Devil's Advocate indeed! The title does not force them to do anything! Was Sleeping Beauty or Cinderella's trailers all about the girls? Were Aladdin's all about the guy?
They can still sell the film however they want in marketing...but let the creators of the film keep the film how they created, title and all!
Tangled (formerly Rapunzel)
Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)
Last edited by Dusterian on March 1st, 2010, 6:10 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)
Wow, just that tower alone looked fantastic. I can't wait to see the rest in motionJosh wrote:Here is the teaser trailer for Tangled: http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/ta ... er-trailer.
Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)
That's probably a bit touchy to use as an example. As Robin Williams had an agreement that Disney would not use the Genie in promoting the film and we now know how that turned out. If my old brain is recalling correctly, Robin refused to do any more voice work because of the sour taste, dealing with Katzenberg especially, left in his mouth. There had to be some major sweet talking to get him to return for the 2nd sequel. I have no doubts if the Genie was ho hum, Disney would have focussed on the little urchin.Were Aladdin's all about the guy?
Thanks for posting the new teaser trailer. Now that is what a teaser trailer should be. It is intriguing, makes me what to know more. And I do like teaser trailers without a title card. Makes you want to remember what you saw and then hunt down more info. I love how they appear to have managed to make the CG look hand drawn. Loving the voices, even if Mandy Moore sounded a bit like Drew Barrymore the second time she speaks. I love how it manages to convey that it could be a fairytale and that slight reference to the Rapunzel story ('Let down your hair') is good as well. For a teaser trailer I give it top marks. Cannot wait for more footage.
Anybody know if the music is sourced from somewhere else, or is it an appetizer for Menken's score. If it'sthe later, it could be his best work since Beauty And The Beast.
Last edited by Bill1978 on March 1st, 2010, 3:14 am, edited 3 times in total.
Seeing the "painted" characters will be what gets me really excited. So far, and although the tower looks amazing, it's not so far off where Deep Canvas was headed.
My hope now is that they don't make this a schizophrenic campaign and end up promoting two very different movies to the different demographics...only for both of them to be unimpressed.
My hope now is that they don't make this a schizophrenic campaign and end up promoting two very different movies to the different demographics...only for both of them to be unimpressed.
Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)
Very cool! It's always nice to get some recognition from the mainstream press for the work you do online. And the publicity -- and extra hits you'll get -- is a very nice thing too!robster wrote:Okay, I just received an email from the LA Times about the petition I started regarding the title change of"Rapunzel"/"Tangled". They want to ask me some questions...
Thanks for posting!
Um...that teaser was so short that I honestly can't make *any* sort of real judgement as to what it is I just saw.
And no title? That feels a bit...well, sloppy.
And as for the title being changed to "Tangled," yeah, I was annoyed by it at first, but if it suits the movie, I'm all for it. After all, should "Hoodwinked" have been called "Little Red Riding Hood" instead?
And no title? That feels a bit...well, sloppy.
And as for the title being changed to "Tangled," yeah, I was annoyed by it at first, but if it suits the movie, I'm all for it. After all, should "Hoodwinked" have been called "Little Red Riding Hood" instead?
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."
Rapunzel or Tangled
Hoodwinked was not meant to be a version of the original tale, it was the tale twisted, and from different points of view, like "what "really" happened".
This is meant to be the Disney version of the original tale, enough like the original to be called Rapunzel. Did you forget that this film was called Rapunzel right until a few weeks ago? And now they are starting animation. The original creators were working on (and still want!) the film as "Rapunzel".
You should read more in this thread before you post not knowing the original creators like Glen Keane don't like the new title.
Also, Ben or James, I would love, love, love if the film was "formally titled Rapunzel", as the front page says, but shouldn't that be "formerly titled Rapunzel"? Though Rapunzel is indeed a more formal title! : )
This is meant to be the Disney version of the original tale, enough like the original to be called Rapunzel. Did you forget that this film was called Rapunzel right until a few weeks ago? And now they are starting animation. The original creators were working on (and still want!) the film as "Rapunzel".
You should read more in this thread before you post not knowing the original creators like Glen Keane don't like the new title.
Also, Ben or James, I would love, love, love if the film was "formally titled Rapunzel", as the front page says, but shouldn't that be "formerly titled Rapunzel"? Though Rapunzel is indeed a more formal title! : )
Re: Tangled (Formerly Rapunzel)
Work progressing on Tangled:
http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... a-hat.html
About the teaser, I loved the visuals and was intriged by the dialouge...but didn't respond much to Mandy Moore.
Nothing against her, but her voice is just too modern-sounding and not expressive enough for a voice-over role.
http://animationguildblog.blogspot.com/ ... a-hat.html
About the teaser, I loved the visuals and was intriged by the dialouge...but didn't respond much to Mandy Moore.
Nothing against her, but her voice is just too modern-sounding and not expressive enough for a voice-over role.You can’t just have your characters announce how they feel! That makes me feel angry!
Re: Rapunzel or Tangled
I have read the thread.Dusterian wrote:You should read more in this thread before you post not knowing the original creators like Glen Keane don't like the new title.
And we don't know yet what kind of movie "Rapunzel" will be. But from what I've heard about the plot, it takes place after the story that people know. There may some of the "original" story at the beginning, but the majority will be Rapunzel rediscovering life on the outside after being in prison for so many years.
I'm not trying to say it's a "better" title. I'm just saying that I understand the logic behind it.
"Yesterday is history, tomorrow is a mystery, but today is a gift--that is why it's called the present."
It is the same story of Rapunzel, but yes, in this version you see her escape from the tower earlier, and the falling in love with the guy comes later, and the witch punishing them comes later. Still the same story, just stretched out to feature length (and with a bandit!). I mean The Little Mermaid was very different from the original, yet still told the story, and so had the title.
The logic behind the title change was that not enough boys would see the film. Remember, they have been working on the story up till now, now it's in production, and it was called Rapunzel right up until now, so the change was not based on the story, the film, but marketability. A last minute change.
The logic behind the title change was that not enough boys would see the film. Remember, they have been working on the story up till now, now it's in production, and it was called Rapunzel right up until now, so the change was not based on the story, the film, but marketability. A last minute change.