Tangled (formerly Rapunzel)

[ELIOLI]

yes! Made me very pleased

[droosan]

According to Deadline Hollywood, Tangled is on-track to make US$67 million domestic, for the 5-day holiday opening weekend.

That's over two-thirds of what Meet the Robinsons made in its entire domestic run.

Plus, the movie has great 'word-of-mouth' buzz (and it deserves it!) .. so, here's hoping its success will continue.

[danieltruchsess]

I went to see Tangled on Saturday night, and I really enjoyed it. I actually liked this one better than Toy Story 3! Go Disney!

[Dusterian]

I SAW THE MOVIE!!!!! And I was happy because it was Disney doing a fairy tale...but sad because it was really only kind of half that.

It felt like Disney came half-back, with some classic Disney and some modern, fast-humored, twisted touches. But it also had the best animation I have ever seen in CGI, and some of the best emtional acting animation I have ever seen in any animated movie, Disney or otherwise. It should have looked more pianterly and more like hand-drawn, even Glen Keane never came out and said they had reached his goal, but oh well, at least they tried and came some of the way.

So all in all, some magical, beautiful, touching, moving, brilliant and very, very powerful moments...that still didn't save me from the gloom I felt of the tangled mess of twisting Disney's tradition and the original story.

But one thing I must point out:

In the opening of the film, Flynn is narrating the story the film is about. And then Flynn says, This isn’t my story anyway.” I’m sorry, WHAT?! Didn’t the directors, Byron Howard and Nathan Greno, say they called it Tangled because it was really a story about two people, both Rapunzel and Flynn?! W. T. F. Thanks, guys. I know Disney’s marketing department has lied before, but I didn’t expect you to. Because of course, it really turned out to be about Rapunzel. They didn’t stand up to the marketing department, and why, what power did they have over them? Were they worried they would lose their jobs or positions? Was Bob Iger practically threatening them? I don’t know if these directors were cowards or Bob Iger a villain.

[Dacey]

You know, Dust, if you are honestly going to get that worked up over one line of dialogue and use that to back up some argument that the directors were "lying," well...

I could think of more deserving things that are worthy of your anger.

[Bill1978]

Not to throw fuel to the fire, but the fact this movie made so much on its first weekend and NEARLY beat Harry Potter kinda gives the marketing departmnet some justification for what they did.

I haven't read anything where people have complained about being duped from the trailers or the name of the title. The closest of seen is people cmmenting they didn't know it was a musical, but they haven't said it ruined the experience for them. So all of that stuff which bought people to the theatre has worked in Tangled's favour. I would say many of these people MAY have stayed away if it was Rapunzel and they showed the singing and what not.

And just PERHAPS if Tangled can continue to succeed, we'll see more of the classic Disney style advertised that you so desperately crave Dusterian. As they can now lead with the studio that bought you Tangled as the lead in and then go all classic after that.

[droosan]

Flynn's bookended narration is actually the 'weakest' part of the movie, IMO .. I personally would've preferred a generic narrator (à la Beauty and the Beast) to his cavalier prologue. But -- as Dacey says -- that's a minor 'nitpick'.

-----------------

And, yeah, Bill1978 .. an unfortunate 'side-effect' of Tangled's success is that it would seem to justify the Disney marketing department's ham-fisted promotion of the movie throughout the past year.

As I mentioned on Cartoon Brew, I'm firmly of the opinion that Tangled is doing well in spite of its marketing, rather than because of it.

[Macaluso]

Sounding like a broken record here, but Dusterian you are just... full blown insane. Just, holy cow man.

I loved it. Everything about it. I honestly think I prefer it to the Princess and the Frog. Mandy Moore did a fantastic job as well.

[Ben]

I was happy because it was Disney doing a fairy tale...but sad because it was really only kind of half that.

So Disney does a fairytale = Rapunzel.
Disney does kind of half that = Tangled?

[Dusterian]

BUT it turned out to actually BE more about Rapunzel than Flynn, too. They did lie.

And if this made money this way, chances are they will continue to do fairy tales the same way. Half-Disney, half-traditional, half-classic. Not a full classic.

All they care about is money, money, money. They had enough money, but no. To show that Disney was back on top...they had to act like they were only half Disney?!

Ben, if I understand you, then yes.

[Dacey]

Well, if movies don't make "money, money, money," then studios will stop making them. Sad, but true.

[Whippet Angel]

Seriously Dust, if you define a "classic" Disney film as one that mostly sticks to the original story then NONE of the "fairy tale" films would be considered classic (not to mention the thousands of young children that would've been scarred for life from the works of The Brothers Grimm, Collodi and Perrault )

Sorry to say it, but you seem to have this romanticized image of "classic Disney" that doesn't really exist.

Sounding like a broken record here, but Dusterian you are just... full blown insane. Just, holy cow man.

Yeah, and this too.

[Bill1978]

So Dusterian, you would have preferred a movie that spent the majority of its time in a tower with one character who gets visits from random people. And then she gets pregnant out of wedlock, so the witch throws the father out the window into thorns where he loses his sight and wanders aimlessly around until the mother of his twins cries on him and they live happily ever after. Yeah I can see that being a big crowd pleaser and one: families will totally adore all those family friendly themes and two: the conservative US crowd would lap up and activiely say it is awesome. Guess you are one of those people who wished Ariel died in The Little Mermaid or lament that Disney aged Pocahontas as you wanted to see a 30 year old chase after a 12 year old or were bummed that all the good guys survived The Hunchback Of Notre Dame.

And based upon your arguments, you are saying that this movie would be an instant classic if it was called Rapunzel. But yet the exact same movie can't be called a classic because it is called Tangled??

And last time I checked Disney was a company with shares. Which means the shareholders like to make money and the only way to make money is to have profits. And pouring money into a movie that doesn't make its money back is not good for the share market, which will make shareholders not happy, probably making them ditch their shares and thus suddenly Disney doesn't exist anymore.

[EricJ]

So Dusterian, you would have preferred a movie that spent the majority of its time in a tower with one character who gets visits from random people. And then she gets pregnant out of wedlock, so the witch throws the father out the window into thorns where he loses his sight and wanders aimlessly around until the mother of his twins cries on him and they live happily ever after. Yeah I can see that being a big crowd pleaser and one: families will totally adore all those family friendly themes and two: the conservative US crowd would lap up and activiely say it is awesome. .

Well, seeing as we technically DID get

the witch ambushing the prince in the tower, Rapunzel "exiled" by losing her hair, and the tears restoring him,

that was certainly more of the original tale than I'd been expecting from the marketing and their inserting the HTTYD extras as a subplot.
By classic-90's standards, they could have kept the original title with that faithful a script, except, of course, for "buck-buck-buck"...

[Bill1978]

I hear ya EricJ, I'm just confused with the implication from Dusterian that the title stops the movie from being a classic. Either the movie you watched is a classic or its not. The title ain't gonna change it. Tangled could have been called: The Thief And The Bare Footed Lady and it would be the same movie. They could have named it The Missing Princess and it would be the same movie. Even Dudette, Get A Haircut! and it would be the same movie. Titles are just meant to give the product name recognition, not classic status. Dusterian implies that even if the movie sucked, if it was called Rapunzel it would be an automatic Disney classic.