>>87361702Are you drunk? Your posts are all over the place and a bit delusional, full of typos. Maybe it's time to stop posting
>Yes, they didAnon. Disney did not market Frozen as a coming-out-of-the-closet film. The fact that you're trying to insist that shows you're deluded.
>The sheer amount of money spent on PR alone Again it seems you don't read before replying. It went the other way; Frozen merch consistently sold out first, the parents were desperate for it, the Frozen merch demand made the news, and only then did Disney wake up and start to push and market the franchise more. Your understanding of things is wrong, upside down.
>>First movie focused on Anna,I think you meant to quote a different line. Let's assume you were talking about Elsa:
>Rule in what way? Her first show of being a queen was an outright failure>we already saw Elsa's storyYou're contradicting yourself. Her story's not over; like you say yourself she hasn't proven herself as a ruler yet to her people, but she's the queen and has to rule the kingdom despite having failed disastrously at first introduction. She needs to learn and grow and prove herself.
>second featureYou mean short, 7 min isn't feature length. Yeah it was just a drawn out song, but it did add to the characters a bit. At least, it showed that Elsa's still traumatized about the past and obsessed with apologizing and making things up to Anna, still wrecked with guilt.
>The fuck does Frozen have? Why are you this angry? Also Ariel got the shit direct-to-video sequels, and similarly Frozen is getting a full-length sequel, book series, shorts, and who knows what else. They'll probably have more story in the sequel, so they'll have more to their story then. You're not making much sense.
And the first sisterly argument ending badly is exactly why they'd need more development. They can't skirt around arguments all their lives.
Honestly it's sort of difficult to understand your points, if you have any.
