I get that vibe especially during his song. He keeps whipping around and spinning her. She looks very uncomfortable...in a sort of embarrassed bashful way he is immortally young, so he's not "too old" for her. They should get together in a sequel
Does everything have to be about romance? Friendship is a strong type of love too. Disney seems to be slowly getting away from the "All women need is a man to be happy and make their dreams come true" formula. That's not man-hating, either.
Moana 1 wasn't. So it's not "everything", if it's just the sequel.
Friendship is a strong type of love too.
Boring. Men and Women are rarely 'friends' outside romance or family relationships. (without one secretly being in love with the other) It would be fun NEW territory. Seeing a Princess live a MAGICAL type character. We always get normal humans in the end, with the magic character like a 3rd party genie. I don't think any random 'man' on her island would be good enough for her or even at her level.
Disney seems to be slowly getting away from the "All women need is a man to be happy and make their dreams come true" formula.
Ohh shut it. Slowly?? Did you not see Brave or Frozen or Malifecent? Mulan wasn't even about love either.
You are relationship hating YES for most Men and Women you DO need to fine love to be happy. Who the heck is happy being alone? Nobody who has a choice, that's who. We need food. we need water. We need love. etc
There was nothing in the movie to suggest there was anything between them. You read way too much into your pathetic observation during that song. To have them get together in a sequel would be forced. Same with a Zootopia sequel. Now if in a sequel to Frozen, Kristoff and Anna were together, that would be different because it was hinted by the end they would get together... although, still obvious they would take it slow.
I understand your point, but you don't have to be a douche about it. I bet you really hated those films where
There was nothing in the movie to suggest there was anything between them.
Her expressions during his song it's obvious...the sexual tension is off the charts
To have them get together in a sequel would be forced.
In the sequel there would have to be a timeskip during the ending we see her and her people exploring the seas...... So there was some time jump Maui is still keeping up with them and out there. Their love is inevitable
I understand your point, but you don't have to be a douche about it. I bet you really hated those films where
lol haha sorry, This board is rough and at war....some people hate romance and want it extinguished from the world. They say love is evil and romance is sexist. It gets annoying
reply share
First of all, I don't really care about proving it to you, as it's honestly irrelevant because you'll believe what you believe whether I offer proof or not. Second of all, I said HAVE not HAD. I was not married in high school, I am married now. And no, my sexual preference did not change between high school in now. But again, all of it is irrelevant, because it's not going to change what you believe no matter what.
While that is very slightly possible, I highly doubt it. There's a possibility maybe one or two liked me, I guess, but I'm not arrogant enough to think I'm likable enough that all 9 of my close female friends had crushes on me throughout our friendships (keeping in mind that one of them is still a very close friend of mine and has been since we were both kids, and we're both married...not to each other, to point out the obvious that you would probably try to harp on).
Do you two hang out together/go places alone without your spouses?
No, we don't. When we hang out together, it's the four of us. Don't see how that's relevant, as your exact words were that a male and female can't be friends without something more going on. You never mentioned anything about going places alone together.
lol dude you're having an affair Not good at hiding it. SAD!
Um, no. I'm not. People who cheat on their spouses are the scum of the earth in my opinion, and I would never in a million years do that.
reply share
I came here to check out the board for this beautiful movie, and I see this carrot moron monopolizing the board. Well I guess I'll look somewhere else to discuss this movie.
Nobody exists on purpose. Nobody belongs anywhere. Everybody dies.
I came here to check out the board for this beautiful movie, and I see this carrot moron monopolizing the board. Well I guess I'll look somewhere else to discuss this movie.
I only have like two topics on the front page Troll softer
reply share
No, we don't. When we hang out together, it's the four of us.
My point exactly. You're "couple friends" not Individual friends. Men (alone) and Women (alone) can not be friends You two pairs are friends. That is the distinction.
So you categorically state that a man and a woman cannot just be friends under any circumstances. However, Zaphenzo has produced a valid example as to how a man and a woman can in fact be friends with no romantic or sexual involvement: Thereby proving that your original statement is not 100% true under all circumstances. There are plenty of perfectly valid circumstances where man and woman can just be friends.
