As it’s 50th animated feature film, Tangled is very much the summation of Disney’s previous output. Depending on your opinion of the House of Mouse, that could be either a good or bad thing.
Personally, I think it’s a good thing. Disney has finally figured out a way to align itself with current animation trends and attitudes similar to what Dreamworks and their contemporaries at Pixar are doing without sacrificing the traditional story elements that make a film uniquely Disney. The animations has a snappy feel, a fairy tale princess is front and center and the dialogue is wry without sailing completely over the heads of children.
Most importantly, it’s entertaining. It’s easy for me to say that Tangled is the most fun I’ve had watching a Disney movie since Aladdin. Frankly, its wit and pop makes it one of the few Disney movies I can imagine watching proactively instead of through the filter of nostalgia.
By now you’re probably familiar with the premise behind Tangled. It’s basically a modified take on the German fairy tale of Rapunzel. But, smartly, what directors Nathan Greno and Byron Howard did was expand the mythology and gave us a much more satisfying reason why Rapunzel was locked away in that tower lo’ so many years ago.
While pregnant, Rapunzel’s mother, the Queen becomes very ill. The kingdom sets out in search of a golden flower rumored to have healing properties. The flower has been hidden away by the selfish crone Gothel, who uses the flower to keep her young. But once the magical flower is found, it restores the queen to health – and infuses its healing abilities in the strands of the young princess’s hair. Gothel steals the child away in the night and locks her in a secluded tower, cut off from society, as she continues to use the healing magic to keep her young.
“Why dat hair gotta be so long?” the audience demands. Easy. Cut the hair and it loses its magical power. Well played, Greno and Howard. Well played.
Of course, the problem with writing a movie about an isolated character is that there has to be some drama or change in the status quo for the plot to move forward. Meet Flynn Rider, a thief and a rouge looking for a place to hide after stealing the kingdom’s crown jewels.
Cynically, critics complained that Flynn the Adventurer was introduced as a marketing tool to attract boys (who would be otherwise turned off by a “princess” story) to the film. Considering the disappointing box office on The Princess and The Frog, it’s easy to see why some might jump to that conclusion. Certainly the flim’s marketing and Disney’s decision to name the movie Tangled and not “Rapunzel” would seem to support this theory.
But it actually makes a great deal of sense to have the smarmy and charismatic Flynn as Rapunzel’s guide in the real world. It’s Rapunzel’s dream to investigate the floating lanterns she sees in the distance every year on her birthday. She doesn’t realize that it’s actually a symbolic ceremony from her kingdom longing for the return of the kidnapped princess.
Rapunzel, despite her wonder, is so closed off from the outside world she doesn’t even wear shoes. You need a fast-talking character like Rider to essentially provide both sides of the dialogue. Otherwise you’d be left with a movie where the heroine walks around, clutching a frying pan and looking confused for two acts.
Despite being the Disney movie with the longest running time since Fantasia, Tangled’s 100 minutes never lags or bores. In fact, if anything, it almost feels short. Time flies by as Rapunzel and Flynn explore the soft, rounded, painterly world developed by Disney animators using techniques they were tasked with inventing in order to achieve their look. Typically, whenever Disney sets out to create techniques to develop their films, the results are always memorable.
If I could be critical of Tangled at all, I think they almost made the process too easy. This familiarity with the traditional fluidity of Disney’s style probably made audiences feel as Tangled was something they had seen before. Considering some of the visual cues the film picks up on from Disney’s past (the romantic kiss in the boat from The Little Mermaid or Flynn “surfing” down the trench of a water wheel like Tarzan “surfed” across mossy tree branches) it’s understandable.
As a Disneyphile, I found the references endearing and appropriate for Disney’s 50th animated feature. In fact, these references were very similar to the visual cues producers of the James Bond films did for their 20th franchise film, Die Another Day back in 2002.
In terms of Blu-ray extras, I found them a little light on substance. A short behind-the-scenes feature called “Untangled: The Making of a Fairy Tale” played more like a bunch of bumpers ported from the Disney Channel and were stitched together with narration from the film’s stars, Mandy Moore and Zachary Levi.
There are a handful of “deleted scenes” (or, rather, slightly enhanced animatics), a couple of extended songs and two alternate versions of the film’s opening sequence. They’re interesting, but not substantive.
Most entertaining are the “9 Tangled Teasers” – a collection of parody commercials made for the theatrical release of the films that utilize the film’s characters.
Ultimately, the success of Tangled relies in its unique ability to be respectful of the Disney fairytale tradition while also keeping it pliable enough to have fun with it. The movie keeps things snappy, but never looks down its nose at you for enjoying traditional storytelling. The movie is a fine addition to any animation fan’s library.
