- Joined
- Dec 23, 2008
- Messages
- 6,114
- Reaction score
- 5,811
So, Aladdin was probably my favorite Disney film growing up. I actually like it better than The Lion King, mostly because of Robin Williams (also, even as a kid, I realized Simba was a little bitch, and he got Mufassa killed. I can't root for him at all). But when you really think about it, Aladdin is literally the worst villain in Disney history.
Think about his wish for a second. He wished to be made a prince. Not to be disguised as a prince, but actually made one. So, due to the wording of his wish, Aladdin inadvertently wished an entire kingdom into existence. This alone is problematic, since there are two possibilities regarding the location. A) his kingdom overlaps some preexisting domain(s), in which case his people are certain to have territorial disputes with their neighbors, or, B) his kingdom emerges in some remote, isolated part of the world, with no contact with the outside world. This means that his people are liable to be left culturally and technologically stagnant, and an easy target for more advanced nations down the line.
It gets worse, though, when you consider succession. Whether his wish entails the creation of a king is debatable, but it doesn't really matter. If the king is alive, he is presumably at least 30 (given that Aladdin is around 17, and the king must've been at least 13 when Aladdin was conceived), about at the end of the average lifespan during the middle ages. There is no reason to assume that any other princes were created by the wish, so Aladdin is the heir apparent to a kingdom he doesn't know even exists. When the king dies, the kingdom is going to be left entirely without a ruler. And even if the king were to have another son and name him as his heir, he's liable to be, at most, 10 years old by the time the king dies. Child rulers are almost always, historically speaking, disastrous for kingdoms in their own right, but it gets worse when you consider that there is bound to be some sort of loyalist faction opposing Aladdin's brother. Either way, the kingdom is likely doomed to decades of civil war.
TLDR: Aladdin wished an entire kingdom of people into short, brutal existences just because he wanted to get laid.
Think about his wish for a second. He wished to be made a prince. Not to be disguised as a prince, but actually made one. So, due to the wording of his wish, Aladdin inadvertently wished an entire kingdom into existence. This alone is problematic, since there are two possibilities regarding the location. A) his kingdom overlaps some preexisting domain(s), in which case his people are certain to have territorial disputes with their neighbors, or, B) his kingdom emerges in some remote, isolated part of the world, with no contact with the outside world. This means that his people are liable to be left culturally and technologically stagnant, and an easy target for more advanced nations down the line.
It gets worse, though, when you consider succession. Whether his wish entails the creation of a king is debatable, but it doesn't really matter. If the king is alive, he is presumably at least 30 (given that Aladdin is around 17, and the king must've been at least 13 when Aladdin was conceived), about at the end of the average lifespan during the middle ages. There is no reason to assume that any other princes were created by the wish, so Aladdin is the heir apparent to a kingdom he doesn't know even exists. When the king dies, the kingdom is going to be left entirely without a ruler. And even if the king were to have another son and name him as his heir, he's liable to be, at most, 10 years old by the time the king dies. Child rulers are almost always, historically speaking, disastrous for kingdoms in their own right, but it gets worse when you consider that there is bound to be some sort of loyalist faction opposing Aladdin's brother. Either way, the kingdom is likely doomed to decades of civil war.
TLDR: Aladdin wished an entire kingdom of people into short, brutal existences just because he wanted to get laid.