The smart thing for you to do would be to revise your original statement, maybe add in a few conditions and caveats.
reply share
So you categorically state that a man and a woman cannot just be friends under any circumstances. However, Zaphenzo has produced a valid example as to how a man and a woman can in fact be friends with no romantic or sexual involvement
Incorrect. He gave a group friend example. And I clarified my statement, since it went over your head.
Group friends, individual friends, I don't feel the need to make that distinction like you do. Social relationships are organic.
If I look at my social circle I have many of what you would call 'individual friends' who were originally 'group friends', but over time and as we went out together more as a group, we got to know each other on a more personal level, therefore becoming friends in our own right, without the need for a supporting group.
And yes, many of these people were women, women who were already in long term relationships. We became friends because we had common interests and enjoyed talking to each other, not because of any romantic interest from either of us.
Group friends, individual friends, I don't feel the need to make that distinction like you do.
Of course you don't. Because it proves you wrong.
I look at my social circle I have many of what you would call 'individual friends' who were originally 'group friends', but over time and as we went out together more as a group, we got to know each other on a more personal level, therefore becoming friends in our own right, without the need for a supporting group.
And? Would you hang out with his wife alone and go places alone? Then no, she's just a couple friend. Not your individual friend.
I have a female friend who I met through some other friends about 8 years ago. She had a boyfriend at the time but I did not know him, he wasn't part of my friends' group. So in no sense is she a 'couple friend' as you put it.
Over the years we've met up many times as individuals alone, but we both understand there is nothing between us, if anything we've formed a brother-sister type of relationship. It's nice to have someone like that to give perspective on our own separate relationships.
This woman is one my favourite people on the planet, she is a great supportive friend, a true friend, an individual friend. I don't care what you tell me.
Here's something you haven't mentioned yet: Can a gay man 'just' be friends with a gay woman? I don't see why not. Add that to your growing list of exceptions.
Ok, so you do accept that there are circumstances in which men and women can be friends. Good, I'm glad we finally got there.
In future I would suggest that you don't open with such a bold opening sweeping statement if you have to keep going back and adding conditions and exceptions to it. It weakens your stance and makes you look foolish. And cut down on the name-calling as well, it's childish.
Now, back to the original point of this thread: There is no romantic interest between Maui and Moana, and unless you have bought the rights from Disney to make the sequel that is unlikely to change. Good day.
Over the years we've met up many times as individuals alone, but we both understand there is nothing between us, if anything we've formed a brother-sister type of relationship. It's nice to have someone like that to give perspective on our own separate relationships.
This is how I am with the girl I'm talking about. I've always viewed her practically as a sister. It helps to have female perspective on things, as you said. I've given her relationship advice before as a male point of view, and she's given me advice before as a female point of view. It's been very helpful.
reply share
Absolutely, I put extra value on good female friendships these days. They seem to be more caring and conscientious, and I like that I can open up and talk to them about a wider range of topics, other than the usual sport or politics.
My point exactly. You're "couple friends" not Individual friends. Men (alone) and Women (alone) can not be friends You two pairs are friends. That is the distinction.
I see you're now changing your tune slightly to include exceptions. Interesting. However, you're still incorrect. Couple friends/pairs who are friends typically meet when at least one of the couples is a couple. This is different. We are "couple friends" only because me and this girl were friends well before either of us met our spouses. And yet, we never hooked up or advanced any further from friends, and both dated other people and eventually married other people. Therefore, completely invalidating your point.
reply share
I see you're now changing your tune slightly to include exceptions.
That's called clarifying. Since you don't understand the concept of group relationships being a separate thing. Where two people take on a hive status only relating to another hive when fused into a dual personhood.
