I’ll start.
A third life-changing transformation for Elsa.
A new cute animal sidekick that will sell a lot of cuddly toys
Either
A:The duke turning out to be runeard in disguise or
B: Hans dying brutally
The former would be more logical for frozen's style of subversion
Because this is a fictional character a comprehensive evaluation cannot be done; however, without having completed one you can see there are no signs of sociopathic traits.
In chapter two of A Frozen Heart Hans shows that he is able to effectively empathize with others – he stated that he feels badly that his brother Caleb treats his wife so poorly and he ponders having a relationship with her because he can relate to not fitting into the Westergaard family. Later, in chapter five, he expresses the important of his bond with his brother Lars who he has maintained a positive relationship with and seeks out when he is in need of interaction or comfort.
Hans shows on both occasions the ability to choose whom he will bond with, which those with sociopathic traits struggle to do.
It should also be taken into consideration that through Frozen Hans’ course of action changes. His plan to court Elsa is altered when he meets Anna and realizes Elsa may be preferable but she is not accessible, unlike Anna. From A Frozen Heart we know overthrowing either sister wasn’t his original course of action, he sought only to escape the isles and marriage would provide that. When Anna’s heart is frozen Hans ( knowing that because he struggles to form romantic attachments and believes love is something foolish and weak) leaves her for dead because there is nothing that can be done to save her anyway – he chooses to attach himself to Arendelle because they need him and above all Hans wants to be needed on a larger scale – with Anna as acting regent her death is needed to make him prince regent and grants the legal right to kill Elsa and end her curse. All of which are last minute decisions, as he had no way of knowing Anna would be hurt in the first place. He was, until that moment, content to marry Anna.
It’s important to note that regicide is not an uncommon practice, while abhorrent, it was widespread and in that respect not abnormal on Hans’ part. We need to look no further than the Tudor Dynasty and the War of the roses for further evidence of this.
Summary And Conclusions
Based on the results of my own evaluation of canon history and childhood in both Frozen and excerpts of A Frozen Heart, Hans Westergaard meets the criteria for the following diagnosis according to the DSM – IV TR:
Axis I
Axis II
Axis III
Axis IV
Axis V GAF = 55
i was reading a post of yours from a while ago, and you mentioned how Hans' redemption if there ever was one, would have to be written well and would not be easy. Since you say that you're not really against the idea, just how the hans fandom treats Jeniffer Lee, I wanted to know what you think would be a good way to approach it.
True - I am not against the idea of a Hans redemption happening, more so the treatment that some of his fans give to Lee. However, I also recognize that the possibility of redemption happening is very slim at this point, especially since the Lopez's have made their stance very clear on him (with their Trump comparison) and the comments made in F2 - "Irredeemable Monster". Hans has also been the butt of quite a few jokes over the years, so that also doesn’t really help his case.
Now, if we put this aside and actually think about what it would take, I think the answer is a little complex. You can’t just have Hans do something heroic, say he’s sorry, and now he’s part of the Frohana. That would be cheap. There are three main elements to a good redemption arc -
1. Having the villain learn why what they did was hurtful so that they genuinely feel bad about what they did.
2. Giving the villain quite a bit of time to reflect on everything and actually have the audience go in this journey with them. Thus helping the audience themselves believe that they have changed.
3. The victim’s pain needs to be the main focus, not the villain’s. Yes, understanding why the villain did what they did is important in any redemption arc. However, if the focus is too much on their tragic past, then it tells the audience that we need to feel sorry for them and not the victim.
With all this in mind, we also need to understand that it is Anna is not obligated to let Hans to be part of the sister’s family no matter how much he’s changed. Even if she forgives him, letting him back in and giving him that trust again is a lot to ask. Forgiving ≠ letting back into your life. Basically, Hans would have to get his redemption and then be on his way to find his own purpose in life. A forgive but not forget idea.
Didn't Disney invent a completely new heroine – Cassandra for Tangled the Series, who was good but then became evil and then again became good?(or vise versa? Sorry, I didn't watch the series, I only heard about it) So, if there were Frozen the Series, bringing Hans back would be an interesting Second Chances story, plus would show the new edges of Frohana's characters.
But you're right, the interest of the auditory...I'm not sure about it too. Plus, the conceptual problem... F2 has led the franchise into a field of an almost archetypical story with mythopoetic elements, so how Hans would fit into a possible F3 with his inconstancy? It would make the story more "earthly" again, but also would take many craftsmanship from the writers to weave all these elements together, saving the 'epicness' they achieved in F2. (Maybe Hans should take a part in some magic thing somehow) I believe that they are really capable to do this, but if they would want it, that's the question.
