Now with Add On.
... doesn't tell you much. But hey, it's something.
Add On: And here's the longer version. Encouraging.
I've seen larger chunks of animation, and there are comical sidekicks, sneering villains, brawls and other fool-tomery. This doesn't particularly show-case it, but the lighting and art direction are strong.
And Rapunzel's "Best. Day. Ever!" is right up there with the line "You are so busted!" in the How To Train Your Dragon trailer ...
Add On: The first of the buffoons weigh in, with this particular buffoon making sure his head is buried deep in his large intestine.
Here's a trailer for Tangled, Disney's terribly titled Rapunzel animated movie musical. The look of the film is inspired by "The Swing," though it's rendered in cold 3D computer animation. This is something of a disappointment. ...
Posts
64 comments:
The animation in this clip looks so... typical. So what ever became of the beautiful, painterly look? Isn't Glen Keane supposed to be behind this? The background in the final clip (with the tree) looks remarkably like Shrek... the original one. And am I the only one who finds it odd that Rapunzel was hardly in the clip at all?
Tells me a lot.
Oh, well ... next ?
Glen Keane is directing the animation. Think of him as in-between the supervisors and directors. It's his job to oversee the performances, do draw overs to keep the characters appealing and on-model.
I think before everyone rushes to judgment, we should give it a chance. It IS Glen Keane after all. From the extremely limited youtube clip we've seen, I think theres potential.
I know all this because Im an animator and one of my friends works there.
And the painterly look?!
This seems a mix of Shrek and Bolt!
Please, tell me this is just an early test.
Get over the painted look. It was a failed experiment from half a decade ago that has only been kept alive by rumor and internet discussion. What matters is solid design inspired from classic traditional Disney animation, believable performances, and good storytelling.
If you want it to look like it was painted, throw a photoshop filter on it
She looks like what I thought she would, a Barbie doll.
It looks like the Tinker Bell movies.
You guys are passing judgment from a 10 second clip which only shows ONE second of actual Rapunzel footage.
You can determine the quality of her look from ONE second!?
You guys are savants! GENIUSES!!
all the shots in the teaser are essentially tests. None of these shots are in the final film.
the final look is much more refined, and quite stunning imho.
Full trailer:
http://movies.yahoo.com/premieres/20263362/standardformat
youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=at7ojt8e8HQ&feature=player_embedded
meh
Watched the longer trailer... thanks for the link!
I think what's disappointing is that it's just nothing that we haven't seen before over and over and over again. It's still 90's Disney... but this time in CG.
it's just nothing that we haven't seen before over and over and over again. It's still 90's Disney...
Oh, you mean like Toy Story 3?
don't count your chickens before...
Until it makes more than Shrek4 opening weekend then TS3 isn't a hit. Seems like a surebet that it will be ahit, but nothing's for sure in this town.
It would look better in traditional hand drawn, not this Barbie/TinkerBell look.
Please Disney, bring back (again) traditional for these kind of films.
Saw the trailer, and it's somewhat better, but it looks more Dreamworks than Disney.
Interesting that it's focused more on the guy than the princess. Disney is really running scared, isn't it?
"Please Disney, bring back (again) traditional for these kind of films."
They did. It's called The Princess and the Frog. People didn't go to see it.
The trailer looks great. Why would anyone want this in 2D. The girl is absolutely fetching. I want to take her home.
These responses are ridiculous. You were expecting "painterly" and got CG so that makes this Shreky? Rapunzel resembles Barbie/Tinkerbell so she doesn't warrant a 3D role? She looks nothing like Barbie. The dvd features nor the doll.
These characters breath more life than almost anything ever done in cg. There is so much detail and polish put into the animation, compositions, and environments you can't even put this in the same sentence with the green ogre. Rapunzel is stunning, the sets are gorgeous, The detail rivals anything pixar.
Get over the preconceived expectations and you'll see an incredible piece of art that deserves credit for it's achievements.
