Let's Talk About the Ending of Frozen

[xaszatm]

Making him so likable is precisely why the twist works. They didn't tip their hat too early, and the fact that he IS so gosh darn likable makes the act of pulling the rug out from underneath you so much more damaging. You don't just see Anna's shock and confusion when he betrays her; we feel it too, because we, just like her, thought he was a handsome, good guy... and like her, we bought his ruse.

And my point was his demeanor DIDN'T feel like a ruse. They gave him TOO many genuine positives and made him TOO competent that the ultimate negative just didn't feel like something that character would do even in the back of his mind.

Even the best manipulators inevitably do or say that ONE little thing that makes you go "Hmm..." and tip you off that all is not what it seems. Something you might not think of in the moment, but going back to re-examine his character you'll realize he said this but meant something completely different. And other than the single "I've always wanted a place of my own" line, I just never got that from Hans.

Say he hesitated ever so slightly when they were on their first date. Where it looked like he had to think up a canned line or two to use in response to something Anna said. Throws in a few "umms" or "uhhs" or "yeah sure..." during conversation. Stuff like that we the audience notice but Anna doesn't since she's so head over heels.

I'm not asking for Disney to hang a sign over his head going "THIS WILL BE THE BAD GUY LATER", but the best twists work when the clues given to you are reasonable enough to convince you that there's a slight chance that a twist COULD happen. Everyone was shocked by the Sixth Sense twist, but going back and re-evaluating the movie you could see how all the little clues added up to that conclusion. I knew about the twist here walking in, and I couldn't help thinking "So how are they going to make this twist work?" And to me, what they gave me wasn't sufficient enough to logically justify a reveal like that. I really just think that this was a case of Disney outsmarting themselves just to cram in their Token Antagonist Villain in somewhere.

I disagree, he doesn't have TOO many genuine positives...he just acts like he does. The thing with Hans is that everything he does up till the reveal is superficial. If you stop and actually listen to his lines, it shows that he isn't the kind person he's portraying. While I do feel that the hints are a bit too subtle, they are there. From the point when he firsts meets Anna there and onward. Heck, in his only song, if you actually listen to his words, he's not actually singing about Anna, he's singing about himself. But not only is Anna fooled, so is the audience because Anna is singing above him. Even going to their first meeting, really pay attention to how Hans seems more interested in Elsa than Anna. Notice how he calls Anna "ordinary." There are signs, but aren't really noticeable the first time through.

Hans actually starts off evil from the start (he had plans of murder in mind before he ever showed up.

Hans isn't out to kill Anna; Anna's dying already before his betrayal ever happens.

One of these things is not like the other, one of these things, doesn't belong...

For him to be the "villain all along", he had to know that A) Elsa even had her ice powers in the first place, B) Elsa would freak out enough to flee, C) Anna would insist she goes alone to find her, and D) Elsa would get talked down enough to bring back to Arendalle.

No.

Again I buy that he wanted to marry Anna just to get the throne, but this overly hammy Evil McBadGuy bait and switch just felt way too phony and it oversimplified the complex tragedy they were building. Yeah yeah, kids movie and all so ya need more black and white morals, but it was doing so well before the 3rd act.

The Duke of Wesealtown (WESLETON!) would have been a better choice for the Token Human Antagonist role. He was the major instigator to freak out at Elsa, and he was wanting her dead from the get go ("If you need to take care of that Ice Queen, boys, TAKE CARE of that Ice Queen...). Sure Hans had his own interests in mind, but he still seemed to care about the people and care about the sisters. The Duke was all "KILL EM KILL EM KILL EM NAOWWWW...oh but you do the dirty work Hans since I'm a wuss and I'm going to use you insecurities to pressure you."

(Oh but that's what they wanted you to think too...ya know what, give me a bit of predictability that makes the most sense than unpredictability for the sake of unpredictability)

See this is what I get for watching too much Game of Thrones. I didn't want a Token Antagonist, I just wanted everyone to have their own complicated motivations and reasonings as to why they think they're right and just have all these ideas butt heads, none of which are necessarily BAD unto themselves because you can at least understand how the person came up to that conclusion, hence why it's all such a clusterfuck tragedy. Yes Hans had his own personal ambitions of the throne, but that doesn't automatically negate all the legitimately good things he did to help out. That doesn't negate the legitimately positive bravery and competence and caring he shared toward Anna, Elisa, and Arendelle. Wooing a naive Anna is one thing, but you can't fake EVERYTHING.

So...because he's not the force behind all the problems and because he acts nice, he's not the true villain? Well, I can certainly see your point but I disagree. You are saying that all the nice things he did (Help the kingdom, Prevent Elsa from dying...yeah, that's it) are genuine. I think the main difference is that you're seeing him as a "normal" person. I see him as a sociopath. Someone who is willing to manipulate the world to get what he wants.

