Jump to content

Melvin Frohike

Free Account+
  • Posts

    688
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,741 profile views

Melvin Frohike's Achievements

Sleeper Hit

Sleeper Hit (5/10)

824

Reputation

  1. Huh? What in the world is a "winter movie"?! I seem to be the only one who doesn't get it. Do some contend that the real-life temperature outside of the theater has to match the general temperature of the setting of a movie in order for it to be successful? This seems like an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence. I can imagine holiday-themed movies having some correlation in regard to timing, whether that is actually true or not, or maybe a movie that is about a particular season as its main theme, but Frozen isn't that. It gets cold in the movie, but it takes place during the summer with all of the characters wishing for the return of normal summer temperatures (like much of the audience themselves would in the dead of winter)--hardly a winter-oriented movie. Much of the movie takes place during summer with normal temperatures (Anna even mentions how hot it is--twice), so is the contention here that these parts, which include the ending, just don't work for a winter release? This hypothesis not only requires extraordinary evidence to prove any validity, but also to demonstrate its relevance to the movies being discussed. Its relevance to Frozen is highly questionable as it is, so imagine Frozen II, which takes place during the fall and does not have magically-induced winter temperatures.
  2. The tools Pixar and WDAS use are capable of rendering CGI that is just as photorealistic as any special effects studio can make. The question is how those tools are used, what data they are given, and what additional processes are applied. For example, the background environment in Tangled actually started out as too photorealistic for the directors, so special shaders and other plugins were developed to give the movie a more fantastical rather than literally realistic appearance. For Frozen they used more paintings and went light on shading, depending on the scene, which gives this movie a flatter, more "graphic" look. They could have made it photorealistic by using real textures from real life and full rendering, but that was not what they were shooting for. Frozen II carries over the same style, except that with more time and resources available they were able to make the environment more detailed than before. Maybe they went overboard in some scenes, but their intention was not strict photorealism; it is also possible that they chose to make certain scenes photorealistic to deliberately make the characters look out of place as an artistic choice. For instance, it's kind of creepy and disconcerting to see Elsa on that beach, and that might well have been the directors' intention. It's not about "good" or "bad," it's about the goals and choices of the filmmakers. If you used photographs of real leaves and rocks as textures, then the CGI is going to look a lot more photorealistic than if you used hand-painted art like WDAS very often do. It actually takes more work, talent, and artistry to make CGI visually rich but non-photorealistic, while anyone can easily photograph real-life textures and use those. What can be good or bad are the artistic choices of the directors. Photorealism was obviously the right choice for the fake The Lion King since fake (but realistic-looking) live action was their goal, but arguably the wrong choice was made for The Good Dinosaur and Toy Story 4. Both Pixar and WDAS are capable of making photorealistic or non-photorealistic CGI, but it's up to the director(s) to decide what they want for each movie. For example, Pete Docter went quite cartoony for Inside Out, not because Pixar couldn't make it photorealistic but because cartoony was what he wanted. I'll tell you one thing that Pixar and especially (in my opinion) WDAS can do that the animators on the fake The Lion King probably couldn't do: really good character animation (either that or they weren't allowed to do their best).
  3. While this franchise may be somewhat bold in some ways, I don't think Disney are at the point where they'd actually permanently kill off one of their princess characters. Maybe someday it will be something they'd consider, given the right story and real-life circumstances for it, but almost certainly not just yet, I'd say (and probably not for a long time). If you mean the MPAA rating, it's going to be PG, either way. That's simply what the movie will get, and there is no sense to these ratings that I can discern. The movie is from Disney Animation, so it automatically gets a PG these days, while in the 1990s it would have gotten a G rating seemingly regardless of content. Walt Disney stuck Snow White in a glass coffin, but that movie got a G rating later on, too. Maybe nowadays it would get a PG. Anyway, in Frozen II apparently there will be an issue of potential separation based on what Elsa learns on her quest, but I don't think anyone is going to die. You never know, though. Elsa and Anna are pretty safe, but who knows about Olaf....
