Rebirth of the Disney Empire (Disney Films: Part III)

I've waited quite a while since the first two posts, much like the gap between Toy Story 2 and Toy Story 3, but it's finally time to finish up my dynastological view of the last decade of Disney animated features. While it was not a strong decade for monarchical films, it also could have been much worse. In any case, the past three years especially have shown that the monarchical tendencies of Disney continue to this day. Let's move on...


40. The Emperor's New Groove (2000) – Disney's first monarchical film of the new millennium tells the tale of the young Incan emperor, Kuzco, who is turned into a llama by his chief advisor. Despite starring an emperor as its main character, there is very little in the way of monarchical commentary in this film other than a glaringly obvious one: greed. Kuzco is a very greedy and wealthy emperor and he wants to build a new summer retreat on the site of a peasant's home. The peasant, Pancha, and the emperor-turned-llama then go on a long adventure to turn the emperor back into a llama and humble him a bit. Again, not a lot on the way of monarchical commentary. The emperor turns out to be a better man in the end and everyone lives happily ever after, except the chief advisor. There is no mention of parents, marriage, or children, and even discussion over the empire itself is kept to a minimum. In other words, this is a fun Disney comedy with little in the way of dynasticism.

41. Atlantis: The Lost Empire (2001) — In contrast, Atlantis proved to be all about monarchy. Like The Emperor's New Grove, Atlantis takes place in an empire, albeit an underwater one. Atlantis is ruled by an ancient king who has lived since the empire sank beneath the waves. "Empire" is a loose term in this film since Atlantis is no larger than a volcanic island in the middle of a molten sea far beneath the Earth's surface. Still, the king's daughter, Kida, helps an expedition that discovers Atlantis. She and the expedition's chief scientific advisor, Milo, fall in love and Milo helps decipher Atlantean text so the lost knowledge of Atlantis can be relearned. In the process, though, the militant contingent of the expedition turns greedy and tries to use the knowledge to become rich. Kida becomes an imprisoned heir, trapped within an ancient jewel. Milo, with the help of some of the expedition members and the now-ailing king, rescues the imprisoned princess and restores Atlantis to its former glory. The story has many twists and, though it seems at times like a damsel-in-distress story, it proves to be quite different. It is the heiress, imbued with the power of her ancestors, who saves Atlantis. The king lives on, but it is strongly implied that his daughter and heir, Kida, will be the one that restores the glory of Atlantis, and Milo will be there all along the way as the royal consort to the Queen. A rich film with dynastic depth, Atlantis: The Lost Empire is perhaps one of Disney's best animated features though it is also one of its darkest.

49. The Princess and the Frog (2009) — The first Disney princess film since Beauty and the Beast, this unique biography of a 1920s New Orleans African-American waitress is interesting all on its own. Tiana has a dream to create her own restaurant along the riverfront. Meanwhile, Prince Naveen of Maldonia is a penniless, unskilled daydreamer seeking to find a wealthy bride in the American South. Where Maldonia is is never stated, but it is said that his father does not want a beggar for a son. Like most Disney movies, Tiana becomes a princess through marriage. Naveen is the true-born prince, the son of the King of Maldonia. When the film nears its conclusion, the couple are still frogs who miss their chance to kiss at midnight, thereby remaining frogs. Their failure to kiss seems to suggest that their love and marriage at the end of the film will be rather Shrek-like. Yet upon their marriage kiss, Tiana "becomes" a princess and the curse finally lifts. I found this a bit anticlimactic because they had decided they were content with being frogs yet they still were cured. Sure that meant Tiana and Naveen could open their own restaurant, but the underlying message—"be content with who you are or become"—seems lost. Also, while it is never entirely clear if Naveen is the heir, it seems certain that he will never become king since he remains in New Orleans, the co-owner of a popular restaurant. Nevertheless, this film ends up being a rather fun twist on the usual princess formula, while still following the standard dynastic patterns of Disney films.

