[Movies] Dammit, Frozen (spoilers)

Sorry, Bubble181, but I gave like three warnings :p.

You know the one thing that bugged me?
Why did Pabbie/Grandpa never mention he met Anna before? He couldn't have taken, what, 2 seconds to mention he warned her parents about the danger of Elsa hitting the heart? Or erasing her memories?
I thought about that too. It would've created some nice character growth, for Anna to realize this accident has happened before, and let her know exactly what went down that made Elsa have to be secluded.
 
That's what I was thinking. It would have been an "Aha!" moment for Anna, and probably given her a little more insight to her sister.

And now that I'm thinking about it...
Why didn't Kristoff mention it? He witnessed the whole thing when he was a kid, and I don't remember them erasing his memory. Or did they and I just forgot?
 
Sorry, Bubble181, but I gave like three warnings :p.



I thought about that too. It would've created some nice character growth, for Anna to realize this accident has happened before, and let her know exactly what went down that made Elsa have to be secluded.

Oh, I know, I'm saying "dammit" to myself, not you :p The thread's labelled "Spoilers" right there in the title, and I really don't expect people to have their whole discussion in spoiler tags - au contraire, I'm annoyed when I have to.

Still, I've been reading this thread (sans the OP) since the beginning, and only at the point I posted have I accidentally read something I didn't really want to know. And I'm fully aware that's my "fault", if I didn't want to know, I shouldn't be here ;)
 
That's what I was thinking. It would have been an "Aha!" moment for Anna, and probably given her a little more insight to her sister.

And now that I'm thinking about it...
Why didn't Kristoff mention it? He witnessed the whole thing when he was a kid, and I don't remember them erasing his memory. Or did they and I just forgot?
He didn't mention it. The scene did the "you're in love" bit, then the troll king explained the frozen heart issue, and then they went off to Hans. Kristof didn't bother. It was weird.

BTW, the other criticisms were more things from Tumblr.
 
Didn't he make a comment on how they fixed it before?
He made a comment, but didn't give Anna any context and troll king didn't explain what had happened. I suppose Anna could've found out off-screen, but there's no indication of that. As far as the movie shows, she never finds out her memories were messed with or what really happened.

Also, good job, troll king! You really fixed that situation in your advising the king and queen! Totally didn't set up the older princess with the backstory of a psychopath! A+ magical helping!

 
One thing that also irritated me was Kristof's backstory. Was he just a random orphan tagging along with ice merchants and no one gave a shit that he ended up getting raised by trolls? It was confusing.
 
One thing that also irritated me was Kristof's backstory. Was he just a random orphan tagging along with ice merchants and no one gave a shit that he ended up getting raised by trolls? It was confusing.
I didn't realize he was an orphan until he said the trolls took him and Sven in. At the beginning of the movie I just assumed he was the son or apprentice to one of the ice merchants.
 
That was what I thought about young Kristoff, too. None of these things ruined the movie for me, but I did find myself wondering about them.
 
I will say that normally I consider the solution being "the power of love" to be lazy story telling, but I did approve of it wholeheartedly in this case.
 
This is why I sing all male parts all the time. Mainly cuz I like singing tenor.

That said, isn't Idina an alto (technically)? At least that's what I thought, because I can usually sing her parts... mostly.
 
She's an alto/mezzo soprano, so she has a pretty good range.

The person who made the video said she was referring to most Disney music, she just happened to chose this one because she liked it.
 
And on the whole I totally and completely agree. The vast majority of stage and movie music is written for the higher voices.
 
Well that didn't take long. Interesting facts about it's reception and success:
http://www.wired.com/underwire/2014/01/disney-frozen-broadway/

I can understand that it didn't ring bells for everyone, and there are those who will seek to explain their displeasure as objective rather than subjective, but the reality is that it is a great movie. There are some areas where it could improve, and perhaps we'll see that on Broadway, but as-is, it's fantastic.

I think the biggest problem nay-sayers have with it have to do with the fact that you could say there are co-protagonists. Anna is the film's protagonist, but Elsa overshadows her, and is given the better song and more interesting parts. While they could have made Anna's part stronger, or switched to make it Elsa's story, it wasn't a bad choice to make it this way. But it will feel weak and unsatisfying for people who want the story to be about Elsa and spend most of the movie watching Anna.

