Been a rough summer for movies at the box office but financial success isn't the sole decider of a film's quality. Curious to see what y'all think about this movie for the folks who did check it out. Not seeing much buzz about it so I'm wondering if marketing really just dropped the ball that hard. Probably
There's bits and lines that work but it's boring. The concept isn't a bad idea by any means but the plot and artstyle fell very flat for me. It's not even a so bad it's good movie; this very much feels like a harmless movie you would put on to keep your kid entertained for a bit. I'd honestly rather buy another ticket to Spider verse.
It's weird to hear that Ruby Gillman wasn't advertised well, because I saw the trailers literally EVERYWHERE. But the trailer really did spoil the entire movie and convinced me not to see it. Also surprised this was DreamWorks. Literally thought it was from an independent animation studio with how it was presented
Ngl I saw elemental trailers everywhere on RUclips and in other places but people said it didn’t get advertisement. Although I did only see one trailer for this
The issue is the fact that they legit advertised that they were trying to hide the fact that they were human, but like she’s blue, and that isn’t very hard to see. Wow, I guess the “villian” was a very clever person to find her “secret”
I was gonna say, her appearing as a hosen blue girl was breaking the illusion that she was the "just a normal girl" trope. I think the intention for that was done for a joke on the film makers' parts, but it honestly as Saberspark said, left very little to the imagination. Ruby's whole gimmick shouldve been more along the lines of "I just want to fit in." Or "Why do people avoid me like im some otherworldly creature?..." After all, what teenager do you know who says they just want to be a normal teenager??????? That line was the most unrealistic part. Maybe the story shouldve gone that it was SHE who knew CHELSEA'S secret and therefore Chelsea decides to get close to her, saying she's under disguise at the school because she's trying to protect her town from a monster, then the twist could've been that Ruby was the "monster" that she feared this whole time, thus flipping the script to reveal Chelsea was out to get the humans! Then the script could've been flipped EVEN FURTHER by revealing Chelsea's motive for committing evil was she gets constantly bullied by other jealous girls at the school. This would be a strong but truthful message to the audience, since beautiful people do in fact get bullied in school, not just the "outcasts" characters.
My grandma saw like one trailer and she loves simple children’s movies so I went with her. It was kind of tradition for us to go see movies together ever since I remember. She was disappointed, and she’s the one always talking about how she likes children’s movies and simple happy stories, because the world is sad enough for her, so she doesn’t need tragic or complex movies. And she was disappointed. Yeah, I also would have preferred for the mermaid to be just Ruby’s friend and a nice person instead of doing evil popular girl again. They had such cute dynamic as a shy nerd and outgoing popular girl
@@Chewey_Official Here • OG commentors grandma loves simple children's movies • They have a tradition that they watch movies together ever since the OG commentor could remember • However, the grandmother was disappointed. • *The grandma likes simple children's movies because the world is sad enough for her, so she doesn't need tragic or complex movies* • The OG commentor would've also preferred the movie to go in the route that Chelsea is Ruby's friend The bolded comment is the slight reason I thought your comment was a bit insensitive. But, I hope this helped you understand a bit!
From my POV, I think the marketing was the major failure here. I saw tons of ads for this movie, but literally none of them even contained the TITLE of the movie until after the movie bombed. All the ads I saw were stuff like “Krakens vs Mermaids” or other vague clickbaity stuff that somehow totally fails to even clickbait. It was really weird, felt robotic. Anyone else experience that weird shit?
I saw one trailer for it and I don't remember it actually SAYING the title. I also remember thinking how awful the trailer was as it utterly spoiled the climax. It probably could have done better if somebody competent had been in charge of marketing.
I think the marketing would have been better if they made us question why the mermaids are considered evil by showing clips of Chelsea the mermaid being nice. That way we would want to watch the movie to figure out why they're evil
Chelsea seems so much like a one note villain for me, I never watched the movie but the first trailer I saw gave it all away for me on what this movie is going to be about.
WHY IS NOBODY MENTIONING HER "HUMAN" DESIGN?! IM GOING CRAZY - she's blue.. she's boneless... she DOESN'T HAVE A NOSE. She has TENTACLES for hair.... IS SHE SUPPOSED TO NOT REALIZE SHE'S A KRAKEN? IS SHE SUPPOSED TO LOOK HUMAN?!??!?!?!? I would have taken this movie more seriously and wanted to see it more if they did it like Luca. And while it may be a stylistic choice / a gag, having it be a main plot point for the entire movie is... Slightly absurd. Especially when you have deep and completely serious narratives in that same movie 💀💀
I dunno… maybe the point of giving all the actual human characters such odd appearances was to so muddy up what “normal” was so that you could have actual sea people walking among the “regular people” and nobody would comment on it too much.
Her design is actually pretty good as she's a squid like creature with a different physiology to humans such as having no skeleton, who's trying to pass herself off as a human while also coming across as an actual teenager rather than an impossibly glamorous model pretending to be a teenager like Bella from Twilight. The real question we should be asking is who thought those human designs were passable? They look like a smartphone bot tried to render the bastard children of Popeye the Sailor and Wallace and Gromit.
I was so disappointed that Chelsea didn't have a cohort of evil mermaids to team up with if she was going full bad guy. The poster showed 3 mermaids, not 1.
Check out the scene where Ruby and Grandmamah are in the throne room and she’s explaining the various foes she’s faced. The statues of the mermaids are the exact same as the ones on the poster.
The 1 thing that bothers me is... why does nobody notice Ruby is blue? She's blue with weird tentacle hair? How does nobody know she's a sea creature? How did her parents explain the whole staying out of the ocean thing when they look like fish people?
I had the same thought at first, but then I remembered Invader Zim, and was like “Okay, to hell with that. I’ll just accept this as this lil’ gag about society being kinda dumb and naive and move on”
the whole family knows they are sea people, but rather Ruby and her brother didn't know they were krakens, other than that... guess everyone just accepts that canadians look like that lmao
I feel like a good way to make this movie redeemable would be for Chelsea to 'not' actually be a villain. In that she legitimately thinks that the triton is the key to settling the conflict between the Mermaids and Krakens, maybe she doesn't know why and has just been gaslit by her family into believing so. However, the problem is the triton itself causes power incontinence (hence why Chelsea goes full villain mode) and Ruby uses their time bonding to talk her down. Then grandma could come in, ready to destroy Chelsea but Ruby stands up to her. She demands Ruby give the trident back and it's then Ruby realizes 'the solution'. Destroy the trident. Grandma is incensed, but Ruby's mom talks her down. Ruby offers a hand out to Chelsea and admits that she was right, the trident was the key. So long as it existed, there'd always be conflict. Amends are made, Chelsea and Ruby are still friends with each other and their friend groups intermingle.
I read the summary on Wikipedia and really thought they were setting us up for a misdirect where the mermaid girl Chelsea was actually good despite looking so very obviously evil in the ads. And then the two would work together to stop Chelsea s mom. That would’ve been such a better movie.
This is what I was really hoping for in this movie! It could have been a friends to rivals conflict. But no let's just make her a boring twist villain without any depth
@@KgEclispe252 It's very poor show from Dreamworks, a company that has a history of some truly fantastic villains. Lord shen, Death, Fairy Godmother, Jack horner, Drago, Titan and their portrayal of Ramses was superb.
That's also what i was expecting. My other ideas were that she'd just have a redemption...? Or maybe she turned out to be sent by her mermaid clan to befriend and betray the kraken, but then realizes she's been manipulated. It's simple but I think it would've given more opportunities for Chelsea to have a more interesting character and story idk i'm not a writer. Like, anything else than what was obviously stated would maybe be better imo... reallg no clue why they would market it like that.
@@fartinfpooping8801 Same. I was expecting Chelsea to betray her to get her “mom” back but then the mom would declare that she didn’t care about her daughter and wanted to destroy the world and kill all the krakens. Leading to a team-up to seal the mom away. It’s oddly similar to an episode of Ben 10 but it could’ve worked really well here
I thought the same thing. I thought, surely they didn’t just spoil the WHOLE movie in the trailer, there has to be something else going on. But then the first reviews came in and no, the trailers was all there was to it.
