Tangled.

Chat today at 1 pm EST/11 am Arizona time.

We took our daughter to the movies for the first time the other day to see a movie she’d been asking about for weeks: Tangled. It was a big deal for us beyond the movie, since it was a family outing, and the first time my wife and I had been in a theater together since before our daughter was born. The day planned around the child turned out to be a bigger hit for the adults, as we thoroughly loved Tangled but our daughter’s feelings were more mixed.

The story is only loosely based on the Rapunzel myth, but is updated in a way that gives the film’s two central characters (Rapunzel and her accidental savior, the thief Flynn Rider) much more to do while also increasing the opportunities for merchandising. Rapunzel is now a princess, stolen from her royal crib shortly after birth because her hair has healing powers that the film’s villain, Mother Gothel, wants to use to continue to keep herself eternally young. So, of course, she keeps Rapunzel in an inaccessible tower in a hidden part of the forest, convincing her that to leave the tower and enter the cruel, dangerous world would be sheer lunacy. (I imagine a psychologist would have a field day here.) Flynn Rider, himself on the lam after stealing the crown Rapunzel’s grief-stricken parents have set aside for her hoped-for return, stumbles upon the tower and eventually sets off with Rapunzel … at which point the real movie starts.

And it’s some movie – not a princess movie by any stretch, but a Disney adventure flick, with thugs, fights, chases, trickery, and, in the best trick of all, some actual plot tension even though you know more or less how the story is going to end. It took about a third of the movie to get to the point where Rapunzel leaves the tower, but after that, the movie flies, with three different parties chasing Flynn and Rapunzel, leaving (thankfully) less time to dwell on the budding romance between the two characters. I feel like Disney gave the Pixar gang minimal directions – “make a movie about Rapunzel, and put her in a purple dress*” – and Pixar did what they do best: They turned it on its head and wrote a fantastic, fun, energetic story.

*So my daughter is completely caught up in the princess stuff, which means my wallet is caught up in the princess stuff as well. We were last at Disneyworld in November of 2009, right as they introduced the Tiana character from The Princess and the Frog. Her dress was green, which, I noticed as we walked through that massive store at Downtown Disney, left only purple as the likely color for the next dress, since we already have pink, blue, turquoise (twice), yellow, and green, not including the fairies. I’m wondering what color is next – orange? Magenta? Some other blue? This stuff matters when you know it’ll be on the Christmas wish list a year from now.

The animation in Tangled is absolutely absurd, the most impressive I’ve seen so far, even exceeding the normally high expectations I take into any Pixar-made film. You would expect that, in a film about Rapunzel, the main character’s hair would be superbly animated, but it’s not just her hair – Flynn Rider’s rakish hairdo and Mother Gothel’s curls* look rich and textured, more real than real, if that makes sense. But there’s a scene where a torrent of water breaks loose and heads towards the camera (I assume for the 3-D version) where I couldn’t get over how un-animated the water looked – clear, glassy, almost like I could see the drops of water making up the flood. And my wife and I both noticed that the Rapunzel has realistic-looking feet, something you almost never see on an animated character (and important since she’s barefoot through the whole movie).

*Figures that they give the film’s main villain curly hair.

The Wikipedia entry on the film explains that the animation style was inspired by a rococo painting called The Swing, although I can’t say I would have noticed the difference if I hadn’t read that beforehand. I know nothing about art, though, which is probably the reason.

Tangled was scary for my four-year-old, who particularly disliked “the bad woman” (Mother Gothel), I think in part because that character separates Rapunzel from her parents and then is increasingly wicked as the film goes on. I was more disturbed by the extent of comic violence, especially that involving blows to the head. Some of the physical comedy is brilliant, such as Rapunzel’s trouble stuffing the unconscious Flynn into a closet, but one of the best running gags in the movie involves whacking people in the head or face with a cast-iron skillet. I use one of those almost every night I cook, and a blow to the dome from one of those won’t just knock you out – it would probably fracture your skull. And in Tangled it happens over … and over … and over, to the point where I couldn’t sustain my suspension of disbelief. It lost its humor for me, until Flynn’s one great line about it near the end of the film. There’s other violence in the film, including a stabbing and an implied death by defenestration, that probably makes this inappropriate for younger viewers. It is an action flick, Disney-style, and while I’m glad they didn’t just make a dull princess movie, I don’t think we’d have taken our daughter to see it if we knew just how much of a grown-up kids’ movie Tangled was.

Comments

  1. Our daughter just turned 5, so we’re in the same Princess boat as you. We saw the 3D version of the film which was amazing, but our daughter kept taking the glasses on and off. She too was upset about Rapunzel being seperated from her real parents. Once that dawned on her, she jumped in my lap and didn’t leave until the end. I do agree that it is more of a grown-up kid’s movie, but I guess that’s why it has a PG rating. But overall it was a great Disney movie, I liked it better than The Princess and the Frog

  2. Joseflanders

    I took my 4-year old to see Tangled last weekend, and while she had similar fears mid-film, the (mild spoiler) reconciliation at the end of the movie helped heal those earlier scars. Personally, I like when a kid’s film is able to complete a film arc like the one in Tangled. And while it is obviously cliché to direct the plot the way it was done, isn’t that why we are so drawn to the good v. evil eternal battle? The adventure and pursuit of overcoming evil is what drives every action/epic movie, and I think having it so viscerally play out for this kid’s movie really worked for her and I.

