DVDizzy Forum

Sorry to everyone else. I didn't to intend to make this thread about Tangled, but I do want to respond. Just ignore this.

SWillie! wrote: (However the one rendered picture that we have, in my opinion, looks stunning.)

It looked nice. Only the character designs are beyond bland and Rapunzel looked like a Jesse (Toy Story 2) wannabe. Also having the first, main image anybody sees be of Rapunzel using her hair to tie up someone...well, not inspiring. I haven't heard of any other classic Disney characters having hair that was alive and could be used like an extra appendage. Looks more like something I'd expect in a Dreamworks film, which Disney clearly seems to be going for. And those are decent, but Dreamworks films are not something I go out of my way to see.

a teaser trailer that really tells us nothing except the animation looks great,

Depends on what you mean by 'good.' But the trailer also gives us a very bad impression of the movie. The multi-quote usage showed the movie to be extremely insipid, that Mandy Moore (the lead) is as bad as expected, and that the movie has some very bad ideas (magic hair?). Sorry you didn't find it as bad as I did.

On the other hand, hundreds of artists and other creative people have been hard at work on Rapunzel for a few years now, and has been in various stages of development for a decade.

I'm sure many artists worked hard on The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2--because it was their job to do so--that doesn't make the film any good. The same could be said for several major classics (Brother Bear, Home On The Range or The Black Cauldron, for instance). Time and work do not = a good movie.

Only on 3D animation. No, that's wrong. I don't mind that they do 3D films. Bolt and Meet the Robinsons worked very well and I enjoyed them--but "Rapunzel" does not belong in that category. Just because I don't like one film (and one majorly idiotic medium choice) by Disney does not mean I hate them. It is possible for a person to like one thing and hate another, right?

Why the hell does it have bling?

That voids the entire movie if the beard, breakdancing and everything else didn't.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Sorry, but everything I've seen of Tangled thus far (clips, story details, casting, Rapunzel's design, etc.) has not looked remotely interesting. And I hardly take the words of the people making (and attempting to sell) their movie as "good" seriously. I think I will pick up Menken's soundtrack, but I definitely won't be supporting the movie by seeing it in theaters or buying it on DVD/Blu-Ray though.

I honestly think that Disney are just going about advertising/promoting/titling this the wrong way. I would gladly boycott the movie just because of its stupid title (Tangled does indeed sound like a Hoodwinked-style DTV movie). However, I won't, as it probably will be a good movie to at least some extent, although mis-marketed and with a silly title; just a little bit of marketing magic can present something as wholly different.

If I were Disney, I'd keep the title Rapunzel either way (or change it to something like The Legend of Rapunzel or Rapunzel and the Secret Tower at most). That is the story that is being told, regardless of artistic licence and a pretty much newly invented storyline. If I were marketing it, I'd take away much of the princess-related angles like with The Princess and the Frog, and I would have a trailer that would actually sell both the masculine elements and adventure (via Flynn) and the feminine aspects (via Rapunzel) so that it comes across as a comic adventure-romance. That's a lot like how Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin were first marketed, and I seem to remember them lighting up the box office. If Disney has the sense, they should go back and change the title back to Rapunzel at the eleventh hour. But alas, they probably won't.

Wonderlicious wrote:

Disney's Divinity wrote:Sorry, but everything I've seen of Tangled thus far (clips, story details, casting, Rapunzel's design, etc.) has not looked remotely interesting. And I hardly take the words of the people making (and attempting to sell) their movie as "good" seriously. I think I will pick up Menken's soundtrack, but I definitely won't be supporting the movie by seeing it in theaters or buying it on DVD/Blu-Ray though.

I honestly think that Disney are just going about advertising/promoting/titling this the wrong way. I would gladly boycott the movie just because of its stupid title (Tangled does indeed sound like a Hoodwinked-style DTV movie). However, I won't, as it probably will be a good movie to at least some extent, although mis-marketed and with a silly title; just a little bit of marketing magic can present something as wholly different.

