Frozen (Disney film)

I dont know what are their extraordinarily, except Elsa has magic, but their psychology are entirely same as normal people.

Consider that the Ahtohallan was designed on a fact that glacier can reflect the atmosphere situation, I guess Elsa'job is similar to Anderson's Snow Queen now, balance the atmosphere, then benefit nature. Just guess.

I think the ending of Frozen 1 was a traditional Disney princess ending, they didnt want to make a sequel so they did that, everything was so hasty in that ending. If they wanted to continue to make a sequel at that moment, they would not choose that ending.

I think you ignore the Northudlra, they are also people and they also have society, though I admit the movie didnt shape them well, but it is no the reason we should ignore them in analysis. We all see when Elsa took Anna's letter, her background was Northudlra people, I dont think she only communicated with trees or spirits in forest.

The Northuldra are not Anna and Elsa's family just because Iduna was Northuldra. A family is a person's relationships. E.g. "you're not family just because you come from the same place. And even if some of them were family, it would be only through blood." The Northuldra are still virtually strangers. Honeymaren states, "This is from one of our oldest families." Implying the Northuldra are a collection of multiple separate families. They're not all related, they're a tribe.

The cold never bothered me anyway

Would like to point out that sequels are inherently limited by what the original work establishes, and the stronger the original, the more the sequel has to work within those limits. You can always find someone in real life that has a story just like what happened in the sequel, but that's not a very robust argument for why the writing in the sequel works or doesn't work.

Barring specific genre exceptions, of course, like the ones where they go back in time to change something only to find out that a lot more has changed and they have to fix it, but even then care has to be taken to avoid stepping on the parts of the original that people liked.

One of the issues with 2 is that the meta jokes and gags are overly disjointed from the film as a whole. 1 took the twist with the stereotypical Disney princess romance (itself a somewhat undeserved reputation given how few of the Disney Princess lineup actually this simplistic fairytale maiden awaiting rescue by a big strong man arc) and made it a central part of its main plotline. 2, when it tries to be meta with things like Kristoff's song and Elsa cringing at her Let It Go sequence, just throws them in as one-off gags.

2, when it tries to be meta with things like Kristoff's song and Elsa cringing at her Let It Go sequence, just throws them in as one-off gags.

That's why "Lost in the Woods" qualifies to be a Big-Lipped Alligator Moment. It was clearly designed in an incredibly jokey manner. While all of Anna and Elsa's most emotional songs (of which there are many) are treated as serious, impactful, and profound. So that whole "anti-toxic masculinity" message they were going for in press interviews is lost. Kristoff has three songs total in the Frozen movies and shorts. And "Lost in the Woods" is a parody of an 80s rock music video. He's singing into a micropinecone with a herd of reindeer like some kind of boy band, and dramatically leaning against trees under imaginary spotlights.

There's a double standard that exists here regarding how "Lost in the Woods" is treated. Imagine Anna singing "Do You Want to Build a Snowman?" or "The Next Right Thing" with a scene like this happening around her. We would rightfully be annoyed that they downplayed Anna's emotions during these scenes by turning them into a silly over-dramatized pop culture reference. But it's Kristoff, so we laugh, because when men act all emotional like this, it's funny. This was a very botched attempt to break down stereotypes.

Not to mention that they don't even show us how Kristoff supposedly overcomes these feelings, as he totally vanishes from the movie for like, a half hour, until swooping in to rescue Anna in the dam scene, and from that moment on, it's assumed that he's miraculously figured out all his problems. So, no, they didn't take him or his "arc" seriously.

Edited by dmcreif on Apr 14th 2020 at 3:53:29 PM

The cold never bothered me anyway

[doubleposting due to length]

And when you think about it, "Lost in the Woods"'s mere existence isn't really justified by the plot. Anna leaves the Northuldra camp because Elsa has to leave, she got distracted a couple times during Kristoff's very poorly-timed proposal attempts because she's worried about her sister dying, and Kristoff thinks this means they're growing apart and he's losing her? That's purely Insane Troll Logic.