Furthermore...bravery and competence doesn't have to belong to the hero alone. Which leaves "caring" he shared between Anna, Elsa, and Arendelle. Well, obviously he cares for Arendelle, he wants to rule it. Helping out will make his ascension much easier if they like him. What? Expect the villain to make himself unpopular with his subjects? That's going to go so well.

As for Anna and Elsa...again, listen to his words, they sound caring...but there extremely shallow. I'm not saying that Love at First Sight never happens, but name one quality Hans says about Anna...ever. He doesn't, he just lets Anna carry the conversation and nods and goes along with it. And caring for Elsa? I suppose you are talking about the scene where she is about to kill the two men. Well, again think about this politically, Hans needs Elsa back. Of course he's going to persuade her not to use her powers to kill. If she kills them, he thinks it would be easier to kill him should he make a wrong move.

(and him killing Elsa WOULD end the threat).

That's what Hans THINKS will end the threat, but he would have been wrong. "True love" is what ended the threat. When Elsa embraced and loved herself and her powers and her sister instead of fearing them, that's what gave her the control she needed to thaw out Arendelle. Killing Elisa might have ended the immediate snowfall (keyword: might), but they still would have been doomed without her.

Again, this is such an intriguing, realistically human situation that they put a damper on by turning Hans into M. Bison [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8u7px_GzWQ]; you could still have the same movie without that. Mustache Twirler cliches are just as bad as Impossibly Good Guy cliches.

"Fear is the enemy", right? Fear should have been the only true antagonist here. Elsa fearing for herself, Anna fearing for her sister, and yes, Hans genuinely fearing for the people whose lives he's getting involved with. They make these rash emotional decisions out of fear/misunderstanding and it's not until they take a step back when they realize what they've been doing wrong. Sure Hans might have underlying motives as well, but I'm sorry, the Cobra Commander shit just doesn't happen in real life.

And as I'm saying, Hans ISN'T a Cobra Commander type villain. He's isn't trying to take over the world, he's ruining the lives of two women. It's not the goal of his (That's to become king) but manipulating two people? That's far more realistic of a villain than MOST Disney has put out there.

Furthermore, you're telling me that Hans doesn't exist in real life? Seriously? Two words: "Nice Guys." You know that meme? People who are real entitled petty people who have a false exterior? That's Hans entire persona.

I still have problems with those trolls though...

 

[Trishbot]

Again, I think we just walked out of the film with different interpretations.

And my point was his demeanor DIDN'T feel like a ruse. They gave him TOO many genuine positives and made him TOO competent that the ultimate negative just didn't feel like something that character would do even in the back of his mind.

That's the WHOLE POINT. A "ruse" isn't something you SHOULD see coming. If his demeanor felt like a ruse, then it would be a bad ruse. Every last single act that Hans does in the movie is serving his own goals. ALL his positives all serve his benefit, even the ones that outwardly appear like "love" or "kindness" to others (notice how all of these actions are taken when others are watching him, yet the one time he's alone and sure he's going to get away with it he reveals his hand.) Giving blankets to the poor and cold wins him the approval of the people; he comes across as a selfless and valiant hero trying to "save" the queen and princess, etc. He's the best kind of evil; the one who gets the people on his side, trusting his decisions, without ever twirling his mustache or dropping his guard.

Even the best manipulators inevitably do or say that ONE little thing that makes you go "Hmm..." and tip you off that all is not what it seems. Something you might not think of in the moment, but going back to re-examine his character you'll realize he said this but meant something completely different. And other than the single "I've always wanted a place of my own" line, I just never got that from Hans.

The WHOLE song doesn't "feel" right (notice how he only AGREES with Anna and never actually expresses any personal traits of his own AT ALL), and the whole "I have 12 older brothers" means he was never going to be high up the royal food chain. But more of that below...

Say he hesitated ever so slightly when they were on their first date. Where it looked like he had to think up a canned line or two to use in response to something Anna said. Throws in a few "umms" or "uhhs" or "yeah sure..." during conversation. Stuff like that we the audience notice but Anna doesn't since she's so head over heels.

But WE the audience weren't SUPPOSED to know he's evil. That's sort of the point. Beyond that, he came to the coronation prepared to woo one of the two sisters; he did his homework, put on the facade, and rolled with everything Anna said (no matter how silly or stupid some of it was....)

I'm not asking for Disney to hang a sign over his head going "THIS WILL BE THE BAD GUY LATER", but the best twists work when the clues given to you are reasonable enough to convince you that there's a slight chance that a twist COULD happen. Everyone was shocked by the Sixth Sense twist, but going back and re-evaluating the movie you could see how all the little clues added up to that conclusion. I knew about the twist here walking in, and I couldn't help thinking "So how are they going to make this twist work?" And to me, what they gave me wasn't sufficient enough to logically justify a reveal like that. I really just think that this was a case of Disney outsmarting themselves just to cram in their Token Antagonist Villain in somewhere.

