Rapunzel 3D

[jakerupert]

Saw Rapunzel 3 D this weekend with my son and must say the overall looks and style and design

is quite near to perfection by now and the story was quite entertaining also.

 

At the same time it again made quite clear to me, that we here and, I mean also the most

talented amongst us like Stian, will never be able to close the "quality"-gap to these really

big productions. Every time we advance a little bit, they also advance quite a "little" bit.

A ratrace we cant win.

But what the heck, as long we get our fun out of it and once in a while a payd job, we can live with it.

(We don`t have a choice anyway.)

[jakerupert]

qymhghuqtrewqzuiiopü,mnbbvxxy

 

quentin

 

(this is the first post from my son Quentin 4 1/2 years old, he asked me for it, so please bear with me....)

[Shelton]

I enjoyed tangled as well both look and story.

 

Let Quentin know that his post was very informative and I agree 100%.

 

Steve

[robcat2075]

Saw Rapunzel 3 D this weekend with my son and must say the overall looks and style and design

is quite near to perfection by now and the story was quite entertaining also.

 

They called it "Tangled" here, I think because they were afraid "Rapunzel" would scare the boys away.

 

 

At the same time it again made quite clear to me, that we here and, I mean also the most

talented amongst us like Stian, will never be able to close the "quality"-gap to these really

big productions. Every time we advance a little bit, they also advance quite a "little" bit.

 

I tell people "There's a reason it takes Pixar 1000 people to get out one movie a year!"

 

 

A ratrace we cant win.

But what the heck, as long we get our fun out of it and once in a while a payd job, we can live with it.

(We don`t have a choice anyway.)

 

You should look at it like Chuck Jones did. He looked at Disney animation and knew he would never have the resources to do anything that elaborate, but he did great stuff none-the-less. The "polish" rat race he couldn't win, but the "entertaining" rat race he did win.

 

There are lots of examples of first-rate imagery made with A:M, like Dusan's Chicory and Coffee, but cranking that out at feature-length isn't an A:M problem, it's a person-power and organization problem.

[HomeSlice]

qymhghuqtrewqzuiiopü,mnbbvxxy

quentin

 

(this is the first post from my son Quentin 4 1/2 years old, he asked me for it, so please bear with me....)

Awesome. Your son is already typing. Next thing you know, he'll be wanting his own laptop.

 

 

 

There are lots of examples of first-rate imagery made with A:M, like Dusan's Chicory and Coffee, but cranking that out at feature-length isn't an A:M problem, it's a person-power and organization problem.

Don't forget Time and Money !

[Fuchur]

What for example The Soulcage Department can do with A:M is really amazing, even in comparision with modern 3d-movies. As the people creating such 3d-movies, they are using composition-tricks, many many hours to create the right look and so on. AND we are talking about the best guys available in the industry... as it has been stated before: Any 3d-software needs a very talented person to create stunning 3d-graphics.

 

A:M can do most (not everything if you ask me, but very near to that) effects in 3d-movies (using an compositing-software).

It may not make it very easy for people to create some rendering-effects, but they are most often possible.

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[TheSpleen]

I try my best to be different.

why compete when you can start in a field all your own?

Chasing Pixar is the wrong track I think.

AM has no limits.

[NancyGormezano]

They called it "Tangled" here, I think because they were afraid "Rapunzel" would scare the boys away.

 

I had seen that written somewhere also.

 

Interestingly, despite the great reviews & general reception that "Tangled" is getting, it was also reported that Disney will stop remaking fairy tales.

 

Don't know how true that is. Maybe it's only "princess tales" type stories? Hard for me to believe that little/big girls would ever stop enjoying Princess stories.

 

And yes, I agree with Quentin for the most part. He had me up until "zuiioöomjuzztr45".

[robcat2075]

I finally got out to see "Tangled" yesterday. I liked it very much.

 

Strongest element: Maximus, the horse

 

Weakest element: the songs. I loved what Alan Menken did for "Little Mermaid" and "Aladdin" but what he's got here is too similar to those to feel fresh. TWO has better songs than "Tangled" (my unbiased assessment ).

 

 

I estimate the "look" of Tangled to be mostly due to...

