Frozen II | Nov 22 2019 | 2nd Most Profitable Movie of 2019. Disney does it again! | Documentary series coming to D+ June 26

[lorddemaxus]

Lol, I just realised Frozen 2 could be the first WDAS film I'm watching in cinemas. They were either before my time or I just wasn't interested at all to watch them (the closest I got to was Moana which I didn't watch in cinemas for some unknown reason).

[Porthos]

Frozen's run was before my time on this board, so I was wandering through the Frozen thread just now.

 

ran across this post:

 

Quote

@Heretic

 

Posted December 19, 2013

Saw this yesterday. Dinsey's back for sure.

responded immediately by this one:

Quote

@ChD

 

Posted December 19, 2013

 

The question is... for how long.

 

How long indeed.   

Edited June 16, 2019 by Porthos

[Melvin Frohike]

3 hours ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Anna and Kristoff where both really bland. The former is probably the weakest of the modern day Disney Princesses and to be honest arc wise both Tiana and Rapunzel beat her in spades.

I think that Anna learned more than Tiana and especially Rapunzel, though.  She had no clue about what love was, and her journey and arc took her through many false examples right up to the climax, and then she committed, of her own volition and in an organic manner for the character and story, the ultimate act of true love.  And the symbolism of the white streak in her hair, as it relates to this, is a nice additional touch--it's gone at the end of the movie because she finally understands that the true meaning of love is sacrifice.  And she and her sister Elsa are reunited because she finally understands the sacrifices that Elsa made out of love for others, especially Anna herself, completing the movie's main subtext of sisters who, just as in real life, had grown apart because of a difference in maturity level and found each other again as adults (based on Jennifer Lee's personal story with her own older sister).

 

Tiana and Rapunzel are two of my favorite Disney princesses/heroines, with Belle and Mulan being two of the earlier ones, but the main reason for this is that I find them highly appealing as people (each in their own way).  For instance, when I see that yearning, aching curiosity that Rapunzel has for the stars, she just totally melts my heart.  That's how I feel about her, but it doesn't mean that she has a better arc than Anna or that she is a better protagonist, and frankly I think the opposite is true.  Anna is a better protagonist than any of my favorite Disney princesses/heroines.

 

1 hour ago, Spidey Freak said:

Anna >> Rapunzel

 

Heck, Rapunzel is just a rehash of Ariel without the lover girl angle (well, that too happens in the second half and like Ariel, Rapunzel needs to be rescued by her male hero in the final act too). 

Well, it's OK to have to be rescued sometimes, as no character has to be invincible in order to be "strong" or liked.  No one doubts that Rapunzel is a pretty cool, capable gal, and Eugene needed to be rescued himself earlier, too.  As much as I love Tangled, it always bugged me that he cut her hair--taking away her magical powers--without her consent, though (especially since he could have done it immediately after she had healed him).

 

Anyway, if we must compare which girl is better at traditional boy stuff like being heroic and saving people , then Anna is probably even tougher than Rapunzel, and she was the hero of her movie, albeit she needed to be saved at times.  In the end, she saved herself, though, at the same time as she saved Elsa.

 

1 hour ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

One can argue the same about Anna.

Not exactly, and Spidey Freak made a terrific counterargument.

 

Additionally, while Anna did need to be saved at the climax and tried to reach Kristoff so that he could save her (once more), Anna ended up saving herself in yet another twist--the biggest, most meaningful one in the movie--by sacrificing her own life for Elsa.  Without anyone realizing it earlier (even the trolls), in doing so Anna had committed an act of true love.  It was never a kiss from either Hans or Kristoff that was going to save her, although it was important that she believed this at the time because it means that she knowingly and willingly gave up her own imminent rescue in order to save Elsa, making her act a heroic one.  Rapunzel sacrificed her freedom for Eugene, but that's not really equivalent, while what Anna did was directly related to her arc and what she had to learn in order to develop.

[Cap]

I like all Disney Princesses. Even if Belle is my favorite. 

[cannastop]

2 hours ago, YourMother the Edgelord said:

Aren’t you the only one?

@Jason

[Darth Lehnsherr]

I really did enjoy the sister relationship between Anna and Elsa and the ending is still really powerful. But yes Lilo and Stitch did it first which is why it's in my Top 10 WDAS films. Also I enjoyed Anna being a little more down to earth than the other Disney Princesses though I'll fully admit I have an unhealthy crush on Kristen Bell (VMars back so exciting!!)