I think all the pieces fall in line. His bizarre eagerness to get married (HE wasn't sheltered like Anna was), some hint his duet with her, his origin and history, the fact that only HE showed up for the coronation (and no one else from his kingdom), the way he takes charge of the whole kingdom so readily (and offers Anna absolute no escort on her journey), etc. He said all the right things and was in all the right places, even if there were some twists and turns he had to deal with... More on THOSE below...

Hans actually starts off evil from the start (he had plans of murder in mind before he ever showed up.

Hans isn't out to kill Anna; Anna's dying already before his betrayal ever happens.

One of these things is not like the other, one of these things, doesn't belong...

For him to be the "villain all along", he had to know that A) Elsa even had her ice powers in the first place, B) Elsa would freak out enough to flee, C) Anna would insist she goes alone to find her, and D) Elsa would get talked down enough to bring back to Arendalle.

He says he was going to murder ELSA and marry ANNA for the power. He wasn't going to kill Anna because he needed her alive to marry her. He even says Elsa was who he wanted to marry, but she was too unapproachable, but Anna practically threw the door open for him ("Love is an Open Door"... huh). He saw his 'in' and took it. He didn't plan everything that happened; his plans shifted as the twists game. He was opportunistic and seized the moments. When Anna was dying, he saw yet another opportunity to speed up his plans. He was malleable rather than rigid in his aims, and that's a more realistic villain. He didn't know what Elsa could do, didn't expect the freak out, didn't expect her to leave... but he capitalized on the tragedy like the opportunistic vulture he was, all the while turning their tragedies to his benefit.

Again I buy that he wanted to marry Anna just to get the throne, but this overly hammy Evil McBadGuy bait and switch just felt way too phony and it oversimplified the complex tragedy they were building. Yeah yeah, kids movie and all so ya need more black and white morals, but it was doing so well before the 3rd act.

The Duke of Wesealtown (WESLETON!) would have been a better choice for the Token Human Antagonist role. He was the major instigator to freak out at Elsa, and he was wanting her dead from the get go ("If you need to take care of that Ice Queen, boys, TAKE CARE of that Ice Queen...). Sure Hans had his own interests in mind, but he still seemed to care about the people and care about the sisters. The Duke was all "KILL EM KILL EM KILL EM NAOWWWW...oh but you do the dirty work Hans since I'm a wuss and I'm going to use you insecurities to pressure you."

The Duke still IS a villain. He never stopped being one. But he wasn't on the same level as Hans was. He also wasn't the major instigator of Elsa's freak out; Anna did that too her, and Elsa probably would have fled regardless of the Duke's presence there or not (though he certainly didn't help matters).

But, also, Hans DID care about the people and the sisters... as means to an end. He cared about them in the same sense that he wanted them on HIS side only as long as he needed them. He wanted them to trust HIM. When something "happened" to them (he said he was going to stage an accident), he wanted both the sister and the people to trust in him so they'd never suspect he was involved.

(Oh but that's what they wanted you to think too...ya know what, give me a bit of predictability that makes the most sense than unpredictability for the sake of unpredictability)

It makes total, complete sense. Nothing he says or does contradicts his actions. You just felt he didn't let the audience in on his plans enough before the twist, but that doesn't mean his plans didn't make sense. They actually made a LOT of sense.

See this is what I get for watching too much Game of Thrones. I didn't want a Token Antagonist, I just wanted everyone to have their own complicated motivations and reasonings as to why they think they're right and just have all these ideas butt heads, none of which are necessarily BAD unto themselves because you can at least understand how the person came up to that conclusion, hence why it's all such a clusterfuck tragedy. Yes Hans had his own personal ambitions of the throne, but that doesn't automatically negate all the legitimately good things he did to help out. That doesn't negate the legitimately positive bravery and competence and caring he shared toward Anna, Elisa, and Arendelle. Wooing a naive Anna is one thing, but you can't fake EVERYTHING.

Yes you can. It's called acting. And a good villain will do good things to keep the blame from falling on his or her shoulders. The BEST villains do that and absolve themselves of blame, often playing the part of wolves in sheep's clothing. I mean, he wasn't designed "obviously" ugly and evil like, say, Jafar or Ursula, but both of those villains all did "good" things as a means to their end (Ursula made Ariel's dreams come true, after all, and Jafar freed Aladdin from prison and led him to the cave of wonders). Hans just kept his Poker face and became, perhaps for the first time in Disney history, an EFFECTIVE villain but not looking or dressing or sounding the part. Because, guess what ladies, villains and scumbags can be hot guys only looking to use you and telling you what you want to hear to get their way... (ooh, good life lesson there, in fact.)

