Let's Talk About the Ending of Frozen

[Ryan Hughes]

Long post here sorry. There has been some interesting discussion here, but I want to take up two points where I disagree with Bob.

1) Elsa is a very interesting character, thus I think it is a disservice to define her "Let it Go" sequence as merely sexual in nature. Do not get me wrong, it is a legitimate interpretation, but the sequence struck me as more genuinely and deeply cathartic and even philosophical. Now, these things certainly can relate to a person's sexuality, but we are all -as human beings- so much more than our sexuality. In the end, defining this in merely, only sexual terms may support the current issue of defining LGBT persons entirely by their own sexuality, rather than including their philosophy, spirituality, aesthetics, education, etc to give a much more complete picture of them as people. Case in point: James Baldwin, one of my favorite writers, who was a homosexual, but whose efforts in the civil rights movement and fantastic work in Literature and philosophy would be lost if we just focused on his sexuality. Elsa is this way as well; I feel she rejects Hans not because of sexuality -real or super-imposed by the audience- but because of sheer common sense and intellect.

Where I disagree with Bob is the raising of the issue of authorial intent into the discussion. I could get into a Roland Bathes-style rejection of the very concept of authorial intent, but I won't. Suffice it to say that every person has the right to see, interpret, and feel works of art as they wish, and authorial intent become moot in the face of a strong catharsis that this film could provide someone who sees it. And these differences in interpretation make for some very fun discussions, like we are having here.

2) While there may be -as some here have pointed out- a few minor hints as to Hans' true character, totaling a few frames at most, the real foreshadowing for Hans comes not from Hans himself, but from Anna. The very first scene of the film ends with Elsa begging Anna to slow down and be more careful, to which Anna ignores, resulting in a disaster that is the impetus for the entire story. Why on earth would we -myself included- think that this pattern of behavior in Anna would change just because time passed? Still within the opening Musical semi-montage, Anna talks to a painting of Joan of Arc, essentially the embodiment of recklessness, beauty, and the tragically ephemeral. Showing some sympathy with her saying: "Hang in there, Joan." So, that is two hints to Anna's -and by extension, Hans'- true nature in the first few minutes of the film.

The biggest hint though comes during Anna and Hans' declaration of love:
Anna: "We even finish each others. . .
Hans: ". . Sandwiches"
Anna: "That is what I was going to say!"

At first, I thought this was a bit of whimsy. But, at the end I realized something: Anna was lying. They have not made any sandwiches, now have they? She was going to say "sentences," but lied to facilitate the ongoing romantic mood. Anna is not a perfect princess, but a child so desperate for affection that she would lie to someone she sees as her prince charming. Her flaws as a person lead to the events of the film, but her beautiful, intense philos for her sister is what -in the end- resolves the issues of the film, and saves Elsa, Arendell and even herself. This makes her a great character, equal with her sister; flawed, but with a passion and drive that steamrolls through her mistakes and makes the audience love her none-the-less.

Also, the reveal of Hans' intentions is not a plot twist. It is a Character Twist. This is an important distinction: because mere "plot twists" often ruin characters by twisting them in extension, while twists of character tend to make the plot itself malleable. This -to me at least- is the proof positive that character is always more important than mere plot events.

So, anyway. I loved Bob's review and analysis, but I thought it was very important to bring up those two points were I disagreed.

 

[nadesico33]

Elsa going out into the wilderness, and building her Ice Palace has all the effect of a repressed person, finding themselves alone, screaming their frustration at the world, and then going back inside. "Let It Go" is supposed to be about her finding herself after years of, at least partially, self-imposed depression and repression. But what happens? She's been caged, metaphorically, most of her life, its all she know. She finally gets out, tastes freedom for the first time, and lets loose. She builds that Ice Palace, and then mentally, unconsciously says to her "I can't take this." and shuts the doors, putting her into a new cage. She just chose this one herself. Her interactions up until the final act amount to "This is my house, go away and leave me alone." Elsa still continues to try and shut everyone out for fear of hurting someone.

Also, the trolls, the lead troll simply says "An act of true love." Its everyone else that immediately assumes that it means the good old smoochie smoochie.

 

[Shjade]

The biggest hint though comes during Anna and Hans' declaration of love:
Anna: "We even finish each others. . .
Hans: ". . Sandwiches"
Anna: "That is what I was going to say!"

At first, I thought this was a bit of whimsy. But, at the end I realized something: Anna was lying. They have not made any sandwiches, now have they? She was going to say "sentences," but lied to facilitate the ongoing romantic mood. Anna is not a perfect princess, but a child so desperate for affection that she would lie to someone she sees as her prince charming. Her flaws as a person lead to the events of the film, but her beautiful, intense philos for her sister is what -in the end- resolves the issues of the film, and saves Elsa, Arendell and even herself. This makes her a great character, equal with her sister; flawed, but with a passion and drive that steamrolls through her mistakes and makes the audience love her none-the-less.

