Skip to main content

Frozen II Thaws and Melts


Since its’ announcement I was skeptical about Frozen 2. Not only because Disney used to be unique among animation studios in not producing theatrical sequels, but also because the story of Frozen was nicely wrapped up, the character and thematic arcs complete, and the world not quite alluring enough to warrant further exploration. And Frozen was just also such a great singular gem, the best movie from Disney Feature Animation of the 2010s, and a sequel ran the risk of diminishing that a tad, or worse falling into the traps of any number of Disney’s infamous direct-to-video follow-ups. Now having seen the film, the good news is that the former is untrue, that Frozen remains independent of its sequel or not, a remarkable work of animation and a spectacular piece of modern fairy tale storytelling. The bad news is Frozen II wouldn’t entirely be out of place next to The Lion King 2 or Aladdin 3.
No doubt the films’ defining attribute against that association is its animation, which as per recent Disney standards, is exceptionally good. Writer-directors Jennifer Lee and Chris Buck knew it was important to distinguish this film visually from all the winter imagery of its precursor, and so opted for a crisp autumn aesthetic that allows for a lot of terribly pretty scenery and lush visual versatility. The character animation is once more deftly graceful and emotionally expressive, and the film even finds new and exciting ways to showcase the magic of its world that is sorely missing in its story, which is rather aimless and convoluted next to the first movie.
Frozen of course was inspired by Hans Christian Andersens’ The Snow Queen, one of the pantheon of classic western fairy tales that Disney has pillaged over the course of its history; finding value in their simplistic, moralistic natures embedded within fanciful contexts. Each of Disney’s interpretations has stuck to those core tenets of the fairy tales’ ageless appeal. Even Frozen maintained such an incredibly basic plot, through which the film could be subversive, deconstructionist, and modern, without losing its universality and strong moral foundation; to essentially have its cake and eat it too. Frozen II on the other hand, in not having that grounding in a fairy tale source, tries to substitute the absent framework with an attempt at world-building and specific, harsher moral tendons –a strategy it shares with another Disney film of 2019, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil. Its’ plot, which involves Elsa (Idina Menzel) journeying with Anna (Kristen Bell), Kristoff (Jonathan Groff), Olaf the snowman (Josh Gad), and Sven the reindeer beyond the kingdom of Arendelle to trace an ethereal voice that may yield the source of her magic whilst getting caught up in the after-effects of a war between her people and an Indigenous tribe, falters largely for this surplus of material –and that’s not even factoring in Elsa’s parental angst, Olaf’s crisis of complacency, and Kristoff’s entrapment in a subplot recycled from the far better Disney sequel, The Rescuers Down Under.
One of the reasons there’s no real throughline is that Disney seems to be afraid to truly commit to a new arc for Elsa. She has no clear personal goal (any desire to uncover the source of her magic, which is what the film seems to be going for, is not firmly established), and what development she does undergo isn’t very substantive. The film wants you to know she’s going through a lot but refrains from openly addressing much of what that is. What’s more disappointing is that alongside this, the film doubles down on the queer subtext surrounding her character (including one song that’s so metaphorically charged it might be from an episode of Steven Universe), the studio being much more aware of it and how to capitalize on it, yet predictably avoiding genuine representation every opportunity it gets. It’s altogether not a great use of one of the most compelling characters Disney has created.
On top of this is a film trying to comment on colonialism -a bizarre choice considering how disastrous Disney’s last attempt was –in a sins of the father kind of context. Unsurprisingly, the nuances are over-simplified, and the solutions even more so, entangled though they may be in swaths of backstory and magical elements. It’s tied as well to an environmentalism moral the film is very out of its depth in addressing. And the key message of reconciliation is undercut severely by none of the indigenous characters being voiced by native actors, another white saviour aspect taking centre stage, and a strong suggestion that colonizers don’t actually have to sacrifice anything to do right by the colonized.  I don’t feel this was a case of the film being wrongheaded though, as Pocahontas was; rather that it was just incapable of exploring and understanding this topic within the Disney brand, and didn’t think through the implications of its narrative against such a metaphor.
As disheartening as all this and the jumbled way it’s presented is, Frozen II has some worthwhile bright spots. Among the many story choices and themes it throws at you is a nice folkloric bent. The first song of the film, “All is Found” with its prominent woodwinds and almost Celtic lyrics puts me in mind of Song of the Sea. The rest of the songs, all once again by Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez, are generally good too, if not ever quite attaining the memorability of their Frozen counterparts. And there’s more of an effort to give everyone their due. In spite of his lacklustre role in the story, Kristoff gets his own number (“Lost in the Woods”) allowing Groff to showcase the singing skills that went subdued in the earlier movie; Bell has a pretty good song too in “The Next Right Thing”, and Menzel, obviously the MVP of the film, gets the fantastic “Into the Unknown” as well as another “Let It Go” with “Show Yourself” –a sensational piece, if not as thematically powerful as its liberating cousin. And at least this time, the songs are better spread out across the movie.
At the end of the day, Lee and Buck remain true to their characters too. The relationship between Elsa and Anna is still the movies’ emotional backbone, and as empty as her arc may be, Elsa is still thoroughly engaging. I like seeing these characters again, even Olaf -though the film really needs to dial back the focus on him and his comedy (I also don’t care for the insincere moments of meta-humour). But there’s only so much familiarity can do when in a film where the story is confused, it’s ill-equipped to handle its metaphors, the character development is unclear, and the pacing is inconsistent. Thus why Frozen II belongs among the better of the direct-to-video Disney sequels, where “better” isn’t bad, but it certainly isn’t good.