(and him killing Elsa WOULD end the threat).

That's what Hans THINKS will end the threat, but he would have been wrong. "True love" is what ended the threat. When Elsa embraced and loved herself and her powers and her sister instead of fearing them, that's what gave her the control she needed to thaw out Arendelle. Killing Elisa might have ended the immediate snowfall (keyword: might), but they still would have been doomed without her.

I don't see how the kingdom would've been doomed without her (he would've been there to lead them and the winter would likely have ended if she wasn't around to control or create it). But, yes, obviously "true love" ended it in a much better fashion than in bloodshed. Not that he knew that.

Again, this is such an intriguing, realistically human situation that they put a damper on by turning Hans into M. Bison [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8u7px_GzWQ]; you could still have the same movie without that. Mustache Twirler cliches are just as bad as Impossibly Good Guy cliches.

But he's not a cliche. How can he be a cliche if there is literally NO other villain like him in a Disney movie before, and the sheer absence of which is how he manages to pull the wool over so many people's eyes? He's actually an ANTI-cliche in the Disney formula.

"Fear is the enemy", right? Fear should have been the only true antagonist here. Elsa fearing for herself, Anna fearing for her sister, and yes, Hans genuinely fearing for the people whose lives he's getting involved with. They make these rash emotional decisions out of fear/misunderstanding and it's not until they take a step back when they realize what they've been doing wrong. Sure Hans might have underlying motives as well, but I'm sorry, the Cobra Commander shit just doesn't happen in real life.

Tell that to the people who took advantage of me, my innocence, and my trust. You bet it happens in real life. You bet it happened to ME. And you bet this is a message that I wish Disney had taught my younger self rather than "a handsome prince will solve your troubles". The lesson of "looks can be deceiving" and "beauty is only skin deep" and "sometimes men lie to you to get what they want"... that definitely happens in real life every single day.

Don't have Anna kiss either of them and head toward Elsa.

Er, that's exactly what HAPPENS.

And Anna still gets paired off Kristoff by the end anyways (who ironically enough she has LESS chemistry with than with Hans), even if they're going the "oh we're taking it slow and not getting engaged immediately" thing. They still wanted to have it both ways...

And they got it. Guess what? You're right. She doesn't have as much "chemistry" with Kristoff because he's not pretending to be her dream guy. She and Hans had chemistry because he was telling her everything she wanted to hear, not sharing the things that were true about him. Kristoff, however, shares his flaws, his quirks, and the parts of himself that aren't so perfect, and, well, that's the whole reason he, like EVERY person, is a "fix 'er upper" rather than a "dream guy". The whole point of their relationship is it's built on honesty and acceptance, which takes TIME, rather than immediate infatuation with superficial characteristics that turns out one person was only saying to please the other.

Also, Elsa saves Anna.

Jusssst sayin'

Anna saves Elsa from Hans, and it's that self-sacrifice that thaws her (and breaks the "curse" on Elsa to manage her powers). Elsa didn't "magically cry" her back to life; her own actions, her "act of true love" to sacrifice herself for her sister, was the catalyst that broke the curse. She saved her sister, herself, and the whole kingdom, and she didn't need Hans or Kristoff to kiss her to make it happen.

 

[pretzil]

Can we make a deal where you WON'T write spoiler articles until at least TWO WEEKS AFTER a film or TV show's major debut?

Because seriously. This is stupid.

Not really, this is a Disney princess movie on a video gaming website, its a fair assumption that the 'this is actually good' message could take 2 weeks by word of mouth before people would actually go out and see it.

I have no idea what you're on about. I am suggesting that MovieBob-and others-not write spoiler-related/keyed articles until a pleasantly defined length of time so people have an opportunity to experience whatever media they're on about, instead of having them appear the day of the media's debut.

What are you trying to communicate back?

My bad, I am in Australia and have no idea of release dates in your country, I thought you were saying that the spoiler warning at the start of the article was unnecessary since the movie had been out for 2 weeks...

 

[mecegirl]

They've actually done that "oh, he's not my REAL true love" thing before ("Enchanted" comes to mind), and everyone in the theater, including me, was thinking "well, Kristoff is her true love. He'll give her the kiss".... but the movie subverts this by having her reject his act of love to instead save her sister. She is not the one that gets saved; she saves HERSELF. All while showing that, you know what, love comes in all shapes and sizes. This isn't Ariel "I'll abandon my life, family, and friends for a guy I don't know"; this is "I will give up my life and happiness for the family I dearly love that needs me". That's a revolutionary message for a Disney film, and it subverted the formula and our expectations... and resulted in a much, much stronger heroine than one that simply gets kissed by Kristoff.

