Disney's "Frozen"

[Sean]

So you're saying that because there are so few female characters in the movie, that that's why there was absolutely no effort put into making any of them look any different from each other. Am I reading this correctly? Because I'm not sure in what bizarro universe is there no fucking irony in making the dozens of background male characters actually stand out as unique-looking compared to the central fucking female characters

 

By the way, my point about not seeing personality and body movements in still images is referring to the fact that those factors are byproducts of character design, not facets. You don't make two generic white girls, tell me that one of them has a different personality or walks differently, and claim that that's what sets them wholly apart.

[iDEATH]

So you're saying that because there are so few female characters in the movie, that that's why there was absolutely no effort put into making any of them look any different from each other. Am I reading this correctly? Because I'm not sure in what bizarro universe is there no fucking irony in making the dozens of background male characters actually stand out as unique-looking compared to the central fucking female characters

 

By the way, my point about not seeing personality and body movements in still images is referring to the fact that those factors are byproducts of character design, not facets. You don't make two generic white girls, tell me that one of them has a different personality or walks differently, and claim that that's what sets them wholly apart.

 

No I'm just saying there would literally be more noticible variation in the designs of female characters if there were more of them to begin with. You called me out on showing off the possible variety the Frozen artstyle offers on male characters, but I only did so because there were no other female characters outside of background characters to show.

 

Unless you count....Bulda....

 

....gotta admit....at least she looks different.

 

Again though, I'd make the point that characters who look similar have their place and aren't automatically a bad thing. I'm not saying that Anna and Elsa shouldn't have had a little more difference in their designs, but I don't think they necessarily should have either...

You could have changed them up sure, you could have squared off Elsa's jaw more, plumped Anna up, gave them different heights, whatever. But why? What would be the reason? What would it achieve? Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should.

 

Anna and Elsa are the only two characters who look so similar, there's enough variety in all the other characters, even the more generic "guy" designs of Kristoff and Hans, to set them apart. Anna and Elsa look so similar because they're sisters. The viewer looks at them among the rest of the cast and understands straight away that they're related. That then leads to the slight differences, Anna's cheerier demeanor vs Elsa's cold, professional one, to show how both sisters have lead drastically different lives and are very different people.

 

Maybe the film could have been better if the designs of the two were more varied, maybe not. We'll never know. But in my opinion at least, the similarity between the two serves a very clear purpose and definitely didn't hinder the film for me or anyone else I know who's seen it.

[ElectricAngel]

Okay, I really didn't want to get into this argument but the feminism in this thread is getting too extreme. The reason they look similar (but not to the point of carbon copies I'd say) is because they. are. related. This seems to be a common theme in movies, even Disney is known to do stuff like this. If I may bring this up (and at this point I think it's necessary), take a look at this picture comparing Ariel and her mother, Queen Athena.

 

 

They look almost exactly the same, right? Because they are related. Now, I'm not trying to say it's a good thing, but this is how a lot of animated films work. For whatever reason, I think animators think kids are dumb and won't be able to tell who's related to who. And that's not my call. And I agree with what iDEATH said. If there were more female characters in the important cast, we would have seen a bigger variety. And just because a few female characters look the same, doesn't mean there aren't male characters that look similar. 

 

 

Look at here. The men that are obviously more wealthy are also more chubby and wear fancy clothing, the first two of which wear very similar clothing as well. And the soldiers (I presume) all look very similar as well. Of course, there is that one man in the center that looks different, but let's not forget that female character in the back, who also looks to be designed differently than the other females in this film. And if you really want me to bring more female characters, well.

 

 

There's this one old lady in the scene where Anna is trying to get help from Hans. And although this one is minor, there's another female character in the ending sequence of the film.

 

 

They don't look like Anna, Elsa and their mother, right? Well, that's because they're not related. There are a few more female characters, but because there are so little and are hardly of the main cast, people don't seem to pay attention to them. Yes, the creators could have done a better job with this, but sadly this was not the case. But still, when I see post about people complaining that all female characters look the same, I can't help but cringe at your posts simply because this isn't the case. 