I think Cartoonshi said it best when he said that at LEAST Dreamworks is trying to be experimental. They're trying radically different concepts and art styles. Not all of them are gonna be bangers, but that's what Dreamworks does, they experiment. You got, Bad Guys and Last Wish then you got Ruby Gilman. I would take a studio at least TRYING to be creative and innovative, then Disney constantly pumping out remake after reboot after same story just different shapes ANY day. Same goes for Sony and Illumination, at least they're TRYING
That’s true. One day they give you a fun Ocean’s 11-style heist movie with anthropomorphic animals, and the next, they give you 🎶Your favorite fearless hero🎶 as he confronts his mortality inside a star that can grant one wish.
@thejuiceking2219 well I guess people only say that when they don't understand or appreciate true creative vision. Disney and Pixar set up everyone's expectations way too high (which at first wasn't a bad thing) so now everyone expects other studios to be the next Pixar and make banger after banger like in their early years. The true creative process lies in trial and error, not everything sticks, and that's okay
Personally, Ruby Gillman felt like a multi episode show scrunched into an hour and a half movie. So much of it really needed more explanation and extra time to really get fleshed out.
I gotta agree. There was alot of good content, but most of it needed time to breath. Heck, even some time to build up TwistVillain, and maybe insert she opted to rule the seas with Ruby with an actual companionship. But with how short the movie was, that kind of development wasn't possible.
So true! It had so much potential, but there wasn’t enough time put into anything. The grief after the betrayal, the family bond, the time to change what you thought of someone… all of it happened too quickly for me! Also, I wanted to throw the dialogue in the trash because it was so overused and egotistical.
It sounds like a perfectly fine concept for a late 2000s tv show inexplicably forced to be a 2020s movie instead. I can vividly imagine Ruby Gillman in a thick-line artstyle airing inbetween Juniper Lee and Danny Phantom
I was only interested in the movie initially because of the hints of chelsea and ruby being friendly in the trailers despite everything else being said and shown about mermaids; i honestly *did* think that it would be one of those friendships where the introvert and the popular girl are unlikely pals, with the added opposition of their mermaid/kraken lineage aggression. I always really liked stories with that type of dynamic, i find it sweet, heartwarming, and more relatable than you'd first think. but nah. they just went with the obvious.
Had they pulled the wool over our eyes and subverted the expectation by having a depth of character not shown in the trailer, it may have been a way better movie.
Either that, or maybe have it be where Chelsea is genuine, but the triton was hidden for the mermaids good. Say it had some corrupting influence so Ruby was forced to fight her friend. That could’ve had some emotional punch.
@@Ghostrnaut Wow I would've loved it if it played out like that. I originally thought it would be cool if Chelsea was genuine and her mom and/or the other mermaids are hungry for power and Chelsea was just being used to manipulate Ruby. But with time, their relationship becomes real and they try to find a solution together. The Krakens were so one dimensional as the "good guys" I would've wanted them to have some sort of misunderstanding of the other sea creatures too. Ruby and Chelsea were both such adorable characters who I thought made a great friendship. I was really hoping the entire time I was watching for the ending to not be EXACTLY what they showed in the trailers. side note: Did we even see any other mermaids in the film besides Chelsea??
I think what repelled me most was that Ruby was supposed to be this "normal girl trying to blend in" but I found it difficult to get around that when she's literally blue with flimsy limbs? I don't know...
I give DreamWorks props for going outside the box and trying something new. They've always been the company to take more risks than others and that's why they have so many hit or misses.
@zooker7938might have been more interesting if she had started in the water, had some cultural exchange or something to go to the human school, then met the mermaid. Maybe even have a tentative friendship between then, in spite of knowing of each other families/culture.
A Netflix show is inevitable. The way they were "marketing" Ruby's powers like it was a superhero movie. A TV show with different sea creatures that she has to face is a no-brainer
Would've been nice to have a sort of "Wicked" story where people assume Ruby is evil because she's a kraken and Chelsea tries to help her fit in and is her friend.
He sounds ill, if he is, I hope he recovers soon. Edit: In the time it took to get from this comment, up the page and back to the video I got a like and the notification that it occurred... How?
🤣🤣 He really was rooting for his home studio DreamWorks to start some animation Renaissance when the majority of their films are just average to mediocre. He NEVER learns 😂
@@JinxSanity Dreamworks does have some very high peaks. Shrek 1 and 2, the Kung Fu Panda trilogy, the HTTYD trilogy, Prince of Egypt, Puss in Boots 2, and Megamind are all phenomenal films. The problem is they insist on putting out 2 films a year, which leads to their product getting very diluted and some films just whiff.
I knew who the villain was from the trailers. but had no idea there was a family aspect. you would think you would advertise that family bit more than the TWIST.
I saw the trailers, and was really predicting/hoping that Chelsea would get a redemption! Popular girl characters are villainized and pitted against more nerdy girls too often, and I also just don't really like the essentialism of "Krakens good, mermaids bad".
It is SO weird for the movie to have a "omg Krakens are discriminated against of looks!!!" and then to be like "Ew mermaids care about their looks, such bitches amiright?!!!" Like what??
i thought there were gonna make a story about bought of kraken and mermaid have flaws. it would have been better come , 100 percent mermaid are bad and the kraken are good. it kinda a bad message
I think the problem is that they very clearly tried to market this movie as petty competition for the Little Mermaid, a competition that DreamWorks was destined to lose. Maybe this movie could have done better if they marketed it with genuine passion and creativity instead of a gotcha moment for Disney.
I remember so many people on Twitter hyping this movie up, saying it was going to destroy the live action “Little Mermaid” because it was an original idea. Just another reminder that social media rarely reflects the real world.
As well as the predictions of Ruby beating up Elemental LOL My two local theaters only have one show a day for Ruby Gillman now compared to Elemental which still has several shows a day
@@RB01.10Same here. Two of the theaters that are in the towns next to mine have only one showing for Ruby Gillman each day. Meanwhile, the theater that me and my family usually go to has literally pulled Ruby Gillman from the list of movies they’re currently showing, while they still have Elemental on there. Granted, it’s a small theater attached to the mall and because they have very few rooms, movies are pulled out earlier than in other theaters to make way for the new ones. However, they’re still showing that new Transformers movie which came out way before Ruby Gillman.
Dunno if this makes me some kind of kraken-racist, but I was never sold on the idea of krakens being goodguys. I was sold on mermaids being bad guys though. I think the story would've been WAY more interesting and tied into generational trauma better if it turned out BOTH krakens and mermaids ate people together at some point; krakens being the muscle that takes ships apart, and mermaids picking off the stragglers and/or luring sailors to the krakens. Then maybe, when a kraken finally turns up dead on the shore (tied into the real life discovery of the giant squid), the krakens stop hunting humans out of FEAR, and their amicable nature towards humans is just a recent development and the krakens deny their history of eating people. Whereas mermaids keep at it and are salty (hehe pun) about being abandoned by the krakens they relied on for protection. Also Ruby and Chelsea should've both been the same age, no 1000 yr old teenager thing going on. It would make them develop a real friendship, start a redemption arc for Chelsea, and make the real villains be the grandma and maybe Chelsea's parents/grandparents.
After watching the movie we were leaving the theater and my 3 year old looked back at the movie poster on the theater wall and complained “hey! I didn’t see those fight!” I looked again at the poster and they were right. In the promotional poster Ruby’s family fights multiple Mermaids. But in the movie Ruby fights one giant mermaid that looks nothing like the poster. What’s up with that? Even my 3 year old noticed
Reminds me of when I first saw Cars 2, in theaters and was confused wondering why that camera the lemons used didn’t blow up McQueen. Little kid me was even like “Why didn’t it shoot?” It wasn’t until a repeat viewing, and a lot of rewinding, that I heard the hippy van say something about Sarge swapping out McQueen’s fuel for something that wouldn’t explode, when the camera shot him.
