HOME | DD

nikolas-213 — Why is Meg not a Disney Princess?

#animatedfilm #disney #disneyprincess #funny #hades #hercules #meg #meme #movies #wreckitralph #wreckitralph2
Published: 2018-06-15 04:42:53 +0000 UTC; Views: 7484; Favourites: 91; Downloads: 6
Redirect to original
Description Seriously? Meg has so many qualifications and she is a very unique and interesting character. People claim that there are 2 reasons for this, but I don't think they are valid enough. They are as follows:

 Meg is not of royal blood neither is she married to royalty

What kind of point is that? Mulan doesn't have these qualities either, and she is an official Disney Princess. Plus, Meg is married to Hercules, who is the son of the King and Queen of the Gods. So that makes him Prince of Olympus, thus Meg is Princess of Olympus. People say it doesn't count because Herc declined his father's offer to join them, but even so, that doesn't stop Hercules from being the son of the monarchs of Olympus.

 Hercules wasn't a big financial hit

The Little Mermaid: $211,343,479

Hercules: $252,712,101

The meme belongs to me. I made it for entertainment purposes. Original template found here: nikolas-213.deviantart.com/art…
Related content
Comments: 62

nikolas-213 In reply to ??? [2018-06-15 20:06:16 +0000 UTC]

You and me both, friend

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Mackus23 [2018-06-15 06:27:56 +0000 UTC]

Good points.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nikolas-213 In reply to Mackus23 [2018-06-15 20:05:59 +0000 UTC]

Thank you!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Jabroniville In reply to ??? [2018-06-15 06:26:39 +0000 UTC]

Mulan is there for only one reason- they needed an Asian. Pocahontas & Moana are "Chief's Daughters" and also not Princesses, but they're in. Elsa is a QUEEN and still called a Princess (though officially, she is not. Idina Menzel will even correct people).

👍: 1 ⏩: 1

nikolas-213 In reply to Jabroniville [2018-06-15 20:05:52 +0000 UTC]

I guess in Disney's mind, "Chief's Daughter" still means loyalty as they are the child of a leader. As for Elsa, I agree with you. She's not a princess nor an official member, yet she is there. No sense at all

👍: 1 ⏩: 0

ChaliceOfSouls In reply to ??? [2018-06-15 05:27:02 +0000 UTC]

Seems legit

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nikolas-213 In reply to ChaliceOfSouls [2018-06-15 20:03:42 +0000 UTC]

Thanks

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Lonewolf-Sparrowhawk [2018-06-15 05:09:46 +0000 UTC]

Here's something a little weird about Disney: they don't make the girls official princesses in movies angled to boys.

Let's look at the big 2: Jane and Meg.  What movies were they in?  Jane was in "Tarzan," Meg was in "Hercules."  Both movies have a guy for the main character, but so does "Aladdin."  So what makes "Aladdin" a Disney Princess movie and not "Hercules" or "Tarzan"?  Answer: the objective.

Aladdin's objective that begins his adventure is winning the hand of the princess.  Both Hercules' and Tarzan's overall objective is self discovery and betterment; the girl is more of an added benefit, not their original aim.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nikolas-213 In reply to Lonewolf-Sparrowhawk [2018-06-15 20:03:35 +0000 UTC]

I suppose that makes sense. It's a shame that they aren't there :/

In Jane's case, she's excused as Disney has a problem with the Tarzan franchise. I heard that after the production of Tarzan 2 Disney lost the rights from Edgar Rice Burroughs Inc. So even though Jane's film was financially successful and well received, the fact that they don't own the series probably prevents them from using the characters. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Lonewolf-Sparrowhawk In reply to nikolas-213 [2018-06-15 22:21:55 +0000 UTC]

Ah, copyright wars...

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

nikolas-213 In reply to Lonewolf-Sparrowhawk [2018-06-16 07:32:56 +0000 UTC]

Very inconvenient wars

👍: 0 ⏩: 0


<= Prev |