Iron Man 3 hit theaters this weekend, and while its massive box office numbers tell the story of yet another Marvel blockbuster, it may end up joining the ranks of Spider-Man 3, The Matrix Revolutions, Godfather: Part III, and X-Men: The Last Stand in the bargain bin of cursed trilogies that ended with fans expecting more. (spoilers)

If you haven’t read our reviews for Iron Man 3, take a look at them here and here, where two of our writers have two very different takes on the film. Instead of another review, we thought we’d take a look at what may have gone wrong in director Shane Black’s Iron Man 3.

Marvel fans and moviegoers in general have joined a massive online discussion about whether Iron Man 3 has fallen victim to what so many trilogies have in the past. Its “twist” has audiences across the globe split and foaming at the mouth, with the majority finding it unnecessarily comical, instead of vital to the plot, and wondering what exactly the true villain in this film was attempting to accomplish. The film has also suffered on film review aggregate RottenTomatoes, as it continues to slip from its critic score of 97% to 77% over the past few days.

Iron Man 3 mandarin hatersRobert Downey Jr. starts the film off with a great flashback where we see our old friend living the good life, but throughout Iron Man 3 we’re left with a totally different Tony Stark – one with what we’ll call Post-Avengers-Stress-Syndrome. Director Shane Black and the film’s writer, Drew Pearce, were quoted saying that they wished to move back to the basics with Iron Man 3, but we aren’t seeing even a hint of the original Iron Man in the new film. Honestly, one has to wonder at this point if these two even saw the first two Iron Man films.

Each trailer and TV spot that was released for Iron Man 3 greeted fans with a similar tone for the film. We were led to believe that Tony would be in a psychological battle with Sir Ben Kingsley’s, The Mandarin, but the Oscar-winning actor is in the film literally less than 10 minutes, considerably less if you don’t count the pre-recorded terrorist videos that he releases. Not only is he a weak opponent for Iron Man, he’s an entirely fake opponent, and his bumbling drunken-act completely sucked the life out of everything we thought we knew about this villain and his motives.

Now, sometimes this sort of revelation about a villain can work. Not knowing much about a villain in a movie can often make them more menacing and thought provoking, but what we ended up with was the true villain, Aldrich Killian (Guy Pearce), who has very little backstory, other than a sob story from 13 years ago and literally zero reason to be a major villain. Why is he committing all of these heinous acts? He says he’s attempting to create a supply and demand for his product, Extremis, but to do so he apparently feels the need to kill the President of the United States (and countless others in terrorists bombings) and enlist the Vice President into committing treason?

What is Aldrich Killian’s end goal?

Why exactly would Killian need to go to such great lengths to gain wealth or power? He’s obviously an intelligent guy, and possibly most important of all: his product works. He has an incredible product in Extremis; it rebuilds the human body and makes humans stronger. Of course there are problems along the way, but did he skip Bio 101? People react differently to viruses, therefore his subjects that explode are simply margins of error that investors would have to be made aware of (we are talking about a comic book movie afterall). The point is, Killian’s goals are all obtainable without acts of terrorism and forcing elected officials into committing treason.

What happened with all the talent in this film?

So let’s look past the poorly fleshed out villain(s) and their severe lack of vision. What happened with all the talent in this film? We have a couple of the most talented actors in the last decade in this film and yet most of them have less screentime than some Extremis soldiers. Why hire an incredible actress like Rebecca Hall as Maya Hansen if you’re only going to use her for less than five minutes and then have her own boss shoot her for no apparent reason? This doesn’t even seem to bother Tony that much that his old fling was shot-dead right in front of him. But, if someone dares to say New York in his presence, he’s forced into a fetal position as his eyes swell up.

iron man 3 threequel curse wide new

Speaking of Tony’s flings, Gwyneth Paltrow continues to get the shaft in these films, even though she plays a character that fans truly seem to enjoy seeing on screen alongside Downey. Don Cheadle probably gets it the worst though, as the trailers and TV spots had us believing he would be vital to this film, seeing as he was given the job of protecting the President, but one would never know that unless they saw the teasers as all he’s seen doing in the Iron Patriot suit is going on two missions which turn out to be completely bogus. Then he ends up losing his suit to the terrorists – what sort of script execution is that? Rhodey may be the most poorly written sidekick in the history of superhero films.