To be accurate it's been done before by Disney, it is just not often done in a film with princess in them. Which, yeah, any aberration from the set model can be subversive for a Disney Princess movie. Lilo and Stitch and Mulan are good examples of movies that deal with familial love. Most Disney princesses aren't put in a position where they have to choose romantic love over familial love (or vise versa) like in Frozen. Mostly because family members play such a small role in such films, they are either dead, or already have the protagonist's unconditional love. With your Ariel example, for a second at the end it was just a conflict between Ariel, King Trident, and Ursula. First King Trident exchanges himself for Ariel which actually makes Ariel angry enough to Attack Ursula. But of course the prince has to butt in and muddy the situation and it goes back to the romantic plot . A more complete example of what you are talking about might be the Pocahontas movie(s).

 

[clonezero]

It was a good show simply put, could help but clap at how it was executed!

Kudos to them!

 

[unbeliever64]

Love Is An Open Door was a totally fun duet song he and Anna had. I liked how they vibed so well and had so much fun chemistry together. And they DID talk about stuff together and had things in common and what not. It did feel like they were legitimately getting to know each other through the fun date they had. Sure it was just a first date, but an AWESOME first date that sometimes does happen when the two of you just click. And even throughout the rest of the film he was acting all legit cool and noble and Good Guy Hans. Bob namedrops PUA, but even then you can tell when a guy is being sincere and when a guy is just using canned lines. So when the axe is dropped and he's all "Muhahaha foolish girl! I never loved you!, I just wasn't feeling it. Seriously, all the dude was missing was a mustache to twirl...THAT'S probably why people found it so 'unpredictable'. Gaston's descent into villiany adds up and feels real when you take everything we've seen and known about him into account. Hans's didn't. They avoided one cliche only to run smack into another one.

*THIS*. Very much this. I loved the movie, don't get me wrong. But there's all the difference in the world between a twist that is hinted at ahead of time (even in an extremely subtle way -- see "Sixth Sense"), and a completely out-of-nowhere character reversal.

We're not just seeing the Prince through Anna's eyes -- as Bob (and Dubya) says, we see him in action absent either princess, and he is *ALWAYS* the picture-perfect Good Guy. Having him flip on a dime and turn evil WITHOUT FORESHADOWING is just "Diabolus ex machina".

This might have been fixed by just a single line of dialogue. When Anna first meets the Prince and he says he's the youngest of bazillions of kids, he might have smirked and dropped a self-deprecating line about "yeah, no way *I* will ever be king". Just something so we know he's thinking about that possibility.

Without even any noticeable-after-the-fact foreshadowing, the twist just left me... cold.

Any thoughts on this, Moviebob?

 

[Trishbot]

I loved the movie, don't get me wrong. But there's all the difference in the world between a twist that is hinted at ahead of time (even in an extremely subtle way -- see "Sixth Sense"), and a completely out-of-nowhere character reversal.

We're not just seeing the Prince through Anna's eyes -- as Bob (and Dubya) says, we see him in action absent either princess, and he is *ALWAYS* the picture-perfect Good Guy. Having him flip on a dime and turn evil WITHOUT FORESHADOWING is just "Diabolus ex machina".

This might have been fixed by just a single line of dialogue. When Anna first meets the Prince and he says he's the youngest of bazillions of kids, he might have smirked and dropped a self-deprecating line about "yeah, no way *I* will ever be king". Just something so we know he's thinking about that possibility.

Without even any noticeable-after-the-fact foreshadowing, the twist just left me... cold.

Any thoughts on this, Moviebob?

I'll tell you my thoughts, at least...

Rewatching the movie, they DO foreshadow his heel-turn... a lot... but in very, surprisingly mature and subtle ways.

Yes, they openly state he's furthest brother in line to the throne. He's the ONLY one from his family and kingdom to show up at the coronation. He shares nothing truly personal about himself to Anna whatsoever. The major lyrics in his song are all about "I've found my own place" (not PERSON). Every time he's acting good, he's got eyes watching him. Unlike Anna (who was actively looking to escape her life from the prison-like castle and sees Hans as her ticket out), Hans has no reason to impulsively ask her to marry him. When he seeks to defend Anna compared to Elsa, his best defense is she's "ordinary". The majority of their "bonding" dialogue is just Anna speaking her wacky mind and him just saying he agrees (without expressing an opinion of his own). He does nothing to challenge her, question her, or follow-up anything she says (such as "why do you feel this way" or "why did you do that"... stuff that Kristoff makes a point of asking as they go on their journey together).

And, ultimately, when they are alone for the first time, no eyes watching, no hope of salvation coming, all his plans coming to fruition, he drops the act. As Anna says later, he truly had a frozen heart and bore no love in it.

