Tumgik
#fronalysis
Text
Im fixated on Frozen rn so Im just gonna fuckin. Rant about the Hans plot twist for a sec.
OH MY GOD IT MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE- IT'S NOT FORESHADOWED IN THE SLIGHTEST, HANS' BEHAVIOR AFTER THE TWIST DIRECTLY CONTRADICTS EVERYTHING WE LEARNED ABOUT HIM BEFORE HAND! THAT'S NOT HOW YOU WRITE A FUCKING PLOT TWIST!!! THERE'S ALSO THE FACT THAT HIS PLAN MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE- MATPAT EXPLAINS IT BETTER THEN I EVER COULD IN THIS VIDEO, BUT BASICALLY MONARCHIES DON'T WORK THE WAY HANS SEEMS TO THINK THEY DO SO HIS PLAN IS FUCKING STUPID. ALSO!!!!! THE PLOT TWIST DOESN'T ACTUALLY ADD ANYTHING TO THE STORY??? LIKE, EVEN IF HE AND ANNA TRULY LOVED EACHOTHER, A KISS WOULDN'T HAVE WORKED BECAUSE ANNA HAD TO BE THE ONE TO PREFORM THE ACT OF TRUE LOVE, NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND. IT'S WHY OLAF SACRIFICING HIMSELF DIDN'T WORK, IT'S WHY KRISTOFF DILIVERING HER TO THE CASTLE DIDN'T WORK, IT'S WHY ANNA SAVING ELSA'S LIFE *DID* WORK. HANS DIDN'T NEED TO BE EVIL! THEY COULDVE HAD ONE OF WEASELTON'S LACKY'S ATTEMPT TO KILL ELSA AND IT WOULD'VE HAD THE SAME FUCKING RESULT!!!!!! IM SO FUCKINF MAD I CAN'T-
Tl;dr: the Hans plot twist makes no fucking sense, both in and out of universe, and just exists for the sake of shocking the audience and subverting classic Disney tropes, which are really stupid reasons to add a plot twist.
38 notes · View notes
Text
Frozen genuinely works SO MUCH BETTER as a stage show then it does as a movie, probably because with musical's you have a lot more time to unpack everything, and Frozen is a VERY heavy story. Anna and Elsa's trauma is given so much more room to be explored in the musical because it doesn't need to be condensed for plot progression. We're allowed to just pause everything for like 3 minutes just to get a glimpse into what's going on in Elsa's mind, which I feel we really didn't get enough of in the original film. The extra time also gives them more of a chance to flesh out Anna and Kristoff's relationship, which, while I still think pairing them off at the end was unnecessary at BEST, does at least make them getting together make more sense then it does in the movie. They were also allowed to lean into the darker aspects of the story a lot more, since parents are less likely to take their kids to see a broadway show than they are to take them to a movie theater. The horror Elsa feels at the prospect of hurting people, or more specifically Anna, again is touched on so much more in depth in the musical. She also like, actively contemplates suicide that one time? "Do I kill the monster" - Elsa, in reference to herself. That would NOT have flown in the movie, I'll tell you that much. They're also allowed to be much hornier??? Which isn't necessarily a good thing, more neutral all things considered, but it is funny so I'll count that as a plus lmao.
Weirdly though, despite all the extra time, they did not take a minute to properly foreshadow Hans being the twist villain. Which you knew I had to bring it back to because complaining abt that fucking plot twist has been the only thing I've done in this fandom so far. In fact, I'd say the reveal is almost WORSE on stage, because they can't use all those camera angles that help build tension in the movie, and because the twist is so out-of-left-field there's literally no way to know it's coming unless you've already seen Frozen, which tbh I think the people that intially adapted the movie for broadway might've taken for granted. They took the time to give Hans his own solo number with TWO REPRISES, but don't take a moment to show the audience that he's actually the bad guy until the "if only there was someone who loved you" moment. Tbh it's kinda ironic, since the Hans plot twist is the #1 thing people tend to have a problem with in the original movie. My biggest issue with the Hans plot twist overall is that it really clutters the movie and just feels like a weird aside that distracts you from the actual. Plot. But since they have more room to work with it in the stage show, it didn't have to be that way! If they had revealed Hans' true intentions during, idk, maybe the end of the first Hans of the Southern Isles Reprise, it would've helped build tension in the later scene, because WE understand that Anna is in danger, but SHE doesn't. But alas, complaining about writing chocies you didn't like on the internet won't change them, so I am forced to look on the bright side. What is the bright side, you may ask?
Tumblr media
RYAN MCCARTAN AS HANS THATS WHAT!!!!!!!
