the Little Mermaid remake is utterly bizarre
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 25 окт 2023
- ★☆★ Help Me Get to 4,000,000 Subscribers! bit.ly/1Iqsdaq
Check out my Podcast
/ @dointhedevilstango8197
★☆★Buy some Merch: alexmeyers.teemill.com
★☆★PLEASE SHARE THIS VIDEO!!
★☆★PREVIOUS VIDEOS:
Peter Pan remake
• Disney's new Peter Pan...
Pinocchio remake
• that new Disney Pinocc...
Spy Kids reboot
• the new Spy Kids Netfl...
Thank you so much for 3,000,000 subscribers. If you like what you see, please share these videos with your friends to show support! 
Развлечения
I absolutely hate the "realistic" trend of CGI animals. The old Disney made strange-looking animals like crabs and flounders cute instead of realistic for a reason.
And people out there insist that they keep the animal sidekicks for the remakes and I am always like how? They will look awful, for a cartoon animal sidekicks work, but in live action realistic CGI they look creepy. My favorite remakes are the ones where the animals don't talk and their actions in the plot are reduced in favor of developing the human characters like Cinderella, they took away the mini cat and mouse scenes to leave more room for new scenes. And in Mulan while the movie has other issues, I prefer no Mushu to creepy CG Mushu.
❤❤q❤1Qay😂
but honestly to see KIDS enjoy this film as i enjoyed the OG. priceless.
Just hideous
I dont care much about the movie but THIS..i hate this..please make them cartoon-y..we dont need another sonic incident
I think one big problem with the remakes, outside of the horrible CGI, the unnecessary songs, and the weird plot points, is that they act like a female character cannot be strong AND need to be saved. Rapunzel was fricking strong, but she needed to be saved from the tower, and there’s no way you can get around that. Ariel is strong. Jasmine is strong. Snow White is strong. Cinderella is strong. Strength comes in different forms; stop erasing it.
YeS THIS IS WHAT I MEAN whats wrong with falling in lvoe with a prince?!! doesnt mean your incapable of anything else
That's also part of the reason why feminists liked Barbie so much. Yes, a woman can be strong and independent, but there's absolutely nothing wrong in being silly and liking pink sometimes. A message that is lacking these days
@@tocaaa942You're*
@@lorenzotorri605 exactlyy
@@tocaaa942There is nothing wrong with it but with these characters it was their ONLY motivation and that needed to change. And in changing that they need to add other motivations/reasons for being and not JUST for a man to come and marry them.
one thing that i really really hated about this movie is the LACK OF BUBBLES! like, in the animated version almost every time someone talked or moved there was bubbles and I felt like in the live action the lack of bubbles makes it so hard (at least for me) to believe that they are underwater... that really bothered me.
that is exactly what i said to my friend after I finished watching the movie, they missed a huge chance to make the undersea looks more magical...
Oh. I had a weird feeling but I couldnt pin point why. And I think it was exactly that. It feels like a weird green screen because there's no interactions bw the characters and the environment.
Right!!
if you've ever seen underwater in the real life sea you'd notice there are NO bubbles lol... unless you bring a scuba tank with you
@@robertrijkers4923
also, when you communicated with the fish and crabs through speech, there were also no bubbles. Thanks for the clarification.
What also annoys me is how dark this movie is, visual wise. The ocean is dark but the corals and animals and also the mermaids were so bright and colourful as a contrast. In the live actions it’s just dark
Finally someone said it! I know it's set underwater and underwater is dark but Disney could have changed the brightness and saturation so everything was still easily visible. As an animator, I understand that contrast is difficult to master in film and that the lighting is different to animation but so much of this movie was CG rendered, they could have easily done something to fix it. I spent all of the underwater scenes squinting at the screen in the cinema, just to see what was going on.
They didn’t even get the animals right💀, Sebastian is supposed to be a lobster not a crab, and why is the bird scully not a dude, and flounder is built different 💀
I was so distracted by this alone, she did great but it felt somber!
sebastian is a crab 😭
They could’ve at least make him look like the specie of crab he is,lol
It's insane that the best parts of this remake were the parts that WEREN'T underwater.
Above the sea
Above the sea
Quality's higher
Up where it's drier
That's New Disney
@@NJGuy1973that's new Disney ey ey ey
You know I was trying to explain this and you wrapped it up perfectly. You forget all about underwater when she is out and when you are brought back it’s like “oh right….”
Avatar actually filming underwater made the little mermaid underwater scenes look awful. 😂
Lol. Yes. Underwater scenes were so bad. The chemistry between the 2 leads was great. Once ariel comes on land and is with eric I think it was cute. It reminded me of a play. But the underwater scenes were very very stiff
As an animator, there is so much potential out there! New characters, new animation technics, new stories etc. Why keep this remake thing?! Disney has to stop for real!
established franchises are low effort cashcows....wet dream of corporate greed
Don't forget If they want to do a black Cast there are countless african, jamaican....Stories out there....waiting
Dana Terrace tried to, but you saw how that worked out.
Because no one watched:
Elemental
Soul
Strange New World
Turning Red
Luca
Raya and the Last Dragon
Onward
While yes Covid affected some of these movies, the point still stands that all of these movies had released and went largely under the radar despite some having interesting concepts, animation styles, or new stories. None of these movies really drew any money while familiar properties were still money printing machines, just not to the extent they typically have been. My point being, fan consumption across the board in almost all production companies have largely been against anything “new”.
money, dear boy
I think what made the conflict between Triton and Ariel better in the first was because it was a PUBLIC event Ariel missed. She made her father and sister embassed by her absence. She's embarrassed her family in front of the entire kingdom.
But in the live action - it's just a family meeting. The stakes aren't there as they were with the daughters performance.
In the original, the concert she missed was the equivalent of a quinceañera or debutante ball. It was essentially her official introduction to society as a young woman. Like you said, that was a major embarrassment to the whole family and especially her father as the king for her to be a no-show.
My least favorite part was that in the live action, Ariel did everything so there was really no reason that Triton should think that Eric is worthy to marry his daughter. In the animated version he killed Ursula so he essentially won her over.
That's because Disney needs all the female characters to look strong and capable and all the male characters to look like useless doofuses.
Eric still out his life on the line to save Ariel. It always felt right for Ariel to be the one to kill Ursula
@@SvanTowerManthe original Mulan was strong in her own way they didn’t need to change her
@@kirstenrox234umm no. In the ORIGINAL little mermaid Ariel saves Eric earlier in the film already when he’s washed up on the beach. So it’s only fair in the end that Eric saves Ariel but the REAL reason is so Triton can see Eric was on the GOOD side. We do not know if Triton would’ve noticed Eric if he never saved Ariel
@@lessismore8533 girl stop being a pick me choose me. Eric also saved Ariel maybe rewatch the movie
To be fair, Buddy Hackett, the original Scuttle, wasn't primarily a voice actor. But he was a stand up comedian who was brilliant as Scuttle.
Came here to say this as well. He only had a few VO roles and two were TLM related. By the time the 1989 movie came out he had been in comedy for 40 years.
While that is true, the point made is still valid. They don't hire these people because they are good fits for the roles, but because the names are recognizable.
@@Mediados It sounds like you're disagreeing with me while saying the same thing.
@@CoolPaDuke Now doing that unintentially is almost a feat isn't it?
For real though, you just stated a fact, there is nothing to disagree here. I'm just saying that while the info given in the video is a bit inaccurate, the argument is still a good one.
Yeah
One of the issues i have with "live actions" is that they look so dull visually compared to the animations. I think Cinderella is one of the most succesfull adaptations and all i can think about is how vibravant it was. Her dress popped out of the screen, there was color everywhere. There are some scenes here that are so dark you lose the visuals completely. Animation would be always superior to live action, especially when the animated version came first
YES! Prime example of this drab remake junk is with Lion King! It was so brown and yellow and more brown that you lose all the vibrancy that the original animation had! Even the "Hakuna Matata" and the "Can't Wait to be King" scenes, which were like some Wonderland kaleidoscope trip, is just a boring few minutes that we all compare to the original. Cinderella was the best, and I think Aladdin was actually pretty good, too!
The thing about Cinderella (2015) is that the only scenes that were CGI were vast views of the kingdom or the Castle at the end of the film, and any scenes that involved magic. Every other scene was filmed in an actual location or it was built by the team to really deliver their imagination. *The entire ballroom of that movie was built by hand!* No CGI what so ever and it just made the movie even more magical.
Cinderella was the proof of concept, every movie since then has been industrialized.
Waah
Yes Cinderella was the best remake!
Disney: all the animal sidekicks must look realistic for maximum realism
Also Disney: yeah scuttle the seagull can hang out and talk underwater for seemingly indefinite time
Tbf scuttle isn't a seagull anymore, some birds can sing underwater
Scuttle is a Northern Gannet and they can stay underwater for a few minutes.
@@midnightdream380
Who are you?