50. Tangled (2010) — Returning back to the roots of Disney, Tangled, formerly known as Rapunzel, tells the tale of a true-born princess stolen by an evil woman while still an infant. The reason she was taken was a special property in her hair which allowed her to heal the sick and injured. To maintain this power, though, Rapunzel could never cut her hair. The woman, Gothel, imprisoned the princess in a tower and raised Rapunzel as her own daughter, never telling her of her parents. Meanwhile, her parents annually hold a festival of mourning during which they release thousands of lighted candles into the air in the hope that Rapunzel may one day see them and return to her parents. Rapunzel can see these from her tower and wishes to see them up close, not knowing their purpose, but Gothel refuses. After a long story known as the plot, Rapunzel loses her hair but saves her new boyfriend, Flynn. She is reunited with her parents, who seem to have not produced any other children other than Rapunzel. The film then jumps ahead a number of years to show Rapunzel and Flynn getting married, thereby making Flynn the prince-by-marriage. Disney did some unusual things in this film. First, it is only the second film where there is a prince-by-marriage. In all the other films where there is a true-born princess except Aladdin, the true-blood princess ends up finding a true-blood prince. The only other formula thus far was the non-royal woman marrying the true-blood prince. Secondly, the woman has a magical power. To my knowledge, no other Disney princess has a magical power, except perhaps Pocahontas who can talk to nature. In other respects, the film is fairly similar to Sleeping Beauty and Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, with a princess-in-exile not knowing her parents. This film was definitely an interesting flick with new songs and decent graphics.

As for other films during this time, there is not much in the way of monarchy. Like Oliver & Company, Disney's Treasure Planet (2002) does not take place in a monarchical universe but derives from a story written in a monarchical universe, namely Hanoverian Great Britain. The author of the original story, Robert Louis Stevenson, wrote during the reign of Queen Victoria, but the story takes place during the reign of King George II in the mid-1700s. Disney's other films produced during the 2000s—Fantasia 2000 (1999), Dinosaur (2000), Lilo & Stitch (2002), Brother Bear (2003), Home on the Range (2004), Chicken Little (2005), Meet the Robinsons (2007), Bolt (2008), Winnie the Pooh (2011), Wreck-It Ralph (2012)—all lack any obvious connection to monarchies. Dinosaur contains some latent paternal tribalism, but nothing more serious. Disney's 2013 film, The King of the Elves, suggests that Disney has not yet given up on its monarchical aspirations and is progressing in a similar vein as it has for the past eighty years. Thus monarchies remain an important and even integral part of the animators' and story-tellers' canon.

The Rulers of the Disney Renaissance (Disney Films: Part II)

Continuing my series on Disney dynastological analyses, today we will be reviewing the films from The Rescuers through Tarzan, which means we will be encompassing the majority of what has become known as the "Disney Renaissance". Again, any critique on the dynastological aspects of the films in no way lessens my appreciation and enjoyment of said films. This period especially is one of my favorites in Disney's history and I hope it is returning as it seems to be. Let us begin...

 
Princess Eilonwy

 25. The Black Cauldron (1985) – Often known as one of Disney's darkest and least-known films, The Black Cauldron tells the story of Taran and Princess Eilonwy, two Welsh heroes who fight to end the conquering desires of the Horned King and his minions. While the monarchical aspects of the film are generally downplayed, two different types of royalty are represented in this film. The Horned King, the evil enemy whom all must defeat, is portrayed as a tyrannical conqueror of unknown origins but who has destroyed the beautiful countryside. Princess Eilonwy, in contrast, is a legitimate princess, the daughter of a common man and a daughter of the Sea King. Little further is explained on this matter, however, and Eilonwy mostly brushes off her ancestry as burdensome to recount. In the end, the story focuses primarily on the pig, Hen Wen, and Taran rather than the monarchs and, while the defeat of the Horned King is important to the overarching story, little is discussed in relation to the future of the lands the Horned King once ruled over.

 
Princess Ariel and Prince Eric 

28. The Little Mermaid (1989) – Disney's first masterpiece in the series of films that became the "Disney Renaissance", The Little Mermaid tells of how Ariel, the daughter of Triton, King of the Oceans, fell in love with a human and forfeited her life as a mermaid for life on land with a man. Disney chose to use two blood royals in this story to place both characters on the same grounding. Ariel is the youngest daughter of the Sea King, a man who apparently has no (legitimate) sons since none are mentioned at a pageant near the beginning of the film (nor in any subsequent sequels or television episodes). Eric, the man she falls in love with, is a prince as well but nothing is discussed of his background. Whether he is a sovereign prince, as in a reigning prince, or the son of a monarch is unclear.  It is highly possible that since Eric seems to live as the ruler of a large castle on the sea with no parents ever mentioned in the film, he is the actual ruler rather than simply the child of the ruler. In either case, his hereditary royalty is never in doubt from the time of his first introduction throughout the film.