If I were Disney, I'd keep the title Rapunzel either way (or change it to something like The Legend of Rapunzel or Rapunzel and the Secret Tower at most). That is the story that is being told, regardless of artistic licence and a pretty much newly invented storyline. If I were marketing it, I'd take away much of the princess-related angles like with The Princess and the Frog, and I would have a trailer that would actually sell both the masculine elements and adventure (via Flynn) and the feminine aspects (via Rapunzel) so that it comes across as a comic adventure-romance. That's a lot like how Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin were first marketed, and I seem to remember them lighting up the box office. If Disney has the sense, they should go back and change the title back to Rapunzel at the eleventh hour. But alas, they probably won't.

Do not give up hope, I am sure that Disney will come to their senses to change the name back. I believe that they have until either the release of, "Toy Story 3," or by September (the beginning of Fall) to change their mind. Here is a tip for you: put your faith not only on God and Jesus or other religious faiths, but mostly to Walt Disney as well. I believe that he himself disagrees on the title change. If he was still alive, he fire anyone who changes names based on fairy tales, which he NEVER does throughout his whole career before his death. Do not let the site that Disney made bother you, subject may yet to change in time...I hope. Even though they have two trailers made (one leaked, one tease), a few pictures sent, the story set (to tell the truth, I don't care how the story goes or how the animation looks, just as long as they make a good one (by the way, I give Disney's animation techniques infinite A+)), the dolls set (they still bear the name, "Rapunzel"), the merchandise set (they have not yet finalized the name of the movie yet (I vote for, "Rapunzel," fingers crossed)), and many more. All we can do is put faith on Walt Disney, and hope for the better than the best.

Polizzi wrote:Here is a tip for you: put your faith not only on God and Jesus or other religious faiths, but mostly to Walt Disney as well. I believe that he himself disagrees on the title change. <snip> All we can do is put faith on Walt Disney, and hope for the better than the best.

Next time you hold a seance to talk to him, tell him he owes me $10.

Polizzi wrote:If he was still alive, he fire anyone who changes names based on fairy tales, which he NEVER does throughout his whole career before his death.

Fairy tale or not, there have been title changes for various Disney films from their original source:

The title of "Snow White" was extended to "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs".

"The Adventures of Pinocchio" is shortened to "Pinocchio".

"Bambi: A Life in the Woods" became "Bambi".

"The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad" is far different from the two stories' original titles: "The Wind in the Willows" and "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow"

"Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass" became "Alice in Wonderland"

"Lady and the Tramp" originated from a story in Cosmopolitan called "Happy Dan, The Whistling Dog"

albert

Well, I just came back from my time off and saw this thread. Looks like I'm on another hiatus again, good bye!

http://www.danieltrbovic.com/blurwork/gnomeo.jpg

If Elton John was involved with this movie, that explains the glasses.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/con ... 576ed73643

Rich Ross said that his all time favorite movie is "Tootsie"

Look, I don't wanna bash "Tootsie". I think it's a nice, entertaining comedy but from all the gazillion great movies that have been produced, that's his favorite? Does he even watch any other film genre besides comedy? What does that tell about his taste in movies and the direction he will be leading Walt Disney Pictures?

sotiris2006 wrote:What does that tell about his taste in movies and the direction he will be leading Walt Disney Pictures?

More cross-dressing comedies?

Escapay wrote:

Polizzi wrote:Here is a tip for you: put your faith not only on God and Jesus or other religious faiths, but mostly to Walt Disney as well. I believe that he himself disagrees on the title change. <snip> All we can do is put faith on Walt Disney, and hope for the better than the best.

Next time you hold a seance to talk to him, tell him he owes me $10.

Polizzi wrote:If he was still alive, he fire anyone who changes names based on fairy tales, which he NEVER does throughout his whole career before his death.