 

-very careful choice of color palette and lighting in every shot

 

-suggestive rather than realistic textures

 

-simple geometries, especially the faces

 

-lots of camera fog, even indoors

 

-maybe some soft focus to make everything just a bit less CG sharp.

 

 

Except for a few shots that were all about "the hair" I don't see much that one couldn't do with A:M, presuming you have the same talent and vision as the artists who made "Tangled".

[fae_alba]

Interestingly, despite the great reviews & general reception that "Tangled" is getting, it was also reported that Disney will stop remaking fairy tales.

 

Don't know how true that is. Maybe it's only "princess tales" type stories? Hard for me to believe that little/big girls would ever stop enjoying Princess stories.

 

I had read the same thing about Tanlged being the last "princess" story. Audiences are shrinking for those types of movies, since kids (girls) are growing up way way too fast. Also, Tangled was in production for several years, then much of it scrapped, and the focus of the story changed to be more on the the thief to attract the boy crowd.. and much of the humor added to keep the parents interested.

[Rodney]

Disney will stop remaking fairy tales.

 

I'm not sure what Disney hopes to prove with headlines like this (I'd guess someone thought it up to measure the current market for fairy tales against the thought of them going away?)

You can read this as an fallacy without even reading into it.

 

Oh boo hoo... Disney will never make fairy tales again! Woe is you. Woe is me. Woe to all our families.

 

Good grief. How stupid do they think we are? (Rhetorical question... their marketing department obviously thinks they are dealing with parents of young children... and largely they are.)

 

Okay... look. It worked well for them in the '2D is dead' phase so now they've readied themselves to enter the next phase.

The more things change the more they remain the same apparently.

Hey kids! Let's cut off our noses again to spite our face! Feh.

 

I'm looking forward to watching Tangled many times.

My first (and thus far only) impression of it was that the imagery was superior to the storytelling. This isn't to suggest the story wasn't fun or compelling. I enjoyed it considerably. Still, the tale was a bit stilted in ways that I won't be able to express until I've seen it enough times to properly analyze. The songs certainly aren't very singable. They felt slightly out of place... like tunes borrowed from a Dreamworks flick. I fully agree with Robert's assessment... TWO's songs are better!

 

I'm going to go out on a limb and state for the record that I think the primary flaw (and therefore the area of greatest potential) can be found with the mommy-dearest villain. Consider other Disney villains we all love to hate; the wicked queen (from Snow White), Captain Hook, Cruella Deville, Maleficent etc. Now, what are we missing here? I don't think I ever empathized with this villain or found her compelling in a similar way. It's very true what they say... a hero (or hero and heroine in this case) will be judged by the quality of their opposition and as smart as Raphunzel is she would have best this villain twice before breakfast at the age of eight!

 

Sorry. I must be getting too cynical these days.

This is just to put it on official record that I liked the movie but have some personal reservations.

After watching it a few more times I'm sure it'll all blend perfectly together.

[robcat2075]

I recently read Frank and Ollie's "The Disney Villain" in which they survey and critique every bad guy in Disney films since Peg Leg Pete in the 1920's. Their assessment of most of them could be summarized as "well... that didn't work!"

 

You may be right that the villain is flawed, it's something they've had trouble with all along with just a few obvious successes that make us think they could do it every time. They've been toying with the concept for 80 years now but haven't figured out how to get it right every time.

 

Fun fact from the book: most Disney villains are male not female.

 

 

But I enjoyed this villain. I felt bad for her that she needed Rapunzel so much and she was pretty clever the way she double crossed the two big guys. Was she identified as a "witch" in the beginning? Did she have any magic powers at all?

 

 

 

 

It's hard to figure out what's wrong with "musicals" except that to lament that it's just something from another time. The 40's and 50's seemed to be a golden age where people would write musicals where every song became a classic. These were things like "Oklahoma", "My Fair Lady", "the King and I"

 

And then from the 60's on musicals were lucky to have one song that really stuck.

[zandoriastudios]

The secret to great villains: No one believes that they are evil, or a villain... They have some justification that their actions are for a higher good. They think that history, or future generations will vindicate their choices.

[Rodney]

WARNING: Possible Spoilers if you haven't yet seen the movie.

 

I felt bad for her that she needed Rapunzel so much and she was pretty clever the way she double crossed the two big guys.

 

I'm not suggesting I could have created a better villain but I do enjoy the process of trying to figure how to do just that.

