Tangled (formerly Rapunzel)

Features, Shorts, Live-Action and Direct-To-Video
Post Reply
User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19676
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » September 24th, 2010, 3:20 pm

"If only the final CGI animation looked just like that, right?"

Yes, but you're not listening to us. If it all looked like that, they'd have only rendered the first ten minutes so far and eaten up the entire budget for two feature films.

"Economies of scale" is a phrase you're going to need to learn, not only in how to appreciate that movies can't always spend the kind of wish-list money their creators would love, but as a handy lesson to carry through life.

And apart from whatever feeling they have towards the name change, it's quite normal for a project to be given a nickname that sticks with it. The common name for any version of the film so far has been Rapunzel, and it deals with her as a character, so it makes sense to call the film Rapunzel if you're working on it. It's a shorthand for the crew. Whatever name changes it went through, it would always be Rapunzel to the crew. Now it's Tangled, it's still Rapunzel to the crew, since it's been with them for so long. Until the fourth Indiana Jones movie, the name for them on the crew was the Raiders movies, after the first one. Even though the name Indiana Jones was emblazoned across the screen on the second and third, they were known as Raiders II and Raiders III during production.

Again, I'd love to see some actual evidence of people working on the movie wanting to still call it Rapunzel. But at the end of the day it doesn't matter. A title is a title and it's what's inside that counts. Most people will call it "the Rapunzel movie". I got my copy of Unidentified Flying Oddball last night and enjoyed it again after many years. But it was the same film as I saw originally as The Spaceman And King Arthur, it's UK title, and made me laugh just the same.

Tangled or Rapunzel. It's going to be the same movie.


By the way, that fairytale book must be concept or fake. Whichever it is, they can't spell "there"... ;)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 441
Joined: December 21st, 2007

Post by Dusterian » September 24th, 2010, 11:19 pm

Well, I was thinking, why is it not that they can't at least make the character models look exactly like the original designs, because those models stay the same throughout the movie, they just have to move them?

Like I said, the TAG blog did mention it somewhere.

So, here are the two other reason's I'm bummed about the title, they're only two, just listen once:

It's because without the title Rapunzel, it feels like Disney didn't do Rapunzel, it feels like they didn't do that story, it feels like something else. I know you may say it is something else but the fact it was called Rapunzel until only marketing changed it means it was meant to be Disney's version of Rapunzel, not something else. So it feels like they never did it, now.

The next is it was marketing that changed it, not anything really caring about relation to the project itself, but just a tactic to make money, it's not the same as other title changes you mentioned.

Finally, LOL about the book but you are right that storybook page is a concept from the Disney Hollywood Studios display of art for the film. I thought the "ther" was an old way of spelling it, or something to give a far away long ago fantasy feeling, though in concepts for Sleeping Beauty storybook art words got like that, too, so I feel it was a shorthand thing.
Image

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 5590
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)

Post by Dacey » September 24th, 2010, 11:54 pm

Dust, you're really starting to sound like a record on this. You know, the broken kind. ;)

And as for why they can't just "make the model and use it over and over again by just moving it," maybe you should watch some of those behind-the-scenes things on DVDs to realize just how hard computer animation is.

"Creating King Kong was a piece of cake. Sure, designing him was hard, but after that, BAM! We had a good-looking ape in all the shots!" It's not that simple.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 25
Joined: September 5th, 2010

Post by Tristy » September 27th, 2010, 12:14 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCRCP95b ... r_embedded

And for those of you really wanting to see Mother Gothel more, this would be a good opportunity to check it out.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 800
Joined: July 9th, 2008
Location: Australia

Post by Bill1978 » September 27th, 2010, 7:52 pm

Thanks for the link to the latest video. While others are moaning about Disney's marketing of the film, I think they are doing it well. Slowly unveiling bits and pieces of the movie over time. Rather than oversaturating the market with promotion they are teasing us out and making us actually look forward to the movie. So while I am disappointed that no songs are even referenced in the video, I have faith that there will be a video highlighting that fact before the soundtrack is released.

