I'd also like to point out another reason why Eric has to be the one to save Ariel in the end: it's because Ariel already saved HIM in the BEGINNING, so he returns the favour in the battle with Ursula. They are a couple built of mutual love and respect; they are meant to save *each other.* (Eric steering the ship also makes sense because he was introduced on one. He's a sailor, so of course he's going to use what he knows to defeat the sea witch.)
@@artbytesiaThey were most likely inspired by the Broadway show which had Ariel kill Ursula by smashing Ursula’s conch shell to the ground: ruclips.net/video/8YCLuyllF4A/видео.htmlm40s
also it is what earns him Triton's respect. he learns that humans aren't all evil and this human saved his daughter and even him because he was an 'emaciated shrimp' (to quote an Olaf short about the original movie) in Ursula's garden.
Additionally, you forgot to mention that he has to save Ariel because king triton is supposed to witness this while everything is in peril and learn the lesson that humans aren’t evil because people like Eric, who proactively chose to save Arial and himself, exist. Without that detail, there’s no reason at all for triton to allow Arial to marry Eric. It’s unconvincing.
I've been saying it, Scuttle in the original was like the crazy-yet-harmless old vagabond living just out of town who loved to tell stories to anyone who was willing to hear them, and Ariel was probably the only one willing to actually hear said stories, simply because Scuttle was the only one who quote-unquote "knew" anything about humans and their stuff.
thank you! that is exactly how the character came off to me too as a kid and it made him appealing because he's clearly makin shit up but in a harmless way 😊
I hate the argument of "We didn't want her to leave the ocean for a BOY" because that's not even why she wanted to leave the ocean to begin with. She was ALREADY obsessed with humans and being on land. She met Prince Eric _AFTER_ singing about wanting to walk on land. Its such a no-brainer argument that shows they didn't really actually watch the original film that THEY'RE TRYING TO RECREATE.
I’ll never understand how people could think Ariel didn’t have agency or a personality in the original. Does nobody remember how excited she was driving the carriage in the original?!
The entire PLOT was driven by Ariel, moreso than with a typical protagonist because without Ariel being present the antagonist wouldn't have EVER gotten their scheme to work.
@@madokami03 Don't forget Ariel already wanted to go to the human world eg 'Out of the sea, wish I could be. Part of that world. it was only after seeing Eric that part of that world became 'part of your world'.
@@rebeccawhittington8979 Fr!! Ariel was just a nerd for human culture and wanted to explore land, meanwhile Eric was an equally adorably nerdy guy plot device to get her to go to land. Eric was just as entranced by the sea, not interested in princely duties on land. That’s what I love about this love story. They have their own interests and motivations outside each other
Or what about when she saved Flounder from a shark, killed Ursula's eels in the climax, and saved Eric from drowning and from Ursula's trident? Whatever, because Ariel had to be saved in the end, people claim it wasn't good enough so they continue to claim that "Ariel had no agency."
You know, I'm surprised Aldone went through this whole analysis, without mentioning Sherri Stoner, who I personally think was the actress who made Ariel much more possible. Seriously, look behind the scenes and you'll see how the animators worked very carefully to mimic Sherri's facial expressions into the animated movie. Compared to Halle's acting, it's clear Sherri put in way more effort.
The issue with Halle Bailey she have the smarthphone face, everytime when she smile it looks like she is posing for a photo that would end up on Instagram
@@paradoxzee6834 That's a great way of putting it. She has the exact same facial expression all throughout the movie, and that's not good when you're silent throughout half of it. Ariel's performance absolutely hinges on her ability to act with her face, and Halle Bailey just can't.
@@gabrielleduplessis7388no its not just bad direction. It's her she can't act she was not cut out for this role if anything she was just acting as herself
I also did not like the costume design for the film. Ariel wore the same dress throughout the entire film, it just got a color change at the end. Most Disney princesses have their glamorous ball gown moment, yet she was never given one. The sparkly dress Ariel wears at the end of the animated film would have looked so amazing on Halle. :/
The sparkly dress also symbolized how much her father cared for her. When Ursula turned her into a human, she had no clothes..showing how she just let Ariel fend for herself. But when Triton turned her into a human, she had a beautiful dress showing his love and care for his daughter.
I don't understand why the director of this movie (and many other people) thought that Eric in the original had no personality and that the romance was based on physical attraction. TLM is in fact a pretty emotionally complex movie. And I dare even say that Ariel and Eric are the healthiest Disney couple ever. Prince Eric is first introduced by the movie narrative as adventurous young man who despite his royal heritage is not above the “dirty work”: the audience is initially exposed to him helping other sailors on the ship as well as showing consideration and concern towards Grimsby in addition to being a good listener and quite an experienced storyteller informed about the subject he takes it upon himself to talk about hence the sailors discussing Triton and the sea with Eric while Grimsby sceptically brushes their theories off. Thoroughness, open mind and a down to earth attitude are established among Eric’s primary characteristics from the get go and not for the sake of forcibly and obnoxiously presenting him as a multi-dimensional morally/intellectually superior protagonist - in fact, he can hardly even be deemed as one seeing as the movie essentially revolves around Ariel and her struggles with inability to obtain independence and fulfill herself outside of a place she feels like she belongs whereas every other character, no matter how significant, plays a part of a supporting cast - but in order to showcase his interests thus, in so much as the first few minutes of the movie we already learn up on not only the hobbies Eric is intensely invested in but the extent of his love for the sea, conflicted relationship with his guardian figure (Grimsby) and are provided with a raw sketch of his mindset and the lens through which he observes the world. All of it could have easily been left out seeing as Eric’s individual emotional investments are not particularly related to Ariel’s story, but those aspects are outlined regardless because Eric isn’t merely a love interest of a fiery red head: he has a personality, a character of his own. Next time Eric comes off as “the guy with a flute”, it being the immediate impression he gives off once Ariel first sees him, confronted with not so much his mesmerizing attractiveness as the way his eyes lit up when he produced music for his own pleasure (poignantly, the same exact way Ariel preferred to go about her musical skills: away from the crowds or pretentious grand celebrations, using a melody for self expression. It’s hardly a coincidence that Melody ended up being a name of her and Eric’s daughter) or when he played with his dog or when he was clearly not impressed with the the statue of himself. Speaking of which, that is a good character moment because it shows that Eric is burdened by expectations and is seen as a powerful future king when in reality, he is a shy introvert. This allows Ariel to relate to him. Eric, however, was thankful for the attention and love coming from Grimsby regardless of how inexplicably insufficient and misinterpreted the latter’s perception of Eric generally was, which is rather unfortunate given that Grimsby played some sort of a father figure role to him while being entirely unable to get the grasp of how the young man’s mind functioned. Which brings us to another point: according to all the evidence Eric’s parents are most likely dead, considering they didn’t show up on either of his weddings - the fake one with Vanessa and the real one with Ariel - nor did they attend Melody's christening. Admittedly, being left in charge of no one other than Grimsby who hardly understood what Eric essentially was about, and having to prepare himself to be a future effective ruler of Tirulia. Eric is the epitome of a person who built one self up independently, firmly standing his ground confronting the standards imposed on him that he was unwilling to conform to - such as being forced into getting married before determining whether there was a right woman (“the one” as Eric referred to a person he hadn’t yet been lucky enough to meet and want to spend the rest of his life with, not settling for any less) among his suitors for the sake of fitting into a certain ideal of a proper prince. His attitude of a dreamer was a part of his established characterization but he was also exceptionally analytical about his concepts of romance. Having survived a horrific incident Eric sincerely believed he had found true love and his ideology of a dreamer took a strong grab at his outlooks on relationship seeing as he was set out to find a girl with the gorgeous voice at any cost due to said voice being quite literally the only connection to his rescuer. As some people mistakenly imply, Eric did not fall in love with a voice, in fact, at that point his feelings were all over the place and not exactly what stands for actual love, a mature fully formed feeling. Being drawn to the idea of a girl who saved him Eric - genuinely and irreversibly - projects his certitude regarding her being “the one” onto the only representation of her he had been left with so far - her voice. And subsequently his idealistic but slightly immature romantic notions backfire with a cunning irony once he meets a girl who has everything a man can dream of but lacks what he seeks out the most. A beautiful stranger doesn’t talk therefore cannot be “the one” nor would she ever - as he firmly believes - pass for “the one” hence why Ariel’s beauty is essentially irrelevant to Eric. His one and only goal concerning relationship at that point revolves around finding that person he believes to be one in the whole world who is right for him. Not only doesn’t he fall for Ariel’s looks but is entirely indifferent to said looks due to thinking that woman is not the one he needs (frankly, the assumption about Eric being easily smitten with visual appeal is extensively incorrect considering the fact that, due to his royal status, chances quite a few attractive female suitors were eager to have his hand only to be rejected because Eric at one point explicitly stated he wasn’t interested in superficial relationship and was waiting for the right person). Which doesn’t mean Eric is immune to primordial instincts and cannot appreciate physical attractiveness - he does, in fact, acknowledge Ariel’s captivating outer exterior once she dresses up for a dinner but it isn’t until she makes him laugh for the first time in few days by being her overly excited, imaginative and adorably dorky self that he starts taking a more insightful look into her and is willing to take her on a Kingdom tour - while still not being ready to open up to her or let the endearing mysterious girl into his life due to being committed to his unrealistic ideal. Next day Eric spends actual time with Ariel who proceeds to behave excessive and enthusiastic, never failing to amaze him. She is more invested in exploring various layers of the city life rather than paying a consistent attention to him (but… but Ariel totally “left her family behind to be with a man” and had no other agenda, right? Right?!), however, Eric is perfectly content with dedicating time and effort into making her feel happy and content, not being put off by her overflowing craziness in the slightest, but getting more and more intrigued by the unusual, eccentric nature of his accomplice - to the point of becoming largely conflicted hence the boat scene where Eric wants to get to know Ariel while still being unsure of his own feelings and pulling away when she tries to initiate a kiss - because yes, he still takes relationship incredibly seriously and is unwilling to allow himself so much as an innocent romantic interaction without being fully confident that this person is truly the one for him. He challenges himself and his initially established concepts of idealistic romance, gradually deviating from a strong commitment to an image of a girl with a sing song-ish voice he had created in his mind in favor of opening the door into the possibility of forming a bond with a real person regardless of this blooming relationship being enormously confusing, awkward and opposing to everything he had led himself to believe in before. He was GROWING out of exaggerations and teenage angst and exposing himself to a new perspective of building a mature relationship. The segment with him throwing a flute into the ocean is the ultimate representation of his character development. Eric’s love for Ariel was powerful in both dimensions: back when he was an avid dreamer with a controversial concept of romance who invested considerable amounts of emotional energy into the idea of “the one” and when he was no longer a happy go lucky kid indulging in his dreams but a man willing to fight for a person he loves both in a figurative (choosing the real Ariel over the romanticized ideal) and literal sense (once slipping out of the hypnosis Ursula had inflicted him with all of his thoughts and actions were inevitably and directly related to Ariel, to making her feel loved, to instantly accepting the immensely shocking fact of her being a mermaid and to throwing himself into the waves where he couldn’t even breathe at risk of getting killed in order to make sure she doesn’t remain subjected to her captor) - and in neither of those cases was Eric drawn to Ariel’s looks. Prince Eric is the kind of character to represent self awareness, intelligence, ability to respond to emotional challenges rather than cowardly running away from them and giving all of himself to his nearest and dearest and his story contains more than enough of an evidence to back it up. Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.
Like Eric did nothing in the original movie to warrant the butchering they did to him in this film. He was nothing but kind and generous to Ariel. He was a gentleman through and through and risked his own life to save his lady just like she saved him. And they COMPLETELY ruined him for nothing.
My only concern is I wish that we knew more about Eric's life; most of the film revolves around his hobbies and relationship with Ariel, so it would've been nice to have some backstory, especially since he's a young ruler.
It’s 4 am, my back freaking hurts and I still have one paragraph of this comment to read 😂 I don’t doubt the solidness of said paragraph, agree to everything 100% nice to see someone articulate what many of us feel so well. P.S. actually upon closer examination I still have 3 paragraphs to read. Jesus.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 They ruined Eric in the live action because of "Girl power feminism" They are like "Oh Eric will save Ariel which means she'll be a helpless woman and we can't have that because self-independent women exist and men are seedpouches and nothing more"
As an artist, if there is one thing I have learned is that the medium you use is important, and there are some things that just simply don’t work at all when adapted into other media.
Very true. Some live action movies would never work in animation, 3d sometimes couldn’t work in 2d, and 2d wouldn’t work in live action. Putting TLM into live action made it look soulless and lifeless. All of these remakes will never live up to the original colorful 2d animation.
They took out the "body language" verse in the movie because they said it was insulting. According to a friend of mine who's way more into the drag scene than I am, that line was a direct quote from Divine and very important among the community. This sort of thing is why their diversity talk is so insincere and is soundly rejected. Disney doesn't understand their own films, or the audience they are attempting to make films for.
@@DrawciaGleam02 Children understand the concept of body language though. They know how to read emotions and such. They don't have to know the full adult extent used, just the overall concept for the plot.
@@DrawciaGleam02 I promise as someone who grew up during the Disney Renaissance, I knew what body language was and the fact that there was a potential sexual connotation to it both flew over my head and did not matter anyway. That's one of those "adult jokes" you only catch once your brain is going through puberty and starts noticing that kind of stuff.
funnily enough, it's those supposed 'sexual jokes' what gave older Disney movies their edge. It shows the creators weren't afraid to add jokes that would fly over children's heads, but would get a good laugh out of parents. These live action remakes try so hard to sell themselves as 'mature' versions of the movies you loved, but end up being even more childish than their predecessor.
1:14:00 I feel like they didn't need to change ANY of the lyrics of "Kiss the Girl." They literally could've just had Eric say, "May I?" or something of that extent at the end of the song (before the eels interrupt). It would've had that consent. There really isn't much that they had to change.
And also Sebastian is like “if the time is right and if the time is tonight…” like…dude…WE HAVE A FUCKING DEADLINE. Stop acting like we have more time than three days.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Which is what makes the pro-consent stance hypocritical because while yes, it’s good to ask for consent and to not feel pressured to kiss someone when you’re not ready, it gets undermined by Sebastian still pushing the shy Eric to kiss Ariel and by Eric going straight for the kiss instead of asking for consent.
except if anyone should be concerned about consent in the original it was eric. not only does ariel make eyes at him but half the damn ecosystem in that scene of the original is harassing Eric to kiss this mute girl he is being a gentleman to. its so stupid! whoever thought the scene needed to be changed didn't watch it close enough 😑
@@personafanatic4597 exactly. The kiss was a trick, orchestrated by Ursula intentionally, because she knew it would be impossible. Ariel HAD to try to get him to kiss her, so Eric was the one being encouraged into it.
In fact, making Ariel’s disobedience more toned down/nonexistent in this film really doesn’t put Triton in the most flattering light. Instead of being an understandably concerned father who just doesn’t know how to communicate with his daughter, having what Ariel does not be that bad/completely harmless just makes Triton come off as an over reactive, callous asshole. When that’s not his character at all! And if this was really the writers’ attempt at making Ariel less “bratty”, it makes no damn sense if they kept trying to hammer home the message of her being more “empowered” in this version. It completely gets rid of her character flaws, and what made her interesting in the original. Because that’s how teenagers act! I don’t want ANY of her character flaws to be removed, actually. What they COULD have done was give her more of a character arc, because to be fair she didn’t really have one in the original. Neither did Belle from Beauty and the Beast, actually. They’re both still great characters, though. What was important about these two movies was that people AROUND them changed, not necessarily them themselves. But if they REALLY wanted to add something different, they could have had her actually clearly learning a lesson in this remake. But again, there’s nothing to set up for anything like that because she doesn’t do anything wrong in this film! Triton just over reacts about nothing. I swear, every single Disney princess remake just wants to turn every one of them into Mary Sue’s. Belle, Ariel, Jasmine, Mulan, and likely soon to be Snow White, too. I will defend the og princesses not being Mary Sue’s until the day I die, yet these people don’t even see their own irony in trying to “correct” everything!
Had the filmmakers of “The Little Mermaid” (1989) kept the deleted alternate ending, it would have given Ariel a much needed redemption arc, since Ariel’s apology in the deleted scene is a lot more sincere (only after she regains consciousness does she tearfully say to her father, *”Oh, Daddy. Daddy, I’m so sorry. I didn’t mean to hurt you...”):* ruclips.net/video/FF0_JKyPCwE/видео.htmlm29s . According to the film’s audio commentary track, the alternate ending was cut because then-Disney chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg had just seen the 1988 action film “Die Hard”, and he told “The Little Mermaid” directors John Musker and Ron Clements to make the ending *”more like ‘Die Hard’” (“Guys, guys, I want to see more ‘Die Hard’!”).* YES, REALLY! In other words, Katzenberg wanted to make the climax more epic, which explains why Ursula becomes gigantic in the final film. At least the 2008 Broadway version gave Ariel more agency in the climax in which she kills Ursula by breaking Ursula’s conch shell into the ground; plus Ariel’s apology to her father is a lot more genuine as she tells him *”I’ve caused you so much trouble. Can you ever forgive me?”:* ruclips.net/video/8YCLuyllF4A/видео.htmlm40s Also, in the live action remake, Ariel feels actual remorse when she says to Triton, *”I’m sorry, father. This is all my fault”,* in response to Ursula telling Triton that she and Ariel made a deal; and Ariel then goes on to kill Ursula: ruclips.net/video/FnarFCfVYno/видео.html
But also, by making a character like Scuttle, who is shown to eat fish, and Ariel treats it like nothing, despite Flounder acting scared, it makes Triton seem like he’s right for saying that going up to the surface is dangerous.
@@beethovensfidelioI do wish they would have been more clear with her remorse over her deal with Ursula. I never took her apology in '89 as a "I'm just apologizing because I'm in trouble" apology. Ursula has just been telling her how she manipulated her in order to get power and revenge against Triton. Ariel just helped release Eric from her mind control. She's had some frantic moments to realize how evil Ursula truly is. Then Triton shows up and takes her place to save her. She begs him not to do it. She is horrified at what has been done to her father in her place. This doesn't negate her part in it all. She isn't making excuses. She is desperately sorry and believes she is about to pay the price for her mistake until her father takes her place.
