#it's not just the disney princess factor

[nitewrighter]

Just finished watching Wish with my gf and Im sad the movie turned out the way it did. The concept of a Wishkeeper keeping people's wishes so that their dream doesnt die and so that they dont experience heartache is so good imo!

No, I know!! It's such a fascinating concept and when you see Asha's dad freak out when Asha tries to share his own wish with him because "Why would I want to know a wish that our king thinks is dangerous and will never be granted?" that scene has so many cool implications for like, cultural taboos and all these other concepts. But then Disney has to drown it out with like 47 comic relief sidekicks and jokes that aren't even funny because Disney thinks it has to be jingling keys in the audience's face every 6 seconds.

Like... I was really hoping for the villain song to be a brutal reprise of "At All Costs" but instead it's "This is the Thanks I Get" and it just completely fucks up the actual sense of rising stakes so that when you get to "Knowing What I Know Now" it's just complete mood whiplash.

[mbat]

something i love noticing in shows and movies is the relationship the media has with accents, and sometimes its stuff that makes sense like 'this character has a different accent because theyre an immigrant' or something like that, but other times its stuff that makes less sense like 'the main character doesnt have an accent while everyone around them does' etc etc

obviously theres still explanations for these things, and theres way more varying types of it, but its just something i like to notice. i wish i could talk about it but i dont even know what id say, i just find it interesting, pretty much

[shijiujun]

PROOF THAT TANTAI JIN IS A DISNEY PRINCESS AND THAT TILL THE END OF THE MOON IS A DISNEY PRINCESS MOVIE

He checks off the long gorgeous hair factor as well I just didn’t have enough space

[medievalandfantasymelee]

COME ONE, COME ALL to the MOSTE ILLUSTRIOUS TOURNAMENT of the FINEST, the MOSTE PUISSANT and HOTTEST MEN MEDIEVAL MEDIA HAS TO ITS CREDIT.

Be it known that we shall accept submissions of the hottest men OF THE PEOPLES’ CHOOSING from any live-action* TV or movie media property set between the years AD 500 – 1550 (Tudors WELCOME!!), and any fantasy properties which emulate said period!

KNOW ALSO that we, by the grace of this fine hellsite and with the counsel of the moste honorable and illustrious @hotvintagepoll (many thanks), have made

THESE GUIDELINES here given:

ANY HOT GUY who appears in any movie or TV show released in ANY YEAR, from ANY COUNTRY, shall be deemed eligible for entry. Below are listed examples of eligible properties. If YE BE NOT CERTAIN whether your hot guy is eligible, submit him anyway!

Examples of Eligible Properties: The Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001-03), Game of Thrones (2011-19) House of the Dragon (2022), Wolf Hall (2015-2024), The Tudors (2007-2010), Ladyhawke (1985), The Princess Bride (1987), The White Queen (2013), Rise of Empires: Ottoman (2020-2022), Vikings (2013-2020), The Last Kingdom (2015-2022), Diriliş: Ertuğrul (2014), A Knight’s Tale (2001), BBC’s Robin Hood (2006-3009), The Last Duel (2021), The Story of Minglan (2018), The Borgias (2013), Robin Hood (1939), Outlaw King (2018), Pilgrimage (2017), Legend (1985), Braveheart (1995), The Green Knight (2021), Excalibur (1981), Beowulf & Grendel (2005), The Lion in Winter (1968), Robin Hood: Men in Tights (1993), The Black Adder (Blackadder Series 1, 1982), Rashomon (1950)

Remember: This is just a list of examples—WOW ME!

These following titles are examples of properties that do not fall within or emulate the stated time period and therefore DO NOT QUALIFY: The Three Musketeers (Any Version), Pirates of the Caribbean (2004), Barbarians (2020), Gladiator (2000), Ben Hur (1959), Shogun (2024), Elizabeth (1999), 300 (2006), Troy (2004), Xena: Warrior Princess (1995-2001), Disney's Robin Hood (1973)**, Yojimbo (1961), Shakespeare in Love (1998), King Arthur (2004)***

For the purposes of this tournament, "Man" and "Guy" are defined as any bi-pedal humanoid male character played by a man. As such, characters belonging to non-human races such as Hobbits, Orcs, Elves, Demons, Fauns, Werewolves etc. ARE admissible, and, indeed, encouraged.

If you have propaganda you forgot to include in your submission, just hold onto it and send it in an ask after the Tournament begins.

You may submit as many hot men as you like but please submit only ONE ENTRANT per submission.

Do not hesitate to submit ANY hot guy you think may qualify, no matter how popular he is. There is no such thing as a shoo-in with these tournaments. If you think "Someone MUST have submitted him already!" Everyone else is probably thinking that too and then he may well NEVER get submitted and we don't want that.

Do not worry about how many submissions your hot guy might have had already--I need to get a sense of who the strongest contenders are in order to fairly seed the draws, and the best way to do that is volume of submissions.

We are voting on the hotness of the characters. While the actors who portray them are of course a major factor in this, we are not voting on the actors themselves, therefore propaganda pertaining to the actors real lives (aside from anecdotes relating to their portrayal of the character) is not admissible.

