The author doesn't make a case that since it's Disney you have to read it as ambiguous (or, well, that's not what I got from it), so I wondered "Well, it might be notable since it's Disney, but do you reach the same conclusions when you examine other movies with a similar lack of definition.
And from what I'd heard, that movie, out at a similar time, might satisfy the criteria.
I was thrilled that in Snow White and the Huntsman,
Snow White didn't end up with either of the dudes.
Though I feel like it's implied that
she'll end up with Thor.
Because
duh, he's Thor.
OH MY GOD the second picture done killed me.
ita please start a rope provocateuse site please please please.
Dang, I don't even really think Jeremy Renner is hot, and that picture really gets it done for me.
But also because (re: SWatH)
True Love's Kiss!
I mean, we're still in that story, right?
Jesse, I think (re:SWaTH)
that True Love's Kiss could be open for interpretation. I thought what The Huntsman expressed was a true love for Snow White the person, whereas the other Guy was feeling a more idealized love for Snow White of his memories/dreams. Or maybe the Huntman's True Love was for his wife and he was kissing Snow White and that counted. I was really happy when she didn't end up with either of them. The Huntsman never really seemed to be In LOVE with her and the other guy was more IN LOVE with Snow White as a child.
ita please start a rope provocateuse site please please please.
yesyesyesplease
Dang, I don't even really think Jeremy Renner is hot, and that picture really gets it done for me.
Renner isn't really my slice of pie, either, but yeah.
I saw there was a pic with a gun--that caught my eye. There was rope? Was it made of guns?
No, it was wrapped around his guns.
EpicTangent, can you settle a bet between me and a friend. is there male full frontal?
Not that I saw. Oh wait, there is a scene where one of the guys (Joe Manganiello's character, I think)
seems to be using a vacuum-pump like contraption to *ahem* enhance himself. You don't actually see it from the front - it's shot so that the large/long object in a clear tube sort of inhabits the shot from the upper left side of the screen. Like the camera was just below/behind the guy's right hip. And it's a little out of focus, because the focus is on a couple of the guys talking on the other side of the room. So not full-frontal - full-side-al?
edit - because "i" is not "s"
mmhmm...that's what i thought! thanks!!