 
Belle and Beast 

30. Beauty and the Beast (1991) — A "tale as old as time", this film focuses on an imprisoned and scholarly peasant woman who is captured by an evil beast in his massive castle and inevitably falls in love with him, redeeming him in the process. The beast is in fact a prince turned monster by a sorceress. While he was yet a mid-teenager at the time of his transformation, no mention is ever given to parents in the film suggesting that the Beast was in fact a sovereign prince in charge of the castle and the lands around it. The townsfolk nearby seem to know of the beast but not of his dominion, suggesting that either the castle is much farther away than portrayed or that it does not rule the lands in which Belle once lived. In all likelihood, Cogsworth and Lumière were probably stewards and maybe even regents for the prince in his youth and continued as advisers as he reached maturity. At the time in the film, the Beast was supposed to be around 21 years old, with only one year to break the curse from his 21st birthday.

 
Princess Jasmine

 31. Aladdin (1992) — The classic tale passed down from One Thousand and One Arabian Nights, Aladdin tells the tale of a street urchin who finds the lost genie's lamp and becomes a prince. He does so through his (eventual) marriage to Princess Jasmine, the daughter of the Sultan. However, this film actually has three different forms of monarch portrayed in it. As with the previous three films, Jasmine is a legitimate princess, the daughter of the ruling monarch: Sultan. Aladdin becomes a prince jure uxorious, "by right of his wife", when he eventually marries her (which doesn't actually happen until the third film: Aladdin and the Prince of Thieves). But do not forget the Grand Vizier Jafar, who temporarily uses the power of the genie's lamp to become the Sultan of Agrabah. His claim to the throne is sheer conquest, but that is a style of succession long tried and supported. And while Jafar ultimately fails in his quest, he does manage to change succession law in Agrabah by convincing Sultan than Aladdin, as a hero, is worthy of marrying his daughter, despite the fact that Aladdin has no royal blood. In reality, royalty in Arabia has often married non-royals to cement alliances between tribes, and heroes are certainly good marriage material.

 
King Simba of the Pride Lands

 32. The Lion King (1994) — One of Disney's most remembered and loved films, The Lion King is also the one of only three films to feature a title of royalty in its title. The "Lion King" in question is Simba, initially the son of Mufasa, king of Pride Rock and the Pridelands. Mufasa is the legitimate king of the lands and that is something his younger brother, Scar, despises. Scar is eventually able to orchestrate a coup against his brother with the help of a band of hyenas. They kill Mufasa and attempt to kill his son, Simba, but eventually allow him to flee into the savannah in disgrace. Scar takes over the pride despite resentment from the lionesses while Simba settles in at a watering hole with Pumba, a warthog, and Timon, a meerkat, both outcasts of their own. Fate eventually catches up with Simba, though, and his once betrothed lioness finds him while going on a long hunt. She convinces Simba to return and challenge his uncle for control over the pride. Simba does so and wins the fight, with angry hyenas finishing the task of killing the deposed usurping Scar. The film ends the way it began, with Simba and Nala having their newborn child blessed and presented before the residents of the Pridelands. The dynasty continues.

 
 Pocahontas 

33. Pocahontas (1995) — In contrast to The Lion King, the monarchical roles in Pocahontas seem downright subtle, but they are still there. Pocahontas is a princess of an Algonquian Native American chieftain named Powhatan. Lacking a son, Powhatan is in negotiations with a mighty warrior of the tribe to wed his daughter, who is trying her utmost to make herself scarce. Eventually Pocahontas falls in love with an English explorer named John Smith, but circumstances halt their romance. The monarchy in this is a hereditary tribal chiefdom. While the chief is able to pass his claim to leadership on to his children, bravery and leadership qualities are expected of the leader. Little is explained about how the monarchy works and it remains a background topic throughout the film.