Fairy tale or not, there have been title changes for various Disney films from their original source:

The title of "Snow White" was extended to "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs".

"The Adventures of Pinocchio" is shortened to "Pinocchio".

"Bambi: A Life in the Woods" became "Bambi".

"The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad" is far different from the two stories' original titles: "The Wind in the Willows" and "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow"

"Alice's Adventures in Wonderland" and "Through the Looking Glass" became "Alice in Wonderland"

"Lady and the Tramp" originated from a story in Cosmopolitan called "Happy Dan, The Whistling Dog"

albert

Those title changes that you showed me STILL bear the name, and not only, "Lady and the Tramp," is based on a story in Cosmopolitan called, "Happy Dan, The Whistling Dog," it is ALSO based on Joe Grant's ideas for Disney. And as for, "The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad," it TOO, ALSO bears the name in two segments. Even though it is said different, it is because they are two stories collaborated into one, like, "The Frog Prince," and, "The Frog Princess," collaborated into one for Disney's 49th animated film, "The Princess and the Frog (I give that movie an infinite A+)." "Oliver and Company (based on Charles Dickens', "Oliver")," STILL bears the name, but puts the setting in a different way like Leonard Bernstein's, "West Side Story (based on William Shakespeare's, "Romeo and Juliet"). "The Emperor's New Groove," STILL bears the introduction of the name, but in a different mood (besides, I think, "The Emperor's New Clothes," is not that interesting of a story, and I think it is a good idea to make the story new that uses similar characters that goes with the story, but in a new way). "Meet the Robinsons," STILL bears the name based on the story that is NOT based on a fairy tale, but either a children's book, a novella, or a novel. "The Great Mouse Detective," DID NOT exactly bear the name, at least it is NOT based on a fairy tale. I believe that only fairy tales bear the name while some animated movies based on something else can be whatever it can be, like, "Treasure Planet," based on, "Treasure Island." But Disney's, "Tangled," does NOT support the fairy tale, "Rapunzel." I don't care if that name is a reference to her hair, her adventure with Flynn Rider, her love for Flynn Rider, or whatever, it DOES NOT support her name. Changing the name to get the boys to see the movie is just plain stupid. I don't care if it does make the boys want to see the movie or not, it is still beyond stupid, just like what Floyd Norman said, and I most strongly agree with him. And not only it is stupid, it is (and I shall say it again with full spirit and support to Walt Disney) disrespectful to the Grimm Brothers and Walt Disney himself. It is all right to either lengthen the name, or shorten the name, of fairy tales to make them more interesting than typical. When I have created my version of, "Rapunzel," I have lengthened the name to make absolutely sure that my version is not exactly, but does follow the story, similar to the Grimm Brothers' version. So I say to Disney's title change from, "Rapunzel," to, "Tangled," that DOES NOT support the fairy tale. You can say it does, I say it does not. Sorry to reply like that, but that is my belief. Everyone has different beliefs, or opinions, about the title change. Like you said about your opinion: nobody cares about the title. But according to my opinion: according to Facebook, there are about 1,800 fans that love Disney's, "Rapunzel," and there are about 65 fans that love Disney's, "Tangled." That makes, "Rapunzel," #1 and, "Tangled," #2. That proves that most people like the name, "Rapunzel," than, "Tangled," according to Facebook, but there are other sites that could have a different vote than Facebook.

I want to apologize to Disney fans for talking about the title change again. The truth is, I love to reply on comments that talk about the title change from, "Rapunzel," to, "Tangled." My mission is to give Disney fans high hopes, just for the fun of it. Anyways, I have an interesting link that I want to share.

http://www.theouthousers.com/forum/view ... hp?t=41334

You see, according to this site, Rick Ross said that some movies, including Disney's, "Rapunzel (Tangled)," do not have the "silo mentality." Which means, to my belief, Disney MIGHT have issues with Disney's, "Rapunzel (Tangled)," after they have officially changed the name. Meaning, they could be having complaints from Disney fans, like me, about the name change being misleading, especially not having the sense of humor of names based on fairy tales, which I don't myself. But that was just my opinion, but I am starting to become interested about what Rick Ross said about some movies not having the "silo mentality." It could mean that Disney COULD change the name back due to complaints about the name...maybe...I hope.

