Showing posts with label rapunzel. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rapunzel. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 26, 2019

Let's Talk About The Stigma Around Enjoying "Kids" Things

Every so often, when I tell people I have a Master's Degree in Children's Literature, I can see the internal question behind their eyes: "Is that even a real thing?" They're usually much too polite to say that though, so they usually ask a variant of, "Oh! What kind of job do you get with that?" or, "So you just read kids books for a living?"

To be fair, most of the time, especially when I mention that I focus on Disney and Harry Potter, people's eyes light up and they start to talk enthusiastically about their favorite Disney movie or their favorite childhood book or they lean forward, as if we're sharing a guilty secret, and ask, "So what do you think about...?" Most of the time, it's a pleasant conversation. After all, the power of nostalgia is strong, and most people find it easy to talk about Disney movies or vacations.

But sometimes, I admit, it's easier to just say I have a Master's in 19th Century British Literature. Which I do. I actually have 2 Master's Degrees, which is not a #humblebrag, but more to point out that one of them is generally regarded as "more valid" or "better" than the other. Reading Dickens and the Brontes and Austen and Shelley is considered a legitimate form of academic study -- people get that. But reading Harry Potter and watching Disney movies? That, to some people, just isn't an acceptable way for an adult to spend her time.

Which, quite frankly, is ridiculous. But that doesn't change the fact that when things are marketed to children, they are seen as juvenile: simpler, easier, lesser. I'm certainly not the only one to observe this trend, and it's not a new phenomenon easier, despite the recent surge in popularity of YA fiction.

There's a really great quote by C. S. Lewis from an essay he wrote, titled "On Three Ways of Writing For Children" -- actually, the whole essay is great and I highly recommend it -- that neatly sums up this idea. Lewis writes,
"I am almost inclined to set it up as a canon that a children’s story which is enjoyed only by children is a bad children’s story. [...] This canon seems to me most obviously true of that particular type of children’s story which is dearest to my own taste, the fantasy or fairy tale. Now the modern critical world uses ‘adult’ as a term of approval. [...] Hence a man who admits that dwarfs and giants and talking beasts and witches are still dear to him in his fifty-third year is now less likely to be praised for his perennial youth than scorned and pitied for arrested development." 
Lewis then goes on to offer a three-prong defense of fantasy and the fairy tale, and says this in his first defense:
"When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up."
To Lewis, the notion of being judged for one's personal preferences -- the fear of that judgment -- those are the childish marks of arrested development. A well-adjusted adult (not grown-up!) cares little for such judgment and is comfortable in their own skin.
[And, yes. The phrase "when I became a man I put away childish things" is an allusion to 1 Corinthians because while Lewis is (perhaps) most famous for his Chronicles of Narnia series, he was also a rather prolific theologian. I admit that I didn't know this until my younger brother was assigned one his theology books for homework at his private, Episcopal high school -- although, in hindsight, the religious symbolism in the Narnia books isn't exactly subtle. Aslan is a pretty obvious Christ figure when you think about it, which Little Me certainly didn't. Whoops.]

Anyway -- all of this is a rather long-winded way of introducing this:


I came across this article this morning and immediately bristled. My knee-jerk, snarky response was, "So? I'm [older than 24] and I love all things Disney." Yes, maybe the caption was click-baity, but the implication seemed to be that the author ought not to be enjoying a show about a Disney Princess on the Disney Channel. After all, the Disney Channel airs children's programming for kids, not adults.

The beginning of the article didn't do much to assuage me either:
"These are questions I often ask people when I get a little tipsy and start talking about TV, because, as I am here to proudly proclaim, my favorite show on TV right now is none other than the Tangled continuation/sequel series that everyone is sleeping on, Rapunzel’s Tangled Adventure."
I prickled when I read this part because, again, the implication seems to be the author can only gush about one of her favorite things when her guard has been let down, her inhibitions lowered, her judgment impaired. Sober, she would never admit to liking, let alone loving, such a show, making it seem as if enjoying a Disney product is a dirty little secret and a very-guilty-pleasure. She even goes to criticize Disney a little bit, when she says:
"Yes, I am 24 years old and love a kids’ show about a Disney Princess, but this show—created to give Rapunzel more outfits so they can sell a new line of Tangled dolls—has some surprisingly relatable themes for millennials (and even Gen Z)."
The criticism of Disney-the-Company here is striking. Taking Disney down a peg -- reducing the show to another example of its synergistic relationship between film and merchandise -- isn't surprising: it's the dominant narrative these days. It just seems like a way to qualify the appeal of the show, to legitimate the rest of what she's about to say.
[It also seems, to me, to be unfair. Yes, of course, there's merchandise that accompanies the show, but I view the business and creative sides of the company as two separate entities. Perhaps that's naive of me, but I don't think that Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi would have agree to return to do the show if it had been a shallow merchandising ploy. And Mandy Moore has acknowledged this.]