  4. It probably won't be huge or even large in Latin America. Being a first sequel, it will likely grow some in terms of admissions, but with exchange rates being what they are today, it may either slightly grow or drop from the original in this region. I expect significant growth in Europe and China, though. There was never any indication whatsoever that Elsa would be involved romantically with a female character. Some highly vocal people were calling for it and trying to pressure the directors into doing it, but it was never something they seriously considered, much less promised, as far as I'm aware. If there was any hype, it was entirely created in the public/media imagination. Fake news, anyone?
  5. I think the situation has changed quite a bit for this franchise as far as China is concerned, at least based on what I've heard about it becoming far more well known in this country and reportedly fairly popular sometime after the original movie's run. Take this for the unsubstantiated rumor/anecdote that it is, but it could be true. This market has opened up more to western movies, as well, since that time. If the sequel happens to gross a similar amount, then that would be a coincidence, I believe. While that has been true thus far regarding China specifically, Frozen did not appear to underperform in Japan and South Korea, so it's not so much about western versus eastern, but what China happens to prefer. Frozen II may not break any box office records in China, but significantly outperforming the original movie in this market seems plausible. If it does, then the question is whether that will be enough to offset the significant drop in Japan (typical even for first sequels), which is practically assured.
  6. A lot of people do (falsely) think that, yet CinemaScore pegged Frozen's DOM female-male split at 57-43, which is well balanced among female-led movies for this market, and better balanced than many of Marvel's movies, which have often skewed more strongly male than Frozen skewed female. If 80% of its audience had been female, then you might have had a point regarding the DOM market. As for Latin America, I don't know what the audience gender split was, but even if we assume that the original movie skewed far more female than in the DOM, could its numbers not still grow from what they had been? Today's exchange rates would work against that, but at least in admissions couldn't it grow, or does that only happen for movies that are perceived to be masculine? As for hating on "love" it's kind of a sad statement if men in some cultures really hate on that and think it's not for them. I consider myself a very masculine man who has mostly so-called "conservative" views (yep, I shoot guns and everything), and I think that love for family has nothing to do with gender. As you might expect, I generally can't stand romantic comedies, but that's a different sort of thing, and I find the kind of romance in Disney animated features and, for that matter, Titanic quite acceptable. I think the real problem is that people tend to be prejudiced against things they really know nothing about, and immature about subjects like love of all types. A fair number of the haters I've seen are women. Most of them were driven crazy by the viral songs of Titanic and Frozen, or at least that's what they say. Frankly, what I'm sick of hearing is how sick these people are of these songs! They must listen to a lot of radio broadcasts or something, because I never heard either "My Heart Will Go On" (which was just in the credits anyway) or "Let It Go" all that many times back in the day. Wouldn't this help some, though? Why didn't The Incredibles do anywhere close to Incredibles 2 numbers DOM? It's because the latter was an anticipated sequel, of course. Couldn't Frozen II likewise grow in DOM, especially since the ad campaign has succeeded in changing the perceived image of the franchise? Completely? Couldn't the same story with only minor differences have been told with male protagonists? Elsa and Anna were never super-girly girls doing super-girly things. A few things would change, undoubtedly, but I think the story essentially would have been the same. That's Pixar, however, and of course they always feel the most comfortable with male protagonists, given their internal culture. They don't seem to know what to do with female characters, except perhaps for Jessie, but she's a tomboy anyway. Is anyone going to suggest that Onward will be more successful DOM because of the gender of its protagonists? Just from what I know (and have confirmed), Frozen II should be a far superior movie to Chicken Little, even if they were to royally screw up everything else. I think someone must be kidding. Frozen II will be big in Japan for sure, but the drop from the original might possibly be quite big, too. Frozen was a true phenomenon there that will be difficult to match at the box office (especially since sequels tend to drop in Japan in general), while in the DOM market I think it could have done better, and WDAS appear to have made some choices that will give the sequel a decent chance to grow from the