 
Hercules 

35. Hercules (1997) — One of the lesser films of the "Disney Renaissance", Hercules deals with a non-monarchical issue but one that is surrounded by monarchs. Thirteen to be exact. That is the number of gods and goddesses there are on Mount Olympus and Hades. The film is played out like a dynastic struggle for leadership of the Olympian Gods, a struggle fought mostly between Zeus and Hades, using Hercules as their tool. Hades and Zeus are brothers, but Zeus is god above while Hades god below. This angers Hades and so the underworld lord leads a rebellion by releasing their gigantic and wrathful parents, the Titans, upon the world. Hercules, through his bravery, is able to stop both the Titans and Hades' attempt at conquest by rescuing his love from what appears to be a Well of Souls. His immortality defeats Hades and Olympus is saved. Zeus became god of Olympus when he defeated the Titans the first time around, and thus this film is really about a dynastic struggle between two brothers who both feel like they should rule their siblings, a topic oddly similar to that in The Lion King.

 
The Han Emperor 

36. Mulan (1998) — Mulan follows the journey of Fa Mulan as she joins the Chinese army disguised as a man and falls in love with her captain. Two aspects of the story suggest royalty. The obvious one is that the story takes place in Imperial China during the Han Dynasty that lasted from the 3rd century BCE through the 3rd century CE. The emperor plays a fairly prominent role at the end of the film as he is  captured and nearly killed by the Hun leader, Shan Yu. The Chinese monarchy was a agnatic (Salic) primogeniture system prone to periodic succession by conquest. This film follows one of those attempts, as Shun Yu, the leader of the Huns, leads a campaign of conquest over the Great Wall and toward the Imperial City. Shan Yu is most likely a tribal chieftain who rose to his rank through deeds rather than by heredity, although some hereditary descent may have occurred. Had he conquered the Chinese capital, he would likely have adopted the manners of China as did the Mongols in the 14th century and the Manchurians in the 18th. It should be added, however, that Mulan, at no point in this story, becomes or is implied to become a princess. She remains the daughter of a soldier and marries a soldier.

Of the remaining films in this period, nearly all have a trace of monarchy in them despite the fact that no monarchs or their children appear in the films. Basil: The Great Mouse Detective (1986) and Tarzan (1999) both take place in Victorian England or with a Victorian English cast, with the former mentioning the Crimean War periodically and the latter featuring modes of Late Victorian dress in both the character of Jane and many of the slides she shows to Tarzan. The Hunchback of Notre Dame (1996) takes place during the reign of King Louis XI in the 1400s, and the king appears once in the novel but not in the film. As a stretch, The Rescuers Down Under (1990) takes place in contemporary Australia, which means Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is also the Queen of Australia via the Commonwealth of Nations. That leaves only Oliver & Company (1988) without any monarch whatsoever, either implied or otherwise, featured in the film since it takes place in contemporary New York City. Coincidentally, though, the novel upon which Oliver & Company was based, Oliver Twist by Charles Dickens, took place in London during the reign of King William IV. Thus the "Disney Renaissance" is also a period in Disney's history rich with connections to monarchs and, most surprisingly, legitimate female rulers whose husbands are the ones not royal. Indeed, only Belle from Beauty and the Beast becomes royalty through her marriage, all the rest already are royalty. A kind switch from earlier Disney films.

Damsels in Distress (Disney Films: Part I)

As a fun little dynastology topic that I have been putting off, I want to analyze all the canon Disney Theatrical Animated Features released since Snow White in 1937 and each film's monarchical style. I hope you enjoy and I promise, my critique of the dynastological aspects of the films do not have any baring on my enjoyment of the film. I am a huge fan of Disney's canon and hope one day to have the whole series.

This first set of analyzes will revolve around the first twenty-two episodes up through The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh. The majority of Disney films in this period do not have monarchical concepts, but a few do including some of the most famous princess films. Note: Numbers beside film-names represent that films sequence number according Walt Disney Animation Studios.

 
Princess Snow White

 1. Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) – The first in a long chain of Disney princess films that continue to this day, Snow White also sets the stage for one of the two modes that a "princess" becomes a princess. For Snow White, her method is ancestry. Snow White is the (apparently) only daughter of the late king. When the king died, it seems that her step-mother, called the Queen, usurped the kingdom from Snow White. All was well and good until Snow White became "fairest of them all". The Queen attempted to murder Snow White and she fled into exile. A while later, the Queen discovered Snow White still lived and, through a power struggle, both were killed. Snow White, however, was rejuvenated following the kiss of a rather mysterious man simply named Prince. Snow White and the Prince ride off toward the castle and "live happily ever after". Talk about stereotypical and unhelpful. The only thing that can be assumed at the end of this film is that the Prince is going to become the King suo uxoris—by right of his wife. That wife, it is assumed, is or will be Snow White. This is all left out, though, as is the identity of Snow White's parents and why Snow White didn't become queen after her father's death. Also, who ruled the kingdom once the evil Queen was gone? Surely some time passed and, it was assumed, that Snow White was dead either by the woodsman's axe or the Queen's poison. Surely someone would have claimed the throne since the Queen's passing. So many things left unsaid that this film, unfortunately, does upset me due to its simplicity. Other Disney films fare much better in the end. 