@@_-_-_-_-_ I'm no one, I just commented something I remembered from David Attenborough's series. I didn't mean to come off as '☝🤓' but I can see how I did lol.
Fr like where’s the realism
Even as a kid I assumed Ariel can't write in human language and can only write in Atlantian and this is why she didn't write anything for him.
Yeah she writes her name in English on the contract and you can see some English words but I assumed it was just for the benifit of the audience so they understand what she is actually writing.
But then you have to explain they all speak the same language
@@a.k.1217 Why? Civilizations on earth can speak the same language but write it differently and have through out history it's only in the modern ages that everything became more standard because reading a writing wasn't taught in schools, chances are in 18th century when the film is set only the rich, royal and a few people in a few jobs could read and write most regular people didn't.
The UK is made of England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales and English was spoken across all these countries but they mainly spoke and wrote in their own language and even if the wrote in English it was mispelled because it was spelled phonetically.
For example fone instead of phone.
That's dangerous thinking. You watch your back.
@@RettMikhal What?
@@matthew-005 Disney has powerful assassins.
You forgot the chef scene, just like Disney did. lol. They took away the fear of the sea animals, during the time on land. The crab just goes wherever it wants, in the live action, and has no worries about being eaten, which is a big reason why sea life fears man in the original.
FRRR
I feel like Disney left that out purposely since it can offend people with the fact it promotes "animal abuse". I'm not saying it does, but this generation, that is exactly what people would be thinking
I loved that song and what Rene did with it - I was mad as hell when they decided to drop it in the name of political correctness, and as a result will never watch it!
Wasn't that from The Little Mermaid animated series on Disney channel? 😂
ok
The memory loss not only adds nothing to the story, it takes away. The reason why Triton couldn't destroy the contract was because it was valid, Ariel willingly signed it, but if you add that Ursula cheated it changes it completely. Also, her knowing what she needs to do adds more urgency to the story and contrast between her just enjoying herself and Sebastian losing his mind to make the kiss happen.
Ironically it also makes the Kiss the Girl scene _actually_ creepy instead of the weird implication that mute people can't consent they were applying to the og. Since she doesn't remember/keeps pulling away and he keeps pushing for it.
Also, in the original, she was aware of the necessity of the kiss so when she *heard the animals singing* it was like trying to get them both into the mood.
The new version has her fully able to hear the song but ignore it, and eric can't hear it at all. Whereas in the original i think it was sebastian that gives the correct name to eric and he acts like he thought of it himself, proving that the song has some sway over him even if he isn't consciously aware of it.
It's things like this that make me say if you aren't going to do it right, don't do it at all.
@@Cardinal_claw The other thing about the 'Kiss the Girl' song/scene is that the lyrics stress that Eric needs Ariel's permission before he can kiss her; and yet, Ariel can invade his space and touch his face/run her fingers on his lips (a very intimate gesture - regardless of the reason) to 'tell' him what her name is.
Absolutely loathe the double standard here.
@@madamefluffy4788where in the song does it stress that he needs her permission? If anything the song was prompting him to make a move because they both were shy. In addition to this, Ariel doesn’t know any social cues because this is her first time out of the water, where as he’s a human prince that grew up on proper mannerisms and doing what’s socially acceptable.
@@changesme110yearsago9 The lyrics in the song were changed from 'there's one way to ask her' to 'use your words, boy - ask her'.
I.e. - The song is telling Eric he needs to ask Ariel's permission to kiss her before kissing her.
And clearly, permission is something that the seafolk believe in because they are telling Eric to ask for Ariel's permission before doing anything. If that applies to Eric, the same applies to Ariel (or it should - but it doesn't). I.e. - double standards.
Obviously melissa mccarthy couldnt touch the original ursala but she was the only actor who brought more than a minuscule amount of emotion to the character
Agree she NAILED it! Along with Vanessa’s actress
Seriously. Halle Bailey had the entire expression the entire film.
She was all o __ o
@@lessismore8533 She didn't "nail it", she was horrid compared to the original. But at least she showed emotion, unlike anyone else on the cast.
@@lessismore8533 Vanessa was the best part of the movie!
I love Melissa’s interpretation and performance of Ursula! She actually did her research and I think was the only one who could’ve pulled of a live action Ursula. Ursula is based of the drag queen, Divine. And Melissa has done drag portraying Divine so it’s really incredible that it’s come full circle
I find that the sisters being of a different ethnicity is a bit disturbing... cause how many affairs did big king fish have to have all those different daughters or do they all start looking the same and than magically change when they are put to rule over the set ocean 🤔 or does the ethnicity change depending on which ocean they are born in... I find this whole thing confusing 😕
You’re absolutely right and I’m glad you said it. Diversity in movies is awesome when it makes sense, here it just looked like King Triton got busy
@@mistyeyestudios6342”got busy”😂😂😂
I’m in for a cast of all different ethnicities, but having them be siblings honestly isn’t right 😭 not helping is that they’re just racelifiting instead of making original characters
I suppose they could all be adopted but then I feel the writers need to put in a line alluding to that.
I believe they are supposed to represent the Seven Seas.
I liked that they gave Eric more agency outside of being Ariel's love interest, by having him also collect artifacts from his voyages. However, I wish that they'd kept the scene of him ramming the ship into Ursula, instead of having Ariel do it herself.
THIS !! I was so confused of this change
Oh, but surely you know Disney have to remove even the slightest hint of women needing help from their romantic interests. Because modern women don't ever need a mans help with anything, that would make her less of a person. .....my God they literally makes it seem like a sin to just be a normal silly girl who likes a boy. Not even the real crazy feminists wants this narrative.
@@kristin123a true 😭 it’s so sad like they can write strong women whilst they also have a good relationship?? It’s not so hard to make both characters well written and be important
How does he have more agency? He does even less in this movie than the original.
Tbh, he had plenty of agency outside of being the love interest in the original too, i think they made him worse here. He could play the flute and had a dog he loved and used to dance with him, and he used to go in public and mend in with the common folk etc etc. It was obvioud he had so much personality and a full life and they fit perfectly with Ariel. Like, i actually don't think collecting voyages added that much? Idk i think he was fine the way he was. He's my favorite disney prince lol.
Fun fact Ursula and Triton being siblings, and Ariel's mother being killed by humans has actually been established canon, long before the live action. The siblings thing was one of the original concepts for the movie, which was later used in the musical retelling. As for the dead mother that was (i believe) shown as the first scene of the sequel.
Yeah, I know there is a scene about the death of the mom in the prequel, Ariel's Beginnings. Can't confirm if they mention the mom in the sequel though, I've never seen it.
Came to the comments to say this as well. It always surprises me when people don’t know about the other little mermaid movies because I grew up with all of them.
lol I just commented the same thing. Also- in Disney's Teisted Tales books Ursula and Triton are siblings too.
Actually the mother thing is shown on the 3rd movie, the 2nd movie was about Ariel's daughter, Melody
Considering they cut it out of the original, maybe people need to realize that they did that for very good reasons.
I can’t believe they had that bird underwater for so long and I didn’t even notice 😭
This is what "too realistic" looks like, real life looks pretty boring a lotta the time especially in the context of this fantasy/fantastical setting :) I love the flute transitions lol
Love the point you made about voice actors!
So cutest creator❤❤
Wow😢😢
nice
Except Scuttle was not just a voice actor. He was a legendary actor and comedian, Buddy Hackett.
👍
Part of what makes Disney movies so whimsical was the animation. Snow White, sleeping beauty, Alice in Wonderland. Hell even the live action Alice in wonderland looked good. I wish they’d go back to what made them so special
She has a beautiful voice.
The acting though....
well the classics you mentioned had Technicolor, which is now a completely obsolete form of color filmmaking (which is so disappointing in so many ways).
However, Disney still had this charm with their 90s Golden Age. The Lion King is still one of the best animated films ever made, and certainly Disney's top 10. They haven't been taking these kinds of risks for a long time. Only Moana, Turning Red, and Soul have come close for me personally within the last few years.
Hand drawing requires effort...main reason everything is overseas CGI puke these days
The live action Alice in Wonderland was a great example of keeping a live action movie feeling cartoony. It's definitely possible, they just don't want to put in the effort because they know people will still keep going to see these lifeless remakes.
Right!! Alice in wonderland and Maleficent are top tier when it comes to color
Bro I don't give a frick what color Ariel is but I want her to have red hair 🥲
100% - her hair should have been redder for sure.
My biggest issue with raceswapping characters because of the lack of diversity in the movies, is that Disney has def got a good movie starring a black Disney princess. I don't get why they don't want to make a remake of Princess and the Frog? It's one of the best and most underrated movies of Disney!
