I hope it starts and ends with a duet between Elsa and Anna. And I hope Elsa gets more than one song to herself this time.

Frozen Heart was awesome, it brought the mood. It was all foreshadowing when you give it a second look.

No, it’s fine. You’re not the only person who had made these complaints, and I respect your opinions.

I don’t mean to come off as defensive and I’m sorry if I do, I just feel people should at least understand where I’m coming from, even if they disagree. Besides, those aren’t even my biggest problems with the film.

I don’t know what has made you so defensive. I wasn’t trying to convince you to like Frozen or anything. If you don’t like it, fine. I’m just expressing my opinion on why I disagree.

Being a little hypocritical? You mentioned that Kristoff had all the backstory he needed, but now you question why he was the only ice cutter after “Frozen Heart?” Either way, “Frozen Heart” shares the same purpose the song “Fathoms Below” from The Little Mermaid. Both songs foreshadow the events in the film (Elsa’s powers going out of control, Anna’s literal frozen heart, Elsa’s metaphorical frozen heart, even mention of “Let It Go”). I have no idea how you could call that useless just because the ice cutters (save for Kristoff) don’t appear again.

I still don’t understand that complaint of Elsa’s powers. It’s a mystery for the characters and audience, but it doesn’t add to the overall story. I think that it might make the film go really off-topic. The Queen is gone, the kingdom is freezing, and almost everybody could die. I doubt there would be enough time trying to fully understand HOW Elsa got her powers instead of trying to control them and fix the situation.

All I was mentioning was that a sequel would be a good idea to expand on things. I never mentioned that it was an excuse for any poor writing you thought was in the film, but an opinion is an opinion.

No, the forgettable song that has nothing to do with the rest of the movie was indeed “Frozen Heart”. There was no point for those ice cutters to be there. At all. They’re just there for one scene and they’re gone for the rest of the movie. That doesn’t even begin to explain how Kristoff’s suddenly the only ice cutter out there.

And even if they wouldn’t change much, explaining Elsa’s powers would at least explain why she’s the only one in this kingdom with magical powers. Did the movie explain if there were others like her? No, they did not.

Even if the sequel DID go into those things, that wouldn’t excuse why the original movie’s plot is so broken and disjointed that even I, with my suspension of disbelief, was taken out of the experience CONSTANTLY. We can argue about this all day if you want, but that doesn’t change the fact that I consider Frozen an absolutely mediocre mess.

Calm down. It was only a few ideas. I didn’t need a whole block of text. But so be it. The origins of Elsa’s powers would add almost NOTHING to the original film. The story itself wouldn’t change if we knew about them. For instance, in Tangled, the origins of Rapunzel’s powers had to be told because it would explain why Mother Gothel took her in the first place, and how Rapunzel loses her powers (which is huge for Rapunzel’s fear of people and the climax). As Tangled continued, there were several references to the introduction. The origins of Elsa’s powers wouldn’t really change much of Frozen’s story. There is also a hint of the conditions Elsa may have been born in from the song “Frozen Heart” that goes, “Born of cold and winter air, and mountain rain combining…” I also hope that that “forgettable song that has nothing to do with the rest of the movie” you were referring to wasn’t “Let It Go.”

Being the tritagonist, Kristoff’s backstory was very brief. Anna and Elsa were meant to be the main focus in the original, so Kristoff had to take a seat. I just figured more about his actual family could be expanded more in a sequel and learn more about him.

They should have explained the origin of Elsa’s powers IN THE ORIGINAL MOVIE. Instead, we get a forgettable song that has nothing to do with the rest of the movie and a weak explanation that “she was born with them.” Also, we already saw Kristoff’s backstory in the original, so why do we need to see more of it? I’m just saying, these were things that should have been more of a focus in the first one. The reason Kung Fu Panda 2 explained the backstory of Po was because the first one was focused more on the story of Po’s rise to Dragon Warrior status rather than some dark troubled events of his past. They waited until a sequel because they felt that, with the success of Kung Fu Panda, there was more story to tell. Frozen may have been a success, but does that mean there’s more story to tell? In my opinion, no. They had their chance with the original movie, and in my opinion, the final results were too weak.

-Origins of Elsa’s powers.
-Kristoff’s backstory.
-Anna and Kristoff’s relationship
There’s a little that could be expanded. Weird for a fairytale, but I’m just going for it.