#(and the chokehold elsa still has me in) | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

allseeinganalyst · 1 year

Text

Frozen II Novels - Review

It's been a while since I reviewed or analyzed anything here. This blog was made for that exact purpose, but I've posted one half-hearted review-ish thing about Mob Psycho and the Nanoha look-back is taking a while.

Part of that is due to being that I find myself in weird mental spaces more often than I'd like. The internet is a hell-hole, but it's also one that's borderline impossible (and certainly very impractical) to actually just sever ties to. I've ditched Twitter and I don't use TikTok (except to look at videos my partner sends me), but I still get, somehow, hit with a lot of LOUD, SHOUTY voices that seem to make it impossible to enjoy anything.

After about three-to-four midlife crises about things (i'm 30 this November), and a chat to my partner, I've managed to get the mental TARDIS that is my mind up and running again, ready to tour the fictional universe and enjoy what is has to offer, getting back into the things I love, without getting bogged down in the screeching of fandoms and social media.

Gods, that was a very long way of trying to say "I read a cool Frozen book."

Frozen 2 - Forest of Shadows and Frozen: Polar Nights - Cast into Darkness are two original novels set in the world of Frozen (Duh.) Forest of Shadows was released in 2019 and I actually read it back then, while Polar Nights was released in 2022, and I picked it up from Target and read it in march of 2023.

To get this out of the way, while it does sometimes throw people off, I am actually a big fan of Frozen. I've loved it since the first movie. It's not my favourite Disney film (that would be Tangled, and whoo-BOY, will we get to Tangled related media at some point on this blog!), it's probably a close second. I love the animation, I love the songs, I love the characters and I love the world. I was even sad when the hype for Frozen died down, and no, I don't think Enchanto is better - That's another LOUD SCREECHY OPINION that I'm not sad to hear less of.

These are obviously not the only Frozen novels out there. I do own "A Frozen Heart", which I've really got to get around to, because apparently it contains some Hans backstory, and Hans is a character I'm really interested in learning more about, and obviously there is a slew of additional Frozen media. Frozen-Mania gripped the world in a chokehold not seen since the god-damn Shrek movies, and it had an effect on our media and culture so great that no doubt, someday there will be an essay on youtube by Super Eyepatch Wolf explaining and analyzing the overwhelming impact of a Disney movie from 2013 and the INSANE fandom that sprung out of it - which I was a part of from very early on, and quite honestly you can use it as a self-contained example of how fandom has changed since then... BUT I'M DIGRESSING.

The point I was trying to make here is that, most of the media released post the original Frozen movie is fairly generic. Baring one or two things, and of course, the animated shorts, a lot of it is standard kids stuff - Storybooks, Quick Reads, Junior novels, picture books, etc. Some of it is really fun, and the art was almost always either a wonderful, bright cartoonish 2D style, or a painterly, soft style that's really pretty to look out - But not a lot of is espeically unique. It's got a "Frozen Flavour" to it, but it's all very standard. If you changed one or two things, you could swap out Elsa and Anna for Rapunzel, or Ariel, or any other number of Disney Princess characters and the stories would be more-or-less the same. Stuff that mum and dad can give to their kids to let them have their Frozen fix without having to endure "Let it Go" one more time. (Side note: If you do happen to be one of those people who're bitching about how over saturated that song is - Fuck you, I'm going to play it again on purpose.)

The point I'm getting around to is that these books, cheep target paperbacks they may be, are not that. There's a distinct world and continuity here, and it's even possible to place a timeline.

These books (I believe there may be a third between them for a reason I'll get too shortly) have recurring characters, direct continuity and callbacks. All of them expand on the world of Frozen, moving away from the generic Disney-Princess storytelling of kingdom mishaps and "oh-no! character X is lost/upset/lost a precious item/wants to do something special/has a special occasion/etc" and into a deliberately constructed world, with a soft but distinct influence from Nordic and Sandenavian folklore.

They are not perfect, but they are worth talking about. Spoilers abound below, for those of you who are interested!

I'm not going to summarize the plots. I want to talk what I find interesting, annoying, curious, fun or frustrating about these books. These reviews are intended as a form of looking after my own mental health anyway. If you're interested, I've given names and pictures of the covers. Go look them up. Or better yet, read the books yourselves and tell me what you think!

