Tangled (formerly Rapunzel)

[eddievalient]

"But no one will know what "Tangled" is from the title. Sure they'll figure it out when they see the poster, commercials, previews, merchandise, dvd cover, art books, simple searches on google, but they won't know from the TITLE"

Couldn't have said it better myself. I think that the whole title change argument assumes that Viewers Are Morons (to quote tvtropes). Disney's going to blitz-market this thing like they do all their major movies. By the time the film is actually released, anyone with even a slight interest in seeing it will know all about it (and if they don't, word of mouth will take care of that) and logically, there shouldn't be any confusion whatsoever as to what the movie's about or who it's aimed at. This is much ado about nothing, folks. The sooner we all realize that, the better.

[EricJ]

This is much ado about nothing, folks.

Oh, we KNOW what this is a-doing about (and I made a brief indirect allusion to it in my own letter):
It's not about whether a movie gets a freakin' title!!! (oops, did I start jumping up and down and tearing my hair out in frustration again? ), it's about the future direction of the company, once the major predominating fallacy in the studio's mind about the audience starts taking root.

Flashback to '99:
---
Disney gets cold feet about releasing Princess Mononoke, and gives it to Miramax to theatrically open "carefully". No one at the studio figures out why it grosses less than they wanted it to, immediately assumes that All Ghibli Is Unmarketable in the US, cancels all future releases--including the in-production "Castle in the Sky" dub which no one now ever expects to see the light of day--and focuses their marketing entirely on the overseas market.
When PM goes to disk, Disney decides to give it the bare-bones release with the English-only dub they think the audience "wants". Furious rumblings storm the Geek community on the Internet, and within weeks, the Anime community organizes a sanctioned letter-writing campaign to give the disk a proper re-release...Not so much because they're subtitle fans, but because they see the issue as to whether Disney ever releases another Ghibli film in the US ever again, pending on this one hasty panic decision successfully being changed.
The BVHE representative, skeptical that any serious number could care about such a trifling matter, asks for written proof of letters by serious customers, to be presented at the end of the month at one of the conventions. Expecting to see 500 letters, he is surprised to see the a box of over 1,000 letters and printed e-mails, and even more surprised to hear of the five other boxes waiting outside. In keeping with the bargain, PM is released with bilingual subs.
The next year, Disney "carefully" pursues their option to release "Spirited Away" in the US, gets national acclaim, the Best Animated Oscar and a top-selling DVD, and is now boundlessly enthusiastic about promoting Studio Ghibli in the US...Well, why shouldn't the be?--It's so popular!
---

Anyone who still thinks I'm talking about a Japanese film from ten years ago, read it again, carefully. I'm seeing an awful darn LOT of historical parallels. (I imagine John Lasseter might, too.)
I'm not changing a title back to see a title changed...I'm changing a title to get the audience some respect, to see the Traditional studio back on course, and to get "Snow Queen" back into production.

...How 'bout you?

[Randall]

I think a lot of us are still stuck on the "respect" thing. Personally, I'm not feeling disrespected in the least. I'm just not that sensitive. Write them if you like, by all means. But a lot of us just aren't seeing this as a big deal, and don't see a clear relationship with Snow Queen, which could have been shelved for a variety of reasons. I know you think that we means we don't "get" it. I suppose we don't then.

[EricJ]

Basically, ALL the decisions that have been made in the last month--not just the one--have been made on the assumption that we've been pelting Tiana with rocks and bottles because we "loathe" princesses as much as we did eight years ago when the first "Shrek" came out.
Why?...Just because P&tF didn't make as much as Alvin or Avatar? That's a bit presumptious, isn't it?

We're about to see five years of a battle fought to kick Eisner out the door and to change the direction of the studio end on ONE film:
They were so traumatized by their own self-reciminating fears of an audience they hadn't even bothered to talk to, they thought we "wouldn't mind" if they changed a title to something more pandering, just as they thought we "wouldn't mind" if they quietly dropped another 2-D fairytale off their slates. What else will they do that they believe they're doing us "angry" audiences a favor by doing? I don't wish to find out.
Disney, maybe you haven't heard yet--funny how news never reaches the offices unless we send it--but....WE MIND.

[droosan]

Looks to me as though Disney isn't alone in making assumptions.

[EricJ]

We in the fan community came up with five, or even seven reasons why P&tF could have done better in the theaters. (And ended up with even more reasons to see Alvin die. )
Highly paid Disney execs who analyze box office for a living came up with ONE. ("Boys didn't like princesses!")

