ByPeter DiDonato, writer at Creators.co
A night owl that writes what comes to mind. You can follow me on Twitter at @didonatope or visit my blog at filmfizz.com.
Peter DiDonato

DISCLAIMER: This article contains the opinion of solely the author and not the website. Also, this article contains spoilers.

Lately, I've been noticing a lot of rumors and fanbase wishes for a sequel to Disney's smash hit, Frozen. Don't get me wrong; I loved Frozen enormously, but that doesn't mean I want there to be a sequel. The fans that want a sequel certainly mean well, but I honestly don't think it would work out so well. Reason being is that Frozen is one of those films that has a clear-cut beginning, middle and end, and has a story that ties up nicely.

At the end of the movie, Elsa comes to terms with her powers, Olaf gets his summer without having to worry about melting, the evil Hans is punished for his misdeeds, and Anna and Kristoff start off their promising relationship. I really don't see the sequel potential in it.

The same goes for many other Disney films; many of them have a concrete beginning, middle and end. It is likely that the only way that a Frozen 2 could be made is if a contrived plot device was added to [Frozen](movie:411685)'s canon. Come to think of it, Disney has done exactly that in the past, and the results were rather poor.

Between 1994 and 2008, Disney has made a slew of direct-to-video sequels to their theatrical films (through their Toon Studios division). Most of them were shoddy productions focused on milking the first film's success for all it was worth. Here are just a few examples:

The Lion King 2: The writers introduce a Scar fangirl who wants to get revenge on Simba. I'm pretty sure the writers completely forgot that Scar was a cruel and inept dictator that was liked by nobody, even the hyenas.

The Little Mermaid 2: All of a sudden, Ursula has a sister that was never mentioned in the previous film. The character, aside from being thin, is hardly any different from Ursula. They even used the same voice actress, Pat Caroll. Essentially, it is a re-hash of the first movie with Ariel taking up King Triton's role as the strict, protective parent and her daughter Melody taking up Ariel's role as the curious teenager.

Pocahontas 2: After Pocahontas' risky ending of not having the two leads end up together, this one just sends her to England to find a husband and live happily ever after.

None of these movies were received well by fans, and were quickly forgotten. It seem unlikely that a Frozen sequel would turn out any differently.

A Frozen sequel would likely fall flat.
A Frozen sequel would likely fall flat.

I understand that Frozen is Disney's highest grossing film, and that it has an enormous fanbase. However, what many members of the fanbase need to realize is that sequels aren't always necessary. Seeing as how Frozen has no loose ends in its story, is having a sequel made worth throwing in contrived and mediocre plot devices?

Of course, if the creators feel that a sequel is possible, then they can feel free to make one. Who knows? It may actually work out. I just feel that Frozen is one of those films that doesn't need a sequel and doesn't really lend itself to one. In my opinion, it would be best for Disney to work on their upcoming original projects, so that audiences can have new films to love and feel nostalgic for.

Trending

Latest from our Creators