DVDizzy Forum

If they wanted to change the title, The Secret Tower would have been a much better choice.

Disney's Divinity wrote:But let's look on the bright side:

1. Maybe this movie'll fail. Then Disney'll know that it's not the type of animation--or, more specifically, 2D animation--that is causing their movies to fail. And they'll also realize that their movies will suck in the box office regardless of the gender they play to. Their mentality is skewed so far off of reality these days, and maybe that'll finally register.

2. Using Tangled as the title is similar to using TP&TF instead of The Frog Princess--in the future, a 2D Rapunzel and The Frog Prince is open to be made.

3. After the movie drifts into oblivion after barely being noticed, I'll never have to see Rapunzel's 3D face slapped next to Cinderella and Ariel

I love you for this post.

The more I hear about this movie, the less excited I get. Alan Menken is the only beacon of light in this whole mess of a production. "Rapunzel" or "Tangled", I don't care anymore. Either way, Harry Potter is going to Avada Kedavra its hairy ass.

Disney's Divinity wrote:So, really, why did they change the Unbraided title? I guess it's because it connotes a kind of glittery, butterfly-stickered hairbrush--not manly at all.

They changed Rapunzel Unbraided to Rapunzel because the story, at one point, wasn't to be a spoof anymore.

Disney's Divinity wrote: Maybe this movie'll fail. Then Disney'll know that it's not the type of animation--or, more specifically, 2D animation--that is causing their movies to fail. And they'll also realize that their movies will suck in the box office regardless of the gender they play to. Their mentality is skewed so far off of reality these days, and maybe that'll finally register.

While I don't *want* any of the DACs to fail (or any Disney movie, really), but you make a good point. At the same time, as I've said previously, if Tangled does a lot better than TP&tF at the box office, it'll make me wonder why...Disney will probably think it's because of the CGI and spoofiness... And maybe that will be true, so I'll give an eye-roll to the general movie-going public.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Mandy Moore's crappy voice

Shoot me in the heart, why don't you? Just give her a chance. You haven't even heard her as Rapunzel yet.

And I'm just guessing, but for the Princess Collection merchandise, I think that Rapunzel would be hand-drawn on the packaging...

Prince Edward wrote:To bad Alan Menken did not get The Princess and the Frog and that they have cancelled Snow Queen, now Rapunzel (sorry, Tangled) may be is last Disney animated movie:/ I love Alan Menken and his music beyond words, and the circumstances for his return to Disney animation could have been better...

I had been upset about Menken not doing the music for TP&tF, but the soundtrack turned out to be one of my favorites (although for scores, no one beats Menken!). And I think that Menken doing the music for Tangled HAS to be considered as a redeeming quality for the film! We can't forget that he's doing the music (although some people here don't like Home on the Range, even though Menken did the music...

robster16 wrote: If they cave in and change the title after using the title "Rapunzel" for this project up untill their own annual report, released in january and now completely re-write the movie's synopsis where the focus in placed on the male character instead of the female character, then I think it's time for someone to speak up and address this marketing failure.

The thing is, we don't know WHEN they changed from a classic fairy tale to what the film is now...we don't know when they started reworking the film (again)...so it's not necessarily a recent development...

UmbrellaFish wrote:If "Tangled" is going to make more money than "Rapunzel" we'll see...

I understand your point, BUT Tangled = Rapunzel, or at least the most recent incarnation. Whether or not the title would be Rapunzel or Tangled, the film coming out next winter will be the same film it would've been regardless of the title.

Stats87 wrote:Boy: Tangled? My hair has tangles...let's go see it!

Dream Huntress wrote:the movie is still being referred as "Rapunzel" in the Disney Animation Studios site

Maybe they announced the title change because they knew that people would freak out, and then if they leave the title Rapunzel, people will praise them...

Babaloo wrote:When I first read that the name changed to "Tangled" you should have seen my mouth drop, but then I thought...as long as the movie is good, I don't care. It might have a stupid name, but it could be a good movie. And like someone else said, it might actually have something to do with the film (I don't know, something like to complete opposites *cough Tiana and Naveen cough*, get "tangled" together). And you know what if that's what it takes for Disney to bring in more viewers, then let them do it! Obviously it wasn't the best title choice (I would have loved if they kept Rapunzel), but if it's one that'll help, then its fine.

