DVDizzy Forum

Eventhough it's ALL conceptual stuff, I'll comment anyway,

New logo is MUCH better. The simpler approach looks nicer compared to the girly, DTV-ish, over-the-topness logo of the Unbraided days.

I also think the mood and atmosphere of the newer higher tower is much more interesting and mysterious than the kitchy painting-ish thing that was in the older concept.

REINIER wrote:As always I totally agree with you on this Disney Duster.
I too prefer the original set-up, the current logo misses it's original vibe as well.

Thank you!

Disney's Divinity wrote:I actually like the newer version of the tower better. If the witch is meant to be a villain, then the tower should be menacing vs. the light-hearted atmosphere of the original design. And, if the tower is phallic, then that's a step forward for Disney. You'd expect the female part to portray the evil (see Ursula's Lair). It also creates multitudes of symbolism/subtext, which is never a bad thing.

It may be a bad thing. It doesn't make sense for the witch to trap Rapunzel in what will ultimately save her. It would make more sense to trap her in something womb-like. Anyway, I don't think any of it is good for the film because it says a girl needs a man to be free, to be happy, even it's debatable what the highest pleasure is.

PatrickvD wrote:New logo is MUCH better. The simpler approach looks nicer compared to the girly, DTV-ish, over-the-topness logo of the Unbraided days.

I also think the mood and atmosphere of the newer higher tower is much more interesting and mysterious than the kitchy painting-ish thing that was in the older concept.

Girly shouldn't matter if it's a film about a girl, but I can see how maybe you think it's too girly.

As for the setting, it had better look like the "OLD" concept art, because Glen Keane said that's exactly what he wanted. He based the art on a French Rocco painting, particularly for it's richness, like there's "butter between the brush strokes" and you'll get calories from looking at it too long or something like that. He wanted the whole film to look like that, and had an artist make a CGI environment that matched the original painting.



You can like the new version all you want, but you can't deny the previous tower environment is more lush and beautiful. Which goes more with Glen Keane's promise to make Rapunzel "..a film of astonishing beauty."

I think the new logo is much, much better. The old reminded me of a 'Bratz' type movie sadly. But it's all concept though, isnt it ?

I also think that the new tower is much more inkeeping with the story; since when was Rapunzel kept in a lovely cozy tower, which looks almost like Giselles cottage and the woodcutters cottage from Sleeping Beauty? I always thought that she was taken by the witch to live up in her tower, and her life wasnt a happy one. I could be wrong though; have I missed something in the Disney version of the plot ?

I never thought of the tower being phallic, or Ursua's layer being womb like. Very interesting though !

The old logo had something of a medieval style, yet with some joy in it. I really liked it and I can only hope they will change it again...

Maybe it will open the film!

let's hope so!

Well peeps, I would write that off as the "new" or "official" logo.... same with "the Princess and the Frog" logo. Enchanted had that EXACT same logo.... which they didn't use.

Old Fish Tale wrote:Maybe it will open the film!

That's exactly what I was thinking. Sorta like a "Shrek" opening.

Poody wrote:Well peeps, I would write that off as the "new" or "official" logo.... same with "the Princess and the Frog" logo. Enchanted had that EXACT same logo.... which they didn't use.

I actually never though of that, but now that you mention it, I figured I might include the proof, in which I can definitely see the similarities. Good eye!


As for the concept art, I think it all depends on the story. I'm not exactly familiar with the story of Rapunzel, but I know that Disney alters the original stories to fit with the company (The Little Mermaid being my prime example); therefore I don't think I can judge the concept arts yet. It all depends on where they're going with the story. If they're keeping it as a "motherly witch" and "adopted daughter", then I agree with Disney Duster, the original tower is a lot better. However, if they're going in another direction and making the witch the villain, I'd have to agree with PatrickvD, in saying that the newest concept art is a lot more fitting.

Same for the logo- it all depends on the direction they're taking the story.

If you read the synopsis of the film released with all the other announced animated films a few days ago, it says "an evil witch" is among the characters. I think we have our answer on which direction the movie is sending the witch from the story in. Making her evil also helps eliminate the pregnancy so prominently featured in the Brothers Grimm story. Instead of casting Rapunzel out of her tower in dissapointment over the pregnancy, she can cast her out in anger over letting the prince into the tower.

The new tower fits far better with an evil witch than the old one does.

A phallic shaped tower? You know what they say; sometimes a sausage is just a sausage. And as some have already mentioned, this is still concept art, and the movie has as far as I know still not gone into actual production, so the tower and the logo may still change. It is also possible that the new look has something to do with the new direction the plot has taken compared to the original idea, as well as Dean Wellins' involvement.

But I agree that the original tower looked much warmer, idyllic and cozy.

An image of the prince has been released. I have to say I'm disappointed. I don't know if it is the particular pose but his face looks distorted.

Are you sure this is a character design confirmation? Concept art is not usually the place to look for the latest character design.

I love the design of both towers in the concept art, but I agree that the new one makes it seem a lot more mysterious. As for the prince design, I agree with sotiris2006. I'm a little disappointed in the design, mostly because to me he looks sort of like Bruce Campbell.

Julian Carter wrote:Are you sure this is a character design confirmation? Concept art is not usually the place to look for the latest character design.

I didn't say that this is the final design of the prince.

The Prince looks like Eric and Rapunzel in the new concept art looks like Ariel .

Ariel'sprince wrote:The Prince looks like Eric and Rapunzel in the new concept art looks like Ariel .

New concept art? Please, share!

Here you go:

Thanks!

The motherly which with who adopts Rapunzel is still evil because she took a baby from her rightful mother just for lettuce, she wouldn't let Rapunzel outside of the tower, she casts Rapunzel out to a desert alone when she discovers her visitor (or her pregnancy), and she blinds the prince.

And yet, she can still try to keep Rapunzel happy in a roomier, gorgeous tower. She was nice to Rapunzel for a little bit but ended up as the villain when Rapunzel "betrayed" her.

And that means the previous, original, cheery tower and lush environment still fits whether the witch is the evil villain or...well, she was always the villain!

And can't the villain have different sides to her? It's time Disney started saying even happy looking things can make people miserable. Although, they almost did with Aurora's boredom and loneliness despite a cozy cottage and loving aunts...who never wanted her meeting anyone else...

sotiris2006 wrote:Thanks! Is this concept art before or after the cgi design of Rapunzel?

You're wellcome I have no idea I found it on a website about all the new Disney and Pixar films and this concept art was behind Glen Keane,In the website I also found I found concept art of the frog and a flee from Princess and The Frog.
Wait,Rapunzel was pregment in the original story? on the day she met the Prince? no wonder the witch locked her away! not to mention the phallic tower...