The coolest (pun 400% intended) part about these books is they are clearly on a timeline. They're designed to slot very nicely into Frozen canon, and do so very tightly I might add. The timeline that we can establish is:

Frozen > 3 YEARS > Forest of Shadows > Frozen 2 > Polar Nights.

Forest of Shadows leads directly into the events of Frozen 2, even referencing the scene where Elsa wakes up the spirits at the end, while Polar Nights is explicitly stated to be a matter of 2-3 months since Anna took the throne.

During that 3 YEARS period there, you can obviously slot in Frozen Fever, Olaf's christmas special and probably one or two of the storybook stuff released post Frozen. If the (hilarious) "Olaf Reenacts Disney Movies" shorts are in ANY way canon (and... They MIGHT be to some degree, I'll get to this later...) they almost definitely slot in between Frozen 2 and Polar Nights. Again, I'll get to why later.

I believe I am missing a novel or story somewhere that fits into the same timeline as Polar Nights references an event that's a bit too specific to not have been depicted in some form of media, but I can only work with what I find locally. Although I am in no uncertain terms a fan, I only have so many resources and time to put toward things, and Frozen isn't at the top of that list. If a novel appears on a store shelf, I'll buy it. If it doesn't, I go without.

While my thoughts are mostly focused on Polar Nights, because I read Forest of Shadows over 3 years ago. I'm talking about both novels for the most part.

They are decent in size. Small enough for kids to read with no trouble, but more than a short story. Both tell full length, original stories.

These books paint a slightly wider view of Arendelle and it's surroundings than what we see from the movies. Neighboring kingdoms are mentioned by name (including Corona - Rapunzel's kingdom from Tangled. - Again, I'm going to get back to this later), and there are several named, recurring characters like Tuva and Ada, lesbian blacksmith wives (explicitly mentioned as being married) or Sorensson, the Astronomer who lives far outside of Arendelle and is introduced in Forest of Shadows, then plays a small but significant role in Polar Nights. There's recurring references to Aren of Arendelle, the founder of Elsa and Anna's kingdom, and a secret room or passage discovered in one book is referenced and used again in the next. It's really consistent and it makes it feel rewarding to read these novels. I very much doubt that any future Frozen visual media will reference their events, but if the stories themselves can keep a continuity across writers, then that's good enough for me to feel like I'm really in a bona-fide expanded universe.

There's some stuff in these books that I have personally wanted to see since the first movie. Things like finding out how Anna never recovered the original memories the trolls took from her, or finding out what Elsa spends a lot of her time doing in Ahtohallan...

(conjuring ice memories, apparently. Yeah, seems like while she's not going to "drowning depth" again, she is using her magical ice powers to pull up home-movies of her parents... Gotta wonder if she didn't accidentally pull up one of their date nights and then shattered the whole thing into ice shards in a panic once her dad put on the Barry White music.)

The books ALSO give me something that I have held in my head since the very first movie - Anna cracking jokes about her past and her mistakes.

I've always loved the idea that Anna doesn't seem the type to get all "Shell-Shocked PTSD Veteran" over her traumatic memories. That's Elsa's job, so I've always imagined she makes a lot of jokes and lighthearted fun out of it. Like, she seems the type to go: "OH HEY! That's a great statue of me! And I'd know! I've been a statue! Made of ice! Wanna see me do the pose?"

And while we don't get that exactly, we do get her ribbing Elsa about having Marshmallow throw her out of her ice castle, grumbling about how "Hans isn't actually THAT good looking", and generally having a sense of "oh no, I remember what happened LAST TIME..." about her. It's not as explicit as I'd like, but it's there and it helps with that feeling of the world being alive and moving. These characters do remember what happened yesterday. They are actively learning their lessons and trying to avoid the mistakes of their past.

The stories are compelling enough. While not groundbreaking, edge-of-your seat page turners, they both offer an adventure that's very much on brand for Frozen, effectively utilizing the characters and the world. This isn't a story where you could change a few names and slap Aurora or Belle or Ariel in instead. These stories feel tailored to Elsa and Anna. Unfortunately, there's a bit of an issue that I assume arises from being an author hired to write your own original entry into a carefully curated, multi-million dollar franchise, owned by the real world's full on Mega-Corp.