 
Bambi, Prince of the Forest

 5.  Bambi  (1942) – Throughout this film, Bambi is called a prince. His father is known as the Great Prince of the Forest establishing some form of monarchy. With Bambi being the Great Prince's son, he is established as the heir to the dynasty. This concept is little expanded on throughout the film, but the Great Prince does come to the rescue twice to save Bambi from danger, suggesting that Bambi is important to the continuity of the dynasty. The story ends with Bambi overlooking the birth of his children with his father, and then his father turning and walking away, suggesting that Bambi will soon be established as the next Great Prince. The dynastological undertones of this story are extremely strong, but the lack of conversation and depth in the film constricts its ability to tell its dynastological story.

 
Cinderella 

12.  Cinderella  (1950) – The direct contrast to Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Cinderella tells the tale of a maiden-turned-princess, Disney's other favorite form of "princess" to princess story. Basically, Prince Charming needs a wife because he currently shows no interest in getting married. The king wants a son, dosh garnit! So he invites every maiden in the kingdom to flaunt themselves in front of Charming. Dynastologically, this is already becoming improbable. Royalty-peasantry marriages are generally taboo even today and were much moreso back in the Middle Ages, when this story takes place. Even marrying nobility could be seen as damaging to the legitimacy of a dynasty, certainly marrying the gentry or peasantry was just ludicrous. Generally, that lot was reserved as mistresses or simple concubines. Anyway, Charming meets Cinderella, the wealthy heiress of a man whose widow and step-daughters treat the young woman as a common household servant. Cinderella's fairy godmother enchants Cinderella into basically becoming a noblewoman, but only until midnight! Upon her midnight flight, Cinderella leaves behind a glass shoe that Charming uses to find the young woman again. How only one woman in all of the kingdom fits Cinderella's shoe size is beyond me. Buying shoes for her must really stink. After some quarreling with the family, Cinderella finally manages to try on the show, which fits, and become a princess through her marriage to Prince Charming, a prince by blood. Thus, as Charming's father wished, Cinderella fills in the role of wife and mother to Charming and the many children she will undoubtedly have to fulfill her husband's and father-in-law's wishes.

 
The King and Queen of Hearts 

13.  Alice in Wonderland  (1951) – In Alice's imagination, she falls into the Kingdom of Wonderland, as it is eventually established. Wonderland is ruled by what appears to be a Queendom. Upon further analysis, though, there is a king and, since this was written in Victorian times, it is likely that the king was the suo jure monarch while the queen was just a heavy-handed consort. In either case, the Queen of Hearts is quite obviously the power behind the throne. The only other possibility, and it is a stretch, is that the king and queen are co-monarchs much like William III and Mary II were, but this seems unlikely. The parallels between the large Queen of Hearts and pompous Victoria and the twitchy King of Hearts and powerless Prince Albert are hard to miss. No further description of the monarchy can be found in the film.

 
Princess Aurora 

16.  Sleeping Beauty  (1959) – Disney's third foray into princess land returns the princess technique to that of Snow White: the hereditary princess. Unlike Snow White and Cinderella, however, Sleeping Beauty demonstrates a high amount of dynastological information. Aurora is born as the only child to her parents, King Stefan and Queen Leah. Soon after her birth, she is betrothed to Prince Philip, the son of King Hubert, in a dynastic alliance to unite the two kingdoms together. Thus, the story establishes that Aurora is the heiress of Stefan and implies that she will become Queen suo jure—in her own right. It also makes clear that Philip is the heir of Hubert and will become King in his own right. Thus there will become a dynastic union between the kingdoms, hopefully made permanent once the couple produce children. Years later, when the two meet, they fall in love, but Philip believes Aurora to be a peasant girl rather than the princess in exile. This suggests that the love is not meant to be, since, as mentioned in the Cinderella critique, royalty did not marry peasantry. In fact, Hubert brings this up when Philip reveals the news that he no longer wants to marry Aurora but rather this strange peasant woman. Hubert denies Philip the right to marry the peasant, for reasons mentioned above. Meanwhile, as with Snow White, Aurora is killed by a spinning wheel but may be revived if kissed by Philip. The evil fairy, Maleficent, captures and locks up Philip (why she did not just kill him, I know not). Philip escapes and kills Maleficent and then awakens Aurora, and they all live happily ever after. Out of all of Disney's princess films, this one is probably the best at properly portraying dynastic laws. There is a prearranged marriage for dynastic purposes. Hubert denies Philip the right to marry outside his class (or his betrothal). Both parties are already princes(ses) in their own rights. Frankly, I like the story too, even though Aurora is a really two-dimensional character. Definitely a well-done dynastological story.