To be fair, though, the rest of the article is a spot-on insightful account of the ways in which the show transcends average children's programming on network TV. Yes, shenanigans ensue and it's entertaining -- but the show and the TV movie work to expand the typical Disney Princess narrative, which is often really heavily criticized. After all, the show acknowledges: (1) Rapunzel has to enter the real world for the first time and adjust to a new normal and deal with the aftermath of her abusive relationship with Mother Gothel; (2) she has to forge a relationship with parents she doesn't really know; (3) she has to work at her relationship with Flynn/Eugene because happily-ever-afters don't just happen -- relationships take work (and that is revolutionary in and of itself). And, perhaps most importantly, Rapunzel gets a female friend with whom she gets to develop a real relationship. (Disney princesses are, shockingly, light on both female friends and human friends, let alone one who is both.)


This is  a show to be celebrated -- and to be celebrated without qualification. It doesn't matter if this is labeled a "kids" show; good storytelling is good storytelling, no matter the "target" audience.

This is also, I think, part of a larger cultural conversation. (Aren't most things?) There's this really great meme (which of course I can't find because I'm looking for it) that points out that fans who cosplay are ridiculed for playing dress-up far past the socially-accepted age to do so, whereas sports fans who paint their faces and wear the jersey of their favorite team/player escape that ridicule -- even though the two activities are, essentially, the same. The idea, of course, is that being a sports fan -- and, by extension, showing your support of that sport -- is a socially accepted thing for an adult to do. Dressing up as your favorite character from a TV show or movie just...isn't. Again, it's the idea that it's juvenile, childish, and therefore distasteful or inappropriate in some way.

But, to return to Lewis once more:
"For I need not remind such an audience as this that the neat sorting-out of books into age-groups, so dear to publishers, has only a very sketchy relation with the habits of any real readers. Those of us who are blamed when old for reading childish books were blamed when children for reading books too old for us. No reader worth his salt trots along in obedience to a time-table."
And no person "worth his salt trots along in obedience" to "socially acceptable conventions." It seems quite simple, to me (even though I know it really isn't): read the books you enjoy reading. Watch the movies and the TV shows you want to watch. Support the sports teams you want to support. And show your support and enjoyment in any way you want -- and certainly do so without any shame.

Tuesday, September 4, 2018

To Buy: New Disney Shirts from TeeTurtle

A short post, to ease back into blogging. There is, apparently, some plague remnant stomach bug going around and I caught it. (Which is a big deal, because I never catch those. I always get the colds. Which, fun fact, I got too. Back to back: the virus and a cold.) Basically, this has been me for the past few days:


YAY ADULTING. 

But, this email from TeeTurtle popped up this morning helped a little bit. Two new Disney couple shirts available! 
I mean, on the one hand, I definitely don't need any more Disney graphic-tees, no matter how cute and nerdy they are.

But on the other hand...it's Rapunzel and Flynn! (I'm definitely "meh" about Aladdin and Jasmine -- love the movie, love that scene, but as characters...meh.) And it's the lantern scene! Which is one of the most gorgeous pieces of animation and also "I See The Light" was the First Dance song at my wedding. 💖 

Check them out and add to your collection here -- along with a bunch of other Disney shirts I definitely covet. 

Sunday, June 3, 2018

Wreck-It Ralph 2: The Disney Princesses Unite!


A few days ago, this post popped up on my feed:


A couple of important things to note:

(1) Alan Tudyk is back! Given that his original character, King Candy/Turbo, was the villain and (spoiler!) got his just desserts, and also given that Alan Tudyk has become Disney Animation Studios' good-luck charm -- I was worried that he wouldn't be in this film. Worries no more. 
(2) Taraji P. Henson's character looks awesome.
(3) Perhaps, most importantly, our first look at the Disney Princesses all together is here!