I get the distinct feeling the creators didn't want us to sympathize too much with the villain but that may be an opportunity missed.

 

When I think of a character like Captain Hook... you can't help but like that guy. Life has dealt him a bad hand (literally and figure-atively!) and he's just trying to get what is rightfully his and get by the best way he can. In his eyes it is Peter Pan who represents the eternal never-grow-up-but-always-plague-you essence of villainy. He emotes sympathy and we can't help but feel for the character.

 

The secret to great villains: No one believes that they are evil, or a villain... They have some justification that their actions are for a higher good. They think that history, or future generations will vindicate their choices.

 

I can fully subscribe to that theory. The one exception might be where someone believes they are great at being evil. Even then as you state they believe their way is superior and their cause a righteous one. As you say... they are self justified. I can easily imagine a villain whose inner turmoil is that he wants to save the world, "Why won't those fools listen to me?!?! Can't they see I'm trying to help them? If I must destroy them all to the very last one in order to save them... I will!". The irony of course... a belief that he is the savior/hero. The difference between him and other villians... he fully believe this.

 

With some villains this can often cue in the appearance of henchmen or sidekicks who speak (to us) on behalf of a villain who keeps his inner ego and thoughts hidden until the climax of the film where it is ultimately undone. "Stop peasants! Bow before your Majesty the King. You worshiped him before and you will again. No! What are you doing? Get back! Ahhhhhh! "

 

Then there are the villains of subtlety who connive and contrive and scheme. They often are highly intelligent. They have good reason to feel superior which often proves to be their own undoing. They usually outwit themselves even as they greatly underestimate the resolve and fortitude of the hero.

 

Was she identified as a "witch" in the beginning? Did she have any magic powers at all?

 

Yes she was... and she did.

This may be an element of why I think she didn't connect for me.

Perhaps if she was shown to be filled with more magical prowess and power after reenergized by Raphunzel... this would have contrasted nicely with her other self on a particularly bad hair day. More of a Jekyl and Hyde performance would have sold I think. A villain who is in conflict with herself. In the end the only escape from her torment... is (a bittersweet) death. Consider for a moment how we would have been led along if she had started out like us... was tempted and utterly turned toward evil ...then repented of her evil ways at the very last second. What may be lacking is a sense of change in her character. As I see it the opposite was attempted... she was completely selfishl... turns toward the good shared by Raphunzel's presence over the years... and then is consumed when she decides that if she can't have eternity no one else will either.

 

With the villain as is, I mostly thought... Raphy would have escaped and gone to see those floating lights years ago (which I understand via some of the unused storyboards that may have been a temporary consideration)

 

In the case of Raphy's Mom... after the initial introduction and plot setup a lot of what seemed interesting about her her seemed to wander away.

Perhaps we'd empathize more if she aged more rapidly every day? We'd at least better understand and connect with her particular desperation.

There was good reason to keep Raphy isolated... "Forgive me my dear sweet child... please... I'm not a bad person. I'm just periodically reanimated that way." (Definitely doesn't work as well as the classic Jessica Rabbit bit. )

 

Not trying to take anything away from the talented creators of 'Tangled'. I'm sure they stared at these characters from every possible angle over the years.

 

I recently read Frank and Ollie's "The Disney Villain" in which they survey and critique every bad guy in Disney films since Peg Leg Pete in the 1920's. Their assessment of most of them could be summarized as "well... that didn't work!"

 

It took me years to find that book but thanks to the internet I grabbed one. Thanks for reminding me of it. I should break that out and read it again!

[jakerupert]

>The secret to great villains: No one believes that they are evil, or a villain... They have some justification that their actions are for a higher good. They think that history, or future generations will vindicate their choices.

 

Hardly good Disney villains but outrageous maniacs.

 

And think of for instance Goldfinger and Cruella, both great villains, just driven by their simple greed for material goods.

I think an interesting villain is characterized by a certain contrast of their high education,intelligence,manners, skills (Hannibal Lector) etc. to their lower character goals, that they recklessly try to achieve, combined with a extraodinary charisma of its actor and certain manirisms in their attitude.

 

(On a sidenote: In times, when every second filmcritic beginns with a sentence like:" The contractkiller so and so is doing so and so..."

its starting to get hard to tell, which are the villains and which are the heroes anyhow.)