P.S. I DO NOT care about the title change from Disney and Pixar's, "The Bear and the Bow," to Disney and Pixar's, "Brave," even though it is based on stories by the Grimm Brothers and Hans Christian Anderson combined, they always develop their own stories. Because all I can say about all Disney and Pixar films, they ALWAYS triumph (except that Disney and Pixar's, "Cars," did a little bit of an average, for it lost to 20th Century Fox and Blue Sky Studios', "Ice Age: The Meltdown"). And on top of that, Disney and Pixar's, "Up," was nominated for Academy Award for Best Picture, that is what I heard by the way, but lost to Summit Entertainment's, "The Hurt Locker." Look at the bright side, at least it won an Academy Award for Best Score (I adore the composer's speech at the ceremony, "If you have something creative in mind, do it, don't stop" (I think that is what he said, that was my guess)).

Polizzi wrote:Those title changes that you showed me STILL bear the name

You missed the point. You claimed that Walt never changed names for stories, and I gave examples from Walt's lifetime of movies whose titles are different from the original source material.

Polizzi wrote:, and not only, "Lady and the Tramp," is based on a story in Cosmopolitan called, "Happy Dan, The Whistling Dog," it is ALSO based on Joe Grant's ideas for Disney.

Even so, the words "Lady" and "Tramp" aren't in the original source titles.

Polizzi wrote:"The Emperor's New Groove," STILL bears the introduction of the name, but in a different mood (besides, I think, "The Emperor's New Clothes," is not that interesting of a story, and I think it is a good idea to make the story new that uses similar characters that goes with the story, but in a new way).

The Emperor's New Groove was based on Mark Twain's "The Prince and the Pauper" not the fairy tale "The Emperor's New Clothes".

Polizzi wrote:"Meet the Robinsons," STILL bears the name based on the story that is NOT based on a fairy tale, but either a children's book, a novella, or a novel.

It's based on A Day with Wilbur Robinson, and is still a title change.

Polizzi wrote:"The Great Mouse Detective," DID NOT exactly bear the name, at least it is NOT based on a fairy tale.

It was a bad marketing move by the publicity department who though children wouldn't want to see a movie called Basil of Baker Street.

Polizzi wrote:You can say it does, I say it does not.

I never said it did. I was just correcting your assumption that Walt Disney himself would never change the title of a story.

Polizzi wrote:Like you said about your opinion: nobody cares about the title.

When the hell did I say that? I've barely been in this thread or the Tangled thread.

albert

Just found a trailer for another Disneynature flick that doesn't appear on that timeline of new releases. It's Hidden Beauty:

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pu7tn9XaEbo&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pu7tn9XaEbo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

Anybody know the release date? Anybody know the name of the song in the trailer and who it's by?

Polizzi wrote: You see, according to this site, Rick Ross said that some movies, including Disney's, "Rapunzel (Tangled)," do not have the "silo mentality." Which means, to my belief, Disney MIGHT have issues with Disney's, "Rapunzel (Tangled)," after they have officially changed the name. Meaning, they could be having complaints from Disney fans, like me, about the name change being misleading, especially not having the sense of humor of names based on fairy tales, which I don't myself. But that was just my opinion, but I am starting to become interested about what Rick Ross said about some movies not having the "silo mentality." It could mean that Disney COULD change the name back due to complaints about the name...maybe...I hope.

