Hmmm, I guess I’ll have to see the full trailer for me to decide if I like this. I’m still going to see it though!
This link’ll most likely be down soon, but go to Yahoo!, they have it.
pixarfan9099 - Is that the actual trailer that was supposed to be released on Monday or something?
It was awesome though! I loved how Rapunzel kicked Flynn’s ass. 
lol
Yes, Danachii, it is.
What happened to the “three dimensional drawing”?! There’s no noticable difference between the trailer and any other CGI movie out these days.
The scenic stuff does look really, really nice. I agree, though, that there’s not too much to distinguish the characters themselves from other CGI creations, other than looking a little shinier.
Of all the featured characters, the horse probably has the most “2d-ish” design.
You can also watch the trailer on Youtube if you can’t wait till Monday. 
I have to be honest, I did laugh a couple of times. [spoil]“I’ll miss the sound of your laughter”, “Here comes the smoulder”, and the gecko ‘ear-licking’ [/spoil]were all pretty hilarious moments. I can see this in the same league as ‘Emperor’s New Groove’ or ‘Road to El Dorado’ for action-comedy films with a touch of drama.
That said, though, I’m annoyed with the marketing direction towards teenyboppers. Granted, they are the target segment of this kind of movie, but playing a Pink song and using teen-speak (“She’s been grounded, like… FOREVER”) is just going to alienate the more discerning moviegoers or adults.
Why is it a prerequisite for Western animation studios to market their films as ‘hip’ and ‘cool’, even when the film is mostly otherwise? Why are they afraid to emphasize the dramatic moments, the poignant or heartwarming scenes? The same thing happened with Dragons, Megamind, and Despicable Me… for the first, they only pushed the ‘heart and soul’ bits in the final trailer, while there are glimpses of that in the latter two (but were overshadowed by slapstick scenes). 
You only have to observe the way Pixar or Studio Ghibli promote their films to realize that when it comes to convincing cynics that there’s still some heart in contemporary Western ‘kiddy’* animation, other studios still have a long way to go.
*Sarcasm
I haven’t been paying much attention to how this film has been doing, but I guess I am feeling a bit disappointed. From what I’ve heard the visual style of this film was supposed to be very innovative, like a hand drawn painting come to life, but I’m having a hard time seeing anything with the characters that makes them look any different from other CGI films. There was an animation test they did before that looks simply beautiful and more like what Glen Keane wanted for the film when he was still directing [url]Rapunzel Unbraided (Disney - 2010) - YouTube (the still image on the first page was a bit convincing also), and judging from the new trailer it looks like they failed at keeping that kind of look.
And I guess Disney’s marketing plan now of making less fairy tale-ish titles like Tangled and Brave is kind of a sad thing to resort to for getting people to be interested in their films, all because The Princess and the Frog alienated some people when it came out because they judged it for only being a girly princess film. Part of me also felt that if it wasn’t just because of that the film didn’t do so well it was because no matter how hard they worked on it, people today might not care that much about the quality of classic traditional animation anymore. Most young boys today were probably more interested in seeing hip CGI remakes of classics like Alvin and the Chipmunks, so now Disney has to use hip titles to get their attention. I think it’s really today’s audience that’s the problem there, not Disney.
Holy cow… that was how it was originally intended to look? 
Now I’m really disappointed!
I mean, there’s nothing to distinguish it from Bolt, which already tried the ‘3D oil-painting’ look. The animation test is in fact a further retrogression, a ‘2D film made to look like an oil painting’, which would be much more unique than anything any other studio has done in existence (to my knowledge).
As for Disney’s marketing plan, I agree with you on that aspect. As much as I want to like ‘Alvin’ for updating a classic cartoon with a modern twist, they were too ‘try-hard’ with their pop-culture riffs. When they started wearing ‘ghetto hoodies’, I was half-amused, half-cringing. It’s like the ‘Uncanny Valley’, except not for CGI realism, but for ‘cool quotient’ factor. Not quite sweet-and-cute wholesomeness, but not quite bad-*ss awesomeness either. Just… ‘poser’-ish.
