Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Greetings to all the ducklings swimming around in the Laughing Place Pond. My sisters and I come before you today to let you hear about a conversation the 3 of us recently had with a cast member who works at Disney Hollywood Studios in the Animation section of the park. ORWEN: We were talking with her about Disney's upcoming version of RAPUNZEL, which has always been one of my favorite fairy tales. As we talked with her, we asked her is all the rumors we've been hearing about the way John Lasseter intends to 'modernize' the story is true. ORDDU: She replied that it IS true. We immediately expressed our displeasure over such an idea and she agreed that she didn't like the idea, either, but that she'd heard that there seems to be a certain attitude within the animation departments in Burbank that indicates that many--if not most--of the leaders in charge of story development believe the time for fairy tales is past and that they're even something to be ashamed of. ORWEN: And that makes no sense to us since it was a fairytale--Snow White--which made it possible for the studio to get where it is today! Why be ashamed of fairy tales???? ORDDU: The cast member went on to say that she'd heard the reason they want to make Rapunzel so modern--with music with relfects 60's rock tunes--along with making the heroine of the story more relevant to the cuttent mind set of agressive female types--is because they just don't believe a modern audience is intereted in old world values or old world mannerisms, etc. ORWEN: If that's true, we may never again see a true period piece fairy tale from Disney again and I think that's very sad. ORDDU: It also defeats the purpose of animating a period piece fairytale at all if it's going to be changed to such an alarming degree that it loses it's orginal charm and atmosphere. One of the main reasons we have always loved the fairy tales is because they take us away from what is so jaded about the modern world. We like being transported back to 'Once upon a Time'. ORWEN: But it sounds as though RAPUNZEL won't be doing that for us. The entire story is being changed so much that the only thing left to remind us of the original story will be the tower and some female imposter with long hair who uses it as a whip and a lasso whenever the mood strikes. Maybe some will really like this newer more modern kind of fairytale heroine but we don't happen to be part of that crowd. ORDDU: It all started with how they butcherd CHICKEN LITTle and it continues with RAPUNZEL. It would seem that the last of the true fairytales from Disney ended with BEAUTY & THE BEAST. At least they didn't mess with the time period nor the soul of that lovely tale as old as time. ORWEN: But we'll never get to see the REAL Rapunzel, now. I really don't think John Lasseter knows how to relate to fairy tales. He does better with contemporary stories like CARS or MONSTERS INC.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Please forgive a few mis-spelled words in our post. I meant to say 'current' instead of 'cuttent'. There were a couple of other mis-spellings but we hope you were able to insert the correct one's so that you understood our message.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I'm not sure that I entirely agree that Disney is ashamed of Fairy Tales. If they were, then why would they have just released the Princess and the Frog? Why do they still sell so much fairy-tale-based merchandise every year? Why do they use a castle for the logo of their company? If anything, to me, Disney has exploited the fairy tales to the point that they are all people associate with the company. I visited DL with a friend yesterday who kept complaining about things like the HSM3 show and the Pixar Play Parade because "they aren't Disney". When I asked her what she wanted instead, she listed off a few of the old classics, but mostly princess films. Increasingly recently, Disney has relied to an extreme point on their fairy tale franchises. The princesses rule the merchandise world, and they are doing their best to push fairies anywhere they can. It's gotten to the point where most boys think of Disney and are immediately turned off, because it's just a bunch of girly stuff. If Disney really wants to make some major changes in how they do business, I'm all for it. I don't think they should be ashamed of the old fairy tales, because they are a very strong part of the company's rich history. However, they are only a part of the history, and there are many other things that helped make the company so good. It seems that modern execs only want to see fairy tales, which is starting to feel like beating a dead horse. It guess it sounds like the artists are doing what they can to remove as much fairy tale as possible to create some diversity in the portfolio of films (something the execs should be able to understand), but there's only so much they can accomplish with the stories they are given.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: We're talking about the old fashioned way of doing fairytales, FerretAfros, duckling. And The Princess & the Frog is a perfect example of another detour the studio took away from a more traditional approach to telling a fairy story. Instead of giving us The Frog Prince or The Frog Princess, they decided to give us a more modern tale that was set in New Orleans instead of taking us all to that 'Kingdom far, far away. Yes, there was still magic and a prince that turned into a frog. It was even entertaining. But it doesn't have the same appeal for old souls like us who prefer the medieval time setting for a story like this. THAT is the element the cast member was pointing out to us that current management seems to want to veer away from. They want to take certain elements--like names and titles--but then create original plots and motivations with modern twists that end up making you feel you're still watching something that's set in the modern world with modern attitudes. ORWEN: Also, Ferret, duckling, when you compare the number of fairytales Disney has done over the years to all the NON-fairytale movies, the Non fairytales far out number the fairytales. That's why the fairytales stand out so much more than the rest of the less romantic movies that are more typical of what everybody else is doing. So when they decide to take a story like Rapunzel and whittle it down to such a jaded, modern level, it immediately loses charm. ORDDU: But, then, you'd have to really be a lover of the old fashioned way of telling a fairy story to appreciate the point we're trying to make, here. You're very young and don't seem to have been around long enough to know what it's like to be an 'old soul' with old world values. You're a child of the modern era where such things are lost on you.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I understand the magic of the old films. It just seems interesting that one branch of the company seems to think that they're a dead breed, while the other is trying to milk them for all they're worth. It's a very strange dichotomy.