What I truly love about the "twist" is, well, the realism (taken to an extreme) that, well, a nice guy can and will say the "right things" to a girl if he wants something from her. He'll agree. He'll be pleasant. He'll be charming. It's the "first date". He won't be honest. He won't be sincere. He'll put on his best behavior because he wants her convinced he truly is "Prince Charming", when in reality he's just looking to use her. Anna didn't question it; she bought into the lovesick fantasy long before she even MET him, and he recognized and capitalized on it like a pro.

That's a more masterful and scarily real villain than any "obviously evil", cloaked-in-black, mustache-twirling villain like Ursala, Captain Hook, Jafar, Hades, Maleficent, or Clayton ever were.

He's a charming prince in a Disney movie. He can sing. He can dance. He's rich. He's got brothers. He's shown as competent and brave... it's the "ideal" fantasy that girls buy into, and the perfect formula to turn on its head and manipulate.

Edit: Oh, someone pointed this part out. For a split-second, during the attack on Elsa, Hans glances up at the chandelier and tries to make an "accident" happen by guiding the bolt to knock it down onto her. It's very subtle, but you can see it if you're looking for it:

 

[unbeliever64]

Rewatching the movie, they DO foreshadow his heel-turn... a lot... but in very, surprisingly mature and subtle ways.

Yes, they openly state he's furthest brother in line to the throne. He's the ONLY one from his family and kingdom to show up at the coronation. He shares nothing truly personal about himself to Anna whatsoever. The major lyrics in his song are all about "I've found my own place" (not PERSON). Every time he's acting good, he's got eyes watching him. Unlike Anna (who was actively looking to escape her life from the prison-like castle and sees Hans as her ticket out), Hans has no reason to impulsively ask her to marry him. When he seeks to defend Anna compared to Elsa, his best defense is she's "ordinary". The majority of their "bonding" dialogue is just Anna speaking her wacky mind and him just saying he agrees (without expressing an opinion of his own). He does nothing to challenge her, question her, or follow-up anything she says (such as "why do you feel this way" or "why did you do that"... stuff that Kristoff makes a point of asking as they go on their journey together).

Dammit, now you're making me question myself. I'm gonna have to go see this one again...

If the foreshadowing really IS there, then I'm down to "Dammit, I *LIKED* the Prince", and "That's not how Disney princess cartoons are supposed to work!". Which isn't nearly as valid criticism as I thought I had...

 

[Lex Darko]

They foreshadowed Hans being evil. But they do it in a way that has never been done in a Disney movie so you don't see it coming. Most Disney villains wear dark colors speak in manner that conveys the intent to deceive; he does none of that save for one scene in the whole movie.

In the whole movie he only looks, speaks, and behaves like the villain and that's when he's admitting he's the villain.

Even after that scene everything he does "appears" heroic even confronting Elsa. That was just a well played twist.

On some people thinking Elsa may become a LGBT icon I can understand why some people could see her that way. But I don't think it has solid basis. She was never ashamed of what made her different. She was afraid that what made her different would kill people. There's a difference in being afraid of what people will think of you because you're not the same and being afraid of what makes you different accidentally murdering the first person to touch you.

 

[filmguy450]

While I liked the film, I found "Tangled" to be far more enjoyable, and "Brave" to do a lot more for the 'Disney Princess Movie Mold Revised' than this; although "Frozen" has better songs, save for one, with 'Let It Go' being the absolute standout.

First off, the opening with the ice farmers is never paid off. Why open with a song about their hardwork and spend a few minutes with them just for us to never see them again? Is there an ice farmer village and way of life? Do the live in huts or igloos or regular old houses in the various towns? No one knows because this was pointless. There had to be a more economical way to introduce Kristoff as a boy then that. It sets us for a different sort of thing (the vibe from that opening is pretty different than from the rest of the film) and isn't paid off. Thanks for wasting my time already movie!

Admittedly, that's a minor issue that you can't realize until the movie is almost over, and it barley detracts from anything else. The biggest flaw is the super short running time. We are definitely missing some scenes or some such. Unfortunately, the biggest issue with that is Elsa's characterization-

Once she runs away to the mountain, she's there for at absolutely most, a few hours before fully embracing her powers. With all the years of suppression, it's unbelievable (I realize it's odd to complain about unbelievabity in a movie with a talking snowman, but this issue seriously took me out of the film). If 'Let It Go' (seriously outstanding song) were set to a partial montage- 2 or 3 days of her alone on the mountain in a cave or something, during the first, slower part of the song. Then a day or 2 of her using her abilities in increasingly bigger ways (showing growing confidence) as the song builds and gets faster. Finally, culminating the same way it does in the film, the creation of ice castle.

Her character could have been fully realized with something like this, but as is, she feels like maybe the movie was going to go in X direction but then decided to go Y, and they hastily rewrote it.

Finally, the one song I loathed was the trolls' 'Fixer-Upper' song. It felt like pandering and it wasn't that catchy.