See, while I love the connected, constructed world these novels build around the movies - They do in-fact, happen to be being built around the Frozen media franchise, and Disney have been notoriously strict with this before.

If you were a part of the early Frozen fandom (again, I was), you might remember the sheer excitement around when it was announced that Elsa and Anna, as well as Arendelle and a number of other movie characters would be coming to Once Upon a Time, flinging the universe of Frozen into unexpected live action.

I'm not going to get into my thoughts around OUAT, because... YEAH I'm trying to be focused and that is worth a WHOLE other blog post - which I don't have any REAL desire to write out unless someone BEGGED me to do it, but long story short, given that the show explicitly is alternate continuity for ALL Disney's franchises, it had a lot of leeway in what it could do with it's regular cast... But not the Frozen characters. Although the writers did get to play around creating new backstory and lore, and chopping and changing a bit, there was a strictness to what they could and couldn't do with the characters. They couldn't give Elsa a love interest. They couldn't dramatically change anything from the movie. Characters had firmly fixed personalities that were absolutely not allowed the usual "flex" of OUAT - No extra edginess snuck in, nothing out of character.

(They did have incredible costumes though. Way better than any other live action projects that I've seen).

My point in all of this is, that was explicitly in an alternate universe. OUAT had NEVER had any bearing on any of the franchises it pulled it's roster from, and was marketed to a whole different audience.

These books are NOT. They are marketed toward the same audience as the movies, and are intended to fit alongside it. And it is painfully obvious that Disney holds a tight leash when it comes to ways for writers to interpret their billion-dollar characters. Obviously this is pure speculation, but I would imagine the writers for these novels were given dedicated character bios of characters like Anna, Elsa, Kristoff, Olaf and not allowed to deviate or even go into much depth beyond what was listed in those bios.

I say this for a couple of reasons - The most notable of which is the dialogue, and to a lesser extent the character actions. Characters have an unfortunate tendency to sprout stiff, unnatural dialogue, based on certain things that were mentioned in the moves.

Nowhere is this more egregious than with Anna and chocolate. The movies mention her having it as her favorite treat, and she has like two memorable moments involving it in the first movie, but the books treat it like it is NEVER off her mind. If the books mention Anna wanting to do ANYTHING, most of the time, it involves chocolate in some way. She brings it with her on expeditions. She can't wait to get back to the castle and eat some. She has a "choco-versary" with Kristoff, the anniversary of the first time they ate chocolate together. It comes off as a weird obsession, instead of the favorite food it was in the movies. Similarly, she's mentioned as having "Sandwiches" as her favorite meal a few times. Not only is this FRUSTRATINGLY non-specific, it also seems PURELY based on her one line in "Love is an Open Door" and it's callback during her conversation with Kristoff in the first movie... Although to be fair, this did also get a call back in Frozen Fever where we see her be enthusiastic about one, so... whatever.

It gets stiff with dialogue between characters too. Almost every conversation with Elsa and Anna seems to drift towards "we were seperated, but now we are together again, and I love you and am so proud of you!". They'll discuss the plot, and they do have some genuinely great moments (like Elsa talking about the trolls and Anna pointing out, somewhat sadly, that "no, sis, I can't remember, they took my memories as a child...") but a lot of it is re-hashing their end-of-movie "sisterly bond" stuff. It's a real shame especially in Polar Nights, because that is set AFTER Frozen 2. We could have had scenes of Anna asking Elsa for help ruling as Queen, or Elsa observing how Anna does things differently from her, but we learn nothing more about how these two interact than what we already knew.

The other problem that I assume crops up from Disney's strict oversight is that it's obvious the writers are not allowed to affect the world too much. They can play with the figures in it, but can't change the landscape dramatically. This is understandable, as it's unlikely the Mega-Mouse wants some kids novel throwing out a detail that might force them to change how they write the next movie. They're not going to kill off Kristoff, or suddenly give us a Hans redemption arc - As interesting as that would be, the writers need the all clear from Disney, and Disney won't want some hired novelist to make a major change to their giant money making machine which is no doubt shaped like Elsa's head.

