Tangled (2010)

Aravis Kenobi said:
Well yeah, despite Disney's stands on some issues (homosexuality, for instance, just to name one), they wouldn't dare take the real story of something like that and make it into a movie. They may be walking a fine line at times, but they aren't ready to cross it quite yet.
Click to expand...
After all, who would go to see a movie like THAT?! Certainly not their target audience of 3-10 year-old girls. At least, I hope not... o.O
 
MissReepicheep said:
After all, who would go to see a movie like THAT?! Certainly not their target audience of 3-10 year-old girls. At least, I hope not... o.O
Click to expand...

It distrubs me, nay dismays me how young children are being exposed to vulgarity and excessie violence. Parents take them to see horror films like Saw without any thought to how it plants morbid, morose, and downright gross things in their minds. That lack of concern is disheartening.
 
Yeah, I'm 19 and have seen only one R-rated film (though admittedly, I think I got the PG-13 version of Troy); kids who are much younger than me have already seen a handful or two of R-rated films, and even PG-13 films that deserve an R-rating....no wonder the country is going to Hades in a handbasket.
 
Aravis Kenobi said:
Well yeah, despite Disney's stands on some issues (homosexuality, for instance, just to name one), they wouldn't dare take the real story of something like that and make it into a movie. They may be walking a fine line at times, but they aren't ready to cross it quite yet.
Click to expand...

THey tried with the Hunchback of Notre Dame. IT's the most serious and adult of any Disney film, and had to be toned down before release (not to mention they added those annoying Gargoyles last minute). I mean they try to kill a baby is the first scene! You have murder, lust and moral issues there. Disney has had other films in development, like Don Quixote however due to the bad management during the late 90s and early 2000s, they never went into full production. The closest thing was a film intitled The Wild Life, which was killed due to a gay joke. If they do ever make something Adult they most likely would release it through Touchstone like they did Roger Rabbit.
On wild Life:
http://jimhillmedia.com/columnists1...08/10/06/the-elephant-in-the-room-part-i.aspx
http://jimhillmedia.com/columnists1...08/10/13/the-elephant-in-the-room-part-2.aspx
I do agree that kids see things they shouldn't. It's the old 'TV/Movies are ok because I watch them and they make great babysitting" issue. HELLO!!! Rating system!
 
Last edited:
Soldier of Aslan said:
I do agree that kids see things they shouldn't. It's the old 'TV/Movies are ok because I watch them and they make great babysitting" issue. HELLO!!! Rating system!
Click to expand...

The rating system that didn't include PG-13 for quite awhile?:rolleyes: Thats why when I'm looking into a movie on Netflix I always look to see what year it was made in.

Anyway....

"Who's that?"
"They don't like me."
"Who's that?"
"They don't like me either."
"Who's THAT?"
"For the moment lets just assume that everyone here doesn't like me!"

xD
 
Mozart the Meerkitten said:
The rating system that didn't include PG-13 for quite awhile?:rolleyes: Thats why when I'm looking into a movie on Netflix I always look to see what year it was made in.

Anyway....

"Who's that?"
"They don't like me."
"Who's that?"
"They don't like me either."
"Who's THAT?"
"For the moment lets just assume that everyone here doesn't like me!"

xD
Click to expand...

When the rating system started there were only 4 ratings
G-General Audiences
GP-General Audiences-Parental Guidance
M-Mature
X-18+ only

that was '68, in the 70s GP was switched to PG for better understanding, and by the early 80s M was retitled R. in 1983 PG-13 was created for Steven Spielberg who was about to release 'Indiana Jones' and knew it wouldn't get PG, but was seemingly not bad enough for an R rating. Also due to the issues with the adult industry the X rating was changed to NC-17 (No Child under 17 admitted), Very few NC-17 movies are made today ( they aren't profitable), but several R rated films should have been given that rating.
 