You completely misunderstood what Ross is saying. This is the quote from the article:

Ross emphasized the diversity of the banners under the studio umbrella -- from Disney's bemused and decidedly modern take on the Rapunzel fairy tale in "Tangled" to Pixar, Marvel and DreamWorks' distinctive brands and approaches. But, he added, none has a "silo mentality."

What he's saying is that there is a lot of diversity among all the companies that are under the "Disney" name. And that, thankfully, none of those companies have a "silo mentality." Meaning that none of the companies try to hide information from each other; they all work together, in a sense. For example, Pixar goes to Disney Animation to show a work in progress of their new movie so they can get feedback.

He is not saying anything remotely related to the name "Rapunzel."

At this point in the game, there will be absolutely no changing the name back. I would suggest giving up hope now, so that you aren't bummed when it doesn't happen.

By the way, Polizzi...

You, my friend, are King of Tangents.

And King of Writing Out the Full Name of Things.

(Sorry for all the posts. I keep realizing there's more to say, and my computer is being weird with the edit button for some reason.)

Divinity:

It looked nice. Only the character designs are beyond bland and Rapunzel looked like a Jesse (Toy Story 2) wannabe. Also having the first, main image anybody sees be of Rapunzel using her hair to tie up someone...well, not inspiring. I haven't heard of any other classic Disney characters having hair that was alive and could be used like an extra appendage. Looks more like something I'd expect in a Dreamworks film, which Disney clearly seems to be going for. And those are decent, but Dreamworks films are not something I go out of my way to see.

I do agree that having that image be the first big publicity image is a mistake. From what we've heard about the actual tone of the movie itself, that picture does not represent the movie well. However, as for the character designs... well, I suppose we agree to disagree there. I really like them, for what it's worth. Although I pretty much like all of Glen Keane's work, so I'm kinda biased hahah

Depends on what you mean by 'good.' But the trailer also gives us a very bad impression of the movie. The multi-quote usage showed the movie to be extremely insipid, that Mandy Moore (the lead) is as bad as expected, and that the movie has some very bad ideas (magic hair?). Sorry you didn't find it as bad as I did.

I love the teaser! I mean, sure, the multi-quote thing is kind of lame, because it's kind of obvious that it was rushed together. But overall, I think the animation looks gorgeous (painterly, like we've been hoping), it has a "fairy tale" feel, and I really don't mind Mandy's voice. And I think the story would be hard to develop to a full length feature if there was no magic hair. Maybe I'm wrong though.

I'm sure many artists worked hard on The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2--because it was their job to do so--that doesn't make the film any good. The same could be said for several major classics (Brother Bear, Home On The Range or The Black Cauldron, for instance). Time and work do not = a good movie.

Yes, I realize that. But the thing is, WDAS, in the past few years, has really been trying to get on the right track, and I think that shows. Princess and the Frog was wonderful (at least I thought so, as well as the majority of moviegoers) and I think it's obvious that they are on their way back up, quality wise, even if they aren't quite there yet. On the other hand, movies like HoND 2, while many artist worked hard on it... we knew what to expect. By the time that came out, we had already had at least a few years of DTVs, and I don't think anyone expected a masterpiece. But for Tangled, they're really trying to put together the best movie they can possibly make right now. Not that that means that it will for sure be a great movie, obviously I can't possibly make that judgment at this point... but you also can't make the reverse judgment at this point. At least fairly.

I understand your hate for the medium choice. I agree, trust me. I'm actually studying right now to be a traditional animator... so God knows I wish they'd get serious about making more hand drawn films. Especially good, classic hand drawn films. Like Rapunzel should have been. But alas...


Anyways, all I'm trying to say is that you shouldn't give up on it quite yet. At least give it until you've seen a little bit more. Heck, what if we hear is true and it actually is a great movie?

(I gotta thank you for being one of the only sane members here. It's nice to have an intelligent argument/conversation with someone, as opposed to someone freaking out over something haha )

SWillie! wrote:By the way, Polizzi...

You, my friend, are King of Tangents.

And King of Writing Out the Full Name of Things.