Yes, the third act twists caught me off guard (mostly), but I think you overlooked alot of the flaws in the film because of the surprising amount of non-Disney things that do happen in the film.

@Ishal- your argument is terrible, because according to the logic you used during it, any company/ corp./ inc./ brand that wants to grow shouldn't. That is reductive and counterintuitive as society and politics change, so too should these brands as to reflect what they know their audiences want (I am not meaning a Poochie kind of thing with that).

 

[MB202]

Yeah, Frozen was amazing... I could talk about it forever! Or at least as long as I'm obsessed with it... OH, and that Mickey Mouse short at the beginning was awesome, too, wasn't it?

 

[Dragonbums]

I think the technical side of the Movie was underappreciated. The tech created almost photorealistic snow, amazing Ice Effects with multiple shaders, and the stormy sea scene had probably more polygons than any animation scene before (which is why they didn'T show more than a few seconds of it).

Just my two cents.

It's quite easy to overlook that kind of stuff nowadays when EVERY movie pushes CGI effects to the max. To the point where the general audience is unphased by it. Even more so by the audience that have no fucking clue about the time and effort it takes to make these things (i.e not art major people.)

It doesn't help them one bit that it looks like a Tangeled clone in art style.

 

[Trishbot]

First off, the opening with the ice farmers is never paid off. Why open with a song about their hardwork and spend a few minutes with them just for us to never see them again? Is there an ice farmer village and way of life? Do the live in huts or igloos or regular old houses in the various towns? No one knows because this was pointless. There had to be a more economical way to introduce Kristoff as a boy then that. It sets us for a different sort of thing (the vibe from that opening is pretty different than from the rest of the film) and isn't paid off. Thanks for wasting my time already movie!

The opening serves several purposes, in fact. It is in the spirit of openings such as The Little Mermaid (the sailors sing about the mysterious sea... none of them really show up again), Pocahontas (The Beating Drum establishes their way of life, and we barely see them again), Aladdin (that merchant sings about the setting and never shows up again), Hunchback of Notre Dame (the jester delights some kids and segues into the movie proper, with the kids never showing up again), etc., with the point of the opening being to establish the tone of the movie and the setting of the movie. Like the sailors singing about the mysteries of the ocean, the (other) sailors in Pocahontas singing about the mysteries of the new world, Belle singing about what's beyond her village, we have the ice cutters singing about the perils, mysteries, and benefits of living in a world filled with cold and ice...

It serves THREE key purposes:
1) Apart from establishing the tone of the movie, it's a great place to show Kristoff's origins... and that scene shows what Kristoff will grow up doing. It shows, through the adults, the hard work and sacrifice he'll grow into living out. We don't see it in the movie, but the opening makes it clear that this is what Kristoff is doing for a living once we meet him as an adult and we now know how he does it and how much of a struggle it is, establishing his work ethic, his resilience, and how he finds fun even in grueling labor. We don't see the other ice workers again because the movie "fast-forwards" about 15 years, meaning they might all just be retired or even dead. It seems like Kristoff is one of the sole ice merchants in the kingdom at that point.

2) It establishes the setting of the movie. Like the merchant's song in Aladdin, it establishes the beauty and perils of this Nordic world. It very quickly establishes that, unlike Lion King, Little Mermaid, Aladdin, or other Disney movies, this is a kingdom of ice and rock, built on the fjords, beautiful yet tough. It's the most easy and accessible way to very, very quickly bring people into the movie and immerse them, as a teaser of things to come once the eternal winter hits... which ties into...

3) The lyrics. The song the ice cutters sing is FILLED with meaning, and they practically set up the whole premise of the movie, which describes both the kingdom, the properties of ice, and the entire character arc for Anna and Elsa:

"Born of cold and winter air
And mountain rain combining
This icy force both foul and fair
Has a frozen heart worth mining

So cut through the heart, cold and clear
Strike for love and strike for fear
See the beauty, sharp and sheer
Split the ice apart
And break the frozen heart

Hyup! Ho! Watch your step! Let it go!
Hyup! Ho! Watch your step! Let it go!

Beautiful!
Powerful!
Dangerous!
Cold!

Ice has a magic, can't be controlled
Stronger than one, stronger than ten
Stronger than a hundred men! Hyup!

Born of cold and winter air
And mountain rain combining
This icy force both foul and fair
Has a frozen heart worth mining

Cut through the heart, cold and clear
Strike for love and strike for fear
There's beauty and there's danger here
Split the ice apart
Beware the frozen heart."

That's basically a giant foreshadowing of Elsa and Anna's entire story arc, with strong references to Elsa's nature (even the "let it go" part was entirely intentional). It's a brilliant way to tie in the themes of the movie, establish the setting of the movie, and introduce one of the lead characters (and his reindeer) in a concise and effective manner.

