[ SECRET POST #2442 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2442 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________
















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 045 secrets from Secret Submission Post #349.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[darkmanifest]

That kinda makes sense, with the exception of Ariel, who's got legs in her all her marketing instead of a fish tail. Sure, her movie's quite a bit older, but like you said, there's always the new batch of kids who haven't seen it.

[(Anonymous)]

Design convenience and marketability. Mermaid Ariel can't easily be added to group shots ("Belle, move to your left; we can't see you around the edge of the fishbowl."), nor can she wear a sparkly ballgown that fits with the princess aesthetic.

[darkmanifest]

That's what I figured was Ariel's explanation, but then we come back to Rapunzel - she can wear a gown just fine with short hair. I imagine it comes down to her long hair being much more iconic - she is Rapunzel after all - it just irks me because they want to sell the icon, but they wouldn't let her keep it in the actual story. It's silly, just inconsistency is a peeve of mine.

[(Anonymous)]

I was so happy when they released a Disney Store Rapunzel doll with short brown hair...! And then it was the only one they did. :(

[loracarol]

Depends on the marketing- I know that I've seen posters and the like of Ariel w/ her fin, and in the Disney theme parks, her face character is sometimes a mermaid, plus her story is about her becoming a human being- it's not so much spoilers imo, as the ending of Rapunzel's story, where her having short hair is the ending, if that makes sense?

[darkmanifest]

Ah, I've never seen her marketed with the fin myself, that's interesting. Well, I'd argue it was the same, because Rapunzel's story is about her super-long hair as much as Ariel's is about her becoming human, so you already know what the resolution will have to do with. And there's not much that can happen with hair except to end up cut.

[loracarol]

IDK, I'd have to disagree- to me, at least, Rapunzel's story is about her leaving her tower, and her 'mother', and seeing the lights/the world, her hair is secondary to that- it's the reason *why* she's locked up in the tower, but not why she *leaves*. (I'm really sorry if this isn't coming out right either, I've been having trouble with words today). The resolution (to me, again) would then be her leaving the tower for good, her hair being cut was secondary to this, and again, it's *why* she leaves the tower for good, but it's not the same thing. :3

[darkmanifest]

I understand what you're saying, but I'm not arguing that cutting Rapunzel's hair was the entire resolution, only that it was part of it, and could be easily assumed to be an aspect of how she would get her happy ending, therefore marketing her with short hair wouldn't be a spoiler, per say. Far less iconic, sure, but not a spoiler.

[loracarol]

I suppose we're going to have to agree to disagree then. :)

[darkmanifest]

That's cool. ^^ And I'm sure we can agree that Rapunzel is awesome either way.

[loracarol]

That is true. ^_^

[(Anonymous)]

Ariel gets legs like almost immediately. It's not that big of a spoiler.

[darkmanifest]

I recall her human sequence as being shorter than her mermaid sequence (because nobody goes to see "The Little Mermaid" for a chick who gets legs immediately). But then, that could be because I found her human parts the least interesting every time I watched the film (with the exception of "Kiss The Girl") and keep parsing them out.

[(Anonymous)]

uh no, she's human for a majority of the movie. WTF.

[(Anonymous)]

And by "almost immediately" you mean 45 minutes into a 70 minute movie?

(I don't care either way, but it takes a long time before she even sees Eric for the first time. Just FYI.)

[(Anonymous)]

I HAVE RECENTLY SEEN THIS MOVIE. She is immediately shown as being obsessed with humans and singing about how she wants legs. She sees Eric within the first 20 minutes. She fights with her dad about being in love with a human. Witch casts spell. SHE IS HUMAN FOR MOST OF THE MOVIE. The story of her getting legs IS THE ENTIRE PREMISE. It was in the TRAILERS. Premise of the damn movie =/= spoilers.

[sachiko_san]

wut

No she's not, it's about 50/50. And she was mermaid during the fight scene with Ursula. Also chill, it's a movie.

[(Anonymous)]

Also chill, it's a movie.

Hello, you must be new to the concept of fandom and the internet! Welcome!

[sachiko_san]

No, it's just a movie. Now if it were a shipping war...

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

You might have recently seen this movie, but I double checked before posting my comment. :) "Poor Unfortunate Souls" is around the 45 minute mark so, sorry, you're wrong.