Disney’s “Rapunzel” movie, which is set to release in December 2010, has been renamed “Tangled.”
Ron Coneli, the producer of the animated Disney movie said about the title change:
“It’s a really fresh, smart take on the Rapunzel story. In our film, the infamous bandit Flynn Rider meets his match in the girl with the 70 feet of magical golden hair. We’re having a lot of fun pairing Flynn, who’s seen it all, with Rapunzel, who’s been locked away in a tower for 18 years.”
The movie will still have everything we love about the Rapunzel movie, from the evil witch, the tall tower, the hero and the girl with super long hair, but it will not have the title we are used to.
Hmm…what do you think about this?
Related News:
- Walt Disney Studios' Rapunzel
- Disney Store: “Tangled” Rapunzel Tower Play Set
- Disney’s “Tangled” Directors Talk About The Characters In The Movie
- Meet The Newest Disney Princess Rapunzel From “Tangled”
- New Image From Disney’s “Rapunzel” Movie
- Disney’s “Tangled” Rapunzel Dolls
- Disney’s “Tangled” Video Featurette “Wanted: Pub Thugs”
I find that title, “Tangled,” disrespectful to not only the Grimm Brother’s title, but to Walt Disney as well. Because that is not what Walt Disney would do when he adapts fairy tales into animated movies. Those people, who complain about story titles being too girlish, need to understand that those story titles being too girlish happens to be written by MEN before we are even born. Also, they need to understand that they do not write stories just for girls or boys, they write for families to enjoy, learn, and love. I even love the title logo that Disney created for “Rapunzel,” and now they want to change it to “Tangled?” That title does not make any sense, and it is misleading. If they ever do change the title from “Rapunzel” to “Tangled,” I would find Disney’s next CG movie a flop. But, if they leave the title, “Rapunzel,” the way it is, and the title logo that Disney created, then I would have high confidence that Disney’s next CG movie could be a huge success. So I say to Disney, “I demand that you change that dreadful title back to “Rapunzel” at once, or else you will all become a disgrace to Walt Disney forever. And you will fall to DreamWorks Animation forever more.”
I agree with Jeff’s comment.
Not only is Disney disrespecting their own roots, but they are also under the notion that anything “girlie” needs to be altered so it complies with the “master gender,” the male. Why is this country so paranoid when it comes to films that appeal to females?
This new title makes me want to see this new film as much as I wanted to see “Hoodwinked.”
I agree with both of the above comments. Besides, “Tangled” doesn’t even sound very good. If they’re going to change the title, they could at least put some thought into it.
I’m not surprised that boys didn’t want to see a movie with the word “Princess” in the title (Princess and the Frog); however, calling a movie Rapunzel does not denote “princess.” It denotes a magical tale like Aladdin. Don’t disrespect the timeless tale of Rapunzel by giving it some meaningless name like Tangled just because you think it will be more “catchy” for the times. Disney’s supposed to be timeless. Already people are speaking out about it such as on NPR and in the LA Times. Think again Disney!
I think they should use `Tangled`as a sub-name, kind of like Pirates of the Caribbean: the Black Pearl, that way people would know that there is more to the story then just `Rapunzel,Rapunzel let down your hair`, but at the same time i keeps it`s fairy tale roots and in addition is also respectful to Walt Disney and the Grimm Brothers, like it could be something like `Rapunzel: the tangled years` or `Rapunzel: A tangled tale of epic proportions` or `Rapunzel: prepared to get tangled`
the options are endless, and in my opinion it`s a very ideal compromise.
Perhaps Disney was just tired of using the names of the princesses as titles.
But I agree with Jessie, “Tangled” should probably be used more as a sub-heading for the movie, rather than a vague title.
I’m gonna go ahead and disagree with everyone before me. Of course Disney is timeless and the fact that every princess movie (Except Beauty and the Beast) has one of the character’s names in it is true However, changing it up a bit is not always a bad thing. Rapunzel is such an old and true-to-its-form kind of name. Everyone recognizes it, whether they love it or not is a different thing. Tangled is fresh and new and when you think of it, it gives you a cute impression of a big mess. If you’ve seen the movie, you’re likely to agree that Tangled seems like such a cute Title for such a cute movie, instead of the old-fashioned Rapunzel. BTW, I LOVED IT…
its 2011 and Tangled is the current #1 grossing film in theaters. 160 million so far domestic. Second only to another Disney movie. Disney knows that families bring in a lot of money in ticket sales.
I Love the name Tangled it fits the movie wonderfully! I think having that name gives it more of a Disney twist. I grew up hearing the Rapunzel story but never as a Disney story. So this makes it their’s I think! We saw it twice and are buying it the day it is released! After my daughter saw it the first time she decided she wanted to have a Tangled birthday party! I do like the classic disney princess movies but Princess and the frog and Tangled are favorites! I’m just saying!
As far as the name goes, I can see it both ways. Having seen the movie, I wish I could just refer to it as Rapunzel. That seems logical and follows the classic Disney form. Obviously they were thinking about box office when they changed the name to Tangled. I can understand why and for those purposes Tangled is a great name. Very cute. But now that it’s on DVD I wish it were Rapunzel. I think when they were thinking about how Princess and the Frog did at the box office and how it related to this movie, they should have considered more factors. I liked Princess and the Frog but it didn’t stand out to me. The songs were enjoyable but I didn’t have a tune stuck in my head the whole day after. This film was bound to be better based on Alan Menkin alone with or without the “Princess” title so I think they should have just followed their usual form and called it Rapunzel.