[Maximum Avery]

11 hours ago, tribefan695 said:

Frozen fever was pretty obnoxious back then. You can call it _____envy or whatever_____, but I think people have a right to be annoyed by something when it becomes such an inescapable part of pop culture and its overenthused fans respond to pleas to take it down a notch with a dismissive "Sorry we're having fun". People want variety in their life and having to hear the same song over and over again is grating, regardless of how good it is.

 

It's also hard for me to buy that this sequel was entirely creative driven. WDA only made two sequels in their 70+ year history before WIR2, and now they've made two in two years. I'm sure Buck and Lee can make a good story out of it, but let's not pretend this wasn't influenced significantly by the ravenous fan demands.

 

 

Funny how people think by admitting/devaluing sin they are guilt free xD

 

TTVOMJ

[Melvin Frohike]

6 hours ago, TalismanRing said:

I found Elsa to be a strong concept  - great power feared and bound then unbound but a weak character.

What does it mean to be a "strong" character?  Can't there be good stories about "weak" characters who learned to be "strong," or do they always have to be paragons of strength from the start?  And can't there be good stories in which characters are "trapped" in some way and have to find their way out, or do they have to be in control at all times, unflappable, and invincible?

I think that Elsa is a character who ideally serves the movie she is in.  Frozen has a combination of two sisters who were once very close but have been forced far apart, and a grand, overarching theme of love versus fear.  In order to find their way back to one another at a similar level of understanding, Anna, who is fearless but knows nothing about love, has to learn the true meaning of love, while Elsa, who knows love but is crippled by fear, has to learn that her own fear of herself is her true enemy.  Each had different problems related to the main theme to overcome, and instead of simply being a weak person, Elsa started out as a rather confident 8-year-old with great magical powers.  She was strong, which represents her potential as well as ours, but was made weak by having one of her strengths--namely her love for others--turned into fear, her great weakness.

This happened because while still a child Elsa was made to fear her powers and herself.  She believed that she was dangerous to the touch, and this was reinforced by a crucial rule of her magic that actually, literally made her dangerous if (and only if) she feared herself (hurting others by touching them).  This is a particularly insidious and cruel vicious cycle that virtually no one, even the strongest psychologically, could overcome on their own.  For that matter, it is difficult to imagine how anyone else could help someone caught in such a trap.  By cleverly trapping a strong, powerful character in a position of utter weakness and despair, Frozen gains both a certain story tension (more involving and sympathetic for the audience) as well as a preview of this character's potential to be confident and strong, so that it doesn't simply appear out of nowhere later on.

Seems like a fantastic story setup to me.  And amazingly there was actually a way for Elsa to resolve her problem, although it took Anna apparently dying by getting turned into magical ice and then coming back to life with Elsa touching her, which finally convinced Elsa that she wasn't dangerous after all, as long as she didn't fear herself--an empowering message for anyone who has ever faced serious self-doubt or felt for any reason that they could not be their true selves.  Thus empowered, and being able to feel and express love once more, Elsa saved Arendelle (and who knows how much else) by dispelling the Eternal Winter.
 

Quote

She makes a nice ice home (with seemingly nothing of sustenance within miles)

The Ice Palace took very little time and effort to make--Elsa did it to show herself and us what she could do if she weren't trapped in one of the most fiendish vicious cycles I've ever seen in a movie.  As for sustenance, this part of the movie lasted a couple of days at the most.  She may or may not have had a long-term plan, but firstly she wasn't tied to the place because it took nothing to build, and secondly it doesn't matter because she was found before she needed to do anything anyway.

 

Or maybe like her Internet avatar in Ralph Breaks the Internet she could conjure whipped cream and such.  She performs some matter transmutation and other telekinetic feats in the movie, after all--it just wasn't emphasized, but for all we know she could conjure all types of things, possibly including food.  Whatever.  Is it really that important?

 

Quote

and has a key anthem but otherwise she's passive.

"Let It Go" serves several purposes, but if you think about it, for the most part it is purposely subverted.  As for being passive, what could she have done?  Touched perfectly healthy people in an attempt to prove that she wasn't dangerous?  Her fear of doing so would have made her dangerous, and therefore this would have backfired, potentially causing grievous injuries or death.

 

Quote

She hides, runs away and hides  some more until Anna seeks her out and pushes the issue - hard.    Anna is the one that takes risks, yes she makes mistakes but she pursues and risks her life.

Anna doing so was one of the problems.  She was fearless to a fault, and the harder she pushed matters, the greater danger she was in.  Fearing that Anna would get hurt or killed because she was so pushy and grabby, Elsa had no choice but to retreat into exile.  If Anna had touched Elsa's skin at any time, she might have gotten her hands frozen off or worse, and Elsa wasn't going to take that risk with Anna.  Like I said, Elsa's love--normally a strength--had become her weakness.

