TV show

“The PowerPuff Girls” Theory: Is King Morbucks Afraid of His Daughter, Princess?

This focuses on the original series of “The PowerPuff Girls”, starting in the 90’s and until 2009. Other adaptations won’t be included since I am not familiar with them, nor do I really want to be.

Anyway, for those who’ve watched a big portion or all of the show, we know that Princess Morbucks is not only one of the villains, but a huge spoiled little girl. She brags when things go her way and throws tantrums when they don’t. Her dad plays a big role in giving her whatever she wants and whenever she desires them. He even bought her the mayor’s office in the episode where she legalized crime, probably because Blossom, Bubbles, and Buttercup would not let her be a PowerPuff girl.

In another scene, Princess screams for a glass of water, and her father holds her hand and walks with her as she thanks him. However, if anything happens to his stuff, he will ground Princess for a long time.

In the Christmas special, when Princess and the PowerPuff girls are at the North Pole with Santa, Princess throws a tantrum about how her daddy says she gets whatever she wants and whenever she wants. But I am wondering if he really chooses to spoil her.

Except for that brief parade of villains in a certain episode that I don’t recall the name or plot of, King Morbucks’s face is never shown. I also don’t think he gets any spoken lines. However, I can get a glimpse of his personality where he isn’t too enthusiastic, but rather the opposite. Of course, I could be wrong.

Yet, from what I notice, he doesn’t seem anything like Rancid (an uncle who has a spoiled niece) in “Very CatDog Christmas” or Mr. or Mrs. Salt in either “Willy Wonka” film adaptation. Although the audience doesn’t get much of King Morbucks’s traits, he seems exhausted and likely stressed. That is why I wonder if he gives Princess what she wishes for because he fears her, kind of like how Vicky’s parents are afraid of her in “The Fairly OddParents.”

I will confess, though, that while I did see a lot of episodes of “The PowerPuff Girls”, I didn’t see too many post-2004 ones. So, the reason King Morbucks spoils his child could be explained in a later episode. But I am not sure.

Do you support this theory?

movie

A “Hercules” Theory: Was Hercules Better Off Living as a Mortal? (1997 film)

Warning: contains spoilers***

Although the Disney adaptation of “Hercules” differed a lot from the original myth and was probably highly sugarcoated (which should not be surprising), it still pleases me a lot. I honestly like that stuff.

Anyway, onto the topic. Hercules was born a god, but was turned into a mortal by Hades’ assistants, Pain and Panic. The other gods look for him, but when they finally find him, he is mortal and can’t go back to Mount Olympus.

Years later, when Hercules is a teenager, he discovers from his adoptive parents that they actually found him when he was an infant and took him in. They also kept the metal Hercules had worn when he was a baby, and Hercules takes it to the temple of Zeus. That is where he discovers his true heritage and that he was born a god. The Zeus statue (which could be controlled by the actual Zeus in the movie) tells Hercules that he can become a god again if he proves himself a true hero. He tries to achieve that goal throughout the rest of the story and earns his immortality back. But then he realizes that he’d rather live as a mortal with Meg, his love interest.

So, this is where my question comes into place. Only gods can live on Mount Olympus, but can they leave Mount Olympus voluntarily? What if one of them wanted to go to the market, or go for a walk, or make friends? Are the gods allowed to do that?

Because Disney changes a lot from the original source materials, it’s probably a mystery if the gods can leave Mount Olympus and go out in public. But I am leaning toward an unlikely. I could be wrong for the Disney version, though. If I am correct, then I think Hercules would have been better off living as a mortal instead of a god.

If he hadn’t been turned into a mortal and got to grow up with his birth parents, would he have had limited understanding of the human world? Would he have been extra socially awkward from not being exposed to people?

What do you think?

fiction

Harry Potter Mystery: How Could Almost Every Sixth-Year in “The Half-Blood Prince” Turn 17 by April, When the Cutoff Wasn’t for Several Months?

Everyone who is familiar with “Harry Potter” knows that a young wizard or witch can start Hogwarts when he or she is 11 and is expected to attend 7 years there. That means that by the time a student reaches his or her 6th year, he or she will turn 17 either during the school year or summer.

However, when Harry is a 6th year in “The Half-Blood Prince”, many of his classmates turn 17 by April, and only a few remain 16 by then. Sounds crazy, huh? Only Harry, Ernie, and Draco (as well as Neville, who wasn’t in that scene for some reason), remain under 17 by April, and therefore, have to stay behind while the others in their year can take their apparition tests.

I remember how shocked I’d felt when I’d read that scene, at age 13. Even then, that felt very odd and unbelievable to me. I recall thinking, That’s supposed to mean every other student’s birthdays are close together? No other 6th-years who aren’t 17? That can’t be. I’d also come up with my own theory where maybe there were students with birthdays between April and August in Harry’s year, but were all expelled during the previous years.

But it was not until recent times when I discovered that Harry’s year is quite small. A lot of fans guess that fewer babies were born in the magical world during the late 70’s and early 80’s, when Harry’s peers entered the world, because of the dark times and first wizarding war. Maybe it became worse by the spring. I don’t know.

Another thing that I learned recently is that the cutoff for Hogwarts is August 31st, not September 1st. People on Quora said that if a child turns 11 on September 1st, he or she has to wait another year before he or she can start Hogwarts. Crazy, right? It would make more sense if a child who turns 11 on September 1st could start Hogwarts that day. I mean, that does technically count as being 11. If it’s your birthday, you are your next age. For example, if you turn 18 on Election Day in the US, you can vote. It’s if you turn 18 after when you have to wait.

However, in the UK, cutoffs in August are typical and standard. If there are schools in Britain that start in August, then a cutoff of August 31st makes sense. But for those that start after that, a cutoff no later than the first day of school, would be more rational. In New York, it’s usually the opposite. The cutoffs are often in December. I was born November 22nd, 1993, but graduated high school in 2011. So that meant I turned 5 a couple of months after starting kindergarten. I used to hate being the youngest in my grade and would say, “I’m too young for this grade. I belong in the grade below me.” That would have been true for me if I lived in many other states where the cutoffs are before my birthday, like in September. It’s rare for American school’s cutoffs to be earlier than September, though.

Anyway, now that I’ve gotten to learn these things, maybe it makes sense for almost every 6th-year in HBP to turn 17 prior to mid-April.