 
Arthur, King of the Britons

 18. The Sword in the Stone (1963) – The treatment of the King Arthur story is bound to be controversial since there in all likelihood was no historical king by that name. Regardless, the story behind this version of the legend is that England is in the Dark Ages because Uther Pendragon died without naming his heir. When he died, a magical sword appeared in London embedded in a stone and anvil. The crux: who ever pulls out the sword becomes king of England. Quite an odd succession technique if you ask me. Regardless, Wart (aka Arthur) eventually pulls out the sword and becomes king. The story pretty much ends there, with a short epilogue explaining how Arthur becomes king and brings England out of the Dark Ages. Nothing is explained about his parentage (like that he is Uther's son), nothing about why he wasn't king to begin with, and nothing about his continuing legacy, except how famous he will become. Honestly, for a film about King Arthur, I would expect more regarding monarchy and less about preteen angst.

 
Mowgli and King Louie 

19. The Jungle Book (1967) – Besides the context of British India during the reign of Queen/Empress Victoria, "King" Louie is the only other monarchical figure in this allegorical story. He acts more like a kingpin—a Jabba the Hutt-like figure—rather than a literal king, making his placement in the dynastological context that of a non-dynastic leader and nothing more.

Richard I the Lionheart, King of England

 

John, Prince of England
21. Robin Hood (1973) – This film's dynastological context is quite obvious. Prince John is the little brother of King Richard the Lionheart. Robin Hood, a local outlaw, wants to ensure that Richard's rights in England are retained against the king's usurping little brother. He does this by "stealing from the rich and giving to the poor". John, whenever reminded of his mother, cries "Mother!" and sucks his thumb. Basically, all this is fun but completely contradicts history. Richard wasn't in the Holy Land by this time but imprisoned in Austria. John had usurped the regency of England in this time but the high taxes that Robin Hood fought against were because John was raising funds to ransom his brother from Austrian custody, a fact that Robin Hood would probably have known. When Richard left again in 1196, he left the government in the care of John, who he had named his heir despite the fact that John had a senior-line nephew, Arthur, the son of his elder deceased brother Geoffrey. Richard, in the end, trusted his youngest brother more than his nephew to lead England. Concerning Prince John's constant wailing about his mother, all was well and good. His mother, Eleanor of Aquitaine, was still alive and well, although quite old. She acted often as John's ambassador and served as Richard's regent prior to John usurpation. John only made a grab for the regency after his mother had left to negotiate for Richard's release in Austria.

The films 2. Pinocchio (1940), 3.  Fantasia (1940), 4.  Dumbo  (1941), 6.  Saludos Amigos  (1942), 7.  The Three Caballeros   (1944), 8.  Make Mine Music   (1946), 9. Fun and Fancy Free   (1947),  10.  Melody Time   (1948), 11.  The Adventures of Ichabod & Mr. Toad   (1949), 15.  Lady and the Tramp  (1955) , 20. Aristocats (1970) and 22. The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh (1977) do not appear to have any significant monarchical figures or dynastological concepts. 14.  Peter Pan   (1953) also does not show any significant concepts but initially takes place in Edwardian Great Britain (1901 to 1910) placing it in a monarchical context. Likewise, 17. One Hundred and One Dalmatians (1961) takes place during an unknown time in British history, probably sometime in the reign of George V from 1910 until 1936 but shows no other monarchical tendencies.

 
Limited Edition Thomas Kinkade painting of Peter Pan & Company soaring over Edwardian London to Neverland