for many viewers.

The fandom interpretation that she rejected him over and over for years has no visual, narrative, or character support in canon.

If a viewer accepts the “rejection for years” theory, then yes—it twists Rapunzel from brave and loving into selfish or emotionally unavailable, and it reduces Flynn to a sidekick begging for commitment, which dishonors both characters.

In the Brothers Grimm version, Basile's Petrosinella and in the historical setting:

Marriage = liberation, social legitimacy, and intimacy.

It was not just romantic, but a structural necessity.

To reject it would mean refusing a future together and refusing the relationship entirely—not just “not now,” but “not ever.”

🧠 If the line Were Meant Literally?

Then:

Flynn would be waiting years for a yes (but he clearly isn't upset), despite being the one who gave up everything for her.

Rapunzel would be repeatedly rejecting him—despite loving him deeply and sacrificing everything for him in the film.

Tangled Ever After would show aged characters, different designs, or some passage of time—which it doesn’t. Everyone looks exactly the same.

So either this line is a joke, or the visuals and storyboarding of the sequel short completely contradict it. Which makes one thing clear:

👉 The line is not meant to be taken literally.

🎬 What Was the Original Intention?

The original Tangled was directed by Nathan Greno and Byron Howard, with a screenplay by Dan Fogelman (*also wrote Bolt and Cars). Their intention was to create a classic fairy tale with a modern but sincere love story.

Everything in Tangled builds toward mutual trust, love, and commitment:

Rapunzel is willing to sacrifice her freedom to save Flynn.

Flynn is willing to die rather than let her stay trapped.

They each choose each other over everything else.

This isn't a story about fear of commitment. It's about liberation through love. Marriage is a natural continuation of that.

🤦 Why Does This Misinterpretation Persist?

Partly because Tangled: The Series (which had a completely different creative team) rewrote the characters with inconsistent, sometimes toxic logic—especially in how it portrayed marriage, commitment, and trauma. It inserted modern anxieties into a setting where they don’t make historical or emotional sense.

It literally:

Introduced a version of Rapunzel who saw marriage as a worse prison than Gothel’s tower.

Framed Flynn’s proposal as something traumatic.

Gave us scenes where Rapunzel has panic attacks and nightmares about marrying Flynn.

Yes, seriously.

The woman who sang “I’m where I’m meant to be” the second she and Flynn fell in love… Now treats him like a red flag?

And fandoms—often eager to overanalyze or push new interpretations—ran with it, despite it contradicting the emotional truth of the movie.

✅ Final Thought:

No, the original Tangled writers did not intend for Rapunzel to reject Flynn’s proposal for years because she thought marriage was a prison. That contradicts the film’s entire message, and the final line is clearly written as a sarcastic twist, not a factual timeline.

That misinterpretation came later, from the Tangled: The Series creative team, not from the original movie’s team (Nathan Greno, Byron Howard, Dan Fogelman). The movie Tangled was about love that liberates, not love that traps.

The real love story is this:

Two damaged, brave, loving people find each other, trust each other, and choose a life together.

And that is the ending Disney actually gave us.

The line “after years and years of asking…” was always a joke, not a literal timeline.

There’s zero narrative or visual evidence in the original movie or Tangled Ever After that suggests a years-long rejection happened. Everyone looks the same in the short film. The tone is light. The kingdom is still celebrating. It's clearly set shortly after Tangled.

Many fans—quietly or vocally—choose to:

Ignore the TV series.

Stick with the original film and Tangled Ever After as canon.

See the series as a misguided, out-of-touch continuation that misrepresents the characters and themes of the movie.

You’re allowed to do that too. And it doesn’t make you “wrong,” “toxic,” or “anti-feminist.” It just means you value emotional consistency, storytelling integrity, and what the film originally meant.

Turning Rapunzel into someone who:

Sees marriage as worse than being imprisoned by her abuser,

Panics over commitment from the person who gave up everything for her,

And treats Flynn like a joke or emotional burden,

...was not "progressive." It was painful, reductive, and out of character. To be heartbroken or angry about that is completely fair.

[tangledmovielove]

Why I Can’t Stand Tangled: The Series Rapunzel – She’s the Complete Opposite of the Character I Loved

I loved Rapunzel in Tangled—she was brave, kind, and selfless. But the Rapunzel in Tangled: The Series feels so unlike her movie counterpart that I can’t stand her character in this show.

In the movie, Rapunzel was a character who would do anything for Flynn. She was willing to sacrifice her freedom, her life, and everything she knew because of her love for him. Their relationship was about mutual trust, loyalty, and deep selflessness. But in Tangled: The Series, Rapunzel is almost unrecognizable. She comes across as self-centered, indecisive, and constantly dismisses Flynn’s feelings and opinions. Her behavior feels so out of character that it’s hard to see her as the same person.