...Does that make us smarter than them? Well, that may be taking it a bit too far.
Maybe it might be a better idea to ASK them how much they know about why P&tF didn't make money, and whether they just decided one day to cancel an in-development feature project in the very same week, or whether it was, oh, you know, just dumb coincidence out of the blue.
I mean, well, couldn't hurt to ask, now, could it? Just to be neighborly?

[robster]

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.

My initial BLIND RAGE about the title change has ebbed, but when Irespond and do awnser questions it might be a good opportunity to voice the opinions of fans...... in a well-worded way. This might have more of an effect then ranting like a complete idiot. We could address the fear fans have aboutmarketing and p.r. and how they seem to be overshadowing the creativityof the actual filmmakers. The Disney legacy, the opinions we have onthis subject.Is there anything you guys think I should definately mention?

I'll respond to the email and see what happens, if they send me a list of questions I'lllet you know and we might be able to use it to get noticed and get ourpoints across to Disney , in a reasonable way.

[Bill1978]

So I managed to watch the work in progress trailer and the word to describe how I feel. EXCITED!!!!!

This looks like it will be a fun laugh out loud comedy, I really don't care about the title now, In fact, I think the title is more appropraite than Rapunzel, especially if it is a full on comedy. I'm loving the finished work and the overll vibe of fun.

I do have my fingers crossed that they are just temp tracks for the trailer and they choose better music, but I can't be more excited for this film. I can see now why Menken has chosen the 60s rock feel for the songs.

And to be perfectly honest, I'm one of those people who only know Rapanzel is a girl with long hair in a tower. Some guy comes along and saves her. Would I have preferred to see the original story, maybe but after this trailer I'm all up for a full on comedy action piece, as long as it has heart.

I also don't mind the tag of Rescue, Rinse, Repeat. Gives me the impression that perhaps the male lead is going to have to save Rapunzel a number of times as she is too excited to be free to notice she needs saving.

I'm still amazed that they are still animating. I'll never get over that aspect of animation.

Hurry up November!!

[ShyViolet]

It's fairly obvious with this trailer and the new name that Disney is aiming Tangled to the Enchanted crowd, though if anything is going to kill it, it's going to be the too-similar and overused comic sidekick character, and the same old fall-hit-fall-hit-fall-smash type of slapstick shtick that all animated movies must have nowadays (the only thing this trail didn't show was a zooming through a perspective tunnel or landscape).

I got that vibe too, which is why I am somewhat disappointed (I'd hoped it would be more "epic" than that) but the visuals very much impressed me. My only real problem, as was said above, is the "twist" aspect of the film; once again it's "a new take on an old fairy tale."

Another thing that stood out to me is the "opposites attract/rivals turned friends" aspect that has been done in about a million animated films now. I was sort of hoping the film would veer away from that (especially after having seen that famous "short haired girl/pizza delivery guy" sketch from years ago) but the new official picture of the two main characters doesn't seem all that different. (Not in design of course, but in spirit.)

Two mismatched characters go on a journey together and fall in love was just done in Princess; it was actually very cute but it worries me that it's going to be repeated so soon. Tangled should have been a departure from that so it doesn't feel like just the same old thing again.

Hopefully when more footage is available we'll be able to see other aspects of the story as well. Although I hope when the marketing starts in a few months they don't ONLY focus on this angle.

[Dusterian]

Also after seeing that Tangled is WAY more appropriate than Rapunzel

It has been discovered that a different teaser trailer will be on The Princess and the Frog's Blu-ray and DVD.

First, it sells the film more as a classic fairy tale, in which the title Tangled doesn't fit at all and the title Rapunzel fits WAY more.

Secondly, the CGI looks like it's a painting, which is what Glen Keane has tried for so long, and has finally happened. The animation has come a long way, and everyone at Animated News should appreciate that!:





Yes, that last, big image is from the trailer. It moved, with that waterfall flowing.

[Bill1978]

I'm sure I'll get shot down for this but after coming to terms with the title Tangled, I'm happy with the change if it means the title doesn't turn off a certain movie going public - basically young boys. If Tangled and Flynn can draw the boys into a movie, and it turns out to ba classic romantic movie then so be it. If you look at the past with Disney animated films they tended to alternate between a 'girl focussed' movie and a 'boy focessed' movie and sometimes you even got the ultimate movie that didn't appear to appeal to one gender.

I'm guessing that maybe Disney was concerned with having two back to back movies that appeared to appeal to the girls that they were going to back themselves into the girls corner and renaming it to Tangled would mean that perhaps boys and their parents would want to go and watch the movie.

And just maybe more childless adults would prefer to go to see a movie called Tangled over Rapunzel. I'll admit that as a childless male adult I was hesitate to see The Princess And The Frog in theatres because a) the title is girly and secondly the trailer made it very girl child orientated. Of course in the end it didn't matter as I was unable to catch the movie in theatres and have to wait for the DVD release. But at the moment I would feel very comfortable asking for a ticket to see that new comedy called Tangled.

[ShyViolet]

I also share the concern over boys not gravitating towards the movie, but the title isn't really what concerns me anymore, but the marketing itself. This movie cannot be marketed just for little girls. Otherwise many people might just mistake it for a direct-to-DVD product from the Princess Line. I think Disney tried to market Princess "universally" but it definitely left something to be desired.

This is an interesting post someone wrote on Jim Hill about this issue. I don't know if agree with all of it but I thought it made some good points:

megustajake said:

Box office sales are way up. A new record is being set almost monthly. And in turn, DVD sales are declining. This is a contrast to how it has been in recent years. I do think TPATF will sell well on home video, but I don't believe the economy is to blame for the film underperforming.

The marketing for TPATF was just terrible. A Christmas Carol was much more highly promoted. I only saw the trailer for TPATF in theatres twice, and I go to the theatre on a weekly basis, at least. I saw a trailer for A Christmas Carol attached to everything, including the latest Saw installment!? It was treated as an event film, and ultimately failed. TPATF would've been more successful if it was given the same oppurtunities. Instead, we got a Geico commercial, a handful of TV ads (also seldom seen), and some really lame merchandise that wouldn't appeal to anyone aside from girls under the age of 10.

Also, word of mouth for TPATF was lukewarm. When asked, people would say, "It's cute, but it isn't as good as XYZ". Unfortunately, the movie wasn't good enough to resurrect 2D animation, and that tradition of storytelling. I did like the movie, don't get me wrong, but as much as I was looking forward to it, I can't bring myself to say it was as good as any film of the 90's era.

Disney tried to appeal to boy audiences with "Treasure Planet" and "Atlantis", and they were disappointed by those reciepts, as well. Was "Beauty and the Beast" a girl film? Was "The Lion King" a boy film? Disney needs to create films again that appeal to both genders and all ages... I'm not saying it's easy. But they should start with stop labeling their films. With a title like "The PRINCESS and the Frog", they wanted to sell toys and didn't think beyond the marketing aspect. It was obvious with their merchandising who they were trying to appeal to, and it seemed exclusive. Now, trying to correct their mistake, they're doing the same thing with "Rapunzel", er... "Tangled".

I'm not so upset with the name change as much as I am Disney's pathetic attempts to copy their own and other's success...

Like the poster said, I think Tangled needs a fresh angle when it comes to marketing; the worst thing would be to limit it to Barbie-type dolls and stuffed animals and dresses. It might not suffer the exact same fate as PATTF, but a similar outcome.

[Dusterian]

Well, am I the only one who doesn't think Rapunzel sounds like a girl or a boy's name, almost? If you didn't know what the story was, that name does not sound girly at all on it's own (not like Cinderella). I mean, if you say "Prince Rapunzel", it doesn't sound wrong.

The main problem is that the creators of the film, including Glen Keane, did not want the title change. It was the marketing. Marketing has changed the film the creators wanted to make, that line was crossed.

And as we've been saying, they can keep the title Rapunzel, and just sell it how they want in the trailers, previews, commercials, and other advertisements.

[Bill1978]

I'm going to play devil's avocate here.

Keeping the name Rapunzel would force, at least, the trailer department to make the first trailer focussed on the character the movie is named after. Which means lots of time on a girl, which may deter the boys from wanting to see a chick flick. Or even pay attention to follow up marketing

Calling in Tangled, allows the trailer department to focus on anything that will help sell the product to the widest market.

Personally for me I'm just happy that I am getting another movie with Alan Menken songs. I would even say if they retitled it to 'The Movie With Alan Menken Songs' I'd be there opening day. But just watch, these songs will be more like Home On The Range voice overs than actual sang in the movie songs.

[Josh]

Here is the teaser trailer for Tangled: http://www.traileraddict.com/trailer/ta ... er-trailer.