You have that backwards: Hans starts it, Anna says sandwiches, Hans claims that's what he was going to say. Which is even more damning, really.

The song title/theme itself is the big giveaway though. Sure, from Anna's perspective, love is an open door when she's been shut in all this time, but what's the problem with leaving your door open? Anybody can just walk right in.

To Hans, love is indeed an open door. That is, it's an opportunity - one door closes, another door opens.

That song's probably the most harshly cynical part of the whole movie re: what love is.

 

[Ryan Hughes]

You have that backwards: Hans starts it, Anna says sandwiches, Hans claims that's what he was going to say. Which is even more damning, really.

The song title/theme itself is the big giveaway though. Sure, from Anna's perspective, love is an open door when she's been shut in all this time, but what's the problem with leaving your door open? Anybody can just walk right in.

To Hans, love is indeed an open door. That is, it's an opportunity - one door closes, another door opens.

That song's probably the most harshly cynical part of the whole movie re: what love is.

Ah, you may very well be right, I am obviously just going from memory here. You are right though that may be more damning on the part of Hans' character. It really just goes to show the level of craft in the script. Even with some really good movies to go in academy awards season, I would actually be disappointed if this script does not get the recognition it deserves.

 

[Callate]

I finally got to see the movie. Yes, it's very good, and I appreciate the efforts to subvert the usual narrative. But I think the "twist" with Hans is somewhat weak because he's portrayed up to that point as utterly good. I don't mean that we should be having the camera linger for extra moments on him for no reason, or casting him in shadows, or having him mysteriously narrow his brow at some untoward moment, but... For pity's sake. Leading the expedition to look for Anna? Turning the palace into a soup kitchen on his own authority? Ordering people not to harm Elsa, despite effectively having regency and a fairly straight shot to the throne if she dies- and nearly everyone being in agreement at that point that her death might be for the best? I mean, he didn't even have to order her shot on sight- he just had to stand in the way and let nature take its course. He even had his "don't become the monster they think you are" moment; villains get to give out legitimate moral lessons in the heat of the moment, now?

I think the story might have been stronger (and, again, I'm not saying it wasn't strong) if either they had made him less of a paragon from the beginning or accepted that he could become either a schmuck or at least unacceptable as a love interest without necessitating him becoming an out-and-out villain. As it stands, the twist seems to come entirely out of left field, incongruous with everything we've been told and shown before.

As far as the "Elsa as a lesbian" thing goes- honestly, I find it kind of pathetic, grasping-at-straws, filling up empty spaces with wish fulfillment and agenda. The heart of the movie being in sorority rather than heterosexual meet-cute happily-ever-after ought to be enough of a progressive step without saddling the movie with subtext that just isn't there.

And, no; it isn't there. Shunning all human contact is not akin to preferring your own sex, nor is loving yourself after being taught self-loathing through isolation an experience unique to the LGBT community. Almost any teenager could relate, and I genuinely think trying to shoehorn it into that niche is downright wrong-headed.

 

[thetoddo]

More than a few critics and commentators have wondered/suggested that perhaps we're meant to "read" Elsa as being a lesbian, with her powers acting as an unsubtle metaphor for the same the way it does in the X-Men movies - she was, after all, born this way.

God I hope this wasn't the intended message cause if you take as fact that Elsa's Ice powers are a metaphor for homosexuality then the entire opening scene with the sisters "playing" gets really REALLY creepy.

I think there's enough there to have a conversation, but Disney's never going to confirm it.

 

[Azahul]

I finally got to see the movie. Yes, it's very good, and I appreciate the efforts to subvert the usual narrative. But I think the "twist" with Hans is somewhat weak because he's portrayed up to that point as utterly good. I don't mean that we should be having the camera linger for extra moments on him for no reason, or casting him in shadows, or having him mysteriously narrow his brow at some untoward moment, but... For pity's sake. Leading the expedition to look for Anna? Turning the palace into a soup kitchen on his own authority? Ordering people not to harm Elsa, despite effectively having regency and a fairly straight shot to the throne if she dies- and nearly everyone being in agreement at that point that her death might be for the best? I mean, he didn't even have to order her shot on sight- he just had to stand in the way and let nature take its course. He even had his "don't become the monster they think you are" moment; villains get to give out legitimate moral lessons in the heat of the moment, now?