    And how great was the music!? The scene where they sang “I See the Light” was absolutely incredible, and the actor singing for Flynn is the best male vocalist I can remember hearing in a Disney flick.

  3. hey, I don’t think Pixar was involved with Tangled.

  4. The animation in “How to Train Your Dragon” was the most impressive I’ve seen so far (having not seen “Tangled” yet). It’s definitely shocking to see how Pixar and others have advanced by leaps and bounds over the years in animating human characters since the first Toy Story film. Seems like the evolution of the process would make an interesting documentary, but I’m sure that information is scattered across dozens of DVD extras over the years already.

  5. Great review, as always – you mention that this is a Pixar flick. Is it really a ‘Pixar’ film? Since Disney bought/merged with Pixar, there still seems to be the Disney/Pixar divide when it comes to making and marketing their films. I’ve not seen Pixar mentioned re: this movie….

  6. I really liked Tangled, aside from the healed-by-tears ending. It’s gotten to the point that I now fully expect anyone who dies in a kids movie to be brought to life by magical tears.

  7. “Tangled” is not a Pixar film. It was done by Walt Disney Animation Studios. There’s a difference. John Lasseter was involved as an exec. producer and the COO of Disney Animation but the personnel that wrote/directed/animated this film aren’t Pixar people.

    Source:
    http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=12272779

    It looks like a nice little movie but I rather doubt it’s on the level of the masterpieces Pixar has turned out recently. “Toy Story 3” is one of the best movies of the year.

  8. Just a correction-while Tangled was partially produced by John Lasseter (who will work on any Disney production, rather than exclusively Pixar animation projects), the film was put out by Disney Animation, a separate devision within Disney. Disney Animation is responsible for the Princess and adventure movies (ie The Princess and The Frog), while pixar basically does what it wants. This article talks about the rivalry/tensions between the two programs: http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=12272779

  9. Just a quick headsup that Tangled is a straight Disney film, no Pixar involvement.

  10. It’s not branded as Pixar, but “no Pixar involvement” is incorrect. Disney Animation is run by John Lasseter and other Pixar folk – even that ABC News article refers to the two names as separate brands.

  11. We saw Tangled with my 3yo. She seemed to like it, but I think she’s still at a stage where the character recognition is more interesting than the story itself; that is, she wants everything Tangled now. 🙂

    I didn’t realize it was PG, but thinking back, I’m not terribly surprised. My daughter doesn’t have a lot of “stranger danger” in her, so I’m not sure she really picked up what was going on. I thought Mother Gothel was about as creepy of a villain that Disney has ever created. Her psychological abuse of Rapunzel certainly made me uncomfortable.

    The violence was a bit over-the-top, but it didn’t concern me too much. Although, I wasn’t right next to my daughter, so I don’t know which parts scared her. It was pretty spectacular the beating each of the characters could take and still keep going!

  12. “…but no Pixar involvement is incorrect.”

    I’m not really sure how you would define involvement so that it could exclude Pixar from anything done at Disney Animation. Lasseter, of course, runs the place now, and surely has brought along a few Pixar comrades to help right the obviously flagging ship there. Are all Disney Animated movies now, inherently, Pixar movies, even if they don’t carry the Pixar logo and no work for them is done at Pixar studios? To me, this would make the upcoming Mission Impossible movie a Pixar film–after all, Brad Bird, a Pixar guy, is directing that. Pixar advised to guys making the new Tron movie–again, is this now a Pixar film? From my view, unless Pixar wants to slap their logo on it, it’s not a Pixar film, and it generally seems like they don’t attach that logo to anything that wasn’t created in-house.

  13. I’m not talking about the brand, but the quality of animation and attention to story that defined Pixar and hadn’t really defined Disney Animation in a good ten to fifteen years. I’m not sure how anyone could watch Tangled and argue that the film shows no influence at all from Pixar.

  14. This is an interesting bit on the physics of the hair in the movie:

    http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/201011194

  15. Joseflanders: “And how great was the music!? The scene where they sang “I See the Light” was absolutely incredible, and the actor singing for Flynn is the best male vocalist I can remember hearing in a Disney flick.”

    I didn’t know this until afterwards, but Zachary Levi did the singing for Flynn as well as the speaking.

  16. Keith- I absolutely agree. The revival of Disney Animation since Lassiter’s takeover (Princess and the Frog was his first, start to finish, as head of Disney Animation) is certainly due to a strong influence from Pixar. But influenced and made, to my mind, are not at all the same thing.

  17. You could call Tangled “Pixar-esque” if that’s your reference point for quality CG filmmaking, but it’s not “Pixar-made”, and not a Pixar film. Glen Keane had at least as much influence on the finished product as Lasseter, and Keane’s one of the last links to old-school Disney animation (his first film job was on the Rescuers) and the ’90s resurgence. Saying that Tangled is a Pixar film unfairly dismisses Keane’s contributions.

  18. You didn’t comment on it, but what did you think of the music? I wasn’t impressed. It lacked a staple song that I come to expect (you know, the kind of song that gets covered by a pop artist and ends up all over the radio), as I can’t even remember the duet song from the boat and none of the others were noteworthy. The one in the bar, while humorous, was absolutely cringe-worthy. I expected an Alan Menken soundtrack would be a great addition, but this was a Disney animated film that thrived in spite of music, not because of it.

    • I’d say the music was agreeable, but not memorable. Nothing to really take home with me.