I appreciate your words about my replies, but I want to apologize for saying this, I do not appreciate about what you said about giving up hope about Disney's title change, and I still say it is never too late. Besides, feel free to say that I am wrong when I say this, I think Disney is embarrassing themselves for changing the name to impress the boys, while the rest of the world, but some world's use the name change, keeps the name, and makes fun of the United States. In fact, what would it be like if most of the nations keep the name, "Rapunzel," while a few change the name to, "Tangled (unless Disney has decided that it will say, "Tangled," worldwide)?" I understand that it is pointless to get Disney to change the name back, especially when the petition is not getting high enough, but feel free to call me stubborn (which I am proud of to be), I and some of the Disney fans have to at least try, including Facebook's "No Title Change for Disney's, 'Rapunzel.'"

So, feel free to say this: Polizzi, for the love of Walt Disney, please give it up, before you hurt yourself. I say in the words of Ray from Disney's, "The Princess and the Frog": She's just spoken out of broken heart. Come on Evangeline, we're going to show Tiana the truth. According to my words: If that is what would happen to me, then I shall suffer in honor of Walt Disney, and his ways of adapting fairy tales. Or even better, create my own version of Rapunzel. I already got my first novella completed, and published on WEbook.com. All I have to do is wait for either feedback, or a high score (which I would not count on). In fact, I did not exactly change the name based on, "Rapunzel," I have created an additional name for, "Rapunzel," titled, "Rapunzel and the Spell of Power," like Walt Disney did for, "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs." It still bears the name, but with additional words to impress the public.

Yes, I must agree with you. It is pointless to protest against Disney's title change. But it just comes to show you, that when someone like me has a huge passion for Disney's ways of adapting fairy tales into animated movies, it is better to stick to the name, some times create additional names or diminish names to impress the audience, to make fairy tales more interesting than typical. And sorry to say this about Disney's, "Tanged," that does not support, "Rapunzel." True that it is a reference to her hair, her adventures with Flynn Rider, and her love for Flynn Rider, but still not supportive. At least we all agreed that it is a stupid name, but that is something that Disney did to impress male audience, due to Disney's, "The Princess and the Frog," not successful that Disney hoped, due to prejudged by its name (which I find it not true).

I can tell you this, if that is something that Disney wanted to do, then so be it. But I must warn Disney, that if their animated movie does become a failure prejudged by the name misleading to the story, Disney will regret it for changing the name. But if it becomes successful, then I would be very surprised, and it makes me want to say to myself, "Maybe, but still not quite, there could be a few reasons to change the name."

But to tell you the truth, I have no problem with the name, "Rapunzel," I think it is a lovely name, and perfect to become a movie adaptation. In fact, did you know that the name, "Rapunzel," is actually based on a German plant (I read it on Wikipedia)? That's what it says about, "Rapunzel." In my version of, "Rapunzel," I use the rapunzel plant as a source to create the rapunzel juice that helps cure the sick, heals people's wounds, and gives them strength. In fact, I came up with an idea about a wizard who saved a poor woman's future daughter, who is about to die in her womb. That's when he uses the rapunzel juice to save her life to give her strength. As a result, the woman and the wizard decided to name her daughter, "Rapunzel," to honor the rapunzel plant that saved her life.

Some times like this, I wish I could get used of the title change, but it's just disrespectful. I understand that Disney wants to impress the male audience, but they got to at least try harder without the title change. But, if that is something that Disney wanted, than what they needed according to Mama Odie from Disney's, "The Princess and the Frog," hey, it's their movie. If I ever created my own movie based on, "Rapunzel," I would stick to that name, and add details to the story to make it more interesting than typical. Who knows, what if my version, defeated Disney's version. I know that a few animated movies from DreamWorks Animation defeated a few animated movies from Disney (but could not defeat Pixar), maybe mine can, I just have to have confidence, put my mind to it, and work really hard, like Walt Disney. You can say that it is impossible, but I say that I have to at least try when the time comes. Besides, I'm just a college student who goes to college to get a degree, and become who I shall become. Who knows, maybe I could be the new Walt Disney if I wanted to. And if Walt Disney Animation Studios reaches to bankruptcy (which I doubt), I'm taking Disney with me to the highest mountain to achieve, together.