[Mega]

The problem is that the original fairy tale had a LOT more prominent female characters, and Disney replaced them with dudes. This is an issue because so many movies do this. They have far more male minor characters and background characters, making things highly unbalanced. So, when both princesses use essentially the same facial model as Rapunzel, it's frustrating. Yes, there are background female chars with different physiques, but they're just that: extras.

[Sean]

Oh you're cringing huh? With the arguments of the opposite side being completely skewered into something it's not yet you think it is by bringing in extraneous shit that has nothing to do with the criticisms at hand, all for the defense of identical-looking female characters who rightfully exist due to some made-up logic that parents and non-twin siblings actually have to look exactly the same because simply saying that they're related isn't enough to drill into the heads of stupid kids everywhere, not to mention your absolutely out of nowhere jab at feminism, I can't possibly imagine the internal struggle you're going through to get your points across.

 

If there's anybody who's cringing at the posts in this topic, it's me.

[Celestia]

The problem is that the original fairy tale had a LOT more prominent female characters, and Disney replaced them with dudes.

 

An Actual Conversation That Probably Happened at Disney

 

"Alright, so there's this story called the Snow Queen, and it has a bunch of female characters and only two or three males--"

 

"Ha ha, no. We won't be able to sell that! A bunch of dudes and two ladies or bust. Also, a talking snowman, just to rub it in that we don't care."

 

 

You could have changed them up sure, you could have squared off Elsa's jaw more, plumped Anna up, gave them different heights, whatever. But why? What would be the reason? What would it achieve? Just because you can do it doesn't mean you should.

Apparently the only reason anyone would care about diversity in characters in general (let alone the designs) is just for the sake of it, instead of...the reasons we bring up when we argue over this sort of issue? For example, wanting non-white Princess because people who aren't white do, believe it or not, exist in the real world and deserve more portrayals in media. Then there's the body types, which is also an issue that Disney's handled pretty poorly in terms of the main characters, including the men to an extent.

 

And that's all not getting into the fact that this is a (I presume!) high budget, Disney-made film where the two women are similar enough that a good deal of people noticed and have been criticizing it since before the film was even out! Ignoring every other issue with the designs, this should be an indicator that maybe, just maybe, Disney has made a mistake with their current direction. And I said this in my last post here, but let me tell you, part of what frustrates me about this is that I do like Disney. It's why I want them to do better, and why I "cringe" when people who claim to be their fans make sure to shove fingers into their ears and go "LALALALALALALALALALALA" in the face of criticism.

 

...But nah, you're right, we think they should maybe have a Princess that isn't the same ol' same ol' "because they can, and therefore should". That's clearly the only reasoning here. Yep.

 

 

 

I'm going to go drink some milk and play Kirby or something because I need to calm down. Fr*ck this movie, I'm outta here.

[Nepenthe]

It's not "extreme feminism" (seriously???) to say that Anna and Elsa not only look a lot like each other but Rapunzel as well, and that this is indicative of problematic design trends in entertainment of not really varying female characters beyond generic skinny pretty girls, which only serves to compound upon the effects of cultural trends that women who don't look like these characters have to deal with. And as an animator, I can assure you my fellow animators don't look down on children. Being that we create entertainment specifically for them, we're the least likely to consider our target audiences stupid. It would make for a miserable job; you should take your issues up with board members and financial advisers.

 

And are we really devolving into the argument that people shouldn't be making heroines that aren't skinny, straight, and white because it's useless or something? Are we really going to go there, or can people understand why this bullshit is annoying to talk about all the time?

Edited June 15, 2014 by Nepenthe

[ElectricAngel]

not to mention your absolutely out of nowhere jab at feminism

 

It's not "extreme feminism" (seriously???) to say that Anna and Elsa not only look a lot like each other but Rapunzel as well, and that this is indicative of problematic design trends in entertainment of not really varying female characters beyond generic skinny pretty girls, which only serves to compound upon the effects of cultural trends that women who don't look like these characters have to deal with

I dunno about you guys, but when I see people complaining about the lack of female characters in something and complaining about how all female characters are the same and ask for more diverse female characters, it sounds a lot like feminism to me. Unless I've misunderstood what the word feminism means. And if that's the case, I apologize.

 

And as an animator, I can assure you my fellow animators don't look down on children. Being that we create entertainment specifically for them, we're the least likely to consider our target audiences stupid. It would make for a miserable job; you should take your issues up with board members and financial advisers.