Good points. I mean, we're all jumping to conclusions, but it might be an amazingly awesome film with a non-fairy tale title...we'll just have to wait and see...

***

Some comments from the comments section of Cartoon Brew's title-change article

(http://www.cartoonbrew.com/disney/tangled.html):

Mr. Semaj wrote:I don't know what to think of the proposed story. They said years ago they were moving away from the fractured fairy tale bit, not it seems to have drifted back into that terrain. Doesn't sound like much of Glen Keane's sensibilities are surviving this gestation.

El wrote:It shouldn't be a big deal, but it is. After all the retooling that supposedly went into turning 'Rapunzel Unbraided' back into something like an honest, old-school Disney fairy tale, changing the title now just proves that Disney itself doesn't actually think that's good enough. The film is either a Princess Movie or it isn't; 'Tangled' is apparently going to try very hard to fool somebody. I hope it isn't me.

I must say that I agree. I know that I previously wrote that as long as the movie is the same, it's not a huge deal. Which I agree with (in terms of, the movie that's in production now, regardless of the title, that's the movie coming out). But it makes me wonder: They went from Rapunzel Unbraided (a spoof) to Rapunzel (a beautiful, classic fairy tale) to Tangled (whatever that'll be). Where/when/how/why/by whom did the change happen from Rapunzel to Tangled, I mean in story, in tone? Is Glen Keane happy with the changes? Is it all John Lasseter, trying to tear down Mickey's kingdom?!?

Another commenter on that site:

Fernano Ventura wrote:Bring back Eisner!

It makes me wonder- how would this movie have turned out if Eisner was still around? Granted, it'd be Unbraided, but I mean, I wonder how Unbraided[/i] would have matched up to Tangled...how many similarities in tone are there between the two? I think that the consensus among us UDers is that Rapunzel, the classic fairy tale, painterly type version, would've been the one that we'd most like to see... *sigh*

Donald C. wrote:“It’s a really fresh, smart take on the Rapunzel story.”

Ever sense Shrek!
I swear…

Why can’t we just have a good traditional fairy tale anymore?
It’s stops being witty and original if it becomes the norm.

Sean wrote:Disney has NEVER stuck to the original stories. To do a cookie cutter "princess story" about Rapunzel would fall into the "helpless girl who needs recuing" category and then we would have all sorts of discussions about Disney shying away from empowering young girls.

That's a good point, I must admit. Again, just like with TP&tF, damned if they do, damned if they don't.

greg m. wrote: There once was a time (long, long ago) when I could count on Disney to give me the definitive version (well, sort of) of a classic tale. Peter Pan, Snow White, Sleeping Beauty… NO OTHER COMPANY existing today can pull that off and have a consumer feel that to be the case - Disney has that market cornered - but they have forgotten this.

Now it’s about doing hip, to the moment, films - I guess.

Has the company forgotten what the brand is about?? They used to lead, now they follow. Maybe I’m ‘just an artist’ and don’t understand business.

Well said. (Even though he's not on this board...) I mean, really, Tarzan was their last book-to-film type movie, if you don't count Treasure Planet, since that was a different spin on the novel, and Tarzan did really well. Why (besides Shrek) does Disney think that straight-forward tellings (with the Disney magic) of classic stories won't go over well with the public?

IMO, anyone who says something as stupid as "Bring back Eisner" is obviously short-sighted and clearly doesn't think before they talk or act!


P.S.: I wonder where some of the more sensible members like Margos and Goofystitch are right now.

Mooky wrote:The more I hear about this movie, the less excited I get. Alan Menken is the only beacon of light in this whole mess of a production.

I feel that way as well.

Babaloo wrote:I was reading some of the facebook comments, and to tell you the truth, I think its only us Disney fans who are not liking the title change. Yah there are some who don't like it, but overall it doesn't seem to be a problem. When I first read that the name changed to "Tangled" you should have seen my mouth drop, but then I thought...as long as the movie is good, I don't care. It might have a stupid name, but it could be a good movie. And like someone else said, it might actually have something to do with the film (I don't know, something like to complete opposites *cough Tiana and Naveen cough*, get "tangled" together). And you know what if that's what it takes for Disney to bring in more viewers, then let them do it! Obviously it wasn't the best title choice (I would have loved if they kept Rapunzel), but if it's one that'll help, then its fine.