 

I'm not blaming Anna (nor does Elsa blame her), but there was an issue with some of her traits that made it impossible for Elsa and her to communicate for long.  And of course Anna's pushiness ultimately led to the movie's resolution, but not before Elsa accidentally blasted her in the heart, dooming her to freeze into a magical ice statue.  We can't blame Elsa for wanting to avoid that, as there was no way she could have known that their problems would be resolved by taking that path.

 

Quote

In the end Elsa come through for her sister and people but it's at almost the last moment.

Of course, Elsa saving Arendelle had to happen after her problem was resolved--nothing else would have made sense in terms of story.  If you mean just being there for Anna and her people, Elsa tried to do that at the coronation party, but you saw how that ended.  Anna actually grabbed her glove!  If she had gotten too close, put just a little self-fear into Elsa, and touched her, then Anna might well have died right there!  It's no wonder that Elsa freaked out.  Earnestly put yourself in her place.  She had to get out of there, and fast.  Elsa tried, but Anna wasn't going to give it time and find out how to make everything work out for them both.  She had to force everything--including an engagement--and wouldn't listen.  Elsa must have been hoping that at 18 now Anna had grown out of this behavior, but she hadn't.

 

Quote

Neither though are among the top tier female protagonists in WDAS.

I for one think they are, and this is one reason Frozen is in the top tier of Disney animated features.

 

Quote

They aren't even the best sisters - that's Lilo and Nani.

Well, Lilo and Nani got to be sisters who lived with each other rather than being separated (although there was a threat of separation, it didn't happen when both were very young), while Elsa and Anna got to portray a different aspect of sisterhood that is one of the main subtexts of Frozen: sisters who grew apart and reunited years later when they were both at a more similar maturity level (that's what the white streak in Anna's hair and its later absence symbolized).  This was based on writer-director Jennifer Lee's real-life relationship with her older sister.

 

It's too bad that you think they are inferior sisters, but this sort of thing does happen in real life, and in this case was based on a personal story.  Although they are very different types of sister stories, I happen to think the way Frozen handled things was far more dramatic, moving, and compelling than what was done in Lilo & Stitch, although the latter was nicely believable.  Each served its purpose in the larger story it was helping to tell.

Edited June 17, 2019 by Melvin Frohike

[cannastop]

5 hours ago, lorddemaxus said:

Lol, I just realised Frozen 2 could be the first WDAS film I'm watching in cinemas. They were either before my time or I just wasn't interested at all to watch them (the closest I got to was Moana which I didn't watch in cinemas for some unknown reason).

Big Hero 6

Zootopia

Before your time.

 

Damn I'm old.

[lorddemaxus]

20 minutes ago, cannastop said:

Big Hero 6

Zootopia

Before your time.

 

Damn I'm old.

Didn't care for either of them. Didn't even like Big Hero 6 when I ended up watching it.

[Melvin Frohike]

7 hours ago, Spidey Freak said:

LMAO this revisionist history when you were throwing shade at the movie since Week 1 of its release when it was still far from becoming a phenom and there were barely any stans.

Whoa, someone just got pwned!   And all that utter tripe about Frozen supposedly being too girly, and would have weaker legs than Tangled as a result--hilarious! 🤣  In reality (and hindsight, to be fair), Frozen's DOM male/female balance was comparable to that of the Hunger Games series, which for a female-led movie is among the best--a bit better than Tangled and Maleficent, which in turn are better than the vast majority of female-led movies.  It's also better balanced than Marvel's MCU movies, which skew male more heavily, on the average.  Boys and men like Frozen just fine, thank you very much.  And Frozen's legs were far stronger than Tangled's legs, which were very strong themselves.

[Royce]

34 minutes ago, Melvin Frohike said:

Whoa, someone just got pwned!   And all that utter tripe about Frozen supposedly being too girly, and would have weaker legs than Tangled as a result--hilarious! 🤣  In reality (and hindsight, to be fair), Frozen's DOM male/female balance was comparable to that of the Hunger Games series, which for a female-led movie is among the best--a bit better than Tangled and Maleficent, which in turn are better than the vast majority of female-led movies.  It's also better balanced than Marvel's MCU movies, which skew male more heavily, on the average.  Boys and men like Frozen just fine, thank you very much.  And Frozen's legs were far stronger than Tangled's legs, which were very strong themselves.