That's actually quite nice of you folks. I was merely assuming in my original post (something I really shouldn't do that often) and it's nice to see animators consider every last person when it comes to the audience.

 

And are we really devolving into the argument that people shouldn't be making heroines that aren't skinny, straight, and white because it's useless or something? Are we really going to go there, or can people understand why this bullshit is annoying to talk about all the time?

To be honest, I thought that's what this whole argument was about. :V Which is kinda why I found it stupid. All I understood was people complaining that Anna and Elsa look alike and that's some sort of animation sin or something. But hey, I didn't know the original story had a lot more female characters. You learn something new everyday I guess. And now looking back, yeah that was a dick move Disney made with the characters. I still think Anna and Elsa are different enough to be their own characters though. I mean, seriously it's kinda obvious who is who.

[Mega]

I dunno about you guys, but when I see people complaining about the lack of female characters in something and complaining about how all female characters are the same and ask for more diverse female characters, it sounds a lot like feminism to me. Unless I've misunderstood what the word feminism means. And if that's the case, I apologize.

But does it really matter if it is feminism? I hate how feminism has become this negative buzzword, when these are issues that still exist. Important issues-- like the fact that Disney is afraid of marketing female characters because they think it'll keep boys from seeing their films. But what about Mulan? Beauty and the Beast? Those films were insanely popular, and they had no shame in marketing their female characters then.

I just personally think that gender imbalance and representation in animation are big problems. That Elsa, Anna, and Rapunzel all have the same exact body type is an issue, for one, because it makes it look like they're keeping the designs similar so it'll be easier to design toys. ...this could very well be the reason, in fact.

[Chaos Warp]

Wait I have no context of this whole debate nor have I seen Frozen but I'd like to say one thing: Since they're sisters, isn't it realistically possible for them to look similar? I'm not defending or hating on the character designs whatever your personal opinion of it may be but at least the same-ness has some sort of reason.

[Nepenthe]

I dunno about you guys, but when I see people complaining about the lack of female characters in something and complaining about how all female characters are the same and ask for more diverse female characters, it sounds a lot like feminism to me. Unless I've misunderstood what the word feminism means. And if that's the case, I apologize.

If you see people complaining about the lack of physical, sexual, gender, and racial diversity in film and immediately ascribe to that a political agenda (even if it's the correct political agenda), instead of merely people just wanting to see admirable characters who share their looks and experiences, then there's a problem on your end, not the people complaining.

 

To be honest, I thought that's what this whole argument was about. :V Which is kinda why I found it stupid. All I understood was people complaining that Anna and Elsa look alike and that's some sort of animation sin or something. But hey, I didn't know the original story had a lot more female characters. You learn something new everyday I guess. And now looking back, yeah that was a dick move Disney made with the characters. I still think Anna and Elsa are different enough to be their own characters though. I mean, seriously it's kinda obvious who is who.

I wasn't deriding the people who made the initial complaints. I was deriding the pervading belief among people- particularly gamers- that there is something inherently wrong or useless with asking for better representation within their media, that you're not achieving anything by doing it, and that be able to do something doesn't mean you should as iDEATH so eloquently put it, like the very addition of minority characters is somehow offensive. If I say "I wish the creators could have decided to create female characters that don't conform to Eurocentric standards of beauty," it's not an attack nor is it (or should be) some big bold political statement, especially when we remember the fact that there are countless characters on film who look like Anna and Elsa, thus the "harm" in making a large princess or a South American princess is made that much more minimal.

 

Furthermore, Disney has had shit talked about them by independent and European sects of animators for years in part because of the standardization of their character design, with exceptions here and there like Lilo and Stitch. Art design, particularly character design, is important for establishing identity, expanding the breadth of visual differentiation within the art itself, and in Disney's case setting trends for other western studios. And if nothing else, it's highly ironic that animation opens up the door to do literally anything you want on film, and the best we can get in the best-performing Disney animated film of all time are two sisters who look extremely identical to not only one another, but to the unrelated Rapunzel from the last princess film, who in turn is just basically Glen Keane being Glen Keane. Elsa and Anna are three steps deep into the most generic Disney design imaginable. And with Frozen's success, we can get an idea on what the next Disney film and characters will look like. It will be nothing like this.