At this point in time, Anna is missing. Hans needs one of the sisters alive, because they are his only claim to the throne. Everyone knows that Anna left without marrying him, it's not until she comes back that he gets the chance to spin a lie saying that they said their wedding vows. And on his own, he has even less claim to the thrown than a whole raft of the other noblemen. Until he can marry Anna, he needs everyone to think he cares for both her and her sister. Hence leading the expedition, giving orders that Elsa is not to be harmed (if word got back to Anna that her fiance had ordered her sister killed, I can't imagine his odds would be improved), and talking Elsa down. He does take a chance to try and stage an accident with the chandelier, in a way where he could not possibly be blamed (and would even be lauded for his actions even if Elsa died). There is a very clear reason for everything good he does. He isn't part of the royal family yet, and he can't drop the facade until he is.

I think the story might have been stronger (and, again, I'm not saying it wasn't strong) if either they had made him less of a paragon from the beginning or accepted that he could become either a schmuck or at least unacceptable as a love interest without necessitating him becoming an out-and-out villain. As it stands, the twist seems to come entirely out of left field, incongruous with everything we've been told and shown before.

I dunno. The twist caught me, but I was thinking for a lot of the movie that Hans was getting a damned good deal out of this given his twelve older brothers. Odds were that without this kind of marriage, he'd have lived his entire life off the generosity of an older sibling (which, it's also established, he doesn't always get on with). Once the movie was over, I was pretty comfortable with the twist and how it'd been set up.

As far as the "Elsa as a lesbian" thing goes- honestly, I find it kind of pathetic, grasping-at-straws, filling up empty spaces with wish fulfillment and agenda. The heart of the movie being in sorority rather than heterosexual meet-cute happily-ever-after ought to be enough of a progressive step without saddling the movie with subtext that just isn't there.

And, no; it isn't there. Shunning all human contact is not akin to preferring your own sex, nor is loving yourself after being taught self-loathing through isolation an experience unique to the LGBT community. Almost any teenager could relate, and I genuinely think trying to shoehorn it into that niche is downright wrong-headed.

I can see an easy enough way to make a reading of homosexuality and coming out story out of it. It's not my preferred reading, like you (and MovieBob, from the sound of it) I think the more general metaphor for being a teenager works in a far superior way. I am entirely comfortable with people using Elsa as a metaphor for the homosexual experience of being forced into a closet though.

Anyway, I saw the film myself a day or two ago. Really enjoyed it, and my approval of it has only been growing the more I think about it. That third act is just fantastic, my inner feminist spent the whole thing grinning the biggest grin imaginable.

 

[Callate]

At this point in time, Anna is missing. Hans needs one of the sisters alive, because they are his only claim to the throne. Everyone knows that Anna left without marrying him, it's not until she comes back that he gets the chance to spin a lie saying that they said their wedding vows. And on his own, he has even less claim to the thrown than a whole raft of the other noblemen. Until he can marry Anna, he needs everyone to think he cares for both her and her sister. Hence leading the expedition, giving orders that Elsa is not to be harmed (if word got back to Anna that her fiance had ordered her sister killed, I can't imagine his odds would be improved), and talking Elsa down. He does take a chance to try and stage an accident with the chandelier, in a way where he could not possibly be blamed (and would even be lauded for his actions even if Elsa died). There is a very clear reason for everything good he does. He isn't part of the royal family yet, and he can't drop the facade until he is.

But even before he concocts his story about Anna (which is also one of the most unintentionally laughable parts of the movie- they completed their wedding vows without any sort of officiant, and people just accept that?) Anna leaves him in charge of Arendelle. It was already announced before the party- by Anna, no less- that they were engaged; it's barely more of a stretch for him to say that they were secretly wed before she went off in search of her sister than the lie he ultimately weaves. There's no sense that I gathered that there's any sort of line of succession with a greater claim than he has, having been given stewardship of the kingdom. At the very least, going on a life-threatening expedition is an order of magnitude more effort than was going into going to a party and courting Anna.

I understand what you mean; I just think it could have been handled in a way that still would have been completely surprising without seeming so "out of left field". I mean, I had suspicions anyway, partly because of all the buzz that was going on about third-act twists; but even keeping an eye out with that in mind, I still didn't personally find the threads that led to that conclusion.

I dunno. The twist caught me, but I was thinking for a lot of the movie that Hans was getting a damned good deal out of this given his twelve older brothers. Odds were that without this kind of marriage, he'd have lived his entire life off the generosity of an older sibling (which, it's also established, he doesn't always get on with). Once the movie was over, I was pretty comfortable with the twist and how it'd been set up.

And that's fine; Your Mileage May Vary, as they say. It's really the only thing that bothered me (and my wife) in an otherwise exemplary and remarkable movie.

