Hole-y Plots, Batman!!

[loveofamouse]

You ain't seen/heard/read nothing yet! According to David Koenig in his book, "Mouse Under Glass", he agrees that, when the prince was cursed ten years ago (according to Lumiere), he would have been cursed at the age of eleven. Koenig claims that that is a shade young for the falling-in-love escape clause and that the prince looks much older than the age of eleven in the portrait that he, as the Beast, shreds. He then goes on to question how that would make Chip and even wonders if Mrs. Potts is a little too old for bearing children.

Nevermind the siblings that are mentioned but never seen. The prince is shown as an older teen in that painting and in the stained glass at the beginning. He would actually have been 10 since it's not his 21st bday yet so 10yrs prior would put him at the age of 10

 

[Horizons1]

It's a movie. Quit trying to overthink it.

 

[powlessfamily4]

It's a movie. Quit trying to overthink it.

I am with you on that one! :sohappy:

Just enjoy it! :animwink:

 

[epcotWSC]

It's not difficult. His father was dead, his mother (the queen) wasn't around, but still alive. Therefore, he was alone. He had the servants taking care of him. Now, would he be opening the door to his own castle? Probably not.

So, a servant comes, answers the door. She begs to come in. The servant gets the prince, and is like, "yo prince, there's this woman begging to spend the night." So he comes to the door to see this woman. He's repulsed by her and says "no way." Then she transforms into a beautiful woman and puts a spell on him.

There we go.

 

[Phonedave]

Poor story telling to you may be a condensed plot to fit a format for a screen writer.

Or perhaps I don't take my disposable entertainment seriously enough.

Again, opinions.

I tend to feel, if you are going to do something (write a condesend plot for disposable entertainment) do a good job of it or don't do it at all.

I don't excuse half-arsed efforts.


-dave

 

[loveofamouse]

It's a movie. Quit trying to overthink it.

it's a lighthearted discussion. don't like? dont read

Just because something is a cartoon or fantasy doesn't mean it should be half@ssed. Sometimes, you have plot holes. Understandable but it shouldn't be alot or very obvious. These are obvious plot holes. Just because it's marketed to children doesn't mean it should be assumed that children are gullible little idiots that'll believe anything. Some of these were actually asked by my 5yr old.

 

[Frightful]

I am in a class currently focused on Feminism and the teacher believes that Beauty and the Beast is about domestic violence....WHATTT has anyone ever heard/noticed this? because I still don't see it.

Yup, and I can't enjoy it much anymore because of that. And it takes a LOT for me, because I can get over the overt racism and sexism prevalent in almost every film to enjoy the lighthearted aspects of most of the rest of the Disney canon.

The thing with BatB is Belle sees through the Beast's violence to his good inside. She tolerates his abuse and imprisonment because she believes his rare good moments make up for it, which is a common theme in domestic violence and a huge, huge issue. The film has the potential to foster negative attitudes about relationships--yeah, you can say "I turned out fine!" (although in my case, many people don't think growing up to be a rabid feminist is fine!), but just because it might not make an impact on everyone, the negativity remains. It's like Twilight, your kid probably isn't dumb enough to get the message that threatening, controlling stalkers are good boyfriends, but the books still communicate that, and that's a just bit weird.

IMO, there's always at least two readings to these to make them tolerable, and the second would be that Belle doesn't give in to the Beast as everyone else does, and he learns to be his real, gentle self permanently once he realizes he is loved for who he is...

Just like you could say that Ariel is an idiotic tart and Eric becomes attracted to her based solely on her appearance ("the men up there don't like a lot of chatter") OR you could say that he realizes she's physically beautiful but doesn't actually love her until she gets her soul/personality (voice) back.


Oh, and I think reading into things is fun. I get totally bored with anything that doesn't have subtext, and Disney movies have a TON. So they're very, very fun.

 

[wizards8507]

Yup, and I can't enjoy it much anymore because of that. And it takes a LOT for me, because I can get over the overt racism and sexism prevalent in almost every film to enjoy the lighthearted aspects of most of the rest of the Disney canon.

Are you serious?

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

I blame the invention of labour saving devices, created too much free time to think.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It's not difficult. His father was dead, his mother (the queen) wasn't around, but still alive. Therefore, he was alone. He had the servants taking care of him. Now, would he be opening the door to his own castle? Probably not.

So, a servant comes, answers the door. She begs to come in. The servant gets the prince, and is like, "yo prince, there's this woman begging to spend the night." So he comes to the door to see this woman. He's repulsed by her and says "no way." Then she transforms into a beautiful woman and puts a spell on him.

There we go.

And the medium of the stained glass would, in reality, remove the technicality of the servant answering the door and then asking the prince. The action would be accredited directly to the Prince and that is easily conveyed by showing him answer the door. Visual storytelling cannot get into too many details otherwise it becomes harder and harder to understand. The prologue could easily be understood without the narration.

 

[EvilQueen-T]

lol don't forget most of disneys heroes and heroines are like many kids these days, they're from single parent homes or similar so of course his (the beasts) parents weren't home. don't forget ariel, belle, jasmine all live with just their dads, aurora and rapunzul (sp?) have 2 parents but aren't raised by them, cinderella and snow white are raised by step mothers only. just a thought.

 

[sbkline]

Yup, and I can't enjoy it much anymore because of that. And it takes a LOT for me, because I can get over the overt racism and sexism prevalent in almost every film to enjoy the lighthearted aspects of most of the rest of the Disney canon.

:brick:[insert face palm emoticon here as well]

 

[Frightful]

Are you serious?

Yes. It's just one perspective. I'm not one of the people who think that Disney movies are garbage that kids shouldn't watch (many of them, dodgy ones included, are stunning films), just that they provoke discourse by reflecting society.