Here's a bigger look at the picture:

📷: Purewow via Disney
Again, there are a couple of things to note here:
(1) This is awesome. And you will never get me to say otherwise. I imagine this to be some sort of super-cool Princess secret society. Or, resort/spa where they can relax and get away from princessy-duties.
(2) Excluding Vanellope, there are 11 princesses present:
  • (2a) Interestingly, Anna, Elsa and Moana are all here -- even though they haven't been officially inducted into the princess court.
  • (2b) All the First Wave princesses are present -- Snow White, Cinderella, and Aurora -- even though their voice actors are no longer with us. (I always assumed they'd have different actors, so it'll be fun/interesting to see who they cast.)
    Also--Aurora is in her pink dress. Don't get me started.
  • (2c) 3/5 of the Second Wave princesses are present: Belle, Jasmine, & Pocahontas are there, but Ariel and Mulan aren't. More on this in a second.
  • (2d) 2/3 of the Third Wave princesses are present -- Tiana and Rapunzel, but Merida isn't. (I'm not counting Moana yet.)
Given the panorama-type view of the shot, it's possible that the three of them are just off-screen (and maybe we'll see them in the trailer tomorrow). 

Shockingly, (she said sarcastically), the internet is a little upset about Mulan not being included -- thanks, Buzzfeed!


Which, I know they ask about Ariel in the sub-title, but still. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort to count the princesses and figure out that not *every* Disney princess is there -- I counted 3.  But there's a lot of ignorance misinformation in this post. 



Like that whole jibber-jabber about how Mulan isn't *technically* a princess. Yes. We talk about this a lot in my class -- i.e., how do we determine a Disney princess? Do you have to be born one? Can you marry into royalty? And what about different cultures? After all, princesses are primarily (not exculsively!) a Western concept, especially in the way Disney portrays them. Is Jasmine a princess, as the daughter of a sultan? Is Pocahontas a princess, as the daughter of a chief? (Maui would clear this up.)  But I digress. -- The point is: when Andy Mooney created the princess franchise in the early 2000s, they had to come up with some criteria. After all, Tinker Bell was included at one point -- but then they went and did the whole Fairies franchise ($$$), so she was out. Any female character who is included in the Royal Court, is an official princess, regardless of birth, marriage, or any other factors. See below:

📷: WDWThemeParks
All 11 princesses are there -- and yes, this is before Frozen and Moana, but there hasn't been another "induction" since.

So then they point to these cast photos that were taken at the 2017 D23 Expo (which I thought I blogged about, but I can't find it. Which makes sense. I was so. very. pregnant. in July of 2017 and also running around after a 1-year-old.)


What these images tell us is that, from left to right in the second picture, Paige O'Hara (Belle), Irene Bedard (Pocahontas), Mandy Moore (Rapunzel), Auli'i Cravalho (Moana), Sarah Silverman (Vanellope), Kristen Bell (Anna), Kelly MacDonald (Merida), Anika Noni Rose (Tiana), Linda Larkin (Jasmine) and Jodi Benson (Ariel) are all there. When I first read this story, I assumed Ming-Na Wen (Mulan) wasn't there because of Agents of Shield commitments.

I'm just going to ignore this comment from the Buzzfeed post -- But interestingly the voice actors of Snow White, Cinderella, Elsa, and Aurora were not present, even though they are in the shot from the movie. -- because, you know, LOGIC. (Snow White came out in 1937, guys. It's a safe bet that Adriana Caselotti isn't still alive -- she passed in 1997 -- and even if she were, she'd be pretty old.)

So, yeah. Merida and Ariel will be there -- although no one seemed particularly worried about here in the Buzzfeed post  😢 -- and it's a safe bet that Mulan will be too.

So, let's just enjoy the awesomeness of all the princesses together and hope that we see them all in the trailer tomorrow.

Tuesday, May 29, 2018

Disney Princesses As: Career Women!

May, 2018: We're still re-imagining Disney Princesses in inventive ways. #somethingsneverchange

The latest one imagines Disney Princesses as modern-day career women:

via ScaryMommy
The collection is by Matt Burt and he's put a lot of thought into the careers for each character.