It's also not a very deep story emotionally. It has a lot of emotion, there's no doubt there, but the emotions aren't very complex. I'd argue they don't need to be, and that it's fine as it is. However no one really changed in the movie. Anna loves her sister enough to die for her - well Elsa probably would have done the same if the roles were reversed. The movie suggests Anna's eventual acceptance of the loss of her sister, but doesn't really drive home the fact that, in her mind at least, she had given up on having family, and was looking elsewhere for her happiness and relationships. But she doesn't change, not really, and she's the film's protagonist.

Elsa gives up trying to be what she's not. It's not that big a change, but it's the biggest change we have and is celebrated in the biggest song of the film. It's brought on by the stupidity of the parents, but of course Disney will never say, "It's the parent's fault" so, like so many other movies they kill off the parents so it's the fault of fate to have children not be adequately guarded. But the parents spent a lot of time between the trolls and their death keeping the girls apart, and forcing one of them to hide herself so completely that not even her sister would recognize her, and so forth. You can claim they're just short-sighted, or blame it on the troll's advice, but it's just not a strong setup. I feel like they could have gone in a different direction here if they wanted to toe the line on their usual "parents are good" rule. They didn't go far enough in blaming the parents to not follow that rule, but they didn't really break the rule either, since they took the parents away during a still-formative time for the girls.

Lastly, it would have been more interesting if Elsa actually became bad, or dare I say it - evil. Instead the movie merely conveys that she's running away, with bad consequences, but still cares for the people who arguably are the reason she's suffering in the first place. She only gets to "I'm free!" and never makes it to "Why should I have been made to suffer?" Perhaps she didn't have enough time to become bitter, but the fact that people were after her and attempting to kill her should have changed her mind. Wouldn't it have been more interesting is she had become a full-on villain, and her sister was able to save her (or make good on her emotional divorcement by banishing her) through what would have required significantly more effort and perseverance than the film did? But I suspect you couldn't give justice to this sort of story in such a short film.

All that said, these aren't criticisms of the film, merely different directions it could have taken that might have satisfied those who found the film less than what they were expecting. I believe the film to be fine as-is, and well worth the positive reception.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Lastly, it would have been more interesting if Elsa actually became bad, or dare I say it - evil. Instead the movie merely conveys that she's running away, with bad consequences, but still cares for the people who arguably are the reason she's suffering in the first place. She only gets to "I'm free!" and never makes it to "Why should I have been made to suffer?" Perhaps she didn't have enough time to become bitter, but the fact that people were after her and attempting to kill her should have changed her mind. Wouldn't it have been more interesting is she had become a full-on villain, and her sister was able to save her (or make good on her emotional divorcement by banishing her) through what would have required significantly more effort and perseverance than the film did? But I suspect you couldn't give justice to this sort of story in such a short film.
That was the part I was waiting for that never came. It kind of felt like the movie was rapidly heading in that direction but then the clutch gave out and it just kind of.. coasted to a stop.
 
I totally agree that Elsa-as-evil would have been more interesting, but I suspect that some consideration of the audience probably prevented it. It's a bit problematic associating both rebellion and self-acceptance with evil in a kids movie without giving the matter a lot more screentime and risking ending up with lots of parents explaining things in the theater (your average 6-8 year-old will have issues threading that needle).

If the whole movie could have been about Elsa, it could have been done, but it would have been a substantially different movie with a different focus then. I think they made the right decision that went far enough in that direction without having to take the full step and make the movie more unwieldy.
 
Lastly, it would have been more interesting if Elsa actually became bad, or dare I say it - evil. Instead the movie merely conveys that she's running away, with bad consequences, but still cares for the people who arguably are the reason she's suffering in the first place. She only gets to "I'm free!" and never makes it to "Why should I have been made to suffer?" Perhaps she didn't have enough time to become bitter, but the fact that people were after her and attempting to kill her should have changed her mind. Wouldn't it have been more interesting is she had become a full-on villain, and her sister was able to save her (or make good on her emotional divorcement by banishing her) through what would have required significantly more effort and perseverance than the film did? But I suspect you couldn't give justice to this sort of story in such a short film.
You bring up an interesting point, but thinking back on it, I think the path they chose for Elsa actually makes her a more unique, and strangely, realistic character. We'd expect her to become full-on evil from those circumstances because it's become a cliche for villain origins. More often than not, if the villain doesn't start out as "evil", they become so because they've decided to lash out at those around them that made them feel isolated/unwanted/etc. They become evil out of vengeance. But Elsa continued to internalize the blame/guilt, in no small part due to short-sighted planning on the part of her parents (as you pointed out). Even when she was "free" and used her powers in a fantastic way, she still viewed them as a burden once another person was around. She couldn't bring herself to see that she had a gift rather than a shameful secret that must never be used around people. I think that this is an extremely realistic response. I've known a number of people (both in my personal life and in Halforums) that have been so emotionally affected by events of their past than no matter how much they achieve, they still doubt their own self worth. I think on one hand, it would have been good for Elsa to be empowered, even if it meant becoming evil, but on the other hand, I think making her emotionally vulnerable made her more relatable instead of cartoonishly villainous.
 
You bring up an interesting point, but thinking back on it, I think the path they chose for Elsa actually makes her a more unique, and strangely, realistic character. We'd expect her to become full-on evil from those circumstances because it's become a cliche for villain origins. More often than not, if the villain doesn't start out as "evil", they become so because they've decided to lash out at those around them that made them feel isolated/unwanted/etc. They become evil out of vengeance. But Elsa continued to internalize the blame/guilt, in no small part due to short-sighted planning on the part of her parents (as you pointed out). Even when she was "free" and used her powers in a fantastic way, she still viewed them as a burden once another person was around. She couldn't bring herself to see that she had a gift rather than a shameful secret that must never be used around people. I think that this is an extremely realistic response. I've known a number of people (both in my personal life and in Halforums) that have been so emotionally affected by events of their past than no matter how much they achieve, they still doubt their own self worth. I think on one hand, it would have been good for Elsa to be empowered, even if it meant becoming evil, but on the other hand, I think making her emotionally vulnerable made her more relatable instead of cartoonishly villainous.
I was able to see Frozen and liked it. "Let it Go" is definitely one of my new favorite songs, though I was able to see a lot of the similarities in it and Elphaba's "Bring Me Down" from Wicked (being sung by the same person helped too).

I think choosing the way they did made it more interesting - instead of going on the common-cliche route for most things (ex: Elsa: "You can't marry someone you just met" that goes against most Disney animation movies, or the above mention of Elsa becoming full-on evil that I quoted.)
 
Last edited:
but the reality is that it is a great movie.
It's also not a very deep story emotionally. It has a lot of emotion, there's no doubt there, but the emotions aren't very complex.
no one really changed in the movie.
But she doesn't change, not really, and she's the film's protagonist.
steinman frozen.jpg

:p

I really don't even need to type anything.

That was the part I was waiting for that never came. It kind of felt like the movie was rapidly heading in that direction but then the clutch gave out and it just kind of.. coasted to a stop.
Elsa's backstory is the kind that can breed a Batman villain. It felt exactly as you said, that they were going that way up to a point and then just wussed out on it. I doubt they could get a G rating had they gone that route--it would've been considered a mature theme--but like I said in the OP, it would've given more emotional strength and character dynamic to the sisters for Elsa to go anti-social "frost and ruin on you all!" and then Anna still is willing to sacrifice herself to save her sister.

I do intend to try the movie again sometime when it's on Netflix or something, but the problems steinman mentioned are still problems. In any case, I want to watch Hans's scenes pre-betrayal.










 
Having watched it three times, he doesn't leave a single hint, however it's obvious in hindsight. Twelve brothers, looking for a home he can call his own, it sounds like he's just echoing her, but he actually feels these things himself. It's just that he's in it for blood, and his behavior doesn't suggest that until the scene by the fire.
 
In Elsa's palace, when he rushes the guy with the crossbow - he looks at elsa, then at the chandelier directly above her, then grabs the crossbow and points it directly at the chandelier.
 
You bring up an interesting point, but thinking back on it, I think the path they chose for Elsa actually makes her a more unique, and strangely, realistic character. We'd expect her to become full-on evil from those circumstances because it's become a cliche for villain origins. More often than not, if the villain doesn't start out as "evil", they become so because they've decided to lash out at those around them that made them feel isolated/unwanted/etc. They become evil out of vengeance. But Elsa continued to internalize the blame/guilt, in no small part due to short-sighted planning on the part of her parents (as you pointed out). Even when she was "free" and used her powers in a fantastic way, she still viewed them as a burden once another person was around. She couldn't bring herself to see that she had a gift rather than a shameful secret that must never be used around people. I think that this is an extremely realistic response. I've known a number of people (both in my personal life and in Halforums) that have been so emotionally affected by events of their past than no matter how much they achieve, they still doubt their own self worth. I think on one hand, it would have been good for Elsa to be empowered, even if it meant becoming evil, but on the other hand, I think making her emotionally vulnerable made her more relatable instead of cartoonishly villainous.
I think they could've had her fall and yet come back from it. Her parents may have already been expecting that considering they already had hand-enclosing manacles in the castle dungeon when the frozen landscape would've made it unlikely anyone forged them new.

It's a subversive element. Everything's leading toward Elsa being the villain for a while, but then doesn't happen. Hans seems totally legit, no weird looks to help the audience know he's going to be the bad guy later; he shows nothing until he wants to.

Looking at it more, it feels like the script was written by someone really perceptive who got partnered in writing class with someone really dense.[DOUBLEPOST=1390249399,1390249224][/DOUBLEPOST]
Having watched it three times, he doesn't leave a single hint, however it's obvious in hindsight. Twelve brothers, looking for a home he can call his own, it sounds like he's just echoing her, but he actually feels these things himself. It's just that he's in it for blood, and his behavior doesn't suggest that until the scene by the fire.
That's almost exactly what my wife said on the drive home from the theater.

I saw suggested elsewhere a solo reprise of "Love is an Open Door" after he makes his reveal, but instead of looking at Anna, he's looking at the throne.
 
Also, Celt Z, thank you for digging into the movie to say good about it.

I went into the movie excited, came away disappointed, analyzed to see why and found problems. I'm going to give it another chance someday, but in starting this discussion, I was curious if someone would analyze and find something I missed, something that would help me see it differently, rather than "the problems you see aren't really problems" or "well I liked it".
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I did like how it subverted the prince charming trope.

I did like how it turned out that the act of true love came from the afflicted and counted, that I was not expecting.

I just thought it would have been better if Let It Go had gone a lot darker and angier in the final verse, and Elsa ended up being redeemed by Anna. Not a whole lot else would have had to have changed in the movie.
 
Is it possible to not care for a movie but really love its fandom?

Someone was messing with "Do you want to build a snowman?" and ended up with this. It's fucking creepy (and hilarious) and culls up an alternate universe where Anna freezes to death and comes back as an ice wight or something.

"Elsa, I know you're in there"
 
You're welcome! I walked away from it feeling more excited than I had after seeing a (non-Pixar) Disney movie in a long time, Enchanted and Wreck-It Ralph coming the closest. I was sorry to hear you didn't enjoy it at first, but everyone's allowed an opinion. It's not a flawless movie, but I don't think one exists. But I do like hearing other people's analysis on a film's strengths and weaknesses, especially when they're willing to hear others' interpretations also. It just gets under my skin when discussions like this become absolutes, as though there's only one "right" way to view the movie.

It's not like we're talking about steak here. :D
 
You're welcome! I walked away from it feeling more excited than I had after seeing a (non-Pixar) Disney movie in a long time, Enchanted and Wreck-It Ralph coming the closest. I was sorry to hear you didn't enjoy it at first, but everyone's allowed an opinion. It's not a flawless movie, but I don't think one exists. But I do like hearing other people's analysis on a film's strengths and weaknesses, especially when they're willing to hear others' interpretations also. It just gets under my skin when discussions like this become absolutes, as though there's only one "right" way to view the movie.

It's not like we're talking about steak here. :D
You did make me see the Elsa villain thing differently and with reason. My wife thought it was a good point too.
 
Is it possible to not care for a movie but really love its fandom?

Someone was messing with "Do you want to build a snowman?" and ended up with this. It's fucking creepy (and hilarious) and culls up an alternate universe where Anna freezes to death and comes back as an ice wight or something.

"Elsa, I know you're in there"
Holy freaking creepy! It's giving me shivers - the entire music tone is so different. It definately sounds like something right out of a horror movie - like Anna's waiting outside of Elsa's door with a meat cleaver or something.
 
Elsa bears similarities to the Hulk: she avoids people to minimize occurrences, stress brings the powers out, everyone thinks she's a monster, she escapes people wanting to kill her, and just wants to be left alone. But then, I reduced the first Thor film to half Shakespeare and half Encino Man.
 
I went into the movie excited, came away disappointed, analyzed to see why and found problems. I'm going to give it another chance someday, but in starting this discussion, I was curious if someone would analyze and find something I missed, something that would help me see it differently, rather than "the problems you see aren't really problems" or "well I liked it".
Sorry. :oops:
 
Top