I blame the invention of labour saving devices, created too much free time to think.

Oh, for sure.

 

[Phonedave]

I blame the invention of labour saving devices, created too much free time to think.

Now we are inventing thinking machines, leaving too much free time .....


-dave

 

[loveofamouse]

LMAO

Personally, although Beast acted like a tantruming 5yr old much ofthe time, Belle wasn't exactly a well behaved girl. IMO she's very rude and stuck up.

Ariel is a very disobedient child. And yes, Eric loved her for her looks since he fell in love while her voice was gone which is why the sea witch went in disguise.

Cindy was a doormat lol

Snow white was a little on the niave side. lol


Honestly, I really don't care for the Dumbo movie. A single mother has a child with a "deformity" that other adults laughed at. He was made fun of and forced to do demeaning, dangerous work because he was different. His mother was caged for protecting him. He gets drunk to the point of hallucinating. Sorry but the group of crows have alot of racial undertones. Do I let my kids watch it? Yes. I even purchased the DVD. I just don't care for the story. lol

As for twilight, I can see the view that he was an controlling stalking boyfriend but I don't see it that way. Maybe it's cause I'm a mom and can understand the need to protect those that are weak. Not saying there weren't times the character went a bit too far. IMO, though, Jacob was the worst and far more emotionally abusive. I'd be more concerned for my girls to date a guy like him than a guy like Edward. Yes, I read the series

I'm surprised the feminists don't say anything about the fact that almost all fairy tales are based on a girl in trouble that she just can't get herself out of until some strange, unknown man rides in on a white horse and saves them. Then they feel obligated to marry the guy. lol

 

[unkadug]

...Then they feel obligated to marry the guy. lol

You forgot "and lived happily ever after." Therein lies the fairy tale !

 

[dragongirl]

Most of the stories collected in Andrew Lang's set are actually about a girl* in trouble until a fairy comes into the story and helps them rescue a guy, who ends up marrying them.

Thus the name "fairy tales".


*Sometimes the "girl" is actually a young widow or a single mother (or both) and there's no marriage at the end. Still has some sort of magical fairy help though. But the white knight rescue sorts of stories are actually few.

 

[Enchantâmes]

Human Again was originally written for the stage musical. It's performed in the middle of act 2.

It was originally written for the movie silly (watch the Special Edition). Howard Ashman died 4 years before the musical opened....

 

[sweetpee_1993]

I have one:

My hubby & aunt swear up & down that Andy's mom was Jessie's original owner, Emily, in TS2. I have never gotten that indication but they both swear they have. When asked what part of the movie indicates that neither have a definitive answer. They have no explanation to support their theory but it is noteworthy that 2 people independently came to the same conclusion. My reasoning against Emily being Andy's mom is that she values toys too much to have discarded her childhood favorite the way Emily did. At the yard sale when the toy guy offers her money for Woody and she declines citing that he's a family heirloom of a toy this proves it. Also, I got the impression from this scene that Andy obtained Woody as an old family keeper. Wasn't Woody's Roundup an old children's show from the time period Mom would've grown up? If Woody was so valuable to have been carefully saved then handed down to the next generation certainly Jessie would've been treated the same.

And this is where I take major issue with the ending of TS3. If Woody had been saved from a parent's childhood & handed down to Andy, why on earth did Andy give his favorite toys including the family heirloom to another unrelated kid??? That's tragic! Andy should've saved his toys for his kids! We should've seen Andy's kids discovering our beloved toy gang in a box in the garage! Andy should be playing with his toys again with his kids! Ugh! I know a lot of people totally loved TS3 but I walked away some kinda miffed at him. Lol!

So has anyone else ever thought of Andy's mom as being Emily? Can you explain that thinking?

 

[sbkline]

I have one:

My hubby & aunt swear up & down that Andy's mom was Jessie's original owner, Emily, in TS2. I have never gotten that indication but they both swear they have. When asked what part of the movie indicates that neither have a definitive answer. They have no explanation to support their theory but it is noteworthy that 2 people independently came to the same conclusion. My reasoning against Emily being Andy's mom is that she values toys too much to have discarded her childhood favorite the way Emily did. At the yard sale when the toy guy offers her money for Woody and she declines citing that he's a family heirloom of a toy this proves it. Also, I got the impression from this scene that Andy obtained Woody as an old family keeper. Wasn't Woody's Roundup an old children's show from the time period Mom would've grown up? If Woody was so valuable to have been carefully saved then handed down to the next generation certainly Jessie would've been treated the same.

And this is where I take major issue with the ending of TS3. If Woody had been saved from a parent's childhood & handed down to Andy, why on earth did Andy give his favorite toys including the family heirloom to another unrelated kid??? That's tragic! Andy should've saved his toys for his kids! We should've seen Andy's kids discovering our beloved toy gang in a box in the garage! Andy should be playing with his toys again with his kids! Ugh! I know a lot of people totally loved TS3 but I walked away some kinda miffed at him. Lol!

So has anyone else ever thought of Andy's mom as being Emily? Can you explain that thinking?

I never thought of Andy's mom as being Emily. However, despite all the good plot reasons you gave as to why she could NOT be, you do have to keep in mind that this is a thread about plot holes and how Disney has proven itself inconsistent in its storylines. :ROFLOL:

I don't know about anyone else, but even though I purchased my copy of Toy Story 3, I can't really bring myself to watch it again. It almost made me cry when I saw it the first time, as I have a 4 year old boy who plays with his toys the way Andy did, and all I can think of is my boy growing up, ditching his toys and driving off into the sunset like Andy did! So I'll play it for him in the van where I don't have to see it, or maybe let him watch it in the living room while I do other things, but so far, I haven't had any desire to sit down and watch it again! :ROFLOL: