DVDizzy Forum

If you can find a way to flesh out
*witch steals baby
*baby grows into pretty girl
*prince comes
*witch finds out
*happy ending

for an hour and a half, being faithful is fine.
I mean Cinderella, a fairly solid fairy story, requires the mouse subplot to flesh it out to standard movie time.

Dragonlion wrote:

robster16 wrote:The thing is I think I read somewhere that Disney's Rapunzel is now a mix between the traditional fairytale and a estonian folktale. The premise being that baby's are switched. Then the story would be something like this:

A king uses resources or help from a witch, but in return she demands that she will get the king's firstborn child. The King is desperate and agrees. But after his son/prince is born he can't bear to hand over his only child to the witch and persuades a peasant family to switch their newlyborn daughter with his son with a promise that the king will track down the witch and switch back the children. So the witch takes Rapunzel, thinking she is the daughter of the king, a princess and the real prince is raised by a peasant family. The boy eventually figures out what happened and when he is old enough he goes out into the world to correct the mistake, free the girl and give her her life back.

So in that version the witch THINKS Rapunzel is a princess and the bandit actually turns out to be the prince! Makes sense and leaves a lot of room for some great twists and turns plotwise. The witch could figure out the mix-up and want revenge on the king and the prince, Rapunzel reconnects with long lost parents, the bandit has to change his ways and become the prince he is destined to be...

I'm not sure if this is 100% true or if this story has changed in the meantime, but I really like this incarnation a LOT!

That sounds really cool! I hope that's the story. By the way, robster16, how did you find that out?

I read that on another Disney forum/website. I think it was part of an interview with someone involved in the production, I think the directors even. Anyway, I did some research but can't find the original quote. I did figure out what fairytale it was, The Grateful Prince, a fairytale from estonia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grateful_Prince

A king got lost in a forest. An old man offered to show him the way out for the first thing that came out of his house. He did not want to give up a dog, and so tried to escape again; then he agreed. At home, the first thing was his newborn son, in his nurse's arms. To deceive the old man, he gave his son to a peasant and raised the peasant's daughter as a princess. A year later, the stranger came and took the girl, but the king did not dare claim his son, for fear it would be heard.

The prince grew up as a peasant, but while his foster parents, being rewarded, were content, the prince himself had learned of the girl and was grieved at the thought he would be king at her price.

I'm pretty sure the directors even confirmed that was the storyline. I also remember reading that synopsis.

What I love about it as well is that the story is out Rapunzel learning to let go and enjoy life after having spent it locked in a tower. That's a wonderful departure from the usual "I want" premise. Even more refreshing that Tiana's "work hard" dream. Wich I like, but not love.

PatrickvD wrote:I'm pretty sure the directors even confirmed that was the storyline. I also remember reading that synopsis.

What I love about it as well is that the story is out Rapunzel learning to let go and enjoy life after having spent it locked in a tower. That's a wonderful departure from the usual "I want" premise. Even more refreshing that Tiana's "work hard" dream. Wich I like, but not love.

I like that story a lot too! Let's hope it becomes similar to that. If Rapunzel longs to be out of her tower, that would be like Quasimodo yearning to leave Norte Dame and go "Out There" into the world. It's a great message of freedom.

IagoZazu wrote:

PatrickvD wrote:I'm pretty sure the directors even confirmed that was the storyline. I also remember reading that synopsis.

What I love about it as well is that the story is out Rapunzel learning to let go and enjoy life after having spent it locked in a tower. That's a wonderful departure from the usual "I want" premise. Even more refreshing that Tiana's "work hard" dream. Wich I like, but not love.

I like that story a lot too! Let's hope it becomes similar to that. If Rapunzel longs to be out of her tower, that would be like Quasimodo yearning to leave Norte Dame and go "Out There" into the world. It's a great message of freedom.

I'm not sure if she actually wants to leave the tower. From the interview with the directors I got the vibe that she will enjoy life outside the tower but ultimately have trouble adapting to her new life. I could be wrong.

Either way, I love the potential in the ideas.

Thank you all who kindly backed and stood up for me!