[Mollfie]

Wait I have no context of this whole debate nor have I seen Frozen but I'd like to say one thing: Since they're sisters, isn't it realistically possible for them to look similar? I'm not defending or hating on the character designs whatever your personal opinion of it may be but at least the same-ness has some sort of reason.

 

I dunno... my sisters and I look related but not the same. I also look more like one sister than the other. My other sister actually looks more like my Nan.

 

Also, my mum had two sisters and they look pretty similar to each other, except two have brown hair and one had red hair due to a recessive gene. The red haired one went on to have three boys, again two with brown hair and one with red, which is pretty cool. My mum is the one who looks most different to her sisters, she takes after my Grandpa's side of the family.

 

If you put us all together then you can see that we are clearly all related to each other, but we certainly do not look like clones with tweaks here and there.

 

You aren't just a mixture of your parents either but both of their entire heritage. Which is why myself and one sister are taller and slimmer than our other sister too, she just takes after the shorter, curvier side of the family.

 

Personally I think that it's just boring character design. I like the style, they do look cute, but it's boring when all the main female characters in a show or film look so similar to each other, especially when the male characters look very different to one another.

 

Edit: I know that when I draw characters I tend to favour certain traits over others but I try to be aware of that and ensure that I'm drawing a variety of shapes, sizes etc because people are all different and I want my art to be representative and inclusive. It's not exactly difficult to do, you just need to be aware.

[Iggy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&persist_app=1&v=5_EQ1Rlz1jE

While I totally agree that two sisters looking a bit too similar to each other is something to have a conversation about, don't you think we're getting a bit... angry? I'm not trying to backseat mod or anything, but I just think we're getting a bit out of hand here.

[pppp]

So, just to spark more discussion, thought I'd post Confused Matthew's review of it. In it he praises the movie describing how it is a deconstruction of typical Disney tropes:

 

http://blip.tv/confused-matthew/matthew-s-favorite-movies-frozen-part-i-6945666

[Celestia]

While I totally agree that two sisters looking a bit too similar to each other is something to have a conversation about, don't you think we're getting a bit... angry? I'm not trying to backseat mod or anything, but I just think we're getting a bit out of hand here.

Where's this anger, exactly? I think my posts have been the closest to "angry", and even then it's mostly sarcasm in the face of people not really listening. It's not like anyone is resorting to caps lock and exclamation marks and swearing. I'd rather not waste that much energy on something I don't like, anyway.

[Iggy]

I wasn't referring to your posts in general, Celestia. I was talking about the discussion as a whole. Anyways, since we're on the topic of characters looking too much alike, doesn't Studio Ghibli do the exact same thing with their female protagonists? I mean, really.

I don't mean to bash Studio Ghibli because they're absolutely glorious, but I'm just saying that there are ALOT of identical facial features in these girls.

EDIT Someone showed me this http://steveholtvstheuniverse.tumblr.com/post/90325855105/lmao-like-the-only-time-i-ever-see-hard-disney so nevermind.

[Dizcrybe]

I wasn't referring to your posts in general, Celestia. I was talking about the discussion as a whole. Anyways, since we're on the topic of characters looking too much alike, doesn't Studio Ghibli do the exact same thing with their female protagonists? I mean, really.

I don't mean to bash Studio Ghibli because they're absolutely glorious, but I'm just saying that there are ALOT of identical facial features in these girls.

EDIT Someone showed me this http://steveholtvstheuniverse.tumblr.com/post/90325855105/lmao-like-the-only-time-i-ever-see-hard-disney so nevermind.

 

You could say the same thing for much of anime. Looking at you in particular, Kyoto Animation.

[Nepenthe]

Who says what Ghibli, or rather what a lot of anime in general does artistically is perfectly okay? This comes across as a derail in the actual topics of Frozen itself as a movie and its overwhelming success in mainstream movie circuit.

[Jovahexeon Jax Joranvexeon]

This just in, a sequel to frozen has been announced!