Based on the cut content, it seems DreamWorks was originally going for a more conplex storyline in which Chelsea and Nerissa were separate people It's very likely that either the story became too complex for 90 minutes or production was running against a deadline, so they scrapped the original concept and went for something simpler
@@davidhong1934well i also found out the movie are to rushed. It's like they're trying to catching with little mermaid release date lol Tried to competing. But truly this last month june-ags isn't the best month to release a movies, specially the competition already to much with _Oppenheimer, spiderman the spider verse, elementals, little mermaid, ect_ Definitely not the best months to release a movies with those many competition
@@davidhong1934the final fight in the storyboards was a LOT better than what we got. Ruby somehow got the ability to manipulate water and grew four extra arms (or those were her feet tentacles she was using as hands) and there was a lot more stuff. Ruby just taunted Nerissa the whole time while absolutely destroying her and I wish that was realised on screen. I’ve always had this idea that they could reuse the fight, or elements of it like Ruby manipulating the currents and taunting Nerissa, as a rematch of sorts in a potential sequel. Then they could introduce THE main antagonist (Leviathan. Make it happen. It’s the closest equivalent to Godzilla.)
Also they should make it so Chelsea was either in one of these scenarios instead of being Nerissa: A) Corrupted by the Trident’s influence (or a higher power, like The Leviathan) B) Used as a sacrificial lamb by the REAL Nerissa, her mother C) Posed as Nerissa to honour her deceased mother
Even apart from the issues with the marketing and plot, the whole “teenager trying to fit in” plot has been done nearly as many times as the “monster in a horror movie represents an abusive parent” thing.
I mean that technically could have worked since it’s a universal troupe that worked off very good execution. The movie itself was trying to (but fails since diseny itself technically knows mermaids are bitch ie Peter Pan) specifically version and not something general
to be fair this time around it was more Ruby's perception not matching up with reality as opposed to her not being accepted, but like most of the movie's ideas it was really underexplored and underused.
Def see that as a missed opportunity with Chelsea. Would’ve been more of a worthwhile plot if Chelsea was actually manipulated to betray Ruby by parents and then pivots to wanting to help Ruby at the end and stop the war.
Ya, the motivation that Chelsea spoke about, like not wanting to hide anymore, but also not having a friend when she left home was so realistic! Plus, being a mermaid princess would show that she’s being pressured to do what is best for her people, even if it means betraying her best friend. All of that beautiful stuff was thrown out the window when “Oh, it was all a fake! Narissa never had a daughter!” Plus, isn’t it kind of gross for an older person to manipulate a teen?
@@mackeylin9387 True, and it seems they wanted to try and make a villain to teach teens about that kind of danger, but this kind of fake nice manipulation villain was done way better in Sky High, Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and Cats Don't Dance.
Yeah but the smaller kicker is they also missed the opportunity to release it on Canada Day since they have a Canada joke in there, they even have O Canada in the credits.
I think it would've been cool if instead of Chelsea being the side character she was made into the main character. We could see how evil the mermaids are in her perspective but its normal. Maybe the mermaids dont like the humans because of how they treat the ocean. She then meets Ruby and befriends her which causes issues between betraying her friend and her family while also questioning everything. I think it would be a lot better that way
The movie's plot straight up would've benefitted from Chelsea and the mermaids being an actual side we got to see. If Chelsea and Nerissa weren't the same person and we saw what the mermaids in exile were like it would've benefitted the movie. Plus the film wants to say activist-y words like "patriarchal colonialist institutions" but we never see the mermaids' side, they were banished by a totalitarian monarch....
@@Nightman221kyeah! And the only we thing we get is the Chelsea wants to rule the ocean which was mentioned like one time, and not even by her. It's weird but honestly if Chelsea actually got a redemption in the end the movie would be better. They made the mistake if giving Chelsea's character too much actual good involvement. Let me explain: when Ruby is complaining about not feeling like she fits in Chelsea gives a look that seems like genuine concern and empathy, but then to Ruby she light-heartedly brought her spirits up showing Ruby Ruby that she shouldn't feel bad about being a Kraken or that she has to be a ruler of something she doesn't want to/or is prepared for.... Why did the movie give us that look of almost madness from Chelsea, that was clearly only for the audience? So they could be like "SIKE! YOU THOUGHT!" specially when the grandma already tell us mermaids are evil? Because both Ruby's grandma and mum have problems in the way they're handling their situation with Ruby, and weirdly Chelsea was actually HELPING Ruby have some self-esteem, so when you end up making her the obvious bad guy in the end I just look at like.... And who is Ruby gonna have now to understand what she's dealing with? I guess her land friend's can help to an extent but they can't go to the sea, they aren't trapped in the world of expectations Ruby is. It actually makes me kinda sad for Ruby?
@@violetiolite Agreed, I was hoping Chelsea wasn't going to be reduced to just a one note villain. There was more potential there that could've been done. The mermaids vs krakens thing felt a bit dubious narrative-wise when we only hear one side and it just seems like "one side banishes the other" with neither being the good side or the evil one.
I used to work for Kroger. Fun fact: Those characters are called Krojis. Which is Kroger plus emojis. Kroger insisted that every corporate associate and store management create a Kroji that looked like themselves. I never made one. It really annoyed me because they were not emojis. They were avatars. So the name Kroji did not make any sense. No one cared for my opinion though since I was not in marketing. Shortly after, Kroger stores and commercials pushed them hard. I still hate them today.
@@minerman60101I suggested that name. Marketing had no idea what I was talking about. They thought I was talking about “the movie with the blue people.”
@@krisrk1YOU MEAN TO TELL ME THOSS GROWN-ASS PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHY THAT MOVIE IS CALLED "AVATAR"?? THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WORD "AVATAR" MEANS?? Jesus, this is why I doubt the intelligence of anyone higher-up in a major company.
I honestly think there has to be some kind of corporate meddling that changed the plot. The biggest thing was Chelsea being a twist villain. She’s so obviously villainous that me and many people thought there would be a redemption or something. That’s not even mentioning the other problems like the awful trailers, the animation style which really doesn’t work for the human characters, and then how it’s never explained how Ruby is literally blue with tentacle hair and is able to make people believe she’s human. At least Chelsea is believable. Like I genuinely can’t believe that a movie with this story would’ve been green lit as it is.
I feel that most of her friends knew she was a kraken but were just fine with it, it was just cartoon logic like in The Bad Guys when no one noticed them at the gas despite the obvious disguises LOL
I wonder if it's a budget thing; the movie is *short*, maybe they realized they didn't have money for the extra 20~ minutes they'd need to do that justice. So they folded Chelsea together and had a shorter runtime. That said, I do defend the skin; one of the things the movie did do is show how being in the closet is scary even if people really don't actually care and would accept you. People in the town accepting the skin, captain aside, is a sign they could live in the open no prob, they just don't realize it. Ruby's hurt by her mother's need for secrecy, not any real need for securecy, and they have evidence to show it.
This was inevitable. Not only wasn't the first teaser released until three months before it hit theaters, but they spoiled the big twist villain reveal, and almost everything else in said teaser. That, and the film itself is kinda lackluster, especially compared to the masterpiece that came before. Plus, it was the 5th animated film we got in a single month, AND released on the same day as the massively better, _Nimona._ the film was kinda doomed.
From what the trailers showed us (and Chelsea’s unfeatured lines) I thought Chelsea wasn’t even going to try hiding that she was evil towards Ruby. I thought Chelsea was going to spend most of the movie trying to villify Ruby and set her up to look like a monster. Meanwhile, Chelsea was going to make herself look like a hero by defeating Ruby and make everyone trust in her. Then come prom night, Chelsea would arrive with the Trident of Oceanus and Ruby would be forced to choose between letting the people who hurt her be destroyed by Chelsea, or save them despite their belief in Chelsea’s lies. The story we got with Chelsea fooling Ruby was NOT what I was expecting.
They literally could make chelsea a gaslighter who kept reducing ruby's morale with psychological tricks, and it would make better sense if they show her as a villain in the trailer, and at least make 1 character that isn't a cardboard
Same! They sorta forgot to make Chelsea evil in the movie until the "reveal." I was also thinking she was going to be an attention hog making everybody love her to paint herself as a hero, or at least to suck up the adoration and use that to power up.
@@kittykittybangbang9367 soulless reboots and live action remakes are also not doing well. Tbh nothing looks interesting enough to go and watch. That's the problem.
True! I love to see original animation but the problem with Elemental and Ruby Gillman was poor advertisement and the plots were safe. I mean, come on, the pretty girl being a bad person has been done a million times. The "I'm just a weird not-popular kid" getting some sort of unique power that makes them special, has also been done a million times. It's way harder to stand out if you have original animation but not an original plot. Because you basically get no audience. People who like original plots don't like safe/predictable stories. They like movies like The Last Wish. And people who like safe stories, they want animation they are more familiar with, so they go watch stuff like the Mario Movie.