One of the most frustrating things is the way she allows others—especially Cassandra—to insult and belittle Flynn. He’s constantly made the butt of jokes and treated poorly by those around him, and Rapunzel rarely, if ever, stands up for him. In fact, when he speaks up for himself, she often sides against him! Flynn has a mind of his own, but in the series, Rapunzel seems to dismiss his opinions and needs as if they don’t matter. The Rapunzel from the movie would never treat him this way.

The Marriage Rejection: A Major Betrayal One of the biggest disappointments is Rapunzel’s reaction to Flynn’s marriage proposal. In the movie, she loved him so much that she was willing to give up everything for him. She even offered to stay locked in the tower forever just to save his life. But in the series, she rejects his proposal, acting as if marriage is somehow a prison for her. This not only feels out of character, but it’s also insulting to Flynn, who’s putting his heart on the line only to have her brush him off. It sends a terrible message, suggesting that true love isn’t enough for her unless it’s always on her terms.

What makes this rejection feel even worse is that it’s not even based on any logical reason. They’ve known each other for months, and considering the historical time period, marriage would be the natural next step. And yet, Rapunzel hesitates, as if she’s constantly questioning her love for Flynn. For a character who was willing to give up everything for him in the movie, this lack of commitment is a complete betrayal of who Rapunzel was supposed to be.

The Constant Manipulation and Lack of Accountability Throughout the series, Rapunzel hides secrets from Flynn, manipulates situations, and uses time travel to “fix” Flynn’s personality when he dares to disagree with her. This kind of behavior is controlling and unfair, but she never seems to feel guilty or take responsibility. She even draws his face on a punching bag to please Cassandra, never apologizing or showing concern for how hurtful that could be to someone she supposedly loves.

By the end of the series, it feels like everything always has to go her way, while Flynn’s needs and feelings are constantly ignored or trampled over. Rapunzel’s treatment of him is selfish and dismissive, as if she only cares about him when it’s convenient for her. This kind of behavior feels toxic, and it’s not the love story I remember from the movie.

The Hypocrisy of Tangled: The Series Rapunzel The Rapunzel in the series is not the fairytale character she was meant to be. She’s the opposite of the girl from the movie who was ready to sacrifice everything for love and freedom. Her behavior is hypocritical: she rejects Flynn’s love and commitment, takes him for granted, and constantly lets others disrespect him. If anything, the series’ version of Rapunzel treats Flynn more like a sidekick who’s there to serve her than a partner she truly cares about.

The movie’s Rapunzel was kind, selfless, and full of love. But the series’ version seems like someone else entirely—self-centered, ungrateful, and unwilling to compromise.

For me, this isn’t Rapunzel at all. It’s a poor rewrite of the character, turning her into someone who acts selfishly and constantly overlooks the love of someone who’s been nothing but supportive and devoted. This series doesn’t deserve to be canon, and I’ll always remember the real Rapunzel as the one from the movie who knew the true meaning of love and selflessness.

rapunzel is an absolute piece of shit. anyone who likes her is questionable x.

[marie95disneygirl]

How Tangled: The Series Undermines the Original Film — And Why We’re Allowed to Reject It

Let’s get one thing straight: You’re allowed to love the original Tangled movie. You’re allowed to reject Tangled: The Series. You’re allowed to protect the version of the story that meant something to you.

Because what the series did wasn’t just lazy or inconsistent—it was insulting. It took two beautifully written characters, Rapunzel and Flynn/Eugene, and systematically warped them under the guise of “progress.” And it hurts. Especially when you're expected to applaud it.

The series builds itself on the patriarchal narrative that marriage is a prison—but only for women. That if a man proposes, he must be trying to “trap” her. That commitment is the enemy of independence. That wanting to build a life with someone you love is... antifeminist?

This entire framing is deeply regressive, wrapped in a modern, faux-progressive ribbon.

In the time period the story is set in, marriage was the only socially accepted way for two people—especially a princess and a commoner—to be together. A rejected proposal would have meant the end of that relationship. The original fairy tale understood this. Even the Tangled Ever After short did. But the series demands you ignore all of that for the sake of its shallow, revisionist messaging.

And the disrespect doesn’t stop there.

Flynn/Eugene, once the best-written male love interest Disney ever gave us—a flawed, complex, survivor—is reduced to a sidekick. A punchline. His entire arc from the film is undermined when the series implies that “Flynn Rider” wasn’t a mask or a coping mechanism, but his “real self.” Suddenly he’s not a man who grew through love and vulnerability, but just another "womanizing thief."

