Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Headscratchers / ThePrinceAndThePauper

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Out-of-universe, the reason is obviously "BondVillainStupidity is a common trope because it gives the heroes a chance to win." But is there an in-universe reason?

to:

** Out-of-universe, the reason is obviously "BondVillainStupidity there are two obvious reasons: One, BondVillainStupidity is a common trope because it gives the heroes a chance to win." win. Two, this is a family-friendly cartoon, and they wouldn't allow such violence. But is there an in-universe reason?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Pete figures out that the Prince is in the village, so he plans to make sure the Prince doesn't get back to the castle alive. That's all well and good. But then, when Pete and his henchmen find the Prince, they take him back to the castle... alive! They do lock him in the dungeon and plan to execute him later, but still, why leave him alive in the first place? You could argue that Pete needed to be back in time for the Pauper's coronation (if Pete wasn't there to threaten Mickey, Mickey probably wouldn't have gone through with it.) But why not swoop in, kill the Prince in the village, dump his body somewhere on the way back to the castle, and be done with it? Would that take so long? You had a solid plan, Pete! Why contradict it?

to:

* Pete figures out that the Prince is in the village, so he plans to make sure the Prince doesn't get back to the castle alive. That's all well and good. But then, when Pete and his henchmen find the Prince, they take him back to the castle... alive! They do lock him in the dungeon and plan to execute him later, but still, why leave him alive in the first place? You could argue that Pete needed to be back in time for the Pauper's coronation (if Pete wasn't there to threaten Mickey, Mickey probably wouldn't have gone through with it.) But why not swoop in, kill the Prince in the village, dump his body somewhere on the way back to the castle, and be done with it? Would If they were able to capture the Prince in time, would it really take that take so long? much longer to kill him? You had a solid plan, Pete! Why contradict it?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

!!Disney version
* Pete figures out that the Prince is in the village, so he plans to make sure the Prince doesn't get back to the castle alive. That's all well and good. But then, when Pete and his henchmen find the Prince, they take him back to the castle... alive! They do lock him in the dungeon and plan to execute him later, but still, why leave him alive in the first place? You could argue that Pete needed to be back in time for the Pauper's coronation (if Pete wasn't there to threaten Mickey, Mickey probably wouldn't have gone through with it.) But why not swoop in, kill the Prince in the village, dump his body somewhere on the way back to the castle, and be done with it? Would that take so long? You had a solid plan, Pete! Why contradict it?
** Out-of-universe, the reason is obviously "BondVillainStupidity is a common trope because it gives the heroes a chance to win." But is there an in-universe reason?

----

Top