Let’s focus on one of the more poignant scenes in the film: Stark’s cliffside mansion being blown to bits. Prior to this event, Tony broadcasts his home’s location, but when “The Mandarin” attacks Tony’s home with helicopters and missiles, he has no home defense mechanisms and his main suit is essentially unusable. No flight-mode yet?

Apparently Stark’s been working on all of his other 41 suits instead of giving his current suit the ability to fly. While the visual effects are breathtaking, this inability to have a fully functional suit available after taunting a terrorist seems like quite a poor choice. Not to mention, in many of the 21 TV spots released for the film, we see The Mandarin hanging outside one of the helicopters that takes down his house, but he’s nowhere to be found in the film itself. Not entirely unusual for trailer footage to be cut from the final film, but this just continues to make us think the studio was selling us a film they never intended on the public seeing.

Tony Stark meets his new best friend

The suit finally takes flight (for unknown reasons) underwater after being crushed by slabs of concrete from his mansion, and he wakes up in Tennessee where we meet his new friend, Harley. Granted, this kid was actually fairly refreshing considering the mess that was the first act. He and Tony’s relationship was fairly comical, a surprising highlight during this part of the film, culminating to the point where he’s called a pussy by Tony of course (But who’s the one crawling on the ground weeping). One question though, why exactly does Tony Stark need to charge his suit during this sequence again? Isn’t that one of the advantages of having an arc reactor attached to his chest 24/7? Plot hole number 87.

Iron Man 3 full page half size finalDespite enjoying Harley, we can’t help but feel Disney’s heavy hand in his involvement. Injecting a young kid into the film, and then later having Stark send him a ton of Christmas gifts, including a Verizon FiOS enabled computer which just happened to have their logo plastered on the screen. We were fairly surprised Tony didn’t include some toy-sized Iron Man suits to play with, along with the hot rod that Harley won’t be able to drive for the next six years.

It definitely had us paying attention to the product placement, but fans may have been laughing too much to remember what products they should be buying after heading out of the theater. Not to mention the half a dozen Audis we saw throughout the film. One which Tony Stark seems to simply steal when he leaves the bar, but not before throwing Harley another insult.

The final act attempts to redeem the film by stuffing scenes with as many Iron Man suits as possible, but it fails to emotionally effect fans as even Tony Stark can barely muster up any emotion when “the person he cares most about” falls 100 feet into a blazing fire to her death.

As he and Aldrich battle, it doesn’t quite feel as epic as it should, and as Tony destroys suit after suit, they really start to lose their magic that they once had in the previous films. Not to mention his suit is shattered when hit by a truck after the the Air Force One sequence. Wasn’t he able to catch cars and trucks with his suit in the first film? As he continues to fight Aldrich, with interesting jumps and slides into multiple suits which Killian cuts in half with ease, we start to wonder about their lack of durability. By the end of the massive fight, Killian’s death is forgetful at best as Pepper comes out of nowhere and knocks him on his ass with a pipe, while Tony throws his Mark 42 suit on him and orders Jarvis to self-destruct.

Wrapping it up

With Pepper showing back up, all is well as Tony, for reasons unbenounced to the audience, decides to blow up all the rest of his suits that he’s spent countless hours (ignoring Pepper and his company) building over the last few years.

Looking past the rampant product placement, which can be understood, this film simply wasn’t well executed. The VFX looked impeccable, as it should, but with the lack of a well written, proper villain, and a plot which strays constantly, we just ended up with a panic-attack-ridden Tony Stark, outside of the suit that made him famous, attempting to save Pepper Potts once again in front of a new backdrop.

The film wraps up nearly everything; Stark even has his metal fragments removed from his chest, and he tosses his arc reactor into the sea below his previously destroyed cliffside mansion as his voiceover attempts to make audiences feel all warm and fuzzy – as if something has actually been accomplished by what we’ve just seen.

When the end credits finish rolling, and we see Stark talking with his new “psychiatrist,” Bruce Banner (Hulk), it definitely felt great to have the two geniuses together again since The Avengers proved that the two actors have great chemistry, but when the screen flashes “Tony Stark will be back,” we’re just not so sure about that after sitting through this film.

It’s no surprise that Hypable loves Broadway. We selected a few shows made us get in touch with our emotional side. We were hit with a lot more feelings than we bargained for.

Kristina: ‘Once’

once broadway emotions

I saw Once at a very transitional time in my life. A junior in college living in New York City alone for the summer, I waited four hours one Saturday morning for a matinee rush ticket and ended up learning a lot more about the myself than the show.