The scene in the original when Triton destroyed Ariel's collection honestly broke me. We could see how much Ariel loved the human world that it was devastating when she lost her collection. Her father destroyed something she loved with all her heart, and I felt absolutely terrible for her.
100%. I have many collections of many different things, but my absolute favorite and proudest one is my plushie / stuffed animal collection that I've been building up for years now (I have almost 40 different plushies.) If someone destroyed it all one day, especially when I have such a strong emotional attachment to some of them, I would be absolutely crushed. You can't replace the value of someone's collection of their favorite things. And even just hearing about someone else losing what's so important to them is heartbreaking.
In a way, King Triton was a bigger villain than Ursula. It was because of him that Ariel became desperate enough to see Ursula, even though she knew how dangerous the sea witch was.
One of the worst things about Scuttles introduction is that Flounder gets scared and Ariel laughs and chastizes him. "Its only Scuttle." Scuttle just dove from high above and swallowed one of Flounders cousins whole! What do you mean theres nothing to be scared of you fish stick brain!?! Removing Ariels trips to the surface completely diminishes her rebellious, curious, adventurous nature. She loves her father and doesn't want to disappoint him. Her hunger for knowledge makes her take that risk though. It makes her impulsive dangerous choice to take Ursulas deal later more believable.
I mean, Ariel's sneaking to the surface was why some people got mad at her character. I understand why they changed that because it's been a major criticism for YEARS!
But then during her stupid little inner monologue song she sings in her head after she gets to land, she has the nerve to sing the line "Are we only food for slaughter? Is this life on land?" Like b**ch what do you think? Your friend just ate one of your other friend's relatives or whatever right in front of both of you and you're asking yourself that question? It's eat or be eaten. And even humans, deep down we are still animals.
Yeah, it also makes the scene where Flounder accidently admits that him and Ariel were out exploring quite off. Also, notice how the remake cuts Flounder's line, "And then this seagull came, and it was 'this is this and that is that'...", as if the writers knew that by having Flounder say that, it would lead to Triton calling his daughter out for going up to the surface. Which considering what you've provided, would definitely make Triton seem right. Which just goes to show that the creators behind this remake took so much from the original, but also removed so much, therefore not seeming to understand, let alone care to why the changes/removals being done don't work.
Another stupid addition this movie made was that Ursula takes her nickname "the sea witch" as an insult (when she introduces herself to Ariel) but yet, they still kept the verse "They weren't kidding when they called me, well, a witch". Like, if they will actually change some of the lyrics of the songs, they could do it to fit with the changes and aditions they do to the original story.
Right? She sounded so offended. The og Ursula's tone implied that she's downplaying her horrible past and relishes in being evil, shaking her ass in the cave as she sings and it was just so much fun. Here? Ursula is so boring, so stiff, and the part where she takes Ariel's voice made me have flashbacks of tentacles in anime and it's just...not pleasant lmao.
One thing I read that pissed me off was about Triton being turned into that little poulop creature. They said that they just flat out killed him cause being turned into the poulop creature seemed like something that was an “animation deal” calling it “goofy”. It pissed me off cause it once again showed Disneys having a growing disrespect for animation. Especially since the eels killing Triton doesn’t make sense since they’re MORAY EELS: NOT electric eels, which are FRESH WATER FISH.
Also brings up the question of why couldn’t Ursula do this before? You know how much electricity it takes to reduce a body to ash? You know how far that electricity travels underwater? Flotsam and Jetsam are pretty much two atomic bombs under Ursula’s command…
@@battybuddy Couldn't they have turned him into compacted sea foam as a reference to the original tale? I mean if there was a way to make sea foam into a rock like how lava turns into magma rocks....
@@DrawciaGleam02 they probably could have, but that would have meant having some sort of idea what they were doing. Like I said it pissed me off that they’re dissing animation like they are and then doing this sort of thing instead without any clue why it was like that in the original.
I think the changes to the parent-child dynamic between Triton and Ariel might be the worst thing about this mess and I would not be showing this to my kids if I'd had any. It's Iike the people behind the remake only saw Triton as a loud, dangerous tyrant and not the scared, concerned single parent he is (and the prequel isn't perfect, but I did like getting some backstory about Ariel's mother). And that's part of a larger problem in Hollywood too, where masculinity is being neutered, but that's a big rabbit hole to go down.
And the more I think about it, the more I realize is that one reason why the original is so great is that it's a different movie at different ages. I saw it in the theater when I was 6 or 7 and I became obsessed with just the underwater aspect (I even got snorkeling equipment for Xmas that year. Yeah, I was one of those kids that wanted to be a marine biologist lol). Then as a teenager, I could relate to the need for independence and knowledge that Ariel had. And now I'm 40 and have a lot more sympathy for Triton and Sebastian. Heaven help anyone raising a teenager lol
Especially when the heart of the original movie is the relationship between Ariel and Triton. Triton was overprotective and had a temper but it was because he cared and didn’t know how to healthily express it. But every time he did lose his temper, he regretted it immediately. There was a genuine love between the two of them despite their differences that explored Triton in a more complex way. Especially when he’s forced to confront the fact that he was wrong about humans when he learns that one of them risked his life to save his child. None of that translates over to having Triton be nothing more than a boring and stale man with grief problems when that was NEVER who he was in the original movie. And I am a huge fan of Javier’s work but this is probably his weakest role.
Just want to add that Halle is a great singer and no one will deny that, but I cannot agree that she is a great or even a decent actress. Besides the fact that Halle's Ariel seems too dull compared to Jody's Ariel, Halle for sure is acting as herself if she was a mermaid rather than embodying Ariel.
Her acting experience is pretty much only from being in the show, Grownish. Her IMBD is mostly music videos and then sprinkled with a few tv cameos where she plays herself.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 besides the fact that objectively her acting is mediocre at best, the direction for the acting in general was truly idiotic so yeah....eff rob
Ariel is a role where good acting should be PRIMORDIAL because she spends over half of the movie unable to talk and expressing herself only through 💫 bOdY lAnGuAgE ~ 🎉 and facial expressions.... And they gave the role to a good singer who can't act. Why.
@@msk-qp6fn Oh I'm not denying that. I'm just saying that like what happened to Hayden Christensen in Star Wars, when you're given a bad script and aren't directed in a way that's effective, it leads to a performance that is bad.
Love that footage of Jodi being coached through the song so thoroughly. She is such a fabulous performer and gave Ariel such a fabulous blend of cute, funny, adventurous, passionate and naive.
Completely agree. This movie would have been subpar without any of these wonderful performers, animators, directors, writers.... etc. Howard Ashman played a pivotal role in not just TLM but in the Disney Renaissance. We wouldn't have any of the magic without him. Sometimes magic happens and just the right people are brought together. These new pretenders don't have their talent or thoughtfulness in their little fingers.
@@B3zpristrasten1 original voice actors make appearances in Live Action remakes, and a lot of other movies. I just watched Wolf of Wall Street, and Jordan Belfort made an appearance. They do it a lot in movies, not a shocker.
@@awildpokemonuwujust because it’s known happen doesn’t mean it’s a LAW. It doesn’t need to happen. I know Diseny paid Jodi tons of cash just to show up in a 3 second scene
Disney could have made the royal family more diverse by using the adoption reason. They could have also had one of those adopted sister be Ariel's bestie too. Heck make that sister based on Gabriella the deaf mermaid from the little mermaid tv series!!
@@zoeb3573spoiler alert, the actress playing her doesn't give a hang about snow white and is misunderstood about anything that story way about. Not to mention Dinklage throwing a hissy fit so now he is the only little person who playing a "magical creature" as they've been redubbed.
I saw a post that read "I will never shut up about how perfect Halle Bailey is for the role of Ariel." To that I say 'fine, Ellen DeGeneres was perfect for the voice of Dory. Or if we're talking about black actors and actresses, the late Chadwick Boseman was perfect for the role of T'Challa. Anika Noni Rose was perfect for the role of Tiana. Shameik Moore was perfect for the role of Miles Morales and don't even get me started on Daniel Kaluuya as Spider Punk. I'd like to see Halle Bailey in a genuine role where she doesn't require constant validation because however much she may have been paid, this clearly isn't it.' It's like Disney is trying to survive off of nostalgia and controversy rather than good storytelling.
Bailey can sing, no doubt. (Even if I dont personally love her interpretations of the songs) But boy oh boy her acting isn't up to par yet. Jodi, was a theatre performer. They absolutely could have found a Broadway actress for the role who would have been able to handle the full role.
@@stackels97 yeah I agree. I find it rather annoying how people try to push the narrative that Halle Bailey was the absolute best for the role and they couldn't have found anyone better. Bailey was neither the worst nor best person for the role.
@@tjsmith5276 You wanna see Halle in a genuine role where she doesn't need her hand held? Watch Grown-ish. Grown-ish is what put her and her sister, Chloe on the MAP. In the show, Jazz (Chloe) and Sky (Halle) are twin sisters who are both dedicated track runners. Sky is a very sarcastic, blunt, tell-it-like-is-no-matter-how-much-it-hurts kind of girl and Halle captures that perfectly. Jazz is the same way but slightly nicer than Sky, Jazz always tries to act tough but ultimately she has a big heart and is a deep, emotional person when she lets her guard down. Sky is the kind of role Halle is meant for. She and Chloe are both very outspoken, confident women who are good for playing characters that are SASSY. Ariel is not sassy. You can tell Halle is trying her best to capture the innocence and child-like energy of Ariel but it's not working and a lot of times she's doing too much. She always has this doe-y eyed baby face and isn't very expressive. She just comes across as a 3 year old girl not a 16 year old girl.
@@truthseeker9249 Yeah, as another RUclipsr named Shady Doorags put it. We don't see Ariel, we see Halle Bailey in a costume playing Ariel. With Grown-ish (which I will make a point to see) since we have no previous iterations of the character she plays on there, we see the character and we buy into it.
@@tjsmith5276 Exactly. She just eats that character up. I even saw a short video on RUclips not too long ago that had me laughing. It was a little black girl with her family, I'm assuming the woman holding the camera is her mom. Anyway they're all having her watch the trailer for 2023 Little Mermaid and she literally said THAT'S NOT ARIEL, ARIEL IS WHITE. She said some other things too but that's the main thing she kept saying. Her mom was very surprised to hear her say that. Black children are the target audience for this dumpster fire, and even that little girl was smart enough to see right through Disney's tricks.
Lol I love when people say Asian markets are racist but the spider man across the spider verse comes out and makes MILLIONS of dollars in the same markets lol
And? Does a person stop being racist because they watch a film with a person of another ethnicity? So if one from a person of another ethnicity is successful does it mean that racism no longer exists in a specific society?
Disney really doesn't like doing any research, or quality checking especially when you have Ariel saying "the ship rode on the wind and filled the sky with fire" when she says in the song (part of your world) "What is a fire and how does it, whats the word buuuuuuurn". She doesn't know what fire is so her saying "lit the sky with fire" wouldn't make sense cause she doesn't know what a fire is. A better thing for her to say is "the ship rode on the wind and made the sky sparkle" which would also be a better description to convince sebastian with.
Seriously, Avatar 2, for being overrated as it is, had better underwater sequences than this. Also, did nobody ever try to take notes from other films featuring mermaids? Heck, Splash came out in 1984, yet had WAY better underwater scenes than this remake. And that's saying something, especially when The Little Mermaid (1989) came out five years later....
I've just watched a Russian fantasy movie from 2017 or so. It has a CGI dragon in it. And it actually looks really good. Much better than the CGI in this Multi Million Dollar Disney production.
The location and racebending could've given way for an original interpretation with a new story (and new songs) with larger roles given to Ariel's sisters, rather than trying to be 50% different, 50% shot-for-shot remake.
For real, give more importance to the sisters, heck makes some of them adoptive sisters, make one of them be gabriella the deaf mermaid from the tv little mermaid series based on a real dead girl who loved ariel so much
@@msk-qp6fn I wondered why they didn't include Gabriela since they qwre going for diversity. Plus Ariel's sisters' designs were much more interesting than hers, which I think was a poor choice because it drives home the misconception that Ariel felt like she didn't belong or had body dysmorphia. While I despise the remake, I like the idea that all of the sisters are related but they all look different because of magic (I forgot the exact explanation). It's a nice thing because it could tell people even if you don't look the same, you're still family. I'd have loved it if for an original film, the mermaid (who wouldn't be called Ariel since this is an original story) would have a longer amount of time on land to further emphasis her journey of self-discovery and identity.
Imagine if a some of the sisters knew about Ariel's secret grotto, love for humans, and supported her? What if Flounder accidentally blabbed to them about her deal with Ursula after Ariels transformation and tried to cover for her and help her out with a magic shell for communication they gave Scuttle to give to Ariel and Sebastian talks to but them but the sisters still understand Ariel without a voice because of their close bond as sisters. They totally had the chance to give the sisters a more proactive role. Instead, they just added new songs that add nothing to the story. During the battle, they could've changed it to where the sisters helped Eric save Ariel instead by working together to steer that ship into Ursula, they are daughters of King Triton they could have special powers at controlling the sea as well and Triton could see mermaids and humans can work together while also seeing humans weren't that bad after all as well if they kept the poor unfortunate soul transformation like in the original
@@lunabunnii I like the idea! Though I'd prefer if Sebastian told them rather than Flounder since it'd make Flounder look bad and Sebastian does it right aftee the destruction of the grotto because he wanted someone to know but didn't want to betray Ariel by telling Triton. I'd prefer if they try to follow Ariel on land like Flounder and Sebastian do rather than only having communication with them. But giving them a larger role when fighting Ursula would be satisfying. My only fear is that with 6 of them, they wouldn't really have enough time to be distinctive (personality-wise) without taking up screentime. A big issue I had with Encanto was that it focused on 12 family members and Isabela, Luisa, and Dolores weren't included enough for their arcs to feel satisfying to me (I think they each only had like 10 minutes in the film), and Antonio mostly disappeared after getting his gift, despite the writers saying he was like a brother to Mirabel and stuck by her. The mermaid's sisters wouldn't get enough time to be their own characters versus aides to the little mermaid--plus Gabriela wouldn't have any time to exist in this one, either.
If they were going to swap Ariel they should have swapped Triton too. The price is adopted? Why? Make him black too. You moved it to the Caribbean already, but they can't commit. Must be multicultural, and yet no culture.
It's sad, because the original film qualifies for a remake: it came out a century ago rather than 3 decades ago, and Snow White, the queen, and the prince don't get as much attention as the dwarves (who Disney focused on for the humor), so they could've done the 2015 Cinderella treatment by fleshing them all out more. Instead we get a cast that defies the original story (and fairy tale) and a star who doesn't find much to like about the film. It felt like she only jumped on board to make a statement rather than wanting to expand on an enjoyable story.
@@OpticalSorcererI so agree. Snow White deserves that treatment for the remake, it’s the og Disney Princess movie/first full feature animated film everrrr too. It’s so sad how it doesn’t appear to be getting that Cinderella treatment 😢 but I hope I’m wrong
I was in acting all through high school and the main thing my teacher told us was to EXAGGERATE our emotions. Because even though we may feel that we’re showing a lot of emotions, the people watching may not see those emotions. Subtly is a beautiful thing but these actors clearly can’t do it. I’m sick of these guys just staring blankly with no emotions and then call it acting. You’re not acting, you’re just there. They don’t deserve to get paid as much as they do for not even doing their dang jobs.
My initial thought about the lines "filled the sky with fire!" that she delivered was: "Didn't you JUST sing a song where you didn't know what was fire and why did it burn?"
Watch older movies. Not every one is a classic, but there are a ton of great movies that utilize literally EVERYTHING they have. Animation being so expensive, Disney once upon a time, understood that. So, any cartoon has to be paced well and gotten right the first time. Whenever you see what landed on the cutting room floor for a cartoon is often just in storyboard format, rarely is it ever truly animated and typically contains scratch voices vs. the final cast. As others more eloquent than myself have said, that holds very true for The Little Mermaid. Our introduction to Ariel tells us everything we need to know about her including her obsession with the surface world. Our introduction to Eric tells us loads about his demeanor and relationships, hobbies and kindness. Our introduction to Triton simultaneously tells us how much he cares about his daughters (particularly his youngest) and his hopes for her. Our introduction to Ursula, the Sea Witch, shows us at a glance, that she is clever and dangerous and *not to be trusted* In addition to the pacing of each scene and musical number, the coloring plays a tremendous part. The greens and purples surrounding Ursula and her ashy looking skin all signify poison and danger. The scene where Triton destroys Ariels' grotto is lit with reds and yellows showing his anger. Under the Sea is vibrant and lively, even with its blue tones, trying to convey his attempt to get Ariel to see how fantastic the world of the Ocean is, and ending on a very bland and dull frame when he realizes he failed. That's why the muted backgrounds and dull color choices don't work, they make everything monochromatic and "dead" compared to the original. It always would have been compared to the original, unless Disney had to adapt the story differently, to maybe tell the story more like they feel would be closer to the original book perhaps? They could have pitched it as a more "grown up" little mermaid, especially since so many of its viewers have grown up with the original. I saw another animated Little Mermaid from a Japanese studio once and the Sea Witch was part manta ray, and her companions were a dolphin and some other fish I forget. It was also closer to the Hans Christian Anderson one, with Merina (the Little Mermaid) unable to kill her love and so becoming sea foam. While Disney didn't have to go that dark and can still have a happy ending, what if it got to that point before the Sea witch was discovered? That she was so close to winning that the only out would endanger her love? Heck, the original Vanessa wasn't even a sea witch but an ordinary girl who happened to come across the prince while he was recovering on the beach. Ariel could try to get her to confess that she wasn't the one who saved him. So many possibilities... squandered.
Also, the color pallets for the original could have been recreated in live action! Like, sure they went for the realistic angle, but even movies with realistic settings can have strong lighting to set the mood, they had the opportunity to emulate that and they just didn’t!
Probably my biggest issue with this film was it was unnecessary. Not to mention Disney already did a Caribbean love story between the sea being and land dweller. That was Tia Dalma and Davey Jones in The Pirates of the Caribbean series. Had they actually decided to do a full film focused on those character, how they met, and how their love grew I would have been down. Instead they went the cheap route of chasing down a story already done and done better.
And they don’t even celebrate the Carribean. If you wanted to do a completely different Little Mermaid with different characters who aren’t those from the original movie set in the Caribbean, I don’t think people would be so mad. But no. We have to stick a culture we don’t celebrate unto a movie clearly set in another part of the world in 1989’s movie.
I love that you point out that live actions keep trying to be realistic. The only live action that I have seen that has that balance of realism and fantasy is Cinderella.
Halle is an amazing singer but her acting is just not it. The worst parts were when she lost her voice and she barely had any different face expressions.
32:28 I think people who don't understand the functionality of music in musicals tend to butcher movie musicals. (Looking at you, Tom Hooper.) The basic adage of musicals is this: whenever the emotions get too much, you sing. Whenever the emotions get too big for singing? You dance. These songs in the live-action movies don't feel justified because there is no build up of that emotion. It is a performance, not an extension of character and emotion. The performance, the song is stripped of what makes it magical; the declaration of desire. "Part of Your World" is an I Want song. Which is oftentimes the most recognized song in a Disney movie. "I Just Can't Wait to Be King," "How Far I'll Go," "Almost There," and "Reflection" being some. The changes in how the animated and live-action/animated hybrid change the tone of song itself, but also the character itself. In this version, Ariel seems to be confident, uncaring about what her father just said. She is putting on a performance. But the animated Ariel is hopeful, but scared. She wants something so bad, but she knows in doing so, her father may put her in massive trouble over it. Unlike the live-action movie, the animated version of the song is an extension of character. The way the animated version is sung, there is character in the singing. For the live action movies, Disney wants everything to be and sound perfect. Meaning that these hints of character are stripped. You don't get those bits of decision that you get when you are singing as a character. They stripped the character from the song and she just performed it. It's as if Disney is like, afraid to have their live action characters show any bit of emotion or character in their songs. Especially their I Want songs.
I hate that they turned Part of your world into a power ballad. Yes Halle nails the song in terms of vocals and sounding great. But I feel like the directors missed the point about what the song is supposed to be.
I haven’t seen many people bring this up on how Halle changes the song to be more of a performance rather than a part of the story. It took so much away from the movie. I really hated it and I’m nervous for the color of purple.
They made changes to "Poor Unfortunate Souls" too. Melissa's voice got so dramatic so quickly without proper buildup, which heavily impacted my rating of the movie.
It wasn't the Cinderella remake that started this awful trend. It was Burton's Alice movie.The Cinderella movie was actually the best live-action remake they've made as it never strayed too far from the original, made wise changes that were excellent, did not insert toxic identity politics and it had the best characterization and writing. It was an exception to their rule.
@@orboakin8074 I completely agree that it was the best remake and honestly I completely forgot about Alice in Wonderland 😅. I know it’s wishful thinking but I really hope that Snow White will be so horribly received that it will cause Disney to open their eyes, cancel all remakes and focus on making original stories again.
@@nala1190 Amen to that, friend. Given how the lead actress has been behaving, and the crew behind it, I have no doubt it will be awful. I still can't understand why disney is letting her insult the Magnum opus of their founder and insult their viewers. Maybe me being Nigerian makes me not understand their strange business reasons.
@@orboakin8074 they also managed to give the main couple chemistry, make the stepmother interesting in a different way from the original, and, most importantly, it FELT like a fairytale, which is something that NONE of the other remakes accomplished (while I still like the original more I'd say the remake feels MORE like a fairytale, actually). Also it has COLORS in it. THE REST OF THE REMAKES COULD NEVER
@@orboakin8074 Disney seems to believe it too because they are the ones making these changes to ‘fix’ the originals. But there is no pattern to their behaviour like what was wrong with the Lion King and Mulan in terms of the ‘modern age’ that warranted (awful) remakes? Pocahontas wasn’t very well received during it’s time for quite a few reasons, why not remake it with actual improvements?
Insignificant things that deeply bothered me for no reason: Introducing scuttle by having her eat a fish (why tf would you do that?? Isnt that the whole reason they hate humans?) And Sebastian pulling Ariel by the tail. (How tf does he do this it looks so stupid) Ariel scaring the shit out of the pufferfish to make it puff up like that Melissa Mcarthys 'Ursula voice' Ariels inner monologue singing after she lost her voice Flounder not helping Ariel get to the wedding (justice for my boy flounder ) The wedding not being a wedding and not being on a boat Ariel not being able to comb her hair with a fork because she got locks on Rip Les Poissons and the caked up chef Max and the eels no longer being characters
I fully believe these are being made poorly on purpose now. The first batch you could tell they were at least trying, but starting with The Lion King and Aladdin, the laziness and bare-minimum faith to the source films really started showing through. At this point they've stopped caring because hate-watching is the new thing. They'll get the money whether it's good or bad.
Except Aladdin is actually a great film it remained faithfull to source material but was also able to create it's own story. In fact one of the best live actions they made. My only complaint was the miscasting of Jafar.
I remember as a kid I liked Prince Eric the most out of all the Disney Prince's at that time. I thought he was handsome, heroic, and he had Max, but thinking back with an adult lens now, it was probably because he was SO nice to Ariel. They truly did him dirty in the remake.
When Ariel and Eric looked so racially different to their parents, I initially assumed there was going to be some neat twist that both were originally of the other’s species, bringing a new element to the old notion of changelings, or potentially sacrificed/swapped children between Royal or noble families for sake of peace. But no.
Perfectly said. I hate how people are using race as a shield now instead of defending their work they get mad at people for not falling for the lazy race swaps. Characters like Miles Morales and T'challa are original characters and have stories that relate with people and those characters are beloved by many the reason people dont like race swaps is because people have realized it's not representation they are not changing the story or characters at all to relate to people they just slap a different race on a character and call it a day and call you racist if you dont clap for them. We need more characters like Miles and T'challa we need more movies like the Wish movie coming out. Give new characters a chance some will fail no question that's life not everything will work but the fact these characters have been successful and the race swap characters have flopped tells you all you need to know.
I was watching a reaction to the this live action movie, the reactors liked some things and disliked others about the film but the problem was the comment section. I litterally saw someone say it was better than the animated version and a ton who said all the changes made sense. Seriously how could they say that when none of them ever responded to me with an explanation why making Ariel forget the deal makes any sense, instead they just said I was nitpicking and that I needed mental help for analyzing a "kid's" movie. I try to judge things by what they are, Cocaine Bear knew it was dumb and had fun with it and didn't need a stellar script, sure it had too many characters I think but it was fun. This Little Mermaid is a cash grab capitalizing on nostalgia and heavily relying on the animated original, of course I'm going to compare them and judge it accordingly. If they had done the original fairytale or just a different mermaid story all together it could've had better sales, less comparisons you know (though the production itself isn't great, kind of lackluster honestly, especially for a fantasy movie).
I just assume the people that say those sorts of idiotic things have smooth 🧠 like Koala bear. They are missing the "thinky thinky" parts. There's a certain amount of leeway to be given for someone having different taste but anyone that honestly watches both and has any depth of thought or emotion and the ability to logically follow a story can't say this weak photocopy they crapped all over then covered in sparkles and outrage is better... or even close.
And these movies were made for families by adults who weren't pandering to 5 yr olds. They were telling a universal story that can be appreciated by people at any age.
Slight chance it's out of pressure to not be seen as a racist Halle may be a good singer but acting? She needs a better teacher. Point is, I think those who say they liked it actually loved the "idea" of it instead of what it actually was
All it has going for was Eric being more developed and the romance being more genuine and believable. But, that's it. Other than that it's still not good. The CGI is not good, the bloated pacing drags, the new songs are unnecessary, and the changes they made to the story either hurt the narrative, create plot holes, miss the point of the story in the 1989 original, fail to connect with the main plot, or were just unnecessary.
My biggest gripe with the remakes is the shallow representation and the lack of creativity put in each film. Each one is so dark and monotone in color to be 'realistic' when the story they are telling is one of magic and music, things we often depict as colorful and/or vibrant. I instantly knew seeing the scenes that were meant to be colorful in such underwhelming colors it wasn't worth watching even if the music was great. What became even more outrageous was people defending the movie tooth and nail because it starred a black actress. Then pretending her being black had nothing to do with her being cast when it so obviously did with how the marketing was portraying it, Which no shade towards her, shes defiantly beautiful and talented . Im honestly interested in her role in 'the color purple' film. But disney did not do her justice by casting her in this film, it would of made more sense to call her back for the princess and the frog remake that their going to do at some point which, It is my favorite film of the princess movies aside from TLM. Which is why I was disappointed in this film for doing something that was so unnecessary and obviously for shielding critique. It was also disgusting how people attacked anyone on twitter for simply drawing the original Ariel during a particular scene, in place of Halle. Yeah that drama, Almost like people grew up with red head ariel and will continue to view ariel as white with red hair. It's literally how they market her as, so Im not sure what the point of the race swap even was supposed to accomplish when they continue to largely promote her as her classic design and probably will for the rest of the studios existence besides the disney jr spin off show I guess? It's just lazy at this point.
She's a terrible actress should have stuck to music industry because singing-acting is a talent she definetly lacks! And Halle is also to blame for accepting the role knowing it was not meant for her. Btw Color Purple was just another flop
It annoys me because now all these girls are going to assume that they are the ones who have to save men all the time, they have to be the one in the relationship who fixes everything. There needs to be a mixture that makes sense for each story and set of characters. I saw a comment that spoke on how the ending made Ariel and Eric on the same level, as they have saved each other at different points. Not to mention how Eric is the one who has skills in sailing!
While I don't think they would find fire dangerous (being underwater, they don't likely have much fear of fire compared to other dangers), I do find it a little odd that she doesn't have to remember what the word 'fire' means anymore. Suddenly it's written like talking about fire is a normal part of her lexicon when it's not. Because she's underwater. She should have called it 'lights' or something. Her understanding of fire should be limited or like a fascination with something foreign, not like she talks about it every day.
Personally I think one of the reasons why the Disney Renaissance flourished was because it took traditional ideas and modern ideas and put them together in a way that works. The new artists and writers worked with old ones from Walt Disney’s time and together they compromised, because both have something beautiful and meaningful to offer. But nowadays, these movies only care about incorporating what’s modern and throwing away anything traditional. Because apparently anything from the past is bad. But it’s not. Yes some views are outdated but not all of them. Not things like romance, and fairy tales, and chivalry and expressive animation, and bright color and dark shadows and warmth. These elements were used to help bring new modern ideas, views, and culture into light and it worked. To me, without some elements of tradition, a Disney movie can’t work. I’m sorry.
This is so in-depth and I really appreciate it. Thank you for making this. When people ask me why I don't like this remake I don't really have the time to really communicate the reasons, and I've never found a good enough critique online to point them to. So I'm glad this exists so I point people toward this video.
Hell no Aladdin and The Little Mermaid broadway shows were disappointing to me. First off it was the downplaying of villains as well as the climax and how they got defeated was super rushed and lame; instead of Ursula disguised as Vanessa we get this silly princess contest; Jafar never wishes to become powerful sorceror; they basically replaced Abu with this trio that served no purpose to the story other than comic relief
I don't have much criticisms for this movie because my satisfaction bar is pretty low. That said, I like the old Little Mermaid because it's a film of a fairytale, where I can feel Ariel's curiousity and her desire of wanting to go to the human world, a world beyond her reach yet so close. I can relate to her fascination of the human world, as I also have a fascination with the supernatural world just like her. So, yeah. Relatable protagonist. But this movie's Ariel is just so...bland and passionless. The plot happens because that's what happens in the animated film. Ariel is just...lifeless in this, idk. So yeah, that's bad. Also, this movie is filled with so much pointless social drama online that it just turned me off from ever watching it, and Disney's insulting use of Halle Bailey's race to shield themselves from legit criticisms of the movie is...scum. So yeah, I've sworn off Disney. I'll just pirate their movies in the future if I'm feeling masochistic. Oh, and lastly, I don't like Melissa's performance in "Poor Unfortunate Souls". It sounds like she's trying WAAYY too hard to sound like Ursula. I mean, I know actors are meant to try hard to BE the characters they're playing as so I'll praise her for the effort. But the og song starts off very chill and relaxing with Ursula just being a little bit creepy before going full on crazy and intense near the end of the song to pressure Ariel into signing the scroll. In this movie, it starts off so dramatic so early that it just takes out my emotional investment to the song. So, yeah. Not a big fan of this movie.
These soulless remakes were already bland, but most of them don't even respect nor understand why the originals will be better in comparison. This one is especially awful because they've used race tactics in order to shield tangible issues with the film. The characters were written sloppily and the climax only solidifies how much its willing to sabotage the originals imo.
Awkwafina is an absolute acting deficit. It boggles.... BOGGLES my mind that she keeps getting work. Her work in this was absolute half-assed dribble. The film in whole was an overlong, unengaging, tonally scattered mess. I found maybe 2-3 authentic moments in the whole thing. These live action revisionist films are gonna be looked back on as some of Disney's biggest blunders.
She’s actually had good performances before in The Bad Guys, The Angry Birds Movie 2, Crazy Rich Asians and The Farewell where she even won the Golden Globe for Best Actress- Musical & Comedy. It’s time you stop treating her like she’s the female equivalent of James Corden. She doesn’t need that same infamous reputation.
@@hunterolaughlin I'm allowed to have my opinion about her lack of talent and her personality acting. Whatever she did in Crazy Rich Asians she does NOT bring to her other work. She's lazy, she's predictable, and she shouldn't be taking up voiceover jobs when there are hundreds of other talented people in the field.
@hunterolaughlin Oh no... what ever will I do?? Dude, grow up. Seriously. Better get used to the idea that people aren't going to agree with your views.
My least favorite part of the movie is when Ariel sings Part of Your World. It is more depressing than passionate. You can hear that the tone is flat, with no emotion whatsoever and she is talking instead of singing.
It would be unfair for them to use calypso music/steel drums and not set it in the Caribbean. Also Sebastian's accent was a mix of Jamaican and Trini, which is what Daveed was trying to portray. So comparing it to solely a Jamaican accent, yes it would sound strange. But they tried to put trini elements in the accent because of the heavy influence of calypso and steel drums, which originated in Trinidad.
I’m just gonna say this but why couldn’t this just be an adaptation of “Once on this island”? Cause it’s based on the original Little Mermaid story AND set in the Caribbean.
Literally the only reason I wanted to watch this movie was to see how they adapted the finale with Kaijursula into live action. Disney classics always had spectacular endings for their villains. How embarrassing was that ending?! Where ever the money for these bloated budgets are going, its clearly not in the VFX because these ending battles whether with in this film or Jafar becoming a genie in Aladdin 2019 or he looks like he just had red dye splashed on him. Point is they never look better in live action.
It's funny that The Little Mermaid turned out really meh when the mermaid scene in the 4th Pirates was literally the best part of that movie 😭 what a wild juxtaposition for Rob Marshall lol
I just realized something that I haven't heard anyone say. They straight up kill king triton, and bring him back with the trident. So, now it's established that the trident can bring back the dead..... why didn't triton bring back his dead wife? 😅
I honestly hated how Flotsom and Jetsom didn’t speak in the live action. I always loved them as children(ironically everyone was scared of them but I loved them sm) so I was so upset to see it I only watched this to see how the shark looks in the live action😔
When it comes to the sisters I assume they breed like fish - so a bunch of Mermaids (merwomen?) laid their eggs and triton came along and fertilised them - hence the different "race" sisters - however there should be a LOT more children than that if that were the case - unless they are ALSO like a species of shark whereby the first born out of its egg cannibalises its siblings making IT the only survivor to carry the genetics.
😂 I thought maybe merpeople reproduced like seahorses and Triton was a bit of a seawhore in his younger days. He decided to travel the 7 seas before he took over being King Fake Muscle Fins and collected eggs from someone in every sea. Then he realized raising that many daughters would be a big hassle so he dropped off the eggs again with their egg donors families which is why they all have different accents. He visited each once a year to instruct them on what their future roles would be then had their mothers and families taken out when they would be useful and less irritating. Except he made a horrible mistake with Ariel and forgot where she was from, given her American accent and mixed African heritage he must have found someone to raise her, but it certainly wouldn't have been a native merperson from the Caribbean if the merworlds geographic ethnicities match with humans, which makes no sense if they do. If she had been from that region she would have resembled the native people of the area not the changed racial mixture that was the result of slavery. The merpeople who raised her must have gotten annoyed with her and given her back too early which is why they are both cold and distant and he is easily befuddled by her barely breaking the rules.
I'm not sure if it was your channel or another praising the Cinderella adaptation for being the only good one, but as I said under that video, what makes Cinderella work is that it actually introduces more elements of the fairytale, like the name Cinderella coming from sleeping near the cinders- It makes the things the writers made up like Cinderella's childhood and the prince getting fleshed out grounded in the story. Whilst The Little Mermaid is just picking away at its bones and wondering why it collapsed like a Jenga game.
Sorry but Cinderella live action really irks me. If anything they made Cinderella way more passive there than animated movie. And the abuse by her stepmother starting with her already being an adult as opposite to the cartoon where it started when she was just a child, makes zero sense and is less impacful. Doesnt cartoon Cinderella did everything to earn her happy ending while remake did nothing only gets it out of luck
The original story took place in Italy, not Denmark. Denmark's seas aren't warm enough to be as beautiful as described in the story. Plus, the kingdom had mountains, something that is nowhere to be found in Denmark.
@@finland4ever55 Eric was named after Eric Larson, one of Disney's 9 old men. That's the only reason his name is Eric. And HCA appearing in one episode doesn't mean anything.
Some Disney spin-off media does sometimes go back and forth on this. In the graphic novel “Ariel and the curse of the sea witches” it states Eric’s kingdom is Denmark with him and human Ariel going to the Danish colony in Greenland. Then in the little mermaid “A twisted Tale” book/graphic novel it states Eric’s kingdom is Tirulia a completely fictional kingdom.
In 2006, I always wanted a live-action version of The Little Mermaid with Kirsten Dunst playing Ariel. Instead, they have held onto this idea for far too long until they decided to give it the green light in the era when the shallow and sensitive douchebags who are ruining the entertainment industries were the ones who led this infamous strike in the first place.