I agree with art. As most Disney projects, they make it look good and somehow manage to pull it off. Try laying off the critique and your idea of past history and see it as whats being done in the present. AND it is creating jobs. If you haven't got one, then find something meaningful to do beside throwing tomatoes at your computer screen.
art: I'm guessing by from your puffery you are working on the film. Sorry but I would much rather watch Shrek than this, and you are dreaming if you think the movie going public won't agree with me.
Honestly I want it to do well, but I don't think it will.
Yeah, because anyone who likes this trailer MUST be working on the film :rollseyes:
Anonymous @2:07:00PM
Thank you for speaking for the General Public. It's really helpful for us seeing as our voices so often go unheard and to be honest, if given the chance to speak up I would most likely just cower under your true talent as a speaker and just say nothing at all. What would I do without people like you willing to speak for me and the rest of us Public folks.
From the bottom of my heart, thank you.
/Sarcasm
To the poster who said that PATF didnt make any money. Well someone saw it, it made a total of $267,016,772. Lets see Bolt made $309,979,654 and cost twice the amount of PATF. Before Bolt, Meet The Robinsons came in at an awful $169,333,034 and that film was made twice so you know it cost more than PATF and rounding out the CG films at Disney we have Chicken Little with $314,432,837 and I am sure it cost a bundle being it was their first CG movie. Tangled has been in production for 8 years people and I heard that up till "real" production had started they had blown through $140 million. Add on the production costs after that time and you end up around "265 million most likely. The clear winner here is PATF. It costs less to make and did pretty well and the toy line alone will make money for years to come is huge. So the age old question, why does Disney still try to make CG when clearly 2d is their bread and butter?
I'm guessing by from your puffery you are working on the film.
Bad guess, puffer. I'm not working on it. There are plenty of things wrong with this trailer, but many of the comments were comparing the trailer to either what people dreamed it would be or movies with bigger shortcomings. The things I find far more annoying are in the marketing of it, not in the production of it. The annoying pop song, the "fearless" and "dangerous" titles, the fact that a girl locked in a tower knows kick-butt kung-fu hair moves. I'll also admit that the characters are generic but they look Disney so that makes sense?
Enjoy Shrek 4. There hasn't been an animated movie in years I'm less interested in seeing. It'll make it's money, which is good for the industry. That's what franchises do. It'll probably make more than Rapunzel. So if you want to put your eggs in the Shrek basket then yes, you're safe. You can't compare the two artistically though. Every frame of this looks as though Glen himself drew it by hand and they matched his drawings in CG. The timing of the movements, the facial poses, all have his feel to them. Go ahead join the movie-going public. You only discredit your taste for quality.
Oh, I get it...you're a Glen fanboy. Isn't that cute....I didn't know there were any of you left.
@Anon 3:19:00
I dismiss your dismissal of this film.
DISMISSED!
"Oh, I get it...you're a Glen fanboy. Isn't that cute....I didn't know there were any of you left."
Oh, I get it...you're a Dreamworks fanboy. Isn't that cute...I didn't know there were any of you. Ever.
to ANON Thursday, June 10, 2010 2:51:00 PM
...if the pre-existing numbers you quote are real for Rupunzel / tangled, then this would be up there with Dinosaur as one of the most expensive animated films ever to produce?
Surely that can't be.
I've read comments on this blog and on cartoonbrew claiming that shots in this teaser are merely test animation, and not actual footage from the film. Is this true? Can someone confirm this?
Some of it is, some of it isnt.
Funny, Anon 3:29, 3:19. Funny.
As a non-animation-expert who has never even heard of Glen Keane, let me just say that the film looks fine. Clever. Both characters seem likeable, the gags are cute and not cheesy-minus the "smolder"-and the visuals are nothing like Shrek at all. People are just saying that because both movies have scenes in forests.