There are some movies that succeed in straddling this curve between ‘Cute’ and ‘Wicked’. Emperor’s New Groove, Darkwing Duck, Lilo & Stitch, Bolt, and maybe the recent G-Force. But for most movies, they fall off the scale entirely, like for the Shrek sequels, most Dreamworks movies, and now Tangled. 
Well there are a lot of cartoon lovers who hate seeing the classics being remade in live action/CGI and “modernized” to look hip and stuff. Not only is it unoriginal for making movies but many would agree that it tarnishes the quality of those classics depending on how it’s done, like with all the pop-culture hip-hop type stuff you mentioned. That’s just bringing the classics to a new generation in all the wrong ways.
I agree with you Flik-E. Hence my statement:
Their intentions were admirable, but unfortunately their efforts were in the wrong direction.
On a side note, I’m very annoyed with remakes of 80s TV shows and covers of retro music. Sometimes it works, like the Michael Mann Miami Vice film (IMHO), or Glee’s cover of ‘Journey’. Other times, like for the upcoming A-Team and the rest of the Glee covers… eh… not so sure. 
And as I ranted in the ‘Blue Sky Studios’ thread… Jungledyret Hugo? Bone? Tin-Tin? Smurfs? Freakin’ Speedy Gonzales? All in Three-Dee? 
Hey thanks TDIT for quoting me! Anyway if you just copy that link to the URL the the trailer shoud be on, I see this was the place where we talk about tangled!. My bad!. I didn’t know!.
Gee, I don’t know. For me, I actually see a huge difference between this movie and Bolt; if you notice, the objects, ornaments and characters look a bit more 2D-ish, more livelier, smoother and shinier, the background art look and feel more like paintings, and there even seems to be a certain line of depth that I haven’t seen in other CGI animated films before, particularly when you look at Rapunzel in this shot (you’ll notice that she kind of looks digitally painted here as she’s falling off the tower). But I guess that kind of depends on what your definition of “painterly” is. Generally, when you talk about a painting, you’re talking about a drawing that has a painted surface, something that more or less looks like this, this, this or even this. There’s just so many different types, styles and techniques for painting that it’s hard to distinguish it with just one style, so I’m thinking that the look Disney went for is probably something more of the former than the latter.
Also, in the film-making industry, you also have budget issues to worry about, so using things like 2D, CGI or other special effects costs a whole ton of money. When Glen Keane even started the project around the 2000’s, the specific look and feel that he was aiming for was impossible to do at the time because technology hadn’t advanced that far yet, not to mention producing it would have been extremely risky and costly on Disney’s part. It’s exactly because of this problem that this project kept getting shelved, then back into production again countless amount of times until it took them ten years to make it and release it this year. I mean, they DID say they were trying to make the film to look and feel like a classical 2D Disney film in 3D, and in my humble opinion, they really did manage to accomplish that goal quite beautifully from what I’ve seen in both the promotional poster and the trailers. It really looks like a hybrid between the two mediums, and I absolutely love it. And regardless, I’m sure once this film is finished, it’s still going to be absolutely beautiful and stunning to look at.
But thedriveintheatre, I really do have to agree with you on how Disney is marketing this movie. As much as I liked the trailer on some parts, I still couldn’t help but cringe when I read the, “She’s been grounded… like, FOREVER.” I mean, really? What exactly are they trying to do? Degrade it from a fairy tale to a teenybopper romantic comedy film, even though the film itself probably isn’t even like that? It’s the same thing with Bolt; just watch and compare the English trailer and the Japanese trailer - it feels like they’re two completely different movies. The Japanese focused a lot more on the emotional and sentimental parts of the movie, as apposed to the ‘hip’, ‘cool’, ‘slapstick comedy’ and and ‘flashy’ superdog action that the English trailer did. But it just goes to show how Japan is so much more different in culture and mentality, I guess. shrugs
Totally agree with you. American audiences tend to go for the more over-the-top and excessive (which is why they listen to rock music, are obsessed about clunky muscle cars, and watch loudmouthed heroes in action movies), so the trailers are naturally tailored to similar ‘shock-and-awe’ levels. While Japanese audiences are more nuanced and sentimental (which is why they listen to bubblegum pop, are obsessed about sophisticated robots, and watch androgynous beauties in anime cartoons), so the trailers are toned down and focus on the heartwarming parts.