My adoration for the show started not much earlier prior to that summer, I had heard “Falling Slowly” numerous times and saw the spoof of the show during the opening of the 2013 Tony’s, hosted by Neil Patrick Harris. But nothing could prepare me for seeing the full musical.

Once is not a sung-through show, but the story is small and a portion of the dialogue is spoken in Czech. After the first song (“Leave”) I burst into tears at the beauty of the music — the guitar and the vocals evoked my favorite genre alt-indie — and didn’t stop for long before I started again.

There’s no big theatrics, the main character’s names are literally Guy and Girl, he’s an Irishman armed with a vacuum (he’s a Broken Hearted Hoover Fixer Sucker Guy) and she’s a Czech woman living in Ireland trying to support her young daughter and help her family. They simply create good music together. Were this a rom-com, they’d end up together, and they do briefly flirt with this convention, but the show doesn’t go down this route, but rather their relationship remains platonic through the end of the show.

At intermission, I dried my eyes and made small talk with the woman at the merchandise stand. I asked if this show ever made her emotional and she told me she cried every time she say it (which, because she worked there part-time, was frequently). Whether she was telling the truth to make me feel better or lied as a part of a salesman’s tactic, I bought a $50 Once hoodie that would be ghastly anywhere but totally worth it to remember this experience.

That night, and for many more days and nights after, I played the Once soundtrack on repeat. Standouts such as “Leave,” “Gold” and “If You Want Me” totally buck the typical Broadway musical sounds and play more like a concert played in a small bar in Ireland.

Irvin: ‘Finding Neverland’


I’ll ‘fess up: I’m a crier. I cry at a lot of shows (Wicked’s “For Good,” Mamma Mia’s “Slipping Through My Fingers,” all of Les Miz). But those are all dignified single-tear-on-the-cheek affairs, and then I feel good about having had a good cry. Finding Neverland was not like that.

Finding Neverland was, for lack of a better term, emotional terrorism. Having never seen the movie about J.M. Barrie and his inspiration for Peter Pan, I knew that it was probably sad, but I did not expect to be sobbing so much I almost had to leave the theatre. Having lost my dad at age ten, something in me was triggered by Peter’s reaction to losing his parents, and I pretty much lost it at “When Your Feet Don’t Touch the Ground.” The musical, with its haunting melodies, perfectly captures the agony of losing a parent at a young age – how one’s entire world view is shattered by the realization that sometimes good people don’t get happy endings.

While I couldn’t relate to the other characters as well, not having been on the adult side of that painful situation, I could easily project their pain onto people I knew, so pretty much everything in the second act was setting me off. And the death scene was gorgeous, not done justice at the Tonys when Jennifer Hudson performed it out of context.

Finding Neverland is not a perfect show – there are some jarring tonal shifts, and the Act One closer is more bombastic than meaningful (“I need to be stronger! Stronger! Now I’m stronger! Stronger! Stronger!”). But in terms of emotional response elicited, it’s unmatched. I’d love to see it again… I just don’t think I can for a couple years.

Natalie: ‘Les Misérables’

les mis barricading my emotions

Are you really a Broadway fan unless you’ve interrupted yourself attempting to sing along to all the overlapping parts in “One Day More” at once? I think not. Given that I once wrote a 7000-word blog post reviewing Tom Hooper’s film version of this show, making this blurb concise is going to be one of the greatest trials of my life.

Les Misérables has been running consistently in London since it opened, but since the release of the 2012 film, the show has been revived worldwide, and I’ve seen it seven times on a Broadway-scale stage in the past few years. However, I first saw Les Miserables as a child, when it toured Australia in the ’90s, and I think I imprinted on it.

Over time, different aspects of the show have stood out to me in different ways — as a lovesick teen, I was all about Eponine and how unfair her plight was, as an adult fascinated by historical events I became filled with empathy for the naive revolutionaries, particularly the alcoholic skeptic Grantaire, who never believed their cause was worth dying for but loved his friends enough to die with them anyway.

My feelings about the show skyrocketed when I actually read Victor Hugo’s novel (despite the title, it’s actually got a light and lively tone, which makes the fact that everyone dies even worse, because they’re all so adorable and funny until they do) meaning that now, I watch it with the weight of 650,000 words of character development on my shoulders, examining the faces of the cast for glimpses of the rich inner lives of their characters.