[robcat2075]

What did the witch do in the movie that was magic? I can't recall anything, she seemed to get by like everyone else.

[Rodney]

What did the witch do in the movie that was magic? I can't recall anything, she seemed to get by like everyone else.

 

That is an excellent question and perhaps also a flaw with the execution of the character.

We are referring to her as a witch but she didn't display any of those characteristics.

Perhaps (rather oddly I'd say) the producers were going for a world with little or no magic.

 

My memory says there were two scenes where she performed some sort of magic-crafT.

Once at the beginning and once with the bandits. Perhaps I imagined even that? (It was probably the touching of the flower at the beginning and something to do with Raphunzel's hair toward the end)

Raphuzel's magic hair is this world's sole source of magic?

 

So cue the trailer voice, "In a world without magic. A fragile old woman. A girl held hostage for 18 years in a really tall tower. A Thief. A magical treasure beyond our wildest imagination. Of course, it's all a little more complicated than that. (rapidly show scenes from the movie and end with the Bandits then Maximum) (boom) Tangled."

[robcat2075]

Maybe I just imagined that she was called a witch at all?

 

i only recall her doing completely human things.

 

The flower was magic... and that's what made Rapunzel's hair magic... but "mother Gothel" was human like everyone else in the story. I'll pay attention more when I re-watch it.

 

Wikipedia details numerous variations of the story but even though they hint she's a witch there doesn't seem to be any magic powers about her.

[Fuchur]

Maybe I just imagined that she was called a witch at all?

 

i only recall her doing completely human things.

 

The flower was magic... and that's what made Rapunzel's hair magic... but "mother Gothel" was human like everyone else in the story. I'll pay attention more when I re-watch it.

 

Wikipedia details numerous variations of the story but even though they hint she's a witch there doesn't seem to be any magic powers about her.

 

Sounds like the "real" kind of witch to me... someone with more knowledge? The kind, people liked to burn a few centuries ago....

 

See you

*Fuchur*

[fae_alba]

So I was totally agreeing with the comments that the mother wasn't a real villain, in the Disney sense. But this morning on the drive to work I was sharing this discussion with my wife and she emphatically disagrees that the mother wasn't a true villain. Her comment, in a nutshell, is this: Depends on which side you look at it.

 

If you come from an abusive home, where as a child you were emotionally and or physically abused, (as she was) the mother character in Tangled was absolutely, without a doubt, a villain. The final scene with the mother, where Rapunzel and the thief are chained, and Rapunzel is begging for his life, "Please mother, I'll do anything you ask" is a phrase and setting that for her, was almost unbearable to watch.

 

While the mother was not drawn on the level as Captain Hook, or Cruella DeVille, she is beyond a doubt a villain. Not an apple wielding witch, but a manipulator.

 

but my take on it is this; did you enjoy the movie? Were you entertained for the time you spent watching it? Did you get your monies worth? If so, then it was a good (great) movie. Who cares what the critics say? Who cares if the characters did meet some formula for the way they should be? I thoroughly enjoyed it, I plan on buying the DVD (April).

 

My Two Cents Worth.

[Rodney]

Depends on which side you look at it.

 

If you come from an abusive home, where as a child you were emotionally and or physically abused, (as she was) the mother character in Tangled was absolutely, without a doubt, a villain. The final scene with the mother, where Rapunzel and the thief are chained, and Rapunzel is begging for his life, "Please mother, I'll do anything you ask" is a phrase and setting that for her, was almost unbearable to watch.

 

While the mother was not drawn on the level as Captain Hook, or Cruella DeVille, she is beyond a doubt a villain. Not an apple wielding witch, but a manipulator.

 

With apologies to your wife... I agree with her sentiment but reject her reality and substitue my own.

 

The reason I go to watch Disney movies is to escape (in part and only for a moment) from this god-forsaken world.

Please feel free to quote me there. lol

 

Cartoons (and I think Disney animation) are best as a caricature of reality.

If the kidnapper/imposter is the same as one we'd see in the real world then she isn't much of a caricature any more.

 

I know the difference is subtle and I know the effects of abuse up and close personally but a fair distance from reality is what keeps me wanting to watch Disney movies. If I want that kind of reality I'll just stay at work.