Soldier of Aslan said:
When the rating system started there were only 4 ratings
G-General Audiences
GP-General Audiences-Parental Guidance
M-Mature
X-18+ only

that was '68, in the 70s GP was switched to PG for better understanding, and by the early 80s M was retitled R. in 1983 PG-13 was created for Steven Spielberg who was about to release 'Indiana Jones' and knew it wouldn't get PG, but was seemingly not bad enough for an R rating. Also due to the issues with the adult industry the X rating was changed to NC-17 (No Child under 17 admitted), Very few NC-17 movies are made today ( they aren't profitable), but several R rated films should have been given that rating.
Click to expand...

My parents told me about X. I named my school computer X because I hated it.:p
They made a new rating for Indiana Jones? HAHAHAHAHA! xD :p
 
So, this thread is a bit off topic so I will endeavor to bring it back by my assessment of the movie.

I really liked Tangled. It had some very funny parts. I watched Saturday and it was a good watch even though I had a migrane. What I was most struck with did not occur to me until Sunday morning when, at my church, my Pastor's Homily was about Jesus calling us to BE light, not just be in the light. Maybe I am overthinking this but oh well.

Here is the deal, all of us (at least I assume all of us) have heard the child's song "This little Light of Mine." When Mother Gothel found the sun ray flower she hid the flower under a bushel keeping its power to herself instead of sharing the Light with others. When the light was stolen from her she resented it and went to great lengths to steal it back. She then found a bigger "bushel" to hide the light in. At many times during the movie, Mother Gothel was so stifling in protecting what was hers that she almost put out the light. But as Rapunzel grew, the light refused to be contained. Rapunzel had to get and share her light with others. The climax of the movie where she tries to make a choice to help someone over her own wishes; the person who she was trying to help took the outward manifestation of Rapunzel's light to save her inner LIGHT. At the end, Rapunzel got to share with the world what her hair had represented.

In this way it was not just what the original fairytale told about greed and selfishness. It gave a little sermon about the beauty within.


EDIT: About the original tale yes, she bore children out of Wedlock, I liked the fact that the movie changed some of the circumstances of the tale but left much of it intact. I am pretty sure that Tangled is closer to the original than Cinderella and Prince Caspian are
 
Last edited:
~Lava~ said:
So, this thread is a bit off topic so I will endeavor to bring it back by my assessment of the movie.

I really liked Tangled. It had some very funny parts. I watched Saturday and it was a good watch even though I had a migrane. What I was most struck with did not occur to me until Sunday morning when, at my church, my Pastor's Homily was about Jesus calling us to BE light, not just be in the light. Maybe I am overthinking this but oh well.

Here is the deal, all of us (at least I assume all of us) have heard the child's song "This little Light of Mine." When Mother Gothel found the sun ray flower she hid the flower under a bushel keeping its power to herself instead of sharing the Light with others. When the light was stolen from her she resented it and went to great lengths to steal it back. She then found a bigger "bushel" to hide the light in. At many times during the movie, Mother Gothel was so stifling in protecting what was hers that she almost put out the light. But as Rapunzel grew, the light refused to be contained. Rapunzel had to get and share her light with others. The climax of the movie where she tries to make a choice to help someone over her own wishes; the person who she was trying to help took the outward manifestation of Rapunzel's light to save her inner LIGHT. At the end, Rapunzel got to share with the world what her hair had represented.

In this way it was not just what the original fairytale told about greed and selfishness. It gave a little sermon about the beauty within.


EDIT: About the original tale yes, she bore children out of Wedlock, I liked the fact that the movie changed some of the circumstances of the tale but left much of it intact. I am pretty sure that Tangled is closer to the original than Cinderella and Prince Caspian are
Click to expand...

I adore thy assesment and sentiments Lava. I had not precieved a hidden sermon beneath the narrative. I love the idea of the flower represting the light of God, that it then dwells in Rapunzel and yearns to spread to others. Gothel is no doubt the devil who longs to snuff out the light, to trap us, nay ensare us in tower so we may not share Christ's light with the world. Satan is called the liar, stealer, and destroyer. Gothel lies to Rapunzel, steals her from her true parents and from a life of purpose and ultimately seeks to destroy those Rapunzel loves. I like how Rapunzel influences people, how she brings out best in Flynn, Maximus and the Ruffians. How she shares the light freely and loves unconditionally. You have inspired me Lava, I shall watch Tangled with a new lense, with new eyes. :)
 