I mean, the opening scene alone features the manliest Disney song since "I'll Make a Man Out of You"

 

 

[Melvin Frohike]

13 hours ago, Royce said:

I mean, the opening scene alone features the manliest Disney song since "I'll Make a Man Out of You"

 

 

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....

[shayhiri]

On 6/16/2019 at 11:18 PM, lorddemaxus said:

Lol, I just realised Frozen 2 could be the first WDAS film I'm watching in cinemas. They were either before my time or I just wasn't interested at all to watch them (the closest I got to was Moana which I didn't watch in cinemas for some unknown reason).

 

Wow, so you are a noob then.

 

Make sure to watch them from now on, they are infinitely better than most Pixar, so you'll gain a needed perspective.

[FrozenUnicorn]

35 minutes ago, shayhiri said:

 

Wow, so you are a noob then.

 

Make sure to watch them from now on, they are infinitely better than most Pixar, so you'll gain a needed perspective.

Funny thing is, I feel like for a while there was a bit of a sesaw between the two in terms of quality.

 

WDAS had the Renaissance when Pixar was starting out 

Afterwards WDAS had a slump period (though in that slump period was The Emperor's New Groove which is one of my all-time favorite Disney movies), while Pixar put out hit after hit. 

Then Pixar's quality dipped while WDAS bounced back.

 

And now both seem to be putting out good-to-great movies. 

 

Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.

[Maximum Avery]

26 minutes ago, FrozenUnicorn said:

Funny thing is, I feel like for a while there was a bit of a sesaw between the two in terms of quality.

 

WDAS had the Renaissance when Pixar was starting out 

Afterwards WDAS had a slump period (though in that slump period was ____The Emperor's New Groove____ which is one of my all-time favorite Disney movies), while Pixar put out hit after hit. 

Then Pixar's quality dipped while WDAS bounced back.

 

And now both seem to be putting out good-to-great movies. 

 

Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.

Kronk and his sneaking tihihihi^^ or shouder dualities ^^ priceless 

 

TTVOMJ

Edited June 17, 2019 by Maximum Avery
Typos

[Melvin Frohike]

On 6/11/2019 at 6:58 AM, FrozenUnicorn said:

In the first one Anna was 18 and Elsa was 21. Not sure how much time has passed in the sequel.

I doubt this is much of a spoiler, but I'll wrap it up just in case:

Spoiler

There is a time jump of 3 years between the original movie and the sequel, so Anna will be 21 (old enough to drink gløgg in California now) and Elsa will be 24 (old maid--the next Elizabeth I for sure).

 

 

On 6/11/2019 at 6:53 AM, CoolioD1 said:

anna kills elsa to save everyone from being frozen confirmed. and then errr... olaf becomes king.

Probably not this, but if you watch the second teaser really closely, you'll see

Spoiler

Elsa on her knees far in the background struggling to get up, Anna in the foreground watching her and seeming to want to go to her, and Kristoff on Sven nixing that course of action by grabbing Anna and taking her away.  Apparently, Kristoff will do anything to protect Anna, even keep her away from her own sister.  There may be a conflict, but will it be between Kristoff and Elsa or Kristoff and Anna?

 

 

On 6/10/2019 at 9:17 PM, catlover said:

More like, "Why was Elsa given a power?"

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.

[catlover]

3 hours ago, Melvin Frohike said:

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.

Well, I was just translating what's written on that Japanese poster. It literally says "Why was Elsa given a power?". The verb used in that sentence is "give" in a passive form, not "have". So I was just correcting the previous poster, didn't mean anything else.

 

But yeah, maybe the question in that poster is a clue that someone or something gave Elsa the power for a reason, or to serve some purposes.

[Melvin Frohike]

 

On 6/17/2019 at 4:29 PM, FrozenUnicorn said:

Funny thing is, I feel like for a while there was a bit of a sesaw between the two in terms of quality.

I agree in the sense that they've both had creative slumps now, and by coincidence they more or less took turns with this.

 

Quote

WDAS had the Renaissance when Pixar was starting out 

Afterwards WDAS had a slump period (though in that slump period was The Emperor's New Groove which is one of my all-time favorite Disney movies), while Pixar put out hit after hit. 

Then Pixar's quality dipped while WDAS bounced back.

 

And now both seem to be putting out good-to-great movies. 

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.

 

Quote

Perfectly balanced, as all things should be.

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).

Edited June 21, 2019 by Melvin Frohike

[BK007]

Frozen 2 trailer looks epic. Well, the teaser did as well, so happy that it continues.