Tiana was a human for less than 20% of that movie, at this point I don't even care about the race swap just give us new stories and new characters
I think they need to get to remake this to have the license of the merchandise and stuff prolonged, I've read it somewhere but can't explain in English sorry. This is why they do the crimes of horrible remakes to the old movies first. But fret not I bet they will ruin every movie for us. 😅
yeah like they definitely need to have more black characters, but why take away white for black? it's just as bad as taking away black for white. i can understand making more of the background characters black for diversity but why make the main character black when they were originally white? im not saying it's bad to have black main characters but its bad to make characters that were originally white be black. its so stupid.
@Genevieve-xj8ng it's really not. there is ONE originally black disney princess as opposed to, what, like 10 white ones? we have been well represented almost exclusively for as long as film, as a media, has existed. chill out.
Or create new princesses to do that too. What is literally stopping them!? (Obviously the lack of imagination, being the main reason. . . .)
You just phrased it perfectly: It‘s all lifeless now!
It’s all just about money and remakes and CGI and you can feel it whilst watching the new films.
It’s so sad to think that future generations will grow up with that
Yeah I still remember seeing The Lion King and Aladdin (the originals) in the theater as a kid. The magic of them stuck with me for a long time. I loved Aladdin and Little Mermaid so much as a kid. I'm sad my child won't have that now with these new ones. He likes the cartoons tho.
They won't, though every little child who reacted to the trailer already knew about the original. The original movie is not disappearing. I don't know why people keep making this argument as if they like burned all the original copies. It still exists and it still being newly watched all the time 😂
just show your kids the old movie instead of this one
@@pinkiepiereincarnate2291because the internet likes to over exaggerate.
@@pinkiepiereincarnate2291 Of all people, Nostalgia Critic made this argument in defense of modern adaptations in general (his was specifically in reference to one of the Dr. Seuss remakes). The remakes exist, but they'll fade to dust while the originals will live on.
In fact, he posits that the remakes caused a Renaissance of appreciation for the original works. I feel like the same thing is happening with Disney. "HEY LOOK! A NEW LION KING THAT SUCKS. Let's rewatch the original instead!"
You said Eric and Ariel defeated Ursela, but Eric, unlike the original where he is the one to steer the ship into Ursela, is just hanging off a piece of debris while Ariel takes command. So.. he's just.. there. Which is weird becuase I always thought that Eric's show of bravery and his actual help slaying Ursela was the reason the king had a change of heart and finally accepted the fact that not ALL humans were bad and he could be at peace with his favorite daughter being among them. The live action makes Erics very small part in the story even smaller and turns the king into a guy with anger issues but who is ultimately a giant pushover.
Also the seagull and the fish bothered me. They did a decent job with the crab🤷♂️
That wasn't a seagull. That is a Gannett. They gender and species swapped Scuttle.
Totally agree with you on the first paragraph!
yeah, this is what happens when people try to change individual elements in complex stories just because they want to make it more up to today's standards. I'm kind of fascinated by how short-sighted these changes are. Most of the time they seriously damage the integrity of the story or character motivations
@@filipsperlits not even an issue of "today's standard" its just bad writing.
If I had a nickel for every Disney live action movie had a sassy seagull, I would have 2 nickels, which isn't a lot, but it's weird that it happened twice.
A little correction; the "dead mom" trope is actually real! In the 3rd movie, "Ariel's beginning" it touched base and explained how her mother actually died and it was humans that killed her out of greed with a ship. So that part is actually right. lol
Her mother was dead in the original Hans Christian Andersen story as well.
Just because they tried to poorly retcon her mom's Self Crit in a crappy straight to DVD prequel doesn't change the fact that it's still a trope, and it doesn't change the original film that had no explanation at all.
It also comes from the Broadway, those lines are directly lifted from the show. Like most of the changes
Your bit about Ursula suddenly becoming Triton's sister in this version: found this on Wikipedia (about the cartoon movie):
"Ursula was originally conceived as Triton's sister, which would have naturally made the character Ariel's aunt, but the idea was ultimately abandoned. However, their blood relationship is still vaguely alluded to when the character mentions a time during which she actually lived in Triton's palace." So, these guys pretty much decided to include a part of the original screenplay that was scrapped; they didn't invent the idea.
I'm certain that I've heard that idea over a decade ago, to the point where I was convinced that it was mentioned in the original movie.
The idea was scrapped for a reason. It just brings up too many questions. Like, why didn't Ariel know more about her if she was a blood relative? Why didn't Ursula refer to her as cousin, or niece, or whatever?
The line about her living in the palace doesn't mean she's related to royalty. It just means she used to be a dignitary of some sort. Like an advisor or even some sort of servile role, like a cook or a tutor.
I always imagined Ursula had a Jafar-like role in the palace in the distant past, but that since Triton is proud, smart-ish, stubborn, and strong-willed, she got exiled for meddling.
My breaking point for Disney was making the Sanderson sisters sympathetic. The women who brutally murdered god knows how many children. Like wtf.😂
Side eyeing cruella de vil
@@yuki97kiraomg don’t even get me started on that movie, they keep doing the “evil person can be redeemable” and I’m like, it’s fiction? The woman literally made coats out of dogs there’s no redemption from that which is why she’s a fictional villainous character? I don’t like that idea they’re giving to kids, sometimes evil happens and there’s no reason or explanation
NO, LITERALLY!!! Like there's no WAY that Winifred suddenly GAF about her sisters! She would've been so happy to have that much magic and power at her fingertips.
@@yuki97kiraI actually liked the movie Cruella, but that's because it's about fashion design and the songs are pretty good
@@joellezima3506 I liked the Cruella movie myself, but mostly because I mentally dissociate it from 101 Dalmatians.
I like the point you made about how Disney's trying to use the "I don't need no man" trope for every princess. They're equating a strong woman to one that doesn't desire love or doesn't fall in love, or "need a man", but it's not wrong to want a man - or a woman, to want love. It also doesn't make you any less strong to want that or fall in love. I feel like the entire concept of relying on others has become negative - even as someone who struggles to rely on others - and it makes me sad and goes with how isolated we all feel I'm sure.
I feel the same way. There is the saying that, "Behind every successful Man is a strong Woman" (or vise versa, etc) - because even the most "successful" people need someone to go home to, or to vent to, or rely on sometimes to make dinner or pick up the kids, etc. There is a reason that people and many species of animals need to rely on others - because it takes a village.
Corporate feminism is basically a very shallow version of actual feminism that does more harm than good tbh
ok
I didn’t get that. I liked her more in this film than in the original. I thought it was nice that they put in more common interests between the two. And by making Ariel do things herself, it made her more accountable for her actions. In the original film, I understand she is supposed to be young and naive but she had no growth in the original film. She didn’t have to answer to her own actions. Eric saved the day. I didn’t see anything that diminished Eric’s strength in this new one.
@laurabraus, Funny how people have issue with the supposed "Don't need no man" trope, while meanwhile in some of the older movies, the only reason why women *needed* a man, in movies like Sleeping Beauty and Snow White, was because they needed to be rescued by their one dimensional knight in shining armor. Name one interesting thing about the princess in each movie
I agree with you on that part where Ariel sings when she supposedly lost her voice lolz. Like, it really came out of nowhere in the movie 😂
Kinda feel dissapointed that they let pass the chance to show Ariel's yearning through dance like in the original fairytale instead of 'metaphorically' sings in her head tho.
Like, there's something poetic about the scenario where even though she loses her best gift, she would still try the hardest to master her newly gained human legs justs so she could communicate with this man she fell in love with.
I think the direction that Disney and so many other studios are going in now just really show the lack of (or stifling of?) creative voices and a willingness to experiment and create something new. When the Disney Renaissance started it not just sparked off for Disney it inspired other studios to come up with fresh new takes too, like Anastasia or We're Back!. Whereas now they're all playing it so safe and just redoing the same scripts with new characters or remaking older favorites and while audiences may come out to see it because there will always be parents looking for a family movie to take their kids to, they aren't going earn those same beloved places in their hearts and become part of the cultural zeitgeist the way the old ones did. The last few Disney's I can think of that did incredibly well like that were probably Frozen and Coco, both original stories based on folklore and fairy tales. And with the incredible library of fairy tales and folklore from the entire world that's never been adapted to tap into it's kind of strange that instead they're just redoing their old movies.
The worst offense for me are that Sebastian is a ghost crab, which are mostly land crabs and are capable of drowning.
Plus their excuse for why Scuttle can breathe underwater is that she's a gannet, which are diving birds. Ignoring the fact that gannets still need air, and that she should have bubbles coming out of her mouth from the gulp of air she should have took before diving.
It's weird that they're trying to make the animals "realistic", yet don't at least Google information on the animal they base the characters on.
god, the more I know about this film, the more I hate it
she says in the movie “i need to go up for air “ at one point in the film.