@@prettyoriginalnameprettyor7506 Was Suzume good? I really wanted to watch it but but couldn't because in my local cinema it was only shown 3 times (with one of them being the dub) and i just didn't have the time.
This really feels like a movie with a premise that would have made a better TV show. A fun, monster of the week show with the Chelsea plot as the seasonal arc.
Agreed A tv show would’ve been more fitting, and / or sending this film straight to on demand. Because man, it did *not* pay off shipping it to the box office. As of this writing, it’s only netted $36 million worldwide off its $70 million budget. That’s a colossal failure
I’m honestly very sad and disappointed that this has happened. After TLW, everyone has given DreamWorks this very unrealistic expectation to now make masterpieces when DW has always made hit or miss movies. I still wanna see this movie but with this failure, it makes me fear that movies from DW will become cancelled due to the failure.😞
That already happened back in 2014 with Me And My Shadow, Bureau of Otherworldy Operations and Campfire Jack. Please do not let this happen again! Ruby Gillman still has a few more months to run in theaters, so we can not count it out as an immediate failure because of the first week. Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 3 exceeded box office expectations by doing much better in the second week than in the first week, so it is possible for Ruby Gillman to do the same.
I hated the art style and that was a major turn off for me. Even the “human” characters (especially the love interest boy) ALSO looked like fish people. It was just too weird looking.
@@KBsales171It was alright honestly but some adjustments could've been made to make them less look uncanny and fit better in the shapes they were trying to do
I hate it too. Saber's Kroger ads people comparison is pretty spot-on. It also irked me how it seemed like they had a differing amount of limbs. I don't know if the reason for that was explained in the movie, but it's still a weird choice.
I think the "every character looks really messed up and ugly" thing is a style that works better in 2D, but when they're textured and moving around it makes them look really uncanny and creepy, same as most of the human characters in the 3D addams family movie too. They remind me of those 'hideous on purpose' cartoons from the 90s, which were barely tolerable to look at in 2D but in 3D they'd just be nightmares. IDK my friend group and I are always usually really excited for new animated movies but the LOOK of this one just made us go 'eugh' and decide not to bother.
totally unrelated but "hideous on purpose" and "barely tolerable to look at" reminds of Ren and Stimpy and Ah! Real Monsters and I still wonder how did kids even get hooked on that stuff But true, both would be worse in 3D
My mother said she really disliked how the reason Chelsea used to manipulate Ruby is extremely weak, she says it’s either Ruby being far too stupid or the movie thinks the audience is stupid. (My mom didn’t see the trailers). My mom said a better reason would’ve been Chelsea really wants to save her mother Nerissa, who is imprisoned in the depths of the ocean. And the key is none other than the trident itself. She believes she can save her mother and bring her to the light side. In order to truly restore peace, setting the mermaid Queen free, and then sharing the trident between the two reigning forces, can truly bring peace. Chelsea really wants to redeem her mothers past war crimes, and she said she and Ruby could show her there is another way. Her mother wanted to force this destiny of hurting the Krakens and taking over the ocean, but Chelsea never wanted that. She just wished she could find a way to end it all, so she risked her life to find anyone, someone who would listen to her, and she found Ruby.’ This will make the audience wonder if some mermaids are really good. Then we can go ahead with the big reveal, that there is no Nerissa in a cage, for I am Nerissa. Also the trident is wayyyy to weak- Trident should have more powers: -Absorb other peoples powers and amplifying them. Having silvers power of levitation will really help. -Create waves, whirlpools -Resurrect and bring back the dead A better way to defeat Nerissa: Something smarter will be to utilise, shrinking and enlarging of the Krakens themselves to battle against Nerissa who couldn’t do that. Chelsea also gives her side of the story, saying that her injured fin is the result of a kraken negotiation gone wrong, making viewers truly question who is good and who is evil. ‘My mom is trapped deep beneath the trench, encased by the deep ocean volcanoes. Only the trident can subside the heat and unseal my mother.’ ‘It’s been 15 years since I last saw her… Ruby, I just wanted to be loved. But she was lost, blinded by revenge… but what if we can change that? What if we show her there’s another way? All the kraken queens going ham and using different powers on Nerissa at nearly the same time, showing off their unique styles and skills? It’s just this movie is so repetitive and feels woke too, it looks like Turning Red alongside Luka rewritten in the image of Ariel vs Ursula. What a disappointment. If my mom could write a better version, that’s intimidating. I also added my own ideas in there, but the reason my mom thought of, took her less than 1 minute of thinking to develop. Originality WHERE??? So disappointed with dreamworks.
I think that the reason why animated films don't really have villains anymore is because we are moving away from the idea that there is *only* a good or bad side. I personally really like this approach with movies like Encanto where the plot is about something very real and close to home for many. BUT, for stories that are less grounded in reality, having a villain would make everyone go crazy for it!! We've seen how successful being daring with stories, animation styles, etc. is. Why not having a great villain too?
I’ve played enough video games to know that villains are a great way to strengthen the development of the heroes, and to know that there often is a bad side, or at least a corrupted version of a good side that strayed from the right path. Point is, villains freaking matter.
I think too many modern movies take too many notes from the Ghibli films, where there aren't many bad guys. And when there are antagonists, they are also well-rounded, human, show admirable morals, and are sometimes even justified. Redeemed antagonists have also become a thing. But I think most animated movies don't understand that just becasue the appeal is popular, it doesn't mean it works for every story.
I didn't mind having a big bad villain but Chelsea was already spoiled as a twist villain so it was disappointing to find out the trailers just revealed everything. If the actual big villain was either Chelsea's mom instead of Chelsea being the Mermaid Queen ( at least the trailers didn't spoil that detail) or Ruby's grandmother it would've been better. Or at least it could've been enjoyable if the trailers showed Chelsea as Ruby's friend and you had to see the movie to see her as a villain.
@@Scrofar Animated films like Across the SpiderVerse and The Last Wish proves that there can be a balance between anti-hero characters (Spider-Man 2099 and Goldilocks) and pure-evil villains (The Spot and Big Jack). Even Castle in the Sky (a Studio Ghibli film) did the same thing. Tbh, I don’t mind the lack of villains or the usage of morally grey characters but it does loses value when it becomes too constant.
A rumor I heard from some folks at DW (not on this project so take it with a grain of salt) is that this story was going to be different but then Universal saw the impact of Turning Red and they leaned more into that vibe-- cuter, smaller finale, centered around generational issues stemming from matriarchs. Personal note: I wish Chelsea was actually the daughter of a badass mermaid warrior. And maybe her mom would make her befriend and trick Ruby, but later she would genuinely become friends, and at the party maybe see the way Ruby's mom has her issues but actually cares about protecting her kid as opposed to sending Ruby out to trick a dangerous enemy. And maybe the finale could have been either Chelsea's mom being an unapologetic evil mermaid, and/or Chelsea snatching the trident and deciding to smash some stuff out of frustration and Ruby has to talk her down and maybe they provide a safe space for Chelsea idk... ramble over!
i was hoping there was some twist regarding her because the trailers already showed her being the villain, would have been cool if they subverted our expectations and did something interesting
The plot you made is so much better!! “Narissa never had a daughter” was such a trashy plot twist becuz it destroyed all of the realistic motivations they put into Chelsea. Plus, I found that twist they wrote as kinda creepy cuz it was like an old person manipulating a young teen.
The most consistent thing about Dreamworks is its inconsistency It’s always been like that and it will most likely not change. But don’t worry, give it a year or two and they’ll be back with another banger film
Really is a shame that marketing murdered this movie. You can tell just by watching the characters move, especially Ruby in the last 5 minutes how much fun the animators had with this film. The art style was solid for 3D and everything just looked and felt super fun, but you're absolutely right, in that you can watch the trailers for the movie and see the movie in its entirety...
The movie isn’t anything special though anyway, it’s a low rental at best. Some cute and funny moments yes, but it’s overall pretty bland and forgettable
why tf is it the marketing team's fault? lmao The movie has an extremely cliché plot with an extremely cliché animation that looks like your generic Disney, Pixar or Illumination movie, no identity at all. This movie simply wasn't good
its actually really disappointing that some of the most stylized animated movies with original stories are the ones doomed to fail, it really doesnt seem fair, like they're purposely marketed to fail so the higher ups can avoid making something similar
and then you get stuff like the live action remakes which do everything worse than the originals. or have superhero movies flopping in recent years like the flash, or pay a huge load of money to make in indiana jones case while not making enough money to get what they lost
Spider-Verse came out a month before Gillman. That's usually enough space for a newer film to stretch its legs, but it seems Gillman was born without those.