I’m going to see Scream 4 but only for the Nostalgia factor. The Scream franchise made me seek out other horror flicks from as far back as the 1930’s so I feel I owe it the benifit of the doubt.
I thought New Nightmare was an awesome flick. I am very much a horror movie guy and thought that apart from the first Nightmare, that New Nightmare was the best in the series.
Well, yeah… New Nightmare was okay. But it didn’t revitalize the franchise like they thought it would. They had more luck getting people to care with Freddy Vs. Jason. People didn’t even seem to notice the reboot with Jackie Earle Haley.
It’s or the best that people didn’t notice. It was awful.
Pretty Funny. Not to be rude, but the faces Tom is making, the position of the arm in the last panel & the ‘noise’ he makes (not to mention the poster’s face), seems like he may REALLY LIKE the series after all. *wink* *wink* (I’ll go dig my mind out of the gutter now)
I know where you’re going and I had the same thought.
I was taking reference pictures of myself yawning last night and thought it would be fun to post some of them to my Facebook page after the comic was published.
Then I was like, “Noooo. It’s only a matter of time before someone goes all Perez Hilton on them and crudely draws a penis over my face.”
I’m not sure what it is, but the sound affects in the last panel seem dirty… I don’t like it.
I’m probably using some kind of Bosnian slang for testicles and not even realizing it.
Dare you to Google it. I would, but I’m at work…
….seriously? SERIOUSLY?! Do we really need a new Scream movie? Is there some kind of demand for overrated franchises I was previously unaware of?
Also, that new title sucks, it looks like it says “Scram”
In this case, I think “Scram” would be a very apt title.
Now you’re making me yawn… STOP IT! 😛
My main problem with the Scream 4 poster is the tagline. It says “New decade. New rules.” But they forgot to add “Same old plot.”
Damn! I should have had YOU write this week’s comic! For real!
Yeah, I noticed that tagline, too. I didn’t understand what it meant to communicate. “New decade? Ohhhh shhhh—-! All bets are OFF!”
I’ve never liked any of the Scream movies, but maybe I was jealous because in 6th grade everybody was talking about them and my parents wouldn’t let me see it. By the time I got around to it, I didn’t care.
But I have to say that even though New Nightmare didn’t revitalize the franchise, it is one of my favorite horror films ever made. In the end, I think that matters more.
I want to like the remake, but I can’t really. I like Freddy when he’s funny, but the new one was too dark. And on the flip side of that, I don’t like how they tried to make you sympathize with him for part of the movie. Freddy is funny because you do feel terrible laughing with him, but you should never feel bad for him.
The first horror film I ever saw was the first Scream, at a friend’s sleepover (anyone still remember those?). Let’s just say when my mother found out what I had watched there she was not happy.
In that regard, Scream series holds a certain nostalgia for me. I saw the first two, and honestly hold the first one up as a grade A teen slasher, a 90s version of Halloween etc. Which was the point and it succeeded very well in that regard. With that said, I’ll probably see this on DVD or Netflix. Insidious however I want to see in theaters before it disapears from them.
“Did Wes Craven learn nothing from New Nightmare? ”
What do you mean? Isn’t that where the whole concept for the Scream series came from in the first place?
It did? It’s been a few years since I’ve seen it, so I guess that’s somewhat hazy to me.
Please explain! 🙂
The whole “pointing out the tropes of horror films” bit?
Wasn’t the Scream franchise originally supposed to be a parody of horror (particularly slasher) films? With that in mind, is it any wonder it’s turned out like the Scary Movie franchise?
It is funny you should compare the two franchises like that since the original title for “Scream” was “Scary Movie”, something that Bob Weinstein had them change halfway during production.
Great comic, and I make the same noise Tom does when I’m done with a yawn. For better or worse. I couldn’t find a pole long enough not to touch Scream 4 with…
I’m just glad I’m not alone on the yawning thing…
No, Scream wasn’t a parody of slasher flicks, it wa a deconstruction of them. It’s a genre movie that is clearly aware of that fact and toys with what that means. If anything it’s several decades of slasher movies perfectly distilled and commented upon.
I still think the second was better though. The aftermath is rarely treated with any sort of realism or gravity in slasher movies.
Oh, and before anyone points this out, yes parodies do comment on their source material. But they poke fun. Scream is clearly in love with, and nostalgic for its source.
I thought Halloween II did a good job exploring the aftermath.
But you’re right. In general, horror movies don’t explore this enough.
I’ve got to be honest I don’t really remember much about the last Scream movie, just that the killers took a lot of damage before they kicked the bucket. that and it had a great soundtrack, I worked in a cinema when it was out and it was the best music during the credits of any of the films out at the time, got to respect that in a film thinking of the worker 🙂
I just got back from Scre4m (Damn number inserts) and it was really good. After 3 I was worried but this one was a return to form. In fact I’d say it was as good as 2.