@@jova9941 they still should've put bubbles coming out of her mouth to show she's using air. No matter what she says, the visuals still show her "breathing" under water
@@HarmonyHope7534 lol i mean that’s just a nit picky critique ..you do know flounders and crabs don’t really sing too right 😂 and mermaids are fake..no one is watching these movies for scientific accuracies of ocean life ..they made the fish life LOOK more real , that’s pretty much where it ends . ..
and i literally could care less about this movie i prefer the original but this critique threw me off i had to comment
OHHH MY GOD thank you so much for being pro-voice actor! Those of us who've put our whole lives into perfecting our art are losing work to big names who just think that VA means "a job I can do in my pajamas" It's horrible. What's worse is there's a hidden job where a talented VA will create the voice for a character, and then they'll hire a big name to just copy the intonations of the VA - who doesn't get any recognition for their hard work. I went from being in anime and video games to being the hidden voice behind Scarlett Johannson and Lake Bell. I never expected to be on the red carpet as a VA, but this new trend pisses me off
That's so cool! There's a voice actor I love called Susan Egan, she was Meg in Hercules and Lin in Spirited Away.
I never heard of the hidden job thing before. That's real awful!
@@sandyr5407 Oooh! This is more common than you'd think. Tara Strong actually talks about doing it for The Rugrats Movie. Dill Pickles was supposed to be voiced by Madonna (fuck if I know why they'd hire her to make gurgle noises...) but Tara was doing the babbles/crying/gurlges so that Madonna could come in later....only when Tara did the crying noise, she did it so well she caused one of the voice directors to start lactating 🤣😅 Needless to say, she got to keep the job.
Anyone who says voice acting is easy is a damn clown. I've tried it myself and it's hard af.
❤❤❤ i remember when the actress who played Mei in Turning Red was meant to be a hidden voice but she did so well they kept her.
Hi! We did the little mermaid as a musical about three years ago and the movie is more closely related to the musical. In the musical Ursula and Triton are siblings, scuttle has a song (just not that) Ariel has a song where it’s “in her head” and much more just wanted to let you know it’s more based off the musical too
8:00 especially not a sheltered teenager who's only ever known life as a scullery maid. Nope. No sir. Never going to happen.
I guess not in the original movie, but in the direct-to-dvd movie/prequel "Ariel's Beginning" the fact that Ariel's mom is actually killed by a pirate ship is not sugar coated at all and is the reason why in that movie, before the events of the Little Mermaid, King Triton outlawed music, because his wife, Athena loved it so much and loved singing. Which is why I think he loves Ariel singing, because she's so much like her mom.
I seriously love that movie! I never knew it existed until I was an adult.
I hate how underrated that movie is (though understandable), but it’s so much better than the second movie too
@@chevelle921 Yeah maybe it's just me, but I thought the animation for the second movie sucked. The third looked great imo and was a better story too
@@gardenofroses197 The second movie is one of the most disappointing things to exist. The initial song is wonderful, the concept of a "reverse-Ariel" is great, Melody's whole execution is great (the fact that, despite having the same role as Ariel's, she is different in a lot of things - younger than Ariel was in her movie, looks more like Eric appearance-wise, etc.)! Then, the movie's entire execution ends up as an awful, badly-paced, illogical and devoid-of-rewarding-scenes mess.
been looking for this comment bc i've seen that one too haha
The reason why arielle looks "off" is down to three errors:
-Her body is all-CG in the mermaid-scenes, which leads to some "floating head"-issues.
-They filmed the movie "dry for wet", and used footage from that as reference for lighting along with reference footage of wet humans. Thing is, when you're submerged in water, light reacts differently than when you're out of the water (and dripping wet). Mainly, you shouldn't get shiny highlights. You should be "matte".
-Her hair is mostly to entirely CGI, but while they have great software to animate that, they put in a "barrier" so it never obscures her face. Which...yeets it right into the uncanny valley, because the hair doesn't behave as it should.
In the mermaid scenes her body is CG from the waist down as well as her hair.
You forgot the race swap, super off-putting
@@Kill4GloryWhat "race swap?" The movie is based off a book, do you just want to see letters scrolling on screen?
The hair is barely red
@@Ready-ForTheEndthere's almost no color anywhere in the movie. I get that the ocean really doesn't have much color, so it's realistic. But it looks awful. The animated movie was colorful and full of life, this just looks bland, boring, and grey. Like a dead coral reef.
that was such a genuinely well-thought out analysis of this movie (and of Disney in general) !
"The biggest change obvious with Ariel is that Ariel is .... Live action now." Lmao
Having Ariel struggle with her identity without her famous voice is such a brilliant yet obvious solution to expanding her character. Everyone is obsessed with her voice, including Eric who is searching for his mystery girl. She equates love with her singing, so how can she make him fall in love with her without it? Can she compete with her own voice? She'll have to discover how to connect without words, and by doing so realize that there's more to her than just her famous voice.
Or she could have fallen for someone who loved her without her voice.
@@depressantdrug that's exactly what happened in the original. Eric fell in love with this goofy mute girl so hard, Ursula had to cheat and hypnotize Eric to prevent him and Ariel from kissing.
@@Elipson52008 So he never heard her voice in the original?
@@depressantdrug He did. The original did a similar thing where Ariel's voice was also what he remembered most about the "mystery girl," the remake just leans into it even further I think
@@depressantdrug he heard her voice, but he didn't know it was Ariel. He quickly gets over "the mystery girl" as he spends more time with Ariel and doesn't hear her voice again until the near end of the movie when Ursula uses it like a Siren to lure Eric away from Ariel.
I think the thing that bothered me the most (besides the emotionless characters) is the incomplete story pieces. They put that “Ursula causes trouble between humans and merpeople” and “your mom was killed by humans” but didn’t connect anything. They also added “Ariel has a healing siren song” that they did nothing with, Eric could have killed Ursula, but had Ariel use her song with the trident to being back her father. Also, there was no feeling of family with Ariel and anyone underwater so her hesitation to leave or stay above water felt like literally nothing.
Plus. if you read the books... the plot holes grows WAY bigger. like the detail where Ariel knows her mother was killed by humans, and her way to cope was collecting human stuff. Which for me is the equivalent to someone learning what type of knife was use to kill their loved one and ONLY used that type of knife.
Also despite being the youngest princess, Ariel was ALREADY ruling a part of the see DURING the film. She was already a working royal. That was what the meeting at the start was about. an update on the condition of each sister's ruling sea.
And I learn about that, I was like "Wouldn't this mean that the movie is showing her to be a neglectful, incompetent leader, who abandoned her sea- THOUSANDS of merfolk without a leader, for legs? where is this kind and gentle leader Ariel the book is mentioning?"
@@user-th1qo4cq9g God loves you!!, repent, it will be hard on the journey but it'll be worth it in the end!! God bless💙💙💙❤️
@@user-th1qo4cq9g God loves you!!, repent, it will be hard on the journey but it'll be worth it in the end!! God bless
It's called lazy writing. You're welcome.
I'm always so thankful when reading review comments. Imagine if yall were not consumers but writers and we had to sit thru the most cliché booshee ever? 🤡
I disagree with your assessment that her motivation in the original is Prince eric. I think it's clear she's more interested in legs and exploring the surface world, and eric is just a secondary motivation.
Exactly
I’m in love with the flute transition
The thing with the memory loss is that it goes ENTIRELY against the whole contract thing in the original and while sure you couldn't really call the contract "fair" there were also no hidden lies. Aerial knew EXACTLY what she was getting into.
Ursula obviously had hidden motives and may not have "told the whole truth" sure but she didn't lie either.
New Ursula just feels cheap because of this.
They did this because in modern Disney a woman hast to be a victim of some kind to fit the narrative
@@TK-xg8xqinteresting view! I always thought it was rather to sort out the consent problem you know so that it doesn't look like Ariel is trying to force herself on Eric to win over Ursula
@@mastermangouste5425 maybe but If that's the reason than just because they messed up the plot before, in the original she was already in Love with him
@@TK-xg8xq Yeah and whichever is the real reason I don't think they should have added that plot point
Fun Fact: A lot of the lore-addons/retcons actually happened years ago. In the Little Mermaid Broadway Musical, it's established that Ursula and Triton are siblings and each got a magical item (her conch shell and his triton) from their father, Poseidon in the song "I Want Those Good Times Back". Her mom's death was also shown in the direct to DVD prequel from 2008 The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning where her mom is crushed by a human ship. Fun movie by the way! You should watch it
Is Ariel's mum also a mermaid?
If so, I don't see how it works that Ursula is related to them.
@@thelegioncollectiveout of concern for you I'm just going to assume that you meant Ariel's grandmother and not mum. Because if you meant mum then oh boy we are going to need a talk.
Well it's possible Ursula and Triton had different mothers, but at least in the show Once Upon a Time it's a form she decides to take after a falling out with her father renouncing her mermaid origins. But it's never truly explain otherwise.
@sandrosliske it's called not everyone's brain works properly anymore so I make mistakes.
The issue feels like it's not as well implemented like in other adaptations. apparetly the stage play even gave ursula another song to expand on her relationship with Triton. they could have added that song to justify including this new detail.
but the way they handled it, it makes you understand why the original animated film cut it out.