This, though. I watched Spiderverse for the third time the other day and saw the poster for this movie when entering the cinema, and it really got me thinking about how I've paid to see ATSV 3 times but never even considered watching Elemental or Ruby Gillman on anything other than streaming.
One thing I do have to give this movie props for is the monster mermaid design. It's nice to see a good balance between the "disneyfied" fish people and the nightmare fuel from the Harry Potter movies. The Krakens were a bit too soft and friendly looking but I get it, it's a kid's movie.
The merpeople in Harry Potter weren't merpeople in the classic sense. Technically they were sirens, not merpeople. mermaids and sirens is not the same thing.
@@Oozaru85I don't know why people keep confusing: Mermaid == human torso fish legs Fishbpeople == fish torso human limbs Siren == human torso and arm, bird wings and legs.
the betray was so predictable but i was not expecting a "Sky High" kind of twits💀, i rly wanted chelsea to actually be the mermaid queen's daughter and that she was looking for revenge bc she was all alone and yada yada and in the end ruby was like "oh you don't have to be alone, this is not the way" redemption arc kind of thing (i'm a chelsea apologist😭 i rly wanted her to be redeemable)
One thing I noticed just from these trailers is that the shape language is just so... round. Like everything looks so bubbly and soft and friendly and there just isn't much diversity there. I think that's what's been bothering me with these past few movies like elemental and this is that everything about the designs is bright, soft, round, it feels like everything is playing it safe by its very design. I've been trying to figure this out because I've been a huge advocate for unique styles between movies, but the attempts at this that I'm seeing here really haven't done it for me, and I think this is part of it. I'm reminded of great designs like the dragons in how to train your dragon, there seems to be something lost there, which is interesting considering the focus on style that spiderverse brought. I think there is even a way to do a bubbly style like this that has more character to it. I feel like there's another piece to this I'm missing but it makes sense. What also confuses me is that I like the styles of Luca and Turning Red, which followed a similar style.
I actually don't like thestyles of Luca and Red either. I'm all around tired of seeing the same style in every movie, especially these unexpressive bean mouths, please make it stop lol
I know this is kinda tragic for the animation industry as a whole. But I still find this hilarious after having so many “DreamWorks is murdering Disney” memes shoved in my face
Disney and Pixar's have had miss after miss. Lighyear, Onward, Elemental, and quite a few others didn't do very well. Blame it on the pandemic if you want, but they still flopped on Disney+ (except for Elemental, but we'll see about that).
I wanted so desperately for Ruby and Chelsea to be friends. Would have been interesting to see the grandma and society itself actually be the villains as they try to keep Ruby and Chelsea apart from one another.
I do know a movie that does that sort of thing, it’s a Japanese movie I watch a few yers ago called Arshi No Yoru Ni which I really enjoyed, to be honest I cried watching it though Im very sensitive. It still felt like a good movie though, would suggest it
I liked how the main character's "intelligence" and obsession with shouting random calculations was brought up. It became more of a quirky, so random catchphrase esque thing instead of an actual part of her character. It'd be different if they did the mermaid turning on the mc like it was something she knew was highly plausible, too. Then the movie could delve into what its like trying to fit in with people whose entire personality is centered around popularity. And still respect the mc's intelligence
The very doughy, squisy style of the whole movie really doesn't lend itself at all to any kind of grand battle, unless its very slapsticky. If it was just the krakens (cause they ain't got no bones) maybe they coulda made it work but all the humans and mermaids have the exact same boneless bendy stretch and squish so when there's this big high stakes fight its more like a pillow fight cause everything's made of marshmallows.
I think the art style should've been either cuter or uglier. I'm in the 'make them uglier' camp pretty much every time but ik that wouldn't sell as well for a kids movie lol
After meeting the grandma, I'd assumed she'd turn out to be a "twist" villain. She lied to her daughter and granddaughter because she's a warmonger, and the mermaids just wanted some semblance of peace. Then the protag realizes the mermaid is lying about who she is, giving the trident to her grandma. Real heel turn happens, everyone fights grandma, power passes on to the mermaids. The movie is fine, honestly pretty good imo. Its just that it could have been a lot more interesting. Did love the mermaids kaiju design tho.
I think it's a combination of a number of things. The price of going to the movies keeps growing, while paychecks are not. The mindset of waiting for the movie to come out on streaming (something you already must pay for) is far more appealing than paying a fortune to take your family to the theaters. The pandemic definitely affected the movie industry in a negative way, and I don't think the reliance on franchises and lack of confidence and support of independent or new concepts is helping. People seem to prefer the familiar, and new or innovative storylines don't connect as well. On the other extreme, doing any semblance of a common storyline has audiences accusing the film of copying others. It's just a perfect storm for mediocre movies
lot of these companies don't seem to understand entertainment is one of the first things that get cut out of the average person's budget, people need food and shelter FAR more than they need to be subscribed to a dozen host channels. And neither pay or anything else for that matter is getting 'cheaper' or more accurately 'livable'
Movie tickets prices have soared in many countries, I used to go to the movies almost once a month, but after the pandemic I only watched few movies in the theater once things came back to normal. This year I've only seen Mario and Spider-verse 2 because they were the ones I was more interested in seeing
I think it's about what movies really repay being viewed on a big screen to be best enjoyed, too...? Something like Avatar with it's sweeping vistas or Spiderverse with its very densely filled action screens really justifies splurging for the cost of an expensive movie ticket, whereas looking at the Ruby Gillman clips, that seems more like something that was designed for the small screen... From the trailers & marketing people can usually tell if somethings going to look great on big screen, and I think that really impacts their decision on whether to stream or go see in theaters?
I don't think people are opposed to new stories (Little Mermaid also flopped), it's just the new concepts we're getting from the big players are bad. There's plenty of amazing original content out there, plus unique stories coming from unexpected names (Nimona, Arcane, etc.). People want knew stuff, they just want good stuff.
I think a big problem right now for films is just that... everyone is poor. I mean I can't say much for other countries, but I know here in the UK bills are rising, wages are not... and it's honestly not super feasible for most people to drop so much money on going to see things in theatres if they're not dead set that it'll be something they're going to enjoy. My family has been to see one film in cinema since covid lockdowns ended, and that was the Avatar film because we knew it'd be worth seeing it on the big screen. With a lot of these films, you don't lose out on anything by waiting and watching them at home. You can get the same level of enjoyment (if not more, it depends on how you are with other people) for a lot less money.
Dreamworks has been known to make shows from their animated movies, and I get the sense that was the intention of this movie, to launch a show. I can definitely see this premise being made into a show; about Ruby balancing her double life; living amongst humans while defending the seas. Each episode she’d fight a new sea monster of the week from her Grandma’s gallery. They could do a Hannibal Lecter approach with Narissa where the Captain keeps her locked in an aquarium and Ruby goes to her for information. There could be an arc about how the Grandma wants to retire and for Ruby to take the throne and there’s this question of “will she or won’t she?” And if she doesn’t then the Uncle becomes King. If they really wanted to be ballsy they could somehow kill off the Grandma in the season/series finale which would force a successor, but I don’t think they’d do something that dark.
I think the word you're looking for is merchandising, yes, a show is a form of merchandise. Ever since Madagascar it feels like DWA has been trying to mimic Disney in the way they expand their properties into multimedia projects. Shrek was kind of it, but the most successful were Kung Fu Panda and Dragons
I think it'd be better if they make Chelsea and Nerissa separate characters, make it so that Chelsea is only pretending to be Nerissa or something like that. The most enjoyable part of the movie was seeing Chelsea interract with Ruby anyway , would be nice to flesh out her character
This entire movie gives me vibes that Dreamworks tried to pull another Shrek to take jabs at Disney, but were too busy showboating with the marketing that they forgot everything that made Shrek good to begin with.
