Frozen

[blah the Prussian]

Continued from the Wings of Courage feedback.

Okay, Eclipse, here's your link: http://serenesforest.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=50767&page=8

Edited March 6, 2015 by blah2127

[eclipse]

Wings of Courage, IIRC, was in Written Works. The topic title looks like it belongs right here. I'm confused. blah, PM me about what this topic is supposed to be about, and I'll unlock it/move as necessary.

EDIT: Sort-of figured it out. Link the relevant Wings of Courage post, for clarity's sake.

Edited March 6, 2015 by eclipse

[Shin]

It was a nice enough film. Admittedly, it had its flaws but otherwise it was an enjoyable experience. The plot twist towards the end was a little unexpected, and there really wasn't much basis other than "man, we need a villain".

[MacLovin]

It's a decent flick, and probably the best disney/pixar one since UP.

The only issue I have is that the movie is popular to the point of being sickening. I like the characters well enough, and the fairy tale it's based on isn't exactly well known, which is nice. I'm just tired of the music and merchandising.

[Anacybele]

I personally enjoyed the movie a lot and think it deserves the popularity it has, though I will admit it's kinda overwhelming. :P

It has a great plot, great music, great characters (Elsa is my fav!) and is different from the other Disney Princess movies in that it doesn't focus a lot on a princess finding true love, but more so on the bond between two sisters. Kristoff x Anna is a background event.

Shin, that was the whole point. You're not supposed to suspect that Hans was the bad guy, it was clearly meant to be a surprise. Hans was obviously supposed to be a manipulative scheming bastard, which he turned out to be.

[Sentacotus]

Frozen was ok. I just get tired of hearing about it constantly. I will give Disney credit though they know how to make so god damned kizzash cha-ching! Here's kinda a parody video about the whole thing though.

As funny as it is it does raise some interesting questions.

Edited March 6, 2015 by LordTaco42

[Elieson]

It was a nice enough film. Admittedly, it had its flaws but otherwise it was an enjoyable experience. The plot twist towards the end was a little unexpected, and there really wasn't much basis other than "man, we need a villain".

I think the plot twist aka Conflict resolution at the end was a big deal, for a Disney movie. It really didn't follow the expected pattern that your typical Disney movie follows. True Love being represented as unity in Family really struck home for me and for the public evidently. I did not expect it, and I don't think many others did until moments before the climax.

Anna is more relatable/enjoyable as a character because she's incredibly flawed, despite being royalty, and is probably my preferred character from the movie, despite all the hype and fangasm aimed at her older sister.

I walked into the movie expecting to hate Olaf, but Integrity said it one time that his voice and speech is just obnoxious enough without being too much, that it's enjoyable in its doses, and he never has too much screentime.

The songs, didn't resonate that well with me. The entire involvement of the trolls, the Fixer Upper song, it all just kinda felt ramshackled in. Sure, it was cute for kids, but it just felt so out of place. Same goes with Summer being sung in quite possibly the most matter-of-fact manner, with extra cheese in literal "badum, badum"s being added to the lyrics themself. It marketed to the audience (children) quite well, but for both of these songs, I found my nose in my popcorn wondering to myself how these two actually made it in. Granted, they haven't received reception compared to other songs in the movie *ahem let it go ahem*, but I think the world agrees, given the lack of interest in them even now.

Kristoff [and Sven] made an interesting duo. Typically, the "pet" goes along with the female lead. Snow White and her entourage of woodland creatures, Rapunzel and both Maximus and Pascal, Ariel and Flounder, Jasmine and...you get my point. Seeing the "pet" not glued to the lead made Anna even more relatable, while making more sense with Kristoff given his explained character more validity. He's just some average nice guy and weird-o Ice Farmer trying to make a living. He doesn't stumble upon and magical destiny, and doesn't catch the glowering eye of any female really. Even during the trolls, he and Anna just kind of feel awkward telling them that they're not interested in eachother. Sure, there's a few subtle hints pointing towards one thing or another, but it's evidently crossed their minds and gone no further than that, which is well..normal.

Which builds to Kristoff himself. He makes more sense as a character too, rather than most. Where male leads tend to be either flat out royalty and carved perfection, or just guys that are more or less "bottom feeders" (Aladdin, Flynn), Kristoff has a job and is just trying to get by, before he is accidentally thrown into the story, and resists the romantic subplot pretty naturally. He strikes me as a genuine character; someone who isn't desperate for [whatever your definition of Romance is] (a refreshing sight), but just kind of ends up doing the right thing without ever really giving up his initial ideals.

I dunno, I really liked the movie. It was refreshing in its ideas and conclusion, and many of the songs at the start (before LET IT GO) really struck home with me. Anna is identifiable and flawed, and it's nice to see more characters designed like that. Where other movies have a nostalgic place in my heart, like Lion King and Little Mermaid (and hell, even Enchanted), Up was fantastic, and this was too.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Sara.

[Shin]

Shin, that was the whole point. You're not supposed to suspect that Hans was the bad guy, it was clearly meant to be a surprise. Hans was obviously supposed to be a manipulative scheming bastard, which he turned out to be.

The problem with that nothing else in the film suggests it at all. A good literary surprise would have had subtle hints that the viewer could look back to and think "yeah, it makes sense but I didn't see it coming". It's not that it didn't make sense, it was just relatively poorly executed.

[blah the Prussian]

If Chewbacca was revealed to be Luke's father in Star Wars, it would be unexpected. Does that make it a good twist? No. It could have worked if Hans had mentioned being last in the line of succession before we knew he was evil, because he has a motive to kill Elsa. The main problem with Elsa is that she pisses all over her responsibilities as Queen. She is too cowardly to face her problems, so she runs away. If she couldn't handle her duties, she should have abdicated and passed the throne to Anna. Elsa is one of the most incompetent, idiotic, and entitled characters ever. During the Let it go song, every time she shoots out some ice, there goes an entire family's livestock. And after? She goes back to living in her palace like nothing happened. Hell (and this may be the part of me made ruthless from hours of CKII), Hans would have made a better monarch. He was never shown hurting the common people, and was a decisive leader. He also was one of the best manipulators this side of the House of Hapsburg. He would have been a great king.

[MacLovin]

Yeah, the flick lacks the buildup to the twist.

I suppose we're supposed to be suspicious that he reciprocates the advances of the ginger princess, but one wouldn't think of that angle in a DISNEY movie.

oh and the song about summer felt out of place.

[Anacybele]

The problem with that nothing else in the film suggests it at all. A good literary surprise would have had subtle hints that the viewer could look back to and think "yeah, it makes sense but I didn't see it coming". It's not that it didn't make sense, it was just relatively poorly executed.

What about when Hans mentioned that he has a bunch of older brothers and then suddenly proposes to Anna a bit later? That raised a red flag for me. I just thought he was as desperate as Anna though, not a villain. But then when it was revealed that he only wanted to marry her so he didn't have to be in his brothers' shadows and all, it made total sense.

If Chewbacca was revealed to be Luke's father in Star Wars, it would be unexpected. Does that make it a good twist? No. It could have worked if Hans had mentioned being last in the line of succession before we knew he was evil, because he has a motive to kill Elsa. The main problem with Elsa is that she pisses all over her responsibilities as Queen. She is too cowardly to face her problems, so she runs away. If she couldn't handle her duties, she should have abdicated and passed the throne to Anna. Elsa is one of the most incompetent, idiotic, and entitled characters ever. During the Let it go song, every time she shoots out some ice, there goes an entire family's livestock. And after? She goes back to living in her palace like nothing happened. Hell (and this may be the part of me made ruthless from hours of CKII), Hans would have made a better monarch. He was never shown hurting the common people, and was a decisive leader. He also was one of the best manipulators this side of the House of Hapsburg. He would have been a great king.

Hans did mention it. He said that he was the youngest of a bunch of brothers. He also left Anna to die as she gradually froze up and then attempted to kill Elsa. That's not what a king should be at all.

You do realize that Elsa grew up pressured and in fear and her parents practically forced her to hide her powers from everyone? She was afraid of hurting Anna and her people, she ran away in an attempt to protect them because she couldn't control her powers. She didn't even KNOW she buried the kingdom in never-ending winter until Anna told her. Also, it isn't like she never came back, she finally figured out that she COULD stop the winter and that her ice powers could be used for fun things, like that ice-skating rink at the end. She grew stronger as a person in the end and stopped being so afraid of hurting others.