Chronologically, here they are:

Snow White -- Leading Psychologist
Cinderella -- Animal Rights Activist
Aurora -- CEO of Spinning Wheel Coffee 
Ariel -- Pop Star & Record Producer 
Belle -- University Chancellor
Jasmine -- UN Ambassador
Pocahontas -- Environmental Activist (I mean, duh)
Mulan -- Title IX Lawyer
Tiana -- Award Winning Chef (I mean, duh)
Rapunzel -- Neurologist
Merida -- Two Time Olympian (Archery & Equestrian)
Elsa & Anna* -- Climate Change Scientists
Moana -- Officer in the Navy

*Not official princesses, but, a common mistake.

Okay, one, it's clear that Burt put a lot of thought and rationale into each of these career choices.
Two--I love that each of them is an empowering career for the character -- you've got chancellors and ambassadors and scientists. (Yay for Women in STEM!)

But.

I wouldn't be me if I didn't have nit-picky thoughts.

1. Most obvious -- Tiana & Pocahontas: really, any other career options for these two wouldn't work.


2. My favorite "new career" -- Aurora: I love that she's the CEO of a coffee company. Tongue-in-cheek, but oddly appropriate.


3. No...just no -- Snow White as a "Leading Psychologist" and Rapunzel as a "Neurologist": Nope. Not buying it. While I appreciate that Burt made Snow a "leading" psychologist who cares for her clients but also presents at conferences, I...would not put my faith in her as a psychologist. If anything, I think she'd made a great preschool/kindergarten/elementary school teacher. Her cheerful disposition plus her ability to make people actually wash their hands? Textbook.
And Rapunzel? Yeah, cool. Neurologist, doctor, med school, blah blah blah. But the thing I love about the end of Tangled is that Flynn tells us that she learned to rule and govern her people and was a great princess/queen. So, yeah. I would have liked to see her be a senator or even a female president. 

    

4. Miscellaneous thoughts, from someone who has clearly spent too much time thinking about this:
  • I guess I see Cinderella as an Animal Rights Activist -- but maybe she and Ariel join forces together. I don't love Ariel as a Pop Star -- because she's my favorite, and it seems a shallow career -- but...I suppose Ariel is kind of shallow, so it fits. :/ 
  • Again, I love that Belle is the chancellor of a university, but again, it kinda doesn't fit her personality. I don't see her as an authoritative decision-maker -- something I think Once Upon A Time captures nicely with Belle as a librarian -- maybe an English professor at best. 
  • Mulan & Moana -- For some reason, I'm just "meh" about these. I think it's because they seem too rebellious for such straight-laced careers. I'm pretty sure Mulan would do something -- with the best of intentions, of course -- that would end up getting her disbarred. And Moana? She relies too much on emotion and instinct to be a good naval officer -- I can't see her taking orders well. 
Like I said, I've clearly spent too much time thinking about this! 




Friday, September 22, 2017

Happy First Day of Fall!

Fall is, without a doubt, my favorite season. I was raised in the Hudson Valley in New York, so I grew up with beautiful fall foliage, chilly nights and mornings, and some of my best memories involve going apple picking with my family. Falls aren't quite the same in the South, but the minute that first hint of crispness enters the air...I love it. 

Thursday, August 10, 2017

Disney FanArt Drop

Still one of my favorite things from the D23 Expo this year.

And I love that the artist captured/translated their facial expressions. 💖


📷: Nin (@rirrr1731) via Disney Memes




Wednesday, May 25, 2016

Disney Artwork -- Isaiah Stephens

Blogger tells me that my last post was March 8th. Oof.

To be fair, I'd like to think I had a pretty good reason:
Another Disney princess (and future Disney consumer?) has entered the world. :) Our little Cricket Bug was born on April 21, three weeks early, and I've been playing catch-up ever since.

Cricket Bug has -- surprise surprise! -- yet to wear a Disney outfit -- but when she does, I'll be sure to document and share it.

For now, I thought it was fitting that my first post back be this "Disney Princesses As" piece by Isaiah Stevens for Cosmo: Disney Princesses As Mothers. (Follow Isaiah Stephens on Instagram here! He does a lot of Disney work that's super cool and inventive.)

