So, what do you think Miss Minchin's problem with Sarah was?

[deleted]

Sometimes when a person has experienced the lack of affection that Minchin seems to have experienced in her childhood,she thinks she is doing any children under her tutelage a favor by making them aware of the harsh realities of life and reigning in their expectations. Minchin's tears tell me that she remembers being a little girl with hopes and fancies like Sara's but they had been dashed in her just as she attempts to dash Sara's hopes and dreams.

I think she purposely lied about Sarah having no father because she was shocked to discover, after she'd been told about his death, that he was living next door all along. Would be kind of shocking, in my opinion.

I always thought that scene was shocking too, since Minchin had to know for sure that it was Captain Crewe. However, now I think it was fear on Minchin's part. Once she recognized him and knew that he was, in fact, alive, she had to know immediately that her life, as she knew it, was over, since Sara would tell him everything. I think it had gone beyond the hatred and had turned to fear, since her treatment of Sara was incomprehensible. She wanted to rush her off to jail before her father regained his memory.

[deleted]

She doesn't say all girls are princesses, but that every girl/woman has the right to be a princess. It's a matter of choice, not of financial or social status. That's a huge difference and explains how Sara still can be a princess when she is an indept orphan.

First, can we agree once and for all, movies and books are different. They co-exist and some share themes but they're not the same. A movie has a limited amount of time to 'say' what a book can take lots of words and pages to say. We derive value from each so why would we want them to mirror each other anyway?

When we read a book, the author paints a picture with words that we use our imagination to envision. A movie, on the other hand, is a representation of the director and/or screenwriter’s vision. Our imagination is engaged but in an entirely different way. The director uses a variety of cues (words, scenery, characters, lighting, music, etc.) to tell the story. For dramatic effect or to better tell the story, the director and/or writer may even see fit to alter aspects of a story, the plot, characters, even the ending. Changes are often made when a movie is based on actual events; why would it be any more unusual for it to happen when it's based on a work of fiction?

Several versions of this movie have been made over the years; all based on the same book yet each version is different. Though the movie is set in a particular time in history, times and the conditions under which we live have changed along with our views of the world. The current ethos has to be considered when making updated versions especially when the target audience is so young. They may not understand or be able to relate otherwise.

In regards to princesses, let's remember there are 'real' princesses in the world so we know it means a certain level of privilege. These princesses are born into the role and whether they grow up to be intelligent, even-tempered, polite, young ladies or not; whether they play tricks or behave in any given way; they are princesses nonetheless. I admit, I have not read the book myself but based the things I have read here, including by those who dislike the movie for its 'inauthenticity', the movie and book seem to make the same point.

All girls, regardless of the conditions in which they find themselves; whether they are beautiful, rich, smart, have parents, are well-behaved, or have none of these, are princesses. Calling them princesses, in my opinion, simply suggests they are special and are entitled to respect; at the very least, self-respect. This is their birthright. They should realize and remember it no matter what actually happens in their lives. If the little girls (or anyone) who watch this movie get that message, take it to heart, and believe, then the specific details, whether they match the book or not, don't really matter.

Ironically, as we see in the story, those who get caught up in all the little details of life and are the most rigid, have, obviously, missed the point. Miss Minchin, in my opinion, is the representation of that point. I don't think she necessarily hates Sara or is jealous of her. I think, like a lot of misguided people, she's bought into and behaves according to the very specific and rigid rules of the society in which she lives. It's not for her to question anything. When Sara screams Papa, Minchin's been told he's dead so he's dead. Period.

It's clear Miss Minchin is human and has feelings but she works very hard to control and suppress them. She has lived her life this way because it’s what is expected of her; it’s what allows her to hold a respectable place in society. She expects others, like her sister and the girls in her charge, to buy into that same societal contract and behave accordingly as well. Her cold demeanor and questionable behavior may not stem from meanness or spite at all but rather from a place of caring. She wants them to be realistic and know while there may not be good things for them they can at least try to avoid the bad. By the way, life was no piece of cake for a lot of people, especially women, during the early 1900's. It's not always easy now but relatively speaking now's a breeze.

In her view, Miss Minchin simply does what she must to keep order and fulfill her duty to raise socially-suitable, respectable, albeit repressed young women. Sara, or anyone who attempts to disrupt the social order, is a threat to order and to everyone so she must be dealt with severey. First she separates her then seeks to remove her when she fails to cooperate. Like the saying goes, ‘one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch’. Miss Minchin (and those like her) would feel her actions are justified. Removing Sara would be on par with removing a rotten apple from a barrel of otherwise good apples to keep them from rotting too. I’m not condoning this behavior; just explaining it.