That's the second time I've heard you refer to Walt Disney almost as being greater than God.

Slow down, buckaroo.[/i]

I'm printing my own custom DVD/Blu-Ray cover for Rapunzel.

I'll never call it by that awful name.

Of course, if I don't like the movie, I will never buy it.

Escapay wrote:"The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad" is far different from the two stories' original titles: "The Wind in the Willows" and "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow"

I always thought it was interesting that one of the considered titles for that film was Two Fabulous Characters.

Escapay wrote:

Polizzi wrote:Those title changes that you showed me STILL bear the name

You missed the point. You claimed that Walt never changed names for stories, and I gave examples from Walt's lifetime of movies whose titles are different from the original source material.

Polizzi wrote:, and not only, "Lady and the Tramp," is based on a story in Cosmopolitan called, "Happy Dan, The Whistling Dog," it is ALSO based on Joe Grant's ideas for Disney.

Even so, the words "Lady" and "Tramp" aren't in the original source titles.

Polizzi wrote:"The Emperor's New Groove," STILL bears the introduction of the name, but in a different mood (besides, I think, "The Emperor's New Clothes," is not that interesting of a story, and I think it is a good idea to make the story new that uses similar characters that goes with the story, but in a new way).

The Emperor's New Groove was based on Mark Twain's "The Prince and the Pauper" not the fairy tale "The Emperor's New Clothes".

Polizzi wrote:"Meet the Robinsons," STILL bears the name based on the story that is NOT based on a fairy tale, but either a children's book, a novella, or a novel.

It's based on A Day with Wilbur Robinson, and is still a title change.

Polizzi wrote:"The Great Mouse Detective," DID NOT exactly bear the name, at least it is NOT based on a fairy tale.

It was a bad marketing move by the publicity department who though children wouldn't want to see a movie called Basil of Baker Street.

Polizzi wrote:You can say it does, I say it does not.

I never said it did. I was just correcting your assumption that Walt Disney himself would never change the title of a story.

Polizzi wrote:Like you said about your opinion: nobody cares about the title.

When the hell did I say that? I've barely been in this thread or the Tangled thread.

albert

I want to extremely apologize to reply back to you what I am about to say, but here it goes. Feel free to say that I am infinitely wrong times pie, but I too believe that you have missed the point as well on some points, but not all. It will be a privilege to show you why.

Have you forgotten about what I said about only fairy tales bear the name, not the stories that are not fairy tales? True that names have few changes, but they are actually either extended, diminished, or arranged to impress the audience.

Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs
That is not a title change, it is an additional name to impress the audience. For example: "Rapunzel Un-braided (changed to, "Rapunzel," and now, "Tangled").

Pinocchio
That is not a title change, it is a diminished name to shorten the name to impress the audience.

Bambi
Same thing for Disney's, "Pinocchio."

The Adventures of Ichabod and Mr. Toad
The reason why the name is different because it has two stories, "The Wind and the Willows," and, "The Legend of Sleepy Hollow," collaborated into one. There is a possibility to change the name when it comes to adapting more than one story. For example: Disney's, "An American Legends." Based on, "John Henry," "Johnny Appleseed (Chapman), "Paul Bunyan," and, "Casey Jones." These animated shorts are all created by Disney ("John Henry," is the new animated short created in 2000), and are all collaborated into one full-length movie.

Alice in Wonderland
Same thing for Disney's, "Pinocchio," except that it is not based on a fairy tale.