And about Flynn potentially having a more prominent role, I think that's fine too. Lots of people on UD say "it's about Rapunzel, not him", but the fact is it would be another princess movie. I LOVE princess movies, but you have to remember Disney is a company. They have to make back their money. For PatF the estimated production cost was $105 million, but that doesn't include other things. You know sometimes marketing for an animated film can cost up to $150 million. If it was another princess movie, many boys wouldn't want to go see it, and that's taking away almost half the desired audience. The reality is, yah I would love them to make films catered to fans, but it's not going to happen. They want to please everyone, not just fans.

Go to the links I posted, comingsoon.net and ohnotheydidn't are blogs where the general public comes, the general movie fan and it's safe to say 90% of them are all questioning the title! I posted the two links a few posts back!

As if Disney would read facebook comments. I find it strange that so many people would get all upset over just a silly name change. I would be more concerned about the movie itself.

I was taken off guard when I heard the name change, but I decided to get over it and judge the film on how it looks and not what's on the cover. Outside of us hard-core (and I hate using that term) Disney fans, nobody has heard lickety spilt about it. If Disney wants to go down that path, then let them do it. If it succeeds or fails, they can hopefully learn from it.

Sure, Tangled doesn't sound like the classic name of a DAC, but there's nothing you can do about it to get it back. I would have much rather have had Rapunzel be the title, but I'm not the head of Disney animation nor is anyone of us. Complaining about how stupid the title is will get you nowhere. Facebook petitions are about as fruitless as Youtube comments, and we all know how credible they are. Someone saying "bring back Eisner!" proves that easily.

What I just what to say is wait for the movie trailer. You can have a wonderful movie with a terrible title or a terrible movie with a wonderful title. It's just a name. A name is meant to stick in your head for a while, and although Tangled isn't a very memorable name, it may play a part in the story somehow. You can go rant on facebook and youtube all you want, but it would be so much better to just stay cool and wait to see how it looks. If it looks great, then it might not be so bad would it?

how bout

THE WITCH'S CHILD.

IagoZazu wrote:As if Disney would read facebook comments. I find it strange that so many people would get all upset over just a silly name change. I would be more concerned about the movie itself.

I was taken off guard when I heard the name change, but I decided to get over it and judge the film on how it looks and not what's on the cover. Outside of us hard-core (and I hate using that term) Disney fans, nobody has heard lickety spilt about it. If Disney wants to go down that path, then let them do it. If it succeeds or fails, they can hopefully learn from it.

Sure, Tangled doesn't sound like the classic name of a DAC, but there's nothing you can do about it to get it back. I would have much rather have had Rapunzel be the title, but I'm not the head of Disney animation nor is anyone of us. Complaining about how stupid the title is will get you nowhere. Facebook petitions are about as fruitless as Youtube comments, and we all know how credible they are. Someone saying "bring back Eisner!" proves that easily.

What I just what to say is wait for the movie trailer. You can have a wonderful movie with a terrible title or a terrible movie with a wonderful title. It's just a name. A name is meant to stick in your head for a while, and although Tangled isn't a very memorable name, it may play a part in the story somehow. You can go rant on facebook and youtube all you want, but it would be so much better to just stay cool and wait to see how it looks. If it looks great, then it might not be so bad would it?

Well said, IagoZazu.

I agree with IagoZazu, but there is one thing I might point out. A name, be it for a movie, a store, a theme park, a broadway show, or a book, is a factor meant to attract people. While Walmart aint the most attractive name, it gets made up in the "consistently low prices", Best Buy has an okay name. The Wind in the Willows is attractive,etc.

robster16 wrote:

Babaloo wrote:I was reading some of the facebook comments, and to tell you the truth, I think its only us Disney fans who are not liking the title change. Yah there are some who don't like it, but overall it doesn't seem to be a problem. When I first read that the name changed to "Tangled" you should have seen my mouth drop, but then I thought...as long as the movie is good, I don't care. It might have a stupid name, but it could be a good movie. And like someone else said, it might actually have something to do with the film (I don't know, something like to complete opposites *cough Tiana and Naveen cough*, get "tangled" together). And you know what if that's what it takes for Disney to bring in more viewers, then let them do it! Obviously it wasn't the best title choice (I would have loved if they kept Rapunzel), but if it's one that'll help, then its fine.

