Deviant Login Shop  Join deviantART for FREE Take the Tour
×



Details

Submitted on
July 6, 2010
Image Size
407 KB
Resolution
1600×997
Link
Thumb
Embed

Stats

Views
70,670 (12 today)
Favourites
2,443 (who?)
Comments
529
Downloads
1,054
×
Tangled - The Way It SHOULD Be by LPDisney Tangled - The Way It SHOULD Be by LPDisney
(Created 07.10)
To see the Process go to: [link]

------
Why oh why????

I've decided to try and capture the idea what if Disney’s “Tangled” (a horrible name I must say, what was wrong with Rapunzel??? *Edit - Yes, I know why it was changed, this was a rhetorical question) were to be animated in the good old Traditional 2D Animation.
I took what I could find - at the time I posted this drawing this was the only production still available online. I also didn't find anyone else who did this at the time, so I gave it a shot.
I tried (with little success) to capture the style of Glen Keane (specifically from The Little Mermaid, cause Rapunzel is soooo Ariel), though I don't think I'm even worthy of writing his name here, less I am to draw in his style.
I took the background from the original production still. I'm not a background artist. If anyone wants to draw a collab background for this, send me a note (but no offense - you need to be at a Disney level, this need to look like a real frame from the movie).
Yes, I used reference. This was done to prove a point (maybe I'm the only one who is annoyed by this...)


I must share with you my feelings toward this movie, and I apologize if I’m blowing some steam here, you really don’t have to agree with me, that’s just how I feel:
This could have been such an AMAZING 2D movie! Good old fairytale and directed by THE one and only - Glen Keane. Just think about it - an ENTIRE movie in the style of Glen Keane!
And the hair!!!!!! The longest hair ever made in a 2D movie!!! (For those of you who know me, I have a fetish for long hair) Just imagine how it could move!!!!!! Like Ariel? Like Pocahontas? AH!!!!

BUT NO!!!!!!!! They HAD to make it 3D! (Eyes narrowed with a lot of sarcasm) Yes, 3D is the next thing... right...
Bluah! All the Art is lost! The style of the lines is gone! It just looks like a regular, a drop in the sea, 3D movie....

I had to go and fix some stuff, like the position of the neck and the feet. WHY DO I NEED TO FIX IT?????? It's a freaking 3D! And Yes, I had to fix stuff, they were just WRONG! I have to say I hate her feet, from what I saw so far in the trailer something with her feet is just not right. And what's with all the pink??? She looks like they took Ariel and turned her into Barbie! (hmm.. I have one of those... or 4...). Even Kida had red lines in her all blue outfit!

Yes.... I'm still going to see it with those 3D glasses or whatever.... It's Disney's after all :-)


All in all I believe it turned out nice. I’m pleased.
I uploading quite a high res file for you to use as wallpaper and such. Do not use this in your art or something like that, unless you got an approval from me, k?
I'm guessing when there will be more details (and shots) from the movie I will do more fanart. At this point I need more details on the plot to get inspired.

Oh! And Flynn… I hope I got your nose right :-)

--------

*EDIT: OMG! Just look at the first ones: [link] I just now found them!! Why? T_T *sob* Why Disney? The drawings are so beautiful!

*EDIT 2: I truly respect each and everyone's opinion. I just wish to point out a couple of things:
1 - Before the movie was released all the comments were pro 2D and now, after the movie was released, suddenly everyone is pro 3D... Yes, I saw the movie, I still think if it were 2D it would be remembered 20 years from now, but sadly I'm sure this movie won't last for a couple of years.
2 - Please read this: [link] If my words aren't enough, then I guess you have to hear it from Glen Keane himself, and I quote: "the computer is like a used car salesman. It’ll always make you walk off the lot with something you don’t want".
So... ya...

--------
About 5-6 hours.
Disney Soundtracks
I LOVE PS CS5!!!!! Content Aware Rules!!!
HAAAAAAIIIIIIRRRRRR!!!!!! Daisuki! Love to draw it! Love to move it! Love to smell it! (yes, I'm weird)

Follow My Work:
Online Portfolio / Lady Ice Official Website / Facebook / LinedIn / YouTube Channel / Commission Info / Stock Images
Add a Comment:
 
:iconkirosu:
I agree 100%. What was wrong with Repunzel...its been heard of. What was wrong with the frog prince? Things in Disney's eyes always need to be changed. To us out here it is confusing. But when ever it comes to the truth, things need to change for it to keep our interest as viewers. If it was the same old same old it wouldn't be fun to watch or buy or pay 8.00-12 bucks for the theater.

