Friday, August 27, 2010

Tangled French...

Yo, woman, let down yer hair...

And gimmie some money...

No, I'm not talking about my inability to talk to Alain over at Disney and More in his native tongue...

Here is the French poster for "Rapunzel" that has been released. That's right, it's called by its original name internationally, but not here in America. Dang those boys for not liking Princesses!

Wait till they become teenagers, then they'll like them...

Hat Tip to /Film.


enchevĂȘtrement said...

A beautiful image.

Interesting marketing angle, dumb it down for the American audience, probably won't work though, and it will still be crushed by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part I the same week.

Looks good though, shame.

Twisted said...

Yea and thanks to you Americans we are getting stuck with Tangled across all of the English speaking globe. Grr..

Anonymous said...

Idiots. The story is Rapunzel, not Tangled.

This is a horrible move by Disney, the fact that they're doing this is no longer just looking down upon young boys, but on Americans as a whole.

I wonder if there are any anti-dumbing down of America groups out there interested in starting a boycotting of this film and pointing out the way Disney is treating its audience.

t said...

^Sorry, but you are blowing this WAY out of proportion. Seriously, get over it.

Look, was it a smart move to change the title...who knows as of yet. What is FAR more worrisome than the ridiculous drama about the title is the release date that may negatively affect the movie. That is a much bigger issue...

If you are somehow 'offended' by a change in need to get a life.

ScaleDown said...

Disney fanbois really need to take a moment to catch their breath:

1). Boys don't like going to movies that have a strong romance element in them.

2). Disney has made a lot of movies that have a strong romance element in them.

How hard has this been to figure out? Honestly, do any of you have young boys in your family? Are they all eager to go to movies named "Fluffy Pink Princess" or the like? Would YOU, at the ages of 7-12, have wanted to go to a movie with that name?

If anything, name changes are only one of several reforms that Disney needs to perform on their entertainment properties before young boys are willing to go back to trusting in Disney entertainment.

* Video games tie-ins to movies that are actually decent. I can't stress how important this is. If your video game sucks, then your movie sucks and vice versa. Young boys will play the video game first AND THEN decide if they want to see the movie. They'll borrow it, they'll rent it or they'll even rip it from the Internet (If they're above the age of 9, you better believe they know how to do that). If your game "sucks," then there's no way you can drag them into the theater or watch the DVD.

* Boys know what "G-rated" means and that's a bad thing. Boys don't want to be called "children" or even associate with them. "G-rated" means toddlers, young girls wearing their favorite princess costumes (in the theater), that bicycle helmet-wearing special education child in the corner constantly making noise and babies that make even more noise. Boys don't want to even be in that environment, regardless of the movie. The movie needs to at least be PG or higher.

* Female-centric films tend to have less-than-desirable male role models. Consider the human males in "The Princess and the Frog" - A push-over father to an obnoxious girl / woman, an overworked fat servant (who becomes a secondary villain, no less), polite but obstructive bankers (who are only persuaded into doing the right thing by intimidation), a boss who chides the princess for her dreams, the prince himself who is a stereotype of African Americans to begin with (lazy, musical and always looking to romance the ladies) & the villain himself (no, I'm not including the father of the female lead because he's not in the movie long enough). How many boys do you think are going to like that movie? Honestly? Boys like movies with strong male leads in them. Not exactly rocket science.

That's just 3 of many reforms to follow if Disney wants the boys back to watching Disney movies and buying Disney merchandise.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, cause the name Tangled is soooo manly. That's going to make boys go screaming into the theater.

As for ScaleDown's comments about the Prince in Frog, he ain't African-American so your logic on that point doesn't hold up. Perhaps you should put your glasses on before watching the film?

Cory Gross said...

One doesn't realize how far Disney is off when they try to update something until you see it done right to contrast it against.

In this case, I picked up and read through the graphic novel Rapunzel's Revenge, and it's spin-off Calamity Jack, a few weeks ago. It's a retelling of the fairy tale in an Old West/Weird West setting that nonetheless has a modern sensibility about it. Rapunzel isn't, like, OMG totally way hip - in fact she's a little naieve from not having experienced the world - but she is ingenious, courageous and an action hero in her own right. For example, she figures out how to use her hair as a lasso to get herself out of the tower, and afterwards ducks out when the duded-up cattle baron with pearl-handled pistols comes along.

I could kind of care less about the title, but when I compare what I've seen of this film to revised fairy tales done smartly, it just makes Tangled look more trite, Shreckish and avoidable.

Fairy Hunter said...

Perhaps you should see it before you condemn it?

For the record, the trailer tries to be hip and it is trying to attract boys. I think it's a marketing mistake, but that's not the animators fault. The film plays far closer to Beauty and the Beast, regardless of the trailer. There is no hip song in it, it's a classical tale.

And just so you know, she uses her hair creatively in the film as well, so that's not a charge that will stick. She is also naive as well, considering she's spend her eighteen year life stuck up in a tower. It's a beautiful film and it has a great deal of heart. Much better than most films you've seen from Disney since the mid-90's.

But don't believe me. See it for yourself when it comes out. Just don't stay home because of what you feel they've done. I think you'll be quite surprised by what you find.

Cory Gross said...

"Perhaps you should see it before you condemn it?... See it for yourself when it comes out."


Trailers and ads exist in order to compell me to see something. I am under no obligation to see anything, my number one rationale for not being "that looks dumb and I don't want to waste my time." Yes I have seen movies that were misrepresented by the ads, but you know what? I'll risk it.

Right now, Tangled is exactly in that category. Unless I hear that the ads completely and utterly misrepresent the film, I don't want to see it.

Anonymous said...

Look Cory,

What the guy was seems to be pointing out is that he's seen it and thinks the marketing is all wrong.

"Unless I hear that the ads completely and utterly misrepresent the film, I don't want to see it."

I believe that was his response to you. It ain't what you see in the ads. Lighten up, dude.

Cory Gross said...

Actually I was reading it like s/he interpreted my recommendation for Rapunzel's Revenge as a checklist, which wasn't my point. Maybe it does play closer to Beauty and the Beast, but as it stands, the characters in the trailer would have to not be in the movie and have their places taken by characters that aren't annoying.

I wasn't particularly upset by his/her response though. If I came across that way, it is simply because I'm forthright with my objection to the argument "how can you decide if it's not worth seeing unless you go see it?" No, I will be unfair and judgemental with my time and money on the line, thanks.