So yeah you're still incorrect. You are couple friends. Thanks for proving my point. Cry more.
reply share
No, but good try. It is called adding something that wasn't there. Your exact statement, and I quote, was:
Guys and Gals can never "Just be friends"
Nothing is mentioned about hanging out alone. Nothing is mentioned about hanging out at all. You specifically and only said that men and women cannot be friends without something more being there. Once you were categorically proven wrong, you then started adding to try to still be correct. But, again, your logic is wrong:
Where two people take on a hive status only relating to another hive when fused into a dual personhood.
Again, this is not the situation. The girl and I were friends for much longer than either of us have known our spouses. However, that friendship never turned into anything more. And we met, dated, and eventually married our spouses because we harbored no romantic feelings toward each other, and were therefore in the process of looking for a wife (in my case) and husband (in her case). If your point was true, then we would've eventually ended up together, since we were friends since kindergarten. However, that is not what happened.
Cry more.
Really? I'm not crying at all over this. I honestly don't even know why I'm bothering replying, because you are clearly stubbornly holding onto this ridiculous preconceived notion and no matter what proof is brought against you, you won't accept that you could be wrong.
reply share
No, but good try. It is called adding something that wasn't there.
False, and you mean excellent try.
Your exact statement, and I quote, was:
Guys and Gals can never "Just be friends"
And I've since clarified, yet you still play confused. SAD!
Nothing is mentioned about hanging out alone.
That's what a friend is. You two hang out. Otherwise it is a group friend. Not your friend. Once again you prove my point.
Again, this is not the situation. The girl and I were friends for much longer than either of us have known our spouses. However, that friendship never turned into anything more.
She wanted it to. You were just ignorant of her feelings.
And I've since clarified, yet you still play confused. SAD!
Again, what you did was ADD to what you said, not clarify. Do I need to paste the definition of clarify here to help you understand the difference?
That's what a friend is. You two hang out. Otherwise it is a group friend. Not your friend. Once again you prove my point.
No, a friend is someone with whom you have mutual affection (and given your clear miscomprehension of the English language, I will CLARIFY that affection does NOT mean romantic or physical attraction). Yes, typically you spend time with a friend as well, because you enjoy time together. Does that mean that you MUST spend time alone with them? No. That is a made up requirement you are using to try to make your unbelievably emotionally stunted idea seem more plausible.
She wanted it to. You were just ignorant of her feelings.
There is 0 evidence that this was true. We actually talked to each other about people we liked all the time. She dated multiple guys when I was single, and she met, dated, and married her husband well before I started dating my wife.
Cry more.
Again, not crying. But, honestly, I'm done. You are being ridiculously stubborn and ignorant, and clinging to this emotionally stunted idea even though you've been proven wrong. So it's not worth arguing it anymore. Good day to you.
reply share
No. Ew. She's a 16 yr old girl and he's a millennia old demigod.
-Ancient Polynesians married younger than 16. There would be a timeskip anyway to when Moana is Queen -Maui is immortal, so that means eternally young. He doesn't look like a million year old man now does he
She went from "get off me" while spinning her around to "oh. It's cool he did all that". At no point did she look like she liked him in that way.
She looked constantly FLUSTERED aka a sign of embarrassment especially when he flexed his pecks muscles
at the end of the song she looked like she was in love with him
reply share
Maui is ages above Moana in terms of experience and physical years and Moana will never catch up to that.
And she doesn't look flustered at the start. She looks suspicious/doubtful. By the end of the song, she looks like SHE WAS HAVING FUN with the song. Not enamored with him.
Btw, you can't see her face when he does the pec pop so I don't know how you can tell that she looks flustered.
Ages above in experience Well that always must be the case when an immortal character and a mortal have a relationship
It shows her face afterwards and the chest slapping I don't know why you want to fight the relationship though..think about how interesting and revolutionary it would be for Disney Maui is not mortal, nor is he not twice the size of her and sort of freakish looking with a big belly and the proportions of a muscular baby
Disney has no pairing like this...it would be very fun And he 'stays' overlooking the world and even following her people at the end What other man could be good enough for Chief Moana herself in a sequel? ;-)
The reason is because there is absolutely no hint at a romantic connection. Everything you're reading into during You're Welcome is simply your own inability to read body language.