Someday, you forgot pregnant woman craves food, husband steals food, witch catches husband, witch makes him promise baby, possibly how witch raises Rapunzel and the whole setup of their relationship and how Rapunzel lives, prince and princess develop love, plan escape, get cuaght, Rapunzel is banished, prince is blind, and how they live like that and how they come to find each other, spell breaks and the wedding and how would the witch gets her comeuppence or reconciliation with the child she loved?

robster, so that is a tale that is like Rapunzel but not the same as a different version of Rapunzel. You see, with Aschenputtel and Cendrillon, those were two different versions of Cinderella, the same tale. They both translate roughly to ash-girl and are clearly the same heroine and story. But with this different "Grateful Prince" tale, aside from an almost completely different way of how the characters came to be, their backgrounds (while the two Cinderellas were the same), does the heroine even have the same name, something like Rapunzel or something from a garden?

So Disney's if Disney uses that, they are mixing two different tales, not two slightly different versions of the same tale.

Please, I can't be the only one with a problem with that? Disney: "Let's mix Rapunzel with some other story just to make it longer, even though it gets rid of how Rapunzel got her name and all that, not to mention the potential drama that could have arised from that husband-steals-witch-ctaches story."

If you're already finding so much to criticize about Disney's version (repeat: Disney's version) before the damn thing even finishes production, and all focused on story changes without even considering other things like voices, characters, animation, music, editing, etc., perhaps you should ignore the Disney one and make your own Rapunzel and it can be as traditional as you want it to be.

albert

, Escapay,

Escapay wrote:If you're already finding so much to criticize about Disney's version (repeat: Disney's version) before the damn thing even finishes production, and all focused on story changes without even considering other things like voices, characters, animation, music, editing, etc., perhaps you should ignore the Disney one and make your own Rapunzel and it can be as traditional as you want it to be.

albert

Escapay wrote:If you're already finding so much to criticize about Disney's version (repeat: Disney's version) before the damn thing even finishes production, and all focused on story changes without even considering other things like voices, characters, animation, music, editing, etc., perhaps you should ignore the Disney one and make your own Rapunzel and it can be as traditional as you want it to be.

albert

And that's what books are for. To see the story the way you want to see it!

Well, he's not judging the music, animation, etc, etc.

He's just saying that he's disappointed in the story changes and that it's a pity that it's gonna be a weird mix of stories, just to make it longer, even though it gets rid of how Rapunzel got her name and all that.
Which is wrong in my opinion too. It might be a nice film, but if it's not Rapunzel, they should call it something else.

Can you guys (Escapay and all the clapping followers) please explain to me what's up with your reactions, because all he's doing is giving a good explanation of why he is disappointed in some story changes.

Why are you saying something like this
"If you're already finding so much to criticize about Disney's version (repeat: Disney's version) before the damn thing even finishes production, and all focused on story changes without even considering other things like voices, characters, animation, music, editing, etc., perhaps you should ignore the Disney one and make your own Rapunzel and it can be as traditional as you want it to be."

He is only talking about the story. Nothing more.

I didn't know this message board was made for praising films (or other things) only.

So only people who find all the story changes fantastic are allowed to post?

He has a history of being a negative poster, complaining more than any one member should about everything - basically, if it's not his way, he hates it.

Brick Wall wrote:Can you guys (Escapay and all the clapping followers) please explain to me what's up with your reactions

No.

I've already said what I wanted to say. If you didn't understand it the first time, I'm not going to repeat it five more times and have you misunderstand it five more times because you can't seem to grasp any other opinion beyond your own and those that agree with you.

Brick Wall wrote:So only people who find all the story changes fantastic are allowed to post?

albert

Marky_198 wrote:Well, he's not judging the music, animation, etc, etc.

He's just saying that he's disappointed in the story changes and that it's a pity that it's gonna be a weird mix of stories, just to make it longer, even though it gets rid of how Rapunzel got her name and all that.
Which is wrong in my opinion too. It might be a nice film, but if it's not Rapunzel, they should call it something else.

Can you guys (Escapay and all the clapping followers) please explain to me what's up with your reactions, because all he's doing is giving a good explanation of why he is disappointed in some story changes.

Why are you saying something like this
"If you're already finding so much to criticize about Disney's version (repeat: Disney's version) before the damn thing even finishes production, and all focused on story changes without even considering other things like voices, characters, animation, music, editing, etc., perhaps you should ignore the Disney one and make your own Rapunzel and it can be as traditional as you want it to be."