My favorite character, from childhood to this day, remains Enjolras, and the reveal of his dead body, thrown over the barricade on his red flag, is, for me, one of the most powerful and evocative images in wider pop culture. Despite my changing opinion about the relationship between Eponine and Marius, “A Little Fall of Rain” still causes a fair amount of rain on my face whenever I see the show. But the real kicker is always Valjean’s final line, before the final heavenly chorus: “to love another person is to see the face of God.” I’ve never been religious, but perhaps, if this is how it’s done, I could be.

To me this show and its source material timelessly encapsulates humanity at its best and worst — everything you ever need to know about human nature, you’ll find it in Les Mis.

Donya: ‘Godspell’

godspell_broadway emotions

For those of you who know me, you will know that I am not a particularly religious person – brought up steeped in the traditional values of both Catholicism (the Roman kind) and Protestantism, I never really took to either in the strictest sense. Which is why it may come as a surprise for you to hear that Godspell is one of the most emotional Broadway (and musical) experiences I’ve ever had.

“Day by Day” had been a part of my life long before I knew its origins – a staple of morning assemblies and choir throughout my childhood. But it wasn’t until I entered Comprehensive School (the U.K. equivalent to High School) that I learned about Godspell as a whole, when it was chosen as that year’s production. Theologically, I was riveted by it, as it laid out the parables from the Gospel of Matthew (mostly, there are some from Luke too) in a way I had never seen before. Though it was more than just its Biblical origins.

Godspell, through its music, was a reminder of disparate people coming together in friendship and community, was about love in all of its forms, and forgiveness. It came to me at a time in my life when I struggled with where I fit in, and out of it came an understanding of who I am and wanted to be, but also some of my dearest and enduring friendships. It’s difficult to quantify the depth of emotion that Shwartz’s music and lyrics evoke in me, but it remains one of the most affecting shows in my life – it’s impossible for me to make it through the score with dry eyes.

I had the good fortune of being in New York during the run of its revival in 2012, and managed to get tickets to see it at the Circle in the Square theater. It was the perfect setting for the show, an intimate and immersive experience that I often think back on, as with minimal dressing to the stage the success of the show rested entirely on the shoulders of the performers – and, vocally, it was one of the most impressive performances I’ve ever seen. Not only that, but engaging the audience and having them join in during the intermission was a stroke of genius, and speaks to the core of the show – which is its community. Dancing with my friends on stage is a memory I’ll continue to cherish.

Though I’m still finding confetti in my clothes, years later.

Brittany: ‘Spring Awakening’


Spring Awakening was the first Broadway show I saw alone in New York. I was 16, sitting in the audience watching the original Broadway cast undress each other, curse, commit suicide, and the process of illegal abortion. It was radical and extreme and I will never forget sitting there, multiple times, watching those performances.

Enter 2015 when Deaf West’s Spring Awakening revival returned to Broadway. It was not the same show that I saw when I was a junior in high school and I was not the same person sitting to see it in the Brooks Atkinson Theatre. Spring Awakening is a hard story to tell. If the actors on stage do not trust one another, the story can quickly move from uncomfortable to unnerving. The cast, now comprised of both hearing and deaf actors, needed that trust more than ever to breathe life into this production.

Sandra Mae Frank, the lead deaf actress playing Wendla, at times had her lines sung by her backup voice, but mostly her story, that of a girl kept in the dark, was reflected just that way through her silence. The moments that were specifically chosen to be told in complete silence were perhaps the most striking of all. The scene between Moritz and his father, where the elder casts shame upon his son for embarrassing the family is told completely through ASL ending with a deafening door slam. I didn’t need to look at the words projected on the screen to know what was going on in the exchange and that is due to the actors incredible emotion poured into their delivery of their lines.

I went into this performance hoping to pass the story along to someone who had never seen the show before. Now my memories of the show no longer include Jonathan Groff, Lea Michele, or John Gallagher Jr. Their voices may be the ones I hear when I revisit the soundtrack, but the visuals are forever changed to watching the Deaf West cast silently cue each other to begin their story.

This article is a part of Hypable’s inaugural Broadway Week in celebration of the 2016 Tony nominations.

What Jon Snow’s fate means for the future of ‘Game of Thrones’

Oh, the places we'll go, the things we'll learn!

11:00 am EDT, May 4, 2016

This week, Game of Thrones continued to create more questions out of answering others.

Now that we finally know for certain what we all predicted, it’s time to speculate how this will impact Game of Thrones going forward. Yes, of course I’m talking about Jon Snow’s resurrection.