I can see an easy enough way to make a reading of homosexuality and coming out story out of it. It's not my preferred reading, like you (and MovieBob, from the sound of it) I think the more general metaphor for being a teenager works in a far superior way. I am entirely comfortable with people using Elsa as a metaphor for the homosexual experience of being forced into a closet though.

Anyway, I saw the film myself a day or two ago. Really enjoyed it, and my approval of it has only been growing the more I think about it. That third act is just fantastic, my inner feminist spent the whole thing grinning the biggest grin imaginable.

The "Elsa is homosexual" reading just seems incredibly shallow to me, to the point that if the idea had first been put forth by anti-gay "homosexual agenda" paranoids, the same people would laugh. The tiny and trivial things that make up that case aren't compelling at all, and it irks me somewhat that I've seen a few people sling "well you just assume she's straight because of your heteronormative presumptions" rhetoric at others who doubt it. One could as easily make the case that Elsa must be straight because her creation of Olaf suggests the need for a male presence in her life, or that his creation represents her secret desire for motherhood, or the casting of Idina Menzel in a role so parallel to the one she played in "Wicked", where she played a heterosexual character, must mean this character is heterosexual too.

(I'm not saying any of the above is the case. I'm just saying the arguments are no more compelling.)

I don't have any problem with anyone seeing parallels with a closeted gay character, or someone feeling that the way Elsa is presented suggests sympathy to someone in that plight; I'm just annoyed that some people would want to make that claim to the exclusion of a wider and more inclusive kind of sympathy. That, and a vague suspicion that a broad press for such an interpretation might make some higher-ups say "That's it, we're matching every female character with a male counterpart from here on out." I'm firmly of the belief that when exterior agendas start curtailing the ability of writers to make their own narrative choices, we all lose.

(And yeah, my inner feminist loves Elsa and Anna too.)

 

[Farther than stars]

There is actually one suggestion that Hans is the bad guy, because somewhere in the second act he talks about protection Arrendelle from "treason" and the Duke of Weaselton looks genuinely shocked at the suggestion. After all, no one up until that point has even hinted at treason - the Duke's main reason for exterminating Elsa being that he thinks she's a monster and therefor not considering it treason - so that was kind of a Freudian slip on Hans's part. After that bit I was well-prepared for Hans being the bad guy*, so I didn't think that this was the ending MovieBob was going to talk about.
No, the thing about the ending I thought Bob would discuss was the fact that Anna has to chose, in the end, between saving herself with love's first kiss or saving her sister. The fact that she turned her back on true love to save Elsa is a pretty big deviation from your average fairy tale in itself. It makes Kristoff pretty incidental to the story, but that's a good thing. It means that there doesn't need to be a masculine hero to save the day and ultimately it makes Anna the complete hero of the story.
But this article also had some pretty interesting analyses, although I should point out that possibly being asexual doesn't make you a lesbian; that reasoning can be pretty offensive in itself. But yeah, a good film for gender equality all round.

*Also, Shrek has thoroughly trained me in turning fairy tale tropes upside down, especially when it comes to 'bad prince charming'.

So, My friends and I were already like "What?" when Anna and that prince guy, who turns out to be the bad guy, latched on to each other pretty quickly. Yeah...getting engaged after only a couple of hours of knowing eachother? Right...I wasn't sure if we were supposed to buy into that(I mean, holy shit, I already had to try to do that in fucking Les Miserables), but when Kristoff actually kind of points out that what she did was kind of dumb, I was a bit more relieved to know that, yes, the movie also knows that what's she's doing is incredibly stupid. It wasn't like Kristoff was painted in a certain cynical light. I'd imagine that if they were going that way, Kristoff would have acted more like Eeyore. But, instead, Kristoff was pretty up-beat in his own sort of way as well.

I think this depends a lot on cultural perspective. Quickly getting engaged was not at all uncommon in Medieval Europe, especially in higher social circles. Romeo and Julliet, for instance, get engaged after only getting to know each other for three days. This trend continued well on into Victorian times, when a beautiful single woman at a ball might get a couple of marriage proposals in one evening, hence the common theme of literature from that period in which women sometimes find themselves considering multiple offers to marriage.
Of course, part of this trend was because marriage had a lot less emphasis placed on it than these days. Back then, marrying was a far more formal affair and it was partly done to bring prestige to the family. Another part was money and security of living - women didn't exactly have professions in those days - and thus marriage was much more like a contract than a romantic affair. However, the fact that Anna and Hans just 'click' would then be seen as such an extra boon that it is entirely to be expected that they would get engaged in the same evening.

 

[Farther than stars]

[...]

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.

"Bit of a fixer-upper"? That was pretty cute.

 

[TravelerSF]

About Elsa

Spoiler

Quick question: Was I the only one who felt Elsa was pushed aside for the most of the movie? I loved almost everything else about Frozen, but she was the most interesting character for me and I felt that her emotional arc could've been better explored.