Support me on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/JordanBosch
Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/Jordan_D_Bosch
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Disney's Mulan, Cultural Appropriation, and Exploitation

I’m late on this one I know. I wasn’t willing to spend thirty bucks back in September for a movie experience I knew was going to be far poorer than if I had paid half that at a theatre. So I waited for it to hit streaming for free to give it a shot. In the meantime I heard that it wasn’t very good, but I remained determined not to skip it entirely, partly out of sympathy for director Niki Caro and partly out of morbid curiosity. Disney’s live-action Mulan  I was actually mildly looking forward to early in the year in spite of my well-documented distaste for this series of creative dead zones by the most powerful media conglomerate on earth. Mulan  was never one of Disney’s classics, a movie extremely of its time in its “girl power” gender politics and with a decidedly American take on ancient Chinese mythology. It got by on a couple good songs and a strong lead, but it was a movie that could be improved upon, and this new version looked like it had the potential to do that, emphasizing
Post a Comment
Read more

The Hays Code was Bad, Sex in Movies is Good

Don't Look Now (1973) Will Hays, Who Knows About Sex In 1930, former Republican politician and chair of the Motion Picture Association of America Will Hayes introduced a series of self-censorship guidelines for the movie industry in response to a mixture of celebrity scandals and lobbying from the Catholic Church against various ‘immoralities’ creating a perception of Hollywood as corrupt and indecent. The Hays Code, or the Motion Picture Production Code, was formally adopted in 1930, though not stringently enforced until 1934 under the auspices of Joseph Breen. It laid out a careful list of what was and wasn’t acceptable for a film expecting major distribution. It stipulated rules against profanity, the depiction of miscegenation, and offensive portrayals of the clergy, but a lot of it was based around sexual content: “sexual perversion” of any kind was disallowed, as were any opaquely textual or visual allusions to reproduction, and right near the top “No licentious or suggestiv
Post a Comment
Read more

Pixar Sundays: The Incredibles (2004)

          Brad Bird was already a master by the time he came to Pixar. Not only did he hone his craft as an early director on The Simpsons , but he directed a little animated film for Warner Bros. in 1999, that though not a box office success was loved by critics and quickly grew a cult following. The Iron Giant is now among many people’s favourite animated movies. Likewise, Bird’s feature debut at Pixar, The Incredibles , his own variation of a superhero movie, is often considered one of the studio’s best. And for very good reason, as the most talented director at Pixar shows.            Superheroes were once the world’s greatest crime-fighting force until several lawsuits for collateral damage (and in the case of Mr. Incredible, a hilarious suicide prevention), outlawed their vigilantism. Fifteen years later Mr. Incredible, now living as Bob Parr, has a family with his wife Helen, the former Elastigirl. But Bob, in a combination of mid-life crisis and nostalgia for the old day
1 comment
Read more