I’m being overly stereotypical here, but you get the idea. Personally, I favour heart-tugging sentimentality over pretentious ‘coolness’, so the way they appealed to the ‘High-School Musical’ crowd kinda had my eyes rolling all the way back to my skull.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m sure the movie is much more than they made it out to be. Try watching the trailer on mute, and close your eyes when you get to the college-student-level title cards (Seriously, couldn’t they have worked on getting better transition effects and fonts?). It actually looks quite amazing. 
I was kinda disappointed in the trailer, mostly for the reasons already stated here. I honestly could not care less about Flynn Rider. But, if that’s what Disney wants, what they say goes . I’m kinda getting the Princess and the Frog vibe from this, it seems like they can’t stand each other but in the end fall in love and defeat the villain. I also think that this really does look like a painting though! It definitely looks different than like Shrek, or like Up! Has everybody already forgotten about the first trailer though?
[url]Tangled - Teaser Trailer - YouTube
This one definitely seems to be on the more “epic” side of things. So in a nutshell, even though the trailer sucked. I still can see an amazing movie inside of there (some where) and my expectations haven’t wavered a bit.
No worries. xD I’m the same way actually. It’s why when I re-watch emotional-provoking scenes in Princess and the Frog or Bolt, I always tear up regardless of how many times I’ve seen them, lawlz. I’m a huge sap like that. 
I actually have a feeling that this movie is going to be just as emotional and heartwarming as Disney’s other films. If anybody’s seen all the old and classical Disney films up up until the Princess and the Frog, you’d notice how all the slapstick comedy always takes a backseat to the drama and heartfelt scenes. And if people also take into account one of Walt Disney’s most famous quotes, which is: “For every laugh there should be a tear.” then I have a feeling that Tangled is going to be exactly like that too.
I really don’t want that in this movie to tell you the truth. As much as I loved the Princess and the Frog and find that kind of a relationship archetype really cute, having Flynn and Rapunzel hating each other at first will be really repetitive. I’d prefer it if they were just normal with each other, lol.
Personally, what I really want to see from PatF in this movie too is redemption. If you notice, [spoil]Naveen starts off as a self-conceited jerk, but once he travels with Tiana across the bayou and falls in love with her, he redeems himself and turns into a brave and hardworking young man and overall a better character[/spoil]. My sentiment is that if Flynn originally starts off as a despicable bandit, then there really should be an element in the story that redeems that quality so that he becomes much more tolerable not just through the eyes of the audience, but through Rapunzel’s eyes too. Having Flynn changing and giving up on his bandit and ‘always-on-the-run’ ways while redeeming and becoming much more committed and dedicated by falling in love with Rapunzel would be really affective and it would give such a good message to kids who are watching this movie. I’d like for something like this to happen, but I’m not going to hold my breath for it because Disney probably has something else planned for their love story that might be completely different from what I just rambled on about.
I have a feeling I’m still going to LOVE Flynn and Rapunzel’s relationship though. I can already smell an OTP vibe from them. lol!
I’m not like that… 
Quote edited for length - TDIT
I totally agree with whatever you just said, woody!
Me too! Huge saps, unite!
I thought that was Mr Lasseter’s quote. Guess he appropriated his idol’s words.
I like your idea of redemption, Danachii. Such a plot theme has been explored before in films like Road to El Dorado, Emperor’s New Groove, Pirates of the Caribbean… Basically, every anti-hero has to come out at the end different than he/she was at the start. As cool as it is to be a wicked-cool character with a bad attitude, being the ‘hero’ will always be the order of the day. But that doesn’t mean they can’t have fun along the way!
I know you’re not, Incredigirl. That’s why I said I was being overly stereotypical. I made a broad generalization to drive home the point on differences in cultures and attitudes of moviegoers in America and Japan.