Last edited:
Sir Godfrey said:
I adore thy assesment and sentiments Lava. I had not precieved a hidden sermon beneath the narrative. I love the idea of the flower represting the light of God, that it then dwells in Rapunzel and yearns to spread to others. Gothel is no doubt the devil who longs to snuff out the light, to trap us, nay ensare us in tower so we may not share Christ's light with the world. Satan is called the liar, stealer, and destroyer. Gothel lies to Rapunzel, steals her from her true parents and from a life of purpose and ultimately seeks to destroy those Rapunzel loves. I like how Rapunzel influences people, how she brings out best in Flynn, Maximus and the Ruffians. How she shares the light freely and loves unconditionally. You have inspired me Lava, I shall watch Tangled with a new lense, with new eyes. :)
Click to expand...
I agree it did have a nice Christian message inside of it! :D It did feel quite different in that respect.
~Lava~ said:
So, this thread is a bit off topic so I will endeavor to bring it back by my assessment of the movie.

I really liked Tangled. It had some very funny parts. I watched Saturday and it was a good watch even though I had a migrane. What I was most struck with did not occur to me until Sunday morning when, at my church, my Pastor's Homily was about Jesus calling us to BE light, not just be in the light. Maybe I am overthinking this but oh well.

Here is the deal, all of us (at least I assume all of us) have heard the child's song "This little Light of Mine." When Mother Gothel found the sun ray flower she hid the flower under a bushel keeping its power to herself instead of sharing the Light with others. When the light was stolen from her she resented it and went to great lengths to steal it back. She then found a bigger "bushel" to hide the light in. At many times during the movie, Mother Gothel was so stifling in protecting what was hers that she almost put out the light. But as Rapunzel grew, the light refused to be contained. Rapunzel had to get and share her light with others. The climax of the movie where she tries to make a choice to help someone over her own wishes; the person who she was trying to help took the outward manifestation of Rapunzel's light to save her inner LIGHT. At the end, Rapunzel got to share with the world what her hair had represented.

In this way it was not just what the original fairytale told about greed and selfishness. It gave a little sermon about the beauty within.


EDIT: About the original tale yes, she bore children out of Wedlock, I liked the fact that the movie changed some of the circumstances of the tale but left much of it intact. I am pretty sure that Tangled is closer to the original than Cinderella and Prince Caspian are
Click to expand...
Actually Disney's Cinderella is pretty Accurate, I think it only illuminated the additional balls. Agreed on the PC aspect though!

Back on Topic: Did anyone like Her with short or long hair?
 
Soldier of Aslan said:
When the rating system started there were only 4 ratings
G-General Audiences
GP-General Audiences-Parental Guidance
M-Mature
X-18+ only

that was '68, in the 70s GP was switched to PG for better understanding, and by the early 80s M was retitled R. in 1983 PG-13 was created for Steven Spielberg who was about to release 'Indiana Jones' and knew it wouldn't get PG, but was seemingly not bad enough for an R rating. Also due to the issues with the adult industry the X rating was changed to NC-17 (No Child under 17 admitted), Very few NC-17 movies are made today ( they aren't profitable), but several R rated films should have been given that rating.
Click to expand...

I knew that about Indiana Jones, but I wasn't sure about it.

Anyway, I watched my film class movie last night and am sending it back today. I'm thankful too; I don't want it in my house any longer *shudder* Tangled should come in by Tuesday, me thinks.
 
Soldier of Aslan said:
I agree it did have a nice Christian message inside of it! :D It did feel quite different in that respect.

Actually Disney's Cinderella is pretty Accurate, I think it only illuminated the additional balls. Agreed on the PC aspect though!

Back on Topic: Did anyone like Her with short or long hair?
Click to expand...

I frankly liked her with both long and short hair. With her long golden locks she could appehend people, swing from branches, descend her tower, and well heal her loved ones. Her short hair however was more practical and quite stylish. :D
 
Wow, Lava! Thank you for sharing your wonderful observations about the film! That had never occurred to me! :)

I prefer Rapunzel with short brown hair, but the blond was pretty too.
 
Back
Top