Tangled (2010)

buckmana said:
The DVD is out next week.

I can't wait to get my hands on a copy!

I hope it comes with lots of extra features.
I'm interested to see the process behind the scenes and I'm looking forward to learning what went into the production of Tangled.
Click to expand...

Which country are you in? We've had the movie for about a month! :eek:
 
MissReepicheep said:
Which country are you in? We've had the movie for about a month! :eek:
Click to expand...

His location says Australia.


I doubt they'll make a sequel to Tangled. For one thing, I believe Disney has sworn off making animated films like Tangled for a while, plus if and when they get back to making such films, it might be too many years for a sequel to be plausible.
 
Aravis Kenobi said:
His location says Australia.


I doubt they'll make a sequel to Tangled. For one thing, I believe Disney has sworn off making animated films like Tangled for a while, plus if and when they get back to making such films, it might be too many years for a sequel to be plausible.
Click to expand...
Haha. Silly me- I should have checked. :eek:

I agree with you. Even if they did make a sequel, I might not like it- most Disney sequels are rather dreadful. :rolleyes:
 
MissReepicheep said:
Haha. Silly me- I should have checked. :eek:

I agree with you. Even if they did make a sequel, I might not like it- most Disney sequels are rather dreadful. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I agree with you. I mean when I saw the sequel to Beauty and the Beast and The Little Mermaid, I didn't enjoy them at all. I also don't like when sequels are made in movie form, if the book or fairy tale doesn't have a sequel to it.
 
Disney hast not had great track record with sequels, but Pixar has. Prehaps if they can replicate what Pixar does, they can make splendid Tangled sequel. :)
 
Got my dvd

Well, Tangled is an unofficial Pixar production, so maybe that could be a plus.

Does it really lend itself to a sequel though?

I thought it was one of these stories designed specifically to be a "happily ever after" and not continue on.

Mind you, so were a lot of other Disney movies and it didn't stop them getting sequels.

But maybe this isn't something Disney should pursue.

Their track record with sequels isn't all that great, they've usually been substandard compared to the first movie in the series.

I think Lilo&Stitch is the only one that managed to do it.
It had 3 sequels, 2 of which were as good as the original (the third one wasn't!).


I have my dvd now.
And yes, I'm am an inverted Aussie!

Overall, it's quite nice, lots of extras.

However, there is one thing that disappointed me:

It has no commentaries!

Usually at minimum, you have the creator/director and/or somebody else talking about the movie.
If you're really lucky, you get a second commentary with the lead acting cast.

Unless I missed something really obvious, they just aren't present on this disc!

There was also something that puzzled me, probably one of those insane decisions directors make that I'll never understand.

The song that introduced Rapunzel and the first rendition of Mother Knows Best had some parts cut out of them.
But not a great deal, probably equating to 10-40 seconds from each song.
The director used the excuse I hear all the time:
"We had to cut it for pacing".

Let me get this straight, they clipped out a tiny part of each song to make the movie shorter?
I'm still trying to understand the logic of this.
Especially since they removed roughly a minute total from both songs!
 
It's not unusual for songs on the album to be longer than the songs in the movie; case in point: Ever After from Enchanted. Ever After had to have been recorded twice by Carrie Underwood because it's clearly different than the album version. Another point: the songs from the Narnia movies. "Can't Take It In" from LWW was different in the movie than it was on the album. It's absolutely nothing new, and there's nothing wrong with it.

Most likely, they recorded full studio versions and decided that they didn't want the musical sequences to be as long.
 
Mother knows best has extra 'Dangers' , but nothing special.
There is an alternate song for Rapunzel at the beginning, gets pretty dull. I think there is also an additional line or two for 'I have a dream' but I don't remember what it was about.
Considering this is the third try at Rapunzel, over a 10 year production period, you'd think they'd have something juicy and interesting to offer.
 
buckmana said:
Well, Tangled is an unofficial Pixar production, so maybe that could be a plus.

Does it really lend itself to a sequel though?

I thought it was one of these stories designed specifically to be a "happily ever after" and not continue on.

Mind you, so were a lot of other Disney movies and it didn't stop them getting sequels.

But maybe this isn't something Disney should pursue.

Their track record with sequels isn't all that great, they've usually been substandard compared to the first movie in the series.

I think Lilo&Stitch is the only one that managed to do it.
It had 3 sequels, 2 of which were as good as the original (the third one wasn't!).


I have my dvd now.
And yes, I'm am an inverted Aussie!

Overall, it's quite nice, lots of extras.

However, there is one thing that disappointed me:

It has no commentaries!

Usually at minimum, you have the creator/director and/or somebody else talking about the movie.
If you're really lucky, you get a second commentary with the lead acting cast.

Unless I missed something really obvious, they just aren't present on this disc!

There was also something that puzzled me, probably one of those insane decisions directors make that I'll never understand.

The song that introduced Rapunzel and the first rendition of Mother Knows Best had some parts cut out of them.
But not a great deal, probably equating to 10-40 seconds from each song.
The director used the excuse I hear all the time:
"We had to cut it for pacing".

Let me get this straight, they clipped out a tiny part of each song to make the movie shorter?
I'm still trying to understand the logic of this.
Especially since they removed roughly a minute total from both songs!
Click to expand...
This is a bit old but to clarify:
TANGLED is NOT a Pixar production. Walt Disney Animation Studios (WDAS), studio head is the same as Pixar, but they are separate--completely.
All sequels to Disney films by WDAS (excluding, Winnie the Pooh (2011), The Rescuers: Down Under, The Three Calibraros and Fantasia 2000), are productions of either Walt Disney Television Animation or Disneytoon Studios. (If your an Aussie, did you know Disneytoon had a satilight Studio there?).
All in all they are pretty lack-luster cash-ins. The only ones that where well made were Bambi II, Cinderella III (I actually cried, and was surprised by the impressive writing), and Ariel's Beginning. That studio head -- John Lasseter, stopped production on all sequels not produced by WDAS, as they were damaging WDAS's reputation due to Audience's confusion thinking it was all from the same studio.

Those extended songs are what I was talking about in my post above.
 
I doubt I'll ever wrap my head around it, but I'm still trying to work out how removing a tiny part of the songs makes the movie better (although they usually just want to shorten the running time!).

Well, I did say it wasn't an official Pixar production.
But considering there was involvement from Pixar on both Princess and the Frog, then Tangled, I'm not counting them as 100% Disney brand animation.
Even if they just borrowed the director from the company, he's still going to bring the "Pixar work ethic" to the movie and it's going to follow the Pixar spirit.
So, as far as I'm concerned, just because it isn't completely made by Pixar doesn't mean it should be counted as an official Disney film.

Hmm, I'm now wondering if the fact that there's no commentary is related to the fact Disney didn't want John Lassiter recording one.
Although, most likely, he's very busy with Cars 2 and Brave (upcoming production) at the moment.

Have they gotten around to making a brunette/short hair Rapunzel doll or toy yet?
I'm curious if they'll ever do that.

No, I didn't know Disney had a satellite studio here.
Thanks for telling me.
Now if only they'd give us a Disneyworld......

I like Ariel's Beginning better then most of the other sequels, but it still wasn't "quite right".
Basically, to sum up the inconsistencies, it completely broke continuity.
Lots of things happen in the movie that break the "history" established by the movie and cartoon series.
All in all though, if you ignore those problems, it still is a good continuation.

And that's far better then any of the others did!
 
I haven't seen a short haired Rapunzel doll, yet. But I have seen pictures of girls altering the long haired ones and it actually turning out looking pretty legit.
 
Back
Top