original at the box office. As for South Korea, I don't know because I think its phenomenal success there had a lot to do with its songs, and this aspect might be difficult to replicate. They're really quite finicky about western animation over there, so it is very difficult to predict. It sure would help to know how the trailers are being received. If the Koreans would most like a rehash of the original movie, then they aren't going to get it. The sequel will be more like the original than we've been shown thus far, but they don't know that. As impactful but not nearly as viral and overplayed would be the ideal scenario. Personally, I completely agree with you, but in being forced to make a sequel they had never intended to make, the directors have chosen for their sequel concept the one thing that seemingly the vast majority of people have been wanting to know: why Elsa has cryokinetic powers. I'm perfectly happy with having no explanation whatsoever (she was simply born with them, like Harry Potter) and from a story point of view would rather not have an explanation, but I'm forced to admit three things: 1) many people really want to know about the origins of Elsa's powers, 2) if this were real life then Elsa would certainly also want to know (a natural story progression), and 3) the particular choices the directors have made in going this route are not only very good in and of themselves but I think are very good for the box office at the same time. The directors are not giving the audience more of what they think the audience want (i.e. a futile rehash scenario fueled by the directors' own egos), they're giving the audience what they really, actually want, and in an organic way that justifies making Elsa into a freaking superhero! Additionally, it's part-prequel and part-sequel all at once, covering all of the bases. If they and WDAS can nail the story and emotions and all that, which they tend to be rather good at, then I really have no idea what Frozen II may be capable of. No, I'm not in the $2B WW camp, but it could beat the original DOM and WW, and maybe it could do so handily.
  7. Does it stand to reason at all that only Frozen II could actually surpass said record still held by the original movie? One animated sequel of an original animated feature that grossed much less almost did. Ah, but that one had superheroes, and superheroes are still hot right now. The only thing that could beat that sequel and the original Frozen would be a movie with a Disney princess who also happens to be a superpowered superhero. Say, WDAS should make a movie like that, but I doubt they're smart enough. Domestically, I thought that Frozen underperformed for such a phenomenon. I still see numerous people who are proud that they've never seen the original movie (as a result of the severe backlash). Did Frozen do as well as it did at the domestic box office only because it became such a cultural phenomenon, in spite of it, or some of both? By the way, I have also seen a bunch of these people (here and there online in large venues such as YouTube) become interested because of the sequel's trailers; some of them even finally watched the original movie, and the response has generally been positive in such cases. The sequel's trailers are apparently helping the franchise as a whole shake off some of the backlash and stigma against it. A 4+ OW multiplier is nothing for a WDAS movie. OK, this one might open extra-big, but the original had a 6 multiplier. Frozen underperformed in Latin America for some reason, leaving room for growth in a region that if I remember correctly tends to favor animated sequels growing, in general. I don't know if it can do that, but the original's run in China seemed to be leggy when it was abruptly cut short. I doubt this will happen to the sequel, and I expect it to grow significantly in China, in any case. I can't see that happening, but China could potentially more than make up for this. Well, that leaves plenty of room for growth, then, and in Europe animated sequels commonly seem to grow from the originals. You can't have it both ways--Frozen II dropping or not growing much whether Frozen did super-well in a particular region or not. It almost certainly will not have a song as viral as "Let It Go" (such songs are few and far between), but would this really be a net negative? Many people think that Frozen has too many songs, and therefore feels forced in this respect. Imagine trading half of the songs (keeping only the strongest, most essential and relevant ones) and replacing them with action scenes. I bet there will be a sizable net gain, and hopefully no undeserved backlash from a song going viral this time. Now imagine Frozen II having an ad campaign that highly impresses the public while showing us nearly nothing. Imagine the story being really surprising once again (I know it's nothing like what most people expect right now, at least), and the action and drama (that people have responded so positively to) being way more intense than what we've been shown so far (at times). Some of this we don't have to imagine, and the rest is not hard to imagine.