Originally Posted By Manfried Like a person at that section of that park really is close to the situation.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Whether or not the cast member is close enough to the situation or not, the bottom line proof is in the current product of what's being released. Watered down fairy tales that don't have the power of being as timeless as Snow White or Sleeping Beauty.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>We like being transported back to 'Once upon a Time'. << Witches, what are your feelings regarding how Princess and the Frog performed, box office wise, vs. the Alvin and the Chipmunks sequel? I was very frustrated by that, but I don't know what Disney is supposed to do if competition like that eats their lunch. In other words, it seems that modern audiences will flock to computer animated chipmunks much more quickly than hand drawn romantic tales. Which, to use indelicate language, sucks.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Hello KartoonMan, duckling! We're not quite sure what to make of the public's reaction to Princess & the Frog. We did see it and thought it was entertaining enough. ORWEN: It's just that we would have preferred they made a movie about the original Frog Princess who is from Russia. ORDDU: Or else made a film about the original Frog Prince from the Brother's Grim. ORGOCH: Heck!! I would'a been happy if'n they'd just made a mess a frog legs ta pass 'round so's I wouldn't git so hungry!!!
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: To prove our point about current Disney being too 'ashamed' of fairy tales, there's currently an article we read over at Blue Sky Disney which talks about how there is disappointment over the performance of Princess & the Frog; enough disappointment for those management types to become paranoid in regard to their upcoming travesty of RAPUNZEL. ORWEN: Believe it or not, they're actually thinking about changing Rapunzel's movie title to several other titles. One of the suggestions is "The Theif & the Tower". ORDDU: The believe seems to be--according to the article--that the time for fairy tales has come and gone; that the general public might be turned off if they actually tried to let Rapunzel carry the film's title on her own. So who knows where this paranoia will lead the powers that be? ORWEN: If they're going to butcher the story line and make the main characters so modern, after all, maybe it's better that they DO change the title. The story isn't turning out to have much to do witht the original one I fell in love with from the Brother's Grim...
Originally Posted By dshyates Well, it looks like they won't even be calling the movie Repunzel. It is now called "Tangled". <a href="http://www.geekweek.com/2010/02/tangled-disney-renames-3d-rapunzel-movie.html" target="_blank">http://www.geekweek.com/2010/0...vie.html</a>
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: It's a tangled mess all right!! Poor Rapunzel never had a chance after Glenn Keane was taken off the project. ORDDU: Thus if they do rename the thing to Tangled, it will be most fitting for a project that has become just that!! ORGOCH: Got combs???
Originally Posted By mawnck <--------- anticipating that it won't be the last of the name changes. ;-)
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: And all because they became paranoid over the word 'princess' in The Princess & the Frog! They thought the film turned male viewers away by the word princess. And now they think a female character's name will do the same thing for Rapunzel. If the modern male is that afraid of a damsel in distress, it's a pretty sad world...
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: I'm just so glad Uncle Walt didn't react the way Mr. Lasseter and Company is reacting. I'm also glad most of the well known fairy tales were made while The Disney Company still had some good talent going for it. Otherwise, Snow White, Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty would have totally different titles, too! ORDDU: Yes and I can imagine what all 3 would have been retitled: Snow White would have most likely been renamed 'Overprotected'. Cinderella would have been called 'Overworked' and you just Know Sleeping Beauty would have been been called 'Overslept'. Cathcy little modern twists on the ancient themes--but they're very disrespectful to the original stories and can't be taken the least bit seriously. ORWEN: We might as well face it; Rapunzel becomes more doomed every day with all these 'entanglements'...
Originally Posted By trekkeruss <<The cast member went on to say that she'd heard the reason they want to make Rapunzel so modern--with music with relfects 60's rock tunes--along with making the heroine of the story more relevant to the cuttent mind set of agressive female types--is because they just don't believe a modern audience is intereted in old world values or old world mannerisms, etc.>> I agree with this line of thinking. IMHO, I think if a movie like Snow White were made today, it wouldn't be nearly the hit as it was in 1937. People tastes *are* different between then and now. I don't see anything wrong with Disney tinkering with classic fairy tales, or any other stories. It's what they do; that's why it is Disney's Snow White, and Disney's Little Mermaid, and Disney's Princess and the Frog; they're all reinterpretations and products of a company and of their time.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: True that tastes change and true that original stories can be 'tinkered' with as much as those in charge would like. But isn't it interesting that Snow White was more of a 'hit' when it was released than was The Princess & the Frog, which has already caused its creators to become more paranoid about doing fairy tales in a way that keeps them 'timeless' for future generations?
Originally Posted By dshyates I think that if Disney made a film like Snow White or Sleeping Beauty today they would get blasted by hysterical mothers livid that they would make such unDisney movies because they are too dark and scarey.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORWEN: And at least with Snow White--while there were changes made by Uncle Walt, himself, he didn't change the basic heart and soul of the original story the way they're currently doing with Rapunzel. Snow White will live on forever as a masterpiece. That's because Uncle Walt knew what to change and what NOT to change. This Tangled mess will be a travesty that fans of the original story will be very disappointed with and THOSE are the one's whose tastes should have been considered FIRST.
Originally Posted By Witches of Morva ORDDU: Actually, dshyates, duckling, there WERE those very criticisms leveled at both films at the time of their release--by some. But they weren't any more frightenig, really, than The Princess & the Frog. Even The Wizard of Oz was taken to task for having such a frightening witch. Yet, today, these films are considered classics by the masses. More importantly, their basic origins weren't tampered with to the point where their origial titles had to be changed to ease the paranoia of someone else.
