my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » Film Handlers' Movie Reviews   » Tangled (2010)

Author Topic: Tangled (2010) Sam Graham AKA: "The Evil Sam Graham". Wackiness ensues. Posts: 1431 From: Waukee, IA Registered: Dec 2004 posted 11-27-2010 02:22 PM                        CINEMA: Megaplex 17 at Jordan Commons, Sandy, UT AUDITORIUM: 16 PRESENTATION: Dolby Digital Cinema DLP/Disney Digital 3-D PRESENTATION PROBLEMS: None RATING: Three stars (out of four) I'm in line behind a group of kids going to Harry Potter. As they go past Ticket Boy, they keep trying to grab 3-D glasses. He keeps telling them it's not in 3-D. They're startled by this. "It's NOT?" they keep saying. As do the parents. I give Ticket Boy my ticket, go into the auditorium, settle in, think about it, and go back to Ticket Boy because I didn't get MY 3-D glasses. He says "Wait...what movie are you seeing?" and gives me the glasses upon confirmation of my 3-D qualifications. I go back to 16, settle in, enjoy some popcorn, look at the glasses, then go back out to Ticket Boy to exchange the child glasses I got for adult size glasses. At this point, we're both having a good laugh. Yikes. The "Cars 2" trailer looks painfully bad. Like 'straight to video' bad. A Smurfs movie? Really? Gnomeo and Juliet? Really? Megaplex has a new 'no texting' policy trailer that involves a school class, a teacher, and a really big wooden paddle. Freaking awesome. THE PLOT: A princess lets down her hair. Wackiness ensues. I remember my junior high social studies teacher teaching a lesson about movie companies using marketing to polish a turd...using star power and misleading trailers to get people to go to bad movies. This is sort of that lesson in reverse. Disney, still pissed off about the poor performance of "The Princess and the Frog", put together a really good Rapunzel and renamed it and marketed it in a way they hope will fool little boys into wanting to see it. I don't think it's going to work. But this is the perfect little girl flick. Really beautiful and well put together.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 11-27-2010 02:57 PM                        Somebody actually watched this movie?  |  IP: Logged Geoff Jones Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 579 From: Broomfield, CO, USA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 12-04-2010 03:54 PM                        Saw this today at the AMC Westminster Promenade in Auditorium 14, which has a decent sized screen (~40-50' wide?), in 2D 35mm. Screen had some marks on it right in the middle, which were distracting. Another reason to wait for video, sadly. Heard some rumble from Harry Potter LieMax next door once or twice. Focus was a bit soft throughout, and I politely mentioned that to a manager on my way out, and he actually called upstairs to pass it along as I was walking away. Loved the film and hope to see it again. The characters were interesting and amusing (and entertainingly like-able or hate-able), the plot moved along nicely without any major head-smacking moments (for a fairy-tale musical anyway) and the visuals were lush and beautiful. My daughters (6 & 3) and wife all enjoyed it as well. 2010 scorecard Toy Story 3 - 5 stars Tangled - 4 stars Inception - Meh Everything else - didn't bother  |  IP: Logged Tom Petrov Five Guys Lover Posts: 1121 From: El Paso, TX Registered: Jan 2003 posted 12-08-2010 12:49 AM                    This movie has done a lot better than I thought. $100m is more than I expected.  |  IP: Logged Jonathan Goeldner Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1360 From: Washington, District of Columbia Registered: Jun 2008 posted 12-12-2010 10:59 PM                     I really really enjoyed this movie more than I thought I would, I saw, well 'heard' it twice once in 7.1 and the next in standard 5.1 sound, guess which was superior - well it ain't no surprise, the former had a much more aggressive omnipresent soundfield, the 5.1 paled in comparison. The 3D looked great and I liked the story and characters, much much better than last year's 'The Princess and the Frog' oh and I hated 'Cars' so the sequel trailer did absolutely nothing for me.  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 12-23-2010 09:08 PM                        quote: Tom Petrov This movie has done a lot better than I thought. $100m is more than I expected. ??? Even Princess & the Frog did over $100M, and it wasn't even in 3D. We're getting outstanding word-of-mouth on this and the attendance is actually building thru the week. Just what the doctor ordered. I haven't seen all of it yet but some of the 3D scenes I've seen have been a lot of fun. And, it's nice to hear a Disney movie with songs in it again. It's not always bad to do some things the old-fashioned way. We tried to book this in 3D and 2D, in order to give people a choice. I said we would run 3D at 7:00 and 2D at 9:00 -- figured it shouldn't be a problem since Dis would get all the rental anyway from both shows. But, no dice -- they have no problem giving both versions to a multiplex and giving people a choice across the hall, but our efforts to INCREASE BUSINESS and SATISFY MORE PEOPLE fell on deaf ears. I agree the Cars 2 trailer doesn't look so good.  |  IP: Logged Geoff Jones Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 579 From: Broomfield, CO, USA Registered: Feb 2006 posted 12-24-2010 09:21 AM                        I saw this again yesterday with my 3 year-old daughter and 66 year old-father (his first time). 2D 35mm, Westminster Promenade 24, auditorium 6. I liked it even more the 2nd time. The visuals are beautiful, the animation is really amazing, and the characters are given time to breath and grow. I'd see it again, except that auditorium 6 sucked. It had a tiny screen and was full so we had to sit off to the side. I might as well wait for blu ray. It's sad that Fockers (11% RT) and Yogi Bear (13% RT) are on larger screens. And Mike, that sucks about Di$ney not giving you a 2D choice. Little kids won't sit with dark glasses on for 2 hours, but I guess their tickets don't cost as much so who cares?  |  IP: Logged Stu Jamieson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 524 From: Buccan, Qld, Australia Registered: Jan 2008 posted 01-15-2011 07:24 PM                     It's hard to underestimate the value of the departure of Disney's divisive former CEO, Michael Eisner, in 2005 and Disney's acquisition of Pixar Animation Studios in 2006, the quality and success of animated feature films from the Mouse House have steadily improved since that point, from Meet The Robinsons and Bolt to The Princess and the Frog and now Tangled which stands shoulder to shoulder with the best animated feature films Disney has ever produced. A long time coming, the intention to produce a Rapunzel story has been kicking around Disney since the 1940s and was originally considered along side Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty. The problem with the Rapunzel story, however, is that it's about a girl sitting in a tower waiting to be rescued - not a story conducive to a riveting movie for kids. In this age of grrrl power, however, Rapunzel has been given a new lease on life, getting her out of her lofty prison and dealing with the hard realities of freedom and independence. It's a formula which works exceedingly well. It's fitting that a story that has been on the drawing board for so long was chosen as Disney's 50th animated motion picture and Pixar giant, John Lasseter, was chosen to executive produce this milestone release. Lasseter's control has ensured that Tangled has captured the beauty of classic Disney story-telling and cel animation incumbent with a series of great, well-formed characters to boot. The colours are rendered in beautiful soft pastels and the animation is exquisite - the fluidity of pixeline fabric and hair has never been better. It's a great credit to the story writers that the personal crisis which inevitably befalls our two heroes in the last reel refreshingly comes about because one of the pair does something noble rather than something stupid as is usually the case these days. All the characters are perfectly rounded by a combination of great performances and endearing animation, even the cutesy animal sidekicks are great. The depth of shots employed means the 3D technology is used very effectively without being at all gimmicky; it's one of the best 3D films yet. And importantly, the music doesn't grate. In the grand Pixar tradition, the film appeals to adults and kids alike, particularly to young aspiring princesses, and by the end of the film there's not a dry eye in the house (well, from the adults, anyway) such is the considerable emotional investment garnered by the unfolding story. A new pinnacle in the Disney cartoon canon, Tangled is a must-see. 9 out of 10.  |  IP: Logged Caleb Johnstone-Cowan Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 593 From: London, UK Registered: Mar 2006 posted 01-16-2011 08:42 PM                     I saw Tangled at a trade screening a while back and the film is fantastic. Disney have with this film and Princess and the Frog entered what will hopefully be another golden age. The Rapunzel story has had the 'Shrek' treatment here, with a go-getting heroine, quirky sidekicks and a less than golden hero. However the plot still retains a quintessential Disney magic to it, helped greatly by the musical numbers. Some of the 3D, in particular the lantern scene, really adds to the experience and was quite moving. As a colleague said, it was maybe one or two major songs away from being up there with the early 90s films. All said and done, Tangled was one of the best films I saw last year and definitely the biggest surprise.  |  IP: Logged Bill Enos Film God Posts: 2081 From: Richmond, Virginia, USA Registered: Apr 2000 posted 03-06-2011 04:32 PM                     How did this vile turd of a movie get a PG13 rating?? This is the most violent film of the last several years. If it depicted a male character slamming a female character dozens of times on the head with an iron frying pan thru out the movie the public outcry would have forced Disney to pull the movie. How can any person with normal sensibilities think this shit is entertainment? It just goes to prove that the Disney label apparently makes anything OK. Walt is undoubtedly rolling in his grave over this piece of crap.  |  IP: Logged Stu Jamieson Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 524 From: Buccan, Qld, Australia Registered: Jan 2008 posted 03-06-2011 05:44 PM                     ^Oh, bah humbug!  |  IP: Logged John Wilson Film God Posts: 5438 From: Sydney, Australia. Registered: Dec 1999 posted 03-06-2011 10:05 PM                     Bill, are we talking about the same movie?  |  IP: Logged Mike Blakesley Film God Posts: 12767 From: Forsyth, Montana Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-07-2011 12:09 AM                        quote: Bill Enos It just goes to prove that the Disney label apparently makes anything OK. Nah. Just go searching back through the archives here and you'll find plenty of Disney-labelled crap. This movie is a winner though. We ran it two weeks and could have gotten a third out of it, pretty unheard-of for a movie we didn't play on the break.  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.