What made the Tangled movie so profound was that it challenged those assumptions. Rapunzel looked at Eugene’s worst parts and said, “I see you. And I like you better this way.” She validated him when society never did. She listened. And he listened back. They grew together.

The series throws all that away.

Now Rapunzel lies to him, gaslights him, and mocks his trauma (and yes, from what I've seen, she does make fun of his past as an orphan—and the show plays it off like nothing). Why? Because now she's a princess in power, and according to modern “girlboss” feminism, that power alone is what defines her worth. Compassion, emotional intelligence, and reciprocal respect apparently aren’t needed anymore.

The fact that Flynn’s backstory was rewritten to make him look shallow while Rapunzel gets enabled in every mistake she makes isn’t empowering—it's just bad writing. This isn't feminist storytelling. It’s insecure posturing dressed up as representation.

And what makes this even harder to swallow is how criticism of the series is treated online. Fans who point out these inconsistencies or express their pain over how the characters were twisted are mocked. Labeled “anti-feminist.” Told they’re just “nostalgic” or “don’t get it.”

Meanwhile, it’s somehow fair game to endlessly criticize the older princesses for marrying young—even when they were simply written in a historically accurate context. Snow White, Cinderella, Ariel—they get dragged for “not being feminist enough,” but a series like this that twists love into weakness and turns vulnerability into comedy is held up as “progress”?

Let’s be clear: You can’t claim to be rewriting history when your version makes less sense, both historically and psychologically.

The creators claim this is canon—but canon is not law. These characters don’t exist outside of what the writers decide for them, and that means we, as viewers, get to choose what we accept. These are not real people—they are creative tools, and we have the right to curate our experience.

You don’t have to accept a version of the story that spits in the face of what you loved.

Reject the series. Embrace the movie. Love the fairy tale. You’re allowed to.

[marie95disneygirl]

If You Can Die For Someone in 3 Days, You Can Marry Them

Let me get this straight—Tangled fans want to praise the fact that Rapunzel and Flynn are willing to die for each other after knowing each other for like, what, three days? But if they get married after a year (or even months, which is more than enough time in the 18th century), suddenly that’s a “bad decision” and too fast? What kind of double standard is this?

First of all, the message being sent here that “marriage = prison” couldn’t be further from the truth. This idea that marriage is some kind of oppressive trap is not only insulting to the women in the past who used it as a form of freedom, but it also ruins the romance of Tangled. In the movie, Rapunzel was ready to die for Flynn right away. She risked everything just to be with him. Yet, in the series, they’ve completely undermined their entire relationship.

Rapunzel goes from being willing to risk it all for him to rejecting his proposal because of...what? A joke at the end of the movie? That’s clearly what it was meant to be—a joke. Yet, the series takes it seriously, and suddenly we’ve got Rapunzel keeping secrets from him, letting people insult him without saying a word, and even drawing his face on a punching bag. Let’s not forget, she literally travels back in time to rewrite his personality—seriously, how is this not toxic? And let’s talk about the fact that she rejected his proposal...after everything she went through in the movie? That’s not the Rapunzel we knew. It’s disrespectful to the character, to the romance, and to the message of the original movie.

And let's not ignore the historical context here. This whole series messes with the 18th-century reality where people (especially princesses) were married off at age 16. They had to get married quickly to be together in public. No one—especially not a princess—could just “wait” for a few years to “see if it’s the right time.” Marriage was a necessity. If you’re going to rewrite history, at least understand it. This isn’t just some modern day issue—this was the only way to live back then. So, why insist on rewriting this historical reality?

The series was clearly written by someone else than the original movie, and it shows. It’s not canon. Disney never intended for Rapunzel to reject Flynn’s proposal like that. That line at the end of the movie was meant to be a joke, not a deep philosophical statement about the evils of marriage. If anything, Tangled Ever After proves how rushed and ridiculous it is to try to suggest it’s years later—Rapunzel and Flynn don’t look any different, and the whole thing feels completely out of sync with the tone of the original movie.

And honestly, the fact that Tangled fans trash older princesses like Cinderella, Ariel, or Aurora for marrying young—when that was totally normal and fitting for their time—while completely fine with Rapunzel and Flynn being willing to die for each other on day three, is the ultimate hypocrisy. If the message is “commitment takes time,” then dying for each other should also take time, because that’s far more commitment than getting married.

