Tangled (formerly Rapunzel)

[Darkblade]

Bill, thanks for summing it up. I was gonna do give an explanation for it though but my PC is facing technical problems.

[EricJ]

I have no idea BUT I'll take a stab at it.
Some people think Tangled looks like a repeat of Shrek (Disney copying Dreamworks). Because only the Shrek movies are allowed to produce funniness in fairytale land.

I think he thought that "Disney was doing a deliberate green-eyed ripoff of Dreamworks" just by looking at the trailer, and not by their trying to salvage the faux-DW "Unbraided" script into something workably post-Lasseter after the change of directors...
The CGI and, like, funny stuff being clear evidence, since they could have just as easily turned it back into 2-D after two years of Eisner-enforced pre-production CGI work by Glen Keane.

(Remember, people, we've SEEN Disney deliberately "try to ripoff Dreamworks" in the past, and the results were a lot less pretty than this. People got fired for it. )

[parka]

If anyone's interested in the art book, it's going to be out soon. I managed to grab it at a local bookstore.

It's gorgeous!

Check out more pictures at http://parkablogs.com/content/book-revi ... of-tangled

[Dusterian]

Just so you know EricJ, Glen Keane was offered to turn this back into 2-D, but thought the work (and hand-drawn-like boundary-pushing) they had done in CGI was too good to let go.

And that Art of Tangled book has the original CGI that looked like a painting in there, with Rapunzel on the swing! Now we can see her much more clearly! Wait a minute...it looks like her head and hair changed!

[Pascal]

Concept painting vs cg model test image.

[Ben]

I'm with Bill. I don't think anyone ever got anywhere by doing anything simply out of a need for revnege.

[estefan]

Just so you know EricJ, Glen Keane was offered to turn this back into 2-D, but thought the work (and hand-drawn-like boundary-pushing) they had done in CGI was too good to let go.

Not to mention the trickiness of animating Rapunzel's hair by hand. The fact that they created a entirely new programme just for her hair shows a lot of the massive complexities that would require animating such a story in the traditional manner.

And the whole "DreamWorks copying Pixar" idea seems to still be going on today. I can give you Antz taking inspiration from A Bug's Life (while Katzenberg was still at Disney), but I don't see The Incredibles in Megamind, like so many people seem keen on saying. I guess nobody besides Pixar is allowed to make an animated comedy with superheroes anymore. Otherwise, everybody is ripping off Brad Bird.

If anything, Brad Bird took more inspiration from the Fantastic Four than Megamind did from Brad Bird.

But, I'm going off-topic here, sorry.

[Dusterian]

I agree estefan on the ripping/not ripping-off thing. Though Disney clearly started doing CGI because it was popular, not because it was innovative like Walt would have done.

But I will always believe, and the people working at Disney should always believe, anything is possible, and that they could have made Rapunzel's hair look fantastic in traditional animation. Sometimes you have to work really hard on something, though they worked really hard on this.

I actually was wondering if the film would have looked great with hand-drawn people, but CGI hair, clothes, and environments, all made to look like they are the same kind of animation and style (like hand-painted paintings). But then would we still consider it Disney's first CGI fairy tale, since the people's movements and expressions were hand-drawn?

[Ben]

That would be so prohibitively expensive that the film would never have been made.

It could have gone either way, and if anyone knows that hair can look great in traditional animation, it's Keane, who did Ariel and Pocahontas' locks in their two films and provided exceptional hair animation. But he liked what could be done with it in CG and embraced the challenge. I've no doubt that Rapunzel's hair could have looked just as amazing hand drawn, but it's not gone that way.

[Tristy]

Hey did anyone see the new clip at Disney.com? It's on the main page. It's the first full clip released for the movie and it is a Godsend.

[Ben]

First "official" review of Tangled, from The Hollywood Reporter - spoilers ahead:

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/review ... gled-42752


Let me know if it doesn't work (not sure if THR is sometimes subscriber only).

The bottom line is: "It would have been nice if Disney's self-touted 50th animated feature were one of its best, a film that could stand with the studio's classics, but the world will have to make do with 'Tangled,' a passably entertaining hodgepodge of old and new animation techniques, mixed sensibilities and hedged commercial calculations."

[Tristy]

"The Disney name and the studio's all-powerful promo combined are sure to propel this profitably through the holiday season and beyond, though the question lingers as to the extent of resistance preteen boys will show to this girl-centric romp."

Oh yeah! That's going to help Disney get back to putting fairy titles for their films (especially those that have woman's names.)

[Bill1978]

Amazon has samples up for every track on the soundtrack. Rapunzel's I Want song is rockier than I thought it would be. Due to workmates looking at me wierd, I haven't managed to listen to everything else really good. But The Pub Song sounds like a typical Disney showstopper, the villain song sounds suitably Broadwayish along with the reprises of the I Want song.

http://www.amazon.com/Tangled-digital-b ... _rhf_p_t_1

I also read that apparently Disney is only going to be submitting I See The Lights for consideration for Best Song.

[Dacey]

Don't think that this has been posted here, but here's a newer trailer:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsJFEqOL1UI

[Tristy]

New Clips!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIs9sFyF ... r_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5QOnLyk ... re=channel