Disney’s Modern Villain Problem, and why it Damaged Frozen II
****Frozen II Spoilers Up Ahead****
So this makes me sound like an old man parked in front of a lawn complaining about the good ol’ days, but here goes nothing:
Can Disney please, please, please, pleaseeeee stop fearing the concept of a legit villain and bring back the better days of Disney Villains actually being in Disney movies again? Whatever the reason, recent Disney (and even Pixar) films have been avoiding the concept of a straight-up antagonist to consistently be the main obstacle to our hero/heroines. And then, when we do have potential, they become revealed to be something/someone else and hiding the true supposed villain until the final act---which isn’t really part of the Disney Villain formula. This lack of a legit villain damaged Frozen 2’s potential and prevented it from matching up to the first.
Without spoiling too much, Frozen II is mainly about the elements going out of whack because of Elsa having specific powers amidst the fallout of a backstabbing committed by a certain group of people. Elsa along with Anna and the gang head off towards the source of the conflict to seek why their kingdom is under attack and how they can stop it. The opening act sets up what could be a fine adventure that tests Elsa’s powers and emotional strength as in the ending of the original finally fully embraces her family, embraces the land she rules, and finally decides to open up a little and receive the love she longingly but fearfully desires. So now that Elsa has emotionally evolved, its time for her to face her first major quest as queen.
And then everything falls flat because there really isn’t an antagonist. It’s a journey with obstacles, but none of them really consistent.
The elements are (rightfully) pissed and therefore are acting out in honor of the very people who had been betrayed. Sounds familiar, right? Well, Frozen II didn’t necessarily steal, but definitely imitated story beats from Moana, The Last Airbender, and even to a minimal extent Thor: Ragnarok.
But what do all these movies have in common? They don’t have Elsa, by far the most fascinating Disney character this decade.
Think about it, Elsa is the most powerful princess Disney has ever made, and the most powerful character overall since Aladdin's Genie. She can create life from snow and ice, she can freeze up an entire portion of land to an eternal winter, she can walk on water, she can use her ice powers for evil, for good, and for construction purposes (Let It Go ice castle building reference), and she can even kill (there is no death count currently, but let’s be honest she nearly killed Anna twice). And throughout Frozen it was revealed that the older she got, the more powerful she would become. So imagine a fully-realized Elsa at her peak of control over her ever-growing powers ruling a kingdom that’s constantly sought after because of their diverse resources---hence the multiple rulers from other kingdoms stopping by to visit and try to keep positive relationships during Frozen’s opening act.
All these storyline elements from Frozen could have continued on in the sequel easily, and even give Hans the surprise-late-in-development baddie from the original an upgrade in true fully fleshed-out villainy by declaring war on Arendelle. Imagine Hans creating a mutiny within his own kingdom and becoming more bloodthirsty and vengeful after being humiliated by Elsa and Anna and being sent to prison. Imagine a sequel that involves Elsa with the power to destroy entire armies at her hands while just starting to open up to love her sister as well as the people she reigns over. Instead, we have Elsa battle the other elements for one scene and quickly conquer them while setting out on her main quest…finding the truth.
How exciting.
And the final revelation was not much of a shock considering like I said, we’ve seen this in previous films, and even in previous Disney movies. And once you see the third-act-true-villain twist in multiple Disney animated films made within the last decade (Wreck It Ralph and its sequel, Zootopia, Big Hero 6), you kinda expect it to happen again. In Frozen II's case the main villain is......the kingdom itself..?
Side-Note: Big Hero 6 had such an awesome villain concept but after they humanized him it wasn’t quite the same…slightly watered down what was actually a powerful film.
Frozen II has this issue of looking back constantly, at her past, at what happened to her parents, etc. Frozen, for all its flaws, beautifully wrapped up the first chapter in their story, as Elsa has learned to stand up to her past, accept who she is, while also accepting her uniqueness in society and the love her sister has for her nonetheless. Why are we looking back again? Why are we seeing moments from the past? Why are we seeing the boat that sunk Anna and Elsa’s parents? Why are we seeing Elsa’s powers being a point of contention? Hell, why does it even matter why Elsa got her powers? Sometimes, the mystery is stronger than the answers.
Back to the main overall issue though, Frozen II is the latest chapter in Disney’s recent (profitable) campaign to try to own up to historical mistakes of the past, within the company and within the country that birthed it. We see this in the remakes of Dumbo and Jungle Book, we see this in Moana (slightly), and this is the main crutch in the surprisingly dark (and spectacular) Zootopia. But you can’t do this with a legit villain; that would muddle the story beats and pace. You can’t have a legit villain on top of an overarching villain in the background.
Before I continue complaining, Frozen II had spectacular songs, spectacular visuals, gave Olaf some depth and even superior humor, and lastly strengthened the bond between the two sisters while giving each their moments to shine. But damn it why couldn’t we get a villain to test Elsa’s powers and see how far she can go and how powerful she can become? Why couldn’t one of the other elements become a foil? Why couldn’t there be an additional element that would test Elsa and her emotional and physical strength? Imagine an Ice versus Fire showdown of some sort.
Even though Disney has had this second renaissance, as almost all their films have been well-praised for the past decade, none of them really can match up to the 1990-2000 entourage of animated films. What do those movies have in common? An actual foil. How good would Beauty and the Beast honestly be without Gaston? How about Aladdin without Jafar? Even Emperor’s New Groove broke every Disney rule in existence but had Yzma and Kronk trying to kill the lead character within the opening 15 minutes. Even the weaker Disney films of the 90s resonate because of the antagonist, with Hunchback of Notre Dame’s Frollo and Hercules’ Hades. Look at what (among a lot of things) severely hurt the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise: after Captain Barbossa and Davy Jones, the antagonists were downright horrible.
Not to say Disney has no idea what they are doing…unless it’s Star Wars-related. Disney is a moviemaking factory, and churns out these storylines based more off of what makes more money as opposed to what makes the most sense. Tangled and Princess and the Frog had true villains, but didn’t make Frozen or Big Hero 6 money. Disney has instead tried the Pixar technique of introducing diverse and grandiose concepts and selling the film that way, it’s about the environment and the protagonists much more than what obstacle might lie ahead. Pixar doesn’t have a lot of actual villains, in its entire history they have only created four three-act enemies (Sid, Hopper, Syndrome, Lotso).
So Frozen II might be outrageously successful because it’s carrying the formula of this generation's Disney/Pixar efforts, but it doesn’t mean the movie reached its full potential.
Queen Elsa deserved much, much better. She deserved her villain.