Marriage wasn’t a prison for Rapunzel or the other princesses. It was a means of freedom and survival, especially back then. So please, stop disrespecting the original stories, stop rewriting history, and stop sending the horrible message that marriage is the enemy. The Tangled series is not canon, it disrespects the legacy of the movie, and it sends a dangerous and unrealistic message about relationships. Historical context matters, people!

[marie95disneygirl]

How I Would Write a Tangled or Rapunzel Remake

If Disney decides to remake Tangled, I know what kind of version would finally allow me to say goodbye and feel peace — the kind of version that honors the original fairy tale, the original movie, and everything I loved about it before it was ruined by the series.

I’ve come up with three possible scenarios that would stay true to the message of the original film and the classic fairy tale. Any one of these would restore what Tangled meant to me — a love story about healing, freedom, and choosing each other over control.

Scenario One: Keep the Original Film Intact — But End With the Wedding

This is the simplest fix: Keep everything exactly as it was in the animated movie, but extend the ending to show the wedding — like the live-action Aladdin remake did. It’s clear that Tangled Ever After was meant to take place shortly after the movie. Everyone, including the four little girls who braided Rapunzel’s hair, is the same age. Flynn’s joke about marriage in the movie was just that — a joke. Unfortunately, the series writer took it literally and built an entire plot around delaying their relationship and sending the most horrible message that marriage is apparently a prison, completely missing the emotional tone of the original film.

Let’s be honest: after both characters were willing to die for each other, marriage would be the natural next step. That level of self-sacrifice is deeper commitment than any ceremony. And in the time period this is set in, marriage would have been the only way for them to even be allowed to be together. It wouldn’t just be realistic — it would be emotionally satisfying and true to the story.

Scenario Two: Adapt the Original Fairy Tale — Petrosinella

Instead of remaking Tangled, Disney could return to the roots of the Rapunzel story by adapting Petrosinella, one of the earliest versions of the fairy tale.

In Petrosinella, the heroine isn’t a damsel — she allows the prince into her tower on her own terms, plans her own escape, and uses the witch’s own magic to defeat her. She's strong, clever, and brave — and yet, she still falls in love and wants to marry the prince.

And there’s nothing wrong with that.

She chooses commitment, and that choice doesn’t make her weak or anti-feminist. Feminism is about women having choices — including the choice to love, marry, and trust someone. Disney should respect that Rapunzel chooses love in the fairy tale. She doesn’t need to reject marriage to be strong.

Scenario Three: A Fusion of the Two — My Own Rewrite

This scenario is based on a version of the story I once wrote myself — one that combines the emotional core of the original film, the fairy tale’s themes, and a more grounded, character-driven journey.

Backstory: Keep Rapunzel’s magical hair as a reason Gothel wants to keep her locked away, and either use the Tangled backstory where Gothel takes Rapunzel from her birth parents or the fairy tale version where she makes them give up their child in exchange for the Rapunzel bellflower that heals Rapunzel’s mother. But I would prefer Rapunzel not to be a princess. Making her royalty undermines the emotional power of the Petrosinella story, where love and marriage, not birthright, sets her free. However, I could still live with her being a princess, if the love story and romance are respected like in the original Tangled movie.

Flynn as a Prince: In this version, Flynn is born and raised as a prince like in the fairy tale. He’s trapped by duty and pressured to marry a princess for the sake of his kingdom. His parents give him a deadline to find love or face an arranged marriage — echoing the pressure Rapunzel faces from Gothel.

How They Meet: Flynn escapes the castle and stumbles across Rapunzel’s tower. She sees a way out and tries to blackmail him into taking her to see the world. At first, he refuses and tries to run — but Rapunzel follows him. Eventually, they open up to each other: Flynn confesses the pressure he faces, and Rapunzel reveals her fear, her magic and her dreams. They bond over shared feelings of being trapped by their abusive “parents.”

Falling in Love: They travel together in secret for a few weeks, with Flynn taking her to different villages and sights across the kingdom. Their connection grows, built on shared freedom and mutual vulnerability. Eventually, Flynn realizes he truly loves her and proposes — and she accepts.

The Conflict: Unbeknownst to them, Gothel discovers what’s happening. She secretly allies with Flynn’s controlling parents who want him to marry a noblewoman. They trap Flynn, drug him, and make it seem like he abandoned Rapunzel for the arranged marriage. Gothel swoops in and tells Rapunzel they have to move again — playing the victim and deepening Rapunzel’s despair.

The Revelation: While packing in the tower, Rapunzel finds a baby blanket or a token with a symbol that links her to her real parents — either royals from another land or a kind couple like a tailor and seamstress she met with Flynn during their travels. It all clicks. She realizes Gothel kidnapped her, lied to her about Flynn leaving her, and is still trying to control her. She confronts Gothel — who becomes violent and physically restrains her.