It starts off pretty strong with explaining her backstory and showing the distanced, cold person she has had to become (though I still would've wanted them to spend more time on that). But after the incident and the FANTASTIC Let It Go... she's kinda stuck.

Anna gets a proper emotional finish, but I feel that Elsa never really had a change to work through all the bottled feelings she had kept inside for all the years. I kinda expected the meeting inside the ice castle to go more violent; Elsa yelling in tears at Anna about what's it been like to not even been able to hold her little sister during all these years. She has sacrificed so much, yet Anna refused to see that.

And the finale would've been perfect if Elsa would've given a better closure. Instead of "Oh yeah, Love" I expected to see her finally realize just how strongly her sister loves her. This in turn would've given her something to draw strength from, to feel more secure. After all it was FEAR that made her loose control, I imagine understanding that Anna would always, always be there for her would've helped to overcome it.

 

[VondeVon]

Elsa can't be celebrating FREEDOM from terror and parental-encouraged self-oppression? She can't just be ecstatic to no longer live in fear? It has to be about her sexual orientation, or her sexual maturity. And how DARE she not-want a true love or prince, WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER? She must secretly love WOMEN, not just be content with herself or her current situation or have, I dunno, bigger things to worry about? Like running a gorram KINGDOM?

The twist in Frozen was fantastic but the same old cliched way you and others interpret it Movie Bob, is sickening.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Elsa can't be celebrating FREEDOM from terror and parental-encouraged self-oppression? She can't just be ecstatic to no longer live in fear? It has to be about her sexual orientation, or her sexual maturity. And how DARE she not-want a true love or prince, WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER? She must secretly love WOMEN, not just be content with herself or her current situation or have, I dunno, bigger things to worry about? Like running a gorram KINGDOM?

The twist in Frozen was fantastic but the same old cliched way you and others interpret it Movie Bob, is sickening.

Um, I think you misread something. Bob said that he understood how people could think that Elsa was gay, not that he thought so himself. Also, he didn't ascribe it to her lack of a male love interest, but rather to the song "Let it Go" - which is a song about not just accepting who you are but embracing it and being proud of it. Bob, meanwhile, said that Elsa is plenty revolutionary all on her own for not needing a man than any issue with her sexuality.

So, while you may have beef with several other individuals on the internet, Bob isn't one of them. He agrees with you primarily.

That is actually one of the reasons I loved Elsa as a character. She is everything to everyone. Because her "otherness" is metaphorical - ice magic - it can be read as any type of disenfranchisement that the viewer feels - if you're gay, then Elsa is gay too; if you're asexual, then Elsa is asexual too, etc. She can represent ALL groups, not just a single one, and make Everyone feel like they have someone telling them to not only be okay with who they are but to be proud of who they are.

She's one of the most uplifting characters I have ever encountered. She is the reason that Frozen is my personal Movie of the Year (and personal Best Disney Film ever).

Edit:
Also, here's hoping that Anna and Elsa make appearances in Once Upon a Time. ^^

 

[VondeVon]

Elsa can't be celebrating FREEDOM from terror and parental-encouraged self-oppression? She can't just be ecstatic to no longer live in fear? It has to be about her sexual orientation, or her sexual maturity. And how DARE she not-want a true love or prince, WHAT'S WRONG WITH HER? She must secretly love WOMEN, not just be content with herself or her current situation or have, I dunno, bigger things to worry about? Like running a gorram KINGDOM?

The twist in Frozen was fantastic but the same old cliched way you and others interpret it Movie Bob, is sickening.

Also, he didn't ascribe it to her lack of a male love interest, but rather to the song "Let it Go" - which is a song about not just accepting who you are but embracing it and being proud of it.

Yeah, but he's still linking it to an issue of sexuality. I argue that such a link is both unnecessary and misleading.

I think what really bugged me wasn't the implication (not by MB) that she might be gay but that her big moment of release from constant fear (of self, for others) and the tension of self-control was reduced to metaphors of sexual release and coming of age (this was MB). This was a woman who had been raised to be Queen her whole life. This was a big sister who was already trying to reign in her little sister even as kids. This was a person who didn't need to experience romantic love in order to know that a few hours at a party wasn't marriage material. It wasn't a movie cliche of 'uptight woman sexualises herself and thus becomes confident (or confidence equals sexualised)' the way he seemed to see it. Sashaying hips? Please. She was trudging through calf-high snow, on a mountain. We're lucky she had the breath to sing, let alone sway her hips as a sign of sexual/mental/emotional maturity.