[blah the Prussian]

What about when Hans mentioned that he has a bunch of older brothers and then suddenly proposes to Anna a bit later? That raised a red flag for me. I just thought he was as desperate as Anna though, not a villain. But then when it was revealed that he only wanted to marry her so he didn't have to be in his brothers' shadows and all, it made total sense.

Hold it! A while back, you said that this came as a complete surprise to you! This is a clear contradiction of your previous statement!

Hans did mention it. He said that he was the youngest of a bunch of brothers. He also left Anna to die as she gradually froze up and then attempted to kill Elsa. That's not what a king should be at all.

Objection! Morals are irrelevant to being a good king. A bad king kills without reason. A good king should be ready to kill that which is in his way. You can be a bad person, and still be a very good king.

You do realize that Elsa grew up pressured and in fear and her parents practically forced her to hide her powers from everyone? She was afraid of hurting Anna and her people, she ran away in an attempt to protect them because she couldn't control her powers. She didn't even KNOW she buried the kingdom in never-ending winter until Anna told her. Also, it isn't like she never came back, she finally figured out that she COULD stop the winter and that her ice powers could be used for fun things, like that ice-skating rink at the end. She grew stronger as a person in the end and stopped being so afraid of hurting others.

Her parents did the right thing forcing her to hide her powers. What they did is a prime example of a king being forced to do bad things for the greater good. Destroying their daughter's childhood was worth it if it meant the kingdom was safe. Their only mistake was not going the extra mile and killing her.

Elsa shouldn't have run away. She should have killed herself. That is what it means to be a queen. As a queen, she must put her people above herself. If she posed such a threat, she should have had the courage to neutralize it.

When Anna told Elsa, her reaction was to sic her Killer Mutant Snow Goon on her. (If you got that reference I'm proud of you.) Attacking your own sister because you're too cowardly to own up to your mistake? That's not what a queen should be at all. Also, how the fuck did she not know? What, did she think the snow went into some pocket dimension? (Admittedly this may be more a plot hole than a character flaw) I'll give you the moment she should have known: when she steps out onto the balcony of her Ice Palace, and proclaims that "The cold never bothered me anyway" to the TUNDRA that her kingdom had become.

The problem is that your logic doesn't hold up because in the beginning, she damn well should have been afraid of hurting others. That isn't character development; it's like saying someone who just had their Cancer cured, and thus is no longer afraid of dying, went through character development.

Edit: In response to what you said in the feedback thread, a KING (which is what the King is first and formost, before a father) should love their country more than their own flesh and blood.

Edited March 6, 2015 by blah2127

[Snowy_One]

Elsa snapped. Things like that happen. Mainly because rulers are people and not robots... yet. Her snapping was believable. Her loss of control and subsequent actions are also understandable. Honestly there is nothing that can be pinned on Elsa besides having those powers in the first place.

Ruling is funny like that as well. You can't just pick and choose your next heir in 95% of monarchies. Anna could have been a godsend of a queen and landed the first lunar probe in a world where Elsa died on her coronation due to choking on a truffle and everyone could KNOW that she would have been that great a queen beforehand but until said truffle, Elsa would be queen. Simply because she was older. Even if Elsa was such a horrible queen as to freeze her entire kingdom. That's politics for you and part of why bloodlines tend to be a terrible method of choosing a leader.

[Anacybele]

Hold it! A while back, you said that this came as a complete surprise to you! This is a clear contradiction of your previous statement!

No, it's not. Even after Hans mentioned his brothers, I still didn't expect him to be a villain. As I said, I just felt like he was desperate like Anna was and such. But when he was revealed to be the antagonist, I was surprised and then it made total sense given what he had said about being the youngest of a group of brothers.

Objection! Morals are irrelevant to being a good king. A bad king kills without reason. A good king should be ready to kill that which is in his way. You can be a bad person, and still be a very good king.

Wrong again. Morals are completely relevant. You can't expect people to accept a bad person as their ruler. That's entirely ridiculous. That bad person would make them live in fear.