I mean, Kristoff's first attempt didn't work out because Anna was concerned that Elsa was behaving so strangely, so she wasn't even paying attention. His second attempt (after Anna plainly hinted that she straight up wanted to make out with him, TOTALLY signifying that she's losing interest) admittedly didn't have any distractions until Elsa woke up, but it was out of character for Anna to be so sensitive about it. And in the third attempt (while they were in the middle of a magical forest that damn-near killed Anna and Elsa's parents), Anna was clearly made anxious by Kristoff's bizarre "we honestly could die" talk, so she left to make sure Elsa wasn't wandering off after they promised to stay together.

These incidents that all occur within a span of one day (which are also played off as jokes, by the way) don't nearly justify Kristoff suddenly feeling like he and Anna are growing apart and he might lose her. Kristoff also doesn't bother to question why Anna might have left the Northuldra camp without him. He just automatically assumes it means she doesn't give a shit, and it makes no sense. And again, his priorities are a bit mixed up. The people of Arendelle are counting on them to solve the problem, an extremely unprecedented situation, and for him to even think that it's a good idea to try proposing to Anna at this time, is laughable. For him to think "whaaa? We're on a death-defying quest in the magical northern wilderness, Elsa keeps trying to get herself killed, and Anna isn't paying ME enough attention?" is silly. They've been together for three years, she treats him well for the vast majority of the movie and does the same in the short films. It would make sense if Anna were to be acting disinterested outside of all the paranormal shit that goes down in the middle of the movie, but she and Kristoff have an evidently close and affectionate bond during the whole beginning sequence. So he's just being an insane drama queen. A reasonable person would've done some scrutiny and presumed innocence first, perhaps instead assuming that Anna might have had a legitimate reason to leave without him, and elect to discuss it with her later. That is how healthy relationships function.

I mean, in the "miscommunication" instance that led to "Lost in the Woods," well, Elsa had to leave. Her presence had drawn in the earth giants, who had previously never entered the Northuldra camp, and she didn't want to be the cause of any danger to them, so she made herself scarce. Anna had to choose between following Elsa and leaving to find Kristoff (which she had no bearing to even begin searching). Also, nobody necessarily knew how far Kristoff and Ryder went, even if Anna had a general direction. She wasn't willing to risk losing track of Elsa just to find Kristoff, when Elsa would be in much more danger than Kristoff, and following Elsa and the voice was the whole reason they came to the forest in the first place. So, yes, in this specific situation, Kristoff was not Anna's priority, which was appropriate considering what was happening. She knew Kristoff was with Ryder, too, so she might have assumed that he had a reason to leave. She didn't ignore him, and we have no reason to say that she "jumped to conclusions". We only see that she was just confused that he left without saying anything.

But at the end, when everyone reunited, Anna was the one doing the apologizing to Kristoff, saying, "I'm sorry *I* left you behind, I was just so desperate to protect her." Even though Kristoff was the one who snuck away without telling her. Even though she had to leave with Elsa, she still felt guilty about it, because it was a sort of lose-lose scenario. And what's cringy is that Kristoff says "I know, I know, it's okay, my love is not fragile," to her apology. Wow! You didn't know, Kristoff? Come on, you just sang a whole ass song about how you figured it must have meant that Anna was losing interest in you! You jumped to conclusions!

The cold never bothered me anyway

So Let’s talk songs.

So here’s a list of the songs that made it in to the movie, since I think it’s going to change pretty significantly.

• "Some Things Never Change"
• "Into the Unknown"
• When I Am Older
• "Lost in the Woods"
• "Show Yourself"
• "The Next Right Thing"

The first song we’re definitely cutting is “When I Am Older” (Olaf’s song). It doesn’t really contribute anything to the plot, and we’re giving him a new song at the beginning. So the tentative new list of songs would look like.

The reason that I put questions marks around “Show Yourself” is because while it’s a great song, I’m not sure how it would work in the new Altohallan sequence.