The Climax: Flynn regains consciousness and tells his parents he won’t let them decide his future and that he would rather give up the throne than lose Rapunzel. He races to save Rapunzel and is stabbed by Gothel in the process. Just like in the original movie, Rapunzel offers her freedom for his life, and he cuts her hair to free her — sacrificing himself so she can be free.

The Ending: Her tears bring him back to life. They marry before confronting his family, solidifying their commitment. Rapunzel reunites with her real parents, and Flynn either completely breaks ties with his, keeping the theme of leaving abusive parents for love, or his parents apologize and accept their love, what Gothel wasn’t able to do and therefore prove they are better than her. The film ends with them setting off to explore the world on their honeymoon — a promise fulfilled, and a story completed with love and freedom.

Final Thoughts

Of course, I know Disney won’t do any of these versions. They’ve made it clear that they don’t value romantic storytelling like they used to and hate marriage. But if I had the chance — this is how I’d write a Tangled remake that respects the love, the themes, and the original fairy tale. This is the kind of ending that would allow me to finally say goodbye — because it would honor everything Tangled used to mean before it was changed.

Love should never be treated like a weakness. Marriage is not a prison. And not every story needs a franchise or a timeline stretched beyond its limits.

Some endings should be left whole.

[marie95disneygirl]

Tired of pretending this series didn’t completely butcher the original story AND disrespect German culture. The real Rapunzel (yes, Brothers Grimm Rapunzel) was locked in a tower, traumatized, and STILL said yes to her prince the first time. Why? Because in that time, marriage wasn’t just about love—it was survival. There was no dating for years. An unmarried couple couldn’t even be together, especially if she was royalty. That’s literally the point of the fairy tale.

So WHY do Tangled stans act like she had to reject the proposal? Why is “commitment takes time” only a valid message when it’s about marriage—but totally fine when she was ready to die for him after three days? If dying together is okay, but getting married isn’t... that’s not "modern values," that’s hypocrisy. 😑

Also, that “we got married eventually” line? It was a JOKE. Tangled Ever After clearly happens right after the movie. Same creators. Same flower girls who didn’t age a day. But y’all out here rewriting canon and acting like it’s deep.

Meanwhile, the older princesses—Ariel, Cinderella, Aurora—get trashed constantly just for marrying quickly, when that was normal for their time. It wasn’t “rushed romance,” it was historical accuracy. And now we act like the original Rapunzel’s choice to marry is a problem too? Like... do you even know the source material?

If Disney hated the old story this much, they should’ve just made up a new character. Stop erasing the original meaning of these tales just to push modern agendas. And stop pretending that this Rapunzel is the same character. She’s not.

This isn’t “progress.” This is just disrespect.

[marie95disneygirl]

❓ Why does Tangled Ever After look like it’s set just shortly after the movie?

Because it most likely was intended to be. Despite the “after years of asking” joke at the end of the original Tangled, nothing in Tangled Ever After suggests a long passage of time:

Rapunzel and Flynn look exactly the same.

The little girls who braided Rapunzel’s hair are still tiny children.

Maximus and Pascal act the same.

There’s no visual age progression in anyone — including background characters.

All of this suggests the short was never really meant to show a “years later” timeline — just that some time had passed, likely a few months, enough for a royal engagement and wedding preparations.

The “years” line from Tangled is best seen as an exaggerated storytelling flourish — not a literal timestamp.

❓ Why did the animators or writers include the “years of asking” line if the short contradicts it?

The answer is probably: tone over timeline.

The ending of Tangled is narrated by Flynn — and his voice is still playful and cocky. He exaggerates for humor (“after years of asking and asking…”), then Rapunzel corrects him, and he admits the truth. That’s the joke.

The short was made to be a comedic wedding disaster, not a deep emotional follow-up. The creators were likely not thinking about long-term continuity — and that’s a valid criticism. The movie, short, and series all have different tones, teams, and goals, which causes narrative inconsistency.

❓ Why did Disney make the short if they were supposedly against marriage (like the series seems to suggest)?

This is an important point. The short (Tangled Ever After) was released in 2012, five years before the TV series existed. It came from the same team that worked on the original film, not the series.

At that time, Disney was not pushing anti-marriage themes. In fact:

Frozen hadn’t even come out yet (2013).

Tangled Ever After was clearly a celebratory, romantic piece — albeit with slapstick comedy.

The idea that marriage = prison only came into the TV series, and that show had different writers with a different agenda. It retroactively inserted themes that were not present in the original movie or short.