And about Flynn potentially having a more prominent role, I think that's fine too. Lots of people on UD say "it's about Rapunzel, not him", but the fact is it would be another princess movie. I LOVE princess movies, but you have to remember Disney is a company. They have to make back their money. For PatF the estimated production cost was $105 million, but that doesn't include other things. You know sometimes marketing for an animated film can cost up to $150 million. If it was another princess movie, many boys wouldn't want to go see it, and that's taking away almost half the desired audience. The reality is, yah I would love them to make films catered to fans, but it's not going to happen. They want to please everyone, not just fans.

Go to the links I posted, comingsoon.net and ohnotheydidn't are blogs where the general public comes, the general movie fan and it's safe to say 90% of them are all questioning the title! I posted the two links a few posts back!

I signed your petition but I made a typo mistake on the comment.
As I once said "Disney should hinder their talent"(written correctly "Disney should NOT hinder their talent!")Disney MUST be pulling a trick on us,but this can be serious.Maybe they shouldn't focus on the young male audience too much.Alan Menken's music can attract hippies and fans.The animation is just beautiful.Rapunzel is a like-able character(this is from the voice casting description).Mother Gothel is an amazing villain.Why can't Disney be satisfied with the masterpiece they wanted to make.Just let the movie be "Rapunzel" and just see what could happen.

Guys, something tells me that we're gonna have to accept the possibility that "Tangled" WILL be a successful film whether we want it to be or not.

Of course, in the end, all things lie with marketing, which The Princess and the Frog didnt have squat.

I base this on several things:

1. Alan Menken - his Broadway style of music is gonna attract the Broadway crowd...the same people who saw Enchanted most likely

2. Less focus on Rapunzel - If it's true that the story is not gonna be so Rapunzel centric then you'll attract new people who are sick of the destruction that Disney has done to their Princess franchise by making it so girly. It's just the facts, fellas. Disney can get away with still making Rapunzel marketable to girls with this approach.

3. Shrek/Enchanted-like approach - It seems that's how theyre gonna do this story though I hope they can still maintain the possibility of having Gothel as a villain with depth as the rumor goes. Face it folks, Shrek and Enchanted made moola for a reason

4. Celebrity voices involved

5. I give you one guess and three letters...

Yes, as much as we as Disney purists hate it, I predict this film will overshadow The Princess and the Frog by making $200 million or somewhere near it. I would be surprised/shocked it this fails.

Only then can we start panicking!

toonaspie wrote:Of course, in the end, all things lie with marketing, which The Princess and the Frog didnt have squat.

Are you daft or something?!

TPatF recieved TONS of heavy marketing!

WDWLocal wrote:

toonaspie wrote:Of course, in the end, all things lie with marketing, which The Princess and the Frog didnt have squat.

Are you daft or something?!

TPatF recieved TONS of heavy marketing!

In terms of quanitity TPatF got standard marketing: previews, theme park promotions, etc but I think the quality and the approach was very lacking.

There was very little focus on what to look for in this film. Instead most of the marketing has been "we're bringing back 2D with a black princess now go see this movie!". Personally I think marketing could've been better, especially when so much was at stake for this film to be sucessful. The one hour special they had while, very good production wise, was a weak promotional tool for the film itself.

Personally people need more than the return of traditional Disney to come back to it, you need to offer them something new. Maybe if they had talked about the special effects or something like that but I dunno. Those are just my thoughts.

WDWLocal wrote:

toonaspie wrote:Of course, in the end, all things lie with marketing, which The Princess and the Frog didnt have squat.

Are you daft or something?!

TPatF recieved TONS of heavy marketing!

But not truly enough.

Although I will say that I preferred "Rapunzel," am I the only one that thought "Tangled" was the best alternate title they offered? Or am I just biased because I like the Maroon 5 song of the same name?

Here's a preview at some Rapunzel toys with some more info on the movie hidden in the descriptions of the toys:

Disney Rapunzel
2010 Fact Sheet

The enchanting and magical world of Disney brings to life timeless fairytales and characters adored by little girls all over. Disney’s newest animated film, featuring the heroine Rapunzel, will debut this fall, and girls can re-enact their favorite scenes with Disney’s Rapunzel Braiding Friends™ Hair Braider, Rapunzel & Flynn Rider Fashion Dolls and the Rapunzel Fairy-Tale Tower.