Her parents did the right thing forcing her to hide her powers. What they did is a prime example of a king being forced to do bad things for the greater good. Destroying their daughter's childhood was worth it if it meant the kingdom was safe. Their only mistake was not going the extra mile and killing her.

Elsa shouldn't have run away. She should have killed herself. That is what it means to be a queen. As a queen, she must put her people above herself. If she posed such a threat, she should have had the courage to neutralize it.

...Dude. What? Are you fucking high? No parent would EVER do that to their kid regardless of their position or duties. That's just downright cruel.

[bottlegnomes]

I only saw the movie recently and I really liked it, and loved Let It Go. I can see why it got so much attention, but I do think it was a bit overhyped. People made it seem like there was this huge shift in Disney princesses, and I mean there was, what with Anna saving the day in the end, but it wasn't nearly to the degree that people made it out to be. Cracked actually did an article on it: http://www.cracked.com/blog/4-ways-disney-princesses-created-modern-feminism/ (on a side note, does anyone know how to make the link text?), that I sort of agree with. All, or at least most, of the princesses started the plot by breaking out on there own; it's just that the prince saved the day at the end. And in that regard, Kristoff still sort of did the same thing since he's the one who made sure Anna got home to set up the whole climax. Now that I think about it, Mulan actually did the day saving herself, too. The only major difference was that they acknowledged another form of love, which, again, Belle did, but to a lesser extent.

As for Hans, it goes both ways. As Ana said, it wasn't completely unfounded—when he gave his reasoning I immediately remembered him saying he had like 14 older brothers—but Elsa was originally intended to be the villain, so when they shifted I think they were scrambling to find a villain and settled on Hans and sort of skimped on the setup.

But yeah, it's a wonderful movie, and I did like the familial true love thing.

Hold it! A while back, you said that this came as a complete surprise to you! This is a clear contradiction of your previous statement!

This is stupid, and I'm not even talking in regard to Frozen specifically, which as I said could have been better. Something catching you completely by surprise doesn't mean there's no buildup. It just means the hints were subtle enough that they didn't consciously register immediately. Going by this, basically every twist in relatively modern movies had no basis, or at least gaping holes, which is actually kind of true, but meh.

Objection! Morals are irrelevant to being a good king. A bad king kills without reason. A good king should be ready to kill that which is in his way. You can be a bad person, and still be a very good king.

And you expect Disney movies to address ambiguous moral grey areas?

Her parents did the right thing forcing her to hide her powers. What they did is a prime example of a king being forced to do bad things for the greater good. Destroying their daughter's childhood was worth it if it meant the kingdom was safe. Their only mistake was not going the extra mile and killing her.

Or, you know, they could have Professor Xed the whole situation and helped her nurture and understand her powers.

Elsa shouldn't have run away. She should have killed herself. That is what it means to be a queen. As a queen, she must put her people above herself. If she posed such a threat, she should have had the courage to neutralize it.
When Anna told Elsa, her reaction was to sic her Killer Mutant Snow Goon on her. (If you got that reference I'm proud of you.) Attacking your own sister because you're too cowardly to own up to your mistake? That's not what a queen should be at all. Also, how the fuck did she not know? What, did she think the snow went into some pocket dimension? (Admittedly this may be more a plot hole than a character flaw) I'll give you the moment she should have known: when she steps out onto the balcony of her Ice Palace, and proclaims that "The cold never bothered me anyway" to the TUNDRA that her kingdom had become.
The problem is that your logic doesn't hold up because in the beginning, she damn well should have been afraid of hurting others. That isn't character development; it's like saying someone who just had their Cancer cured, and thus is no longer afraid of dying, went through character development.
Edit: In response to what you said in the feedback thread, a KING (which is what the King is first and formost, before a father) should love their country more than their own flesh and blood.