What neither Rapunzel nor the prince know is that the Chameleon is Rapunzel's witch Mother, from Madagascar.
Loves it All!
"It's still 90's Disney... but this time in CG. "
Yeah, if John Lasseter had been in charge of it in the 90's. That makes all the difference in the world.
Why do so many people hate on Glen Keane "fanboys"? He's an amazing artist, and an even more amazing animator. I understand he's not the only animator out there, but when someone tries to compliment the trailer saying that it looks like Mr. Keane had quite a strong impression on it... why is that bad?
Are you just jealous that you're NOT Glen Keane?
Just wanted to say that the animation looks very nice and congratulations to the crew for all their hard work so far.
I don't fit with the Disney channel demographic so the trailer isn't my cup of tea but come November I'll be in theatres to see the real deal.
Here is a link to the dutch trailer which is different and much more classic Disney. It shows different footage with a different build-up, with more focus on the magic and fairytale and less focus on the contemporary. This teaser is much better if you ask me, AND we'll be getting the original title in the Netherlands. Rapunzel baby! HELL YEAH!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GTut733YmRo
That's MUCH more like the actual tone of the film. Amazing what a difference music makes, huh.
definitely liking the feel of the dutch trailer better then the american one. hopefully this is the feel we'll get with future trailers.
You guys are fooling yourselves...other than a slight musical difference I get the exact same vibe from both trailers. Whether that's good or bad depends on who you are, but it seems clear that this film will hewe closer in tone (or an attempt) to Shrek and Enchanted than to the 90's Disney films. maybe that's a good thing. Who knows. We'll have to let the public decide.
Even if a hit, will it be able to overcome the enormous cost that was accumulated is doubtful.
gloom doom gloom doom. I bet you're a fun person to hang out with.
It is just a trailer, after all, but it looks pretty damned good. Definitely a Disney feel to it, which is really the first time I've seen that in one of Disney's CG features. I think audiences will eat it up.
If there's any DreamWorks' movie whose look I'd compare this to, it would be the more playful aspects of The Road to El Dorado. That was a film nobody loved, but there was some good animation in there.
I was on the bandwagon with "the title doesn't matter", but after seeing the Dutch trailer, I think I've just changed my mind.
It's basically the same trailer, but the title kinda adds a focus as to what the whole movie is about. "Tangled" doesn't work as well... It doesn't read that it's about this quirky girl.
The Dutch version has about 14 seconds more of animation not in the US trailer. I know, cuz I made my own edit, including the additional footage in the domestic trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k67ThC4MXls
There's a double of Rapunzel's hair going up after Flynn enters because the US trailer has it out of order and it was too minor of a cut to bother.
However, one thing I left out, also because of the minor edit is that you'll notice that Flynn cites the one line the Rapunzel fairytale is known for: 'Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair.'
Except in the Dutch version, he only names her once. And in the US version, he doesn't name her at all.
Guess 'Tangled, let down your hair!' didn't make the cut.
Art: the animation looks great, but your desperate fanboy attempt to elevate it to some level of artistry not achieved at Dreamworks is little odd. I have seen shots in DW films that look both much worse and much better than anything in the trailer. But if you want to play that game, then concept wise this is lightyears behind DW's current films and the box office will reflect that.
Thank ya!
Mr. Koch,
I liked The Road to El Dorado. I guess I'm definitely in the minority there. I also liked Spirit and P of E.
As fo the trailer, I'm reminded of TPAF more than anything - esp. the banter between main characters and even facial gestures.
"Whether that's good or bad depends on who you are, but it seems clear that this film will hewe closer in tone (or an attempt) to Shrek and Enchanted than to the 90's Disney films."
No. Some of us have actually SEEN Tangled. It's much closer to the 90s Disney films. There is no Shrekkish snark in it at all. They play it straight.
"you'll notice that Flynn cites the one line the Rapunzel fairytale is known for: 'Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair.' "
That scene is one of several things in this trailer that aren't actually in the movie, at least as of the test screening on May 25th.