[Sidebar: I just finished reading "Nearly Everybody Gets Twitterpated: The Disney Version of Mothering" by (Hollins professor!) Lisa Rowe Fraustino--which...well, let me just quote a line from the abstract:
"The animated films [reproduce traditional mothering ideology] not by animating the realities of marriage, childbirth, and mothering work for girls to model after but instead by idealizing the dream of romance that leads to the making of the traditional patriarchal family."
Basically, Disney movies end with the fairy-tale happily-ever-after of a wedding, and basically ignore everything that comes after -- including motherhood (although that's not necessarily a requirement).
So it's interesting to see Stephens kind of take up that mantle and portray the princesses (albeit in a romanticized, stylized way) as mothers. I dig it.]

Quite possibly my favorite:


This one just makes me smile -- even more so because I think the photo in the background is women of all different body types spelling out "B-E-A-U-T-I-F-U-L." I don't know if this is a subversive dig at Cosmo or something that was sanctioned by the magazine, but either way, I love it.


Okay, so this one's not as romanticized...but I love that Flynn is wearing a gas mask. (Although...shouldn't Rapunzel's hair be short and brown?) 


#ParentingTruth. I know Cricket Bug is only 4.5 weeks old, but I have nieces and nephews. This is pretty much how it goes. 

Also--it's called "karma," Merida. :) 





Friday, February 19, 2016

Disney Artwork -- Phil Berry

In today's installment of "Disney Princesses as..." I bring you "Disney Princesses as Jedi" by Phil Berry. (Check out his work at his DeviantArt page.)

While I'm not the biggest Star Wars fan, I still think these are pretty cool if only because the princesses seem super kick-ass and not at all like damsels in distress. I also like the little subtle nods to the other characters in the film -- although Pascal, Rajah and Flounder are not nearly as cute and cuddly in Berry's versions.

Rapunzel might be my favorite -- after all, she's using her hair as a weapon, freeing up her hands, so the bad-ass potential is pretty high here.


Runner-Up probably goes to Ariel -- probably because she's my favorite princess in general. 


Berry rounds out his quartet with Jasmine and Belle:


For some reason, I'm not as big of a fan of the Belle one (to each his own!), mainly because if Beast wasn't there, I'd have a hard time knowing it was Belle. Her pose is also less active and striking, but maybe she's more of a strategist. 



Friday, February 5, 2016

People Love Disney.

Okay. Whatever you're doing -- stop, take 5 minutes of your day, and listen to this beautiful cover/Disney mash-up. 

I am always in total awe of people who can not only sing but who can sing acapella since I have no musical skill whatsoever. 

Here, Kirstin Maldonado (of Pentatonix) and Jeremy Michael Lewis (of AcoUstiKats) mash-up "I See The Light" (from Tangled), "You'll Be In My Heart" (from Tarzan) and "Go The Distance" (from Hercules) and the result is stunning. I'm so used to Phil Collins' version of "You'll Be In My Heart" that I think hearing the soprano version when Maldonado sings is a bit weird for me, but she absolutely slays the Rapunzel vocals in "I See The Light." (And, as I explained to my husband, she's the reason I'm nitpicky about the actresses who play the Disney princesses on Broadway -- a few years ago, we saw an Ariel who was just so nasal, it bothered me the whole show: yes, Disney Princess songs are incredibly hard to sing, and I'm not professing to do any better, but when you find the right vocalist, it's amazing. They're out there!)

And those vocalists in the background? Doing the "music"? SO TALENTED.

*sigh* I wish I could sing. (On-key.)

Saturday, January 16, 2016

Life Imitates Disney Art

So this story popped up in my newsfeed this morning: "Fayetteville Home Invade Receives A Little Frying Pan Justice":



Cliffnotes version: guy breaks in (apparently shot?); homeowner attacks him with frying pan.

Sound familiar?


I mean, you just have to laugh. 

Not about the guy getting hit with a frying pan. Although I think he's okay, that's still not a humorous incident. (Especially since I think he assaulted a woman before the B&E.) 

But...they did use a frying pan to take care of an intruder. Survival skills by Disney? I wonder if they're even aware of the Disney/Tangled connection...



Friday, September 11, 2015

Well played, Tee Turtle. Well played.

So TeeTurtle finally released the other two designs in their Disney/Harry Potter mash-up series -- Rapunzel as Hufflepuff and Maleficent as Slytherin. 