1. A NOTE about Scuttle: Instead of the eccentric seagull The Little Mermaid fans grew to love, Scuttle was rendered as a Northern gannet, a large seabird known for its preference for oceanic habitats and the ability to forage for food sources by plunging headfirst into the water....and so that's why THIS Scuttle, who was not a seagull, can be under water :)
2. PS, it's Melissa McCarthy, not Megan :)
3. They gave Eric adopted parents cus like, diversity lol
These messed up remakes really makes you realise the beauty of the originals like those really felt like fairytales...
I feel like Disney would have far more luck making "inspired by" movies. A story about a mermaid falling in love with a human *inspired by* The Little Mermaid would be fine! Similar story with entirely different characters. Seeing characters with pretty different personalities in similar situations is FUN.
It's really too bad. Especially because they're putting themselves in a corner. These movies will always be compared to the original animated ones and, like Alex says, will have extreme difficulties getting to that level with live action.
"Splash" with Tom Hanks and Daryl Hannah comes to mind.
There's a movie from 2018 which is pretty much exactly that! It's even called The Little Mermaid but it's entirely different characters and it was a pretty cute movie (as far as I remember)
Of course it would, but then it would also accept a larger share of the risk in doing so. With movies costing as much as they do, and with Disney having countless titles to milk, it makes little sense from a financial standpoint to deviate from the time-tested money formula. That is very sad, of course, but they are looking to depend on as little luck as possible, not more of it.
The problem I have with people comparing the live action remakes to the originals, at least in regards to stories like the Little Mermaid is the fact that Disney didn't even create these stories. Little Mermaid was written by Hans Christian Anderson, Ariel was a blonde and she was supposed to murder the prince since he wouldn't fall in love with him, when she decided to instead throw herself into the sea to become sea foam (since mermaids don't have souls) the spirits of the air decided to take her in as one of them for her 'noble sacrifice', and the best part about the whole thing was that it was an allegory for a gay love story XD
@@samm.6625I remember seeing trailers about it on tv
what kind of baffles me is that they absolutely had the opportunity to not have the mermaids be basically completely CG. H2O did it, and I remember that as a kid, some of the magic of H2O is how REAL they looked as mermaids. I also think that by turning everything into a live action remake, it kind of undermines the animated version? Why can't animated things stay animated? Even if there were to be a good live action remake, I feel like at this point I don't want to support it
Absolutely love h2o and didn't even watch it for the first time till a few years ago and I'm 27 now. The tails are incredible and absolutely magical! They put so much work in for a teen show!
Why does the existence of a live action film that takes advantage of decades of advancements at all affect the originals to you?
If anything, I love watching the originals before and after seeing the modern twists even more. If anything, I appreciate their dedication to being critical of the stories they present and not becoming so complacent that they don't see what could be problematic.
When they make a live action Tiana, I'd hope they address the almost incestuous best friend with her dad. There was no need for her to fawn over a Big Daddy like that, for us to get yet another black lead film devoid of a black person because they're shapeshifted.
In the same way, I'd love to see more iterations improving on what they can. Maybe we see another Little Mermaid that focuses on her childhood and it's a different version of Ariel. She could be white, south asian, who knows or cares as long as someone felt the story was necessary and fun?
They aren't erasing things to pave a new road, they are expanding on what is present.
Except the mermaids in H20 didn't look like mermaids. They looked like humans wearing latex tails.
Because then Disney wouldnt bet their hands on the possible millions from shitty remake built on pandering.
@@nailinthefashionexcept they are erasing the past. Kids will see this version, think it sucks (especially awkwafinas 30 year smoker voice) and think the og is dog water. Happens all the time. There was also nothing anout the old movie that was "problematic" Ariel even saves Eric's ass. It's only problematic because people hate seeing red headed white women. Hence why theyve been all eradicated from media and games. Ebeeh red head has been replaced except the girl from brave. Hive it a year and I'll bet well see a live action brave with a black main character. Race swaps are dome exclusively to pander to black folks. They could have made a diffrent little mermaid and made an actual black story nut instead they race swapped a red head to save some shekels
They admit in this movie that Ariel's song is a siren song. meaning it has magical capabilities to enrapture men. It explains why she had her voice taken, and also how her voice magically enamors Eric for Ursula. I agree with most of your other points. I just think a lot of people missed this, and although it's not "important" to the plot, it is useful to know. I do prefer the animated movies, across the board. I don't hate the remakes, but they certainly lack a bit of something the originals had.
1:35 Sebastian sounds like the “I am the Clayton dude”
I dont know why Disney just thought it was a great idea to make one of their MOST colorful animated movies into this muted dull colored live action, when they made so much buck for the pre-2019 movies that were just barfing out color and liveliness. Like, I love the movie, but I just dont get the direction with the color palette, and the person who pitched this kind of mood CLEARLY doesn't know what ppl want from a Disney movie
There was like cgi artist who reacted to the movie and I just don't think it would be possible to make it as colorful as all yall want and not making it look like Ariel's head was floating off her body, so yeah.
I mean BBC's blue planet which is an actual REAL LIFE documentary looks more colorful and exciting. Same with Lion King. The REAL in person savannah looks more interesting and colorful that the movie one.
@@pinkiepiereincarnate2291Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin were colourful
@ShaiLai underwater scenes are a different ball park than regular cgi
It's like they've never seen what the ocean can look like.
One of the saddest things about these remakes (imo) is that the trend mostly kicked off with a few fairly unique movies and a Cinderella remake that a lot of people think is better than the original with a few exceptions. The reason Cinderella worked is because it took a fairytale that wasn’t as fully realized as it could have been and for the most part made changes in line with the original story. Cinderella is a genuinely good person who is rewarded for her kindness and generosity with a night at the ball and falling in love with the prince. The prince is a character rather than a plot device. I never much cared for the original Cinderella as a child, but the remake felt so magical when I saw it in theaters and feels mostly like the type of movie Disney would’ve made ages ago if it could have.
The other remakes have felt less magical and mostly less realized than the originals. And it’s really depressing in cases where Disney could’ve (like Cinderella) taken advantage of their brand IP and the recognizable imagery to create a less questionable version for some of the older ones. Like how Walt wanted the prince in Snow White to be more active, but the studio struggled with animated male characters so they recycled the material for Prince Phillip in Sleeping Beauty.
Peter Pan is a glaring example of where they could have fixed a few things (and in some cases gone closer to the original novel) and had good feminine representation with Wendy and better written the Native Americans but kept the magic of the original. There have been quite a few good live action versions of Peter Pan/Neverland, so clearly it’s not a matter of “live action can’t tell this story” and more of “Disney doesn’t respect its own films and characters and stories.”
As usual the problem is not that they made an adaptation. Its that they keep writing it poorly and then complain that the audience is at fault.
That's what I appreciated about Cruella. Even if one thinks it bad or unnecessary... at least it tried to do SOMETHING. Remakes need to attempt to find their own character, like children coming out from under their parents' wings.
Too easy for Disney to churn out a generic copy, which is inevitably less than, and rake in the cash.
I thought id would be interesting if prince in Snow White was childhood friend of hers for one and maybe he could've studied medicine/healing - that way he would be diff. kind of prince one who values knowledge and helping people instead of swordplay and as bonus he would have knowledge to help and heal Snow White at end maybe perforfing version of CPR 😜or brewing some magic antivenom. I think it would make him more interesting comp. to original and kids would get nice rolemodel too.
I love Cinderella remake, it's my favourite Disney remake so far. The ball room dance scene has more soul and personality than the rest of the Disney remakes. I'm just glad that Cinderella remake came out in the perfect timing, Amazon's Cinderella is what we could've gotten if Disney made it today
I actually enjoyed those Cinderella, Snow white movies with Selena Gomez, Hillary Duff, Brandy, Lily Collins. Pretty unique in their own ways
8:08 “the way that dude sittn on that guy”😂
She got that, BODY LANGUAGE.
One note: the dead mom thing actually did happen in one of the animated sequel movies to the little mermaid (it was a prequel) she got like crushed by a boat or smthn like that, it was an accident involving humans basically.
Yes! Ariel’s Beginning it’s technically the third movie but taking place before she met Eric and how her life was with her sisters! One of my favs 🥰
THANK YOU. I was hoping somebody wii or his say this
YES. also Ariels dad and Ursula are actually siblings but you'd only know from reading the books
The humans killing Ariel's mom isn't new to live action, but was actually shown in the little mermaid three: the prequel one whose title I can't remember.
Ariel's mom(Athena, for some reason) was minding her business when a ship came over and road killed her to death. Sea killed?
Yep! This is true.
Same with Ursela being Triton’s sister. I think that was an abandoned plot line that was hinted at in The Little Mermaid and was revealed more explicitly in Little Mermaid 2? I might be wrong but I know it wasn’t entirely new, they just made it more explicit in this one.
okay but this is a direct to video sequel, they were pretty much just padding and disney hardly considers them canon
Yeah, Ariel's Beginnings, where Athena was killed by a ship crash, right?
