DVDizzy Forum

Snow White wrote:If they want to change name of the movie, I prefer The Hidden Tower!

Agreed.

Snow White wrote: Tangled is a title for a Shrek type of movie, so I really think that Rapunzel will be in Shrek-style...

That's what Disney wants us to think, or rather, the general public. And if that's what brings in the movie-goers, so be it. I'm also going to say that whatever trailers we get will focus on the comedic angles, and definitely the hero of the story.

To be honest, I rather have a traditional Alan Menken Disney fairytale with a bad title aimed to bring in audiences than one with a "girly"" (and I use that term loosely) title that Disney had already resigned to failure. In the grand scheme of things, will the title "Tangled" make you hate the movie when you see it? I mean, do you only critique a movie based solely on its name? The title could be "*3ebbx)%g" and it could end up being the best Disney film ever made.

Yes, a good title is incredibly important when naming a book, movie, etc., but I'm not going to sweat over this.

I understand but Tangled sounds like a porn movie!!! It's the worst title I've seen!

Do you think parents will go to the cinema with their children to see a movie with a porn title???

So, they could name it Undressed, it's the same!

I'm too disappointed!

The title is too important... so if they want to change it, they could name The Hidden Twer, it's better and it isn't a porn title!

http://blueskydisney.blogspot.com/2010/ ... orrow.html

I don't know why they don't just take part of the original title and call it that... "Unbraided" as in "Rapunzel Unbraided," which was the actual name of this project. We'll find out about this very soon, btw. And by that I mean VERY soon. The only way that the title will remain the same is if Ed and John decide against it and right now they're part of the group that is working on this name change.

Does anyone else think that Unbraided might as well be the title if they're going to change it at all? Although, it does have the word "braid" in there, and most boys don't want to see a movie about a girl's hair. (And I don't want the title to be Unbraided, I'd rather just Rapunzel, but I mean, unless Rapunzel gets a lot of knots in her hair, Unbraided might be better than Tangled.

Snow White wrote:I understand but Tangled sounds like a porn movie!!! It's the worst title I've seen!

Do you think parents will go to the cinema with their children to see a movie with a porn title???

So, they could name it Undressed, it's the same!

I'm too disappointed!

The title is too important... so if they want to change it, they could name The Hidden Twer, it's better and it isn't a porn title!

Well, no matter how much they want to change the perception of their brand, I don't think anyone will be confusing a Disney movie with a porno anytime soon.

Although, of all the possible the choices, I felt "Tangled" was only second worst to "The Switch". But like I said, I'm not going to let it bother me.... Just wait for the Menken music!

After giving this some thought, I've come to the conclusion that this is a brilliant strategy! And they should do it with all the DACs, not just princess films. All those classic titles sound so boring and cliche, they should be given modern, gender-neutral names. They will never attract new audiences with such unimaginative titles like "Lady and the Tramp", for instance. Just imagine, come 2012 and we will be celebrating 75th anniversary of "Poisoned". How wonderful!

Now, here's my pitch for re-titling some of the DACs. If anyone has better ideas, please share!
- Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs ==> Poisoned
- Pinocchio ==> Wood
- Dumbo ==> Feather
- Bambi ==> Orphaned
- Cinderella ==> Barefoot
- Alice in Wonderland ==> Dreamy (I'm torn over this one, it sounds too girlie, but not as girlie as the original title, of course)
- 101 Dalmatians ==> 101 (duh!)
- The Sword in the Stone ==> Stoned
- The Little Mermaid ==> Fins (I was thinking "Splash" but it was already taken Isn't it sad that back in the '80s Disney was much more progressive than it is today?)

My ideas:

- Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs -> Death Apple
- Pinocchio -> Wood
- Dumbo -> Ears of Flight
- Bambi -> Deer Hunted
- Cinderella -> Footloser
- Alice in Wonderland -> Trippin'
- 101 Dalmatians -> Spotted & Skinned
- The Sword in the Stone -> Wiz Kid
- The Little Mermaid -> Fish Fingers

Aren't we overreacting just a teeny bit here? It's just a title change, happens all the time. And I can see why, Rapunzel as a title doesn't really sounds inviting at all (at least to me).

We're Disney fans, overreacting is what we do best. But you're right that in the great scheme of things something as trivial as a title doesn't mean a squat. What's worrying is that the whole concept of catering to the audience (of which this title-change reeks) resulted in things like overproduction of DTV sequels and the switch to CG animation. This was supposed to be a new time for Disney and they're apparently still stuck in 2003.

sotiris2006 wrote:

Snow White wrote:If they want to change name of the movie, I prefer too much The Hidden Tower!!!