There are larger implications for the future of the show besides the fact that Jon is an active character again. Aside from how different Jon himself might be, we also must consider what his presence means for other characters and plots.

First thing’s first, Melisandre is going to die. She has two things working against her. 1) She did her part in bringing Jon back, so her purpose is done. 2) She’s getting a sympathetic edit, and that never bodes well. Start preparing yourself now, because Melisandre doesn’t have long for this world. It is known (wait, no, wrong religion!).

Now let’s talk about Jon. What Jon Snow are we getting back ? Resurrection is not new to Westeros. Most recently we saw the Mountain brought back to life through ‘scientific’ methods, and he appears to be quite obedient. He’s mute and just does what he’s told, a mere killing machine (although, you could argue that’s all he was in life too).


Then there’s Beric Dondarrion, resurrected by Thoros through magical means in more or less the same way as Jon. Though Thoros was adept at this feat (he’d done it enough times), every time Beric came back, he lost a bit of himself. Memories would go, and he seemed only capable of (re)living for a singular purpose: revenge.

This was Melisandre’s first attempt at bringing the dead back to life, so it’s possible she might have screwed up somewhere in the ritual, causing Jon to come back a little different from the Jon we know. Even if she did it perfectly, Jon is likely to be a changed man.

Having died, he has no Night’s Watch oaths to maintain, and seeking revenge on those who killed him would understandably be a high priority. We’ve known Jon to be more merciful than merciless, but will this be reversed after losing a part of himself in death?

And will Jon’s return impact other characters? Sansa is on her way to Castle Black, and after hearing what she has to say (assuming they actually do reunite), Jon will have more vengeance to seek. The Boltons have taken over his home and hurt his family, so it’s likely he’ll rally all he can to help him go after them.


Back home in Winterfell, Ramsay is planning on storming Castle Black, and if he’d done it earlier, he just might have won. The old Jon probably wouldn’t have been prepared for a man like Ramsay, but the new Jon will give no pity and show no mercy. After having died, Jon might feel he’s nothing to lose, that this is a second chance and he’ll take it guns blazing (swords slashing?). It would be the perfect contrast, the two Snow bastards who each believe Winterfell is theirs, fighting to the death.

Jon coming back is also almost solid proof that R + L = J. From the beginning we’ve heard tidbits of information about Lyanna Stark, Ned’s sister, and the mentions last season were particularly blatant and frequent. Even this season, already, we’ve gotten a Lyanna reference, when Bran visited the past. Unless it’s a giant red herring, there’s obviously a reason a long dead woman with seemingly no relevance keeps getting a shout out.

Of course, if it is true that Jon is a Stark and Targaryen, then Dany is not necessarily the ‘rightful’ heir to the Iron Throne. Being half Targaryen also means that Jon has the blood of the dragon, and he has a claim to the Throne and to one of Dany’s dragons.

Side note: He probably won’t get Drogon, since he’s Dany’s favorite. But how funny would it be if Jon just strolls in and Drogon immediately bows down and does what he’s told? That’ll teach Dany the importance of training!


Having been resurrected by the fire god and having the blood of the dragon also poses an interesting notion of Jon’s overall purpose. It’s long been postulated that the “Ice and Fire” referenced in the book series title is Jon and Dany. But what if it’s just Jon? Jon has gotten ‘looks’ from both sides: Melisandre stared him down when she first saw him, and believes him to be Azor Ahai. The Night’s King also shared what seemed like a telling look with Jon at Hardhome.

We know the war between ice and fire is coming, so what if Jon is a link that connects them? He’s the undead brought back to fight the undead, and put an end to this war. He won’t do it alone, either. Azor Ahai needed a weapon to fight the darkness, and he had Lightbringer. If we’re to assume Lightbringer is a physical sword, it’s most likely Longclaw. In season 5, both Jon and a White Walker were surprised to see Longclaw kill the White Walker. We thusly learned that Valyrian steel can kill White Walkers. But what if it was more than just being Valyrian steel? If Jon is Azor Ahai, why couldn’t Longclaw be Lightbringer, the ‘hero’s sword’ meant to fight the darkness?

Jon coming back opens many doors. There are so many possibilities his presence brings to the show. Is Melisandre finished? Will Jon be the one to kill Ramsay? Is Jon really half Targaryen? And most importantly, will he ride a dragon?!

How do you think Jon’s resurrection will impact the future of ‘Game of Thrones’?