28 notes · View notes
Text
Y'know, I've said this before and idk how common a misconception this is anymore, but the act of true love that saves Anna in Frozen is NOT Elsa hugging her corpse. The act of true love that thawed Anna's frozen heart was throwing herself in front of Elsa, fully prepared to die so her sister could live. The cursed individual must preform the act of true love, not have it preformed towards them. I've seen a lot of people complain about how Olaf tending the fire so Anna wouldn't freeze to death right then and there should've counted, but it didn't because again, Anna had to preform The Act. I do wish somebody in-universe pointed that out at some point but fuckin- whatever it's whatever. I think the movie should've dug into that concept a little more, really, because it speaks to the fact that, no matter how hard you try to change someone with a *metaphorical* frozen heart, in the end, it's really up to them wether they change their ways or not
I find it ironic and honestly kind of cruel, in a meta-sense, that Anna, arguably the most love-filled person in the entire movie, had to be cursed like that. Usually, in fairytales, that kind of curse would be put on somebody deemed incapable of love by the curser. It's why the Beast in Beauty & the Beast is cursed, and I uh. I can't really think of any other examples off the top of my head but I think you get the point. Anna didn't need to learn that lesson, though. I don't think she even REALIZED she needed to preform the act of true love until after the events of the movie, if at all. It is, once again, a very interesting concept that I wish the movie dug into a little more. I've said it before and I'll say it again: FROZEN NEEDED MORE TIME TO TELL ITS STORY IN A SATISFYING WAY. The writers present so many genuinely interesting concepts, one after another, and then barely scratch the surface of their potential because they're too busy trying to keep the plot going. It's really frustrating.
I uh. Don't remember where I was going with this. Eeeehhhhhh fUCK IT this is my blog I can ramble about whatever I want lmao
Edit: So, upon rewatched the movie the other day, it turns out Olaf DOES point out that Anna was the one who preformed the act of true love, and in a way that was just obvious enough that it makes you wonder how anybody missed it, but just subtle enough that at the same time I can kinda see why? Idk Im writing this at fuckin 3am my thoughts are a fucking mess...
18 notes · View notes
Text
With Frozen 3 being a Thing that Is Happening, a couple of people(or maybe a lot idk) have started theorizing about what the plot could POSSIBLY be. I, personally, have nothing to offer in that regard. I think pretty much everything got wrapped up nicely in Frozen 2 and they well and truly do NOT need another installment, and also the plot of a 3rd movie in a Disney trilogy is usually WILDLY unpredictable. Aladdin 3 was about finding a golden hand on a magic turtle island with Aladdin's Hot Dad or whatever Karina Drawfee called him, Cinderella 3 was about motherfucking TIME TRAVEL, these things are fuckin wild. No, instead, I'm here to say what I think Frozen 3 SHOULDN'T be about, and that would be Anna getting powers of her own.
Okay, to be fair, I don't think they should introduce ANY human characters with powers in the 3rd movie. It would feel cheap and fan-service-y at best, and make the lore 8 MILLION times more complicated at worst. But, hypothetically speaking, I think I could potentially be okay with them introducing some other human elemental magic user to the story. Unless it's Anna.
Why am I so against the concept of Anna having powers? It would make more sense then if like... Kristoff had them or some shit. She's Elsa's sister, after all! Well, I hate the idea of Anna having powers because it undermines her as a character. The narrative has NEVER, not even ONCE, implied that Anna is any lesser then Elsa because she doesn't have powers. The only moment I can find that comes even remotely close to that is the fuckin... don't run into fire scene in Frozen 2, I guess, but even then that's really, really stretching it. Anna not having powers has never been a source of conflict. She's been put into situations that having powers would probably make somewhat easier, sure, but uh. Most characters end up in situations like that. Cool powers make fighting easier, but just because it would be easier doesn't mean it's the only solution. Anna not having powers doesn't actively make her life more difficult in any capacity.
All that to say, why retroactively give her them, then? They wouldn't add anything to her as a character, and would in fact take away from all the things she's accomplished in the past by making it seem like the Brand New Powers are putting her on equal footing with Elsa, when in reality, as far as the narrative is concerned, they've always been equals. All it would do is take away from the story, distract us from the parts of it that actually matter. Kinda like the Hans plot twist did in the first movie.
So, tl;dr is basically that there really shouldn't be any new elemental magic users in the next movie, but if there ARE then Anna definitely shouldn't be one of them because giving her powers undercuts everything we've seen her accomplish in the last two movies, and retroactively makes it seem like Anna and Elsa were never equals to eachother because Anna wasn't "special" enough.
9 notes · View notes