MovieChat Forums > Tangled (2010) Discussion > The Villain is why this will never be a ...

The Villain is why this will never be a classic film

posted 8 years ago by carrot_handvo
6 replies | jump to latest

The evil king stole the magic plant from the peasant woman and greedily used all of it, wasting it.

I was rooting for her the entire time.

[–] CatelynTullyDidNothingWrong 8 years ago

no, it's just because it brings absolutely nothing new to the table, the animation is nice but nothing special, the soundtrack is uninspired pop, the "heroes" are bland and borrow everything from previous Disney Princes and Princesses (plus Dreamworks), etc.

I tried atheism but wasn't pious enough.

[–] Stratego (30761) 7 years ago

They did not steal the plant, Gothel did not own it or even take it home. It's very much possible that the land on which the plant grew belonged to the king.

The animation is good, even gorgeous at times. The music is catchy, the characters likeable and the story entertaining with enough touching and funny moments. If anything stops this movie from becoming a classic, it's the stupid title.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (14654) 6 years ago

I always thought Mother Gothel was pathetic as a villain in this film. She was a full-blown witch in the original story, and yet in this, all she's got for magic is a crappy, 3-day youth spell, and gets what she wants through lies, trickery, and emotional abuse. If we wanted that from a villain, we could always watch "Cinderella" again.

[–] Stratego (30761) 6 years ago

Who's "we"? I had no problem with it.

The "full-blown witch" from the original story used no magic at all. At least Gothel uses the one spell she knows, even though she's not a witch. The evil of both characters comes from their manipulation and abuse.

[–] AmeriGirl26 (14654) 6 years ago

By "we," I mean people who like better-written fairy-tales.

Apparently you never watched Fairytale Theater or Timeless Tales. The witch in those versions of Rapunzel truly was a full-blown witch. In Fairytale Theater, she could stun people with her magic, make doors disappear, obviously had found a way to magically become wealthy, magically transported Rapunzel to an oasis in the desert, and Rapunzel once mentioned riding "Pegasus," meaning the witch had access to supernatural creatures at times. In the Timeless Tales, the witch could do similar stuff, and turned the prince into a bird as punishment. I'd say that's WAY more magic than old Gothel could do, wouldn't you say?

[–] Stratego (30761) 6 years ago

"By "we," I mean people who like better-written fairy-tales."

Then you're dead wrong. I like "better-written fairy-tales" (like Andersen's The Snow Queen instead of crap like Frozen) and I have no problem with Gothel not being a witch.

"Apparently you never watched Fairytale Theater or Timeless Tales. The witch in those versions of Rapunzel truly was a full-blown witch."

I actually have seen Duvall's Faerie Tale Theatre and that's great and all, but it's not the case in the "original story". No magic at all, in fact, except Rapunzel's tears healing the prince's eyes. It isn't necessary for Gothel to use magic, because that's not what the fairytale is about. Although I don't see a problem with her being a full-blown witch either.