Why #GiveElsaAGirlfriend went viral, and why Disney should listen

It's high time Disney introduced an LGBT character - and Queen Elsa is an ideal candidate.

10:15 am EDT, May 4, 2016

A fantastic new campaign is urging Disney to give Frozen heroine Elsa a female love interest in the sequel.

Earlier this week, we wrote about the annual GLAAD report, which revealed the uncomfortable truth that not only is Hollywood vastly underrepresenting the LGBT community, but two major studios — Paramount and Disney — failed to include any LGBT characters in their major 2015 movies.

As a response to this, Feminist Culture founder Alexis Isabel Moncada tweeted a simple suggestion to help Disney fix the problem, which has since gone viral:

The socially aware teen saw so much positive response to this one, simple request, which has transformed into a major movement over the course of a couple of days. In an article for MTV, Moncada explains why she decided to take up this issue:

“Growing up, I never saw a princess fall in love with another princess — and neither have girls growing up right now. The entertainment industry has given us girls who have fallen in love with beasts, ogres who fall for humans, and even grown women who love bees. But we’ve never been able to see the purity in a queer relationship.”

This isn’t the first time someone has suggested that Frozen‘s Elsa might be Disney’s first canonically lesbian princess (or queen, in this case).

In Frozen, the central ‘love story’ is not romantic at all, but rather about the love between two sisters. And, while Anna finds love with Kristoff, Elsa’s life is decidedly romance-free.

Of course Elsa has a lot more to worry about than cute boys (or girls), but in Frozen 2, she’s already the Queen of Arendelle. Perhaps there’s finally time for romance in her life — and as evidenced by the popularity of Moncada’s #GiveElsaAGirlfriend campaign, many fans think this romance should be with another female.

Credit: Izzie Bytes

When it comes to portraying LGBT characters (something Disney seriously needs to do, and soon), the strong, sexy, empowered and independent Elsa is an obvious candidate. She’s a popular, established character, she’s hitherto romantically unattached, and is not ‘bound’ to any canonical love interest from the story on which she is based (another candidate for Disney would be Star Wars’ Poe Dameron, as Hypable has previously argued).

She becomes an even more obvious choice when you consider what Moncada so succinctly points out: That the LGBT community is already strongly connected to Elsa’s story in Frozen.

“Many in the LGBT community view this movie as a metaphor for the experience of coming out and accepting who you are,” writes Moncada, explaining why her hashtag went viral so fast.

As Queen Elsa is already an LGBT icon, establishing her sexuality as non-straight would be hugely significant for LGBT audiences of all ages, giving them a strong, iconic role model to look up to and reflect themselves in. And, just as importantly, it would give straight parents a way to talk about sexuality with their children, and to help teach them that — just like Elsa and Anna — people are equally deserving of love, agency and representation whether they fall in love with a man or a woman.

Related: Not everyone was happy about Once Upon a Time’s LGBT couple

Of course, as expected, the dissenters of #GiveElsaAGirlfriend have all the usual counter-arguments: It’s pandering to the gay community, there’s no ‘reason’ to make her a lesbian, it’s all part of some kind of ‘agenda,’ and the Frozen audience is somehow ‘too young’ to handle a same-sex love story.

But in reality it’s all very, painfully simple: LGBT people exist in real life, all around you, all the time. Sometimes they’re someone’s mom or dad, and by and large, kids don’t actually care whether their classmates have two mommies or daddies, or one of each — unless their parents tell them to care, that is.

And Disney, for all its talk of equality, is in dire need of LGBT representation in its movies. In GLAAD’s report, it is noted that “the film industry must embrace new stories reflective of the actual world if it wants to remain competitive and relevant,” and while Hollywood’s outdated and conservative approach to representation may be working right now, the popularity of campaigns like #OscarsSoWhite and Moncada’s #GiveElsaAGirlfriend proves that audiences are ready for the movie industry to join us in the 21st century.

It is going to look very bad for Disney very fast if they continue their tactic of LGBT erasure. Making Elsa a lesbian would not only be a major step towards fixing this huge stain on their brand, but it would also do a lot to prove to those suffering from what GLAAD calls “gay panic,” proving once and for all that it’s not the end of the world to feature an LGBT protagonist (a hero in a position of authority, even) in a family movie.

tl;dr: Sometimes princesses love princes, and sometimes they love other princesses. We need to stop being afraid of acknowledging that this is an indisputable truth, which deserves recognition by mainstream media. Let’s evolve, already.