None of the remakes have been entertaining, necessary, wanted, or inspired. Other than Cinderella 2015 like this RUclipsr mentioned, every other reboot and remake has been completely lackluster and actually tarnishes the original imo
Scuttle was an absolute unit in the animated film. He's the one who conducted the espionage mission that led to the discovery that Ursula was going to marry Eric. He gathered air and sea units to lead a joint operation to stall the wedding, with himself leading multiple bombing runs. He went toe-to-toe against the sea witch, hitting her with a deafening scream which resulted in him getting choked; even through the asphyxiation, he grabbed the locket and pulled until its string broke, crashing the locket to the ground and returning Ariel's voice where it belonged. Now he's just Awkwafina.
Regarding Howard Ashman, on the director's commentary for The original Little Mermaid, John, Ron, and Alan Menken all talked about how Ashman was VERY particular about the songs in every detail, including the lyrics. The directors joked about how they would make suggestions and Ashman would (in their own words) correctly shoot them down except for two minors instances ("thingamabobs" in "Part of Your World" and her tone being more optimistic, less melancholy when she's singing to Eric on the beach). My point in mentioning this is that if Ashman were alive today, I believe he, like Sir Elton John over the Lion King songs, would be furious about the changes to The Little Mermaid songs.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Bad faith criticisms against Ariel aren’t anything new (ironically, they’re the reason that Belle was given a feminist update in the 1991 animated film “Beauty and the Beast”), but Halle Bailey got flack for making those criticisms against Ariel because people are racist and want to find any excuse to harass Halle Bailey.
@@beethovensfidelio I'll give you that they're nowhere near as insulting as Rachel Zegler's. And yes, I fully agree people's treatment of Halle was very unfair. She didn't ask to be cast or chosen. And even if she did, I feel blaming, harassing and making racist memes about her casting for taking a job was fucking wrong. Just as I think them calling Rachel Zegler Snow Brown is just as awful. But Halle in almost every single interview is insulting the original movie. She kept talking about how the themes are being updated and it got annoying really quickly.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Not only that but she did something that is hard for me to forgive her for, something that I see barely anyone talking about. I genuinely hope this is somehow misconstrued but she went on a Spanish talk show and the host was being very sweet to her, giving her compliments and such but she was smiling, glowing, thanking him sincerely but then she went to Disney execs after and told them it made her uncomfortable and now the host is in a lot of trouble. I keep seeing articles about his “disgusting” or “inexcusable racism!” But all he said was, and remember this was translated so he could have easily meant it differently, “When we saw you in the theater we did not see your skin color, we were lost in your eyes.” I feel what he was trying to say was that her being the skin color she was does not matter, to him and his family her emotion was enough. And yet I keep seeing people making him out to be a villain, even if he didn’t intend to be that he needs to be “educated.” Like I said he most likely didn’t mean it the way she took it but even so, she should have told him privately after the show and not the Disney execs because the guy might get canceled for saying something he meant to be a whole hearted compliment.
9:45 Hey, I like Stranger Tides, mainly because my favorite scenes were the mermaid sirens 16:56 Poor child actor for getting a lifeless character as his role 1:19:15 Yeah, the actress for Vanessa really did well and deserves to be in a better film It's upsetting nowadays that in modern movies, women empowerment/feminism/independent women means hyping the women too much while making the men less involved or more useless. I'm up for some equality but not in this angle, it should be balanced not competed against
Vanessa's actor is literally the only actor other than Melissa McCarthy that is actually fucking trying. Vanessa is the one aspect of this movie that is on point.
I honestly found Vanessa more attractive than Ariel in the remake. I don’t even need Ursula to use her magic to make me fall in love with her human alter ego.
I haven't watched the full video for this but I can definitely say one thing, I don't fucking understand the praise for this remake because from what I've seen, everything looks like *bullshit.* I have no hope left for Disney any more, honestly
I think the praise is coming from peer pressure like "If you don't like this movie, then you're a racist through and through" Which is unfair because if they wanted a movie about a black princess then they should have made a new story based on African mythology or folklore or Jamaican stories. They had a plethora of options but instead, they took the lazy way out
45:35 TLM musical DOES have songs for Eric and Triton. The only difference I think is that it makes sense with how they added them in. (And TLM musical is probably one of the worst of the Disney theatrical adaption, but it is leaps and bound better than this.) You have "Her Voice" & "One Step Closer" for Eric, "The World Above (Reprise)" for Triton. You also have "If Only" with Triton, Eric, Ariel, and Sebastian. And then you have "If Only (Reprise)" with Ariel and Triton. Are they perfect? No. But I think those songs give more dimension to the characters than the new songs in this movie did. I do also like that Ariel sings "The World Above" and the Triton echos the same song as he destroys the grotto. Turning her hopes into what she should fear.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 When we did the show, I didn't think they were horrible. No, they're not the best. But it was better than Eric's song in the live action. (And leaps and bounds better than Scuttlebutt.)
I really do not like the shade of red they chose for Halle Bailey. Because all of the underwater shots are so dull, it causes her hair to look like it blends into her skin. She has a nice skin tone, pick a shade of red that complements it. A rich dark red like a red rose or a red wine would look so pretty on her.
@@maidenofiron I saw a video a long time ago where Glen Keane, the head animator for Ariel, explained that there were two reasons why they chose the iconic red hair for Ariel: it stood out from the green and blue ocean backgrounds and the red still maintained a nice color in dark scenes, which many of the underwater shots had. Plus a deeper richer shade of red would have better sold the idea of Halle Bailey playing Ariel and made her look more ethereal. Since she is playing a fantasy creature.
Not to mention the godawful costumes they chose to put her in. Ariel has some of the most iconic outfits in Disney history and Halle is a very beautiful woman. Why would you not want to highlight that beauty? They put her in the most gawdy and ill fitting clothes that somehow make the awful yellow live action Belle dress look great by comparison.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 I know, Ariel had many amazing outfits to wear in the film. The blue dress she wore on land wasn’t bad, but why was that her only outfit?!
All the daughters (including Ariel) ruled over the seas they called home. So, Ariel abandoned her duties as ruler so she could galavant around the human world with a human male she barely knows. Shirk your responsibilities to do what you want. What a great message for the kiddies, Disney!
Ariel is still a princess in the human world, so she isn’t renouncing the throne. At least “The Lion King” had Simba renouncing his carefree lifestyle, so he could return to Pride Rock and take his rightful place as king.
I have a feeling that some of these changes are due to budget restraints, but under the guise of "modernizing" the story. They probably couldn't get Ariel to look right on the surface with Scuttle and cut it. And couldn't afford enough extras to be mermaids, leading to that pointless meeting and Ursula killing her clients
@hunterolaughlin I hope Moana gets canceled (although I am a little curious as to how ugly HeiHei would look in cgi). I think it's all over after Snow White though, the whole company is teetering on a cliff edge right now.
@traviscunningham7062 oh I do, from the crappy movies to the price gouging at the parks with less and less value. He devalued the company to try to sell it to his friends at Apple and now it's not even worth it for them to buy it.
Oh thank GOD somebody realises that Disney doesn't give a rat's ass about diversity or equality or any of those things. Instead of creating strong women, Disney gives out this message that sure, women can be more powerful than men, IF THEY HAVE UNLIMITED MAGICAL POWERS. It's not like Disney hasn't had strong women with character flaws. Elastigirl, Anna and Elsa, Mulan, Jasmine, Esmerelda... But somehow Disney has become even more sexist and racist. Ursula's villain song was meant to sound like a rocking brulesque song. Ursula was deliberately telling Ariel that she should use her body and looks rather than her skills and personality to get Eric's attention. And Ursula is the villain, she's trying to get Ariel to sign a dodgy contract. But Disney is all "Oh, well the villain's evil villain song can't be TOO evil." April didn't want to leave the sea JUST for a man in the original. She'd long been fascinated by the human world and Eric was simply a final catalyst, another thing April was fascinated by. The whole point was it was a coming of age story, and Ariel was growing up, but her father King Triton did not want her to leave. God, the actors and actresses they get for these roles are missing a brain or something, for they don't understand the original movies, and they don't even TRY to understand.
Thank God, I decided to wait until this film came out on Digital to watch it and instead spending my money to watch on the movie theater Across the Spider-Verse
Another detail about the timeframe of the Little Mermaid remake I noticed is that while showing Ariel his collection, Eric points out on a map that Ariel was looking at, the “Brazilian Empire” and “Venezuela”. Brazil was an empire (a _real, monarchal_ empire) for much of the first half of the 19th century.
What about "Ariel makes a deal with Ursula and puts everyone in danger" (a criticism that has been around since the 2000s)? Ariel doesn't change in the original film because it was not needed for the story to work. Ariel wanted to go to the surface and convince Triton that not all humans are bad and in the end, Triton was wrong (and learns and grows in the end) and Ariel was right because the surface is where she belongs and not all humans are bad. But, she also struck a deal with Ursula (the villain). We all make mistakes. It happens to everyone. But, it's essential that you learn and grow from your mistakes. In fact, I was expecting this remake the address this criticism. But, for the most part, people aren't saying, "This movie is better because Ariel has an arc and she learns something in the end. Hooray. To hell with the 1989 problematic cartoon" when the remake got released this year. In fact in the remake, Ariel said, "I'm sorry. It's all my fault." While in the original, Ariel said, "Daddy I'm sorry. I didn't mean to. I didn't know." I think you can make the argument that the original is more genuine and believable thanks to the voice acting and we do see Ariel's expressions being more terrified in shock and horror (despite being illogical and nonsensical. But, the original's narrative is more simple and emotional like a traditional fairy tale, meaning logic takes the back seat while later Disney fairytale films like Beauty and the Beast and Frozen have more logic despite them being based on fairytales). Afterall, Ariel in the original was very expressive. But, in the remake it doesn't feel genuine because of Halie Bailey's lackluster acting and her mime acting wasn't expressive compared to Ariel in the original. So, is it really worth getting so angry over? (Even the Nostalgia Critic didn't bring up this criticism again in his recent review of the Little Mermaid 1989 despite him bringing it up back in his older review from 2011)
Sure Ariel signing Ursula’s contract was an error on her part BUT Ursula was smart to ask Ariel when she was already crying after her dad destroy her collection. She knew Ariel would more likely say yes to the offer. Villains always try to catch you at a low point in your life
Personally, as a Dutch woman who was also exposed to non-English adaptations that were faithful to the novel, and I definitely think a big thing of what goes wrong with The Little Mermaid is represented by the race swap but it's not the core issue. Rather, it's the fact this remake is even less faithful to the original novel's story then the animated movie whilst simultaneously showing they never read the novel as that actually did have a pretty feminist ending. By changing so much of the world, they weakened its foundations.
They won’t since that film bombed at the box office and got mixed reviews. Atlantis doesn’t have the large nostalgic following that Little Mermaid has.
One of the things I hated about the movie was that Ariel didn’t have her iconic red hair, it looks more brownish, I don’t have a problem with hailey being part of a cast, but I have seen fan arts that do more justice, have more vision and respect escencial characteristics of Ariel, like the color of her hair and bangs, but not the texture of the hair, which in the fan arts, it not smooth, is not bad, because it respects the essential characteristics, and is a more faithful representation of the original movie, also because of the color palettes and lightings.
I hated everything about this mess-acting, characters, filming, the music sounds like elevator music. The girl is retry and has a nice voice but she’s NO Ariel!
I gotta wonder if the writers of this movie were brain damaged. Having Ariel forget that she needs to kiss Eric makes the situation LESS empowering to her because it takes away Ariel's agency. In the original movie, she wanted to kiss Eric, he was the one hesitating. How do they not see that making Ariel forget what she's doing when she's alone with a guy she barely knows is REALLY sketchy? She's basically getting a magical roofie, and that's supposed to be empowering???
Have you seen Robocop 2? Remember the scene where OCP execs installed like a hundred new directives based on arbitrary complaints and the result was that it hindered Robocop's cognitive functions and made him chaotically incompetent? That's basically what Disney does with its remakes.
Like it takes more of Ariel’s autonomy away. In the original, she really didn’t care about rules like most teenagers don’t. If in Halle’s words if this movie is supposed to be about her freedom and what she wants, then why are we making her forget the reason she traded her tail in the first place? The original Ariel wanted to be with Eric. By taking that away, you’re also removing Ariel’s autonomy from the original and the character as a whole. You guys didn’t give her any agency. All you did was make her weak which is NEVER what Ariel was in the original movie.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Exactly. Btw, people tend to get too caught up in her quest to be with Eric and think that undermines her goal to explore the surface when in reality, she wanted to explore with Eric at her side.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343she literally wanted to be with him as they got to know each other more. They still fell for each other and got their kiss
I'd also like to point out another reason why Eric has to be the one to save Ariel in the end: it's because Ariel already saved HIM in the BEGINNING, so he returns the favour in the battle with Ursula. They are a couple built of mutual love and respect; they are meant to save *each other.*
(Eric steering the ship also makes sense because he was introduced on one. He's a sailor, so of course he's going to use what he knows to defeat the sea witch.)
Did the people behind this movie think anything through at ALL?
@@artbytesiaThey were most likely inspired by the Broadway show which had Ariel kill Ursula by smashing Ursula’s conch shell to the ground: ruclips.net/video/8YCLuyllF4A/видео.htmlm40s
also it is what earns him Triton's respect. he learns that humans aren't all evil and this human saved his daughter and even him because he was an 'emaciated shrimp' (to quote an Olaf short about the original movie) in Ursula's garden.
@@personafanatic4597 Exactly! They didn't think it through!
Additionally, you forgot to mention that he has to save Ariel because king triton is supposed to witness this while everything is in peril and learn the lesson that humans aren’t evil because people like Eric, who proactively chose to save Arial and himself, exist.
Without that detail, there’s no reason at all for triton to allow Arial to marry Eric. It’s unconvincing.
I've been saying it, Scuttle in the original was like the crazy-yet-harmless old vagabond living just out of town who loved to tell stories to anyone who was willing to hear them, and Ariel was probably the only one willing to actually hear said stories, simply because Scuttle was the only one who quote-unquote "knew" anything about humans and their stuff.
Live action Scuttle is a nerd.
thank you! that is exactly how the character came off to me too as a kid and it made him appealing because he's clearly makin shit up but in a harmless way 😊
@@personafanatic4597 Scuttle is the original version was just a playful old man who enjoyed telling tall tales or fish tales about things
@@traviscunningham7062 Live action Scuttle is also unbelievably obnoxious and unfunny, unlike the original.
I hate the argument of "We didn't want her to leave the ocean for a BOY" because that's not even why she wanted to leave the ocean to begin with.
She was ALREADY obsessed with humans and being on land. She met Prince Eric _AFTER_ singing about wanting to walk on land. Its such a no-brainer argument that shows they didn't really actually watch the original film that THEY'RE TRYING TO RECREATE.
Fax.
I’ll never understand how people could think Ariel didn’t have agency or a personality in the original. Does nobody remember how excited she was driving the carriage in the original?!
The entire PLOT was driven by Ariel, moreso than with a typical protagonist because without Ariel being present the antagonist wouldn't have EVER gotten their scheme to work.
Not to mention Eric would’ve died at the start of the movie if not for her saving him from drowning
@@madokami03 Don't forget Ariel already wanted to go to the human world eg 'Out of the sea, wish I could be. Part of that world. it was only after seeing Eric that part of that world became 'part of your world'.
@@rebeccawhittington8979 Fr!! Ariel was just a nerd for human culture and wanted to explore land, meanwhile Eric was an equally adorably nerdy guy plot device to get her to go to land. Eric was just as entranced by the sea, not interested in princely duties on land. That’s what I love about this love story. They have their own interests and motivations outside each other
Or what about when she saved Flounder from a shark, killed Ursula's eels in the climax, and saved Eric from drowning and from Ursula's trident?
Whatever, because Ariel had to be saved in the end, people claim it wasn't good enough so they continue to claim that "Ariel had no agency."
she doesn't even look happy her dad is alive, it's like she's a kindergartner looking up at a stranger in mild fear.
You know, I'm surprised Aldone went through this whole analysis, without mentioning Sherri Stoner, who I personally think was the actress who made Ariel much more possible. Seriously, look behind the scenes and you'll see how the animators worked very carefully to mimic Sherri's facial expressions into the animated movie. Compared to Halle's acting, it's clear Sherri put in way more effort.
The issue with Halle Bailey she have the smarthphone face, everytime when she smile it looks like she is posing for a photo that would end up on Instagram
@@paradoxzee6834 That's a great way of putting it. She has the exact same facial expression all throughout the movie, and that's not good when you're silent throughout half of it. Ariel's performance absolutely hinges on her ability to act with her face, and Halle Bailey just can't.
I really feel it is bad direction. I have seen her in other things and she is not stoic at all.
@@gabrielleduplessis7388no its not just bad direction. It's her she can't act she was not cut out for this role if anything she was just acting as herself
I also did not like the costume design for the film. Ariel wore the same dress throughout the entire film, it just got a color change at the end. Most Disney princesses have their glamorous ball gown moment, yet she was never given one. The sparkly dress Ariel wears at the end of the animated film would have looked so amazing on Halle. :/
In fact, the original dress was dedicated to the previous Disney princesses prior to Ariel
As a fashion designer, I agree. It's not bad but for a movie about mermaids it's very underwhelming and rather plain.
The sparkly dress also symbolized how much her father cared for her. When Ursula turned her into a human, she had no clothes..showing how she just let Ariel fend for herself. But when Triton turned her into a human, she had a beautiful dress showing his love and care for his daughter.
@@meowchaela287Aurora?
Plus I hated how her "seashells" is now just a part of her body. It looks creepy and weird.
I don't understand why the director of this movie (and many other people) thought that Eric in the original had no personality and that the romance was based on physical attraction. TLM is in fact a pretty emotionally complex movie. And I dare even say that Ariel and Eric are the healthiest Disney couple ever.
Prince Eric is first introduced by the movie narrative as adventurous young man who despite his royal heritage is not above the “dirty work”: the audience is initially exposed to him helping other sailors on the ship as well as showing consideration and concern towards Grimsby in addition to being a good listener and quite an experienced storyteller informed about the subject he takes it upon himself to talk about hence the sailors discussing Triton and the sea with Eric while Grimsby sceptically brushes their theories off. Thoroughness, open mind and a down to earth attitude are established among Eric’s primary characteristics from the get go and not for the sake of forcibly and obnoxiously presenting him as a multi-dimensional morally/intellectually superior protagonist - in fact, he can hardly even be deemed as one seeing as the movie essentially revolves around Ariel and her struggles with inability to obtain independence and fulfill herself outside of a place she feels like she belongs whereas every other character, no matter how significant, plays a part of a supporting cast - but in order to showcase his interests thus, in so much as the first few minutes of the movie we already learn up on not only the hobbies Eric is intensely invested in but the extent of his love for the sea, conflicted relationship with his guardian figure (Grimsby) and are provided with a raw sketch of his mindset and the lens through which he observes the world.
All of it could have easily been left out seeing as Eric’s individual emotional investments are not particularly related to Ariel’s story, but those aspects are outlined regardless because Eric isn’t merely a love interest of a fiery red head: he has a personality, a character of his own.
Next time Eric comes off as “the guy with a flute”, it being the immediate impression he gives off once Ariel first sees him, confronted with not so much his mesmerizing attractiveness as the way his eyes lit up when he produced music for his own pleasure (poignantly, the same exact way Ariel preferred to go about her musical skills: away from the crowds or pretentious grand celebrations, using a melody for self expression. It’s hardly a coincidence that Melody ended up being a name of her and Eric’s daughter) or when he played with his dog or when he was clearly not impressed with the the statue of himself. Speaking of which, that is a good character moment because it shows that Eric is burdened by expectations and is seen as a powerful future king when in reality, he is a shy introvert. This allows Ariel to relate to him. Eric, however, was thankful for the attention and love coming from Grimsby regardless of how inexplicably insufficient and misinterpreted the latter’s perception of Eric generally was, which is rather unfortunate given that Grimsby played some sort of a father figure role to him while being entirely unable to get the grasp of how the young man’s mind functioned. Which brings us to another point: according to all the evidence Eric’s parents are most likely dead, considering they didn’t show up on either of his weddings - the fake one with Vanessa and the real one with Ariel - nor did they attend Melody's christening.
Admittedly, being left in charge of no one other than Grimsby who hardly understood what Eric essentially was about, and having to prepare himself to be a future effective ruler of Tirulia.
Eric is the epitome of a person who built one self up independently, firmly standing his ground confronting the standards imposed on him that he was unwilling to conform to - such as being forced into getting married before determining whether there was a right woman (“the one” as Eric referred to a person he hadn’t yet been lucky enough to meet and want to spend the rest of his life with, not settling for any less) among his suitors for the sake of fitting into a certain ideal of a proper prince. His attitude of a dreamer was a part of his established characterization but he was also exceptionally analytical about his concepts of romance.
Having survived a horrific incident Eric sincerely believed he had found true love and his ideology of a dreamer took a strong grab at his outlooks on relationship seeing as he was set out to find a girl with the gorgeous voice at any cost due to said voice being quite literally the only connection to his rescuer. As some people mistakenly imply, Eric did not fall in love with a voice, in fact, at that point his feelings were all over the place and not exactly what stands for actual love, a mature fully formed feeling. Being drawn to the idea of a girl who saved him Eric - genuinely and irreversibly - projects his certitude regarding her being “the one” onto the only representation of her he had been left with so far - her voice. And subsequently his idealistic but slightly immature romantic notions backfire with a cunning irony once he meets a girl who has everything a man can dream of but lacks what he seeks out the most. A beautiful stranger doesn’t talk therefore cannot be “the one” nor would she ever - as he firmly believes - pass for “the one” hence why Ariel’s beauty is essentially irrelevant to Eric. His one and only goal concerning relationship at that point revolves around finding that person he believes to be one in the whole world who is right for him. Not only doesn’t he fall for Ariel’s looks but is entirely indifferent to said looks due to thinking that woman is not the one he needs (frankly, the assumption about Eric being easily smitten with visual appeal is extensively incorrect considering the fact that, due to his royal status, chances quite a few attractive female suitors were eager to have his hand only to be rejected because Eric at one point explicitly stated he wasn’t interested in superficial relationship and was waiting for the right person). Which doesn’t mean Eric is immune to primordial instincts and cannot appreciate physical attractiveness - he does, in fact, acknowledge Ariel’s captivating outer exterior once she dresses up for a dinner but it isn’t until she makes him laugh for the first time in few days by being her overly excited, imaginative and adorably dorky self that he starts taking a more insightful look into her and is willing to take her on a Kingdom tour - while still not being ready to open up to her or let the endearing mysterious girl into his life due to being committed to his unrealistic ideal.
Next day Eric spends actual time with Ariel who proceeds to behave excessive and enthusiastic, never failing to amaze him. She is more invested in exploring various layers of the city life rather than paying a consistent attention to him (but… but Ariel totally “left her family behind to be with a man” and had no other agenda, right? Right?!), however, Eric is perfectly content with dedicating time and effort into making her feel happy and content, not being put off by her overflowing craziness in the slightest, but getting more and more intrigued by the unusual, eccentric nature of his accomplice - to the point of becoming largely conflicted hence the boat scene where Eric wants to get to know Ariel while still being unsure of his own feelings and pulling away when she tries to initiate a kiss - because yes, he still takes relationship incredibly seriously and is unwilling to allow himself so much as an innocent romantic interaction without being fully confident that this person is truly the one for him. He challenges himself and his initially established concepts of idealistic romance, gradually deviating from a strong commitment to an image of a girl with a sing song-ish voice he had created in his mind in favor of opening the door into the possibility of forming a bond with a real person regardless of this blooming relationship being enormously confusing, awkward and opposing to everything he had led himself to believe in before. He was GROWING out of exaggerations and teenage angst and exposing himself to a new perspective of building a mature relationship. The segment with him throwing a flute into the ocean is the ultimate representation of his character development.
Eric’s love for Ariel was powerful in both dimensions: back when he was an avid dreamer with a controversial concept of romance who invested considerable amounts of emotional energy into the idea of “the one” and when he was no longer a happy go lucky kid indulging in his dreams but a man willing to fight for a person he loves both in a figurative (choosing the real Ariel over the romanticized ideal) and literal sense (once slipping out of the hypnosis Ursula had inflicted him with all of his thoughts and actions were inevitably and directly related to Ariel, to making her feel loved, to instantly accepting the immensely shocking fact of her being a mermaid and to throwing himself into the waves where he couldn’t even breathe at risk of getting killed in order to make sure she doesn’t remain subjected to her captor) - and in neither of those cases was Eric drawn to Ariel’s looks. Prince Eric is the kind of character to represent self awareness, intelligence, ability to respond to emotional challenges rather than cowardly running away from them and giving all of himself to his nearest and dearest and his story contains more than enough of an evidence to back it up.
Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.
Bro made a whole essay that made sense
Well done man!
Like Eric did nothing in the original movie to warrant the butchering they did to him in this film. He was nothing but kind and generous to Ariel. He was a gentleman through and through and risked his own life to save his lady just like she saved him.
And they COMPLETELY ruined him for nothing.
My only concern is I wish that we knew more about Eric's life; most of the film revolves around his hobbies and relationship with Ariel, so it would've been nice to have some backstory, especially since he's a young ruler.
It’s 4 am, my back freaking hurts and I still have one paragraph of this comment to read 😂 I don’t doubt the solidness of said paragraph, agree to everything 100% nice to see someone articulate what many of us feel so well.
P.S. actually upon closer examination I still have 3 paragraphs to read. Jesus.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 They ruined Eric in the live action because of "Girl power feminism"
They are like "Oh Eric will save Ariel which means she'll be a helpless woman and we can't have that because self-independent women exist and men are seedpouches and nothing more"
As an artist, if there is one thing I have learned is that the medium you use is important, and there are some things that just simply don’t work at all when adapted into other media.
Very true. Some live action movies would never work in animation, 3d sometimes couldn’t work in 2d, and 2d wouldn’t work in live action. Putting TLM into live action made it look soulless and lifeless. All of these remakes will never live up to the original colorful 2d animation.
@@GoofyAhhBoxy To be fair, some 3D films can actually translate to 2D animation.
@@hunterolaughlin I didn’t say they couldn’t
@@GoofyAhhBoxy What are some 3D films you don’t think would translate well to 2D?
@@hunterolaughlin definitely a movie like 9. It’s rag doll and grim feel would totally be lost if it was put into smooth 2d animation.
They couldn't even get the two main side characters right. That alone was pretty bad itself
Y’all r mad. Miserable life
Amazing. Every word of what you just said… was wrong.
Yeah, you sure defeated his argument with that retort
I'm assuming they meant Flounder and Scuttle, which is pretty accurate. @@EpicJoshua314
They took out the "body language" verse in the movie because they said it was insulting. According to a friend of mine who's way more into the drag scene than I am, that line was a direct quote from Divine and very important among the community. This sort of thing is why their diversity talk is so insincere and is soundly rejected. Disney doesn't understand their own films, or the audience they are attempting to make films for.
I thought it was removed to avoid awkward questions from children....
"Mom, what's body language?" 😆
@@DrawciaGleam02 Children understand the concept of body language though. They know how to read emotions and such. They don't have to know the full adult extent used, just the overall concept for the plot.
@@DrawciaGleam02 I promise as someone who grew up during the Disney Renaissance, I knew what body language was and the fact that there was a potential sexual connotation to it both flew over my head and did not matter anyway. That's one of those "adult jokes" you only catch once your brain is going through puberty and starts noticing that kind of stuff.
Not having a drag play ursula is a crime.
funnily enough, it's those supposed 'sexual jokes' what gave older Disney movies their edge. It shows the creators weren't afraid to add jokes that would fly over children's heads, but would get a good laugh out of parents. These live action remakes try so hard to sell themselves as 'mature' versions of the movies you loved, but end up being even more childish than their predecessor.
1:14:00 I feel like they didn't need to change ANY of the lyrics of "Kiss the Girl." They literally could've just had Eric say, "May I?" or something of that extent at the end of the song (before the eels interrupt). It would've had that consent. There really isn't much that they had to change.
And also Sebastian is like “if the time is right and if the time is tonight…” like…dude…WE HAVE A FUCKING DEADLINE. Stop acting like we have more time than three days.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Which is what makes the pro-consent stance hypocritical because while yes, it’s good to ask for consent and to not feel pressured to kiss someone when you’re not ready, it gets undermined by Sebastian still pushing the shy Eric to kiss Ariel and by Eric going straight for the kiss instead of asking for consent.
@@beethovensfidelio Especially when Ariel was fully on board with kissing Eric in the original movie.
except if anyone should be concerned about consent in the original it was eric. not only does ariel make eyes at him but half the damn ecosystem in that scene of the original is harassing Eric to kiss this mute girl he is being a gentleman to. its so stupid! whoever thought the scene needed to be changed didn't watch it close enough 😑
@@personafanatic4597 exactly. The kiss was a trick, orchestrated by Ursula intentionally, because she knew it would be impossible.
Ariel HAD to try to get him to kiss her, so Eric was the one being encouraged into it.
In fact, making Ariel’s disobedience more toned down/nonexistent in this film really doesn’t put Triton in the most flattering light. Instead of being an understandably concerned father who just doesn’t know how to communicate with his daughter, having what Ariel does not be that bad/completely harmless just makes Triton come off as an over reactive, callous asshole. When that’s not his character at all! And if this was really the writers’ attempt at making Ariel less “bratty”, it makes no damn sense if they kept trying to hammer home the message of her being more “empowered” in this version. It completely gets rid of her character flaws, and what made her interesting in the original. Because that’s how teenagers act! I don’t want ANY of her character flaws to be removed, actually. What they COULD have done was give her more of a character arc, because to be fair she didn’t really have one in the original. Neither did Belle from Beauty and the Beast, actually. They’re both still great characters, though. What was important about these two movies was that people AROUND them changed, not necessarily them themselves. But if they REALLY wanted to add something different, they could have had her actually clearly learning a lesson in this remake. But again, there’s nothing to set up for anything like that because she doesn’t do anything wrong in this film! Triton just over reacts about nothing. I swear, every single Disney princess remake just wants to turn every one of them into Mary Sue’s. Belle, Ariel, Jasmine, Mulan, and likely soon to be Snow White, too. I will defend the og princesses not being Mary Sue’s until the day I die, yet these people don’t even see their own irony in trying to “correct” everything!
Had the filmmakers of “The Little Mermaid” (1989) kept the deleted alternate ending, it would have given Ariel a much needed redemption arc, since Ariel’s apology in the deleted scene is a lot more sincere (only after she regains consciousness does she tearfully say to her father, *”Oh, Daddy. Daddy, I’m so sorry. I didn’t mean to hurt you...”):* ruclips.net/video/FF0_JKyPCwE/видео.htmlm29s .
According to the film’s audio commentary track, the alternate ending was cut because then-Disney chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg had just seen the 1988 action film “Die Hard”, and he told “The Little Mermaid” directors John Musker and Ron Clements to make the ending *”more like ‘Die Hard’” (“Guys, guys, I want to see more ‘Die Hard’!”).*
YES, REALLY!
In other words, Katzenberg wanted to make the climax more epic, which explains why Ursula becomes gigantic in the final film.
At least the 2008 Broadway version gave Ariel more agency in the climax in which she kills Ursula by breaking Ursula’s conch shell into the ground; plus Ariel’s apology to her father is a lot more genuine as she tells him *”I’ve caused you so much trouble. Can you ever forgive me?”:* ruclips.net/video/8YCLuyllF4A/видео.htmlm40s
Also, in the live action remake, Ariel feels actual remorse when she says to Triton, *”I’m sorry, father. This is all my fault”,* in response to Ursula telling Triton that she and Ariel made a deal; and Ariel then goes on to kill Ursula: ruclips.net/video/FnarFCfVYno/видео.html
But also, by making a character like Scuttle, who is shown to eat fish, and Ariel treats it like nothing, despite Flounder acting scared, it makes Triton seem like he’s right for saying that going up to the surface is dangerous.
@@beethovensfidelioI do wish they would have been more clear with her remorse over her deal with Ursula.
I never took her apology in '89 as a "I'm just apologizing because I'm in trouble" apology.
Ursula has just been telling her how she manipulated her in order to get power and revenge against Triton.
Ariel just helped release Eric from her mind control. She's had some frantic moments to realize how evil Ursula truly is.
Then Triton shows up and takes her place to save her. She begs him not to do it. She is horrified at what has been done to her father in her place.
This doesn't negate her part in it all. She isn't making excuses. She is desperately sorry and believes she is about to pay the price for her mistake until her father takes her place.
The scene in the original when Triton destroyed Ariel's collection honestly broke me. We could see how much Ariel loved the human world that it was devastating when she lost her collection. Her father destroyed something she loved with all her heart, and I felt absolutely terrible for her.
I remember crying for her when I first saw it.
100%. I have many collections of many different things, but my absolute favorite and proudest one is my plushie / stuffed animal collection that I've been building up for years now (I have almost 40 different plushies.) If someone destroyed it all one day, especially when I have such a strong emotional attachment to some of them, I would be absolutely crushed. You can't replace the value of someone's collection of their favorite things. And even just hearing about someone else losing what's so important to them is heartbreaking.
In a way, King Triton was a bigger villain than Ursula. It was because of him that Ariel became desperate enough to see Ursula, even though she knew how dangerous the sea witch was.
One of the worst things about Scuttles introduction is that Flounder gets scared and Ariel laughs and chastizes him.
"Its only Scuttle."
Scuttle just dove from high above and swallowed one of Flounders cousins whole!
What do you mean theres nothing to be scared of you fish stick brain!?!
Removing Ariels trips to the surface completely diminishes her rebellious, curious, adventurous nature.
She loves her father and doesn't want to disappoint him. Her hunger for knowledge makes her take that risk though.
It makes her impulsive dangerous choice to take Ursulas deal later more believable.
I mean, Ariel's sneaking to the surface was why some people got mad at her character.
I understand why they changed that because it's been a major criticism for YEARS!
@@DrawciaGleam02but it shows she’s adventurous, rebellious and free-spirited.
@@Rose-xm4og and most importantly, insatiably curious about humans and the human world.
But then during her stupid little inner monologue song she sings in her head after she gets to land, she has the nerve to sing the line "Are we only food for slaughter? Is this life on land?" Like b**ch what do you think? Your friend just ate one of your other friend's relatives or whatever right in front of both of you and you're asking yourself that question? It's eat or be eaten. And even humans, deep down we are still animals.
Yeah, it also makes the scene where Flounder accidently admits that him and Ariel were out exploring quite off. Also, notice how the remake cuts Flounder's line, "And then this seagull came, and it was 'this is this and that is that'...", as if the writers knew that by having Flounder say that, it would lead to Triton calling his daughter out for going up to the surface. Which considering what you've provided, would definitely make Triton seem right.
Which just goes to show that the creators behind this remake took so much from the original, but also removed so much, therefore not seeming to understand, let alone care to why the changes/removals being done don't work.
Something tells me that the Snow White “remake” is gonna be more pathetic than this one.
I mean at least all of the chacaters from the original movie are here.
As opposed to Snow White that has removed the Prince and the dwarves.
Considering that the Evil Queen in the remake is hotter than Snow White herself (among other things)....yeah pretty much lol
They gunna disrespect the og disney princess 😢
Another stupid addition this movie made was that Ursula takes her nickname "the sea witch" as an insult (when she introduces herself to Ariel) but yet, they still kept the verse "They weren't kidding when they called me, well, a witch".
Like, if they will actually change some of the lyrics of the songs, they could do it to fit with the changes and aditions they do to the original story.
Right? She sounded so offended. The og Ursula's tone implied that she's downplaying her horrible past and relishes in being evil, shaking her ass in the cave as she sings and it was just so much fun. Here? Ursula is so boring, so stiff, and the part where she takes Ariel's voice made me have flashbacks of tentacles in anime and it's just...not pleasant lmao.
Lmao yes. Like it's so inconsistent
One thing I read that pissed me off was about Triton being turned into that little poulop creature. They said that they just flat out killed him cause being turned into the poulop creature seemed like something that was an “animation deal” calling it “goofy”.
It pissed me off cause it once again showed Disneys having a growing disrespect for animation. Especially since the eels killing Triton doesn’t make sense since they’re MORAY EELS: NOT electric eels, which are FRESH WATER FISH.
