![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Frozen - Hans
Apparently my sympathy for the devil instincts are still alive and kicking, since my immediate reaction to finally watching "Frozen" was "Prince Hans simply doesn't make sense" :-p
I could swallow Hans as a weak opportunist who suddenly realises that this is his big chance (the heir to the throne is dying after their hasty engagement and the Queen has exiled herself, leaving him as effective regent). But that's not what we're told. We're asked to believe that he has somehow been scheming for this all along and that everything he has done has been with this specific aim in view, which is inconsistent with what we see in the rest of the film.
After all, it's Anna who runs into him -- he doesn't set out to court her. He doesn't even know who she is, and yet he's clearly attracted to her from the start. (Again, this might make sense as opportunism -- he's susceptible to a pretty face, and then delighted to find out that the girl on whom he has made such a good impression is actually a highly-desirable marriage partner -- but as an evil scheme it's hopeless.)
And if, as he later claims, he wanted Elsa dead from the start (since he hasn't a hope of marrying her), then he has no need to insist during their expedition on the North Mountain that she should not be harmed, never mind taking active steps to save her life... let alone trying to save her from damning herself by using her powers for murder, which is an act of no benefit to anyone save Elsa herself. He doesn't need to impress Anna at this point (who in all probability is already dead in any case): all he has to do is allow events to take their natural course and let the sorceress queen get lynched by her outraged subjects.
Indeed, he doesn't need to send out an expedition to rescue Anna at all, since he is already Regent and can only benefit from her death -- nor go on it himself ("I have to look after the people!"), thus compounding the irresponsible error that first Elsa and then Anna have made in running out on their kingdom. If he is a cynical schemer, he has the perfect excuse to send out his minions to ensure that neither of the heirs to Arendelle come back -- he doesn't need to endanger his own life to save Anna, let alone Elsa. None of these actions make any sense if reinterpreted in retrospect: if Hans's apparent motives are not genuine, then the script is cheating.
And as a villain, he's a very bad one-- as in, very bad at it.
He doesn't even need to refuse to kiss Anna: if he knows that he is not her true love then he can simply kiss her in full view of the Court and act devastated when the 'superstition' mysteriously fails to work and she dies anyway. He could sit by her side and watch her die in absolute safety, thus winning sympathy (and making sure that she really does die -- he can even give matters a little extra push if necessary).
The whole 'revealing his evil plans' scene makes no sense at all, and frankly feels like a retcon inserted for some reason -- I'm reminded, inevitably, of Erik-fans' attempts to 'monster' Raoul's actions in order to make their desired hero look better in comparison, where said actions are very obviously being gratuitously and implausibly twisted in support of a plot interpretation that isn't upheld by the facts. If Hans is a villain, why does he act clean against his own supposed interests for three-quarters of the film? This isn't a clever twist -- it's total lack of plot development.
Again, I'm reminded of Andrew Lloyd Webber suddenly having Raoul start acting like a stereotypical badfic villain and Christine suddenly declare a passionate attachment to the Phantom in "Love Never Dies" with no reason given: Hans could have been given foreshadowing as an out-and-out villain, he could have been given credible motives as a conflicted opportunist, or he could even have been a tragically misguided hero who doesn't realise that the reason why his kiss fails to save Anna is that she has fallen in love with someone else, and rushes out to avenge her by killing Elsa. Just giving him a radical character change in the final scenes and announcing that all his charming and indeed admirable behaviour has been a rather incompetent lie doesn't cut the mustard where writing a plausible villain is concerned.
Indeed, it leaves the viewer with the impression that the script had written itself into a hole and didn't know how to get itself out again.
I can see why little girls adore the film, with its theme of loyalty between sisters and message that 'true love' doesn't have to involve romance (though I for one was frankly anticipating this revelation to come at the point where Olaf sacrifices himself by lighting a roaring fire for Anna and telling her that she is worth melting for: I assumed that was going to be the big twist! Why doesn't a snowman's devotion count?) But the message I'm getting is that the writers simply didn't care enough to make Prince Hans a credible human being... which is bad enough in a minor character, but disastrous in one whose flaws are made to be pivotal to the climax of the film :-(
Also, it instantly enlists me on Hans' side :-p
no subject
If he had minions. Which he doesn't.