But the team has already done an excellent job giving us the two great stories, and even if the stories have some foibles or a hero was gone, it's not the reason do not respect and love the creators team.
You’re right! Tangled the Series featured both Cassandra and Varian as heroes turned villains, then redeemed. It gives a good reference on how a Hans redemption could be done in a theoretical Frozen Series (although the stories weren’t exactly perfect, but they were pretty decent).
It’s an interesting point on how the Frozen Franchise has become a bit more mythopoetic, and Hans would have a hard time fitting in - however, given that Anna and Elsa are living in very different areas, perhaps if there was a series, maybe they can have the sisters explore both? As in, telling two different stories that intertwine towards the end. Thus, Anna’s story could be a bit more earthy, and maybe include a Hans side story.
They’re going to try and kill him.
He’s probably already dead
BOOOOOST THIS
YOOOOO
seriously guys boost this
I don’t care if it looks ugly on your blogs THIS COULD POSSIBLY SAVE LIVES
Nigerians are about to save the world
Governments are gonna kill this guy.
his name is Maduike Ezeibe, a professor at the Michael Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike, Abia State. this is huge
The world won’t get serious about this unless a post goes viral and that’s sad af You rather talk about a vine video or popular culture ok that’s fine and all but there’s a cure for HIV/Aids and america is lying There is a cure for HIV/Aids and no one will spread the news for those who are diagnosed with it, so that THE WORLD COULD WAKE TF UP There is hope for those who have been diagnosed with a disease that may have given them 20 or so years to live For the first time in the history of the world there’s is a possible preventative cure for one of the most deadliest viral diseases
Most def had to reblog this. I’m supporting him 1000%
Repost & Save a Life!!!!!! Repost
There is hope .Amen Repost this would help a lot of people…
God bless this man. I hope this saves lives.
The tumblr app closed on me TWICE when I tried to reblog this
coincidence?
(THREE TIMES)
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! cool shit !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
WHAT I S THIS
REBLOG REBLOG REBLOG
WHATSHDJD–
RE-FUCKING-BLOG
Speaking of Disney, I have seen so many stupid takes when it comes to frozen 2 but one of the worse has to be that “Disney should have let the spirits destroy Arendelle because it’s all their fault that everything went wrong and by not punishing those colonizers it shows that Disney supports the kings actions trying to take out the northuldra and if you liked how the movie went then that makes you a colonizer apologist who needs to die”
"Frozen 2 should've destroyed Arendelle" isn't an anti take or an especially hot take either. Fans and non fans have been having this debate since day 1 (HERE and HERE are two examples from YT). Also Frozen 2 is very much about colonialism and historical injustice, so of course those topics are brought up during movie discussion. Its not out of left field or malicious or anti's trying to cancel people.
I've been in the F2 fandom since the movie came out and people aren't saying "Disney agrees with the King's actions", they're saying "Disney wasn't brave enough to follow through on their colonialism plotline". (Again you can see all this from the 2 links)
Now, full transparency! I have called ONE person a colonizer apologist (not those exact words, but you understand). But that was because he was a racist redditor who was trying to justify all of King Runeards actions, up to and including: the racism, xenophobia, intentional and unintentional destruction of indigenous land, lying, disrepect, deception and intent to harm. To him, all that was "being a good king" and perfectly acceptable up until he physically killed that one Northuldra leader.
But that's a whole different can of worms...
Thank you Pickle!! Also @just-antithings I'd like to add something. I wanted to make a longer post about this but to summarize:
It's not that Arendelle should be destroyed on principle. It's not that white people should be punished in any given circumstances for the crimes of their ancestors. It's that, given the thematic implications the movie establishes, not destroying Arendelle implies some problematic meanings. Let me explain (disclaimer: this is my interpretation).
Destroying Arendelle is first presented as no more than collateral damage. "The next right thing" isn't to destroy Arendelle, but the dam. The spirits in-universe don't care about whether Arendelle stands or falls. The film doesn't intend to PUNISH Arendelle. Whether it stands or falls is irrelevant. It MAY be allowed to stand-- but when push comes to shove, protecting Arendelle cannot and should not be more important than protecting the Northuldra. You need to be alright with the possibility of sacrificing it if you ever have to.