[Moishe Oofnik]

Elsas magical powers are uncleared and leave plot holes to dig in too

Its an ok flip

If id used the numeric system Id probably rate it 6/10

decent enjoyable film which is better then anything pixar post 2009 (I hopes for the good dinosaur doe)

The story is ok the characters are ok but some of the main cast is meh(olaf is not to my taste)

its visualy dazzeling (weaker then HTTYD2 because not as much colors or detail)

but it desperately wanted a villain that sucked the twist wasnt great nor was it bad it was just again ok

The soundtrack is good too bad that the song that won the oscar is the worst on the track(it wasnt even overplayed in israel) it just sounds like fire work by katy perry and has very weak vague sentiments (happy should had won that oscar)

Edited March 6, 2015 by TTPK_Tal

[Elieson]

No, it's not. Even after Hans mentioned his brothers, I still didn't expect him to be a villain. As I said, I just felt like he was desperate like Anna was and such. But when he was revealed to be the antagonist, I was surprised and then it made total sense given what he had said about being the youngest of a group of brothers.

Hans was only ever portrayed as an Antagonist, rather than a Villian. Heck, Elsa was portrayed in a similar light, and teh roles gradually transitioned from one to the other

Villian =/= Antagonist (This is me just sharing a point to everyone, not really to you specifically)

Wrong again. Morals are completely relevant. You can't expect people to accept a bad person as their ruler. That's entirely ridiculous. That bad person would make them live in fear.

If you're a bad person but a good king, then you're not the best king that you could be. A good person who is simultaneously a good ruler is a great king. Good is an insult. Ana makess ense here

Her parents did the right thing forcing her to hide her powers. What they did is a prime example of a king being forced to do bad things for the greater good. Destroying their daughter's childhood was worth it if it meant the kingdom was safe. Their only mistake was not going the extra mile and killing her.

Elsa shouldn't have run away. She should have killed herself. That is what it means to be a queen. As a queen, she must put her people above herself. If she posed such a threat, she should have had the courage to neutralize it.

Umm. What? She is not an inherently bad person; she's a confused teenager. It's not shown that she had spent time trying to control her powers, but she evidently had, given the coronation ceremony. Her parent's didn't understand her powers but knew that they were dangerous, so rather than letting their kid play with a loaded gun, they pretty much told her not to. It's not known if the parents tried to help her control her powers to any major extent, or if it just came with age. Regardless, the parents did the right thing in encouraging her to hide her powers, but should not have killed their daughter when she exhibited no signs of evil, and when she was decided to have been "cursed", which is something that more or less means a bad thing happened to a good person

As a Queen, she should've consulted with her advisors and the fucking rock trolls and said "how to I control this shit". if her parents knew about them, and could find them with Anna when she was little, when Elsa was awake for the whole thing, she could've just as easily gone back to them and asked for help. They obviously knew what was going on.

Killing Elsa when the trolls are known to understand this crap is really underthought. I'd expect this from Weselton/Hans (they know nothing of the Rock trolls), but the troll's knowledge of magic is a HUGE reason for Elsa to remain alive.

Edited March 6, 2015 by Sara.

[blah the Prussian]

No, it's not. Even after Hans mentioned his brothers, I still didn't expect him to be a villain. As I said, I just felt like he was desperate like Anna was and such. But when he was revealed to be the antagonist, I was surprised and then it made total sense given what he had said about being the youngest of a group of brothers.

Fair enough. I didn't see your comments that suggested what you said here. Sorry for the confusion.

Wrong again. Morals are completely relevant. You can't expect people to accept a bad person as their ruler. That's entirely ridiculous. That bad person would make them live in fear.

What in the movie showed that Hans was going to be evil to anyone other than Anna and Elsa? There have been many examples throughout history of rulers who did bad things to come to power and were phenomenal at ruling. Augustus, the Hongwu Emperor, Caesar, Napoleon... the list goes on. All of these people did a to worse than kill two girls to come to power, and none of them used that power for evil. In fact, they are all heroes to their countries today.

...Dude. What? Are you fucking high? No parent would EVER do that to their kid regardless of their position or duties. That's just downright cruel.

No KING in history has ever been faced with a kid who could doom their entire country, either. I feel like the situation in Frozen was extreme enough to justify such a harsh measure. Though exile would have worked fine, too.

And you expect Disney movies to address ambiguous moral grey areas?

Fair enough. This discussion is reading way too deep into the movie already, though.

Elsa snapped. Things like that happen. Mainly because rulers are people and not robots... yet. Her snapping was believable. Her loss of control and subsequent actions are also understandable. Honestly there is nothing that can be pinned on Elsa besides having those powers in the first place.