DISNEY’S RAPUNZEL

Disney’s Rapunzel Braiding Friends™ Hair Braider
With the help of Rapunzel’s adorable animal friends beautiful braids are a breeze! Just give a section of hair to each animal friend to hold and turn the handle. Wow--it really braids, and it’s so easy to do! The Rapunzel doll and friends can also be removed from the braider and taken on the go. Girls will love braiding their doll’s beautiful hair over and over again.
ARP: $29.99 Ages: 3+ Available: Fall 2010



Disney’s Rapunzel Fashion Doll Assortment Rapunzel & Flynn Rider
Disney’s newest heroine wears her signature gown from the movie and features beautiful golden hair that nearly touches the ground! Includes 10-inch wear-and-share hair extension so girls can re-create their favorite movie scenes with Rapunzel’s long, luxurious hair. Also in the assortment is Flynn Rider, the dashing hero who joins Rapunzel on her adventures and eventually wins her heart. Girls will love playing out this romance with the Rapunzel and Flynn Rider dolls. (Each doll sold separately)
ARP: $14.99 each Ages: 3+ Available: Fall 2010





Disney’s Rapunzel Fairy-Tale Tower
With Disney’s Rapunzel Fairy-Tale Tower girls can enter the world of Rapunzel with the extra-high Tower and recreate her magical hair scenes with a 30-inch hair extension that can clip onto any Rapunzel doll’s hair! Inside the Tower are five different rooms to play in: downstairs features a kitchen with dining room, a cozy fireplace and main room; the second floor features an artist studio where Rapunzel paints her murals – here the walls change color with water and a paint brush so girls can “magically” paint them, too! Upstairs is the bedroom and vanity room, with a secret compartment to hide Rapunzel’s treasures; underneath her bed is her chameleon friend, Pascal. The Tower comes complete with hair extension, Pascal and accessories.
ARP: $99.99 Ages: 3+ Available: Fall 2010





Disney’s Rapunzel Collectable Small Doll Assortment
The newest Disney heroine has beautiful, long golden hair. This doll assortment includes 2 adorable Rapunzel dolls, each with 12 inches of hair and each showcasing either fashion or hair play. The fashion play Rapunzel doll includes 2 signature fashions from the movie. The hair play Rapunzel doll comes with style accessories for decorating Rapunzel’s beautiful, flowing hair!
ARP: $6.99 each Ages: 3+ Available: Fall 2010

Disney’s Rapunzel Maximus Horse
A faithful, spirited companion, Maximus joins in Rapunzel’s adventures and quickly becomes one of her best friends! With an articulated head, girls can pose Maximus and really bring him to life. Also included are wear-and-share hair clips so that girls can groom and pamper their horse.
ARP: $19.99 Ages: 3+ Available: Fall 2010

To sum things up in terms of new info on the movie:

* The Tower has different floors inside it, so it's not just one level but several of them with the top level being the bedroom. Which would solve a lot of logistical problems concerning her life inside the tower, eating, sleeping, etc.
* She has a pet chameleon named Pascal. ( in the picture of the opened tower, you can see the tiny version of him on the bed )
* Once outside the tower she also has a pet horse named Maximus.

All the descriptions also once again confirm that when briefing Mattel on designing the toys, Rapunzel would be the main focus of the movie, it's painfully obvious, their press release also still reffers to the movie as Disney's Rapunzel, so this title change is a very recent decision and from the looks of it, very last minute. I guess Mattel is now stressing out and has to change and re-design all packaging and merchandise to fit with the new title, new logo's etc. And a clever line at how "Tangled" is only the title of the movie and not a description of all the extentions that come with the merchandise/toys...

Apparently there is now trouble at the horizon, with more and more people coming to the conclusion that there is a movie from 2001 that's also called "Tangled" which is rated R and contains shots of full frontal male nudity. There are already people complaining how children could come across pictures like that when looking on the web for info on the movie and we all know how soccer moms love complaining... I have my fingers crossed that they'll change this title! Anything is better then "Tangled", even other contenders like "The Secret Tower" which has much more of a fairytale appeal then "Tangled". Let's see how this devellops...

Well.... the toys look interesting. Though Rapunzel's doll literally looks like a Barbie.