Because her "otherness" is metaphorical - ice magic - it can be read as any type of disenfranchisement that the viewer feels - if you're gay, then Elsa is gay too; if you're asexual, then Elsa is asexual too, etc. She can represent ALL groups, not just a single one, and make Everyone feel like they have someone telling them to not only be okay with who they are but to be proud of who they are.

I suppose that is very true. And people are naturally inclined to make connections between things regardless of whether there is or isn't any actual evidence to the notion. It merely being vaguely similar to something else is enough. It's probably only (good) luck that I haven't stumbled over an argument about what the movie says about Feminism yet. -_-v

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Yeah, but he's still linking it to an issue of sexuality. I argue that such a link is both unnecessary and misleading.

but that her big moment of release from constant fear (of self, for others) and the tension of self-control was reduced to metaphors of sexual release and coming of age (this was MB).

Well, to be fair, the movie did kinda set that up. Elsa shutting herself away from Anna is very similar to what often happens between siblings when one is going through puberty while the other is not. I related particularly because the same thing happened between me and my younger sister. The whole "Do You Wanna Build a Snowman" song captured that unfortunate aspect of growing up beautifully.

So, while I do disagree with Bob's use of the term "snowgasm" - there was nothing particularly orgasmic about that scene aside from how damn good it was - I do see why his mind was on puberty since the movie already had a song that addressed sisters growing apart during puberty.

Sashaying hips? Please. She was trudging through calf-high snow, on a mountain. We're lucky she had the breath to sing, let alone sway her hips as a sign of sexual/mental/emotional maturity.

**blinks**

Not at the beginning of the song. At the end, when she's in her sexy dress and sashays across to the balcony of her brand new Ice Castle. That is certainly a sashay. And the eyebrow. Yikes.

The animation at the end of Let it Go is VERY sexually charged.

However, I took that more as Elsa feeling comfortable in her own body now. The source of her shame, of her repression, was the secrecy that held her back before. Now that she's free to express herself (whatever 'herself' is, see my previous comments about her as an avatar), she can embrace herself, be proud of herself, and flaunt herself - which, in the song, is portrayed as her putting on a sexy dress, literally letting her hair down, and strutting across a room made of ice while, yeah, swaying her hips like Jessica Rabbit. The difference being that Jessica did it for her audience - Elsa is strutting for herself.

It's probably only (good) luck that I haven't stumbled over an argument about what the movie says about Feminism yet. -_-v

Um... **raises hand**

Well, it is an incredibly feminist movie. It presents two strong, but realistic and well developed female protagonists, one of whom saves the other without any male intervention. Frozen is the most feminist movie this year.

... were you expecting something bad?

 

[VondeVon]

Yeah, but he's still linking it to an issue of sexuality. I argue that such a link is both unnecessary and misleading.

but that her big moment of release from constant fear (of self, for others) and the tension of self-control was reduced to metaphors of sexual release and coming of age (this was MB).

Well, to be fair, the movie did kinda set that up. Elsa shutting herself away from Anna is very similar to what often happens between siblings when one is going through puberty while the other is not. I related particularly because the same thing happened between me and my younger sister. The whole "Do You Wanna Build a Snowman" song captured that unfortunate aspect of growing up beautifully.

Well a) They were too young for puberty at the start of it and b) I didn't have that sort of experience at all. I definitely think this is a scenario of people seeing what they expect to, whatever it is.

Sashaying hips? Please. She was trudging through calf-high snow, on a mountain. We're lucky she had the breath to sing, let alone sway her hips as a sign of sexual/mental/emotional maturity.

**blinks**

Not at the beginning of the song. At the end, when she's in her sexy dress and sashays across to the balcony of her brand new Ice Castle. That is certainly a sashay. And the eyebrow. Yikes.

The animation at the end of Let it Go is VERY sexually charged.

However, I took that more as Elsa feeling comfortable in her own body now. The source of her shame, of her repression, was the secrecy that held her back before. Now that she's free to express herself (whatever 'herself' is, see my previous comments about her as an avatar), she can embrace herself, be proud of herself, and flaunt herself - which, in the song, is portrayed as her putting on a sexy dress, literally letting her hair down, and strutting across a room made of ice while, yeah, swaying her hips like Jessica Rabbit. The difference being that Jessica did it for her audience - Elsa is strutting for herself.

See, I just don't agree at all. I don't see anything sexual. I went and looked at the scene again and the one three-second scene right at the end where her hips sway widest? She's just striding with power and purpose. Wide hips plus a tiny waist equals a more visual movement than with a normal person. And sexy dress? Because of the slit maybe? (Which allows her a longer stride, by the way. I looked at her legs, she wasn't doing a Jessica Rabbit 'walking a line' walk, but a normal 'space between legs' stride.)
She barely shows more skin by her clavicle and a flash of leg and is otherwise just as clothed as she was before. This dress allows more freedom of movement and doesn't press in around her throat like the last one - 'sexy', as in designed to enhance her sex appeal, is crazy considering she's alone in the mountain and plans to stay that way. And her hair - as someone who has worn a style just like it, the relief that comes from yanking out the pins and letting it down is just elemental. If other people find that sexy... that's on them.