He is only talking about the story. Nothing more.

I didn't know this message board was made for praising films (or other things) only.

So only people who find all the story changes fantastic are allowed to post?

I second that face palm.

Obviously, Marky hasn't been to the Princess and the Frog topic lately.

And I third the Facepalm.

ajmrowland wrote:Obviously, Marky hasn't been to the Princess and the Frog topic lately.

And I third the Facepalm.

Don't give him any ideas


also I fourth the Facepalm and second the T Shirt

Albert, you are wrong here.

Because of the simple fact that you don't let DisneyDuster have his own opinion.

He doesn't like the story changes and he has that right.
Don't say that he's not allowed to have that opinion.

You might disagree, but that's a different story.

"If you're already finding so much to criticize about Disney's version (repeat: Disney's version) before the damn thing even finishes production, and all focused on story changes without even considering other things like voices, characters, animation, music, editing, etc., perhaps you should ignore the Disney one and make your own Rapunzel and it can be as traditional as you want it to be."

He's ONLY talking about the story. He does not HAVE TO like it. Accept it.

Don't try to silence people if they are just explaining their own opinion, about something like a story.
Thank you.

Are all of the story changes even made public? I doubt it that the entire story is already known, so he's still jumping to conclusions. And of course he's right to have his opinions, but seeing as he doesn't know all of it, it makes discussing the point rather moot. But that goes for everyone who tries to discuss something that can't be discussed yet.

ok, so.... I'm gonna side with Duster and Marky on this argument, but only to a certain degree.

I can understand why they would be upset about adopting two different tales, slapping them together, and calling it Rapunzel. At this point it doesn't sound like it's really Rapunzel anymore aside from the Princess's name and the tower. This doesn't really settle with me either. Although I will have to admit that changes would have had to be made to make a film out of it. That doesn't mean they had to switch the royalty of the main characters or add another tale. It's like taking the tale of Cinderella and making the prince a pauper and Cinderella a Princess already. The only thing that these story changes might help is to create a specific kind of character. In the new Disney version, it seems that they are trying to create a self-dependent princess who doesn't think she needs a man. In this case, then having her be a princess would only escalate that fact because she really wouldn't need one. The Prince becoming a thief already sets up a undertone that maybe he's just winning her over to steal all the royal treasures, but falls for Rapunzel in the process. Now, I'm just making all this up but if that's what they were going for then the story switches would make sense.

Duster's complaints are only on the story, and he's reworded himself a dozen times already that he's not bashing the entire film. He's just voicing his opinion on what we know so far, and what we know so far doesn't settle right with him, what's the problem with that? I'm sure that Duster realizes that the film still has time to change from the limited story we know, and that beyond all of that he might end up loving the film. But for now he is entitled to this opinion and there is no reason why any of us should be arguing with him like this. On top of that to jump on a bandwagon to criticize him further without actually saying anything. Honestly, how childish.

I also think that we jump on Marky too fast now as well. I wont sit here and say that I have never disagreed with anything he's said and that I haven't had arguments with him in the past, but I think now whenever people see his posts they automatically read them with the fact that whatever it is he's saying you'll disagree. Also there is completely no point in reposting over and over again without actually saying anything that your slapping your heads or whatever. This is the only forum I post in, and that's because I overall like the community. But when we pull childish crap like this it makes me second guess that judgement. Marky's just helping stand Duster's ground because he shares his opinion. That doesn't me he doesn't understand, what is there not to understand? They are unhappy with what they hear about the story changes so far, and the rest of you are not. That's really all it boils down to.

alright, my rant is over. If you're going to reply actually say something. I'm sick of coming to topics all over the forum thinking that someone has actually made a point or revealed some news and all that's new is a stupid smily or some snide slandering comment. On top of that, when the people who are doing it have criticized other members in the past for doing the same thing. As if that's much different from reyquila posting over and over that he'll buy whatever the film in question is. I really don't want to offend anyone with anything I've said because I like all of you and enjoy being a part of this site, but all of this all over the forum is really getting to me.

P.S. Listen to Kubrickfan they have been simplifying this situation correctly for a while now, and it's as if no one is paying attention.