Since there’s no voice, and her powers are unconnected to the glacier, reaching it wouldn’t be triumphant in the same way. She’s here for answers, that she‘s not sure if she really wants, but it determined to get them. (Which again, is a shame to be loosing that sequence, but a good idea in isolation does not a good movie make.)

Edited by megaeliz on Apr 15th 2020 at 9:32:31 AM

...this is really starting to sound like a "throw dart at board at random" theory. Characters at big studios like Disney aren't handled by just one person, they're handled by dozens, if not hundreds. One man leaving who, recall, was called out for actively making women at the studio feel less safe and less willing to contribute, is a minimal part of the process. How many of those videos praising Lasseter were just PR and advertising, like most behind the scenes video nowadays are, that bore little resemblance to his increasingly souring reputation?

Edited by Tuckerscreator on Apr 14th 2020 at 1:23:23 AM

I said a few months ago how the stakes and overall goals of the characters are somewhat confusing compared to the first film. I'm gonna amend what I said then, which was that "helping Arendelle stopped being the group's priority once they set foot in the forest."

I think, looking at things from a technical standpoint, that like in the first movie, saving Arendelle and helping Elsa are wrapped up in the same overall goal for Anna in the forest in Frozen II. Anna says that if anyone can save Arendelle, it's Elsa, and her panic to rush back to Elsa's side during Kristoff's third proposal attempt is partially precipitated by her concern when Kristoff points out the danger Arendelle would be in if the dam ever fell.

But it still ends up feeling secondary because it's not the narrative's focus. Elsa's mostly busy fighting spirits, Anna's mostly busy worrying about her sister's safety, and Kristoff's mostly busy worrying about his proposal attempts.

And it also doesn't help that in the first movie, we could always see the danger Arendelle is in during the first movie, because the blizzard covered the environment throughout the crisis. We had that one scene where Anna and Kristoff could see the fjord frozen over from high in the hills, and then we saw how things were down in the fjord when Hans began organizing his search party to find Anna after her horse came back riderless. In the second movie, most of the action takes place in a charming forest that only seems to be in danger when Bruni's fire goes off in one scene.

The cold never bothered me anyway

The discourse around this movie lowkey feels like The Last Jedi all over again.

Or...just the original Frozen all over again.

I think "helping Arendelle" was never their main perpose. The topics of Frozen 2 were very clearly in trailers, that were "Seek the Truth of Past" and "Find the Source of Magic". Arendelle crisis was just a opportunity for forcing them to find the truth.(Otherwise there was no way for Elsa to leave the kingdom)

Through the Grand Pabbie, the "Seek the truth of Past" was connected with "Helping Arendelle", and Elsa also said she needed to go to the North and find the voice, so she could find the truth. Thus from that moment, their main perpose was "Find the voice for seeking truth", not from stepping into the forest.

The second act was confused, I think it is because they didnt know how to find the voice, we see they showed different attitudes in forest, because only Elsa had ability to hear the voice, Anna and Kristoff literally had nothing to do except following her.

Did the original Frozen spark so much debates? (I missed the first year after the movie came out on account of not having watched it and not fallen in love with it yet). Sequels are usually worse than original works for sparking controversies because people have been building up expectations of what the sequel should be and how the character should evolve, and a lot of that is guaranteed to clash with the writers own vision.

What I'd really like to know now is how the writers decided that the film should end with Anna as Queen. Lee has gone on record saying that she views Anna as a fairytale heroin (the kind which ends up a Queen) and Elsa as a mythical heroin (the kind which usually meets a tragic fate). I can get by Anna being a fairtytale heroin, but I don't quite get their point about Elsa, apart from the fact that she's horribly overpowered in the setting. Although the tragic fate thing would at least explain the ending - they wanted Elsa out of the picture without killing her since this is Disney, so they came up with a rushed-up non-explanation.

Although maybe all of this stems from the fact that Elsa was originally supposed to be a villain or Anti-Villain, and not the incredibly popular Breakout Character she became.

Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.

What I'd really like to know now is how the writers decided that the film should end with Anna as Queen. Lee has gone on record saying that she views Anna as a fairytale heroine (the kind which ends up a Queen) and Elsa as a mythical heroin (the kind which usually meets a tragic fate). I can get by Anna being a fairytale heroine, but I don't quite get their point about Elsa, apart from the fact that she's horribly overpowered in the setting. Although the tragic fate thing would at least explain the ending - they wanted Elsa out of the picture without killing her since this is Disney, so they came up with a rushed-up non-explanation.

Anna in F2 was Hans'ed. They gave us minimal hints suggesting that she would become a Queen.

For one, she is suddenly “a leader” when she wasn’t before in the first movie. I don’t consider leaving the kingdom in the hands of a stranger like Hans to be a good move, and I don't see it as something that qualifies her as a good "leader”. And what they did in Frozen II to prove that Anna is a leader is through retcons. And not even good retcons, since she managed to convince a total of one person, Mathias, to let her destroy the dam. And even for that, she used Elsa’s authority and name (“my sister gave her life”). She has other qualities, but "leader" is not one of them.

She also never studied for it. I know the books are only semi-canon, but the ones set during their childhoods show that as a kid, Anna was usually outside playing while Elsa was busy studying. Even as an adult, Anna spends her days outside. Which establishes that she’s a free spirit, not someone who should spend her life at a desk.

It’s not what she wanted. She was never written as a wannabe queen, all she ever wanted was to be with Elsa and be useful to her.

She’s not the single and introverted Queen that was different and new, but the usual extroverted princess who gets a boyfriend and a kingdom. Undoing the first movie's progressive display of an unmarried Queen who didn't need a husband or boyfriend to be capable of ruling.

It would make more sense for Anna to be a knight or ambassador. Any sort of position that would allow her to use an ice sword.

Edited by dmcreif on Apr 15th 2020 at 11:02:19 AM

The cold never bothered me anyway

So with all that said, how should we end our rewritten version of the movie?

Maybe Anna could become ambassador to Northuldra or something? I feel like that could work, especially if Kristoff finds out that he's related as well, but then how would we tie up Elsa's character arc?

Edited by megaeliz on Apr 15th 2020 at 12:18:21 PM

If we keep the plot of Elsa feeling trapped in Arendelle, we have little choice but to address that, and that probably means letting her leave her kingdom. And since she's the Queen, I don't see how to allow that without having her also abdicate like in the movie. If we do that, it means Anna has to become Queen, and it's Elsa who would become some kind of Ambassador (or take a third option and make Arendelle a Republic).

Even though I love to think of Elsa as an ultra-competent queen and Anna as too absent-minded to make a good one, the fact remains that the movies give us very little evidence for that. So, if one discounts the Extended Universe, there is nothing saying that Anna will make a worse queen than Elsa.

The question remains of what would cause Elsa to remain there. Here is my suggestion: something happens at the bottom of the lake, when Elsa breaks free, which ties her to the source of magic. Now she needs to replenish the source of magic in Ahtohallan, or reconnect with it, from time to time, otherwise her magic, or the forest magic, or both, will fade away. She takes the opportunity to become the protector of Ahtohallan, Arendelle, and the Enchanted Forest.

It needs work because I just came up with this idea, but what do you think? The idea is that Elsa would really become a protector Sorceress Supreme for all three locations.

Edited by C105 on Apr 15th 2020 at 5:41:52 PM

Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.

Or now that I think about it, couldn't Elsa's character arc be technically concluded with realizing that her parents loved her, and coming to terms with her traumatic childhood?

Maybe we could even set up a subplot where Anna actually feels more at home in the forest, and decides to become ambassador to Northuldra? I feel like that would be a good way to have Anna grow and become less dependent on her sister, while still feeling natural and in character.

Edited by megaeliz on Apr 15th 2020 at 12:20:01 PM

Your idea aganst the topic of frozen 2 totally. In your design, Elsa stayed at forest because she had to keep the magic, if she didnt stay at forest the magic would gone, but I dont think magic is so important for her or forest, why she need to keep that.