By that same token, in the case of historical figures (e.g. Henry VIII) we are judging hotness based on the fictionalized portrayals of them in these properties, not on historical fact.

Regarding immortal/time-travelling/dimension-hopping/extremely long-lived characters, regardless of when the character was born, the main action**** of the story must take place within the Medieval Period (see dates listed at the top of this post) or Medieval-esque fantasy fantasy realm in order for them to be eligible for submission. As such, characters like the Pevensie brothers (The Chronicles of Narnia) and Ash Williams (Army of Darkness) are admissible, but Asgardians (the MCU Thor films) are not.

I, as the Administrator and Master of Revels of this tournament, am exercising discretion in the admittance of characters from works by Shakespeare, since many of them have no set date.

Re: characters adapted from books/written works - Book quotes by/ about your character are not admissible as Propaganda for their tv/ movie counterparts unless said quotes were also written into the show/movie.

Book illustrations and fanart are not admissible Propaganda

SUBMISSIONS SHALL REMAIN OPEN UNTIL MIDNIGHT, JULY 1st

The Tourney shall begin at a date yet to be determined with the Melee (Qualifying Rounds), wherein the entrants with the fewest submissions and least propaganda will duke it out in a free for all brawl to determine who will enter the Lists.

SUBMIT YOUR ENTRANTS HERE TODAY!!!

-- Master of Revels

*The "live-action" qualification does have a caveat: exception may be made for those CGI films which were all the rage in the mid-00's that used the motion-capture and likeness of the actors; for example characters from, Robert Zemeckis's Beowulf (2007) are admissible.

** this one doesn't qualify, not because it isn't the right time period, but because it falls solidly under the "Animated" category.

***Yes, sadly we are deprived of the beautiful countenances of Clive Owen, Mads Mikkelsen, Ioan Gruffudd et al because the producers of this film in their infinite wisdom and in an attempt to seem "more historically accurate" chose to set it during the Roman withdrawal from Britain, which occurred in the 5th Century (About a CENTURY earlier than Authurian tradition) and is generally agreed to have ended by AD 410. It therefore does not fall under the Medieval umbrella and is not eligible for submission.

**** "Main Action" here defined as "More than half an hour of a movie and more than two episodes of a series"

[cogentranting]

Ranking Animated Horse Designs Take 3

This time I really am back by popular demand because the other two posts have been getting a steady trickle of notes for over a year now.

(If you're looking for stuff like Disney and Dreamworks there are two other posts. Here we've got mostly random cartoons and also the Pokemon horses)

Starlite (Rainbow Brite) 6/10 Little weird that he seems to be drawn in a style that's like 3x more realistic than any other character in this show but hey sometimes you just ascend to a higher plane of existence. (2014 Reboot Starlite gets a 3/10. I do not trust him.)

Skydancer (Rainbow Brite) 7/10 I bumped Starlite down a point because he wants what Skydancer has. Skydancer doesn't need rainbows to fly. Skydancer has a lightning bolt. Skydancer has the Drama. (The one wiki page said he's a Shire or a Clydesdale and um I don't think so. Maybe a Friesian.)

On-yx (Rainbow Brite) This is a rocket powered balloon animal. 2/10

Sunriser (Rainbow Brite) 5/10 Eh. I like her hair though.

Swift Wind (She-Ra and the Princesses of Power/ She-Ra Princess of Power)

Right (older version) 8/10 I don't understand the wing physics going on here. Also not sure if the horn is part of the mask or just attached to the mask. Diggin the bib though. Also love that he's a ginger.

Left (new version) 4/10 If the older version wasn't there this would score higher because just as a character design I don't think it's bad but if these are supposed to be the same character he seems so cutesy and I do not vibe with it. I don't know either show. So maybe that works. But it feels wrong.

Amalthea (The Last Unicorn) 9/10 They gave the unicorn the split deer hooves, and the lions tail and that is automatic points from me. Bummed they didn't go all out and give us the goat's beard. Rude. Any distance shot, I love. Close-ups of the face creep me out with the giant doll eyes and tiny nose.

(Pokemon and more below)

Honey Pie Pony (Strawberry Shortcake) 8/10 Adorable. Fantastically chunky design. The others from this... show? book? brand? are like 6s or 5s depending. But Honey Pie has the It factor. (The It Factor here apparently being that recurring pattern of only the main character's horse being able to talk?? This is the third. Swift Wind, Starlite and Honey Pie have dark secrets about how they come by this knowledge).

My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic "ponies" Just as characters they're cute in a "trying so hard to be cute that they almost miss the mark entirely" way. But this is about how they are as HORSE designs. And these are magical gremlins not horses. 1/10 (WHAT is happening on the far right of this set. I do not approve. Zebra is fine though).

My Little Pony: A New Generation Like if the MLP: FM ponies and the Trolls characters somehow had children. Somehow the main character of Bee Movie was also involved. The one on the left makes TikTok thirst traps. -2/10

My Little Pony Tales 3/10 I can almost tell they're meant to be horses. Plus that one has a tattoo of a comb. So. Full extra point for the comb tattoo.