This means that, although the stakes do feel real for the books themselves, there's a sense that nothing that happens within really affects the world that much. Characters don't learn a vital lesson or change in any significant way, and those that do are new characters, constructed for the book, who can easily be ignored by the wider narrative - Polar Nights has a whole segment with a pair of sisters, obviously designed to parallel Elsa and Anna, who's past and backstory, and the mysteries and mistruths thereof, form more-or-less the basis for the entire plot, but our ACTUAL sisters can't have a chat more complex that "boy I'm glad we're not separated anymore, also we're proud of each other!"

The result is - and this is kind of what I've been driving toward this entire time - these books give me a VERY distinct feeling, and it took me a while to identify what it was. I didn't catch it when I read "Forest of Shadows", but it WAS there, and Polar Nights has it there in full force.

These novels feel like FILLER.

Traditional, ACTUAL, filler.

SIGH - Quick sidetrack.

The term "Filler" is thrown around a lot these days, often by people that I don't think realized the term originally had a more specific meaning - At least from what my experience is.

"Filler" was primarily a term used by the anime community, referring to episodes of a show that were not adapted from the original manga. This practice was done as most anime, especially Shounen anime like those pictured above, ran almost continuously, and when your airing an episode a week which is sometimes able to adapt multiple chapters from the manga, you're going to close the gap pretty quickly.

This meant that things would be done in the episodes to stretch them out. Anything from lengthening fight scenes, to additional dialogue, all the way up to - perhaps most famously - whole new arcs created purely for the anime. These arcs had to tell their own stories that were entertaining, but obviously couldn't massively shake up the status quo, as they had no idea what would be coming next for these characters and this story. They relied on events distanced, often entirely unrelated to the plot at large (in-fact, rather infamously, Bleach once went to a year long filler arc in MID-SWORD-FIGHT BETWEEN CHARACTERS). Often they would invent new characters, new powers, and often draw on events of the past, or spotlight background characters to create an unobtrusive narrative.

These arcs can, and have, been good. There's nothing inherently wrong with filler, but as TV Tropes says: "These arcs can, and have, been good. There's nothing inherently wrong with filler, but as TV Tropes says: "At their most extreme, absolutely nothing that happens in a filler episode will affect things going forward, even if it seems like a character developed or grew in some manner."

Filler's definition has expanded a lot, and was never really as fixed as I tended to take it, though I still see it used incorrectly. If an episode of a show had the characters sitting around talking, with the plot not advancing at all, but we still learn things about the characters that matter, and have an impact or call back later, or their relationships change in SOME way, then it's NOT filler. In the words of my Media Teacher: "Just because it didn't feature a car chase and a shoot out, doesn't mean it doesn't matter." - Filler doesn't matter. Slow paced slice of life episodes can matter a LOT.

As a side note, to this side note, Filler in it's most traditional sense is dying out, and has been largely, though not entirely, gone from anime by the mid 2010's. Anime have switched over to the "cour" style of episode production, with a season consisting of usually around 12-or-24 episodes (a little leeway in either direction is common, like having 26 or 10 episodes), which focus on tightly adapting one arc or novel or portion of the story. They then take a break, and return with the next season whenever, picking up where they left off. This is why you don't really see stuff running for 200+ episodes in a row anymore, and why something like, say, Attack on Titan has five seasons. This has allowed for MUCH reduction of filler, and virtually eliminated the need for the filler arc. They do still pop up, but notice how today's "big shots" like My Hero Academia and Demon Slayer have multiple seasons instead of just running for a billion episodes like shows such as One Piece, or Naruto.

Though speaking of that, apparently some new shows are determined to carry on the traditions laid by their parents... *side-eyes Boruto*

AHEM. I really need to drop this topic and get back on track. QUICK, what's an appropriate Frozen-related GIF to use to move on?

I fuckin' told you I was gonna play it again.

ANYWAY, so my point is that - despite feeling like we've really entered a living, breathing world, with its own history and people, it feels like we're never allowed to see that world DO anything.