Now for the picture! Your picture is the way I would have loved to have seen it, it looks beautiful. The colour palette you used was almost if not exactly the same as the Disney artist would have used. I really love the way you drew it. I would kill to draw the Disney style right! Great job!
What do you think?
The Artist thought this was FAIR
78 out of 98 deviants thought this was fair.

:iconflyingfreefantasy:
First off, I would like to add some of my own comments on this issue.

I bought Tangled on DVD a little while ago, and when I watched it, I was amazed. I watched it about 1000 times more, and I loved it. 3D isn't ALL that bad, though I agree, that Disney should stick to 2D. If Tangled was in 2D, it could have had many, many more amazing effects in place. Her hair, for example, could have been more flowing (like Ariel, or Pocahontas). As well as her dress, and other clothing in the movie.
But I will also point out that the 3D gave a more realistic look to Flynn's clothes (like his vest, where it ACTUALLY looked like leather). It also made things look more fun, and flowing. But that's my personal opinion.

About the picture? Well I think its amazing! Your art style is so old Disney, and what Disney needs again. The coloring, and shading style matches that of The Little Mermaid, or Mulan. And the way you drew her hair is... flowing. Just like Disney should be. But there is one little thing that bothers me about this picture. If perhaps you did the background in the 2D style as well, it would "paint a better picture" towards the message you were trying to get across. Leaving the 3D background just clashes, and makes it hard to judge which is better; the 2D or the 3D? (If you get what I'm saying... I really don't know how to explain it better).

Anyhow, great job on the whole thing, and thank you for getting your opinion out there! Very few people stand up for what they believe, even with movies, and art :)
What do you think?
The Artist thought this was FAIR
15 out of 17 deviants thought this was fair.

The Artist has requested Critique on this Artwork

Please sign up or login to post a critique.

:iconbarneyjones123:
barneyjones123 Featured By Owner Jun 19, 2014  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I wonder why you didn't do the same thing to frozen
Reply
:iconlpdisney:
LPDisney Featured By Owner Jun 19, 2014  Professional Filmographer
^_^ I actually wanted but could find the time, I had a super busy year...
Reply
:iconarainachan:
ArainaChan Featured By Owner May 19, 2014  Student Digital Artist
This is beautifully drawn and completely reflects how it would have looked in 2D,

Of course, I strongly disagree with you. And it seems like Im one the few people on here who does. There is still a massive amount of creativity and hard work that goes into 3D animation, and losing the "linework" should not be such a big deal - its not like they are getting rid of hand drawn elements; the entire movie is based off of hand drawn ideas, the 3D simply allows the company to do a lot more with different effects in the movie - the lantern scene for example. Plus the title helps them steer away from the age old "lets put the girls name as the title so we dont have to think about it very hard" notion. I guess what I think is that just because something doesnt follow tradition doesnt mean its bad. Besides, even if you prefer 2D style, the movie was still good overall, and thats whats more important right? And at least they had QUALITY 3D animation...I mean, the Disney team put so much hard work into the movie that it seems unfair to bash their decision just because they wished to try something new. I think 3D animation is a beautiful new way to enhance and expand the limitations of 2D art, but that's just my opinion.

Still, great work on this picture, its well done ^^ Seeing it in 2D would have been interesting.
Reply
:iconspeshemi:
speshemi Featured By Owner Sep 20, 2013  Student Traditional Artist
I think the name tangled gives it a sort of modern look??? But, yes it would have been nice if disney just stuck to the original titles! :) <3
Reply
:iconmisssparkle1:
MissSparkle1 Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2013
I enjoyed it but her over the top large eyes did bother me a bit. Made her look just a bit too young.
Reply
:iconsidetrack1:
sidetrack1 Featured By Owner Apr 21, 2013
Nice enough "what could've been" that I'll actually fave a Disney princess thing.Flynn is totally a few details away from Aladin.
Reply
:iconjonny-r-mac:
Jonny-R-Mac Featured By Owner Mar 6, 2013   Filmographer
I agree with your opinion because Disney has no reason to be using CG animation. It's a common misconception that people will tend to mistake the fact that CG animation isn't an upgrade to traditional 2D animation, it's an upgrade to traditional stop-motion animation; basically CG animation is stop-motion animation with computer generated puppetry. What is an upgrade to traditional 2D animation is Flash animation; which is computer generated 2D animation. Why Disney feels the need to adopt CG animation when Pixar (and other CO.) has it under control is beyond me.