Ruling is funny like that as well. You can't just pick and choose your next heir in 95% of monarchies. Anna could have been a godsend of a queen and landed the first lunar probe in a world where Elsa died on her coronation due to choking on a truffle and everyone could KNOW that she would have been that great a queen beforehand but until said truffle, Elsa would be queen. Simply because she was older. Even if Elsa was such a horrible queen as to freeze her entire kingdom. That's politics for you and part of why bloodlines tend to be a terrible method of choosing a leader.

You wanna take that statement on Monarchy to another thread? Long live divine right! In all seriousness, there have been several historical examples of non hereditary monarchies, the Roman Empire being the most famous. Being a Queen never was an easy job to begin with. Elsa's powers fall under something she'd have to deal with as queen. Also, it's less that the whole blizzard thing was done by her willingly and more that ARE YOU SERIOUS HOW COULD YOU NOT KNOW THAT USING YOUR POWERS WOULD CAUSE THAT?

If you're a bad person but a good king, then you're not the best king that you could be. A good person who is simultaneously a good ruler is a great king. Good is an insult. Ana makess ense here

Sometimes you have to be a bad person to be a good king.

Umm. What? She is not an inherently bad person; she's a confused teenager. It's not shown that she had spent time trying to control her powers, but she evidently had, given the coronation ceremony. Her parent's didn't understand her powers but knew that they were dangerous, so rather than letting their kid play with a loaded gun, they pretty much told her not to. It's not known if the parents tried to help her control her powers to any major extent, or if it just came with age. Regardless, the parents did the right thing in encouraging her to hide her powers, but should not have killed their daughter when she exhibited no signs of evil, and when she was decided to have been "cursed", which is something that more or less means a bad thing happened to a good person

Again, sometimes there is no easy solution, but in this case, I think it would be most prudent to kill Elsa. For the whole conflict of the film to never happen would be worth one girl's life.

As a Queen, she should've consulted with her advisors and the fucking rock trolls and said "how to I control this shit". if her parents knew about them, and could find them with Anna when she was little, when Elsa was awake for the whole thing, she could've just as easily gone back to them and asked for help. They obviously knew what was going on.

Killing Elsa when the trolls are known to understand this crap is really underthought. I'd expect this from Weselton/Hans (they know nothing of the Rock trolls), but the troll's knowledge of magic is a HUGE reason for Elsa to remain alive.

There s no way to know that the rock trolls are a reliable source at all. For all the King and Queen know, they could be like those nut cases who claim vaccines cause Autism. That is a risk that they should not take and my GOD that was a lot of stuff to reply to.

[Snowy_One]

You wanna take that statement on Monarchy to another thread? Long live divine right! In all seriousness, there have been several historical examples of non hereditary monarchies, the Roman Empire being the most famous. Being a Queen never was an easy job to begin with. Elsa's powers fall under something she'd have to deal with as queen. Also, it's less that the whole blizzard thing was done by her willingly and more that ARE YOU SERIOUS HOW COULD YOU NOT KNOW THAT USING YOUR POWERS WOULD CAUSE THAT?

The problem is that the term 'monarchy' is a largely catch-all term for a particular style of government. England before the Magna Carta was a Monarchy, and remained so after the Magna Carta despite the loss of royal power. Heck, it's not technically 'impossible' for a Monarchy to allow women to inherit on grounds similar to men... Just VERY unlikely (can't think of a single major nation that did so). However no indication is given that this is the case and Hans's plan strongly implies that the government was likely one where men pre-epmted women (else he'd still be second-string to Else/Anna).

I also don't think it's fair to judge Elsa's power-use as she was taught to repress and fear them. While it's clear she at least experimented with them and probably has talent with them, it seems unlikely she knew exactly what she was doing beyond a instinctual level. Do remember that she almost killed Anna in the opening because she didn't understand them (and I don't think they ever explained where the powers came from).

[Loki Laufeyson]

Sweet Gerd, theres actually debate about this? Blimey.