Then Arendelle is saved, and, alright, the themes of extreme sacrifice for the sake of reparations would have been stronger if Arendelle HAD fallen and if it weren't entirely theoretical, but, okay. The message wasn't straight up contradicted.
But then, a character says the words "The spirits have decided Arendelle deserves to stand" (roughly). And, hold on. If saving Arendelle = Arendelle deserves to stand, wouldn't that mean that Arendelle being destroyed = Arendelle deserving to be destroyed? Here is when the film backtracks on its previously stablished thesis and presents a new one: that Arendelle isn't collateral damage that may or may not be harmed, but that the form of justice that Anna's character was originally trying to enact was a punishment. Now Arendelle either deserves to be punished, or it doesn't, and the movie decides that it doesn't.
But the movie didn't need to frame sacrifice for the sake of reparations as punishment. And-- alright, let's operate under the film's new logic: why does Arendelle not deserve to be punished? What changed? And if it doesn't deserve to be punished (emphasis on deserves, not in punishment), does that mean it deserves to be forgiven, instead? What has Arendelle done to actively deserve to actively stand? Not deserve to simply not be punished, but to deserve prosperity?
This problem doesn't exist in a vacuum. The movie has multiple instances of some painful two-sides-ism regarding the colonizers and the indigenous people. Iduna's character is actively rewarded for saving the son of the colonizer trying to destroy and subjugate her people. The spirits attack the indigenous people just as much as they do the colonizers when the conflict first breaks out. I don't think the writers are violently racist or that there was any malice behind this script, but they're white people with certain biased and blind spots and this results in some unfortunate implications in the writing.
Plus... Arendelle was originally goin to be destroyed. You can tell. This is just another reason behind the thematic inconsistency: the writers were going on the opposite direction and were forced to change everything at last minute. Of course the writing would be awkward and clumsy under such circumstances.
@themountainsays dont worry about Arendelle getting off easy. Anna has the bishop summon the angel of death to do to THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF ARENDELLE what it did to the Egyptian firstborn on th 50th anniversary of the day the mist appeared in the enchanted forest
Idea: anna has mattias execute hans, the Duke of weselton and the duke's goons for hating magic(or, as she calls it,"Walking the path of runeard"). She does this in public, with the Arendellians,northuldra and spirits(including elsa) all having FRONT ROW SEATS, as opposed to runeard murdering the northuldra chief in secret.
Oh and Arendelle's allies are all present too
@thebjorgmans this vid might be of interest to you. It mixes frozen 2 and OUAT like how you compare gifs of them
https://www.facebook.com/watch/?ref=saved&v=720161358893301
Deciphering the story behind Ahtohallan.
One of the things that always intrigued me in Frozen 2, was the lore behind Ahtohallan. Iduna claims that her people believed that this place was a magic river, where all the questions you ever had could be answered through memories. She also states that this river was supposedly found at the end of the ice age before being lost again, and was the source of all magic in the Frozen universe. We also know that Ahtohallan is referred to as being a female, motherly presence. Which suggests that she could be sentient.
Now, I’m not going to discuss who called Elsa, or how Elsa relates to Ahtohallan. I feel this was already answered within Into the Unknown: The Making of Frozen 2. Elsa is an incarnation/a part of Ahtohallan, which is why her powers are ice related, and is was Iduna’s spirit that called Elsa to her. What I’m going to discuss here, is the mythological, or religious aspect of Ahtohallan. What did the Northuldra believe about her? Where did she come from? I believe that there is an answer to these questions, located within the map that Iduna wrote on.
How does the book agnarr was using in the first movie fit into this
I haven't searched your blog so I'm sorry if this has been asked before but I desperately want to know. Is the woman Agnarr and Iduna see at the Trolls Kristoff's mother?
Good question! I actually wanted her to be originally, but it didn’t work out in the end cause the timing is a bit off. Kristoff would have to be 3 years older than Elsa to have his mother pregnant then, but when you see him during the troll scene, he’s 8, same age as Elsa. But it’s too bad cause it would have been a great tie in. (Why he ended up with the trolls.) Maybe she’s pregnant with his older brother? Haha. That’s just my headcanon now! 😊
This is a question that still is unanswered and i thought the same in that scene. Disney should tell us some day what’s the backstory of Kristoff and what happened, how he came to the trolls and why.
@agduna-central he followed anna, elsa and their parents that's how and why
Like to charge, reblog to cast…
Let’s hope both he and biden get it
Like to charge, reblog to cast…
Let's hope both he and biden get it