@@softbread2073 I mean...
Shouldn't have made them then.
I still consider The Lion King 1/2 as canon just because lol
The "why didnt ariel just write to talk" arguement forgets several details:
What's a pen?
What's paper?
How will she find these?
How will she ask for these?
How will she know what they are?
How will she afford these hot commodities back in the 1800s?
17:04 I can hear YMS screaming.
Pretty sure both of the examples of Disney "stealing" from Japanese creators are both bogus rumours. Kimba being the most blatantly obvious, anyone who spends more than 5 seconds (Especially if they are YMS) will realize that its horse shit.
The original Scuttle was *_not_* just a voice actor. It was stand-up comedian and comedy great, Buddy Hackett, whose acting credits include the musical classic, "The Music Man". His name was a draw for potential viewers. The difference was that he was an amazing actor who was a legend in his own right at that time. Awkwafina is *_just_* a well-known actor.
Not too well known though, I never heard of her
@@Ash_NuggTato Yeah, I wouldn't call her an a-lister, more like a b or c lister
@@Ash_NuggTato Dolphin lady from Bojack Horseman is the only way I know jer
Yeah plus Buddy Hackett is a universal go-to when you need an example of an unattractive man.
ok
I think people fundamentally misunderstood the little mermaid for years.
When you look at the film from the perspective of a father daughter story, with the daughter trying to spread her wings and her father not letting her, suddenly everything about it makes sense.
Even down to Ariel's brashness. It isn't JUST Ariel's story. It's her father's story too.
No.
If that’s how you feel the original Disney movie is supposed to be viewed, you should also then be upset that the new movie definitely didn’t do that too.
Yes, Triton is the devouring mother figure in that he is trying to keep his youngest daughter sheltered when she's ready to grow up and leave the nest. This leads to her essentially running away and making bad decisions to try and follow her dreams. Her conflict with her father is resolved when he sacrifices himself for her sake, proving to her that he truly loves her (whereas before she felt like he only loved to control her). She matures when she realizes this and risks herself (along with Eric) to defeat Ursula and save him.
It's a story that plays out between teenagers and their parents in households across the world every single day.
@@kerim.peardon5551EXACTLY
@@VioletSArbleuWell, yeah. It’s definitely a shame
For me, the CGI animals were the worst part; some things just don't translate well between animation styles and the end result is clear here. Lion King had the same problem, though their problem was that the animals were so realistic that they basically couldn't emote.
Lol, I was so thrown off when I heard the Kirby level up sound because that's my notification tone. 😂
Seriously! I miss seeing professional voice actors in major animated films. Ive been screwming about this for years!
Me too. I hate celebrity stunt casting. Bring back voice actors!
Up until Frozen they were top notch (okay, maybe not Kristof). In Moana... She was really good, and.. other than that I heard just the "you're welcome" song and he was fine, I guess?
I am glad that we get our movies dubbed from professionals for the German version. I have heard such awful voices and was like...what. Why do they put up with such a low quality. 😮
Time to introduce you to the live stage musical, where Ursula is not only Triton's sister but also has committed serial sororicide because she was jealous that her father Poseidon didn't treat her sisters like shit because they were mermaids and not octopus people.
A movie about young Triton, Ursula and Morgana would be pretty dope
@@jezeannwilliams1145I woulda liked that way more than another remake
The Kirby flute gets me every time
Honestly, removing the instrumentals in the Scuttle rap at 12:28 made it even funnier lolololol
As someone who loves video games and cartoons I cannot agree more about voice actors. My husband and I always end up diving down the IMDB rabbit hole when we hear a familiar voice and end up finding out their voice has been with us since childhood. So cool and there are many amazing ones out there!
Same..voice acting is a wonderful craft, its sad that the money hungry executive just wanna slap a known name and call it a day
Also it's that little spark of recognition you have when you instantly recognise a voice that you know, but not know where from! You know but you can't peg it! (Completely maddening!)
Like Jim Cummings! He is and always will be Pooh Bear for me since I grew up hearing that voice, but it was a complete shock to me to hear his voice while playing Elder Scrolls online! (I knew the voice but couldn't peg it exactly. My brain literally went into the old timey dial-up tone reboot as I tried to remember where I recognized that voice from, before I got it but had to look it up because I was so shocked!
His voice was still recognizable after so many years, that I even knew it before I knew it! I get what you mean!
That's the mark of a great voice actor, in my opinion!
Another issue with the memory loss bit is that it undermines the entire narrative nature of the contract. In the original, it was likely made into a contract specifically because it is a Faustian contract: You give something up, to get what you think you want. But Faustian Contracts work as a narrative device because they are great for a character arc. It confronts the signer with a change of perspective and priority: What they gave up turned out to be more valuable than they thought, and/or what they were chasing wasn't worth it.
Ursula tossing in the cheat clause just undermines the entire thing, because Ariel no longer has agency in the outcome.
You're so right... this has been used throughout story writing since stories were invented and they fucked it up. It's not like they were short on examples. It just shows they have no idea what they're doing.
it also creates plot holes of how can you enforce a contract if you make people who signed it forget about the existence of said contract?
Worse, since Ariel has no memory, there's literally nothing stopping Ursula from IMMEDIATELY interfering and preventing her from getting anywhere near completing her mission. "Hey girl who just lost your memory: do you still want that ride to a remote island you asked me for? Let's go!" Ursula being in any way sneaky or waiting is completely absurd.
Also... Ursula was being sneaky and undermining it at the end *anyways* there's no reason she needed to be sneaky in the beginning too, she already made it super unbalanced and difficult.
It would have been nice to keep that kind of narrative device, but I think they went on a different route here, that instead of making Ariel think that she gets what she thinks she wants, to be on land and the man she loves and ultimately knows that she really wants that, it alternatively focuses more on the dynamic between Eric and Ariel. In the OG, it kinda felt like it was a constructed kind of relationship, like Ariel just kind of used Eric to be able to live on land, although she does like him, but you know, she still kinda did use him for her wants and it's a bit icky, for me at least, that it's like that. In the remake, not only does she not remember to need to kiss him to be able to live on land, it makes their relationship feel real, that it happened because they met through fate, she didn't need to chase him to kiss him, it just comes out natural to them, which was the opposite of ursula's insurance plan.
That Jedi council meeting joke made me actually lol
I actually have to point out that actually in the little mermaid prequel they said that they did kill her mom and the original creators of the little mermaid said that the king and Ursula was indeed supposed to be siblings. So nothing technically changed there they just pointed it out🤓😅
Also i am soo happy that you love Ursula bc as you said Ariel was one of my favorites but after seeing it again i cant help but love Ursula 😍
For the record (because I'm very detail-oriented), the remake Scuttle isn't a seagull. She's a gannet, a seabird that actually dives underwater to catch its prey. They changed it in order to give her a plausible explanation for why she can stay underwater (though, of course, real gannets can only hold their breath for about 30 seconds).
That's so cool. I still wish Ariel had gone to the surface tho.
Thank you, I was just about to write the same thing! :D
that said they gave her full Aquaman powers, being able to hold entire conversations with Ariel
Im surprised they didnt have her sitting down for teatime with Ariel.
30 seconds!!! That's more than most humans
which makes no sense because the original Scuttle never had a scene underwater.
Ursula as Triton's sister was part of the original story. But the Broadway version dealt with it a lot better - with ' I want the good times back'. There was an actual backstory and it made more sense as to why Ursula wanted to destroy Triton.
Yeah I wanted to know about that. In the live-action, Ursula is complaining in 50% of the movie but we haven't really seen why she was banished in exile by her brother
You should see the copyright royalties on I want the Good Times Back. One of the only places you’re ever going to see that preformed is on Broadway lmao
It was never in the animated version and they never should have put it in the live-action because in the Little Mermaid 2 Ursula has a sister already, so it literally makes no sense unless all 3 of them are siblings.
Point to me where in the animated movie that happened or was mentioned. And if it was part of the development process, and then discarded, it probably was for a good reason, considering that the animated is a better movie.
Ursula lived in the palace but she wasn never mentioned to be related to Triton in the animated film (or the Hans Christian Anderson tale).
I've always figured she was like his court sorceress or something.
I think I did read it was planned to have them related but scrapped or just never mentioned.
I don't think it's a bad idea, necessaily, just unecessary and in the live action, written poorly.
Totally agree on everything, the magic and the emotions are just gone or hardly visible... while 2D animated characters you can read the emotion from a mile away from your TV.
I was also pretty disappointed in some of the songs. Take "Under the sea" for example. Obviously it was written to work with the cartoon and it did very well. The whole song was basically a preach from Sebastian to Ariel, who pretty much was just sitting there dreaming away about the surface and the prince. And all the fish and creatures show up singing and playing instruments along right on the queues in the song.