I love them all -- but since I was officially sorted into Ravenclaw (as if there was every any doubt, Pottermore!), I bought the Belle one. 

I gotta say though -- two of these are absolutely spot-on. Maleficent as Slytherin (even though she's not a princess -- is there a princess who would be a Slytherin? Maybe Jasmine...) and Belle as Ravenclaw are perfect. 

And I see/totally get Mulan as a Gryffindor and Rapunzel as a Hufflepuff -- but I would have gone with different choices....as my husband pointed out, I feel like they really missed an opportunity to have Merida as a Gryffindor. I mean, her movie was literally called Brave. And while Rapunzel is 100% a Hufflepuff, I would have gone with either Snow White or Tiana; after all, "those patient Hufflepuffs are true and unafraid of toil." 

I'm sure it's been a very popular series--I'm just sayin' they could do a second series. :P There's tons of inspiration by DeviantArtist Eira1893 -- one of my favorite Buzzfeed Geeky posts. 

Wednesday, June 3, 2015

Tangled TV Series

One of the news stories making the Internet Rounds today is that the Disney Channel is developing a Tangled animated series.


Now, Tangled is one of my favorite Disney movies. Rapunzel is pretty high up on my list of favorite Disney characters -- #3, behind Elsa (#1) and Tink (#2). It was always one of my favorite fairy tales, but I love the Disney version -- due in no small part to Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi. (Seriously. How ADORABLE are they??) I love the music, I love Rapunzel's spunkiness, and I love, love, love the lantern scene. After all, "I See The Light" was the song my husband and I danced to for our first dance at our wedding. 

So when I read that the Disney Channel was making a TV series, I'll admit I rolled my eyes and sighed a little. 

After all, I remember The Little Mermaid TV show (which was horrible) and the Aladdin one (which was even worse). So low budget. 

BUT. Then I read that not only have "Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi have signed on to reprise their roles" but also that "The duo responsible for the movie’s original score, composer Alan Menken and lyricist Glenn Slater, also will serve as songwriters on the series." That in and of itself is a pretty big deal. 

But it gets better. Not only are we introducing a new character, "Cassandra" who is a "strong-willed handmaiden who also serves as Rapunzel’s confidant" but here's a brief summary of the plot:
“Her irrepressible spirit and natural curiosity about the world drives her to the realization that there is so much more she needs to learn before she can truly accept her royal destiny. She boldly puts her crown and impending marriage on hold to seek out epic adventures, much to the dismay of the King who, after missing out on Rapunzel’s youth, must accept that his daughter is now an independent young woman.”
For the Disney Princess franchise, this is kind of a big deal. The TV series will take place after the movie but before Flynn & Rapunzel's wedding (from the short "Tangled Ever After"). The implication is that, as the plot summary states, she "puts her crown and impending marriage on hold to seek out epic adventures." That is, we'll get a Disney princess who, despite some progressive moves (she wielded a frying pan!), was still firmly relegated to the traditional Disney princess sphere of love and marriage. When I put on my Critical Cap, one of the things that strikes me the most about Tangled is that Flynn Rider controls the story -- and at the end, he reassures the reader that despite the fact that Rapunzel is going to be a great queen, don't worry -- they got married and live happily ever after. An innocent, romantic ending perhaps, but there's also the potential to read that as the patriarchal voice shifting focus away from the female-as-ruler and placing her back in the safe, domestic role of wife. And then, the focus of the short is, of course, their wedding.

But this TV show proposal changes all that. Or, at least, expands the story and Rapunzel's character to be more consistent with the progressive character we initially see in the film. The fact that she's deferring her marriage to explore the world and discover herself is an amazingly progressive role for a Disney princess. (I know the summary blurb also mentions that she defers her crown but that really doesn't make much sense. After all, her parents are still alive, and thus the rightful rulers of the kingdom. She should, in theory, only be able to take the crown once they've passed -- and, as the plot summary mentions the King's disapproval, it seems to indicate that we'll keep our nuclear family intact -- again, another "different" move for the parent-killing Disney storytellers.)

I have such high hopes for this show -- which, maybe I'm setting myself up for disappointment, but I think Rapunzel could have the potential to be another Elsa in terms of independent princesses.