I've argued many times that Disney has been in the "business" for a long time now and "money" has been the leading priority instead of the faithful "Disney" tradition the company stood for since the early 1940's. I mean Disney has bought out Pixar, Marvel, and Star Wars, and if that doesn't have CORRUPT written all over it, then I don't know what does.

Even though it's pointless to fight for what Tangled should have been it's still an on going battle for what Disney SHOULD be, which is strictly a 2D animation/Or with live action studio.

You did a wonder representation of what should have been. Kudos to you.
Reply
:icontooneguy:
ToonEGuy Featured By Owner Jun 25, 2013  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I actually find Flash to be a downgrade to traditional 2D animation myself. Those shows on TV today make me wish people had never given up painting on cels. :disbelief:

And yeah, I also really hate Disney's change to CGI, especially taking into account the redundancy of doing that and still using Pixar. It even feels like they're becoming another Pixar. That new spin-off movie Planes for example looks exactly like it was done by Pixar, except it's not because Disney did it. They had to put all that effort into doing what Pixar could have done themselves instead of doing anything of their own iconic 2D animation.

And I really hate Frozen as well. At least Tangled wasn't ever planned to be a hand-drawn film the way that Frozen was.
Reply
:iconjonny-r-mac:
Jonny-R-Mac Featured By Owner Jul 25, 2013   Filmographer
Haven't seen any footage for Frozen yet.

I try not to be too cynical towards modern day animation considering the best factor for animation today is the savings on resources with computers compared to traditional mediums.

Personally, I prefer traditional over computers because I can't stand to look at a computer screen for too long, but I do like that I don't have to waste pencils, ink, and paper when I make mistakes.

It's nice that there doesn't have to be a waste in materials and too much extra work now that the computer can input inbetweens, but there is no excuse for lack of originality. Anyone can hop onto a computer and play around with CG software, but not everyone is can make award winning memorable stories. It's not all bad because artists in all mediums are still required for CG films even though the sculptures, drawings, and story boards are just the backbone for the final rendered film. The use of drawn frames have died out, but not the drawings themselves are that are still used for after thought purposes.

I've enjoyed a few flash animations of today, but none of the Picasso looking cartoons, which I find sluggish and lazy, even though, Picasso is my favorite artist his style doesn't seem to suit children's cartoons too well, in my opinion. Shows like, Regular Show, Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends, Adventure Time, etc. are too unattractive for me to pay attention, and shows like The Ren & Stimpy Show, Rocko's Modern Life, etc. are too disgusting for my taste. For me I preferred, The Flintstones, The Jetsons, Scooby Doo, Where Are You!, etc. I admit the 60's cartoons did not flow well, but some how I was memorized by them. Also, some anime like Pokemon, and Fullmetal Alchemist were attractive in a sense. Though, Disney's hand drawn animations will always be number one for me.


My dream is to build a company in which we figure out how to get traditional animation to appeal to audiences everywhere again. I believe people have just forgotten after Walt Disney passed away, but all it takes is another to continue where he left off with enough motivation and energy to appeal to everyone again. It can happen. People think it's Flash animation and CG animation that evolved from traditional animation, but that can't be. Computer animation can't be the next step because that means the magic from artists hands went from pencil to keyboard, but pressing buttons doesn't make your artwork special. If anything computer animation is a step up from stop motion animation. Flash animation could be a step up from hand drawing in sense because we use pen tablets in place of pencil and paper. Though I'm not fully sure if computerized hand strokes are the same as pencil and paper hand strokes. You can't really tell where the artist made the strokes on the computer unless you were using Corel Painter.


Animation is constantly on my mind. I would love to do traditional animation but I'm affraid it will end up being more of a hobby. I would have to look to computer animation or digital puppeteering for work. Computers are great and all, but I'm not that much into using computers, which kind of kills my motivation and energy to want to continue my dream as a cartoon animator. I could suck it up and figure something out. 
Reply
:iconobsidianvelvet:
ObsidianVelvet Featured By Owner Feb 3, 2013
I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU!!!
Reply
Add a Comment: