When I watched Frozen II for the first time there were some things I liked about it but ultimately I found it confusing and not as enjoyable as the first one. The Academy apparently agreed with my initial assumption and didn’t award the film an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Movie but after a year and three viewings I’ve reached a different conclusion; Frozen II is better than Frozen.
I’ve started coming to this realization after my second viewing earlier this year which opened my eyes to the story and left me dazzled by the complexity/darkness of the film’s plot. This wasn’t your typical Disney princess story or a typical Disney movie in general? There were no arched eyebrow-ed antagonists or cackling broads to combat. In fact, there wasn’t really a villain at all.
It was a story of personal transformation, of righting the wrongs of the past, and truth. It’s a beautiful story and a powerful conclusion to a story that already pushed the boundaries with Frozen.
After watching it again for only the third time last week I found myself overcome by emotion while watching the movie, especially after having just seen Frozen.
Frozen II may not be as easy to comprehend as its predecessor but it is its deeper meaning and its darker second half that makes the film feel grave and powerful. I’m hoping The Lion King 2, directed by Barry Jenkins, can be a great sequel like this one as well.
I thank you for reading and I hope you have a fantastic day.
Annlyel Online 
I think there are elements of Frozen II that are better than Frozen. For instance, my son loves Olaf’s greater presence in the second movie, and it is probably funnier in that respect.
Both of them bug me a ton about taking a very unserious portrayal of dynastic succession and what not. The whole Elsa-to-Anna-to-Hans chain of apparent command is totally messed up in the first movie — there are multiple points where I could totally write a whole post on what’s wrong with this picture. (And in fact I probably will.) But the way that Elsa treats the responsibilities of her crown so lightly in the second movie frankly just… pisses me off. More so than the first one.
And the whole deal with Elsa going off to the edge of the world and then apparently being frozen when she gets there until Anna does stuff… I don’t know. It’s just weird. They’re trying too hard. I get the whole theme of righting wrongs from the past, but the whole plotline just strikes me as a bit contrived in its effort to make a metaphor about real world injustices while taking a rather tortured line of logic itself. Star Trek: Insurrection kind of did the same thing, and it’s by far my least favorite of the TNG cast’s Star Trek movies. Frankly, both sisters come off as extremely scatter-brained in the second movie, to a degree that it was a bit hard to really empathize with them for me.
Conversely, the first movie? The story of Elsa living in a state of fear and anxiety and toying with the idea that maybe it’d be better for everyone involved if she ran off into the mountains by herself and never coming back, is a very powerful one to me on a personal level. I still can’t look at that opening push-in camera movement of Elsa walking up the mountainside by herself to the opening piano notes of “Let It Go” without my eyes watering a little bit. It’s the most consistent tear-jerker scene of Disney’s movies for me next to… well, most of Carl’s story in “Up”.
Now, on some level, I get it. Both of the Frozen movies, in their own way, are fantasy metaphors for various forms of marginalized people. I just think the first one did it better.
LikeLiked by 2 people
And that’s why the first one got an Oscar for Best Animated Movie and the second one wasn’t even nominated.
LikeLiked by 1 person