Frozen Problem #3: Comparisons with the Disney Renaissance Films ---------- This final one is a little less objective. (I almost had the nerve to say itd be shorter too. Hah.) Im going to be going on the comparisons Im drawing between Frozen and the films of the so-called Disney Renaissance of the late 80s to mid 90s, from roughly The Little Mermaid to Tarzan. In each of these Disney films, theres a clear distinction of good and evil. There has to be, because theyre childrens films and there needs to be little ambiguity when youre trying to tell a story to a child as to who the bad guy is. Thus, in many of them, we need to set up who our good guys are and who our bad guys are immediately, in order to quickly set the exposition and allow for the storytelling to begin. In some instances, like in Lion King, Mulan, Hunchback, and Aladdin, we actually establish who the villain is and their motivations first, because theyre the driving point of the entire story – without their goals, the story could not advance. Even the villains who dont start the film with nefarious actions (e.g. Clayton from Tarzan) show obvious signs that theyre going to be the villain; such as yelling, short temper, glaring, frowning, basically things we subconsciously associate with negativity. I addressed the fact that Disney took a big risk with their villain bait-and-switch at the end of Frozen Problem #2, but the problem with muddling the antagonist is that the audience doesnt know who to associate negative feelings with. Should they boo and hiss for the Duke of Weselton? Surely he comes off as evil and blustering, but then theres the point where Elsa herself almost crosses into antagonist territory by killing the Dukes minions. I remember how, early in the planning phases for Frozen, Elsa was supposed to be more of an antagonist (Im not kidding, skip to 1:50 on this early teaser trailer while it was still in production: dailymotion/video/x12z9t4_frozen-it-s-my-sister_shortfilms), but her story changed as the music (*cough cough* Let It Go) shaped her into more of a nuanced, sympathetic, coming of age/self-acceptance character. This lack of distinction between which character is supposed to be the bad guy and which is the good guy, while not particularly problematic for the plot (UNLESS YOURE HANS), causes it to sort of fall away from the obvious Good Versus Evil stories that the Disney Renaissance films. Taking a quick aside to compare the Good Versus Evil idea and applying it to Tangled (which I hold as the standard to which any post-2000 Disney film should aspire if they want to be compared favorably to the Disney Renaissance films), within the first ten minutes the audience knows both the entire backstory of Rapunzel, they know that Mother Gothel is the villain, and they understand her motivations for keeping Rapunzel locked in the tower. (However, why she would tell Rapunzel what day her birthday was – or even HOW she knew when Rapunzels birthday was, Ill never know. Backstories are hard sometimes.) So now were gonna come back to Prince Hans of the Southern Isles (ugh HANSSSS) and talk about what I call the Disney Villain Karma Threshold: The invisible meter that tracks just how far a villain goes in the Disney film and what their appropriate punishment at the end should be. In most Disney Renaissance films, its at the exact moment that the villain crosses the moral boundary and attempts to kill a protagonist that they themselves seal their fate and die, usually off a tall building or structure. Lets do a really quick tally: -The Little Mermaid: Ursula tries to kill Eric, Eric runs her through with the bowsprit of his ship and she falls back into the ocean. -Rescuers Down Under: McLeach tries to kill Cody by shooting the rope holding him over a ravine of crocodiles, Bernard tricks Joanna into knocking him into said ravine (this ones a bit obscure, but its for the fellow Disney-philes. Plus he still falls). -Beauty and the Beast: Gaston draws a dagger and mortally wounds Beast, slips and falls off the side of the castle. -Aladdin: Jafar buries Jasmine alive in an hourglass filled with sand, becomes a genie and falls back into the lamp - killed in the sequel when said lamp is destroyed. -The Lion King: Scar kills Mufasa, attempts to kill Simba several times, gets hoisted by his own petard by falling off Pride Rock and betrayed by his hyenas. -Pocahontas: Radcliffe attempts to shoot Chief Powhatan and instead grievously wounds John Smith, becomes the exception by getting sent back to England to await judgement by the Virginia Company. (THE EXCEPTION! BECAUSE HISTORY!) -The Hunchback of Notre Dame: Frollo sentences Esmeralda to burn at the stake and then attempts to murder her personally, falls off the side of Notre Dame. -Hercules: Hades succeeds in killing Megara, gets uppercutted by Hercules into the River Styx and falls into oblivion. -Mulan: Shan Yu attempts to kill a number of protagonists, gets his tunic impaled on his own sword by Mulan, is flung across the Forbidden Temple by a firework and explodes in what would become known at Epcot as Illuminations: Reflections of Earth. -Tarzan: Clayton kills Kertchak, attempts to shoot Tarzan, gets caught in vines, tries to machete himself out and inadvertently causes himself to fall and hang himself by said vines. -(BONUS) Tangled: Mother Goethal mortally wounds Flynn Rider with a dagger, Rapunzel cuts her hair and Goethal begins rapidly aging, falling out of the tower as she crumbles to dust. If youre still reading after all that, lets take a look at how Prince Hans of the Southern Isles fares. -Frozen: Prince Hans leaves Anna to die, cold and alone in the parlor of her own castle, then attempts to personally EXECUTE Elsa with a SWORD. His punishment? Being punched off a boat by Anna, ostensibly for hurting her feelings, and being sent back to the Southern Isles for more noogies and indian burns from his 12 older brothers. THIS DOES NOT HOLD UP. HE TRIED TO KILL BOTH SISTERS AND YET DISNEY IS JUST GOING TO LET HIM SLIDE? HAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNSSSSSSSSSS Finally, and this is really the most nitpicky of things, but I want to briefly go over song style. The musical composition of each of the Disney Renaissance animated features help define the film, both in establishing a setting AND setting a theme. For examples of theme, Hercules has an extensive gospel choir motif in its songs and Tarzan has, well, Phil Collins. (I didnt say it was a great theme, I said it was a theme.) Meanwhile, Aladdin, Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, and especially Pocahontas all have strong songs that focus on their point of origin, be it European, Arabian, or the New World. (Also, apparently everywhere underwater is Jamaica? Did not know that.) Tangled, the eternal contrast, holds up here fairly well. The songs, while more limited than most of its predecessors, are a blend of medieval music and folk rock, with I See the Light as a clever thank-you letter to the Disney Renaissance films for paving the way. By comparison, Frozen feels... scattered. Let It Go is beautiful and I still sing that sucker any time its on the radio (judge away) but it sometimes seems like all of the other songs lack a cohesive theme. I mean compare Frozen Heart and Love Is an Open Door from Frozen Problems #1 with Fixer Upper (https://youtube/watch?v=IHUvALTEDJQ) and In Summer (https://youtube/watch?v=B2jeR_OpOGE). Where is the cohesive theming? Why does the setting music end with Frozen Heart? Why are we left with vignette pieces that – to me at least – dont invoke a deserving reason for their existence just by existing. Dont get me wrong, I love the work of Robert Lopez: I love Avenue Q, and The Book of Mormon is one of the only Broadway soundtracks I never, NEVER remove from my iPhone. That being said, I really feel like the music we were given is almost TOO Broadway. Like, to me, a Disney musical needs to have been a Disney film first, that can then be expanded into a musical with additional songs and revised characters later once the film has proven its worth. I get this feeling from listening to the Frozen soundtrack that Robert Lopez, by sheer virtue of his background, tried to make the connection from film to musical IN the film, and didnt give the film itself the chance to establish its theme as anything other than songs that are bound for Broadway. Again, this is the most arguable point I have, but its a smaller part of a larger problem. I understand that theres not supposed to be a magic Disney recipe with the Disney animated films, and that critiquing each film to the ones before it limits what potential successful risks each successive film can take. However, failing to remember the successful themes, motifs, and even tropes of the preceding films – the things that MADE the Disney films of the late 80s and mid-90s so successful that historians dubbed them the rebirth of Disneys success as an animation enterprise, can cause us to lose sight of what makes Disneys films special. We WANT to see those fights of Good and Evil, we WANT to be transported from a movie theater or a living room to a magical place, if only for an hour and a half. Ultimately, the point isnt that this film is good or bad. The point is that, whether you love Frozen or even if you hate it, I sincerely hope that it causes you to look back fondly on the Disney films you loved (and probably sang along with) growing up as a child, regardless of who likes or hates them now. Thanks for reading.
Posted on: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 02:42:28 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015