I liked the film enough. Its not the greatest animated film out there, but it bucks tradition just enough to be a step in the right direction. Having not one, but two female protagonists in the forefront is a big deal. They share the spotlight and a great lesson about how love can come from anywhere is had. Olaf is a pretty touching character once you think about him. He is actually the physical manifestation of Elsa's love for her sister, and their bond. His desire to be out in the warmth is a reflection of Elsa's desire to be free to be herself. Her longing to be near people. Anna never ever second guesses this and even seems to understand on an subconscious level. Even when Anna learns Elsa is responsible for the winter, she doesnt even bat an eyelash or say "man, my sister is a monster!" No way. Her first reaction is "I need to find her. She's in trouble. She can fix this and im gonna go help her do it."

I feel like this movie's message shouldnt be ignored.

Also i see a lot of "This movie is so white (culturally)." Well, its Scandinavia. /shrug But i think the message is universal. This is part of why its so ubiquitous and Frozen is on so many products.

[blah the Prussian]

The problem is that the term 'monarchy' is a largely catch-all term for a particular style of government. England before the Magna Carta was a Monarchy, and remained so after the Magna Carta despite the loss of royal power. Heck, it's not technically 'impossible' for a Monarchy to allow women to inherit on grounds similar to men... Just VERY unlikely (can't think of a single major nation that did so). However no indication is given that this is the case and Hans's plan strongly implies that the government was likely one where men pre-epmted women (else he'd still be second-string to Else/Anna).

As of now, most major monarchies allow women to inherit if they are the oldest. In the majority of republics up until now, it was impossible for a woman to become head of state. In addition, in most monarchies, it would be possible for a women to inherit. (France was one of the few exceptions, and even they had several powerful Queen Regents.) Finally, Constitutional Monarchies have proven better about electing women to positions of power (eg Margaret Thatcher in the UK and Merkel in Germany, both of which had times when they were monarchies). The scenario you mentioned with Hans has been proven to be false; most King Consorts have been joint rulers at best. So overall, monarchy is better about putting women in power than republics.

[Sentacotus]

Also i see a lot of "This movie is so white (culturally)." Well, its Scandinavia. /shrug But i think the message is universal. This is part of why its so ubiquitous and Frozen is on so many products.

I know right go figure. God forbid there's alot of white people with fair skin and light hair in a cold part of the earth.

As of now, most major monarchies allow women to inherit if they are the oldest. In the majority of republics up until now, it was impossible for a woman to become head of state. In addition, in most monarchies, it would be possible for a women to inherit. (France was one of the few exceptions, and even they had several powerful Queen Regents.) Finally, Constitutional Monarchies have proven better about electing women to positions of power (eg Margaret Thatcher in the UK and Merkel in Germany, both of which had times when they were monarchies). The scenario you mentioned with Hans has been proven to be false; most King Consorts have been joint rulers at best. So overall, monarchy is better about putting women in power than republics.

Dude. I see what you're saying here, I love history as much as the next guy, and I'm not even going to disagree with what you're saying here but lets keep in mind it is a Disney Cartoon.

[blah the Prussian]

Dude. I see what you're saying here, I love history as much as the next guy, and I'm not even going to disagree with what you're saying here but lets keep in mind it is a Disney Cartoon.

I was disputing Snowyone's claim that monarchies are inferior to republics. Also, Frozen styles itself as a more mature Disney movie, considering the shit that goes down there (attempted murder, destruction of a nations economy) and should bring up these issues.

[Caliban of Sycorax]

Fun Fact: Anna and Elsa are not official Disney Princesses. They still have yet to have a coronation ceremony.

Anyway, I'm biased given that I work for Disney, but I am not alone in the many people who are over Frozen. It's not that good of a film (Tangled is leagues better, and Princess and the Frog is leagues better than Tangled), and truth be told, if the cast wasn't so good, Frozen would suck. That being said, working with Anna and Elsa is one of my favorite shifts, so...

[blah the Prussian]

Fun Fact: Anna and Elsa are not official Disney Princesses. They still have yet to have a coronation ceremony.

Anyway, I'm biased given that I work for Disney, but I am not alone in the many people who are over Frozen. It's not that good of a film (Tangled is leagues better, and Princess and the Frog is leagues better than Tangled), and truth be told, if the cast wasn't so good, Frozen would suck. That being said, working with Anna and Elsa is one of my favorite shifts, so...

You work for Disney? Interesting. What do you do?