“Frozen” and “Catching Fire” have both taken the box office by storm. However, currently grossing at over $900 million internationally, “Frozen,” is on fire, raging past “Catching Fire,” which, on the other hand, is frozen at just under $500 million. As the sing-along version of “Frozen” continues in theaters, and the “Catching Fire”  DVD release date has been announced as March 7, I will take a look at how good these films really are.

“Frozen”

Loosely based on Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Snow Queen,” “Frozen” provides a spin on a classic fairy tale and deviates from the hackneyed Disney clichés of its forerunners.

In this unconventional Disney film, Elsa, the poised and elegant Queen of Arendelle, lives in fear, struggling to control her beautiful yet dangerous icy powers. When her powers get out of hand and cast her kingdom into an eternal winter, the spunky, optimistic princess Anna sets off to save her home and her beloved sister Elsa. Teamed up with a wisecracking snowman, a rough-and-tough ice monger and a loyal reindeer, Anna battles the treacherous winter and learns the meaning of true love.

“Frozen” delivers a refreshing break from the old Disney clichés of “love at first sight” and “true love.” Instead, the driving force of the film is the heartwarming love between two sisters, as opposed to romantic love.

Additionally, this movie presents viewers with beautiful animation and enchanting, snowy settings. The meticulous details of the ice and snow help create the raging snowstorm, Elsa’s stunning ice castle and the snowy wonderland, which give the story a unique, whimsical atmosphere.

Although the physical character designs are nothing special and strikingly similar to “Frozen’s” predecessors, namely “Tangled,” the characters are significantly more complex internally than their older Disney counterparts. Prince Hans, for example, seems like the generic Prince Charming, but he, too, is more complex than he seems. Elsa is also an elaborate character, unlike the one-sided villains common in other adaptations of “The Snow Queen.” Elsa, on the other hand, is torn, battling with her own power and trying to protect her loved ones from herself. She is the epitome of a strong heroine and the greatest triumph of the movie.

While maintaining the poignancy of the plot, “Frozen” is also able to draw laughs through Anna’s gut-bustingly funny trio of sidekicks. Their effective comic relief, especially evident through the songs “In Summer,” “Fixer Upper” and “Reindeers are better than People,” invoke laughter from viewers of all ages. However, Sven the reindeer is just a generic silly sidekick and is, seemingly, a carbon copy of Maximus the horse from “Tangled.”

The movie’s original soundtrack also adds to the overall success of the film. Unlike many other movies of the Disney Princess franchise, the songs of “Frozen” are not just thrown in for the sake of having music. They show insight into the characters and plot while remaining refreshingly theatrical and Broadway-esque, which is uncommon for a Disney film. The songs serve a purpose. They enhance character development, provide comic relief and intensify the strong narrative storytelling of the film, thanks to the lyrical talents of Robert and Kristen Lopez. For example, “Do You Want to Build a Snowman” reveals the depth of the relationship between Elsa and Anna and is just plain adorable. Broadway star Idina Menzel’s vocal talent, which easily rivals Jodi Benson’s lovely performance as Ariel in “The Little Mermaid,” is especially commendable. Menzel proves her talents in Elsa’s song “Let it Go,” which depicts Elsa’s newfound independence and is the musical highlight of the movie.

With its wonderful characters, animation and music, “Frozen” is a unique twist on a classic fairy tale. Additionally, the love between sisters, the focus of the film, provides a comforting change from the overused Disney clichés that we have come to expect.

My conclusion: 8/10

“Catching Fire”

Weightier and clearer than its predecessor, “Catching Fire” faithfully follows the original storyline and vision of Suzanne Collins’ “Hunger Games” trilogy.

In this dystopian adventure, Katniss and Peeta have defied the Capitol, allowing them to survive the Hunger Games together, but become prey to a crushing, totalitarian regime. Katniss, the girl on fire, has now become a symbol for the rebellion against the dictatorship. However, the cunning President Snow forces Katniss to be a distraction in a time of turmoil, pushing her to be a good girl and extinguish the flames of rebellion that she unwittingly sparked.

While the first movie was all physical with bloody fights and gory action, the conflicts of the second film are more understated and internal. Nonetheless, the directors are able to skillfully portray the subtle conflicts, weaving them into the movie and injecting them with suspenseful cinema to keep the plot from dragging.

I read all the books. I knew what was going to happen. There were no surprises in the plot or characters, but somehow I still found myself on the edge of my seat, caught up in the wonderfully-crafted suspense. This suspenseful edge to the film proves its success and the director’s impressive ability to convert a book into a movie.

Additionally, the physical design, special effects and sharp contrast between the fear-infested districts and the opulent Capitol help enhance the ominous, dramatic atmosphere and effectively create the bleak totalitarian regime that Suzanne Collins portrayed in the books.

The cast, packed with many powerhouse actors, was what truly allowed the movie to be an accurate representative of the beloved books. Jennifer Lawrence, lovely as always, finds the perfect balance between the strength and vulnerability of her character. She is able to effectively capture the complexities of Katniss’s character while successfully expressing the romance, action, drama and conflict of the story. Somehow, she is able to portray Katniss as her cold, ill-tempered self, while keeping her likeable.

Although Jennifer Lawrence easily steals the show, one cannot ignore the strong performances by other actors, including Donald Sutherland’s chilling interpretation of President Snow and Elizabeth Banks’ portrayal of Effie Trinket. Banks’ role as Effie, Katniss and Peeta’s flamboyant, cheery escort was especially impressive because Banks was able to flesh out Effie’s character, turning her from a clueless, admittedly entertaining, nuisance into a elaborate character who truly cares about the well-being of her victors.

Also, the new game-maker Plutarch’s witty, subtle humor, Johanna’s sass and the Hunger Games host Caesar Flickerman’s perky eccentricity and satirical portrayal of real-life talk show hosts, provide much-needed comic relief. The colorful, avant-garde, even garish style of the Capitol people are loyal to the original story and are also sure to earn some chuckles from movie-goers who are familiar with the book.

Although the violence was unfortunately minimized for apparent commercial reasons, “Catching Fire” is a huge improvement from its precursor, “The Hunger Games.” A suspenseful and faithful adaptation of the “Hunger Games” trilogy, “Catching Fire” is a hit for, not only long-time Hunger Games fanatics, but also for the average movie-goer.

My conclusion: 7/10