Bratz Horses I can't tell if there's an official video game or cartoon design for these but in ANY given version I found the conclusion is the same: if you look into the gigantic distended eye you will be put under the horse's curse. 1/10

Boxer (Animal Farm) 4/10 All horses are equal but some are more equal than others, but Boxer is not one of them because his mouth is not okay.

Marvin (Marvin the Tap Dancing Horse) 5/10 I mean. Dude's got spats. Come on.

Ponyta (Pokemon) 3/5 The armpit and middle thigh flames were a choice.

Rapidash (Pokemon) 8/10 Look at his face. The angst. He has seen things.

Mudsdale (Pokemon) 8/10 The classic mohawk, dreadlocks and legwarmers trifecta. Love it. Would love to hug him.

Galarian Ponyta 3/10 It's giving sheep, and it's giving dog. Very little horse.

Galarian Rapidash (Pokemon) 4/10 He's angry because his hair is too long and he can't walk and also he has not eaten enough somebody feed this horse.

Origin Palkia (Pokemon) 6/10 A built-in hoola-hoop AND thigh high Boots?! what fashion.

Keldeo (Pokemon) 1/10 Clown goat.

Spectrier (Pokemon) 10/10 Beautiful goth girl horse floating around like a Victorian ghost who's too modest to show her ankles.

Mudbray (Pokemon) 5/10 He has passed through the depths of existential dread and returned world-weary but unshakeable and with a snazzy bowl cut.

Glastrier (Pokemon)

20/10 ICE HORSE ICE HORSE ICE HORSE. I love him so much. He's punk rock

The Fat Horse (Looney Tunes) 10/10 Queen.

[resisteverything]

Just for fun (I am really not invested, haven't even watched the full thing): why do you dislike Hazbin Hotel?

This is the biggest one, the hotel is useless. Charlies whole goal is to redeem sinners with the hotel, but by the end of the season there are only two guests, and then one of them dies. This is particularly bad because of the six month deadline set in episode one. Like what is Charlie even doing over those entire months?

The main characters are weak. I expected to learn more about Angel dust in the show itself, and see a new side to him, but in the end his entire character is summed up with Addict, except the show gives him less personality than Addict does. And he's the best one. Charlie is just a Disney princess parody, the only unique trait of hers being that she swears randomly and has daddy issues, the latter only mattering in one episode, the other seven either shafting her character or giving us no new information about her. Vaggie never once does anything that isn't what Charlie told her to. Alastor is vague and mysterious, but the intrigue and fear factor he brought is just sort of ruined in the show proper. He doesn't work as a foil to Charlie or an antagonist because he never does anything for forward the plot.

Nothing happens in this show. Episode one's only contribution is the dead angel and six-month deadline, everything else is skipable. Episode two changes nothing except that Pentius is at the hotel now, and he doesn't do anything. Episode three is only important in that Alastor hears about the dead angel head, info which he doesn't use until episode seven, like no other character is aware of the angel head. Episode four is only important in that episode six centers on whether or not angel has redeemed himself, except in episode six has the question be answered with "Actually heaven doesn't care about that and was never going to listen to Charlie", episode five is only important in that it's setup for Charlies meeting with heaven, a meeting that ends in her being kicked out and nothing having been changed. Episode six is that meeting. Episode seven is Charlie literally giving up on her motivations to prepare to do battle with heaven, and episode eight is them fighting that big battle. Nothing Charlie did from episodes one to six actually brought them closer to resolving the conflict, and season two is just a return to the previous status quo of hell.

The series is packed full of side characters that should not be so numerous in an eight episode season. Why is Carmilla Carmine, a character that shows up in two subplots a more relevant character to the narrative than any of the main characters? Why did we get half an episode dedicated to the Vees dicking around in ways that in no way affect the plot but never got to see Charlie and Angel dust have a real conversation that wasn't antagonistic? Why did Charlie work out her issues with Vaggie with a completely new side character she's never met before this episode instead of with Vaggie? Why is Vox spying on the heroes for all of episode eight instead of doing anything? Didn't one of them actively try to incite a war against heaven? Shouldn't she be siding with the heroes?

The show has a bizarre relationship with the pilot. It expects you to understand that Charlie taking Alastors hand is a big deal, or know who Cherri bomb is, because these things are in the pilot. But it also Retcons things like Lucifer's characterization, or Husks reason for staying at the hotel. It makes the show hard to follow plot wise.

The tone is all over the place. Pentius dies as a joke that kills a serious moment but then they try to make it serious. Charlie and Vaggie have a serious conversation with jokey slapstick noises in the background. Valentino flips between scary and goofy at random. Angel gets raped and it’s a big deal, pentius gets raped and it’s a joke.

[usssnarfblat]

Did Anastasia deserve to die for her family's crimes against Fieval's family?

I've always found it interesting that "Anastasia" and "An American Tail" were made by the same guy...