So it’s fair to say: 👉 The short was made in the spirit of happy-ever-after fairy tales — not with the later “marriage is prison” metaphor in mind.

❓ Why does Rapunzel look so happy in Tangled Ever After if the series said she feared marriage?

Because at the time the short was made, Rapunzel was meant to be happy. There was no plan to “deconstruct” marriage. She’s glowing, calm, and joyful. No sign of panic or fear.

The series creators later invented a conflict for her — one that directly contradicted both the movie and the short.

You’re absolutely right to notice this: ✅ Tangled Ever After does not reflect the “marriage as prison” arc at all. ✅ It portrays a traditional, joyful wedding with no hesitation. ✅ Rapunzel is happy. Flynn is happy. There’s no rejection, no conflict.

✅ Summary

“Years of asking” was a joke — not literal.

Everyone looks the same in Tangled Ever After because it’s not meant to be years later.

The short was created before the TV series and does not share its anti-marriage themes.

The original film and short show a happy, romantic story — with no signs of rejection or fear.

[tangledmovielove]

How Rapunzel Was Ruined in Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure

Rapunzel, the free-spirited, adventurous, and kind-hearted princess we fell in love with in Tangled, was completely ruined in Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure. What could have been a beautiful extension of her journey turned into a frustrating, inconsistent, and at times, out-of-character depiction that undermined everything we loved about her in the original movie. Let’s break down how this once-empowered, courageous character was mishandled in the series.

1. The Shift from Independent Princess to "Mary Sue"

In Tangled, Rapunzel was a strong and independent woman. She wasn’t just a princess; she was a survivor. She had spent years in isolation, and her entire world changed when she stepped outside for the first time. Her bravery and willingness to take risks—even when she was terrified—was what made her so relatable and lovable.

But by the time we get to Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure, she’s turned into the ultimate "Mary Sue." She can do everything—she’s perfect at everything she tries—whether it’s combat, leadership, or magic. She no longer has to grow or learn new things because, apparently, Rapunzel is just naturally amazing at everything now. She went from being a girl who wanted freedom to one who was overly confident, which made her character feel less grounded and realistic.

It’s frustrating because, in the original Tangled, Rapunzel’s journey was about learning to be brave and find her own voice. In the series, she’s suddenly perfect without that growth, and it strips away the beauty of her development.

2. The Destruction of Rapunzel and Flynn's Relationship

One of the most egregious things about the series is how it completely ruins Rapunzel’s relationship with Flynn. In Tangled, their love story is built on trust, mutual respect, and them helping each other find freedom. They are equal partners, and their dynamic is truly special.

But in Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure, Rapunzel starts to take Flynn for granted. She keeps secrets from him, allows her best friend Cassandra to constantly insult him, and even rejects his marriage proposal, despite the fact that in the movie, she was willing to give up her entire life for him.

This shift makes no sense. Rapunzel, the same girl who risked everything to save Flynn, now seems completely indifferent to him. The emotional connection between them feels hollow, and Flynn, who was an equal protagonist in the movie, becomes more of a side character in her life. It feels like the series doesn’t know what to do with them as a couple, and as a result, Rapunzel is made to look like a toxic girlfriend who doesn’t value the person she claims to love.

3. The "Rejection of Marriage" Plotline

Rapunzel’s rejection of Flynn’s proposal is another major flaw in the series. In Tangled, marriage was a symbol of their love and commitment to each other. It was a natural progression of their relationship. She was ready to give up everything to be with him, and that’s what made their bond so powerful.

But in Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure, Rapunzel rejects Flynn’s proposal, and instead of exploring this moment with depth, the show portrays it as a sort of "fear of losing freedom" issue. This is absurd because Rapunzel was willing to give up her freedom to save Flynn in the movie! How could she go from that to now seeing marriage as a "prison"?

Marriage, in their time, wasn’t about control—it was about commitment, and it was the only way for people to be together in a respectable way. The series tries to force a modern-day, anti-marriage narrative into a historical context, and it feels so out of place and unrealistic. It contradicts the very core of Rapunzel’s journey in the movie.

4. The Erasure of Rapunzel’s Vulnerability and Growth

In Tangled, Rapunzel was a vulnerable character. She longed for freedom, for adventure, for a chance to live her life as she chose. But that vulnerability was what made her relatable. She wasn’t perfect, and she was allowed to grow and evolve.

But in the series, Rapunzel’s vulnerability is practically erased. She’s shown to be invincible in many ways, never really facing any consequences for her decisions. When she loses control of her powers or faces difficult challenges, instead of learning from them, she either brushes them off or is bailed out by someone else. It makes her seem like a less complex character than she was in Tangled. She goes from someone who is genuinely conflicted about the world to someone who is almost too perfect, with no room for personal growth or mistakes.