In the live action, it feels lacking on emotion (especially Sebastian), the other creatures are not singing along and we just get some random views about them moving while the song sings about them playing instruments. And then Ariel herself starts singing along with Sebastian? That made no sense at all.
And then there's the scene with the prince on the rowboat. That scene was so beautiful in the cartoon, and it did nothing to me in the live action movie. I rewatched the cartoon to make sure it wasn't just me having gotten older... but no, the cartoon still works for me! 😄
The flute interludes are excellent
Jim Carrey seems to be the only one who can achieve cartoon expression in a live action
Jim Carrey is in it?????
@@ashleyr6809He’s talking about the Grinch
No I think he’s referring to his roll as robotnic in sonic
fun fact he almost voiced Eric, but he wasn't "famous enough" at the time so they went with someone else lol
@@sarayamini2450 Ironic since Christopher Daniel Barnes who voiced Eric wasn’t an A-list actor either. 😂
I miss the era when the definition of remake is something that's created based on the already existed thing, equally good or better, not getting worse and way worse like this.
This has never been true remakes. They’ve alway been controversial to fans of the original
The definition of “remake” has never required them to be good, what are you even talking about?
@@xLadyRaine There have been plenty of good King Kong and Godzilla remakes. Evil Dead 2 was just a remake of Evil Dead done arguably better for rights reasons. Even Ben Hur with Charlton Heston was a remake, and it's the definitive version. It's just a testament to how bad remakes have been for so long that you think there never were any that were good.
I just realized... could you imagine how much potential this film had if sebastian and flounder were mer-people? They could've had way more emotive time and could've come up with fun ways to express the characters and have a merman who supports Ariel and a well meaning chaperone and actually flesh out more then just Ariel and her Dad's dynamic. It would've been more interesting then flounder being just a fish and a lot more room to work with
Would be better, but still really bad
Scuttle just hangs out under water now cause yea why not
Something about this movie that bothered me was how they treated Flounder. As a kid he was my favourite character other than Scuttle and Ariel. The live action made him into a background character that is barely present, sometimes I forgot he was there...I never felt that way when I watched the original.
I also don't like that Sebastian is never mentioned as a composer in the remake, and that Ariel, who NEVER had legs before, knew how to SWIM up to the surface, rather than having Sebastian and Flounder help her to the surface. Ariel was just the person who did everything for herself most of the time...Her relationships with her friends in the original movie added charm to it, a HUGE chunk of that was lost in the remake. I would sum it up like this - in the original, it felt more like they actually WANTED to help her get with Eric and thus help their friend find happiness. In the remake, it feels like they were forced by her to help her - especially with that silly addition of her forgetting that she needed to kiss Eric.
Sebastian also didn't feel as fatherly/guardianly as he did in the original, and that disappointed me. Ariel defeating Ursula still bugs me too - it removes the reason why Triton changed his mind about humans. It's fine for there to be a rescue balance - Ariel saved Eric from drowning and then he rescues her, her father and by extension the merpeople Ursula trapped in her lair. That is what made Triton change his mind, along with trusting his daughter. In the remake all that was lost - Ariel even claims near the end that Eric helped her...when on earth did that happen in the final fight?
One of the things that bothered me was that Eric didn’t kill Ursula. Like Eric is a great character and without that it kind of felt like he was useless. In fact he became the same kind of love Interest that women used to be portrayed as. and that annoys me. Why can’t both of them be compelling characters that contribute to the plot? Also his saving Ariel was the final straw that convinced Triton that some humans were okay so that whole sentiment is completely removed. I’m tired of the need to make girl boss characters. Don’t get me wrong they’re great but they’re all the same and clearly just made so Disney can seem politically correct. Besides it’s dumb if that was the reasoning because we already know Ariel’s a girl boss as she saved Eric earlier in the movie.
While I have lots of complaints about the film, little mermaid is very dear to my heart, so despite all that I still enjoyed it, but it nonetheless frustrated me.
We’ll actually in the beginning of the movie during the ship wreck we’re shown Eric trying to save the ship by steering the wheel. And Ariel watches him as he does this, which is the only reason why she knew how to kill Ursula. She didn’t know that the wheel could move the ship, until she saw Eric do it. So in a way both Eric and Ariel killed Ursula since,if Eric would have never steered the wheel, Ariel wouldn’t have seen, and therefore wouldn’t have known what to do.
@@animelover1582 That’s such a roundabout way of doing it, though. I don't even think the writers were thinking of that. It just happened
@@animelover1582
Jesus, my brain just exploded 😂
And it's not even politically correct. The people behind this are just greedy and are just trying to be pretentious as if we can't tell that they are old conservative businessmen with capital greed that has destroying real art and artists. They are only milking nostalgia as much as they possibly can from the OG fans.
@@animelover1582I think that would be pretty clever if I didn’t also think that happened purely by narrative luck.
Also, the major flaw is in how the scene you’re referring to and the climax interact in the story. In the shipwreck scene, Eric got stuck on the ship as a result of going back into the inferno to save his dog Max, and after doing so, Ariel saved Eric when he couldn’t make it back out. This scene comes with a payoff during the climax where Eric kills Ursula effectively closing a character loop: Ariel saved Eric and Eric repays her in kind.
The remake seemingly completely missed these details in both scenes. During the shipwreck, Ariel saved Max by giving him a push onto a lifeboat and then she saved Eric who just didn’t get off the ship in time, which also ruins Eric’s characterization as an altruistic person. Jump forward to the climax where the roles are reversed and Ariel is saving Eric again. There’s no character through line for Eric. He’s only there to be saved and give Ariel a kiss. Oh my god, the remake made Eric “A PRIZE TO BE WON”…
Side Note: Switching Eric and Ariel’s roles in the climax makes no sense for Ursula either. Ursula in both versions was angry at Ariel for (indirectly) killing Flotsam and Jetsam. In the original, this anger is exactly why she started tormented and attempting to kill Ariel with the power of the seas. She was so obsessed with revenge, that didn’t notice Eric steering the ship toward until it was already too late. The remake fumbled Ursula’s motivation in that scene by switching Ariel and Eric. Even if Ursula were to seek revenge by tormenting Eric, she would never have turned a blind eye to Ariel, the person who murdered her subordinates.
I like how some people think that a classic story format of a girl falling in love with a prince and them living happily ever after isn't "modern" and companies feel the need to politicize everything. Like those two girls that were interviewed looked like the only ones that were more unhappy then they are are everyone else around them.
It just makes me sad that it's apparently illegal to be in love or have a different opinion from people that are obviously deeply unhappy themselves.
Exactly!
It shouldn't be shamed that someone wants to fall in love, or want to marry and have a family!
Like you said, the movie industries are deciding to strongly push their opinions that 'if you want these things, then you're wrong because this is how *we* feel about it and you should do this! It should make you miserable. . . . I mean uh . . . happy. . . . and you're going to like it, because we said so!"
17:05 as a person who saw one of the kimba/leo movies when it came on retro crush one time, trust me when I say lion king didn’t copy from it at all. Was the weirdest shit ever. He climbs up a snowy mountain in the middle of Africa with a human man to get magic moon stones and stop this evil hunter guy from getting them and then he just eats them and dies anyway. And then Leo goes blind on the way back down the mountain and tells his human friend to eat his flesh. And his son runs off and joins the circus or some shit
Honestly I am sick of this myth being brought up as if it hold merit. There is a lot of things to hate Disney for but people making up a bullshit rumour isn't needed. I spend a lot of time making sure i don't just believe random rumours and seeing other people just believe them like a spoonfed baby is infuriating.
@@emerson-biggons7078exactly. YMS did a whole vid on the Kimba thing
disney remakes need to stop 😭😭
Yes they do and I wish people would not make anime into live action like that sucky live action One Piece.
I love them! I find them more entertaining and visually stimulating
@@ashleyr6809 Nah dude, the One Piece live action is the exception, lots of people/fans including myself loved it. Otherwise I agree, anime live actions are usually very awful. EDIT: Ashley hasn't even seen the damn show.
Agreed. I'm hoping their other live action remakes like Lilo & Stitch, Moana & Snow White also flop like Mulan & The Little Mermaid did. Disney has become WAY to complacent with relying on name recognition and their big Ip's milking them to make more money which has recently been biting them in the ass.
@@itstruckmeeveryday you mean that you can't handle the original since these are all but "more visually stimulating"
I just KNOW that if Dylan is in trouble and Alex Meyers come up with the same problems on a movie, I don't have to bother watching it
Dylan made it clear that the movie looked dull and lifeless which is correct
Literally how I judge if media is worth my time is by watching Alex and Dylan. The best kind of influencers!
dylan and alex are literally my fav ever
I LOVE BOTH DYLAN AND ALEX SO MUCH 😭😭😭 my fav movie commentators frr
basing if you're going to consume a piece of media on whether two random RUclipsrs make issues on it is so....strange. make up ur opinion on it truly not that hard hell pirate it or watch lil scenes on it i find it weird ppl nowadays align their whole stance on something based on what other people say
The dead mother was actually got brought up on "The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning" in 2008
I’m pretty sure they’re just remaking the movies so that they don’t loose the copyright
I remember the original Sebastian has such a happy energy in his voice when he sung. The live action version sounds like a drunk at karaoke.