This wasn't too bad in Forest of Shadows, because even though it couldn't do anything massive, it could create the illusion of movement, by transitioning characters from their Frozen selves to their Frozen 2 selves, laying down hints of what would be fully realized in that move, but it is REALLY on display in Polar Nights - The set up involves exploring Anna's first major kingdom event as Queen, and yet, we really don't get any meaningful detail about that. We don't get a sense of how it feels for her to suddenly wield all this power and responsibility when, not just a few months ago, she was more or less the spare princess that could spend her days having picnics with snowmen. I mean sure, there's mention that she's nervous, but it really doesn't go into much detail. She's just "Queen Anna", the same way we saw her at the end of Frozen 2.

(Elsa's also still referred to as Queen - sometimes she gets directly called "The Snow Queen" - but this is a detail I like. It's not like the people forgot or disavowed her as their monarch. The two are called "The Queens of Arendelle" at one point. It's an interesting touch.)

The events of Polar Nights involve a lot of things happening (including major characters losing their memories of each other), but it all amounts to a problem that's easily resolved with Sisterly Love, and by the end of the book, everything's normal. I know these books are not going to affect the movies, but one of the cool things, as I mentioned, was that they did have continuity between each other. Sorensson was introduced as a man of science in Forest of Shadows, and then in Polar Nights, Anna and Elsa go to him for help with something they want a scientific explanation for. While some of these characters might pop up again to be mentioned in the next novel, it's hard to believe it'll focus on Anna dealing with the fact that... Say Dragurs are real, and exist out there, and that things like grudges and nasty legends and rumors can bring unwelcome power.

Some of the dialogue and phrasing is just plain awkward too. A lot of the time, when Anna spoke to Kristoff, it felt very bland, and forced-romantic, rather than their natural, more banter and warm interactions in the movies. We don't even get a call-back to "I prefer you in leather ;)" - Although that may have been pushing the biscuit. If they went any further with how Anna feels about that, the LOUD SCREACHERS might lose the ability to pretend she was being 100% wholesome and child-friendly with that line...

There's another line where Elsa's narration indicates she wants Anna and Kristoff to have kids so she can be "the cool aunt, literally" - A line that exists purely for that one lazy joke, since no other mention of them having children exists that I can remember.

(Though I am borderline certain that Frozen 3 will focus on their child, but again, that's getting distracted)

Polar Nights also avoids any direct appearances of Northuldra. No Honeymaron or Rider or anything - The only other significant characters that appear from Frozen 2 are Mattias (who fills a bit of a generic "general/captain of the guard" role, but that's his job so it's fine), as well as Gale and Burnie and the Water Nokk, who do have roles to play, but relatively minor ones. They are mentioned, but even when we see the Enchanted Forest, it's purely featuring the cast from Frozen, plus the wind and the new plush mascot lizard. Again, it's a shame because beyond: "Elsa loves the fact that she is living free" and "Elsa spends time pulling up home movies made of snow", we get nothing about how the former Queen is living as a spirit. Okay, I don't expect the book to explain about how Elsa hates needing to pee in a bush now or something absurd like that, but when you go from living in a castle to living in tents and caves, you've got to feel more than just "free" right? We don't even see how she interacts with the Northuldra. How do these people, who revered the spirits, interact with one who can speak to them in their language? Who can sit and chill out with them? Who can pop round for dinner? We get none of that, and it's sad, because it would have been nice.

Polar Nights features a mystery story between two sisters, one of whom is said to have outright murdered the other, several fights between Elsa and a Nordic zombie wraith that mimics her powers at one point, a Pirate Queen and her fleet sitting menacingly at Arendelle's borders, at one point escalating to firing on royal ships during a massive storm in an eternal night, Anna and Elsa traveling to a whole different neighboring kingdom, and Anna's fiance explicitly losing his memory of her, and anything they ever did together...

... and somehow it comes off as less compelling and impactful than Frozen 2, where - and I don't want to downplay or insult Frozen 2 because I think it's amazing and obviously it's themes run far deeper BUT - the main antagonist force boils down to "Dam that a bastard-man built one time".

