Disney's Frozen

[Josh]

I liked Frozen but not as much as Tangled and Wreck-It Ralph. I loved its first half, which contains some of Disney's best musical numbers since The Lion King. I only wish its second half had been as full of great songs - "Fixer Upper" stuck out to me as the most unnecessary and out-of-place song since Hunchback's "A Guy Like You," and I really wish they had done a reprise of "For the First Time in Forever" at the end.

[droosan]

While I realize you'd have preferred a 'singing' finale -- the score does weave the melodies of both "The First Time in Forever" and "Do You Want to Build A Snowman" into the film's ending scene.

I agree that the third act could've used another song (or two!) .. but IMO "Fixer-Upper" is lots of fun, with hilarious lyrics throughout.


Blink-and-you'll-miss-it cameo:

Rapunzel (with short brown hair) -- and Eugene -- are among the crowd waiting to attend the coronation, when the castle gates are opened! Is she a royal relative, perhaps..?

And if Imagineering isn't already working on it, I think they should transform Disneyland's 'Matterhorn' coaster into a Frozen-themed ride .. if only on a seasonal basis (similar to the Nightmare Before Christmas-themed 'Haunted Mansion').

[droosan]

I'm not generally one who pays much attention to 'box-office' records (since inflation and ever-widening distribution models render most milestones 'moot'), but Frozen's opening take is actually mighty impressive .. and the movie's positive 'word-of-mouth' should ensure it continued (and well-deserved!) success, well into the holidays.

I've already seen it three times, myself .. and will likely drag a few friends along to see it again, soon. Here's hoping the days pass quickly for those of you waiting for the film to open in your country ..


Congrats to everyone at Disney..!


..except maybe the marketing guys who came up with those first few trailers. I find that I have to qualify my own 'word-of-mouth' recommendations to a skeptical prospective audience member by assuring him/her that the movie is "nothing like the trailers" .. and to inform them that Olaf is not in 80% of the movie, as the trailers imply .. etc.

So, seriously, marketeers: re-think that approach

[LotsoA113]

Honestly though, this marketing is pretty much the only reason people are seeing this movie. Disney's found a formula and I doubt they'll stray from it in the future.

Although that does lead me to wonder what the Big Hero 6 ads are gonna look like!

[droosan]

What I'm finding, though, is that there is a significant number of people in my own circle of friends & co-workers (many of them industry professionals themselves) who were 'turned-off' by those trailers .. enough so that I'm required to convince them to ignore said marketing .. which does seem to purposefully mis-represent the movie as an Ice Age- or Shrek-styled romp.

I just can't help but wonder how much better of an opening weekend Frozen might've had if all of the people who were underwhelmed by those trailers had actually wanted to go see the movie, instead .. without needing to first be convinced they'd enjoy it by their 'crazy animation-obsessed' friend.

[Ben]

Hyper-jazzed here in the UK, for once: we get Saving Mr Banks (out last Friday, going tomorrow night) and Frozen out within days of each other! Looking forward to both!

[Whippet Angel]

Like Josh, I really enjoyed Frozen, but not as much as the last two films. I'm thinking that might've been a result of my expectations being unfairly high, so I'm planning on seeing it again while it's still in theaters.

Arg, I know exactly what you mean, droo! I've had that exact same problem trying to convince friends to see Tangled, and I have to wonder if that marketing strategy really helped the film as the studio seems to think, or if the film's success was really helped by word-of-mouth.

Heh, I'm glad I'm not the only person who got a flashback of "A Guy Like You" during "Fixer Upper".

[droosan]

I've had that exact same problem trying to convince friends to see Tangled, and I have to wonder if that marketing strategy really helped the film as the studio seems to think, or if the film's success was really helped by word-of-mouth.

It doesn't matter; Disney's marketing division is claiming the credit for Frozen's opening weekend box-office.

(as LotsoA113 already implied, above) .. I wonder if the marketing for next year's 'boy-centric' Big Hero Six is gonna de-emphasize the action, and play-up the film's emotional beats, in order to get girls to want to see the movie..?

[James]

AV review is online: "Some of the plot holes may be frightful, but the story, music, visuals, and cast are delightful. Frozen is easily one of the Disney’s best in recent years, and it’s a film that will definitely not leave you cold."

http://a-vie.ws/69

I didn't put this in the review but I know several people here have said it so I want to address it. I was dreading this movie based on the commercials. But the ads did not reflect the actual film. Anyone leery of seeing this based on them should definitely give it a chance.

As for the Mickey Mouse short, I'm surprised at the big positive reaction. I didn't think it was very original, I didn't like the "3d" characters, I thought it was repetitive and too long, and was all gimmick and no story.

[EricJ]

I just can't help but wonder how much better of an opening weekend Frozen might've had if all of the people who were underwhelmed by those trailers had actually wanted to go see the movie, instead .. without needing to first be convinced they'd enjoy it by their 'crazy animation-obsessed' friend.

I wouldn't start pointing fingers right away--
While I won't apologize for the ScratOlaf ads (which actually persuaded me that the comedy reliefs were funny, as I'd cringed when I first read the plot description), let's just say that Frozen had the biggest opening for a November Disney movie in history, and more fangirls STILL went to see the Hunger Games movie.
You just can't stop it with conventional weapons. Bolt vs. Twilight had it easy.

(And we've been over the "Did 'Princess' scare audiences away from P&tF?" issue so many times:
As I seem to historically recall, 'Princess' in the title was the one main reason most people wanted to see it, fresh off the new Lasseter regime change. The movie, OTOH, that may have scared them away...)

(as LotsoA113 already implied, above) .. I wonder if the marketing for next year's 'boy-centric' Big Hero Six is gonna de-emphasize the action, and play-up the film's emotional beats, in order to get girls to want to see the movie..?