That's actually kind of interesting, because it's pretty unique for a Disney villain. And on one level that's probably why: if he had minions, the audience would know he was a villain.
But it also ties into his whole motivation for villainy: He wants power, and doesn't have any. Hans starts out with no support base whatever, and accumulates power over the course of the movie by persuading people that giving it to him would be a good idea. He's not just trying to impress Anna; he's trying to impress everybody. At least until he's got a firm enough grip on power that they can't take it off him again.
He goes after Anna personally because he's got no minions to do it for him, but also because he's building a legend. If he brings her back alive, his approval rating goes up; if she dies out in the snow somewhere, well, at least he tried.
On the other hand, he can't stand by and let Elsa get killed in front of him, because that's not what the kind of guy he wants people to think he is would do. That kind of guy would bring Elsa back alive and insist she be given a fair hearing -- and if the fair hearing never happens because a fatal accident befalls her when nobody's looking, well, at least he tried. (Also, are they still thinking at that point that they need her to bring summer back? I can't remember.)
I do think that the "Oh Anna" scene is a misstep; it would definitely have been smarter for him to wait lovingly by her side while she perished, for all the reasons you say. It would even fit the narrative he's constucting: he couldn't save her, but at least he tried.
(I wonder if there's an extra-textual reason why he needed to not kiss Anna -- there might be rules saying the princess can't kiss the villain in a Disney film, or something -- but in that case the writers shouldn't have put him in a position where kissing Anna was the obvious thing to do.)
no subject
At that point in the story he has all the power and he risks losing it... either by putting himself in unnecessary danger (he nearly dies -- an expensive method of grandstanding to impress the crowd!) or by actually finding and rescuing Anna. Although arguably that last would give him an incentive to make sure that he was the one on the spot when any 'rescue' took place, with the potential to engineer a tragic accident...
Saving Elsa, on the other hand, isn't going to score him any Brownie points with Anna's people. The men he's leading are not well-disposed towards Elsa at this point: she is an evil sorceress, she has fled the kingdom, and if Anna dies it is going to be Elsa's fault -- either directly (it was only Anna who was convinced that Elsa wouldn't hurt her in a confrontation!) or indirectly by causing her to rush off into dangerous conditions and get killed.
The rescue expedition has every potential to be a lynch mob -- which is why Hans finds it necessary to try to insist in the first place that Elsa is not their enemy. If he wants to create a legend, he would need to please his future subjects: instead, he seems to be going against public sentiment repeatedly with actions that please only Anna. Indeed, allowing the men of Weaseltown to sneak in -- against his direct orders -- and try to kill off Elsa would have made a wonderful plot to justify having the witch-queen killed on the spot in order to save their lives (if Hans had known anything about what they were up to, which is nowhere suggested for a minute!) Under those circumstances I imagine he would have been acclaimed as the hero who saved the kingdom after Anna's tragically deluded claims (if she ever turned up alive) put everyone at risk.
And he really doesn't need to worry about whether Elsa has blood on her hands or not for anyone's sake save Anna's own -- it's all to his advantage at that moment to keep his mouth shut and let her damn herself, even if he wants to appear as the epitome of temperance and mercy by not actually executing her on the spot.
Being soft on Elsa isn't going to raise his approval ratings or impress anyone: nobody other than Anna knows her or cares about her. What he appears to be trying to do is to be "the kind of guy" that Anna wants to think he is, as opposed to the kind that wins power ... which makes sense while we assume that he cares more about Anna thinks of him than he does about Arendelle, but doesn't fit in retrospect as part of a deep-laid scheme :-(
Basically, to me it comes across as sloppy writing: either the aim was to deceive the audience rather than having an in-story rationale (which is cheating -- you need to give clues that make sense after the big reveal), or they panicked and re-purposed the character in the laziest possible way at a late stage in the script without thinking through what had already been written (which is incompetent in the extreme). And plots that cheat annoy me :-p
The obvious way to bring summer back is by killing Elsa: end the magician's power, end the spell. I don't remember anyone actually suggesting this in the film, though...
It's an interesting (and entirely possible) suggestion that there may be a studio rule in Disney pictures that the princess can only kiss her True Love... can you think of any exceptions? I can't, off-hand.
no subject
You might be right that the crowd would have been in favour of something happening to Elsa, though. At this point I think I'm going to have to concede that it's been too long since I've seen the movie, and I'm not sufficiently sure of my position to keep arguing it.
(I do want to point out, though, that twice now you've said that preventing Elsa from murdering someone was of benefit to nobody but Elsa and maybe Anna. It seems to me that at the very least it would have been of some benefit to the person who didn't get murdered...)
no subject
Although ironically there is, but it's someone he doesn't know about; it would be neater for the two lots of 'bad guys' to tie up together, but that would presumably be a massive giveaway. I'd have thought that as Prince Hans of the Southern Isles he'd have at least a couple of personal attendants, if not a native ship's crew to rely on... but as the very-much-youngest son, presumably the thinking is that he has arrived in a purely personal capacity as an adventurer aboard a foreign ship rather than as the representative of the Southern Isles to Arendelle (which is what I initially assumed; I mean, if a Prince arrives among all the other delegations of notables from foreign countries, you naturally conclude that he has been sent in an official ship to represent his parents' interests!)
If Hans is an evil schemer, than the putative murder victims are just unfortunate collateral from his point of view: he can simply let it be assumed that there was no way he could have saved them from Elsa's powers (no-one else showed any signs of inspiration, after all) and act helpless and outraged afterwards. (From the Disney morality point of view, I'm afraid the men are 'villains' and hence fair game :-p)
I've only seen the film the once and haven't made a study of the script, etc., so these are just the outraged reactions I remember having while the film was actually running -- it's possible that there were things I've missed. (But I've subsequently had a look on the Net and found that there were a lot of people complaining that there was simply no foreshadowing of any kind for Hans' actions -- so if I'm missing it, I'm far from being the only one.)
no subject
I do know that when I first saw the film, at the reveal I lost suspension of disbelief. It came out of nowhere, and rewatches of the movie don't reveal effective foreshadowing. We have been told that he's a sociopath, but... to me it is very much a problem in the narrative.
no subject
A sociopath? That really is a cop-out -- they might as well have announced that he was being mentally controlled by aliens from the Planet Zog!
One thing about writing fan-fiction is that -- as stage adaptations of novels famously do -- it shows up any inconsistencies in the source material :-( And not merely chronological ones of the Leroux variety...
I think my basic problem with Hans-as-schemer is that I can only interpret his behaviour, as presented, in the light of an attempt by the writers to deceive the audience rather than the other characters. (He never once breaks character. Ever. Not even when he's alone -- not even when it would be to his public advantage.)
And it's such a waste of what could, given a few shades of grey, have been an extremely interesting character. I can believe in a Hans who admits "I badly wanted a throne of my own, so when you seemed to really like me I thought I'd risk jumping in and asking you to marry me in a hurry before you could get second thoughts": it's the idea that he was supposedly carrying out a Plan of Insane Evil all along rather than just muddling through that doesn't add up for me.
I can believe in a Hans who asks Anna to marry him for the 'wrong' motives, then sees his initial ambition to gain a place at the court of Arendelle -- still a massive step up for a landless youngest son with no prospects at home -- suddenly transmuted into a chance at real power when the sentiment turns against the Queen and Anna, unprompted, offers him the chance to take over the reins. I can believe in a Hans who discovers that, after all those years of being squashed out of the limelight by older and more experienced siblings, he actually has a talent for leadership -- who tells everyone and even himself that he is doing all this for Anna, and shows Elsa mercy when there is obviously no prospect of her regaining the throne (or any sign that she wants to do so). And who ends up as de facto heir with everyone looking to him for orders, mentally preparing to Lead the Country for them As Anna Would Have Wanted in the anticipation that a few sad bones will turn up at some point (after all, she was a nice enough girl even if she was most importantly a princess)... and, being human, is genuinely happy to see her alive for the first few minutes.