(On that, Polar Nights is intent on reminding everyone that King Runeard was a Bad Man™ and every single character essentially goes "BOO! HISS!" whenever his name comes up. And yeah, the dude was an absolute bastard, and he only gets revealed to be worse in Polar Nights but you would think Anna and Elsa would have more complex feelings than "hate that guy" to their granddad who they believed was a bit of a legend up until the events of the second movie. Still, maybe they genuinely don't and at any rate, unpacking those feelings might be a bit more complicated than a novel intended mostly for kids is willing to get into.)

There's more that could be said, but I worry I've been sticking to the negative for too long. Yes, these novels do feel like anime filler. Lots of stuff happens, but it doesn't really impact anyone. There's new characters introduced and side characters discussed and all sorts of things that really don't mean that much to the world in the long run, and no doubt will be forgotten by the time Frozen 3 rolls around BUT...

BUT

The books are an enjoyable read. They let me return to the world of Frozen and explore a bit more of the land these characters live in. Yes, I wish the book featured a conversation between Anna and Elsa that didn't just feature them rehashing what they've learned in the movies, but it is STILL good to see them together again. It's heartwarming to know that Elsa still stays in the castle, that Anna let her keep their parents bedroom, that the people of her former kingdom still call her "Queen".

It's great to see side characters mentioned, and not just appear once. It's great that these books are allowed to look outside of the generic fairy-tale fare and bring up things like Dragurs and Huldrefólk and, while I do think the Sisterly Love being the solution to Polar Night's problem isn't the best ending, it does FIT with the themes for the franchise and it isn't a re-hash of Anna and Elsa, instead holding up a mirror to them and showing them what they could have been had their lives been but a tiny bit different.

They're good books, and I would rate them:

A solid B

Was originally a B-, but upon writing this out, I re-evaluated and I wanted to stress that I actually really do like them, and I hope they make more. I really want Frozen to be that thing that winds up having 20 different novel series, six comic books, two original TV series and a line of successful movies. It'd make me happy.

That is just about all I have to say on this topic except for:

OKAY SO YOU KNOW HOW I HAVE BROUGHT UP TANGLED A COUPLE OF TIMES AND I'VE BEEN SAYING I'LL GET BACK TO HOW I THINK IT INTERACTS:

Well - We all know Frozen featured Rapunzel and Eugene visting Arendelle and, ignoring some of the crazy and common fan theories (they're cousins I swear it still works if you squint), that suggests that there is a shared universe and I believe these books CONFIRM that when taken in conjunction with other evidence...

Consider that, Corona is directly mentioned in Forest of Shadows, and that would seem to confirm it, but I've still seen that, and the Tangled character's cameos waved off as cheeky Easter Eggs, BUT... REMEMBER THOSE FUCKIN' OLAF SHORTS? The ones where he re-enacts disney movies?

YEAH WELL, in the Tangled one, he has a bit of extra dialogue where he goes something like "this one is for one of my favorite people in the world, Rapunzel" or SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT SUGGESTS HE'S MET RAPUNZEL PERSONALLY, and...

AAAAAND...

Polar Nights reveals that he and the others HAVE stayed in the Enchanted Forrest before, which gives him a timeframe where he could plausibly tell these stories in universe, AND AND AND AAAAANNNNND:

He also has a short where he re-enacts "The Little Mermaid" which IS CHEEKILY IMPLIED TO BE A BOOK THAT ANNA LOVES in Polar Nights, so Olaf has a REASON to know that story, AS A STORY--

AND BASICALLY THIS CONFIRMS THAT FROZEN AND TANGLED ARE SET IN THE SAME UNIVERSE AND THE FRANCHISE IS GOING TO CONCLUDE WITH AN ULTIMATE CROSSOVER THAT puts Avengers to shame and I SWEAR THAT IT'LL BE SO AWESOME AND--

The Analyst has been dragged off into the night by sensible people. Please ignore his ramblings.

#Frozen #Frozen 2 #Frozen Forest of Shadows #Frozen Polar Nights #Frozen Polar Nights Cast into Shadow #Anna #Elsa #Kristoff #Sven #Olaf #Review #Analyst #Ramblings #Tangled #Disney #disney princess

13 notes · View notes