Her growth in the series isn’t as meaningful because, at the core, she no longer feels relatable or real.

5. Rapunzel’s Relationship with Cassandra

One of the major plotlines in the series is Rapunzel’s friendship with Cassandra, which eventually turns toxic. But the way this friendship develops is strange and inconsistent with Rapunzel’s personality in the movie.

Rapunzel was always portrayed as someone who was kind, empathetic, and loyal. But the series flips this on its head, making Rapunzel ignore the red flags about Cassandra for far too long. She continues to trust someone who clearly doesn’t have her best interests at heart, and this leads to Rapunzel making incredibly frustrating decisions, all while ignoring Flynn, who’s been nothing but supportive.

This shift in Rapunzel’s judgment makes her appear naive and emotionally distant, a far cry from the girl we saw in Tangled, who made bold decisions and was never afraid to confront the people she loved when they let her down.

6. The Impact of Modern Feminism on Her Character

One of the biggest issues with Rapunzel’s character in the series is how she is used to push a modern feminist agenda. While feminism is important, the way it’s portrayed in Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure is problematic. It turns Rapunzel into a superhero who can do no wrong while Flynn, a male character, is repeatedly reduced to being the "dumb boyfriend."

The show pushes this agenda in a way that erases Rapunzel’s humanity, and in doing so, makes her less relatable. Instead of empowering her, it makes her more one-dimensional and less of the nuanced character we fell in love with. True feminism should show men and women as equal partners, supporting and growing with one another—not as one gender constantly saving the other or turning them into a side character.

7. The Overall Loss of Rapunzel’s Depth

At the end of the day, Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure made a huge misstep by taking a character that was complex, vulnerable, and deeply relatable, and reducing her to an overly perfect, one-dimensional figure. The series completely strips away the growth, vulnerability, and relatability that made Rapunzel such a beloved character in Tangled.

It’s clear the show wanted to focus on her magic, her leadership, and her adventures, but in doing so, it lost sight of the heart of Rapunzel’s character—the girl who, in the original film, was finding her way and learning to trust both herself and the people she loved.

Rapunzel deserves better. And, as much as I wanted to enjoy Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure, I can’t ignore how it ruined the character we all adored.

[tangledmovielove]

Please no! I still have hope that Disney is now learning and will completely ignore the series in the live action series and instead give us the movie exactly like it was.

I'm also still hoping and praying that they will end the remake with their wedding and not frame marriage as a prison again. I mean, Disney managed to get the tone right with the Aladdin remake, allowing Jasmine and Aladdin to marry at the end. So, there is still hope even though I know that it's unlikely.

Calling it now: if Tangled LA Remake happens they'll base it not on the original movie (Disney's last female driven and empowering princess story before the company turned to daughters transforming mothers into literal animals to have their way and labeling it as "feminist", Hans twists telling women they are "desperate for love" and are blamed for male abuse and other pseudo-progressive narratives) but on the series. Which fully embrace and perpetuate Disney's current pseudo-feminist trends and completely misrepresent the characters and the title romance.

Thus, in the remake, Flynn/Eugene will be either written out completely (like Shang from the LA Mulan - because a heroine having two daddy figures instead of a love interest she has chosen is so much more progressive) or replaced by Cass*ndra from the series. The climax will be reworked to have the same pandering, faux feminist twist with Rapunzel cutting off her hair on her own because she is such a "girlboss" now and not a victim of lifelong abuse and gaslighting who needed to be helped out of it, just like other victims do.

And just like in the series, Rapunzel will be doing it for Cass*ndra because when Flynn/Eugene sacrificed his life for Rapunzel's freedom and agency it was "not feminist" and "made her weak". But it is an "improvement and fixing the original" when Rapunzel terminates her magic hair's qualities for a female character who, from the very first episode, started to act in the "I know best" manner. Except unlike in Gothel's case the series' narrative framed it as her being strong and "badass" (passive aggressiveness and pushing boundaries is only bad when older women do it, didn't you know?/#hashtag feminism).

[marie95disneygirl]

Why I Still Hate That One Line at the End of Tangled (And How It Let the Series Rewrite Everything That Made the Original So Beautiful)

I’ve loved Tangled for years. It meant the world to me—a love story built on mutual sacrifice, freedom, and trust. A man willing to die for the woman he loves. A woman so selfless she gives up her dreams to save him. It was about healing, choosing each other, and finally being free together.

But that one line at the end—

“After years and years of asking, and asking, and asking… I finally said yes.” —ruined everything for me.