It felt like I already watched a good chunk of the movie with the trailers alone, due to how much they showed. It’s also pretty sad how this is the movie Dreamworks released after The Last Wish, which made people have incredibly high hopes for Dreamworks and their new outputs, and this movie might’ve just decreased that respect a bit, but lets just hope Dreamworks can recover It’s kinda odd how there was a big wave of box office failures and huge flops
Also the dialogue in the trailers was pretty bad, especially the first one where it was mostly completely unrelated lines badly spliced together with unfitting bg music and weird audio mixing like???
@@thekitkatlizard8661 It's a weird trend with Dreamworks movies. I remember the dialogue splicing for trailers on the bad guys made the movie seem really cringy.
when indiana jones is even in that catagory cause it was extremely expensive to make and despite the money its making its still considered a flop cause its not making up for the cost that it had for making it. and even the flash was a flop to a point where the dc cinematic universe is being rebooted
Ngl, I was expecting these expectations made by the trailers to be broken in the film; I was thinking that the big fight was supposed to be a Turning Red type of argument taken to the max, & that they'd be friends but were dealing with the fact that their races were essentially at war or something, throwing a wrench into their companionship... but no. I hope one day I can make my own version if this movie to fix this rather unfortunate but average film. Idk if it'd be too much better rn, but I'd like to provide a version that's the way I hoped it would be.
I definitely think that the better movie would have not made Chelsea the villain. Instead make it more about this friendship between two individuals whose families are at war, and them trying to learn how to calm things down amid everything. Might be a bit more Roneo and Juliet than intended, but given people are already shipping the two... Eh, it'd be fine.
It felt like a Mockbuster to me... every ad i saw was talking about the mermaids being evil, and it just felt like a shameless jab at Disney that did NOT connect.
I feel like the mom’s line about hydration was an obvious excuse as to why they’re near the ocean. I think-consciously or not-Agatha couldn’t stray too far from the ocean in case it called her.
I feel like the biggest issue was the fact that it came out at the wrong time. Weird Al once talked about how his film UHF came out during the Summer of 1989, which was quite possibly the worst time to release a new film since it had to compete with Indiana Jones 3, Lethal Weapon 2, and Batman, among many other blockbuster hits. If it had come out earlier or maybe even late July, then it might have had a chance.
My take on Ruby is even though it’s super-cliched, I could see a young child eat it up who isn’t as familiar with such cliches. Ruby’s nervousness and Chlesea’s pompousness would come off as hilarious.
I didn't expect Ruby Gillman become a biggest flop due to low marketing and too much spoilers from the trailer, but I love this movie, it's sad to see DreamWorks Ruby Gillman having low received money from the Box Office as low compared to Elemental
Elemental has such beautiful animation that definitely couldn't be done even 10 years ago. And I love how it's a love letter to the story creator's immigrate parents. It's a shame it's not getting the love it deserves.
Agreed Thankfully though, it’s made quite a rebound at the box office likely because the positive word of mouth really helped (I’ve already seen it twice and it’s easily my favorite Pixar film in years) As of this writing, it’s netted $356 million worldwide and while it’s not technically great at least it surpassed its budget. Unlike Ruby Gillman, which has only made $36 million off its $70 million budget which is a colossal failure. Ruby wasn’t a great film either though
Someone recently said in their review for Puss in Boots: The Last Wish that mediocre isn't acceptable anymore given what new potential animation studios have to offer. I do agree, this was a hard act to follow after The Last Wish but at the very least helps with a case study of the good and not-so-good ways to follow after a studio's oscar worthy achievement.
People were dickriding DreamWorks so hard and I was so confused. this is the same company that made Home and Boss Baby 2 they have a track record of making Booty ass movies but you trust them because of the first good one they made in like 7 years
@@jamalwalker Dreamworks is such a weird company. They can make one of the best animated movies one year and the next movie will be like “ALIENS THAT FART”.
The little marketing that exists for this movie literally spoiled 80% of the movie's whole plot. Like, seriously, who thought that was a good idea? why would I watch something when the trailers already show me everything about it?
The only reason I can think of is they probably thought no one was gonna see a plain slice of life high school movie so they added "see big MCU fight go see it!". It sure did backfire didn't it
This may or may not be an outdated reason. But I remember a few years ago it was revealed that the reason why film trailers for kids typically tend to spoil almost everything is because the parents are more inclined to take their kids to see the film the more they know about the plot going into it
There are so many cool, interesting and fun characters, but the writers only care about writing a plot of Ruby. I really like Connor, Ruby's friends (which I actually do not remember their names, cuz they're cute but not memorable) and especially Chelsea, who is easily the most charistmatic character in the entire movie. I was so disapointed that Chelsea was a one dimentional film, she is very funny, cool, and I would have wanted her to be a misunderstood villian or at least a flashback backstory animated explaining her
Like okay what about her using ruby to get the trident, bc some mermaid leader told her to or just the mermaid trying to get it to hurt the krakens, but as their friendship progresses she feels actually attached and stuff, and later idk maybe goes against her betrayal and they both try and have both sides make up Idk it just feels they couldv’e done so much mor eman
I think one of this movie's biggest problems is that they decided to spoof something that isn't even a current trend in pop culture. Shrek and Megamind both worked because at the time of their release, the things they were parodying (fairy tale adaptations + superhero movies) EVERYWHERE, so poking fun at the tropes of those genres was a lot easier + better received due to how oversaturated the market for both had become. Ruby Gilman is so odd in comparison because it feels like Dreamworks was trying to predict a trend, rather than tackle one that's been happening for a while. I mean, I'd argue that mermaid media kinda hit its peak in the mid 2000s-early 2010s, and the Little Mermaid remake hasn't exactly started a new demand for mermaid media that I've seen. And also - Shrek was an ogre (a common bad guy in fairy tales), and Megamind was an alien supervillain (a common bad guy in superhero media). Meanwhile...krakens aren't really a common bad guy in mermaid movies? A lot of mermaid media I've seen has either evil wizards/witches or, ironically, the popular mean human girls as antagonists. But again, these movies and shows were all from at least a decade ago. It's such a bizarre movie to me because it feels like it's trying to respond to a trend that has never really existed.
honestly every time ruby said something and chelsea looked guilty and bad or something i honestly thought she was genuine about ending the war, and so that whole movie i was kinda just hoping that there would be a change. especially since i got some villainous vibes from ruby’s grandmother. but no, it turned out to be the exact same plot as the trailers suggested. no twist about chelsea and the mermaid also being misunderstood or something.
i loved Chelsie's character in the trailer, i was reeeeaaallly hoping it wouldn't end of her being just a basic villain, yet here we are. i would of loved her to be a chaotic neutral or idk be forced to go against ruby because of the other mermaids, but sadly that's not the case
I remember seeing a comment about "What if the whole story was a pull on how there's never really good or evil spsciex" and I feel like that could've worked so well
I think they should have leaned more into Chelsea being an Ariel parody by having her just be selfish and not outright evil. Chelsea just wants her freedom from her mermaid family and have her shiny dingle hoppers or whatever and be worshipped by the humans like a Princess and doesn’t hold any particular malice against humans nor krakens. Like, she steals the trident to get her family off her back, until her mother, a separate character, uses it to invade the surface and by extension attack Chelsea’s followers, which forces her to work with Ruby not because she’s magically a good person now, but because it suits her motives. The fish of the sea will always eat each other, so what difference does it make who owns the trident? Not to mention, it would hark back to Ruby's mom, who just wants to carve out a space for her own family on the surface.
@@Flash-FireCC If they really wanted to also play into the mild familial trauma, maybe we could a different angle in while it's also about not being obliged to forgive your family if they've hurt you, it would be a story not only about how presumptions and that evil vs good isn't stagnant, but also a subverse on how familial family trauma stories are currently going. Both Chelsea and Ruby being children of that abuse and realizing they don't have to forgive the people who hurt em. FUCK
I agree so much on chelsea being better as a friend and actually flipping the obvious betrayal on its head, it also would have helped fit the growing up and making her own decisions story in a way. It was unfortunately predictable
From what I saw of the movie in clips, I was much more invested in Chelsea and Ruby being friends and overcoming their differences. An anti-climactic twist villain sounds like a let down. What if the nerd learned to be a little more charismatic and outgoing and the popular girl learned a little humility? That sounds like it could be super interesting.
