 |
| Disney publicity image downloaded from Variety web site. Anna wonders: What the heck is my odd older sister up to now? |
Elsa has retired and moved north to live as some sort of ice demigod, the fifth elemental spirit in this tale with an ecological subtext.
The dam is bad. We need brute force (send in the brutes) to get rid of the damn thing.
I just saw “Frozen II,” and I was impressed. I think Disney was a bit taken aback by the success of the first movie in this franchise, and as always when such a story succeeds, there’s the question of where does it go from here?
And the central unresolved question of “Frozen” was: What the heck is Elsa? And that’s exactly the MacGuffin for this plot. Unless you consider four stones with rather bland logos for elemental forces to be four MacGuffins—or is mist a MacGuffin? Are we back to the dam?
Also, is it just me, or is Olaf the character Jar Jar Binks wanted to be but never was?
Whatever. I don’t think “Frozen II” will hit with the power of the first movie. I don’t expect to see YouTube videos of enthusiastic Marines reacting to the signature music video from this film. But there is a lot to like in this second installment.
While there is an environmental theme here, it’s not the main point of the movie. Anna and her journey to womanhood is really more what’s going on. Elsa is being lured down a different life path by a siren voice who turns out to be ghost mom who also sends ghost horse—but then Elsa dies and is reanimated, so maybe “Frozen II” is a reverse zombie apocalypse there the zombie saves the town and installs the sweet younger sister as the benign despot.
But I’m getting away from my point, if I had one. I’m like Olaf explaining the plot.
I liked this movie partly because it allowed its characters to evolve. That’s even a theme that Anna ruminates on, how even a satisfactory moment in time is really only a moment in time, and things inevitably change. Someone once observed that a happy ending always depends on ending the story at the right place, because in the long run, the characters are all dead.
Which is even used as a joke in “Frozen II.” It’s a rather smart movie, with lots to unpack.
Anyway, my actual favorite theme of the movie isn’t the one about how, as Olaf says, technology can save or destroy us, as interesting as that dam theme is. Nor is it about what Elsa is and how Anna gets to be all growed up. Instead, to me the main theme is Anna facing the likelihood of her best possible choice destroying the town that she loves and is princess of.
To have peace, it’s necessary to tear down that wall. In this case, the wall is holding a reservoir full of water, and doing the right thing means flooding Arendelle. Meanwhile, Olaf has apparently expired, her sister’s fate is unknown but not good given that her magic is ending and Anna is depressed, discouraged and alone.
And she repeats a line that comes up several times in “Frozen II.” What do you do when all is lost, your dreams are shattered and Hillary Clinton was not elected?
“Do the next right thing,” Anna mutters to herself.
That line really resonated, to me, and is the most important theme from “Frozen II.” It’s a message for our times. Indeed, a transcendent message for many times. That’s a pretty deep thought from younger sister in a sequel children’s movie with magic trolls and singing reindeer.
But it works, for me. I hope to remember those words and use them myself.
Go see “Frozen II.” You may find yourself wondering, as I did, whether a giant snowflake would really save the town—sure, the wave was diverted, but wouldn’t the waters rise anyway? That’s not really the point. Elsa’s magic always was a little edgy and improbable (she can create life and nobody seems concerned about whether Olaf has a soul?).
It’s a movie about the sidekick. It's a movie about Anna. And doing the right thing even when all seems lost. And that seems enough.