It was meant to be a light joke. A fairy-tale quip. But instead, it opened the door to one of the worst misinterpretations I’ve ever seen in a fandom—and it ultimately allowed the Tangled series to completely undo everything beautiful about the original story.

Because the line is vague. It doesn’t clarify whether Rapunzel ever rejected Flynn. He jokingly says she asked him, she corrects him, and he just shrugs: “All right, I asked her.” That’s it. And because he doesn’t say “I asked her once,” people now insist this means she rejected him over and over for years.

And that makes her look awful.

It makes it seem like the girl who was ready to sacrifice her entire freedom to save the man she loved suddenly saw marrying him—building a future with him—as worse than the prison she spent 18 years suffering in.

And then the Tangled series ran with that interpretation. They took that one vague line and turned it into canon: Rapunzel rejecting Flynn for years, treating marriage like a trap, having panic attacks over commitment, calling marriage a kind of prison. It’s not empowering. It’s regressive, hypocritical, and completely out of character.

It makes everything in the movie feel fake.

She was willing to die for him, but won’t marry him?

She trusted him with her life, but not with a future?

Marriage to the man who literally died for her is somehow oppressive?

What kind of message is that?

And worst of all—it doesn’t just ruin Rapunzel’s character. It destroys Flynn, too.

Because if she truly rejected him for years, and he just stayed there, waiting, loving her through it, being turned down over and over while she called marriage a prison—that turns him into a doormat. A guy with zero self-respect. And then he jokes about it like it didn’t emotionally destroy him? That’s not charming. That’s tragic.

I loved Flynn. He was brave, flawed, funny, and ultimately selfless. And that version of Rapunzel—the one who grew, learned to love, and made her own choices—loved him too. But the series made her look like someone who didn’t value him. Who took him for granted. Who saw commitment not as freedom, but as a cage.

It makes their love story look like a lie. And it breaks my heart.

And yeah—if we’re being real about the historical or fairy-tale context? Marriage was the only way couples could truly be together. In many stories, including Rapunzel, that longing to share a life and love each other fully is part of what makes the romance powerful. Rejecting marriage in that world is not progressive. It’s cold.

So yes, I hate that line. Because it let all of this happen.

One vague sentence gave people a weapon to rewrite an entire love story into something toxic and ugly. And it hurts so much because this story meant something. It gave me hope. It made me believe in love that was selfless and healing and real.

And now I feel like that was stolen. By a joke. By a shrug. By writers who came later and didn’t care about what made the original story so powerful.

So no—I’m not being “too sensitive.” I’m reacting exactly how anyone would if they watched their favorite characters be turned into strangers. If they saw their favorite love story twisted into something that made no emotional sense.

I wish they’d left it at the lanterns and the kiss. Or made the joke clearer. Or just ended it without ambiguity. Instead, that one line opened the door to a version of their love story that feels unrecognizable, even cruel.

And I’ll never forgive how that moment was used to rewrite everything it stood for and never stop grieving that. Because it mattered.

[marie95disneygirl]

Stop pretending Tangled’s “after years of asking” line was deep. It was a joke.

Yes, a joke. You know—humor? The same writers made Tangled Ever After, and the flower girls who braided Rapunzel’s hair haven’t aged a day. So no, she didn’t spend years “finding herself” before marriage. Y’all just took a quirky line and twisted it into a whole fake narrative. 😂

Meanwhile, everyone’s out here defending this “modern, empowered” Rapunzel and dragging the older princesses like Cinderella, Ariel, and Aurora—for what? Marrying in a time where THAT WAS THE ONLY OPTION?? In their eras, you couldn’t just "date" or "live together." Marriage was the only way two people could even be together.

People keep telling me, “Rapunzel couldn’t have said yes right away, she was too traumatized!” Uh, yeah? So was the original Rapunzel. She was literally locked in a tower and abused. And she still said yes to the prince's proposal. Because you know what? Back then, people were terrified of out-of-wedlock pregnancy. THAT WAS THE ACTUAL PLOT of the original story!!!

Why act like traumatized people can’t say yes to love? Why act like a woman needs to see the world before marriage—when she could still see the world while being married?

Marriage. Wasn’t. A. Prison. Especially not in a time where couples were married off at 16 and unmarried women had zero autonomy.

So why the revisionism? Why pretend discrimination never existed? Why erase the original story, culture, and historical reality just to push a modern narrative that directly contradicts the actual meaning of the tale?

If you want to write a commitment-phobic modern princess who panics at a proposal—cool. Make a new character. Don’t slap the name Rapunzel on it and act like that’s somehow faithful. 🙃