  8. There are definite reasons for all of this, I believe. First of all, animation is a bit different in the sense that usually an old-school type of studio system is used, in which there is great continuity of staff between movies, along with an unusual (for movies in general) level of collaboration within each studio (even between the various directors in some cases). This comes straight from how animation was produced since very early on (it's just about as old as live-action filming, at least in short form), through the processes that Walt Disney and his staff at WDAS (their current name) put in place, and then from there it was more or less emulated by every feature animation studio; in this sense, WDAS is where virtually all of the current big-budget western animated features ultimately trace their lineage from, even if their styles have become quite different. What this means is that, true or not, it seems that in animation entire studios are the authors of their movies, and this encourages people to become loyal fans of certain animation studios, which creates much more of an atmosphere of rivalry between these studios and their fans. In this forum there apparently are many fans of Pixar and/or WDAS (and a few of other animation studios), and the vast majority of them don't think much of Illumination's movies in general. With the possible exception of the original Despicable Me, they all just seem like second-rate B-movies. Many of these fans like animated features from a variety of other studios, so I think it's an honest opinion, not just automatic dislike for a competitor. Now juxtapose this with the fact that Illumination has for quite a long time now been "eating the lunches" of WDAS and Pixar at the box office, year after year, frequently ending up as the top animation studio (except when WDAS released Frozen and Pixar released Incredibles 2--both enormous blockbusters, especially for animation); and in some years Illumination even beat them both combined. I hope it's not envy that leads to hatred in these cases, and actually I don't think it is--it's a combination of honestly not thinking much of their movies in terms of quality and the strong sense that they are not deserving of the massive box office revenue they take in. One movie here or there is simply a head-scratcher, but movie after movie and year after year, this situation starts to build and become a huge annoyance! It feels like there is no justice in this case. Not that it's right to hope for Illumination to falter or fail, even because of that, but if it's an indication that the "unwashed masses" have finally come to their senses regarding this studio and their movies, then that would be a good thing as well as a relief. As for being an underdog, The Iron Giant was an underdog that didn't succeed, and a number of other movies that most animation fans in this forum like have underperformed. Few are going to root for Illumination as an underdog as long as they don't like their movies. Wishing for Illumination's demise is probably going too far, but seeing their movies earn less at the box office would be a welcome change--it feels like there is some justice after all.
  9. How about ambivalent? It kind of means the same thing, but it has three more syllables, so it's four times better! It's just like how four movies are better than three--more, more, more! Has Toy Story 5 been announced yet? Can't have too many endings, you know.