My mom got us "An American Tail" as kids, since we were Jewish, and a Disney-like movie with Jewish characters was a one-of-a-kind thing. ("The Prince of Egypt" was still a few years away. Yes, I'm that old.) More to the point, my dad's side of the family is largely Russian Jews, who immigrated in the early 1920s, for exactly the same reasons as the Mouskewitz. Being a child of this background and very literally obsessed with cats, I had mixed feelings about the movie.

When "Anastasia" came out a few years later, Mom didn't let that history stop us from enjoying the new princess movie, but she didn't shelter us from it either. We regarded it like we did the real history behind any sugar-coated princess movie. She even got us some history books about the real Romanov family, and we were fascinated by the subject.

Still, it's an odd elephant in the room, watching "Anastasia" and knowing that her granddad was the one who sent those Cossack cats after Fievel's village, and her dad himself continued doing it to the Jewish mice who didn't leave.

"Go, Pompom, Kibble and Fluff-Baron! Kill those Jew mice, and I'll give you extra catnip treats tonight!"

Don Bluth presents both the Romannov family and their victims with equal sympathy, even opening both movies with the family celebrating a holiday, with the kid heroes getting a plot-specific present, before being viciously attacked.

"Wow Grandmama! Fieval and Tanya could use this as a merry-go-round!"

*Cough* "Yes uh, about those Jewish mice Sweetie..."

Bluth's portrayal of the Romanov family is not entirely inaccurate. By all accounts, Nicholas II was a deeply loving father who both doted on his children, but raised them not to be spoiled. Despite being royalty, the princesses shared bedrooms and did charity work at hospitals.

It's a baffling irony that Nicholas was nevertheless was a tyrant, and not remotely just to his Jewish subjects. When I was about twelve, Mom got me the Dear America book A Coal Miner's Bride, about the Catholic Polish immigrants who also fled the oppression of the Russian Tzar. (Anastasia's family conquered part of Poland in the 1800s, banning the Pols from speaking their own language and drafting their sons into the Tzar's dick-measuring contest wars.) Anyway, that's what my mom's side of the family was fleeing when they immigrated. Yes, my family has double reason to hate the Romanovs.

So, I personally don't have a lot of sympathy for Nicholas II. But the horrors his poor wife and children endured in their final moments never fails to get the reaction from me.

The rationalization for the murder of the children and queen was that it was the only way to ensure that the monarchy never returned. But I assume most modern-thinking people would say that the ends do not justify the means in this case.

That said, millions of families like Anetka's and Fievel's suffered as bad or worse than the Romanovs, because of the Romanovs, and no one remembers them because they didn't wear tiaras. This no doubt was another factor that killed sympathy for the Romanov children. But they were still children.

The question today is, if we can feel for a family that was literal royalty, despite their father being an undeniable tyrant against our own families...can we also feel for Palestinian and Israeli families, during a conflict that is vastly more complicated than Imperial Russia?

Or do they need to be cute mice and glittery princesses to get our attention?

[princesssarisa]

I have just as many doubts about Disney's live action Snow White as anyone else. But can people please stop calling Rachel Zegler "ugly"?

Yes, the hairstyle is unflattering. No, her face isn't a perfect model of classic Hollywood beauty. Yes, it is a stretch to expect us to view her as more beautiful than Gal Gadot. But she's certainly not ugly! She's very pretty!

Of course Snow White is supposed to be much more than "very pretty": she's supposed to be the most beautiful lady in all the land. That's a tall order for any actress and I'm sure none would satisfy every viewer. Although knowing Disney, I'm sure they'll try to make the script more politically correct than the original and state that Snow White's inner beauty is what makes her the fairest, or something like that.

But she's still not ugly!

I don't want to say "You're just being racist," but... I can't help but wonder how much of a factor race is in these comments.

Of all the live action Disney Princesses, the only other one whom I've seen called "ugly" on social media is Halle Bailey as Ariel.

Lily James isn't a flawless classic beauty like the 1950 animated Cinderella; not with her broad face and prominent front teeth. But I don't remember anyone ever calling her ugly! Nor is Emma Watson's beauty the soft, classically feminine beauty of the animated Belle; her features are more angular and can look almost boyish at times. But I've never heard anyone call her ugly!

Doesn't it seem suspicious that people should pull out the "ugly" card for Halle's Ariel and Rachel's Snow White, yet not for the white girls?

[violethowler]

I am firmly of the opinion that the idea behind the New Seven Hearts in Kingdom Hearts 3 makes perfect sense and is entirely consistent with the themes of the narrative. In a series that consistently hammers in the message that light and darkness cannot exist without each other and must ideally be in balance, and how there is always darkness in every heart, the idea that there are at least seven people at a time who are naturally devoid of any darkness whatsoever throughout their entire lives from birth to death sticks out as contradictory to this messaging.

So the idea that it’s a temporary position that’s passed on from person to person without requiring the previous holder to die first makes a ton of sense in light of the symbolism behind what light and darkness represent that I’ve talked about multiple times in my Constructing Kingdoms videos: Light in KH fundamentally represents focus on others and darkness represents focus on yourself, with the conflict between the two representing conflicts like selfless vs selfishness, community vs isolation, conformity vs individuality, etc.

In that context, the idea that being a heart of pure light is a temporary state works as a potential metaphor for how even the most selfless people who are constantly doing things to help others around them still naturally have to take time to take care of their own needs – physically, mentally, and emotionally – or else they’ll ultimately burn out. (There are also a few meta elements when you factor in the workings of the KH universe when it comes to the Disney worlds, but I’ll save those for later so i don't get distracted lol).

However...

I do think it's a missed opportunity that we were introduced to the idea through the Organization going after new Princesses in KH3, rather than through BBS dropping the bombshell that Minnie was a PoH in the pre-KH1 era.

Think about it.

In her KH2 escort mission she exclusively light-based magic, and her attempt to seal off the Disney Castle audience chamber demonstrates a knowledge of how to ward off darkness, similar to how six of the Seven Princesses in KH1 were able to hold back the darkness coming out of the Final Keyhole using their own power until Sora returned to seal the Keyhole. Her sealing of the audience chamber not being effective at keeping out Heartless could even be retroactively explained by her Light magic being weaker after she gave up her PoH power.

A single mention of Minnie being a PoH in the BBS era would be enough to plant the possibility in players’ minds of more Princesses outside of the 7 we’d already seen without taking away screentime and narrative focus from the Wayfinder trio’s story.

Nomura has talked about how he likes giving players things to think about and speculate over when it comes to the story in the games that he's been involved in, and the fact that Minnie is obviously still alive in the present-day narrative would’ve given fans tons of questions to speculate over as we waited for KH3:

Did this mean that Princesses can pass on their pure light status without dying the way that similar mantles commonly work in a lot of fantasy media? Or is she still a PoH in the present day and there were always more than just the seven that Maleficent needed to open the door to Kingdom Hearts in KH1?

Would we be seeing new Princesses in KH3? And if so, would it be a new set of seven, or will some of the PoH we know be keeping their positions a little longer?

If we do get new Princesses in KH3, would we get to see the transition happen or would it just happen off-screen between games? Did the ones who passed their mantle on already do so and we just didn’t know it?

Would any of the new Official Disney Princesses be Princesses of Heart if or when they appeared in KH? If so, which ones?

If not the new Official Princesses, what about Mulan, Ariel, Tinkerbell, or Esmeralda – the few Official Princesses (the latter two of which only formerly) – to appear in KH but not be a PoH? Would any of them become one in the future? Or were they former ones who had already passed on their mantles like Minnie had?

And since Alice’s inclusion in KH1 means that being an Official Disney Princess is not a prerequisite for PoH status, what other iconic female characters from Disney properties – both those that had already shown up in KH and those who had yet to appear – might be candidates for former or future PoH?

Imagine how excited people would've been if Larxene's line in the KH3 trailers about Elsa being one of the New Seven Hearts was confirmation of theories that the fandom had been debating back and forth over for almost a decade, rather than introducing a whole new concept that most fans had never thought of before.

[fantasygerard2000]

Fandom's Rigid Standards

In my previous post about issues I have towards the Starboy craze, I briefly discussed about how most human Star designs tend to just stick with the Jack Frost "inspired" design over creating their own original designs for him.

Most fan designs try to stay loyal to the rather infamous piece of concept art.

While they made changes based on their own preferences, they kept major core elements like the glowing gold hair, floating, cape, and being white. However, what they neglected, or rather leave out is that this early version of Star can also shapeshift like Genie and Maui. Also, another factor is that this version Star was her grandfather's spirit as an early version of the story has him passing away instead of her father.

The reason why most people didn't know about these early ideas was because they only heard about the Starboy and Villain Couple ones from the more vocally outraged fangirls who cried about "being robbed".

This tweet in particular only adding fuel to the dying fire as most people would just express disappointment to the film, but this only give them an excuse to dislike it even more. Majority of people are so anti-Disney that they would even fact check from official sources from the people who made the film and only listened to the ones who have seen it and have totally not biased opinions on it.

Anyway, even with info about the actual early version of the film being out, most of them just stick with the love story idea. An idea that was the result from the lack of context and spite from said lack of context.

Coming back to the topic of human Star just being Jack Frost but yellow, that also brought up about how fandom has this awful habit of only caring about characters if they are attractive and white. We literally see this behavior with Magnifico and that this is also happening towards a character that doesn't exist says a lot. The fact that most human Star designs just colored Jack Frost yellow is proof of this.

Hell, back then, Disney themselves considered making a non conventionally looking love interest back when Tangled was in early production. Bastion was made to be your non standard prince.

Heck, an even early version of Tangled had the "prince" look like this.

There are people who genuinely like non conventionally looking characters for their looks. Beast is literally known for making people prefer his animal form than human form for crying out loud. You literally have zero restrictions to design a human or even monster Star. But instead, y'all ironically did this meme.

Y'all accuse Disney for not going with this early alternative design for Asha for "not being conventionally Disney".

But y'all also thought this ain't too pretty so you "borrowed' from the most conventionally good looking character from a different film.

Now, this is the part where I focus on the issue regarding Asha and her "romance". Well, lack there of.

Someone once said that people only like a work for the tropes they like being present over how they were executed, comparing how ads are recommending you to buy a book that lists off tropes you're into. L To fandom, the presence of tropes only matter.

When you think of Disney romances, you might thought of the princesses. And ONLY the princesses because their films have romance as a major factor. However, romances in Disney is notoriously bad, especially in their older films. It's not until in the later films that we got a more proper romance with Naveen and Flynn/Eugene. Romance requires both characters to be equally treated. In regards to the "potential" romance he has with Asha, there's this underlying feeling that Asha is treated like a vector for the reader/writer to insert themselves as.

Most romances, especially ones made for women, always centered on the main lead with the "protagonist" being in situations to ensure they get together. Majority of romances are made to be like a dating sim. There's nothing bad about going on fictional dates with a fictional partner but the issue here is that how the protagonist is barely a character of their own right. They are made to be relatable so the reader can insert themselves into, with any personality they have being treated as traits and quirks. Even with examples where both the protagonist and the love interest are both main leads, there's likely more emphasis is put onto the love interest.

And Asha is being somewhat unintentionally treated like this, especially in fiction where Starboy is the focal character is really upsetting. I get that Asha wasn't a great character but she shouldn't be treated like this. Or any character at all.

Asha being rewritten to be a completely different character to the point of being given a different name is just so jarring. That isn't Asha anymore. Just like the concept art above, she's small core traces of what was her there, but it's mostly all fan interpretation.

And this, to me at least, are the vibes I'm getting from. Wish being "remade" into something that it isn't. Being made to cater to a niche demographic whose tastes are just plain bad. I'm not one to judge people's preferences but disregarding the concept of a deceased family member who became magical shapeshifting creature from space for a more generic love story where you could self insert yourself into?

This isn't to say to giving Asha a love interest or making Star a human aren't bad ideas. I do in fact find the early concept interesting and I was initially neutral towards Starboy until that's what most of this "fandom" consists of.

This isn't the Wish fandom. This is the Starboy fandom.

[bittersweetresilience]

adrien often being referred to in fanon as “sunshine” and the sun and something about Felix having Moon symbolism. is this anything sunny?

sentitwin sun moon symbolism is absolutely ridiculous. i have thought about it before but never gotten anywhere. this time i consulted @ninadove about it and rotated it in my mind for many hours and i am still not sure about my verdict. therefore i'm just going to ramble a bit and then pass it over to nina. birthday teamwork!

i started out agreeing with the assignment of adrien as the sun and félix as the moon.

their personalities seem to fit the vibes. moreover, it ties into yin and yang.

adrien's miraculous is placed on the yang half of the miracle box, and ladybug's on the yin. his hair is parted to the right, which is the direction of yang, while félix's and ladybug's are parted to the left, yin.

a brief tangent here: even though the placement in the miracle box and adrien and marinette's civilian selves with their white and black outer garments respectively seem to indicate yang and yin, when they become heroes, they swap entirely. ladybug wears red, yang, and chat noir wears black, yin. their powers of creation and destruction are also yang and yin. my theory is that not only are adrien and marinette meant to be halves of a whole as partners, but their hero selves are also meant to halves of a whole with their civilian selves. yin and yang symbolism all around.

back to adrien as sunshine. before félix was introduced, adrien was established as the character in the show with the disney princess golden hair and golden smile, so it's easy to see where this fanon came from.

marinette describes her love for him as three suns in her heart.

then if we want to pair the sentitwins, and we think adrien is the sun, it makes sense for félix to be the moon.

some final evidence in support of this is mirror imagery. the same way the moon reflects the light of the sun, félix reflects adrien. both in his creation as a reflection of adrien's and in his behavior in the show. félix dresses as adrien in over half of his episodes.

but this picture is complicated by several factors. there's a fair amount of evidence that the twins are actually associated the other way around, with adrien as the moon and félix as the sun.

gold and silver color symbolism. one could easily think of gold as the sun and silver as the moon, but in the show, félix and the graham de vanilys are associated with gold and adrien and the agrestes are associated with silver. the wedding rings, the colors of their homes, their camouflaged miraculous, the lighting... anarchist gang talked about this a few months ago and i think nina may want to expand on what we discovered, so i will leave this to her.

another brief tangent here: white and black color symbolism. i have not fleshed out my thoughts on it but i am leaving notes here for future reference. adrien's civilian outfit features white, but this likely reflects gabriel's influence on him. his hero selves wear black. meanwhile, félix is introduced dressed in black and haloed in white as he enters gabriel's sphere. in the play, it's the opposite. at the diamonds' dance, he and marinette wear white and kagami, like lune rouge, wears red. obfuscation? femininity? yin and yang again?

and a third brief tangent here: when chat noir is unhealthy, he becomes chat blanc, who is white, and patte de velours, who is accented with gold. colors of entanglement? of influence? of inauthenticity? are félix's best parts adrien's idea of a perfect self? i am contemplating.

there are more significant reasons for moon adrien and sun félix. in important moments of the show, adrien is frequently associated with the moon. glaciator, chat blanc, kuro neko, new york special... and on the other hand, where does the sun play an important part of the story? in réplique, with félix.

narratively, sentitwins seem to have moon and sun roles. adrien is the one from whom things are hidden, while félix is the one who shines light on the truth. adrien spends most of his time as support, while félix is an active agent. adrien reacts to things, while félix makes them happen, for better or for worse.

nina has an entire essay on félix and the development of his sun associations from lune rouge to the sunrise in représentation, so i'll leave that to her to discuss.

all right. sentitwins are either sun and moon or moon and sun. what does this mean for them?

it intrigues me that adrien is viewed by fanon as the sun when he could be better described as the moon. adrien agreste enjoyers, please get on this.

here is a starting point for your thoughts. if adrien is the moon, it makes sense why he destroyed the moon in chat blanc when he was trying to destroy himself.

and if félix is the sun, it further puts into perspective why he felt guilty about réplique's fate. they were a sacrifice for his goals. he may has well have literally killed them.

role reversal and false impressions are prominent in sentitwins and this complicated picture adds to that.

frequently bought together. do not separate.

in conclusion, yes, autumn, this is most certainly something. fuck if i know what it is, but i love losing my mind about it.

[ch3ri-ch3ri-lady]

I feel like the powerscaling in hazbin hotel is kinda fucked because even though charlie and lucifer are canonically miles stronger than all the overlords-like they could crush them in .5 seconds without breaking a sweat levels stronger-it doesn’t feeeel that way because they’ve been given no intimidation factor or respect by the narrative. like why was lucifer beefing with alastor who is like a literal fly to him. why was alastor picking a fight with a guy that could humble him and everything he’s ever done with like one snap of his fingers?? like literally why can’t charlie just make valentino free angel?? what is he gonna do?? say no?? and get his ass blown to smithereens by a girl who sings disney princess ballads? ik fighting would be out of character for charlie but you think helping her friends would triumph her pacifism

[that-one-i-think]

bro id be SO KEEN to hear more abt ur oc 👀👀👀

Did not expect a reply this fast, let me get my bearings. Hold on-

So I think this man would have to be older, more of Dante's age range if not older, cause with age comes power and authority. He is a kind man but he can't get by like Aphmau can. She is a young, beautiful, and kind woman, someone much less imposing and visibly dangerous to others. So I think making him older grants him both reasonable respect and fear, but also allows him to be underestimated much the same way as Aphmau. For the same effect he is also a meif'wa, cause they are also underestimated but not enough that he doesn't have to lean on other factors, like intimidation and brute force. Aphmau can Disney princess her way through all of her problems, he can only "old cat man" his way through 50% of them cause he isn't that old.

I have also been debating it but I do want him to be kind of big, but because he is a meif'wa it is over looked. My biggest thought for how this man looks is Ma Dong-Seok aka that big dude from the hello kitty phone case meme

THIS MAN RIGHT HERE!

Cause if you look up the actor, 50% of the images are the man looking as intimidating as hell and the other 50% are just him being a very happy dude living his best life. And that is the vibe of this character. Strong and intimidating but the moment he doesn't have to be he is just kind. Kind to his heart. He wants to fix problems to help.

I am still trying to think of his backstory but I will fully take suggestions, and names for him as well. Also, any cat breed suggestions, big or small!

[cozymochi]

Who is your favourite Disney princess and why :]

I DON’t hAVE A FAVORITE THEY’RE MOSTLY TIED and I like various 😭

But my biases lean towards Snow White, Mulan, Tiana and Ariel

Maybe if I think about it more Ariel might be edging everyone out a smidge today cuz she’s really fun and expressive and she brings me joy. Just looking at all her gifs got me like. C’MON. SHE’S ADORABLE. 🥺 but Little Mermaid is just an absurdly good movie, so that may be a factor. But, that could change. Though, full disclosure, I like all the 2D princesses in some capacity 😭 + Rapunzel

LEAST OF ALL THE GALS NOT COUNTED IN THE OFFICIAL LINEUP LIKE MEGARA MD KIDA AND —-

[kaythefloppa]

With The Lion Guard's 10th anniversary happening in November of next year, I think the best way they can celebrate it, and also the easiest way they can celebrate it (as in, not a fourth season, sequel series, books, or new movies), would be reruns.

When The Lion Guard was coming to a conclusion, it's viewing figures on television took a hard dip, partly due to Disney's poor distribution of the episodes. Because of this, reruns (at least here in America) did not last that long. Only from November 3rd to December 30th, 2019, and then the show was gone for good. They couldn't keep the completed show on the air during the winter holidays when kids had 2 weeks off from school and were at home likely doing nothing but watching TV. Which is - not a good sign.

Up until recently, I would've assumed that Disney would've done nothing for the show given these unflattering results. But seeing the Disney Jr. musical short, as well as people online posting merch of the show in spite of half a decade passing since the show ended, gets me thinking of some significant way Disney would acknowledge the series.

Anyways, back to the topic of reruns. The one thing that would redeem this show's unsatisfying send-off would be reruns, perhaps in the form of a marathon, to celebrate the decade anniversary of the show. Something similar happened this year when The Lion King was re-released in theaters for it's 30th anniversary (most likely to compensate for Mufasa: The Lion King, getting delayed 6 months due to the strikes).

Disney, even Disney Jr has done reruns of cancelled/completed shows, either regularly or as special occassions. Sofia the First and Tangled got reruns on World Princess Week: Jessie still gets reruns on Disney Channel, ironically increasing in quantity ever since it's spin-off Bunk'd ended. Phineas and Ferb got endless reruns on Disney Channel and Disney XD, even before the announcement of the revival. And not to mention many holiday specials/movies/crossovers such as Good Luck Charlie. And just recently, Wizards of Waverly Place got a marathon of reruns in light of next month's reboot series, Beyond.

So it would be very thematically appropriate for The Lion Guard to get this type of treatment. Reruns, from the pilot episode, all the way to the finale, marathoning all day on Disney Junior. It would give the show the mainstream fanfare and recognition, from its target demo audience, that it was robbed of when it died. Not only would it introduce kids of today's generation to The Lion King franchise, but it would potentially bring back viewers who were in the show's target demographic when it aired - who would now be adults themselves.

And it would come full circle too since The Lion Guard was pitched, created, and announced as a tribute to The Lion King's 20th anniversary itself, so to have a decade-related anniversary like this would be sweet in theory.

Do I think Disney will actually do this? No. This is all hypothetical. Logically speaking the furthest thing they'll do is probably upload some Lion Guard full episodes onto the YouTube channel, post a few Tik-Toks, make a few "happy anniversary" tweets and leave it at that. But it's a do-able/possible-ish idea for a way they can give tribute to the show's decennial. I will not hold my breath on that idea, or be surprised if they do viritually little to nothing for the anniversary (I'd actually be surprised if they did anything more than the abovementioned logical factors such as happy anniversary posts and tweets).

[pinkpinkmermayyy]

I finally watched Wish. And I gotta say, it's not as bad as people say it is. Don't get me wrong, it's not good by any means. But it's still not so awful I felt frustrated and sick to my stomach after watching it. But it's also not so bad it's good to the point where it becomes a guilty pleasure for me like the live-action Bratz movie. It's just...bad. But not horrible. It had potential. It COULD'VE been good if the writers actually gave a single damn, and knew what they were doing. Or, alternatively, if they simply spent a few more hours on the damn movie. But alas, they did not, and since we're in the bad timeline, this is what we got. The music is what really weighs it down, with just about every song being meaningless, badly-written, and having terrible grammar/confusing metaphors that don't hold up under a microscope or even make any sense at all, really. The only thing stopping them from being completely insufferable is the fact that the actors are legitimately good singers, making it a crying shame that none of them weren't given better material to work with.

The characters themselves, though, are unfortunately very boring, one-dimensional, and contradictory/confusing in their writing. The setting, plot, and worldbuilding are all very bland and haphazard as well, to the point where I actually laughed out loud during the climactic scene at the end where the king brutalizes Asha with his evil magic. It was that ridiculous! The side characters, both human, animal, and star, were all boring and pointless(except for the Star ig) and I really have a bone to pick with Gabo especially. He goes from thinking that Asha killed her family(for no reason, mind you) to shaming Simon for being a bad friend and betraying Asha to the king, both in the SAME SCENE!!! It's like...all of the characters are this inconsistent honestly.

And I don't buy that people would be happy to "forget without regret" when it comes to their wishes. It just makes no sense to me. The writers should've come up with a better excuse for why the people of Rosas put their faith in the wishing system rather than "they forget what they wanted in the first place but are totally all right with that!" especially when Asha acts like this is a new revelation. Like come on, guys, you work at Disney! Give us something! But they gave us nothing. Because they are lazy. A shame.

Also the costumes in this movie were boring and bland af, and everything was really monochrome and lifeless. It definitely fails in comparison to the costume designs in Encanto, The Princess and the Frog, and even Tangled. Everything just feels so dull, cheap, lazy, and uninspired. Though I do like Asha's design aside from her outfit, she is very pretty and it's sad what this movie does to her. This movie in short didn't feel like a Disney 100 Anniversary. In fact, it didn't even feel like a Disney movie at all. It felt like a student film that was inspired by Disney, or like those direct to video films made for really little kids that have a low budget and even lower-quality CGI. Just a massive disappointment. I'm afraid that Disney is no longer the gold standard of animation that it used to be. Oh well. 😔

this is what really ticks me off about wish. I would be fine if it was just terrible if it ended up not being amazing or even good, but it’s mediocre. And that drives me INSANE because I see so much potential in the story and characters and the villains but they just let it bite the dust and left us with this infuriatingly mediocre movie that was supposed to be the 100 YEAR ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL FOR DISNEY! That’s supposed to be something fantastical and amazing and have that wow factor but it’s just so bland and it makes me angry. Also the fact that it was originally supposed to be traditionally animated but they changed that also makes my blood boil.