Dir: Chris Buck, Jennifer Lee
With: Josh Gad, Idina Menzel
Runtime: 103 mins
According to lovable snowman Olaf (voiced by Josh Gad), who is a permafrosted font of wisdom about the natural world, water has memory. Considering that audiences who flocked to the original Frozen are largely made of water, it’s safe to assume that their memories of Chris Buck and Jennifer Lee’s Oscar-winning adventure will ebb and flow throughout this visually stunning sequel to the highest-grossing animated film of all time.
Water and the other classical elements - air, earth and fire - play pivotal roles in Frozen II. The realistic movement of aqua has always been a chink in the armour of computer animators. Not so here. Disney’s platoons of digital wizards repeatedly quench our thirst with jaw-dropping set pieces including a thrilling gallop over crashing waves of an angry sea astride an untamed water horse.
We’ve had six years to commit to memory every note, key change and lyrical flip of Do You Want To Build A Snowman?, For The First Time In Forever, Love Is An Open Door and Let It Go. It would be churlish to expect returning songwriters Kristen Anderson-Lopez and Robert Lopez to ride the crest of those sound waves again on a first listen. In the sequel, Elsa’s call to arms Into The Unknown soars to dizzying high notes and Kristoff’s faux 1990s rock ballad Lost In The Woods is a hoot, replete with four-legged backing singers.
Anna’s solo The Next Right Thing is a beautifully melancholic distillation of grief. Three years have passed since Elsa (Idina Menzel) ascended the throne of Arendelle. An ethereal voice from the enchanted forest beckons her to unlock the secret of a bedtime story told to Elsa and sister Anna (Kristen Bell) by their parents.
Thus, Elsa, Anna and the gang journey to an ancient stone circle shrouded in swirling mist, which designates a hidden pathway to the supposedly lost Northuldra tribe. Frozen II dilutes a conventional quest storyline. While the first film encouraged characters to let go of things that hurt or hinder - Buck and Lee’s follow-up dives deeper into their tearful self-reflection.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here