I obviously prefer the original too but I will not tolerate any Daveed Diggs slander! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Thank you for great laugh - "drunk at karaoke" !! 🤪😂😂
The tiny changes to the live actions that they make (ex: Ariel's amnesia, Aladdin holding the lamp behind his back) absolutely CONFOUND me! I do not understand who would think these particular changes made these stories better. The only thing I can imagine is that they sat and thought about the original stories for so long that their brains got tied in knots.
same i feel like ariel having her memories and knowing how little time she has left is more tense and heart breaking and makes me root for her more. side note if they really wanted a more in depth, new age story that goes further than just boy meets girl they could have (as another commenter suggested) turned the lense to ariel's relationship with her father and expanded on the two and the trauma that pushes triton to tether her to the sea. i feel like ariel's father was more real and full of life in the 2d original one because you could hear and see the anger or pain in his voice. in the new one the actor feels stiff, cold and unfeeling. not just the actor but the character itself feels less like a doting and protective father and more like a boss or weirdly attached acquaintance with authority. in the original from start to finish you could tell alot of care was put into tritons emotions, the pride and acceptance in his demeanor in the end solidified he genuinely cared and was scared to let go but trusted her to stay safe now.
@@-Vague_Hysteria- Omigosh describing new triton as an acquaintance is so true!😂 It really dulls the final goodbye between them too. The cartoon always made me cry at the end but I didn’t feel a real father/daughter connection between them in the new one so it almost felt awkward.
@@racheldeschaine exactly! honestly disney forgot what made their works so powerful. they've gotten so caught up in following trends and what worked before that they forgot their first unflinching leaps into new territory. they no longer push for the new and unseen. when snow white was made it was effectively the first of its kind in that field of creativity. we are past the days of snow white and honestly they need a new spark. because they've become fixated on the past.
at least maleficent and cruella presented new narrative and stories (though i feel maleficent did it much better than cruella since it feels more fleshed out and less like a fanfiction)
hell i would have jumped for joy at the idea of a triton movie (hell even if it was live action) in which it outlines tritons relationship and history with ariel's mother. allowing us to get to know the character on a deeper level through their childhood and rise to power.
What happened with Aladdin holding the lamp thing?
Didn’t he do that in the original?
@@andreasmeelie1889 in the original he manipulated the genie into getting him out of the cave of wonders by playing on his ego, saying the genie couldn’t get them out even if he wanted to. In the new one they made this rule about having to rub the lamp while making the wish, so he wished for genie to get them out of the cave but held the lamp behind his back and didn’t rub it. It was a really weird change that did less to show Aladdin’s cleverness.
you said it on purpose to get us Disney nerds mad 8:28. they always were siblings it just wasn't put in the classic film but was always cannon I thought at least.
They couldn’t even stick with the right type of animals either. Sabastion was a completely different type of crab
to be fair, Buddy Hackett, the original voice of Scuttle, wasn't a voice actor he was a comedian/actor and only did voice in a handful of films, but he knew how to put his all into a character.
Well that's the point, isn't it? They cast a really good comedian in a comedy role.
@@Domarius64 most likely, and they didnt want to do that with the live action.
@@truechaos6927well rotate way nothing bears the original Scuttle. Originals are hard acts to follow
It is a comedy role. Same with Robin WIlliams in Aladdin.
@@sharonefee1426 true and it was tough to see anyone but Robin Williams do that role
If they could make Tamatoa (the actual coconut crab from Moana) pleasing and fun and entertaining to kids, they could have done something far more fun for Sebastian. And Mark Hamill would have done a far better Scuttle.
They couldnt bc of art direction. It needs to be "realistic" which takes away all creative freedom for good character design
@@kailet1997 But realistic wildlife IS colorful. Have these people ever SEEN the ocean and its fauna?
@irondragonmaiden Obviously, not. Sure, it gets darker the farther you go but you can still add colors and kept realistic in way, for example Finding Nemo wanted to do a realistic ocean but decided against since their target was little kids.
The dead mom trope was also present in the broadway musical lol
Having not seen the movie I have to ask: Is Triton this emotionless through the entire movie? Because good goddess, *emote* , man! Show *something* !
Triton when ariel almost met her death similar to her mom: 🫤
The man was reading lines in his sleep
Javier Bardem is such a good actor too like tbh the only possible explanation is that the way they shoot the underwater scenes was just goofy, they had harnesses and green people making them “float” around.. you can see the difference in Ariel too
He had no presence at all. He was just a wet muppet the whole time. Like, Aquaman Lite. Diet Triton. BOGO Poseidon. Neptune on clearance.
The mother being killed by humans, while not in the original film did happen in the direct-to-video movie Ariel's Beginnings. Also Ursula being Triton's sister was a cut concept from the original film
Also it was in the musical!
Yes finally someone who knows this
This was my first thought when he said that, but I just left it to “he most likely just wasn’t that into the movie so he didn’t know the backstory”
That’s what I thought! I couldn’t remember if that’s was legit or not beforehand
@@alwaysbeen..c.j1576 barely anyone watched direct to vhs cash grabs of these popular stories
Just wanna point out, Ursula actually is Triton's sister in the animated movies. Even in the second movie we're introduced to his other sister Morgana (idk why they're both half Octopus but thats beside the point)
Sebastian is a freshwater crab in the liveaction remake.... but is in the OCEAN. XD
WHAT? they made a photorealistic cgi crab and couldn't even do the research to pick a salt water crab 😂
I totally agree with Alex that getting rid of the "girl falls for boy" thing completely is not the answer. Listen, I realize there is the other side of that where people get all upset, and call Disney "woke" for including literally anybody that is not white, straight, or some how doesn't live up to their expectation what "normal" is, and I'm definitely not about that. However, I think when it comes to writing strong female characters, there are a lot of ways to do it. Sometimes it feels like the only "strong female" hollywood knows how to write, especially in any movie where the target demographic is teens, is the contrarian "not like other girls" trope. I mean, if this were 10 years ago, and it was a new idea, I would be all for it, but it has been SO over done. Also in many of those teen rom coms, you have the main female lead falling for some very handsome but ultimately creepy and unstable bad boy anyway, so what's the point?
The two main things I'd like to see change going forward is 1) more interesting female characters. this really isn't that difficult. Women are people too (I know, shocking!) it's literally the same idea as writing interesting male leads! It's kinda hard to give any suggestions, because there is literally nowhere to go but up at this point, but please just start by giving them literally any trait besides "i wear combat boots, loose baggy t-shirts, and I have one interesting hobby that is mentioned once in the beginning of the movie and never mentioned ever again."
2) being a strong woman does not = don't be feminine. There is nothing wrong with anybody regardless of gender being into literally anything. I realize there is a long history of putting people in a box, and stereotyping, but by going in the complete opposite direction EVERY time, it's literally the same problem but in reverse. literally all of my favorite female characters in fiction are actually not stereotypical cookie cut-outs of what boomers think women should be like. Ciri from witcher 3, Vi from arcane, Rayla from Dragon Prince, what do all these characters have in common? They are strong confident people who are not defined by their gender.
Whether you like pink, cute fluffy things and looking nice, or you don't give a crap about stuff like that, regardless of what you got going on between your legs, a well written character is just that, a well written character!
I hate how it seems every strong female character is an independent tomboy. A girl can wear pink dresses and have a partner while still being badass as hell. Feminine stuff isn't weak! 👏
Love your comment!
I just want to make a little comment about your opening paragraph, if I may. Including anyone that isn't white or straight isn't really why people call it woke. It's because it's not done for any reason other than being able to point to it for claps and snaps. And before you get a head of steam, I'm black. But holy crap did I not care about the race swapping in this movie as much as they wanted me to.
Who cares if animated Ariel doesn't "look like me"? First, she's a fantasy character. Second, why should I be stoked about getting (incredibly) sloppy seconds? This movie makes no sense half the time, doesn't even understand the movie it's cribbing, and has no sense of the basic structure of musical theater. But hey, brown people, right? If better good stories with more minorities was the point, why not give thought and care to the product? Why not create original characters and original stories (or adapt new ones) that can become their own beloved traditions instead of being shrugged at (at best) or derided for being a lackluster copy of a better thing? Because the point was the visual, the surface. That's all the people who made this cared about. I find that insulting. Over-investment in the skin is insulting and tiresome.
Okay, sorry, I have some real feelings about this, and it bugs me more than a little when people don't approach the issue in good faith, or assume that the only people who are bothered by it are sad slighted whites.