Tangled (formerly Rapunzel) Discussion - Part II
- Sotiris
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 19936
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Fantasyland
Tangled (formerly Rapunzel) Discussion - Part II
Continuing the discussion from Part I: http://www.ultimatedisney.com/forum/vie ... start=1780
Last edited by Sotiris on Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Elladorine
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4372
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:02 pm
- Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
- Contact:
- Elladorine
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4372
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 1:02 pm
- Location: SouthernCaliforniaLiscious SunnyWingadocious
- Contact:
- Duckburger
- Special Edition
- Posts: 547
- Joined: Mon Nov 30, 2009 4:23 am
- Location: The Netherlands
- Candy-Bonita95
- Gold Classic Collection
- Posts: 261
- Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:45 am
- Location: Toronto
- Scarred4life
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1410
- Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2009 12:18 pm
- Disney's Divinity
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 15775
- Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 9:26 am
- Gender: Male
The title has grown on me, but I still don't like it (in the long-term). I just can't imagine myself thinking of those greats "Pinocchio, Peter Pan, Hercules and...Tangled."
And that's considering the movie turns out good at all.
And that's considering the movie turns out good at all.
Listening to most often lately:
Ariana Grande ~ "we can't be friends (wait for your love)"
Ariana Grande ~ "imperfect for you"
Kacey Musgraves ~ "The Architect"
- Disney Duster
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 13359
- Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 6:02 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: America
Rapunzel
I realized...
If you look at Disney's list of Animated Classics, you won't see that they did Rapunzel. You'll see "Tangled" and wonder what that is.
It doesn't feel like we are getting the Disney version of Rapunzel. With what we have from the trailer, possibly with the main characters' backgrounds changed, but mostly the title. It's like it's not Disney's version of Rapunzel. It's Tangled, some other thing by some other studio.
Disney said "screw it" to the fans, their past, and themselves, the traditions that defined them, for the sake of getting less caring, less sophisticated audiences. They can make any kind of movie they want based on their own original ideas, but leave the classics alone. They can get their money from new, different, original films they make on their own, and Pixar's films are making a lot of profit for them as well, so they can and should leave the classics the way they have always done the classics, what we have known to be the Disney way. Sigh...
If you look at Disney's list of Animated Classics, you won't see that they did Rapunzel. You'll see "Tangled" and wonder what that is.
It doesn't feel like we are getting the Disney version of Rapunzel. With what we have from the trailer, possibly with the main characters' backgrounds changed, but mostly the title. It's like it's not Disney's version of Rapunzel. It's Tangled, some other thing by some other studio.
Disney said "screw it" to the fans, their past, and themselves, the traditions that defined them, for the sake of getting less caring, less sophisticated audiences. They can make any kind of movie they want based on their own original ideas, but leave the classics alone. They can get their money from new, different, original films they make on their own, and Pixar's films are making a lot of profit for them as well, so they can and should leave the classics the way they have always done the classics, what we have known to be the Disney way. Sigh...
Last edited by Disney Duster on Wed Feb 24, 2010 11:21 am, edited 1 time in total.
enig's graphic said it best. Marketing ploy through and through. And an idiotic one at that. The story is about Rapunzel. Should Hercules have been changed to Muscles? How about 101 Dalmatians be named Spots? Or Little Mermaid could have been Fishtail?
I don't hate the title. I just find it stupid. This the story of Rapunzel. Add some Disney and modern twists to it, sure, but its still Rapunzel. If they are gonna use a fairytale, least keep the title similar to the original. Like Frog Prince = Princess and the Frog.
I don't hate the title. I just find it stupid. This the story of Rapunzel. Add some Disney and modern twists to it, sure, but its still Rapunzel. If they are gonna use a fairytale, least keep the title similar to the original. Like Frog Prince = Princess and the Frog.
- Sky Syndrome
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1187
- Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2006 3:07 am
- Location: Maine
- BelleGirl
- Anniversary Edition
- Posts: 1174
- Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2007 2:36 am
- Location: The Netherlands, The Hague
Is there any chance Disney will come to their senses and change the tilte back to "Rapunzel''?
See my growing collection of Disney movie-banners at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/78256383@N ... 651337290/
-
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4660
- Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 9:47 am
- Location: UK
- Contact:
We can but pray.BelleGirl wrote:Is there any chance Disney will come to their senses and change the tilte back to "Rapunzel''?
I have to agree with Duster and Siren. When I saw that the tagline in the working trailer was "rinse, repeat, rescue" (or whatever - je m'en fou), I cringed at how contrived it seems. Making the film seem like a shampoo commercial or brainless romantic-comedy thoroughly discredits the film from the get-go. I don't expect a deeply serious and faithful adaptation of the Grimms' Fairy-Tales - as sincere as the classics are, even they don't truly fall into this category. Nor do I think that changing the overall setting or genre is necessarily detrimental to the adaptation; look at The Princess and the Frog or, getting away from fairy-tales, the adaptations and stagings of Shakespeare that don't confine the stories to Tudor Britain or Renaissance Italy. But this title change and its potential marketing plan essentially discredits the potential film. Moreover, it thoroughly discredits the original fairy-tale, as by retitling and ultimately repackaging the adaptation, it steals it from the Brothers Grimm in such a crass way more than any other literary or folkloric adaptation from Disney has done before (and that includes Chicken Little, which says something).
I wouldn't mind it if Disney changed the title to something involving Rapunzel (heck, don't most people not know who she even is according to market research? ) but included something boyish as well (like Rapunzel and the Secret Tower or Rapunzel and the Thief; as far as I'm aware, Disney added the dwarfs to the title of Snow White's story, after all). But obviously, the "promoters" know best, despite the fact that they probably never could make a film since their imagination is virtually non-existent (read: they all did degrees in such rational and soulless tat as Economics and Physics).
- Sotiris
- Ultimate Collector's Edition
- Posts: 19936
- Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:06 am
- Gender: Male
- Location: Fantasyland
I wish they would at least change that horribly stupid tagline.
OK, lets make our own then
Let's see: "It takes two to get tangled" (it appeared in the trailer but not as a tagline)
"Get tangled away"
What else?
OK, lets make our own then
Let's see: "It takes two to get tangled" (it appeared in the trailer but not as a tagline)
"Get tangled away"
What else?
Last edited by Sotiris on Thu Jan 19, 2012 5:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Super Aurora
- Diamond Edition
- Posts: 4835
- Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:59 am
"You're sure to be bound by a hair for this!"sotiris2006 wrote:
What else?
"Get ready to get kinky"
<i>Please limit signatures to 100 pixels high and 500 pixels wide</i>
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif
http://i1338.photobucket.com/albums/o68 ... ecf3d2.gif