  10. Bingo! Well, Frozen actually didn't perform as well as it could or should have in China, grossing only $48 million, probably due to timing (it didn't do badly, though, considering). In the grand scheme of things, it came just a wee bit too early to catch the China train, as it were, and on a smaller scale it was released during a bad time for various reasons, and its run, which appeared to have strong legs, was abruptly cut short. Releases and schedules work differently in China, of course, and Frozen wasn't treated like a movie that had much potential, all of which had been set up before everyone realized how big it would become. Since then, however, I have heard from sources associated with Disney theme parks (including Shanghai Disneyland, of course) who claim that Frozen has become much better known and very popular in China, which obviously bodes well for Frozen II's prospects in that market. This time its theatrical release will almost certainly be set up for a potential mega-blockbuster run, and if what I've been hearing is true, then watch out! I'm sure it was the particular combination of several characteristics Frozen possesses that allowed it to "speak" to Asian cultures in general like few other western movies do. While these cultures are all unique, there are some things that are common between them, especially in the Sinosphere, which is East Asia (China, Japan, and the Korean peninsula) plus Vietnam. A movie having female protagonists doesn't mean much on its own, but having two sisters in a fairy tale involving magic that affects nature is a kind of mythology that I think Asians tend to immediately feel a familiarity with and a connection to, and thusly Frozen immediately penetrated cultural barriers. As for the songs, sure, they helped, but other WDAS movies have had wonderful songs, too, and never made much of a dent in the South Korean box office, for example, before Frozen. Interestingly, in this light, the songs had a particularly strong positive impact on the box office in South Korea, and this probably would not have happened if the movie hadn't gotten their attention first with its other characteristics. But wait, there's more. Frozen's message about the true meaning of love, along with its powerful demonstration of family love and loyalty, resonated particularly well in Asia, including South Korea where I've heard that the movie and its songs became popular in schools, as in sung by children, sometimes at the behest of teachers! I guess they were trying to get it out of the children's systems before commencing with schoolwork, but I've also heard that Koreans liked what it was teaching their children. If you're going to make an out-of-control fad out of a western movie with viral songs, then it might as well be one that is particularly culturally compatible with Asians and teaches strong morals from the perspective of your own culture. It was a win-win for everyone, and then there are other things like aesthetics. While I really don't know for a fact, it may be that Asians find Frozen and its protagonists (especially Elsa) particularly beautiful and appealing. It's just the perfect western movie for Asian (particularly East Asian) cultures--a spectacular big-budget blockbuster that they can easily and readily embrace, for once. Frozen's most amazing box office run, though, was in Japan, and while the songs weren't quite as big there (Japanese people don't like to sing so much in public), I think in addition to its Asian-friendly characteristics and the other ones that Koreans also went for, Frozen caught a certain zeitgeist with women's rights issues and hikikomori (severely isolated adolescents are a major thing in Japan) that were the topics of the day. In addition, Japanese people are more into Disney than Koreans in general, and with everything else it had going for it in Asia, this movie might as well have been one of Japan's own, but with qualities that couldn't practically be achieved in Japan because they don't make $150 million-budget movies there. Frankly, this is a no-brainer--sometimes the most blatantly obvious, in-your-face answer is the truest one. Big Hero 6 has an Asian (at least half-Asian, anyway) protagonist and is in many ways very similar to an archetypal Japanese/Asian superhero movie. WDAS were on a real Asian-compatible kick, weren't they? Good explanation, and in addition I think that in China in particular people were very impressed with the detective story. Talking animals and detective stories are of particular interest there, and WDAS combined them so smoothly and seemingly effortlessly, and with such appeal that Chinese people wish they could do the same with their animated features (China is, of course, still at an early stage in really getting into the global filmmaking business, and are learning a lot, which gives them a certain point of view). In a strange way, possibly by embracing Zootopia so fiercely they're sending a signal to their own animation filmmakers about what they want; in other words, they kind of made this movie their own. Yes, I'm comparing this scenario with how China has embraced DWA's Kung Fu Panda franchise--these particular animal movies are goals for them.