And the eyebrow? You see something sensual or 'come hither' but all I see is a 'fuck you, world!'

Now, I can admit that she was probably designed to be beautiful (yanking her hair free like that conveniently fell into a very nice style) but 'sexual' is very much in the eye of the beholder I think.

I don't know why I feel so strongly about it.
I guess 'sexy' is linked to approval of the witness, making Elsa's freedom and relief and empowerment somehow dis-empowering as she replaces 'good girl, conceal' with 'good girl, be sexually desirable'. It's like a reflection of how women have been pressured and/or encouraged to be either demure and sexually restrained or outgoing and sexually active - one or the other, with sexual activity especially being trumpeted as a sign of power when really it serves the other and blah blah blah.

It's like... bringing sex appeal into it at all, into the story of her personal growth and fear and freedom and choices and mistakes etc... it obscures everything else. It takes the focus away from her, who she elementally is and her story as a person... into something superficial and linked to the audience's lower desires.

It's probably only (good) luck that I haven't stumbled over an argument about what the movie says about Feminism yet. -_-v

Um... **raises hand**

Well, it is an incredibly feminist movie. It presents two strong, but realistic and well developed female protagonists, one of whom saves the other without any male intervention. Frozen is the most feminist movie this year.

... were you expecting something bad?

When it comes to Feminism? Always. People get so twisted up by it.

I agree that both characters were strong and flawed in different ways. Buuut there'll be people arguing that Anna falling for Kristoff is reinforcing that women need a man, or that women are foolish and take the slightest bit of affection as love (and Kristoff really did BARELY give her the minimum interaction necessary to just be friends - and all it took was an ignorant 'he must really love you to leave you behind' and she's sold) or that women rush into marriage with the first guy to pay them attention (unless you're a frigid single woman, who just needs the right guy or circumstances to unwind them into sexual creatures), or that it's okay for guys to be hulking and grotty but women should be beautiful and delicate(I remember gawking at the comparison between Anna and Kristoff's feet size), OR that empowerment = sexy....

I'm sure I'm missing all sorts of arguments people can/are have(ing now). Exhausting.

At the end of the day, to me, it's a story about two people, gender unimportant.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Well a) They were too young for puberty at the start of it

It's a metaphor. Elsa is going through "a change" and doesn't want to play with her little sister anymore. They're both also too old at the end, but that's the thing, metaphors don't need to be exact.

and b) I didn't have that sort of experience at all. I definitely think this is a scenario of people seeing what they expect to, whatever it is.

Oh, I'm sure. But that's almost always the case when interpreting fiction. Still, the idea of siblings growing apart is a fairly universal issue - it happens to a lot of people.

See, I just don't agree at all. I don't see anything sexual. I went and looked at the scene again and the one three-second scene right at the end where her hips sway widest? She's just striding with power and purpose.

Yup. And how is that not sexy?

And sexy dress? Because of the slit maybe?

No, not the slit. The shiny. It's so pretty!

... I got a friend who runs an Esty sight to sew me up a custom one of those. It's being adjusted because she got a little overly enthusiastic and I'm not actually a Disney princess, but it is AMAZINGLY fucking sexy.

'sexy', as in designed to enhance her sex appeal, is crazy considering she's alone in the mountain and plans to stay that way.

Only if you assume that the only reason to look sexy is to do so for someone else. Sometimes a girl just wants to rock an awesome dress. ^^

And her hair - as someone who has worn a style just like it, the relief that comes from yanking out the pins and letting it down is just elemental.

Yes, true, but it's all of a piece. It's the deconstruction of the tightly wound, repressed Elsa and the rebirth of the sashaying (such a great word) Elsa who wears her hair down. "Let your hair down" is, after all, a term for being relaxed.

And the eyebrow? You see something sensual or 'come hither' but all I see is a 'fuck you, world!'

As with her stride earlier, how is "fuck you world!" not sexy?

Besides, I didn't get "fuck you world" - I got something more teasing out of it. She does the eyebrow thing on the words "the cold never bothered me anyway," suggesting that the eyebrow is suggesting that the cold would bother others (either because her castle is really damn cold or because she's referencing the reactions her subjects and guests had to her ice magic). So, for me, it was more "you want to be here in this place that's mine? you better be able to handle the cold" - or, to put it simply, "this place here - it's MINE". Not hating the world - taking possession of her place in it.

