Post by Shenzi on Sept 5, 2014 1:14:21 GMT -5
So I came across this via Facebook and found it very thought provoking. It's a humorous sketch where a group of friends are discussing Disney villains and pointing out some very interesting angles that 4 particular villains may have been more right in their actions than their protagonist counterparts.
www.cracked.com/video_18619_4-disney-movie-villains-who-were-right-all-along.html
The tidbit that Ursula was originally written as Triton's sister, I know that's been theorized so whether that was stated here as fact I am unsure. To answer the question of the gentleman who had wondered about their parents, Triton is the son of Poseidon, God of the Sea and ironically in connection with the opinion expressed here, in Greek Mythology he was a dark ruler.
"Hesiod, Theogony 930 ff (trans. Evelyn-White) (Greek epic C8th or C7th B.C.) :
"And of Amphitrite and the loud-roaring Earth-Shaker [Poseidon] was born great, wide-ruling Triton, and he owns the depths of the sea, living with his dear mother and the lord his father in their golden house, an awful god.""
Source: www.theoi.com/Olympios/PoseidonFamily.html#Sea
Notice that last line: "An awful god".
The scene where he'd destroyed Ariel's human things and dreams is in fact a slight accurate portrayal of his Greek Mythology background despite being remorseful of that action later.
Poseidon's "Offspring" had a very brief genealogical link to him and largely were given his paternity to emphasize their brutal nature. They were born of multiple mothers and were of varying species including Divine, Nymph, Giant and Mortal. So there is no reason why Triton and Ursula couldn't be related.
Describing Ursula as the more giving and compassionate character is quite clever and has gotten me reconsidering something. I'd been convinced that the film was missing the initial message of self acceptance and not to change yourself for others from the original tale. As I'd heard it the mermaid was given the choice between the prince's death and her own, she chose her own and was turned to bubbles. I also believe the prince had not returned her affections. So the fact that Ursula's magic comes at a cost may be that message displayed in a more subtle form despite the happy ending with Ariel as Human. She is suddenly a much more intelligently written character in my book. Though this also got me thinking how there is a completely lack of backstory concerning her banishment. Even in the supposed "original script" mentioned here it was apparently just that "he didn't like her". That doesn't say anything.
Now personally I'd always favored Scar and the Hyenas over the "good" characters but to view him as a Martin Luther King Jr. of sorts of the Hyenas is very interesting. An excellent catch that their banishment never had backstory. This indeed distorts Mufasa's image as it appears he has a hate of this species for no good reason. The image of the "Hyenas Only" water hole was not only brilliant but powerful. Scar just got cooler to me.
With Gaston I do not agree. He wanted her because of the one positive quality in Belle the town pointed out, that she's beautiful. He even said and I quote:
"She's the most beautiful girl in town, that makes her the best and don't I deserve the best!?"
Spoken like a true jock! He was a self centered, shallow, superficial character and he even has a whole freaking song devoted to how he's Mr. Perfect! He borderline sexually harassed her the way he was always up in her personal space and the clear discomfort this brought her. He was also clearly controlling, wanting to turn a strong, smart, independent woman into a barefoot and pregnant housewife with absolutely no mind of her own:
"It's not right for a woman to read, soon she starting getting ideas and thinking..."
The Beast came to truly love her as he got to know her. Hell-freaking-lo, he let her go without getting that crucial "I love you" to tend to her ill father. With few precious rose petals left and a sureness that he'd never see her again! He'd given up his humanity for something important to HER! Let's not forget the dialogue between him and Cogsworth directly after:
"I let her go."
"Yes yes splendi-- you what!? How could you do that!?"
"I had to."
"Yes yes yes but why!?"
"Because...I love her."
Then how about his broken and defeated response to Gaston knowing very well that he wanted to slay him until the moment she showed up again?
How does anyone miss any of these clear displays.
Overall a very thought provoking video which I really appreciated. For the most part the points brought up were very out of the box and clever.
www.cracked.com/video_18619_4-disney-movie-villains-who-were-right-all-along.html
The tidbit that Ursula was originally written as Triton's sister, I know that's been theorized so whether that was stated here as fact I am unsure. To answer the question of the gentleman who had wondered about their parents, Triton is the son of Poseidon, God of the Sea and ironically in connection with the opinion expressed here, in Greek Mythology he was a dark ruler.
"Hesiod, Theogony 930 ff (trans. Evelyn-White) (Greek epic C8th or C7th B.C.) :
"And of Amphitrite and the loud-roaring Earth-Shaker [Poseidon] was born great, wide-ruling Triton, and he owns the depths of the sea, living with his dear mother and the lord his father in their golden house, an awful god.""
Source: www.theoi.com/Olympios/PoseidonFamily.html#Sea
Notice that last line: "An awful god".
The scene where he'd destroyed Ariel's human things and dreams is in fact a slight accurate portrayal of his Greek Mythology background despite being remorseful of that action later.
Poseidon's "Offspring" had a very brief genealogical link to him and largely were given his paternity to emphasize their brutal nature. They were born of multiple mothers and were of varying species including Divine, Nymph, Giant and Mortal. So there is no reason why Triton and Ursula couldn't be related.
Describing Ursula as the more giving and compassionate character is quite clever and has gotten me reconsidering something. I'd been convinced that the film was missing the initial message of self acceptance and not to change yourself for others from the original tale. As I'd heard it the mermaid was given the choice between the prince's death and her own, she chose her own and was turned to bubbles. I also believe the prince had not returned her affections. So the fact that Ursula's magic comes at a cost may be that message displayed in a more subtle form despite the happy ending with Ariel as Human. She is suddenly a much more intelligently written character in my book. Though this also got me thinking how there is a completely lack of backstory concerning her banishment. Even in the supposed "original script" mentioned here it was apparently just that "he didn't like her". That doesn't say anything.
Now personally I'd always favored Scar and the Hyenas over the "good" characters but to view him as a Martin Luther King Jr. of sorts of the Hyenas is very interesting. An excellent catch that their banishment never had backstory. This indeed distorts Mufasa's image as it appears he has a hate of this species for no good reason. The image of the "Hyenas Only" water hole was not only brilliant but powerful. Scar just got cooler to me.
With Gaston I do not agree. He wanted her because of the one positive quality in Belle the town pointed out, that she's beautiful. He even said and I quote:
"She's the most beautiful girl in town, that makes her the best and don't I deserve the best!?"
Spoken like a true jock! He was a self centered, shallow, superficial character and he even has a whole freaking song devoted to how he's Mr. Perfect! He borderline sexually harassed her the way he was always up in her personal space and the clear discomfort this brought her. He was also clearly controlling, wanting to turn a strong, smart, independent woman into a barefoot and pregnant housewife with absolutely no mind of her own:
"It's not right for a woman to read, soon she starting getting ideas and thinking..."
The Beast came to truly love her as he got to know her. Hell-freaking-lo, he let her go without getting that crucial "I love you" to tend to her ill father. With few precious rose petals left and a sureness that he'd never see her again! He'd given up his humanity for something important to HER! Let's not forget the dialogue between him and Cogsworth directly after:
"I let her go."
"Yes yes splendi-- you what!? How could you do that!?"
"I had to."
"Yes yes yes but why!?"
"Because...I love her."
Then how about his broken and defeated response to Gaston knowing very well that he wanted to slay him until the moment she showed up again?
How does anyone miss any of these clear displays.
Overall a very thought provoking video which I really appreciated. For the most part the points brought up were very out of the box and clever.