It's not too big to be corporate raided.
No one thought that it was like that 20 years ago. It only started in the early 2010s when shallow faux feminist buzzfeed articles decided to have a vendetta against the Princess films, all of them including Beauty and the Beast and Mulan, and that only happened because of the popularization of the Princess franchise in the early 2000s and the Shrek films crapping on Disney. No one thought that it was off that Barbara Streisand sang "Someday My Prince Will Come" and no one thought that the idea of true love (even if unrealistic) was terrible. People have become more cynical. Guys gets to enjoy their fantasies without people picking them apart, why not women?, hence why there's a severe lack of romcoms and chick flick. Hollywood rarely makes fun movies for women anymore.
It’s impressive to be green on Disney.
What?! Where was I when this happened? I've always loved all the princess films including live remakes.
Yes, it's a clause that prohibits one or more parties from revealing certain information.
Right, but it's a confidentiality agreement. If Disney puts an actor in front of the press and tells her to answer questions about the movie, any confidentiality is waived. And that's only the first reason a non-disclosure agreement makes no sense here.
Studios aren't going to hire her if they think she could tank the entire film during a press junket.
I think you missed the point of those articles if you indeed read them. The passive "damsel in distress princess needs rescue" trope is what was being discussed, and its not a vendetta, its was to say that these characters don't have to be one dimensional and need to be saved all the time, they can have more agency. And Disney themselves tried to move away from using this type of princess trope way before the 2010s. Its why you started to see Mulan, Belle, Rapunzel and many other strong female princess characters emerge.
I got in last year when it was lower. I don't have enough to make any difference in my life, its just ironic its the only one that is in the green.
All the 90s princesses got criticized. All of them. Belle got Stockholm Syndrome remember? And she ends up with a guy at the end. Same with Mulan, same with Rapunzel.
I don’t agree with them, but they’re entitled to feel as they do. The main sections of the forum have many posts expressing dislike of what I consider timeless Disney attractions like the Jungle Cruise, it’s a small world, and the Tiki Room. Much as I disagree with the people expressing such sentiments, it isn’t my place to question their fandom. Disney is a big tent, and there’s plenty of room for different tastes and opinions.
Well it’s important to invest so you don’t have to work for every $$ you earn. Sounds like you’re going to be in good shape.
I can’t imagine that video influencing anyone. Maybe the men here who have such an issue with young female stars because it might explain some things.
Those are different criticisms however than the traditional "Disney princess" trope criticisms which were the focus of many of those articles from the early 00s/10s that you're talking about. And those criticisms are also fair. The idea was that the traditional "Disney Princess" was just there as a set piece waiting for the prince to save her, ie she was a one dimensional character with no agency nothing more than a prop to advance a "love story".
Disney stopped doing romances for a variety of reasons, including the fact that they weren't guaranteed box office hits any more, such as Princess and the Frog.
So tiring.
No I’m not. But the video is so hideously over-the-top that it’s hard to talk about anything else.