I actually really enjoyed this movie a lot. Very sweet and entertaining. Definitely doesn’t deserve to bomb this hard, but it never stood a chance against the competition
I liked Ruby and her mother, the scene where she helped Ruby get through a meltdown was actually very sweet. The movie was a fun one, it just didn't do a lot of twists we haven't already seen. I was getting throwbacks to Halloween Town and Sky High watching this.
In the original story, Chelsea was a teenage mermaid and develops a genuine friendship with Ruby but she’s still a very toxic person. And it’s about how Ruby learns to see Chelsea for what she is and where she goes from there. I don’t know if she ends things with Chelsea or if she convinces Chelsea to be a better person. But honestly, that was a much better idea than having her be a generic twist, villain from the frozen era.
I didn't even know this movie was released 😂, Dreamworks really didn't bother marketing and also the artstyle looks so bland and childish especially compared to Puss in Boots 2
You know I keep seeing people say this but I saw ads for this movie all over the place online. I couldn't get away from it and I never even clicked on them. That makes me think that maybe they were just targeted REALLY badly or something.
Damn, I knew it existed because of all the animation channels (the ones I'm subbed to, and the ones recommended because I watch such content) were hyping this up as the 'anti-disney' animation film that was gonna wreck them and show how it's done. Saw some ads on youtube too.
@@YouAreStillNotablazeIt kinda is and kinda isn’t. Chelsea is a bit more than just “evil Ariel”. There’s some neat lore going in. Was hoping this would be a good alternative to Trolls as far as girly Dream Works films go. My 5 year old and I were not disappointed with the movie. The theater was empty which made my daughter super happy. I do wish we weren’t the only ones there. This movie needs love.
This movie would be better if Chelsea genuinely became friends with Ruby and Nerissa was her mother. The movie seems to send the message that racism can be acceptable if it's against the "right" group of people. I'd have liked if the grandma realized her views against mermaids were wrong, and that mermaids and krakens had teamed up at the end.
With them literally giving away the ending of Chelsea being evil in the trailers, I was hoping that there would be a twist that she’s genuinely good and there’s some other villain (like the grandmother) but unfortunately that wasn’t the case. It really was that shallow.
From what I hear this was a film that Dreamworks had on development since 2015, and didn’t really know what to do with, so they just threw it out there with little to no marketing.
Shoot, if they released it way back then it might have done better since the competition was less hard to top. (I googled animated movies of 2015 and didn't see a big amount of bangers)
@@justsomeguywholovesberserk6375 And be racist because it’s trying to insult that Hailey who’s a black female was Ariel. Lol. Good thing it flopped. Lol Hailey was awesome. Disney the little mermaid was ok but Hailey saved it with her singing skills. Puss and boots 2 was a great woke movie. And conservatives are losing. It’s all good now.
You hit the nail on the head with the marketing spoiling everything! Then the actual movie made the villain kinda fun and likeable until the "reveal." I was almost expecting a TV series by the end where Ruby will have to face new threats to the ocean and she and Chelsea would have to work together until they become actual friends. That would be cool.
It's a shame that Ruby Gilman is going to be remembered as this infamous flop by Dreamworks. I had the opportunity to go see it and I thought it was quite good. Obviously, it was never going to be as amazing as The Last Wish, but I enjoyed it. While the characters look weird at times, it has this cartoony and bouncy art style that they really know how to use (Similar to the art style in Hotel Transylvania) and they basically created lore and world for a really fun superhero concept. An underwater super heroine for both young boys and girls. They even name-dropped creatures like the Leviathan, the Hydra and the Umibozu, so I would love to see a Ruby Gilman show or sequel that follows her adventures as protector of the ocean, this movie was just her origin story. But yeah, not only the marketing itself was almost non-existent, but the only trailer that they dropped spoiled everything. They wanted to show off how Chelsea, the mermaid, was the villain. So they could take their shot against Disney's The Little Mermaid. But that was a bad idea. I think the movie would've been a lot more interesting if they actually tried to sell Ruby and Chelsea's friendship, only to have her betrayal to be a real surprise. Basically, they wanted to have their cake and eat it too.
I agree with you. I liked the movie, but it's story was nothing really new. I've seen the generational disagreements in Halloween Town and the twist villain who's secretly the parent's arch nemesis in Sky High. I did like Ruby as a character and her mom seemed sweet (Ruby's family was a highlight, imo). I was hoping that Chelsea wasn't going to be Nerissa (though I saw that coming a mile away, given the trailer) because the movie had potential to have two friends bridge a gap between sides in a war. Instead the movie only shows one mermaid. We never see if all mermaids are as evil as the grandma said they were so we just assume she's right and they're all bad. Plus the friendship moments would have been more interesting if they didn't project "don't trust this girl" so blatantly.
@@Nightman221kthe thing is, there is no such thing as "new." For example, a main character grappling with their mortality is not a new concept. What matters is being creative or fun with it, like The Last Wish.
I remember watching the trailer and wishing it would stop because I was interested in the movie. It just kept going and revealing more and by the end I was like, "I guess I don't need to see it any more."
I always find it fascinating how different marketing can be from culture to culture. From what I hear it's actually the norm for movie/anime trailers to showcase the majority of the plot in Asia, while in the west it can cause a movie to flop
@@Crakygamez the trailers for season 6 of my hero academia are a pretty good example, they're each about 1:30 mins but give away a number of major plot points and storylines. Compare that to the official netflix trailer for Arcane, which only focuses on a single storyline without spoiling much of what actually happens in between despite being nearly 3 minutes long
@@LowTiertoji Can't say for sure, my guess is it's successful at bringing in new audiences, since from the trailer alone they can decide if that movie or series is something they wish to spend time on. Fans of that movie/series that care about spoilers can ignore these trailers since social media makes any relevant information like release date available to them anyway. Basically, they focus on different demographics
The extended titles of anime and manga now a days is reflection of this idea more people want to know if it’s worth their time rather then going in blind
Every time you say "Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken" I have this mental barrier that keeps making me hear "teenage crackhead" instead and now I can't stop laughing.
I saw this at the theatre last week and I have to say I really enjoyed it. The only problem I had with it was how Ruby and her family could walk around school/town with blue skin and fins for ears and nobody seems to care. After watching all the trailers I was waiting for some explanation for this but no, nothing. Speaking of the trailers, yes, they did give far too much of the plot away, and I was hoping for a twist ending where Ruby and Chelsea team up but it didn't happen. Maybe in the sequel they'll somehow get together to defeat a bigger threat, because that would vindicate this movie's premise..
I'm a firm believer that story spoilers aren't really that big of a deal for most stories. I can still be surprised and invested by HOW the story is told. Ruby Gillman though spoiled its SPECTACLE. The cool to look at parts. What reason do I have to see a movie if I know what happens, and saw all the coolest looking parts already /:
I feel that way about the new Mission Impossible film, like bro, I already know he jumps off the cliff on a motorcycle and there's another train that falls off a cliff, who cares at this point.
@@SynGirl32 There is a 'how' to the telling of the spectacle, too. Ethan Hunt will jump off the cliff on a motorcycle and get in a train, but how will he fight the baddies on the train?
I agree somewhat. I got spoiled twice by a thumbnail that I didn't even look for. It was for final boss in Pokemon. And both was supposed to be a twist villain. The only difference is that it stopped me from finishing one game fully. The other was a bigger twist than the thumbnail led me to believe.
It's like they set this up to fail. Why on earth would they show the "twist" (as if it could be called that) in the trailer? This is up there with Treasure Planet in terms of letting something flop as hard as a rock in water.
Honestly with the Kraken character idea, I would have hoped/thought they'd play more into it and the absuridty, like with Octodad games. Or that the mom is an kraken/octopus and dad a human, and Ruby is like, half human-kraken, something weird and funny. I do generally like the concept of mixing the good/bad guys and using uncommon creatures as protags, but based on the trailer, it again feels kinda shallow (pun not intended) and small scale (not intended either) for such a big longlasting war themed movie. I still do see this be more favored by kids, compared to Elemental, because it taps into similar stuff like Luca and making your own cool kraken OCs etc.
Coming from someone who actually saw the movie: It’s strengths lie in the relate-ability of high school drama and very witty dialogue that got a few chuckles out of me. The animation - particularly character movement - feels both hyperactive and funny to look at. It’s a solid flick from the studio that I ended up enjoying much more than I thought I would.