Lady and the Tramp
The reason why it is named that way because it has one story, "Happy Dan, The Whistling Dog," and one idea created by Joe Grant, collaborated into one. Also, that story, "Happy Dan, The Whistling Dog," is not a fairy tale.

The Emperor's New Groove
It used to be based on Mark Twain's, "The Prince and the Pauper," and the movie used to be called, "Kingdom of the Sun," but due to production in crisis, Disney retooled the story. The name is based on Hans Christian Anderson's, "The Emperor's New Clothes," only they took it into a new way. In fact, the characters in the movie are similar to Hans Christian Anderson's version, but different.

Meet the Robinsons
It is almost a title change, but it is more like an arranged name that still bears the name based on, "A Day with Wilbur Robinson," which is not a fairy tale.

The Great Mouse Detective
Based on, "Basil of Baker Street," which is not a fairy tale, they changed the name to make it sound like an adventurous type of way, than a name that sounds like a baker's story than a detective's story. But I kind of agree. They could at least called it, "Detective Basil of Baker Street," but I think, "The Great Mouse Detective," sounds a little better.

The Princess and the Frog
The reason why this fairy tale adaptation has its title changed, is because of the collaboration of two fairy tales: "The Frog Prince," and, "The Frog Princess." Some fairy tales can have a title change if it has more than one story adapted into one. For example, Miramax Films', "Tom Thumb and Thumbalina."

Tangled
It is supposed to be based on a Grimm fairy tale, "Rapunzel." The reason why Disney changed the name, is because they want to get the boys to see the movie, especially give their next animated movie to focus on the male protagonist than a female protagonist, due to Disney's previous movie, "The Princess and the Frog," not doing well as Disney hoped based on its title. As a result, they decided to take drastic measures by retooling the story, and change the name to make sure that, to Disney's belief, it does not become too girlish. Instead of a prince, it is a bandit named Flynn Rider, who decided to hide in an unknown tower as his hideout to protect himself. But he soon discovers that he is not alone, for a mysterious feisty teen named Rapunzel, lives in her tower, with a magical long golden hair that can move like receiving more hands to grab. She captured Flynn Rider, and decided to make a deal for her freedom. Anyways, Floyd Norman, the retired Disney and Pixar animator, finds changing the name from, "Rapunzel," to, "Tangled," beyond stupid. Because at this time, Disney has neglected Disney's ways of adapting fairy tales just to get the boys entertained. The president of Pixar and Walt Disney Animation Studios replied that if it were not for Disney's, "The Princess and the Frog," prejudged by its name, Disney would not have changed the name from, "Rapunzel," to, "Tangled." Some Disney fans have complaints about the title change, for they find it misleading since Disney wanted to do a fairy adaptation based on the Grimm Brothers. The only way that it can be named, "Tangled," is if it has more than one story, but this story focuses on only one fairy tale, which is, "Tangled." Most of us in this site believe that the name is stupid as well, but hopeless to convince Disney to change it back, since they have two trailers set (one leaked, and one tease), a few concept arts set, dolls set (which bear the name, "Rapunzel"), merchandise set (not yet finalized the name), and still more materials in development. However, in other countries, they bear the name, "Rapunzel," but some have the title change, "Tangled." The name, "Tangled," is a reference to Rapunzel's hair, her adventures with Flynn Rider, and her love for Flynn Rider. To be honest with you, it does not bear her name. It may bear her personalities and jokes based on her hair, but not her name.

Sorry that the description of Disney's, "Tangled," is long, I guess I kind of got carried away on the details that I have revealed to you. I heard rumors that if Disney's, "Tangled," did not do well by November 24, 2010 (hopefully prejudged by its name being misleading), Disney would probably have a really hard time developing other projects that might be put on hold for a couple of more years. Unless if it is successful, then what do you know. Also, they shelved, "The Snow Queen," for it too focuses on a female protagonist. What do you think of Disney's title change from, "Rapunzel," to, "Tangled?" Just a thought.