This trailer is an abomination, the work of a deranged marketing department that has somehow become convinced that they'll never be able to sell a classic Disney princess movie, no matter how good it is.
Ironically, this little rebranding stunt has turned off most of the people who would REALLY love Tangled. Hopefully the Marketeers have read the comments from all over the internet, have repented of their sins, and are frantically working to correct this fiasco.
Cause getting the boys won't help any if they lose everybody else.
gotta love everyone sizing up the entire film based on a 2 minute teaser trailer filled mostly with test footage rather then actual movie footage.
Sure a trailer is meant to give us a preview into the film itself, but nowadays it's almost impossible to tell what any movie is about if you only go off of the teaser trailers.
regardless of what actually made the film, I just happen to think it's quite telling that in countries where they are keeping the Rapunzel name (there is also a French version on YouTube under WaltDisneyStudiosBFR which is identical to the Dutch save the V.O. and titles), he actually speaks her name in the trailer whereas in the domestic trailer, they deliberately cut out the <1 second.
I'm not one hating on the name change (although it certainly invokes the fake Peter Schneider Great Mouse Detective memo), I happen to like Tangled for multiple reasons, but this obviously deliberate edit is just a tad bit ridiculous, particularly given the name controversy.
Why would ANYONE think comparing this to that crappy flop Road to ElDorado is a compliment? It isn't. That film was bad when it came out, and still VERY bad. No wonder it was a complete flop.
Actually, El Dorado's character animation has similarities.
And ED had a gangbuster opening sequence and worked well ... for the first twenty-five minutes. Then it skidded to a halt and failed to regain any momentum.
No third act, and only half of a second.
It really does look like the road to El Dorado's main characters.
Im surprised no one has mentioned that Tangled is going up against Megamind this holiday season.
Should be a pretty notable battle.
If I had to bet, I'd put money on Tangled. Megamind is very forgettable.
And I'm sure you're not bringing any predjudice to your opinion, right...?
But since Megamind is coming out the beginning of Nov and Tangled the end of Nov it doesn't appear to be an issue...unless you want to compare numbers after the fact, but that couyld be done with any two films regardless of when they're released.
And siunce you're bringing it up it is interesting that Disney feels they need to make Tangled look like it's a similiar film as Megamind, isn't it? So, despite all these people that are proclaiming loudly that it isn't, it seems clear that Disney doesn't seem comfortable letting audiences know it is a straight fairytale - assuming those same people really know what the final film is or isn't.
And siunce you're bringing it up it is interesting that Disney feels they need to make Tangled look like it's a similiar film as Megamind, isn't it?
Disney marketing does, if thats what you mean. The artists at Disney dont agree with anything they are doing.
By the way, I was just bringing it up, no need to imply Im prejudice or anything.
"If I had to bet, I'd put money on Tangled. Megamind is very forgettable."
So you've seen both of them? Yes or no.
By the way, I was just bringing it up, no need to imply Im prejudice or anything.
No, of course not. Farthest thing from my mind.
So you've seen both of them? Yes or no.
Of course not silly. Thats why reactions to their respective trailers.
Jeez, touchy touchy. For the record, Im just an animation fan, not an artist or anything.
Oops. I meant "Thats my reactions...."
The trailer for "How to Train Your Dragon" was horrendous. It did not do justice to the movie. This trailer is awful as well.So I hope the movie is better.
The quality of the animation though,is all over the place, some of it good, some of it very amateurish. But most of it is quite qliche.
Being a musical, the songs better be great and memorable.Nothing worst than lame songs on a musical....
Small correction: Tangled comes out the week after Megamind, not at separate ends of the month:
http://boxofficemojo.com/schedule/?view=bydate&release=all&date=2010-11-05&showweeks=4&p=.htm
I am surprised that Glen Keane is directing the animation on this and the acting still looks cliche.
Post a Comment