Before the implications sink in of a situation that has potentially dropped everything he'd ever dreamed of into his lap without his asking for it, and the temptation to do nothing and simply let things ride becomes too great, as he confesses to a frantic Anna. It's not that he planned for things to turn out this way -- just that the opportunity is too much for a weak man to resist. It would make for a fascinatingly conflicted character (though again I think you'd need a bit of foreshadowing earlier on to hint that his motives aren't quite as selfless as they seem), and certainly a gift for fanfic writers :-p
Or if you wanted to make him a "proper" bad 'un who was evil through and through from the start, you could so easily put in little bits of behaviour that were initially unexplained in context: a scornful look behind Anna's back, attentions to other women at the party, over-the-top anger at Elsa's refusal of the engagement, some random callous behaviour to unimportant townsfolk, a laughed-off hint by a family retainer that 'things weren't right' in his childhood, an inclination to temporize (characterised as natural hesitation) before being pushed into heroism, an attempt to recruit men loyal to him and not to the throne, a suggestion that he may be misusing his power as Regent for personal gain -- as I've suggested, a lot more hostility to Elsa behind Anna's back, or even simply passivity in the face of threats to Anna's sister -- it really, really wouldn't be that difficult to make the audience think 'oh, that was clever' at your big reveal instead of 'that was cheating' :-(
no subject
an attempt by the writers to deceive the audience rather than the other characters
I felt this was exactly what they did.
Frozen gets praised for subverting Disney Princess Movie tropes, but it is still a Disney (Princess) movie, so when they have opportunities to do some great stuff with the story, they just don't. I would have liked to see the "true love's kiss" that didn't work -- but then, the princess must only be kissed by the true prince! We can't have a sullied princess!
I'm not satisfied with "Hans is a sociopath." I do accept Hans as a sadist, however. The evil monologue is entirely to make Anna suffer. I like to think that he was about to go through with the kiss, but being fairly certain it would not work, he stopped at the last moment instead of laughing. No, I think he may have even been a little afraid that a kiss might work. What does he know of magic, after all? I also think that he could have accepted marrying Anna in order to get a place in Arendelle, but when Elsa's magic was revealed, he felt -- but didn't show -- the same revulsion to sorcery as did Wessleton. Being a bigot and a sadist would be villainy enough for me.
no subject
Evil Overlord monologues (which are invariably a bad idea, by any objective standard: "before I leave you to die unsupervised I shall first tell you my plans") are nakedly obvious plot devices to convey information to the audience :-p
In this case I think something of the sort is probably essential, since I can't see any other way to reveal 'what I was really thinking when I did X'; however, ascribing it to sadism is problematic in my point of view, since we've seen zero indication that Hans takes pleasure in other people's discomfort or embarrassment, let alone their despair. Indeed, the contrary has been suggested: his unprompted behaviour towards the townsfolk and then his attempt to 'talk Elsa down' -- which can be ascribed to ulterior motives, but which don't serve as coded suggestions that he might be a secret sadist. He isn't enjoying the pinned soldier's terror; he isn't gloating over Elsa's tortured descent into evil. Obviously he couldn't afford to do either in a public situation, but it's the same old problem of total lack of interest in foreshadowing :-(
I definitely like the idea that Hans was afraid that a kiss might work after all; enough completely outlandish things have happened to him in one day to throw anyone's rational certainties out, after all. And Elsa's magic isn't exactly welcoming in form (there's a reason why the original Snow Queen is an antagonist: in the North, cold kills): jagged ice spears cast across the throne room in a fit of rage followed by a curse of eternal winter upon the kingdom are scarcely likely to win many hearts...
(I wonder if Anna retains a subconscious memory of her sister's magic as a beautiful plaything which makes her much more positive about it?)