  11. WDAS movies this millennium have typically been undersold, but on the average they have the strongest legs of any set of movies from any studio (including Pixar), so they typically make up for it. The two Wreck-It Ralph movies just have relatively weak legs for WDAS movies. And by the way, easily the weakest marketing (by Disney) I've seen was for Frozen, so it's really no excuse. Each WDAS movie has to generate its own WOM, and the majority of them of late have not struggled this much. I haven't noticed the public putting any faith in the studio--each WDAS movie is a wait-and-see proposition and must be good in order to succeed. Not that the Wreck-It Ralph movies aren't good, but the public don't like them as much as the others. They sell their animated features more aggressively for sure, and one reason is that these movies--on the average, mind you--don't have the legs of WDAS movies. To be fair, Vanellope was already identified as a princess in the original movie. I do agree that the Internet concept was a bit forced for these characters, though. I think what most people wanted was an expansion of the video game universe before getting into the Internet and things like that. Maybe with multiple sequels a larger story could have unfolded by era, albeit the trap in such a concept is repeating the same plot over and over, like with the Toy Story movies. This could be avoided if one is mindful of it, though. In any case, I suspect that Rich Moore realized he'd be lucky to get just one sequel out of this franchise, so he was going to use his personal favorite Internet concept, which came too early and therefore felt forced or artificial for these characters. As for the princess thing, it was fun, but felt a bit disjointed with how some of their designs were changed while others were not. I think the designers tried to match them to the aesthetic of this universe, but some ended up looking weird. Maybe I'm the only one this bothered, but in any case it sure didn't feel like these were the real princesses, and truth be told, they weren't--they were like weird Internet avatars of the princesses. That's perfect for the Internet concept, but it felt phony at the same time. To be fair, it's easier to sell the concept when it consists primarily of bare yellow butts and random utterances of "Banana!" You really can't go wrong with that kind of concept--it's simple enough even for marketers and the public to understand. Quick, tell me what Frozen's tagline was. Exactly, it didn't even have one. It would have had one if Disney's marketers could have thought one up, but they didn't understand what they were selling, or if they did then they still didn't know how to sell it. As usual, the movie had to sell itself, as most WDAS movies typically do. Legs certainly count for the box office, and the Wreck-It Ralph movies, for whatever reasons, had weaker legs. It's not as though Pixar movies get any better marketing--they tend to be undersold, too. Disney used to regularly release WDAS movies during the summer, back in the 1990s starting with The Lion King, but I think their marketing and distribution staff consider Pixar movies stronger, and therefore better able to withstand the summer competition. Other studios simply want the kids out-of-school-crowd so they go for the summer, but WDAS movies have to stay out of Pixar's way, so they get the November releases, which, truth be told, favor movies with strong legs anyway. You're right. Although I've been trying to show that marketing wasn't completely to blame, they really messed up here. The princess scene should have been kept as a surprise; at the very least they should have showed less of it much closer to the movie's release date. Show just enough awesomeness to impress, show things that get people intrigued and asking questions that they really want answered, and don't show any more than this. Whatever you do, do not scratch a particular "itch" so thoroughly so early and let people forget! So far this is what the marketing for Frozen II, for example, has been getting right. Heh, the first "full" trailer is actually shorter than the teaser! But people are dying to know what happens in droves, and that'll get them into theaters. For the younger children, how about another short two-minute "trailer" full of intriguing charm and cuteness this time, with a dash of the cool adult stuff at the end as a reminder? I like the new marketing strategy so far, and it's too bad other WDAS movies could not have benefited from it. That and the fact that neither WDAS nor Pixar receive any government subsidies and/or tax breaks specifically designated for animation work, while the other major studios get one or both of those. For example, Illumination gets paid by France to produce their animation there, Sony is paid by Canada (probably British Columbia specifically), and Blue Sky (now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Disney) gets paid by Connecticut, while California pays WDAS and Pixar nothing. Additionally, the cost of living is very high in the Los Angeles and Bay areas, so WDAS and Pixar staffers tend to get paid more, I presume.
