In my review of Ashpet, I write that the story works because it is low-key:
Over all, Ashpet is quite a worthy rendition of Cinderella, despite my general distaste for the story. It works because it is so normal. The stepsisters are obnoxious--but Ashpet is housed and fed. The stepmother lets her daughters walk all over her. She isn't actively cruel. The fairy god mother, Dark Sally played by Louise Anderson, knows the secret of the house, specifically where the mother of Ashpet (Lily) hid her fine clothes and jewels. The young man at the dance is thoroughly sweet and good-natured. And he is only returning the shoe, not trying it on every girl's foot. Ashpet comes out of the kitchen while her stepsisters are arguing, and he is relieved to see her.
It occurred to me as I watched this non-irritating version of Cinderella that the problem with the original is not just how passive Cinderella seems but how dependent she is on a chance encounter.
Ashpet leaves one believing that these two young people are well-suited. But it doesn't leave one believing that Ashpet (Lily) could only have found a nice young man and gotten engaged at that night's dance. She wouldn't choose Norman the Drunk, of course. She has too much good sense. That doesn't mean she has no other opportunities, especially as the war ends and young men return from the front.
Nice person meets nice person. They get engaged, married, and have a nice life.
Or, as I mention regarding Branagh's version, Cinderella puts the kingdom first and becomes a political pundit.Both possibilities are so much more relaxing than happiness being contingent on someone else's interference (the godmother's) and pure dumb luck. This is the awful lesson that parents should be wary of letting their kids believe: I can't be happy until other people do exactly what I want.
Reality? Other people never will.
Which is why CinderEdna--who saves up pennies and puts her dress on lay-away and takes the bus--is my screen saver.