 

There is an aspect of this movie if dissected from a real-world perspective that would be utterly disturbing.

I'll grant that if it helps even one child through a similar situation in real life it could be a element worth pursuing... but come on! What else in that abusive relationship should the Disney animators have shown???

 

Over the past decade comic books and film in general were largely destroyed by the cynical approach of bringing dark and gritty storylines in to plus up imaginary worlds. I believe the appropriate answer to "Wouldn't it be cool if...?" is generally "$!#&% No!!!"

 

Sorry. Didn't mean to rant.

That might not have done anyone else any good but for me it was therapeutic.

 

Tell your wife I fully accept and sympathize with her prognosis.

The fact that it hit a little too close to home may be even more cause for Disney's story tellers to reject that particular character arc and craft something enduring.

The villain I was exploring up there in my previous post likely was a victim herself at one time (caught within the endless cycle of violence we are familiar with in the real world) and in the final act she might even try to redeem herself by ending that terrible curse.

[fae_alba]

Rodney,

 

i agree whole heartedly on your feelings with/for going to Disney movies..I'm the same way. Disney should be, on a whole, a somewhat lighthearted escape from reality. That was the crux of our conversation this morning (betwixt my darling bride and I). The Disney characters that I grew up with, know and love, were over the top characters (a talking Mouse, angry Duck, and clumsy Dog?!?). That's what I want to see from Disney. Sadly, we won't see too much of that since most of the audience has become too jaded.

 

Really, this thread is more a commentary on where society is going as a whole. In order to be entertained, movie goers need to be shocked/dismayed/ almost verbally and visually abused by the film.

 

At any rate, I'm a die hard fan of Disney movie making. In my book, Tangled was a fantastic film, to be entertained by. I tend not to pick apart movies, since going to just have some time off from reality means to leave off with the nit-picking afterward.

[robcat2075]

There really are several villains in Tangled. The two big guys that Flynn is originally with become his adversaries, Maximus the horse starts out as his adversary, there are numerous guards he has to fight and of course there's THE villain of the film, Mother Gothel.

 

some are fleeting, but they all fit in Frank And Ollie's broad definition of "Disney Villain".

[Rodney]

Paul,

I can separate my critical thoughts from my enjoyment of the film. The more films like that the better!

I speak mostly from the perspective of someone trying to understand better how to create films like these.

As always it's going to be easier to critique than create.

 

 

The two big guys that Flynn is originally with become his adversaries

 

Now those were the type of villains I really like... to hate.

 

 

Warning: Possible Thread drift

I can imagine Disney's writers are well aware of Dramatica.

I can see the system's appeal but have questions about it's underlying formulae.

I'm not sure if how 'Tangled' fared on the Dramatica scale.

A Dramatica review hasn't been posted as of yet.

 

For those interested, there are some good storytelling lessons/tips to be found on the Dramatic site (lots of free videos and audio lessons on storytelling): http://www.dramatica.com

[robcat2075]

One other little snipe I have...

 

I've heard the complaint that A:M's SubSurfaceScattering looks waxy. The skin in Tangled looked waxy, especially on Mother Gothel, and that's Pixar Renderman they're using.

[Fuchur]

One other little snipe I have...

 

I've heard the complaint that A:M's SubSurfaceScattering looks waxy. The skin in Tangled looked waxy, especially on Mother Gothel, and that's Pixar Renderman they're using.

 

For me that is what SSS is all about .

Never have seen any SSS that was not totally overpowered and by that looked waxy... most likely because otherwise you wouldnt really notice it...

 

See you

*Fuchur*

 

PS: So I have never been able to get that feature to work for me... I only get black surfaces from it and so I left it behind someday and use the Skin-Shader of Yves for that...

[frosteternal]

...

PS: So I have never been able to get that feature to work for me... I only get black surfaces from it and so I left it behind someday and use the Skin-Shader of Yves for that...

The black surfaces are because it doesn't always work properly in preview renders - you need to do a final render to get the true view of it.

[UNGLAUBLICHUSA]

I think that movie could have been made just as well using AM. It's not the software so much as the Talent, Manpower & Money. If I ever win the friggin Lotto I intend to prove AM is just as good by doing a short film....if I don't win, that short film is just going to take a lot longer......