Mother Gothel looks like she'll be a memorable villain and possibly one with a sense of humour as well. The animation continues to impress me and I do think the team has manged to capture the feel of drawn animation in the CGI environment.

Does anyone else think Zachary Levi's Flynn sounds like Kevin Kline's Phoebus?

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1637
Joined: December 16th, 2004
Location: Burbank, Calif.

Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)

Post by droosan » September 27th, 2010, 9:02 pm

I thought it was Kevin Kline playing Flynn's voice, when I saw the first teaser.

So, yeah. :mrgreen:

The fact that the character seems very similar to Tulio from The Road to El Dorado (complete with expressive horse companion!) only helps that comparison along.

But that's merely a first impression, from a few minutes of footage. I'm sure that -- when I see the full movie -- the character will come into his own.

AV Team
AV Team
Posts: 5590
Joined: February 8th, 2005
Location: The US of A

Post by Dacey » September 27th, 2010, 9:22 pm

He sounds like Prince Edward from "Enchanted" to me, even though I know that he isn't.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 3565
Joined: September 27th, 2007

Re:

Post by EricJ » September 29th, 2010, 7:06 pm

Bill1978 wrote:Mother Gothel looks like she'll be a memorable villain and possibly one with a sense of humour as well.
With a little extra detail from actress Donna Murphy:
DM: There's a prologue in the movie, and in the prologue it sets up how my character knows that Rapunzel's hair has this quality. Gothel was aware that there was a flower in this village that had this magical element to it that kept her young. The nectar from this flower kept her young. So then, the queen was pregnant with a child and she became very ill and the people in the town found this flower and became aware, too, of it possessing a healing quality and they picked the flower. So, that deprived my character, Gothel, of what... probably what really kept her alive..
(...Well, I guess that takes care of the "Rapunzel" title, with no rampion in the story. :? )
Last edited by EricJ on September 29th, 2010, 7:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 441
Joined: December 21st, 2007

Post by Dusterian » September 30th, 2010, 3:04 pm

EricJ, I already talked in here about that magical plant. And it's probably still going to be called Rapunzel. Anyway, it doesn't matter, the story is still about a girl with long golden hair kept in a tower and named Rapunzel. It's is Disney telling of Rapunzel. But the new name makes absolutely no indication of this anymore.
Image

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19676
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » September 30th, 2010, 3:15 pm

Yeah. We know.

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 66
Joined: January 18th, 2008

Post by MrsTashlin » September 30th, 2010, 3:57 pm

finally got to see both trailers. something i would defo go see. :)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 1419
Joined: October 22nd, 2004

Re:

Post by Macaluso » September 30th, 2010, 5:34 pm

Dusterian wrote:EricJ, I already talked in here about that magical plant. And it's probably still going to be called Rapunzel. Anyway, it doesn't matter, the story is still about a girl with long golden hair kept in a tower and named Rapunzel. It's is Disney telling of Rapunzel. But the new name makes absolutely no indication of this anymore.
The trailers and posters where you typically see the "Tangled" title clearly show Repunzel so

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 800
Joined: July 9th, 2008
Location: Australia

Post by Bill1978 » October 1st, 2010, 9:16 am

For those people like me who would like a little bit of info on the music and songs of Tangled, here is an interview with Alan Menken (caution: contains minor minor spoilers)

http://www.collider.com/2010/09/27/alan ... w-tangled/

See people, they aren't hiding the fact it's a musical, you just need to know where you look :-P I'm actually very grateful that Disney allowed Menken to discuss the music to be honest.
Last edited by Bill1978 on October 1st, 2010, 9:20 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
AV Founder
AV Founder
Posts: 19676
Joined: October 22nd, 2004
Location: London, UK

Post by Ben » October 1st, 2010, 10:41 am

Nice review! We also have something coming up soon with Alan Menken, so stay tooned! :)

AV Forum Member
AV Forum Member
Posts: 164
Joined: April 13th, 2009
Contact:

Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)

Post by ELIOLI » October 1st, 2010, 12:53 pm

We're excited already :D
http://www.elioliart.com/

Post Reply