Tangled (formerly Rapunzel)

[EricJ]

DisneyPictures, thank you very much for that link about why the directors changed the title.

(Not that we believe a word of it, mind, but thanks for confirming the official studio-line all the same.)

Also, a while back, there was another article that revealed that the marketing department at Disney changed the title just because they thought The Princess and the Frog failed because it had the word "princess" in the title and they thought boys didn't want to see it. So they changed the title because they thought it would make more boys want to see this movie.
The Princess and the Frog didn't even fail! It did well critically and financially!.

And as we must always emphasize:
Aw, poor baby, Frog made "only" $24M on its opening...And was the #1 movie that weekend.
Did it occur to anyone that when the #1 movie in the country makes "only" $24M, nobody was going anywhere near a theater that week???
(I mean, think how Invictus must've felt, opening third!...By that point, anyone opening fifth that week would never have made back the price of their popcorn sales. )

...Just, y'know, food for thought, even if you liked Avatar and those danged Christmas-grabbing rodents.

[Dacey]

I like when they do original stories, but to change the classic stories seems bad.

Which is exactly why Ariel died at the end of "The Little Mermaid."

Oh, wait, she didn't. Guess that means they changed the "classic story," since she, you know, died in the original fairy tale.

Bad for them.

[Whippet Angel]

How about the majority of the original Grimm's Fairy tales?? It's such a shame they didn't include the Queen's execution at Snow White's wedding. Or what about Aurora's cannibalistic mother-in-law?

Goodness, what were they thinking, altering those classic fairy tales??? Bad Disney, bad!

[EricJ]

...DINGDING! GENERIC TOPIC ALERT!

(Oh, lord, how many times?...Here, Dacey, if we give you the pre-Disney Shelley Duvall version to play with, will you sit down and stop distracting DisneyPictures away from the basic issue that we audiences already know about their Princess-phobia box-office-trauma complex and we're not happy about it?

If you keep going humoring them and making them believe that "changing the story" lie, they're just going to sink back into their fantasy-world of denial again...It's interfering with their helpful recovery therapy, we were just on the edge of a breakthrough! )

[Macaluso]

Goddamn you're crazy Dusterian

[Ben]

Regarding the directors' replies, you know anyone says "That's a great question!" through gritted teeth!

[Randall]

Goddamn you're crazy Dusterian

Strong language and detrimental remark aside, this did make me laugh out loud.

[Ben]

Goddamn you're crazy Dusterian

Focused, concise message made me forget the strong language and detrimental remark.

[ShyViolet]

From a few weeks ago but here's a great interview with Glen Keane:

http://www.awn.com/articles/article/gle ... page/1%2C1

[Ben]

Brilliant. Just brilliant.

[Dusterian]

I thought everyone would get what I mean.

Disney has changed classic fairy tales a little before, but "The Princess and the Frog" and "Tangled" changed them a lot more to almost unrecognizability, not least being one in a completely different time period, and the other being the backgrounds/roles of the characters (i.e. a prince now made a bandit) and the title.

You all know they changed the classic stories a lot more this time, going against Disney's past traditions.

EricJ, I think you were a little harsh on DisneyPictures, your language can be very in your face and I don't think it was best to use it on representatives from company's making the very movies we want to talk about.

[EricJ]

EricJ, I think you were a little harsh on DisneyPictures, your language can be very in your face and I don't think it was best to use it on representatives from company's making the very movies we want to talk about.

Okay, sorry, don't want to drive away new members--
Just get a little rankled at being sold "public relations", and it's pretty clear the in-house studio is going all out on the "We meant to change the title!" excuses, when fans know that conquering one bad-horse bit of Princess-Phobia is the most important goal for the studio to overcome right now.

The movie looks good, but there's still no telling how Harry Potter will be a factor, and we don't want to see the mistakes of boardroom history happen twice. Or three times, for that matter.

[estefan]

The movie looks good, but there's still no telling how Harry Potter will be a factor, and we don't want to see the mistakes of boardroom history happen twice. Or three times, for that matter.

I think Harry Potter will pretty much out-gross Tangled in a mile and though my annoyance at David Yates' directing choices has killed my interest in seeing the culmination of that franchise, I won't be peeved by its box-office performance.

I will be mightily annoyed if Yogi Bear makes more than Tangled. Disney doesn't deserve to be beaten by a CGI-hybrid adaptation of an old cartoon two years in a row. So, Tron: Legacy, do us all a favour and CRUSH IT!

[Macaluso]

You all know they changed the classic stories a lot more this time, going against Disney's past traditions.

Ah yes and the classic story of Hamlet has always been about lions

[Tristy]

Hey guys! Check this out! It's the Japanese trailer! And boy! Is it a huge improvement over the US trailers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gViLn6HjmW8