 

[Trishbot]

It doesn't help them one bit that it looks like a Tangeled clone in art style.

I never understood that complaint. "Frozen" shares a visual style with Tangled for sure, but plenty of Disney movies have done that. Like, a ton of them. I don't get why it's a problem just now all of a sudden (and the fact that Rapunzel and Flynn show up in the movie actually makes the art style seem like a cohesive whole).

And I think the claims they look like a "clone" are overblown:

 

[BehattedWanderer]

I loved the twist and the True Love gesture, and did quite like that the knee-jerk reaction of true love happening instantly when you don't know someone being the incorrect (and even presented dangerously!) reaction. That was pretty great. And, while "Let It Go" is a pretty awesome piece, the rest of the songs are a little lackluster. I mean, other than that one, it's hard to remember them. We're not talking "I'll make a man out of you" or "I can go the distance" here.

Did love the credits, too. The "views expressed do not necessarily represent" bit was exceptionally funny this time around, which is something I don't think has ever been said.

 

[DjinnFor]

Are people really so uncomfortable about sexuality that any character not proven to be straight MUST be because the character was meant to be homosexual? She didn't have a love interest because she didn't. She's 18! She has an entire off-screen "happily ever after" to potentially meet a love interest.

I don't think people would be jumping to that conclusion (metaphorical or otherwise) if it were "only" that she has no onscreen romantic interest. But when coupled with the fact that her story is cast as a coming-out narrative - she's been (literally) in a closet most of her life because of a "difference" she was born with, can't control and fears will make her ostracized, she flees her home/hometown, with the safety of distance can finally cut loose and experiment with said "difference," and by doing so becomes her true-self and concludes that her "difference" is not only okay but kind of awesome and joyous... in that context, it paints a plausible (if by no means definitive) picture IMO.

Just don't apply that line of thinking to the introductory timeskip or your head will explode with all the grimdark fridge horror. For instance:

-Anna and Elsa playing as kids
-Elsa damaging Anna's brain (and leaving a permanent mark)
-Troll king wiping Anna's memory
-Parents discouraging Elsa and shutting her away in her room

Makes you a little perturbed when you put all that into the context of homosexuality.

 

[Shjade]

Just curious: did anyone else think the Hans twist, while generally effective, was unnecessarily cruel in execution?

To clarify, when Hans has his big villain reveal moment, I found myself wondering why he was being such a jerk. Not the betrayal part - that made sense - but why he was being intentionally hurtful to boot. It was actually a little distracting; I started wondering about why the writers did things the way they did rather than just pay attention to the rest of the movie.

Why do it that way? What does it add to have him do the whole "nobody loves you anyway" thing rather than a more pragmatic "just business" type approach that his opportunistic plot suggests would be his M.O.? The only thing I can come up with is that they felt they had to make it as obvious as possible that he's A Bad Person doing A Bad Thing for the younger members of the audience, which makes sense, but I dunno. It was just sorta...puzzling.

And one other little thing that bothered me in an otherwise pretty good movie: did it seem like Elsa figured out how to rein in the cold a smidge fast at the end there? I get that she's all emotionally locked down throughout the movie and has her eyes opened to love being the answer, okay, sure, I buy that...but when you've spent the majority of your life sealing that off, you don't just "remember" how to love immediately. Give her some time to thaw out, so to speak. I dunno. Just seemed like they were rushing things.

Edit: addendum, regarding the Elsa sexuality offshoot discussion. That possibility never occurred to me during the movie or afterward until reading the idea here, but I did spend some time reflecting on how masculine Elsa is set up to be, just in terms of emotional upbringing and development. All that effort spent hiding her feelings and not wanting to hurt people, can't control her own strength, don't let people in, etc. I was mulling it over while thinking about the recent Big Picture bit re: pink isn't the problem, effeminate villains, masculine heroes, etc. Reconsidering, though, that bit in Let It Go "Don't let them know -- well, now they know," yeah, that does have sort of an out of the closet sound to it, I suppose. But then, it's supposed to: it's a pretty broad "be who you are" anthem. Sexuality's just a red letter issue at the moment, so of course that's where the conversation would lean.

 

[Darken12]

I absolutely loathe Disney for the conservative, traditional, harmful messages it sends. And then along came Frozen, a Disney movie I actually liked and that made me slightly respect Disney a bit for having the courage to do the Hans subversion and resisting the urge to pair off Elsa with a dude. I wish they would have left Kristoff as just a friend (after all, the whole "he can break the curse with his love!" plot in the ending could have also worked with Friendship Love, given that the movie was already going to incorporate Familial Love to the conception of True love), but I can't expect too much from Disney.

Part of me hopes this is the beginning of an era of progress, responsibility and self-awareness when it comes to the production of media for children, but experience tells me conservativism and tradition are not evils so easily defeated.