I guess 'sexy' is linked to approval of the witness, making Elsa's freedom and relief and empowerment somehow dis-empowering as she replaces 'good girl, conceal' with 'good girl, be sexually desirable'. It's like a reflection of how women have been pressured and/or encouraged to be either demure and sexually restrained or outgoing and sexually active - one or the other, with sexual activity especially being trumpeted as a sign of power when really it serves the other and blah blah blah.

It's like... bringing sex appeal into it at all, into the story of her personal growth and fear and freedom and choices and mistakes etc... it obscures everything else. It takes the focus away from her, who she elementally is and her story as a person... into something superficial and linked to the audience's lower desires.

I can see where you're coming from, but that assumes that the sexiness can't be for her. That she can't be sexy for the sake of being sexy. Or, another point - she's had to cover her body up for years. While hiding her magic (which she was shamed by her parents over), she also had to cover her arms and hands constantly, which for me echoed body shame issues. Now, here, in this cold place, she can be free of her gloves, free of being covered up, dress as she likes, and - for the first time ever - BE sexy. She couldn't be sexy back home - she might attract a partner and then freeze that partner to death. But here, alone, she can finally stop being ashamed of her cold-cursed body and sashay about being sexy if she wants to. Sure, there's no one there but her to see it (reflected in the ice walls), but who cares?

So yeah - sexy doesn't mean sexy for anyone else. Elsa can be sexy for herself, just for the freedom to be sexy and the joy of being sexy.

When it comes to Feminism? Always. People get so twisted up by it.

Okay, I'll give you that one. There was this one guy I overheard as I was leaving the theater after watching Frozen for the second time who was talking about the movie "promoting violence against men" - because Anna punched the Prince who TRIED TO MURDER HER. I had to work very hard not to turn around and either ask him "what the fuck?" or possibly quote Mal Reynolds at him ("If someone tries to kill you, you kill 'em right back!").

So yeah, I'll give you that one.

OR that empowerment = sexy....

Well, I do tend to find empowerment pretty sexy... not sure how that's anti-feminist... but perhaps it is best not to open that particular can of worms this fine evening.

I'm sure I'm missing all sorts of arguments people can/are have(ing now). Exhausting.

Oh, probably. ... fuck em. We're having a nice conversation right here. ^^

At the end of the day, to me, it's a story about two people, gender unimportant.

For you, perhaps.

I'm fucking psyched that this is a Disney film about two women and their feelings. A Princess saving the Queen? That is like my childhood fantasies come to life.

If Anna was Elsa's brother instead of her sister, I don't think it would have worked as well for me. I don't think it would have moved me as much, or have dug so deep into my childhood yearnings for strong female characters who didn't have to be Xena (not that I didn't love the fuck of out of Xena: Warrior Princess, but even Gabby eventually turned into a combat badass - I loved that Frozen could make Anna the hero without making her a deadly combatant).

It's late and I'm almost certainly babbling by this point. I look forward to your reply. Goodnight!

 

[nutmegmeg]

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.

Yeah, looking at it from that angle, I can see how people might come to the conclusion that she's meant to be a metaphor for homosexuality. If nothing else, it's definitely a better excuse than what I thought was leading people to jump to that conclusion.

What I don't understand is why her problems have to be a metaphor for one thing. It's a very basic concept: She feels different and doesn't want people to know that she's different. Why do we have to pin it to being homosexual when there are so many other things that could make someone feel isolated from others and fearful? I feel like pinning it to just homosexuality really takes away from what a broad message it really is. Since people don't really get magic ice powers (that we know of...) the movie isn't trying to teach children that they shouldn't be afraid of their abnormal magical powers. It's just teaching a general message about being different and that it's okay.

 

[WhiteTigerShiro]

What I don't understand is why her problems have to be a metaphor for one thing. It's a very basic concept: She feels different and doesn't want people to know that she's different. Why do we have to pin it to being homosexual when there are so many other things that could make someone feel isolated from others and fearful? I feel like pinning it to just homosexuality really takes away from what a broad message it really is. Since people don't really get magic ice powers (that we know of...) the movie isn't trying to teach children that they shouldn't be afraid of their abnormal magical powers. It's just teaching a general message about being different and that it's okay.

Yeah, that's kinda the conclusion I ended-up siding towards as I continued to think about it; and really it's the more probable reasoning behind her story. I think it's safe to say that Disney denies her being a metaphor for homosexuality, less because it's too controversial for them to openly admit to, and more because she's just a general metaphor for anyone who is made to feel ashamed of who they are. Heck, if I wanted, I could easily explain how she's a metaphor for being a gamer; something that I personally was raised to feel like I should try and hide from people (especially since I live in a very sports-centric state).