Think there's an unspoken feeling of "This is as close as you're going to get to an Incredibles sequel for a while, folks" about the movie, so they're probably not going to go for "emotion" unless you mean the humor of playing up a faux-Pixar sense of how the motley team doesn't get along.
(And so will the movie, as they've pretty much cut the last ties to any existing recognizable Marvel franchise out of it. They only did it because it was self-contained.)

[Dacey]

Bolt vs. Twilight had it easy.

You mean when Twilight opened to $69 million and Bolt opened to less than half of that amount, causing Bolt to barely limp to the $100 million mark, right? Yup. Bolt definitely had it "easy."

[LotsoA113]

As noted on the front page, Michael Eisner commented about Frozen and Get a Horse!, complimenting both of them.

I wonder how he feels about all of this, now that its been years since those days when everything was havoc at Disney Animation (EricJ actually put it perfectly by saying that it was similar to the George W. Bush era in many respects) In one way, he was right; CGI animation is now the fully used format for all of Disney Animations films. And yet, they're also crafting better stories and actually making the classical musicals that he seemed to swear off of around the time of Tarzan. I'm sure he's no longer prejudiced or anything (no financial or company status at stake in this situation helps I'm sure), but there must be a lot of mixed feelings, perhaps wondering how he could've made The Snow Queen under his watch. And why hadn't any of those story people thought of adding a funny snowman...

[EricJ]

In one way, he was right; CGI animation is now the fully used format for all of Disney Animations films. And yet, they're also crafting better stories and actually making the classical musicals that he seemed to swear off of around the time of Tarzan. I'm sure he's no longer prejudiced or anything (no financial or company status at stake in this situation helps I'm sure), but there must be a lot of mixed feelings, perhaps wondering how he could've made The Snow Queen under his watch. And why hadn't any of those story people thought of adding a funny snowman...

Have to remember, Eisner was TRAUMATIZED by the (temporary) mania for Shrek 2, and our rather misplaced pipe-bomb throwing that the "Shrek era" would lead the "revolution" against icky evil un-PC singing princesses. And rather unhealthily traumatized at that.
He was so convinced that CGI was now "in demand", the Mickey's Philharmagic attraction at Disney Parks was actually being floated as a test balloon to see whether they could re-animate Peter Pan's old audio with solid-CGI animation.
And, of course, one of the reasons Tangled was so teenage-y, as fans complained, was that the script was still using DNA traces from his idea to turn Glen Keane's movie into the "Shrek-like" anti-fairytale Rapunzel Unbraided teen comedy. If he'd stayed six months longer, the trauma would've been incurable.
I don't honestly know whether he's still kicking himself for it today ("Scared of freakin' Shrek, what was I thinking??" ), but if he's smart, he should. From what we know of him, however, he probably isn't.

We have some examples of how they couldn't get Snow Queen started under his watch, since the focus was still on the Queen as the central character, and how to give her a romantic interest to "melt her heart", unquote.
That may have mutated into the version we have now, where Elsa is the misunderstood anti-villain, but the movies have offered a little more diversity of funny characters and involving subplots ever since Lasseter brought the Pixar Brain Trust idea over to the main studio, and let more people have say in the path of the movie.

[Vernadyn]

It's not the next Lion King, but I liked it. It's probably the best animated feature I've seen this year (though that's not saying much; out of the other ones I've seen, only Monsters University provides any competition. I haven't seen The Wind Rises or any non-US films yet). I went into the film knowing almost nothing about it; the only trailer I'd seen was the Olaf/Sven teaser "short" that appeared in front of Monsters U. I enjoyed being introduced to the characters and the conflict without prior knowledge. I thought it was quite good with some genuinely great moments, though I didn't enjoy it as much as Wreck-It Ralph, and it was more unevenly paced than Tangled.

The song that plays over the opening studio logos and the "Frozen" title gave me chills. It was as if the film was announcing to the audience, "This is an event. You are about to see something magical." The actual "opening number" that follows (which James accurately describes as "requisite" in his review) can only be a disappointment in comparison.

If Disney Animation continues and improves on its current streak, we'll be in for a real treat.

[ShyViolet]

As noted on the front page, Michael Eisner commented about Frozen and Get a Horse!, complimenting both of them.

I wonder how he feels about all of this, now that its been years since those days when everything was havoc at Disney Animation (EricJ actually put it perfectly by saying that it was similar to the George W. Bush era in many respects) In one way, he was right; CGI animation is now the fully used format for all of Disney Animations films.

I think that there probably is some genuine admiration on his part for Frozen, if anything he isn't stupid and barring all his mistakes he knows what a good movie looks like. He micromanaged WDFA in his last five years at Disney in a desperate attempt to keep his reputation afloat and keep things as good as they were during those first glorious ten years of his tenure. He didn't realize that besting Pixar (an understandable goal considering their corporate relationship and the constant comparisons to WDFA) and throwing out 2d in favor of CGI was actually holding Disney back, not helping it go forward.

But I really think that despite everything he still has some integrity, after all he's not part of the company anymore and no one forced him to complement Frozen. (Considering the fact that DisneyWar hack writer James Stewart mocked Eisner's involvement in Snow Queen's early development at WDFA, his complementing Frozen is actually quite brave.) And as Lotso said CGI, was, at least on one level, the future, and Eisner recognized that. His tenacity in competing with Pixar did mar his artistic judgment, but you have to remember the kind of pressure Disney was under at the time; EVERY film needed to be an instant "classic" or critics would invariably declare Disney Animation dead or at least not worthy of its earlier successes, and certainly not worthy compared to Pixar.

Eisner was human, and he made mistakes. But it's been eight years since he left Disney and time (as well as sudden change) does often force a person to reflect.