I dont think we need to find a reason the explain why Elsa had to stay at forest, because the movie makers obviously didnt want to convey that information, I think you'd better to think about why Elsa want to stay at forest, it is better to explain the ending.

I was actually throwing ideas for megaeliz's revised script for the movie, which does not have to follow exactly what happens in the film. Sorry if that was not clear enough.

In that case, we would need to remove Elsa's expressions of unhappiness at being trapped in the castle in the beginning, and replace it with angst about her parents treatment of her. Come to think of it, Anna could join on that too... maybe this would make a nice duo for them, where each sister privately reflects on their relationships with their parents.

Edited by C105 on Apr 15th 2020 at 6:43:12 PM

Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.

Like, the thing is, if we did want Anna to become queen, we would need to create opportunities for her to to show off her leadership skills, and her having an interest in taking a larger part in running the kingdom.

Since we're still trying to fit the elements they presented in the movie into a workable outline, and not get too far from the overall plot and structure of the finished movie, while developing it's themes a bit more, there's not really a chance for her to do that.

Edited by megaeliz on Apr 16th 2020 at 1:43:26 PM

YES. @_@

So we agree this means Elsa has to remain Queen, and, therefore, not feel that trapped by her life in Arendelle (unless we want the story to have a Downer Ending for her). We can indeed consider her arc as having to resolve the feelings she had about her parents and her powers.
Anna becoming an ambassador, along with Kristoff, would also be a nice tie to the idea they apparently had at some point of having Kristoff being uneasy with the life in Arendelle.

OK. Seems I missed the fun, then.

Whatever your favourite work is, there is a Vocal Minority that considers it the Worst. Whatever. Ever!.

(x6) I like the idea of Anna being the one attached to Northuldra, not Elsa. Anna is the outdoorsy one and being an ambassador fits her friendly nature. The comics also touched upon Anna's confusion on just what her job as a princess entails.

Heck, maybe Kristoff could be from a separate Northuldra tribe and they both could bond through that.

I don't remember much debate until, like, two or three years after the film came out. People begun seriously discussing whether Hans was a good villain or not.

Edited by Pichu-kun on Apr 16th 2020 at 12:16:12 PM

I think part of the debate was the increasing use of twist villains post-Frozen, which made people reconsider Hans and the twist.

The Protomen enhanced my life.

I think that it was brought up here in this discussion making Kristoff descended from the Northuldra tribe leader that Runeard killed, to create a source of conflict between him and the sisters.

Arguably, the twist villains trend didn't start with Hans, but with King Candy in Wreck-it Ralph. Arguably, King Candy's villainy was a bit more upfront from the start, so he's only a twist villain in the sense that he's the villain for a reason we didn't expect, but which has been subtly hinted at through all the references to Turbo. And Dawn Bellweather was a perfect twist villain for Zootopia since Zootopia is a buddy cop and police procedural movie and this sort of twist is a trope commonly seen in that genre.

But with Hans, the idea of him being a villain wasn't really settled until the eleventh hour or something. This results in there being very little overt build-up to establish that he's going to be a villain, and you have to watch a few times to catch details that he's got ulterior motives for wanting Anna's hand in marriage.

The cold never bothered me anyway

Hans as the surprise villain is perfectly fine, when the whole film is Disney subverting the pop cultural expectation of what its films are supposedly like.

The main problem is that this kind of meta writing only works in either small amounts (see Golden Age Bioware games), or one big dose all at once (Frozen 1, which was giving you what you thought would be a Disney fairytale but actually was setting up a subversion).

1 likely also benefitted from the fact that Game of Thrones was still in full swing so pop cultural sentiment towards fantasy settings with gritty politics is still positive, rather than fading into another tired setting where the knights just use their reputations to bed maidens, so grimdark.

I thought the twist villain trope originated with Stinky Pete in Toy Story 2.