Couldn't they turned him into...something else?
@@DrawciaGleam02 they turned him into ash… 🤣
Also brings up the question of why couldn’t Ursula do this before? You know how much electricity it takes to reduce a body to ash? You know how far that electricity travels underwater? Flotsam and Jetsam are pretty much two atomic bombs under Ursula’s command…
@@battybuddy
Couldn't they have turned him into compacted sea foam as a reference to the original tale?
I mean if there was a way to make sea foam into a rock like how lava turns into magma rocks....
@@DrawciaGleam02 they probably could have, but that would have meant having some sort of idea what they were doing. Like I said it pissed me off that they’re dissing animation like they are and then doing this sort of thing instead without any clue why it was like that in the original.
I think the changes to the parent-child dynamic between Triton and Ariel might be the worst thing about this mess and I would not be showing this to my kids if I'd had any. It's Iike the people behind the remake only saw Triton as a loud, dangerous tyrant and not the scared, concerned single parent he is (and the prequel isn't perfect, but I did like getting some backstory about Ariel's mother).
And that's part of a larger problem in Hollywood too, where masculinity is being neutered, but that's a big rabbit hole to go down.
And the more I think about it, the more I realize is that one reason why the original is so great is that it's a different movie at different ages. I saw it in the theater when I was 6 or 7 and I became obsessed with just the underwater aspect (I even got snorkeling equipment for Xmas that year. Yeah, I was one of those kids that wanted to be a marine biologist lol).
Then as a teenager, I could relate to the need for independence and knowledge that Ariel had.
And now I'm 40 and have a lot more sympathy for Triton and Sebastian. Heaven help anyone raising a teenager lol
Especially when the heart of the original movie is the relationship between Ariel and Triton. Triton was overprotective and had a temper but it was because he cared and didn’t know how to healthily express it. But every time he did lose his temper, he regretted it immediately. There was a genuine love between the two of them despite their differences that explored Triton in a more complex way. Especially when he’s forced to confront the fact that he was wrong about humans when he learns that one of them risked his life to save his child.
None of that translates over to having Triton be nothing more than a boring and stale man with grief problems when that was NEVER who he was in the original movie. And I am a huge fan of Javier’s work but this is probably his weakest role.
@@CinnamonGrrlErin1 oh poor sebastian really
Not to mention Javier Bardem seems widely mis-casted in this role. He doesn't even seem like he wants to be there.
@@osmanyousif7849Who would you personally pick to play King Triton in the remake?
Just want to add that Halle is a great singer and no one will deny that, but I cannot agree that she is a great or even a decent actress. Besides the fact that Halle's Ariel seems too dull compared to Jody's Ariel, Halle for sure is acting as herself if she was a mermaid rather than embodying Ariel.
Her acting experience is pretty much only from being in the show, Grownish. Her IMBD is mostly music videos and then sprinkled with a few tv cameos where she plays herself.
And I can’t even say it’s her fault. The script completely butchers Ariel’s character and Rob is not directing anyone in a way that’s effective.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 besides the fact that objectively her acting is mediocre at best, the direction for the acting in general was truly idiotic so yeah....eff rob
Ariel is a role where good acting should be PRIMORDIAL because she spends over half of the movie unable to talk and expressing herself only through 💫 bOdY lAnGuAgE ~ 🎉 and facial expressions.... And they gave the role to a good singer who can't act. Why.
@@msk-qp6fn Oh I'm not denying that. I'm just saying that like what happened to Hayden Christensen in Star Wars, when you're given a bad script and aren't directed in a way that's effective, it leads to a performance that is bad.
Love that footage of Jodi being coached through the song so thoroughly. She is such a fabulous performer and gave Ariel such a fabulous blend of cute, funny, adventurous, passionate and naive.
Yet she's an actress in this pathetic so called movie
Completely agree. This movie would have been subpar without any of these wonderful performers, animators, directors, writers.... etc.
Howard Ashman played a pivotal role in not just TLM but in the Disney Renaissance. We wouldn't have any of the magic without him.
Sometimes magic happens and just the right people are brought together.
These new pretenders don't have their talent or thoughtfulness in their little fingers.
@@B3zpristrasten1 original voice actors make appearances in Live Action remakes, and a lot of other movies. I just watched Wolf of Wall Street, and Jordan Belfort made an appearance. They do it a lot in movies, not a shocker.
@@awildpokemonuwujust because it’s known happen doesn’t mean it’s a LAW. It doesn’t need to happen. I know Diseny paid Jodi tons of cash just to show up in a 3 second scene
Disney could have made the royal family more diverse by using the adoption reason. They could have also had one of those adopted sister be Ariel's bestie too. Heck make that sister based on Gabriella the deaf mermaid from the little mermaid tv series!!
There were so many sources the producers could've derived from but they chose laziness
For real
This is definitely a rant I can absolutely 100% agree on.
And I have a feeling that things are only gonna get worse with Snow White 2024
Snow White isn't my favorite princess movie but she is my favorite princess character and I am TERRIFIED to think what they're gonna do to my baby
@@zoeb3573 Oh, it is WAY worse than you could ever imagine. Really worse than that.
Blame Bob Igor for this.@@zoeb3573
@@zoeb3573spoiler alert, the actress playing her doesn't give a hang about snow white and is misunderstood about anything that story way about. Not to mention Dinklage throwing a hissy fit so now he is the only little person who playing a "magical creature" as they've been redubbed.
@@zoeb3573 I am ready for anything at this point. Mine are belle and mulan lol!
I saw a post that read "I will never shut up about how perfect Halle Bailey is for the role of Ariel."
To that I say 'fine, Ellen DeGeneres was perfect for the voice of Dory. Or if we're talking about black actors and actresses, the late Chadwick Boseman was perfect for the role of T'Challa. Anika Noni Rose was perfect for the role of Tiana. Shameik Moore was perfect for the role of Miles Morales and don't even get me started on Daniel Kaluuya as Spider Punk. I'd like to see Halle Bailey in a genuine role where she doesn't require constant validation because however much she may have been paid, this clearly isn't it.'
It's like Disney is trying to survive off of nostalgia and controversy rather than good storytelling.
Bailey can sing, no doubt. (Even if I dont personally love her interpretations of the songs) But boy oh boy her acting isn't up to par yet.
Jodi, was a theatre performer. They absolutely could have found a Broadway actress for the role who would have been able to handle the full role.
@@stackels97 yeah I agree. I find it rather annoying how people try to push the narrative that Halle Bailey was the absolute best for the role and they couldn't have found anyone better. Bailey was neither the worst nor best person for the role.
@@tjsmith5276 You wanna see Halle in a genuine role where she doesn't need her hand held? Watch Grown-ish. Grown-ish is what put her and her sister, Chloe on the MAP. In the show, Jazz (Chloe) and Sky (Halle) are twin sisters who are both dedicated track runners. Sky is a very sarcastic, blunt, tell-it-like-is-no-matter-how-much-it-hurts kind of girl and Halle captures that perfectly. Jazz is the same way but slightly nicer than Sky, Jazz always tries to act tough but ultimately she has a big heart and is a deep, emotional person when she lets her guard down. Sky is the kind of role Halle is meant for. She and Chloe are both very outspoken, confident women who are good for playing characters that are SASSY. Ariel is not sassy. You can tell Halle is trying her best to capture the innocence and child-like energy of Ariel but it's not working and a lot of times she's doing too much. She always has this doe-y eyed baby face and isn't very expressive. She just comes across as a 3 year old girl not a 16 year old girl.
@@truthseeker9249 Yeah, as another RUclipsr named Shady Doorags put it. We don't see Ariel, we see Halle Bailey in a costume playing Ariel. With Grown-ish (which I will make a point to see) since we have no previous iterations of the character she plays on there, we see the character and we buy into it.
@@tjsmith5276 Exactly. She just eats that character up. I even saw a short video on RUclips not too long ago that had me laughing. It was a little black girl with her family, I'm assuming the woman holding the camera is her mom. Anyway they're all having her watch the trailer for 2023 Little Mermaid and she literally said THAT'S NOT ARIEL, ARIEL IS WHITE. She said some other things too but that's the main thing she kept saying. Her mom was very surprised to hear her say that. Black children are the target audience for this dumpster fire, and even that little girl was smart enough to see right through Disney's tricks.
Lol I love when people say Asian markets are racist but the spider man across the spider verse comes out and makes MILLIONS of dollars in the same markets lol
Yup lmao they just stepped on they own balls by calling a giant mass racist like despicable loser dat Disney is now
And? Does a person stop being racist because they watch a film with a person of another ethnicity? So if one from a person of another ethnicity is successful does it mean that racism no longer exists in a specific society?
I must conclude that the American market is not racist either, because are there Asian and black movies that are successful too
Disney really doesn't like doing any research, or quality checking especially when you have Ariel saying "the ship rode on the wind and filled the sky with fire" when she says in the song (part of your world) "What is a fire and how does it, whats the word buuuuuuurn". She doesn't know what fire is so her saying "lit the sky with fire" wouldn't make sense cause she doesn't know what a fire is. A better thing for her to say is "the ship rode on the wind and made the sky sparkle" which would also be a better description to convince sebastian with.
One thing that I immediately notice, before anything else, is that the CGI is really, really bad.
It looks like an early 2000 film.
Oh please it’s worse than dat lmao imagine ppl in the gaming industry watching dis garbage nd laughing
I thought that and then when people started to speak...everyone sounded like they took a handful of ambien.
Seriously, Avatar 2, for being overrated as it is, had better underwater sequences than this. Also, did nobody ever try to take notes from other films featuring mermaids? Heck, Splash came out in 1984, yet had WAY better underwater scenes than this remake. And that's saying something, especially when The Little Mermaid (1989) came out five years later....
@@uglybetty8747 as part of the gaming community, even cheap/free games look better than that.
I've just watched a Russian fantasy movie from 2017 or so. It has a CGI dragon in it. And it actually looks really good. Much better than the CGI in this Multi Million Dollar Disney production.
The location and racebending could've given way for an original interpretation with a new story (and new songs) with larger roles given to Ariel's sisters, rather than trying to be 50% different, 50% shot-for-shot remake.
For real, give more importance to the sisters, heck makes some of them adoptive sisters, make one of them be gabriella the deaf mermaid from the tv little mermaid series based on a real dead girl who loved ariel so much
@@msk-qp6fn I wondered why they didn't include Gabriela since they qwre going for diversity. Plus Ariel's sisters' designs were much more interesting than hers, which I think was a poor choice because it drives home the misconception that Ariel felt like she didn't belong or had body dysmorphia.
While I despise the remake, I like the idea that all of the sisters are related but they all look different because of magic (I forgot the exact explanation). It's a nice thing because it could tell people even if you don't look the same, you're still family.
I'd have loved it if for an original film, the mermaid (who wouldn't be called Ariel since this is an original story) would have a longer amount of time on land to further emphasis her journey of self-discovery and identity.
Imagine if a some of the sisters knew about Ariel's secret grotto, love for humans, and supported her? What if Flounder accidentally blabbed to them about her deal with Ursula after Ariels transformation and tried to cover for her and help her out with a magic shell for communication they gave Scuttle to give to Ariel and Sebastian talks to but them but the sisters still understand Ariel without a voice because of their close bond as sisters. They totally had the chance to give the sisters a more proactive role. Instead, they just added new songs that add nothing to the story. During the battle, they could've changed it to where the sisters helped Eric save Ariel instead by working together to steer that ship into Ursula, they are daughters of King Triton they could have special powers at controlling the sea as well and Triton could see mermaids and humans can work together while also seeing humans weren't that bad after all as well if they kept the poor unfortunate soul transformation like in the original
@@lunabunnii I like the idea! Though I'd prefer if Sebastian told them rather than Flounder since it'd make Flounder look bad and Sebastian does it right aftee the destruction of the grotto because he wanted someone to know but didn't want to betray Ariel by telling Triton. I'd prefer if they try to follow Ariel on land like Flounder and Sebastian do rather than only having communication with them. But giving them a larger role when fighting Ursula would be satisfying.
My only fear is that with 6 of them, they wouldn't really have enough time to be distinctive (personality-wise) without taking up screentime. A big issue I had with Encanto was that it focused on 12 family members and Isabela, Luisa, and Dolores weren't included enough for their arcs to feel satisfying to me (I think they each only had like 10 minutes in the film), and Antonio mostly disappeared after getting his gift, despite the writers saying he was like a brother to Mirabel and stuck by her. The mermaid's sisters wouldn't get enough time to be their own characters versus aides to the little mermaid--plus Gabriela wouldn't have any time to exist in this one, either.
If they were going to swap Ariel they should have swapped Triton too. The price is adopted? Why? Make him black too. You moved it to the Caribbean already, but they can't commit. Must be multicultural, and yet no culture.
The remakes will only get worse. Just look at Snow White. One thing will kill the whole movie mainly. Two words: Rachel Zegler.
Red Shoes is a better Snow White film
It's sad, because the original film qualifies for a remake: it came out a century ago rather than 3 decades ago, and Snow White, the queen, and the prince don't get as much attention as the dwarves (who Disney focused on for the humor), so they could've done the 2015 Cinderella treatment by fleshing them all out more.
Instead we get a cast that defies the original story (and fairy tale) and a star who doesn't find much to like about the film. It felt like she only jumped on board to make a statement rather than wanting to expand on an enjoyable story.
Rachel just needs to be silent, every time she talks she destroys the film which has not even been released yet
@@OpticalSorcererI so agree. Snow White deserves that treatment for the remake, it’s the og Disney Princess movie/first full feature animated film everrrr too. It’s so sad how it doesn’t appear to be getting that Cinderella treatment 😢 but I hope I’m wrong
@@thegiftedfire3470 or better yet,Mirror Mirror
I was in acting all through high school and the main thing my teacher told us was to EXAGGERATE our emotions. Because even though we may feel that we’re showing a lot of emotions, the people watching may not see those emotions. Subtly is a beautiful thing but these actors clearly can’t do it. I’m sick of these guys just staring blankly with no emotions and then call it acting. You’re not acting, you’re just there. They don’t deserve to get paid as much as they do for not even doing their dang jobs.
My initial thought about the lines "filled the sky with fire!" that she delivered was: "Didn't you JUST sing a song where you didn't know what was fire and why did it burn?"
Watch older movies. Not every one is a classic, but there are a ton of great movies that utilize literally EVERYTHING they have.
Animation being so expensive, Disney once upon a time, understood that. So, any cartoon has to be paced well and gotten right the first time. Whenever you see what landed on the cutting room floor for a cartoon is often just in storyboard format, rarely is it ever truly animated and typically contains scratch voices vs. the final cast. As others more eloquent than myself have said, that holds very true for The Little Mermaid.
Our introduction to Ariel tells us everything we need to know about her including her obsession with the surface world.
Our introduction to Eric tells us loads about his demeanor and relationships, hobbies and kindness.
Our introduction to Triton simultaneously tells us how much he cares about his daughters (particularly his youngest) and his hopes for her.
Our introduction to Ursula, the Sea Witch, shows us at a glance, that she is clever and dangerous and *not to be trusted*
In addition to the pacing of each scene and musical number, the coloring plays a tremendous part. The greens and purples surrounding Ursula and her ashy looking skin all signify poison and danger. The scene where Triton destroys Ariels' grotto is lit with reds and yellows showing his anger. Under the Sea is vibrant and lively, even with its blue tones, trying to convey his attempt to get Ariel to see how fantastic the world of the Ocean is, and ending on a very bland and dull frame when he realizes he failed. That's why the muted backgrounds and dull color choices don't work, they make everything monochromatic and "dead" compared to the original.
It always would have been compared to the original, unless Disney had to adapt the story differently, to maybe tell the story more like they feel would be closer to the original book perhaps? They could have pitched it as a more "grown up" little mermaid, especially since so many of its viewers have grown up with the original. I saw another animated Little Mermaid from a Japanese studio once and the Sea Witch was part manta ray, and her companions were a dolphin and some other fish I forget. It was also closer to the Hans Christian Anderson one, with Merina (the Little Mermaid) unable to kill her love and so becoming sea foam. While Disney didn't have to go that dark and can still have a happy ending, what if it got to that point before the Sea witch was discovered? That she was so close to winning that the only out would endanger her love? Heck, the original Vanessa wasn't even a sea witch but an ordinary girl who happened to come across the prince while he was recovering on the beach. Ariel could try to get her to confess that she wasn't the one who saved him. So many possibilities... squandered.
Also, the color pallets for the original could have been recreated in live action! Like, sure they went for the realistic angle, but even movies with realistic settings can have strong lighting to set the mood, they had the opportunity to emulate that and they just didn’t!
Probably my biggest issue with this film was it was unnecessary. Not to mention Disney already did a Caribbean love story between the sea being and land dweller. That was Tia Dalma and Davey Jones in The Pirates of the Caribbean series. Had they actually decided to do a full film focused on those character, how they met, and how their love grew I would have been down. Instead they went the cheap route of chasing down a story already done and done better.
And they don’t even celebrate the Carribean. If you wanted to do a completely different Little Mermaid with different characters who aren’t those from the original movie set in the Caribbean, I don’t think people would be so mad.
But no. We have to stick a culture we don’t celebrate unto a movie clearly set in another part of the world in 1989’s movie.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 They already did that. It was called “Once On This Island”.
@@beethovensfidelio I meant by keeping the elements of the story like the mermaids, etc.
No one gonna care about them tho-
@@jennah5990 i dont think so older pirates of caribbean fans would watch i think
I love that you point out that live actions keep trying to be realistic. The only live action that I have seen that has that balance of realism and fantasy is Cinderella.
Y and he has a WHOLE video of why Cinderella worked
Cinderella live action really irks me with the whole message of toxic positivity
Halle is an amazing singer but her acting is just not it. The worst parts were when she lost her voice and she barely had any different face expressions.
She sings well, but in what universe is Halle Bailey a talented actress?
Yeah I mean its obvious she can sing but she needs further training as she seems to run out of breathe during songs.
For real
Her acting here was non existent plus her singing is more like screeching tires sometimes honestly
@@uglybetty8747what do you mean? By her singing?
@@jamishascott4854 sometimes it gets bad but personally i blame her bad acting for those moments, it's when her emoting is all over the place
32:28 I think people who don't understand the functionality of music in musicals tend to butcher movie musicals. (Looking at you, Tom Hooper.) The basic adage of musicals is this: whenever the emotions get too much, you sing. Whenever the emotions get too big for singing? You dance.
These songs in the live-action movies don't feel justified because there is no build up of that emotion. It is a performance, not an extension of character and emotion. The performance, the song is stripped of what makes it magical; the declaration of desire.
"Part of Your World" is an I Want song. Which is oftentimes the most recognized song in a Disney movie. "I Just Can't Wait to Be King," "How Far I'll Go," "Almost There," and "Reflection" being some. The changes in how the animated and live-action/animated hybrid change the tone of song itself, but also the character itself. In this version, Ariel seems to be confident, uncaring about what her father just said. She is putting on a performance. But the animated Ariel is hopeful, but scared. She wants something so bad, but she knows in doing so, her father may put her in massive trouble over it. Unlike the live-action movie, the animated version of the song is an extension of character.
The way the animated version is sung, there is character in the singing. For the live action movies, Disney wants everything to be and sound perfect. Meaning that these hints of character are stripped. You don't get those bits of decision that you get when you are singing as a character. They stripped the character from the song and she just performed it. It's as if Disney is like, afraid to have their live action characters show any bit of emotion or character in their songs. Especially their I Want songs.
I hate that they turned Part of your world into a power ballad. Yes Halle nails the song in terms of vocals and sounding great. But I feel like the directors missed the point about what the song is supposed to be.
I haven’t seen many people bring this up on how Halle changes the song to be more of a performance rather than a part of the story. It took so much away from the movie. I really hated it and I’m nervous for the color of purple.
They made changes to "Poor Unfortunate Souls" too. Melissa's voice got so dramatic so quickly without proper buildup, which heavily impacted my rating of the movie.
Halle did not become Ariel but forced Ariel to become Halle.
Reading this comment reminds me of Sideways. That said, I want to rewatch his video talking about this.
The way i completely forgot about the Pinocchio remake 😂😂😂!!! What a waste of time & money
The remake of Pinocchio is literally one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen in my entire life.
That was horrible!
When they make fish into sentient creatures the diving bird is much more horiffic. Aeriel is sacrificing them for the chance to talk to the bird.
The Little Mermaid Live-Action: I am a pathetic remake
Snow White Live-Action: Hold my beer
Or it should be Hold My Poison Apple for Snow White
I’ve been wondering recently if the Cinderella remake wasn’t as successful, would Disney have kept making remakes?
It wasn't the Cinderella remake that started this awful trend. It was Burton's Alice movie.The Cinderella movie was actually the best live-action remake they've made as it never strayed too far from the original, made wise changes that were excellent, did not insert toxic identity politics and it had the best characterization and writing. It was an exception to their rule.
@@orboakin8074 I completely agree that it was the best remake and honestly I completely forgot about Alice in Wonderland 😅. I know it’s wishful thinking but I really hope that Snow White will be so horribly received that it will cause Disney to open their eyes, cancel all remakes and focus on making original stories again.
@@nala1190 Amen to that, friend. Given how the lead actress has been behaving, and the crew behind it, I have no doubt it will be awful. I still can't understand why disney is letting her insult the Magnum opus of their founder and insult their viewers. Maybe me being Nigerian makes me not understand their strange business reasons.
@@orboakin8074 they also managed to give the main couple chemistry, make the stepmother interesting in a different way from the original, and, most importantly, it FELT like a fairytale, which is something that NONE of the other remakes accomplished (while I still like the original more I'd say the remake feels MORE like a fairytale, actually). Also it has COLORS in it. THE REST OF THE REMAKES COULD NEVER
@@orboakin8074 Disney seems to believe it too because they are the ones making these changes to ‘fix’ the originals. But there is no pattern to their behaviour like what was wrong with the Lion King and Mulan in terms of the ‘modern age’ that warranted (awful) remakes? Pocahontas wasn’t very well received during it’s time for quite a few reasons, why not remake it with actual improvements?
Insignificant things that deeply bothered me for no reason:
Introducing scuttle by having her eat a fish (why tf would you do that?? Isnt that the whole reason they hate humans?)
And Sebastian pulling Ariel by the tail. (How tf does he do this it looks so stupid)
Ariel scaring the shit out of the pufferfish to make it puff up like that
Melissa Mcarthys 'Ursula voice'
Ariels inner monologue singing after she lost her voice
Flounder not helping Ariel get to the wedding (justice for my boy flounder )
The wedding not being a wedding and not being on a boat
Ariel not being able to comb her hair with a fork because she got locks on
Rip Les Poissons and the caked up chef
Max and the eels no longer being characters
I hated everything about that mess
I fully believe these are being made poorly on purpose now. The first batch you could tell they were at least trying, but starting with The Lion King and Aladdin, the laziness and bare-minimum faith to the source films really started showing through. At this point they've stopped caring because hate-watching is the new thing. They'll get the money whether it's good or bad.
Except Aladdin is actually a great film it remained faithfull to source material but was also able to create it's own story. In fact one of the best live actions they made.
My only complaint was the miscasting of Jafar.
The butchering of Eric’s character is straight up unforgivable.
They don’t even get his fucking clothes right.
I remember as a kid I liked Prince Eric the most out of all the Disney Prince's at that time. I thought he was handsome, heroic, and he had Max, but thinking back with an adult lens now, it was probably because he was SO nice to Ariel. They truly did him dirty in the remake.
@@lunabunnii I absolutely despise this narrative that Eric is somehow a kind of predator that didn't respect Ariel when that is clearly BULLSHIT.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 ikr?!
@@lunabunnii also max was our stand in thank god he growled at vanessa_ursula otherwise id have gone mad
@msk-qp6fn Max is the best of good beans!! He found Eric's mystery girl before everyone else, but he couldn't talk like Sebastián or Flounder 🤣
When Ariel and Eric looked so racially different to their parents, I initially assumed there was going to be some neat twist that both were originally of the other’s species, bringing a new element to the old notion of changelings, or potentially sacrificed/swapped children between Royal or noble families for sake of peace.
But no.
Disney prefers diversity over logical sense.
Perfectly said. I hate how people are using race as a shield now instead of defending their work they get mad at people for not falling for the lazy race swaps. Characters like Miles Morales and T'challa are original characters and have stories that relate with people and those characters are beloved by many the reason people dont like race swaps is because people have realized it's not representation they are not changing the story or characters at all to relate to people they just slap a different race on a character and call it a day and call you racist if you dont clap for them. We need more characters like Miles and T'challa we need more movies like the Wish movie coming out. Give new characters a chance some will fail no question that's life not everything will work but the fact these characters have been successful and the race swap characters have flopped tells you all you need to know.
I was watching a reaction to the this live action movie, the reactors liked some things and disliked others about the film but the problem was the comment section. I litterally saw someone say it was better than the animated version and a ton who said all the changes made sense. Seriously how could they say that when none of them ever responded to me with an explanation why making Ariel forget the deal makes any sense, instead they just said I was nitpicking and that I needed mental help for analyzing a "kid's" movie.
I try to judge things by what they are, Cocaine Bear knew it was dumb and had fun with it and didn't need a stellar script, sure it had too many characters I think but it was fun. This Little Mermaid is a cash grab capitalizing on nostalgia and heavily relying on the animated original, of course I'm going to compare them and judge it accordingly. If they had done the original fairytale or just a different mermaid story all together it could've had better sales, less comparisons you know (though the production itself isn't great, kind of lackluster honestly, especially for a fantasy movie).
You’ll always find those kinda crowds it’s hopeless
They don't think, they parrot the online talking points that the studio sold them.
I just assume the people that say those sorts of idiotic things have smooth 🧠 like Koala bear. They are missing the "thinky thinky" parts.
There's a certain amount of leeway to be given for someone having different taste but anyone that honestly watches both and has any depth of thought or emotion and the ability to logically follow a story can't say this weak photocopy they crapped all over then covered in sparkles and outrage is better... or even close.
And these movies were made for families by adults who weren't pandering to 5 yr olds.
They were telling a universal story that can be appreciated by people at any age.
@@uglybetty8747exactly
People are saying this is one of the best/better Disney Remakes.
HOW?!
Slight chance it's out of pressure to not be seen as a racist
Halle may be a good singer but acting? She needs a better teacher. Point is, I think those who say they liked it actually loved the "idea" of it instead of what it actually was
@@DragonGoddess18yeah, it’s because they’re scared of being labeled as a racist if they share they’re true feelings.
I think this one of the better Disney remakes but that isn’t saying shit because all of them are terrible and this one is still below average.
@@judebaun9993exactly
All it has going for was Eric being more developed and the romance being more genuine and believable. But, that's it. Other than that it's still not good. The CGI is not good, the bloated pacing drags, the new songs are unnecessary, and the changes they made to the story either hurt the narrative, create plot holes, miss the point of the story in the 1989 original, fail to connect with the main plot, or were just unnecessary.
I love how this is over an hour because you rightfully go on a rant on why a scene does not work for possibly every other scene in the movie.
My biggest gripe with the remakes is the shallow representation and the lack of creativity put in each film. Each one is so dark and monotone in color to be 'realistic' when the story they are telling is one of magic and music, things we often depict as colorful and/or vibrant. I instantly knew seeing the scenes that were meant to be colorful in such underwhelming colors it wasn't worth watching even if the music was great.
What became even more outrageous was people defending the movie tooth and nail because it starred a black actress. Then pretending her being black had nothing to do with her being cast when it so obviously did with how the marketing was portraying it, Which no shade towards her, shes defiantly beautiful and talented . Im honestly interested in her role in 'the color purple' film. But disney did not do her justice by casting her in this film, it would of made more sense to call her back for the princess and the frog remake that their going to do at some point which, It is my favorite film of the princess movies aside from TLM. Which is why I was disappointed in this film for doing something that was so unnecessary and obviously for shielding critique.
It was also disgusting how people attacked anyone on twitter for simply drawing the original Ariel during a particular scene, in place of Halle. Yeah that drama, Almost like people grew up with red head ariel and will continue to view ariel as white with red hair. It's literally how they market her as, so Im not sure what the point of the race swap even was supposed to accomplish when they continue to largely promote her as her classic design and probably will for the rest of the studios existence besides the disney jr spin off show I guess? It's just lazy at this point.
Race swap just does NOT work!!
She's a terrible actress should have stuck to music industry because singing-acting is a talent she definetly lacks!
And Halle is also to blame for accepting the role knowing it was not meant for her.
Btw Color Purple was just another flop
It annoys me because now all these girls are going to assume that they are the ones who have to save men all the time, they have to be the one in the relationship who fixes everything. There needs to be a mixture that makes sense for each story and set of characters. I saw a comment that spoke on how the ending made Ariel and Eric on the same level, as they have saved each other at different points. Not to mention how Eric is the one who has skills in sailing!
While I don't think they would find fire dangerous (being underwater, they don't likely have much fear of fire compared to other dangers), I do find it a little odd that she doesn't have to remember what the word 'fire' means anymore. Suddenly it's written like talking about fire is a normal part of her lexicon when it's not. Because she's underwater.
She should have called it 'lights' or something. Her understanding of fire should be limited or like a fascination with something foreign, not like she talks about it every day.
Personally I think one of the reasons why the Disney Renaissance flourished was because it took traditional ideas and modern ideas and put them together in a way that works. The new artists and writers worked with old ones from Walt Disney’s time and together they compromised, because both have something beautiful and meaningful to offer. But nowadays, these movies only care about incorporating what’s modern and throwing away anything traditional. Because apparently anything from the past is bad.
But it’s not. Yes some views are outdated but not all of them. Not things like romance, and fairy tales, and chivalry and expressive animation, and bright color and dark shadows and warmth. These elements were used to help bring new modern ideas, views, and culture into light and it worked.
To me, without some elements of tradition, a Disney movie can’t work. I’m sorry.
This is so in-depth and I really appreciate it.
Thank you for making this. When people ask me why I don't like this remake I don't really have the time to really communicate the reasons, and I've never found a good enough critique online to point them to. So I'm glad this exists so I point people toward this video.
You know it's a JUSTIFIED RANT when the video is over 1 hour & 40 minutes long
Disney, your broadway musicals are so much better then these live action remakes.
Exactly and they should’ve just done pro-shots instead.
Hell no Aladdin and The Little Mermaid broadway shows were disappointing to me. First off it was the downplaying of villains as well as the climax and how they got defeated was super rushed and lame; instead of Ursula disguised as Vanessa we get this silly princess contest; Jafar never wishes to become powerful sorceror; they basically replaced Abu with this trio that served no purpose to the story other than comic relief
@@rachet87still better than what we got though.
@@history_loves_anime8927 Hell no it isn't not! Not by a long shot
An 1hr Lomg video on this remake show how much Aldone Hates It 😂
As do I!
I don't have much criticisms for this movie because my satisfaction bar is pretty low. That said, I like the old Little Mermaid because it's a film of a fairytale, where I can feel Ariel's curiousity and her desire of wanting to go to the human world, a world beyond her reach yet so close. I can relate to her fascination of the human world, as I also have a fascination with the supernatural world just like her. So, yeah. Relatable protagonist.
But this movie's Ariel is just so...bland and passionless. The plot happens because that's what happens in the animated film. Ariel is just...lifeless in this, idk. So yeah, that's bad.
Also, this movie is filled with so much pointless social drama online that it just turned me off from ever watching it, and Disney's insulting use of Halle Bailey's race to shield themselves from legit criticisms of the movie is...scum. So yeah, I've sworn off Disney. I'll just pirate their movies in the future if I'm feeling masochistic.
Oh, and lastly, I don't like Melissa's performance in "Poor Unfortunate Souls". It sounds like she's trying WAAYY too hard to sound like Ursula. I mean, I know actors are meant to try hard to BE the characters they're playing as so I'll praise her for the effort. But the og song starts off very chill and relaxing with Ursula just being a little bit creepy before going full on crazy and intense near the end of the song to pressure Ariel into signing the scroll. In this movie, it starts off so dramatic so early that it just takes out my emotional investment to the song.
So, yeah. Not a big fan of this movie.
These soulless remakes were already bland, but most of them don't even respect nor understand why the originals will be better in comparison. This one is especially awful because they've used race tactics in order to shield tangible issues with the film. The characters were written sloppily and the climax only solidifies how much its willing to sabotage the originals imo.
Awkwafina is an absolute acting deficit. It boggles.... BOGGLES my mind that she keeps getting work. Her work in this was absolute half-assed dribble. The film in whole was an overlong, unengaging, tonally scattered mess. I found maybe 2-3 authentic moments in the whole thing. These live action revisionist films are gonna be looked back on as some of Disney's biggest blunders.
She’s actually had good performances before in The Bad Guys, The Angry Birds Movie 2, Crazy Rich Asians and The Farewell where she even won the Golden Globe for Best Actress- Musical & Comedy. It’s time you stop treating her like she’s the female equivalent of James Corden. She doesn’t need that same infamous reputation.
@@hunterolaughlin I'm allowed to have my opinion about her lack of talent and her personality acting. Whatever she did in Crazy Rich Asians she does NOT bring to her other work. She's lazy, she's predictable, and she shouldn't be taking up voiceover jobs when there are hundreds of other talented people in the field.
In fact, I might just report your comment.
@hunterolaughlin Oh no... what ever will I do?? Dude, grow up. Seriously. Better get used to the idea that people aren't going to agree with your views.
@@opinian1068 Like they always say, “Haters sadly won’t get anywhere in life and always get proven wrong.”
Goodbye, you talentless jerk.
The original: “Guess whos gonna be on the plate” 💀🍽️
The remake: “Guess whos gonna be on the plate” 🤩🥳🥳🍽️
My least favorite part of the movie is when Ariel sings Part of Your World. It is more depressing than passionate. You can hear that the tone is flat, with no emotion whatsoever and she is talking instead of singing.
It would be unfair for them to use calypso music/steel drums and not set it in the Caribbean. Also Sebastian's accent was a mix of Jamaican and Trini, which is what Daveed was trying to portray. So comparing it to solely a Jamaican accent, yes it would sound strange. But they tried to put trini elements in the accent because of the heavy influence of calypso and steel drums, which originated in Trinidad.
I’m just gonna say this but why couldn’t this just be an adaptation of “Once on this island”? Cause it’s based on the original Little Mermaid story AND set in the Caribbean.
Literally the only reason I wanted to watch this movie was to see how they adapted the finale with Kaijursula into live action. Disney classics always had spectacular endings for their villains.
How embarrassing was that ending?!
Where ever the money for these bloated budgets are going, its clearly not in the VFX because these ending battles whether with in this film or Jafar becoming a genie in Aladdin 2019 or he looks like he just had red dye splashed on him. Point is they never look better in live action.
I thought it was too dark.....
Seriously, you couldn't see anything. @@DrawciaGleam02
It's funny that The Little Mermaid turned out really meh when the mermaid scene in the 4th Pirates was literally the best part of that movie 😭 what a wild juxtaposition for Rob Marshall lol
Or like with the Lion King remake had photo-realistic animals with soft expressions. Meanwhile, Chronically of Narnia with Aslan sits in the corner.
I just realized something that I haven't heard anyone say. They straight up kill king triton, and bring him back with the trident. So, now it's established that the trident can bring back the dead..... why didn't triton bring back his dead wife? 😅
I honestly hated how Flotsom and Jetsom didn’t speak in the live action. I always loved them as children(ironically everyone was scared of them but I loved them sm) so I was so upset to see it
I only watched this to see how the shark looks in the live action😔
You know you have a problem with your remake when the video disscusing the problems is longer than the original film
When it comes to the sisters I assume they breed like fish - so a bunch of Mermaids (merwomen?) laid their eggs and triton came along and fertilised them - hence the different "race" sisters - however there should be a LOT more children than that if that were the case - unless they are ALSO like a species of shark whereby the first born out of its egg cannibalises its siblings making IT the only survivor to carry the genetics.
😂 I thought maybe merpeople reproduced like seahorses and Triton was a bit of a seawhore in his younger days.
He decided to travel the 7 seas before he took over being King Fake Muscle Fins and collected eggs from someone in every sea.
Then he realized raising that many daughters would be a big hassle so he dropped off the eggs again with their egg donors families which is why they all have different accents.
He visited each once a year to instruct them on what their future roles would be then had their mothers and families taken out when they would be useful and less irritating.
Except he made a horrible mistake with Ariel and forgot where she was from, given her American accent and mixed African heritage he must have found someone to raise her, but it certainly wouldn't have been a native merperson from the Caribbean if the merworlds geographic ethnicities match with humans, which makes no sense if they do.
If she had been from that region she would have resembled the native people of the area not the changed racial mixture that was the result of slavery.
The merpeople who raised her must have gotten annoyed with her and given her back too early which is why they are both cold and distant and he is easily befuddled by her barely breaking the rules.
Something tells me that the upcoming Snow White movie will be three times as pathetic and will be Disney's downfall.
It's like Disney starts and ends with Snow White.
@@tjsmith5276 Could be a big possibility.
More like Bob Igor’s downfall. We really need a new CEO who knows how to handle Disney.
Given how bad Pinocchio’s remake was, this is going to be even worse.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 No doubt about it.
I'm not sure if it was your channel or another praising the Cinderella adaptation for being the only good one, but as I said under that video, what makes Cinderella work is that it actually introduces more elements of the fairytale, like the name Cinderella coming from sleeping near the cinders- It makes the things the writers made up like Cinderella's childhood and the prince getting fleshed out grounded in the story. Whilst The Little Mermaid is just picking away at its bones and wondering why it collapsed like a Jenga game.
Sorry but Cinderella live action really irks me. If anything they made Cinderella way more passive there than animated movie. And the abuse by her stepmother starting with her already being an adult as opposite to the cartoon where it started when she was just a child, makes zero sense and is less impacful. Doesnt cartoon Cinderella did everything to earn her happy ending while remake did nothing only gets it out of luck
It seems that the only thing that The Little Mermaid remake is good for is memes, specifically when it comes to its dialogue.
The original story took place in Italy, not Denmark. Denmark's seas aren't warm enough to be as beautiful as described in the story. Plus, the kingdom had mountains, something that is nowhere to be found in Denmark.
The disney movie you meant. Ironically HCA appears in an episode of the cartoon and Eric has a very Scandinavian/Germanic name for an "Italian".
@@finland4ever55 Eric was named after Eric Larson, one of Disney's 9 old men. That's the only reason his name is Eric. And HCA appearing in one episode doesn't mean anything.
Some Disney spin-off media does sometimes go back and forth on this. In the graphic novel “Ariel and the curse of the sea witches” it states Eric’s kingdom is Denmark with him and human Ariel going to the Danish colony in Greenland. Then in the little mermaid “A twisted Tale” book/graphic novel it states Eric’s kingdom is Tirulia a completely fictional kingdom.
@@brandonlyon730 That makes no sense. Eric’s kingdom has mountains, flamingoes and a beautiful clear ocean. None of that applies to Denmark.
@@vetarlittorf1807 That’s what the graphic novel shows so blame the author for that.
In 2006, I always wanted a live-action version of The Little Mermaid with Kirsten Dunst playing Ariel. Instead, they have held onto this idea for far too long until they decided to give it the green light in the era when the shallow and sensitive douchebags who are ruining the entertainment industries were the ones who led this infamous strike in the first place.
None of the remakes have been entertaining, necessary, wanted, or inspired. Other than Cinderella 2015 like this RUclipsr mentioned, every other reboot and remake has been completely lackluster and actually tarnishes the original imo
I love Shakira.
@@tobiasburrell6055man oh man her in red hair 😍
Scuttle was an absolute unit in the animated film.
He's the one who conducted the espionage mission that led to the discovery that Ursula was going to marry Eric.
He gathered air and sea units to lead a joint operation to stall the wedding, with himself leading multiple bombing runs.
He went toe-to-toe against the sea witch, hitting her with a deafening scream which resulted in him getting choked; even through the asphyxiation, he grabbed the locket and pulled until its string broke, crashing the locket to the ground and returning Ariel's voice where it belonged.
Now he's just Awkwafina.
Regarding Howard Ashman, on the director's commentary for The original Little Mermaid, John, Ron, and Alan Menken all talked about how Ashman was VERY particular about the songs in every detail, including the lyrics. The directors joked about how they would make suggestions and Ashman would (in their own words) correctly shoot them down except for two minors instances ("thingamabobs" in "Part of Your World" and her tone being more optimistic, less melancholy when she's singing to Eric on the beach). My point in mentioning this is that if Ashman were alive today, I believe he, like Sir Elton John over the Lion King songs, would be furious about the changes to The Little Mermaid songs.
Why can't they stop making live actions!?! They are all horrible!
Disney: We've got to have... moneyyy
@@carlososoriohernandez3979And people keep giving Disney their money!
Bob Igor: MONEY !@@carlososoriohernandez3979
@@regulus7181 Fr Lion King LA was literal cash grab and nostalgia bait.
💰
Wow Aldone must have really dislike The Little Mermaid for a hour long video 🐠🐡🦀
At least the Halle Bailey didn't talk shit about Ariel or the original movie
Yeah she did. She kept going on and on about how it’s not about her being “all about a boy,” “exploring what she wants.”
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343that’s not talking shit
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Bad faith criticisms against Ariel aren’t anything new (ironically, they’re the reason that Belle was given a feminist update in the 1991 animated film “Beauty and the Beast”), but Halle Bailey got flack for making those criticisms against Ariel because people are racist and want to find any excuse to harass Halle Bailey.
@@beethovensfidelio I'll give you that they're nowhere near as insulting as Rachel Zegler's. And yes, I fully agree people's treatment of Halle was very unfair. She didn't ask to be cast or chosen. And even if she did, I feel blaming, harassing and making racist memes about her casting for taking a job was fucking wrong. Just as I think them calling Rachel Zegler Snow Brown is just as awful.
But Halle in almost every single interview is insulting the original movie. She kept talking about how the themes are being updated and it got annoying really quickly.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Not only that but she did something that is hard for me to forgive her for, something that I see barely anyone talking about. I genuinely hope this is somehow misconstrued but she went on a Spanish talk show and the host was being very sweet to her, giving her compliments and such but she was smiling, glowing, thanking him sincerely but then she went to Disney execs after and told them it made her uncomfortable and now the host is in a lot of trouble. I keep seeing articles about his “disgusting” or “inexcusable racism!” But all he said was, and remember this was translated so he could have easily meant it differently, “When we saw you in the theater we did not see your skin color, we were lost in your eyes.” I feel what he was trying to say was that her being the skin color she was does not matter, to him and his family her emotion was enough. And yet I keep seeing people making him out to be a villain, even if he didn’t intend to be that he needs to be “educated.” Like I said he most likely didn’t mean it the way she took it but even so, she should have told him privately after the show and not the Disney execs because the guy might get canceled for saying something he meant to be a whole hearted compliment.
The sad thing is it could have been done SO well with some vision and CARE.
9:45 Hey, I like Stranger Tides, mainly because my favorite scenes were the mermaid sirens
16:56 Poor child actor for getting a lifeless character as his role
1:19:15 Yeah, the actress for Vanessa really did well and deserves to be in a better film
It's upsetting nowadays that in modern movies, women empowerment/feminism/independent women means hyping the women too much while making the men less involved or more useless. I'm up for some equality but not in this angle, it should be balanced not competed against
Vanessa's actor is literally the only actor other than Melissa McCarthy that is actually fucking trying. Vanessa is the one aspect of this movie that is on point.
I honestly found Vanessa more attractive than Ariel in the remake. I don’t even need Ursula to use her magic to make me fall in love with her human alter ego.
@@hunterolaughlin I agree with you, she is quite enticing
@@hunterolaughlin
Oh my! 😆
I haven't watched the full video for this but I can definitely say one thing, I don't fucking understand the praise for this remake because from what I've seen, everything looks like *bullshit.* I have no hope left for Disney any more, honestly
Because they’re to f*cking stupid to realize it, all they see is a blackface Ariel and scream 😍😍😍😍😍
That’s literally their opinion
Blame Bob Igor.
@@traviscunningham7062 walt disney is rolling in his grave every time bob iger does something shitty
I think the praise is coming from peer pressure like "If you don't like this movie, then you're a racist through and through"
Which is unfair because if they wanted a movie about a black princess then they should have made a new story based on African mythology or folklore or Jamaican stories. They had a plethora of options but instead, they took the lazy way out
The way she aggressively slides on that small island while singing good God a nightmare
45:35 TLM musical DOES have songs for Eric and Triton. The only difference I think is that it makes sense with how they added them in. (And TLM musical is probably one of the worst of the Disney theatrical adaption, but it is leaps and bound better than this.) You have "Her Voice" & "One Step Closer" for Eric, "The World Above (Reprise)" for Triton. You also have "If Only" with Triton, Eric, Ariel, and Sebastian. And then you have "If Only (Reprise)" with Ariel and Triton.
Are they perfect? No. But I think those songs give more dimension to the characters than the new songs in this movie did. I do also like that Ariel sings "The World Above" and the Triton echos the same song as he destroys the grotto. Turning her hopes into what she should fear.
Eric’s song is the most generic and cliche song they could have ever written for the character. And the one for Triton is even worse.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 When we did the show, I didn't think they were horrible. No, they're not the best. But it was better than Eric's song in the live action. (And leaps and bounds better than Scuttlebutt.)
@@nerdoftheatre Fair enough.
I really do not like the shade of red they chose for Halle Bailey. Because all of the underwater shots are so dull, it causes her hair to look like it blends into her skin. She has a nice skin tone, pick a shade of red that complements it. A rich dark red like a red rose or a red wine would look so pretty on her.
Thank you! I thought I was the only one who hated that shade they used for her hair! Also those shades of red would have been perfect for her.
@@maidenofiron I saw a video a long time ago where Glen Keane, the head animator for Ariel, explained that there were two reasons why they chose the iconic red hair for Ariel: it stood out from the green and blue ocean backgrounds and the red still maintained a nice color in dark scenes, which many of the underwater shots had. Plus a deeper richer shade of red would have better sold the idea of Halle Bailey playing Ariel and made her look more ethereal. Since she is playing a fantasy creature.
@@maidenofiron or something like the hair Kairi has from the Kingdom Hearts games, that would look so nice on her.
Not to mention the godawful costumes they chose to put her in.
Ariel has some of the most iconic outfits in Disney history and Halle is a very beautiful woman. Why would you not want to highlight that beauty? They put her in the most gawdy and ill fitting clothes that somehow make the awful yellow live action Belle dress look great by comparison.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 I know, Ariel had many amazing outfits to wear in the film. The blue dress she wore on land wasn’t bad, but why was that her only outfit?!
He’s finally talking about it! And in full version!!😎
All the daughters (including Ariel) ruled over the seas they called home. So, Ariel abandoned her duties as ruler so she could galavant around the human world with a human male she barely knows.
Shirk your responsibilities to do what you want. What a great message for the kiddies, Disney!
Ariel is still a princess in the human world, so she isn’t renouncing the throne.
At least “The Lion King” had Simba renouncing his carefree lifestyle, so he could return to Pride Rock and take his rightful place as king.
I have a feeling that some of these changes are due to budget restraints, but under the guise of "modernizing" the story.
They probably couldn't get Ariel to look right on the surface with Scuttle and cut it. And couldn't afford enough extras to be mermaids, leading to that pointless meeting and Ursula killing her clients
Then they really should've just left the original ALONE.
At least the Hunchback remake got cancelled
I hope the Lilo & Stitch one gets cancelled. 🙏
@hunterolaughlin I hope Moana gets canceled (although I am a little curious as to how ugly HeiHei would look in cgi). I think it's all over after Snow White though, the whole company is teetering on a cliff edge right now.
A true blessing in disguise
Blame Bob Igor.@@CinnamonGrrlErin1
@traviscunningham7062 oh I do, from the crappy movies to the price gouging at the parks with less and less value. He devalued the company to try to sell it to his friends at Apple and now it's not even worth it for them to buy it.
Oh thank GOD somebody realises that Disney doesn't give a rat's ass about diversity or equality or any of those things. Instead of creating strong women, Disney gives out this message that sure, women can be more powerful than men, IF THEY HAVE UNLIMITED MAGICAL POWERS.
It's not like Disney hasn't had strong women with character flaws. Elastigirl, Anna and Elsa, Mulan, Jasmine, Esmerelda... But somehow Disney has become even more sexist and racist.
Ursula's villain song was meant to sound like a rocking brulesque song. Ursula was deliberately telling Ariel that she should use her body and looks rather than her skills and personality to get Eric's attention. And Ursula is the villain, she's trying to get Ariel to sign a dodgy contract. But Disney is all "Oh, well the villain's evil villain song can't be TOO evil."
April didn't want to leave the sea JUST for a man in the original. She'd long been fascinated by the human world and Eric was simply a final catalyst, another thing April was fascinated by. The whole point was it was a coming of age story, and Ariel was growing up, but her father King Triton did not want her to leave. God, the actors and actresses they get for these roles are missing a brain or something, for they don't understand the original movies, and they don't even TRY to understand.
If I were Disney Casting Director , I would simply Cast Broadway Actor and Actresses as they trained to multitasking at Singing , Dancing and Acting
Thank God, I decided to wait until this film came out on Digital to watch it and instead spending my money to watch on the movie theater Across the Spider-Verse
I watched the Mario Movie instead.
Another detail about the timeframe of the Little Mermaid remake I noticed is that while showing Ariel his collection, Eric points out on a map that Ariel was looking at, the “Brazilian Empire” and “Venezuela”.
Brazil was an empire (a _real, monarchal_ empire) for much of the first half of the 19th century.
And what did Brazil import the most of during the 17&1800's?
Slaves.
Good job setting this in a copy of the real 🌎 Disney. Slow clap.
What about "Ariel makes a deal with Ursula and puts everyone in danger" (a criticism that has been around since the 2000s)?
Ariel doesn't change in the original film because it was not needed for the story to work. Ariel wanted to go to the surface and convince Triton that not all humans are bad and in the end, Triton was wrong (and learns and grows in the end) and Ariel was right because the surface is where she belongs and not all humans are bad.
But, she also struck a deal with Ursula (the villain). We all make mistakes. It happens to everyone. But, it's essential that you learn and grow from your mistakes.
In fact, I was expecting this remake the address this criticism. But, for the most part, people aren't saying, "This movie is better because Ariel has an arc and she learns something in the end. Hooray. To hell with the 1989 problematic cartoon" when the remake got released this year. In fact in the remake, Ariel said, "I'm sorry. It's all my fault." While in the original, Ariel said, "Daddy I'm sorry. I didn't mean to. I didn't know."
I think you can make the argument that the original is more genuine and believable thanks to the voice acting and we do see Ariel's expressions being more terrified in shock and horror (despite being illogical and nonsensical. But, the original's narrative is more simple and emotional like a traditional fairy tale, meaning logic takes the back seat while later Disney fairytale films like Beauty and the Beast and Frozen have more logic despite them being based on fairytales). Afterall, Ariel in the original was very expressive. But, in the remake it doesn't feel genuine because of Halie Bailey's lackluster acting and her mime acting wasn't expressive compared to Ariel in the original.
So, is it really worth getting so angry over?
(Even the Nostalgia Critic didn't bring up this criticism again in his recent review of the Little Mermaid 1989 despite him bringing it up back in his older review from 2011)
Sure Ariel signing Ursula’s contract was an error on her part BUT Ursula was smart to ask Ariel when she was already crying after her dad destroy her collection. She knew Ariel would more likely say yes to the offer. Villains always try to catch you at a low point in your life
Personally, as a Dutch woman who was also exposed to non-English adaptations that were faithful to the novel, and I definitely think a big thing of what goes wrong with The Little Mermaid is represented by the race swap but it's not the core issue. Rather, it's the fact this remake is even less faithful to the original novel's story then the animated movie whilst simultaneously showing they never read the novel as that actually did have a pretty feminist ending. By changing so much of the world, they weakened its foundations.
and they had the nerve on starting the movie with a quote from the book
No, they better not touch Atlantis.
They won’t since that film bombed at the box office and got mixed reviews.
Atlantis doesn’t have the large nostalgic following that Little Mermaid has.
A live action Atlantis The Lost Empire would be a great idea.
Eric is one of my favorite princes, so I hated how his moment of defeating Ursula was taken from him
One of the things I hated about the movie was that Ariel didn’t have her iconic red hair, it looks more brownish, I don’t have a problem with hailey being part of a cast, but I have seen fan arts that do more justice, have more vision and respect escencial characteristics of Ariel, like the color of her hair and bangs, but not the texture of the hair, which in the fan arts, it not smooth, is not bad, because it respects the essential characteristics, and is a more faithful representation of the original movie, also because of the color palettes and lightings.
I hated everything about this mess-acting, characters, filming, the music sounds like elevator music. The girl is retry and has a nice voice but she’s NO Ariel!
I gotta wonder if the writers of this movie were brain damaged. Having Ariel forget that she needs to kiss Eric makes the situation LESS empowering to her because it takes away Ariel's agency. In the original movie, she wanted to kiss Eric, he was the one hesitating. How do they not see that making Ariel forget what she's doing when she's alone with a guy she barely knows is REALLY sketchy? She's basically getting a magical roofie, and that's supposed to be empowering???
Have you seen Robocop 2? Remember the scene where OCP execs installed like a hundred new directives based on arbitrary complaints and the result was that it hindered Robocop's cognitive functions and made him chaotically incompetent? That's basically what Disney does with its remakes.
Like it takes more of Ariel’s autonomy away. In the original, she really didn’t care about rules like most teenagers don’t.
If in Halle’s words if this movie is supposed to be about her freedom and what she wants, then why are we making her forget the reason she traded her tail in the first place? The original Ariel wanted to be with Eric. By taking that away, you’re also removing Ariel’s autonomy from the original and the character as a whole.
You guys didn’t give her any agency. All you did was make her weak which is NEVER what Ariel was in the original movie.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343 Exactly. Btw, people tend to get too caught up in her quest to be with Eric and think that undermines her goal to explore the surface when in reality, she wanted to explore with Eric at her side.
@@sophieamandaleitontoomey9343she literally wanted to be with him as they got to know each other more. They still fell for each other and got their kiss
@@jellyjellywowie But again, it takes more of her agency away by the stupid memory loss storyline.