Agreed. Actually there was another contender for the title (that a poster in TAG blog confirmed) which was "The Secret Tower". From all those lame names, i prefer "The Secret Tower" the best.

If they're going with that than they should make it "Secret of the Tower" or "Secrets of the Tower". That at least sounds like something written by a 7 year-old who is bored.

I really should start a thread and write down all the reasons the Princess and the Frog flopped according to the fans and see which ones make sense.

pap64 wrote:I really should start a thread and write down all the reasons the Princess and the Frog flopped according to the fans and see which ones make sense.

I thought it didn't flop? Everyone basically said so.

I think pap knows that. It's just a list of fan-originated reasons.

DisneyJedi wrote:

pap64 wrote:I really should start a thread and write down all the reasons the Princess and the Frog flopped according to the fans and see which ones make sense.

I thought it didn't flop? Everyone basically said so.

I knew the movie didn't flop per say. I'm just stating that everywhere I look fans are trying to figure out why it "flopped".

Princess and the Frog was not really a flop, because earlier this week it passed the 100 million mark at the box office. The cost to make the film was 104 million (an estimate). Once the film hits DVD, it'll make a pretty nice profit. The true definition of "bomb" is "Treasure Planet," which made about 35 million and cost 110 million to make...

.. However, I would not call TPANF a success either... or not a slam bang success. Remember, Disney had been hyping this film for over a year prior to release, (including Geiko commercials!) How it grossed less than the new Chipmunks movie is still baffling me. Many people did not even LIKE the new chipmunks, so it shows that quality doesn't necessarily win 100% of the time.

Rapunzel is not a guarantee hit, though we all hope it does amazing business. Let's hope the title change is a good one.

Does anyone know how soon they are going to announce the name change? "Very soon" I've heard. But does "very soon" mean next month or tomorrow?

KennethE wrote:Princess and the Frog was not really a flop, because earlier this week it passed the 100 million mark at the box office. The cost to make the film was 104 million (an estimate). Once the film hits DVD, it'll make a pretty nice profit. The true definition of "bomb" is "Treasure Planet," which made about 35 million and cost 110 million to make...

.. However, I would not call TPANF a success either... or not a slam bang success. Remember, Disney had been hyping this film for over a year prior to release, (including Geiko commercials!) How it grossed less than the new Chipmunks movie is still baffling me. Many people did not even LIKE the new chipmunks, so it shows that quality doesn't necessarily win 100% of the time.

Umm, actually, Treasure Planet cost $140 million.

As for AatC2, I kind of think it should be against the law for Hollywood to take our childhoods and rape them, by taking them and changing them to "fit in the new millennium".

Now it's my go. I'm giving them sometimes awfully vague, ludicrous, pretentious or Austen-esque sounding titles.

Snow White: Woodland Cottage
Pinocchio: Woodwork
Dumbo: Commitment
Cinderella: Dreams and Decadence
Alice in Wonderland: Sweet Dream/Beautiful Nightmare
Peter Pan: Believe...
Lady and the Tramp: Sincerity and Solitude
Sleeping Beauty: Dormant
101 Dalmatians: Dogs
The Sword in the Stone: Hard In, Hard Out
The Rescuers: Squeaked
Beauty and the Beast: Adapted - A Tale As Old As Time
Aladdin: Chance and Charity
The Lion King: Beastly
The Princess and the Frog: Marsh Monarchy

No Title Change for Disney RAPUNZEL!!!

New Group over at FACEBOOK, please subscribe!

Mooky wrote:We're Disney fans, overreacting is what we do best.

And that's one of the biggest problems with the Disney fan community. Such behaviors ticks people like me off and need to stop this instant.

This was supposed to be a new time for Disney and they're apparently still stuck in 2003.

I can't see that being true. We're not in 2003 anymore. Disney IS on a much better track than they were during the final Eisner years.

Comparing the current year to 2003 is not a fair comparison.

Daydreamer wrote:No Title Change for Disney RAPUNZEL!!!

New Group over at FACEBOOK, please subscribe!

Please don't tell me you're just as bad as Darth Knite.

Daydreamer wrote:No Title Change for Disney RAPUNZEL!!!

New Group over at FACEBOOK, please subscribe!

link please...