  12. I agree in the sense that they've both had creative slumps now, and by coincidence they more or less took turns with this. Hmmm...I don't know. From WDAS, I think Ralph Breaks the Internet definitely could have been better, and from Pixar, personally, I don't think they've been doing so great lately, outside of the box office. Maybe it's just me, but Incredibles 2 seemed routine and boring (I barely even remember what happened), and I've yet to get all the way through Coco. I know a lot of people on this board love the latter, but it seemed more like a long shopping list of cultural references thrown at me, complete with a bunch of winks at the audience, than a story that flowed naturally (i.e. really, really felt like it was made by someone not of that culture). Frankly, I enjoyed Book of Life a lot more, despite its cheesy aspects and its annoyingly in-your-face girl-power bits--it was more watchable and fun, in my opinion. And there's a Toy Story 4 now? I thought three of them were more than enough. Let me guess, the toys get separated from their kid, there is some variation of an existential crisis touched upon as they scramble to find each other and get home, and Woody has to decide where he belongs. They're good, entertaining movies--I even have the whole boxed Blu-ray set with all of the extras--but enough is enough. What is this one supposed to be about, now? I'm guessing living toys happily existing without their kids or even an adoring collector? That's just stepping into weirdness and making it harder for me to willingly suspend my disbelief (maybe partly because I'm not willing anymore!). And as for Onward, uh...yeah.... At least Frozen II is looking pretty spectacular so far, I have to admit. I would have chosen a different subject to explore, but on the bright side it looks like they're not merely trying to repeat the original movie, which is a very good sign (the original is fantastic, but trying to repeat its success would still have been a bad idea in general). Looks like there will be more sequels in WDAS' future, then. Oh well. Not between Disney and the other conglomerates right now, though. Imagine if every Disney studio were firing on all cylinders at once. Even when Lucasfilm and the Disney live-action studio make lackluster movies, they still tend to rake in money, but imagine if they made good-to-great movies. As for Marvel, I'm not a fan and think they're monstrously overrated, but I think most people consider their movies great, so I'll go along with that for the sake of this argument. That said, I do like their Captain America movies quite a bit, and think Infinity War (made by their best filmmakers) is pretty good (haven't seen Endgame yet, but expect it will be good). These guys should have made all of the Avengers movies because in my opinion the other ones frankly suck. Anyway, back on topic, I've previously posted a brief region-by-region OS analysis that predicted an increase at the box office overall for Frozen II over the original movie, but couldn't make up my mind about the DOM market. I think I've been swayed of late to expect that it will grow domestically, too. Yeah, that seems to be the consensus, and most of you probably think it's a no-brainer, but it wasn't so obvious to me because Frozen was an outsized hit for an original Disney animated feature. In cases like this, the first sequel might perform more like the second or third sequel, especially in the DOM market where sequels tend to wear thin at the box office earlier than in many or most other markets. What changed my mind, at least for now, is how successful its unexpected marketing strategy has been in getting people genuinely intrigued without quite frustrating them with the lack of information. Additionally, it has become clear that many if not most people have a very dim, negative view of the original movie, considering it a lightweight movie made for the 6-and-under crowd--happy-go-lucky, drama-free romping and singing that adults can barely tolerate. Those short films have done a lot of damage, I strongly suspect. This makes the sequel look even better in comparison since it appears, to them, to be significantly more "dark" and "adult" than the original. For example, multiple YouTube comments to that effect have received thousands of likes. The main question this raises is whether they will be disappointed once they see the movie (or maybe the first trailer targeting children) and discover that Frozen II will be a lot like the original in tonal balance. Well, they might still be impressed if they really think the original is only for toddlers and kindergarteners. For now, the marketing has had extremely positive results, so I'm predicting an increase (still thinking about how much, and more information would come in handy).
  13. I doubt this is much of a spoiler, but I'll wrap it up just in case: Probably not this, but if you watch the second teaser really closely, you'll see Correct, I think, although she was still born with it. This is similar to Rapunzel, who had an external source for her power but was born with it.
  14. Yes, precisely, my fellow bearer of the Y chromosome. These mighty, manly men of muscle and mettle, so full of machismogoric masculinity it's certifiably toxic to the feeble, pay homage here to the power of love and fear, and to the beauty and danger of ice that are embodied in the mythic tale of two Nordic goddesses--sisters who were driven apart but fought to protect each other and demonstrated love through sacrifice. Indeed there is nothing real men respect more than love for family and protecting family, and therefore no Disney animated feature is more worthy of and appropriate for our appreciation than Frozen. Plus it doesn't hurt that Elsa and Anna are super-cute...I mean, not that it's necessary or relevant, really...but it doesn't hurt....
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.