 

 

 

Disney Announces ‘Frozen 2′ EMAIL PRINT 3 TALK     MARCH 12, 2015 | 10:48AM PT Marc Graser Senior Editor @marcgraser Disney officially announced plans to produce a sequel to “Frozen.” The company revealed plans during the Walt Disney Co.’s annual shareholders meeting on Thursday from San Francisco. The first film’s directors Jennifer Lee and Chris Buck are developing the project with producer Peter Del Vecho for Walt Disney Animation Studios, which took home the Oscar for animated feature for the film. A release date and production details are yet to be announced. John Lasseter, chief creative officer of Walt Disney and Pixar Animation Studios, made the announcement with Disney chief Bob Iger, and Josh Gad, who voices the character of Olaf in “Frozen.” The sequel doesn’t come as much of a surprise, considering how the first film continues to be a major moneymaking force for Disney’s divisions since its release Nov. 22, 2013 — and helped reinvigorate Walt Disney Animation Studios. SEE MORE:How Long Can ‘Frozen’ Fever Last for Disney? “Frozen” generated nearly $1.3 billion at the box office and has become a merchandising juggernaut, breaking sales records on homevideo and at Disney’s stores. Outside of a Broadway show and the animated short “Frozen Fever, “Disney has kept its “Frozen” sequel plans quiet until now. “Frozen Fever,” which reunites the toon’s characters and song writers, will unspool in front of Disney’s live-action adaptation of “Cinderella,” out in theaters this weekend. “We enjoyed making ‘Frozen Fever’ so much and being back in that world with those characters,” Lasseter said. “Jennifer Lee and Chris Buck have come up with a great idea for a sequel and you will be hearing a lot more about it and we’re taking you back to Arendelle. We are so excited about that.” Disney used its shareholder meeting to also announce details of its next “Star Wars” films, with Rian Johnson’s “Star Wars: Episode VIII,” to bow May 26, 2017, and Gareth Edwards’ standalone “Star Wars” film, “Rogue One” to star Felicity Jones and be released Dec. 16, 2016. SEE ALSO: Marvel's Merchandise Plan for 'Avengers: Age of Ultron:' 'Make the Big Bigger' FILED UNDER: DisneyFrozenFrozen 

2variety.com/2015/film/news/disney-announces-frozen-2-1201451480/

[ElectricAngel]

Yeahh, I just read about the sequel on Walt Disney Animation's Facebook page. Good for them...? I wish I could be more excited but after almost being drowned in everything Frozen the past year I'm not very interested. I do hope though that it's going to be a direct to video release. I don't recall Disney ever releasing a sequel in cinemas but this is Frozen so I dunno. I am curious to see what the plot is about though. The first film wrapped up everything so nicely in the end.

[Gabz Girl]

NonononoNO. Wreck it Ralph needs a sequel, even BH6 needs a sequel. Frozen does NOT! Ugh.

[...]

Frozen's the most successful animated film ever released and the merchandizing that has followed it along with the soundtrack still selling like hotcakes is more than enough for reason for Disney to make a sequel to it. I'm not hot on the film nowadays myself and detest the fact its getting a sequel, but you need to take stuff like this into account. BH6 and WiR still have all the time in the world to get follow ups, so don't blow your gaskets just yet.

[sonicgirl313]

When Disney saw how popular Frozen was they declared how they were going to keep the hype going for five more years. They've already made a sequel short called "Frozen Fever."

*sigh* At this rate thanks to Disney we are definitely going to end up seeing Sora and Riku stumble upon a snowy mountain with Anna and Elsa.

[Mando-Whirl-Wind]

MY issue with this is that doesn't Disney Animated Studios with a few special exceptions(Beauty and the Beast Christmas, and the Fantasia series) Not do sequels themselves? I mean there were uncanon ones done by secondary studios, but DAS doesn't do sequels and thats one of their strengths?

 

(Also Wreck-it-Raplh deserved one first )

[Big Panda]

MY issue with this is that doesn't Disney Animated Studios with a few special exceptions(Beauty and the Beast Christmas, and the Fantasia series) Not do sequels themselves? I mean there were uncanon ones done by secondary studios, but DAS doesn't do sequels and thats one of their strengths?

 

(Also Wreck-it-Raplh deserved one first )

Rescuers Down Under and Winnie the Pooh would like a word.