I also should add the villains plan is actually good. She knows straight to go after her insecurities and relate to her to get what she wants. Really fits the narcissist people teens would hang out because they show a fake persona of it.
See, this is one movie I kind of want a subversion to the whole "War Between Red and Blue" conflict. Both Ruby and Chelsea are great characters, and the movie's trailers were leading me toward believing there is a big reveal of a significant change in the plot - but there never was. It was exactly as what we saw in the trailers. Chelsea could have been another pawn in the conflict much like Ruby. I was hoping that both of them wanted to get out of this eternal war between their races, and eventually decide to end the war by walking away and start fresh as true friends. I'm no pacifist, but i feel that it would be more meaningful than simply having good defeat evil and the day is saved.
I got to watch Ruby Gillman with some friends. I wouldn’t say the movie is “bad” but it was difficult to form a connection to ANY of the characters, it felt predictable and mindless. The whole idea of “mermaids vs kraken” was kinda unappealing and basic, just like how the idea of elemental was. What we need is an exciting and original animated movie to break the box office.
Elemental is still 100X better than Ruby. At least that’s rebounding now at the box office (my two local theaters are still having several showings a day of it compared to Ruby which only really has one a day now and that came out two weeks after Elemental). I laughed, teared up a little, and overall felt Elemental left a far bigger impact (I’ve already seen it twice now). Ruby just didn’t leave any impact other than a few decent moments with her and her family.
I absolutely agree!! The whole movie felt pretty shallow, not much was happening, felt like the trailer but a bit longer, the premise was good but the executive fell flat, none of the characters felt fleshed out. It's a shame tho, I loved the design for Ruby and Chelsea.
I do agree with that, at least Elemental had a good story behind its back. I’ve just noticed many people are uninterested in the movie due to the theme/idea of the “Elements”.
My biggest pet peeve with this movie is I can't exactly feel sympathetic with an oddball main character if she already has friends. It defeats the whole purpose of "I'm just trying to be a normal teenager." Or "I'm just trying to fit in." The only "oddball" teenaged characters I can sympathize with, get invested in and relate to are characters like Carrie White.
You mean those dreamworks vs disney shorts people kept pumping out? Yeah, that was cringe. Even as someone who loves the puss in boots movie Like do they realize that dreamworks had quite a few miss and hit throughout their time?
I work at a cinema and i've seen Ruby twice. I don't hate it, and recommend it as a safe movie for families where I'm not sure of how they feel about topics (small town). But I do recommend Elemental way more. I think it hits more with its humor and visuals compared to Ruby.
I was honestly excited for this movie to be about a teenage Kraken adjusting to life above the sea, as the first trailer suggested. It was down to earth and although seen before, would have brought something new to the trope. Bringing in the off version of Ariel as a school bully, not necessarily the villian, would have been a funny nod to the original. However making her the villain against the main character in a Kaju Battle that would 100% happen, as seen in the later trailers, threw me of the boat and just became other Onward situation.
I think part of the reason why it’s not doing well, aside from the marketing, is because people are just a lot more picky when it comes to what they wanna see in theaters these days. Like if this movie came out on Netflix or something it may have done better. But because it was released in theaters. People were like. “Eh. Idk. Doesn’t look interesting enough to see on a big screen when I could watch something of similar quality on my TV.”
I'm with you there. The Big Screen was made to showcase spectacles like action movies and thrillers in a shared space. If I can see a film on a small screen and still get the same effect, than it's not worth my movie ticket.
13:05 The poster being edited to have Subnautica creatures in it makes me wish that the villain was just like, a giant leviathan that was terrorizing the land and sea. No real human motivations, no twist. Just a big, unapologetic beast. Would've made that last fight scene like 10x cooler in my opinion. Something similar to the Gargantuan Leviathan would have been AWESOME to see in an animated movie.
Been a rough summer for movies at the box office but financial success isn't the sole decider of a film's quality. Curious to see what y'all think about this movie for the folks who did check it out. Not seeing much buzz about it so I'm wondering if marketing really just dropped the ball that hard. Probably
Mid movie but it was kinda cute tho
You should review about transformers rise of the beasts
I went to see it specifically to compare it to the recent little mermaid remake.
Apologies for asking, but are you sick? Your voice sounds off in this video.
There's bits and lines that work but it's boring. The concept isn't a bad idea by any means but the plot and artstyle fell very flat for me. It's not even a so bad it's good movie; this very much feels like a harmless movie you would put on to keep your kid entertained for a bit. I'd honestly rather buy another ticket to Spider verse.
Holy shit, Chelsea was supposed to be a twist villain?? They literally introduced her in the trailer as the antagonist, what the hell?
i originally thought she was the villain the entire time because i saw the evil mermaid trailer first :sob:
@@pinesappsame
Also even if they didn’t blatantly show it, it implies the “popular girl is bad mc is good” trope
yeah, hot take imo
its like a twist that you did not see coming. but instead, you were holding.
It's weird to hear that Ruby Gillman wasn't advertised well, because I saw the trailers literally EVERYWHERE. But the trailer really did spoil the entire movie and convinced me not to see it. Also surprised this was DreamWorks. Literally thought it was from an independent animation studio with how it was presented
I felt that it was advertised a lot but not well. None of the ads I saw made it look all that interesting or appealing
I only saw one ad for this and it was when I went to see spider-verse 😭
my farts are better than Saberspark’s farts 💨
@savannahcarrington5221 Same situation with me and that's when I saw spiderman the second time. 💀
Ngl I saw elemental trailers everywhere on RUclips and in other places but people said it didn’t get advertisement. Although I did only see one trailer for this
The issue is the fact that they legit advertised that they were trying to hide the fact that they were human, but like she’s blue, and that isn’t very hard to see. Wow, I guess the “villian” was a very clever person to find her “secret”
Invader Zim comes to mind. "Insolent fool-boy! It's a skin condition."
I was gonna say, her appearing as a hosen blue girl was breaking the illusion that she was the "just a normal girl" trope. I think the intention for that was done for a joke on the film makers' parts, but it honestly as Saberspark said, left very little to the imagination.
Ruby's whole gimmick shouldve been more along the lines of "I just want to fit in." Or "Why do people avoid me like im some otherworldly creature?..." After all, what teenager do you know who says they just want to be a normal teenager??????? That line was the most unrealistic part.
Maybe the story shouldve gone that it was SHE who knew CHELSEA'S secret and therefore Chelsea decides to get close to her, saying she's under disguise at the school because she's trying to protect her town from a monster, then the twist could've been that Ruby was the "monster" that she feared this whole time, thus flipping the script to reveal Chelsea was out to get the humans! Then the script could've been flipped EVEN FURTHER by revealing Chelsea's motive for committing evil was she gets constantly bullied by other jealous girls at the school. This would be a strong but truthful message to the audience, since beautiful people do in fact get bullied in school, not just the "outcasts" characters.
@@KarmikCykleand I thought I had a Dib moment😂 "how does nobody in the movie see it??? Are they designed to be dumb??? They can't be that dumb!!!"
Nevermind the whole being blue thing SHE DOESNT HAVE A NOSE??? That just ruined the imersion for me
They could at least make it very clear that humans see something different from the audience and we even get to see what they see at times.
My grandma saw like one trailer and she loves simple children’s movies so I went with her. It was kind of tradition for us to go see movies together ever since I remember. She was disappointed, and she’s the one always talking about how she likes children’s movies and simple happy stories, because the world is sad enough for her, so she doesn’t need tragic or complex movies. And she was disappointed. Yeah, I also would have preferred for the mermaid to be just Ruby’s friend and a nice person instead of doing evil popular girl again. They had such cute dynamic as a shy nerd and outgoing popular girl
IK there was so much potential WASTED!!😫
@@Chewey_Official That was a little unneeded and insensitive
@@AzuleaFlair sorry
I didn’t understand it
@@Chewey_Official Here
• OG commentors grandma loves simple children's movies
• They have a tradition that they watch movies together ever since the OG commentor could remember
• However, the grandmother was disappointed.
• *The grandma likes simple children's movies because the world is sad enough for her, so she doesn't need tragic or complex movies*
• The OG commentor would've also preferred the movie to go in the route that Chelsea is Ruby's friend
The bolded comment is the slight reason I thought your comment was a bit insensitive. But, I hope this helped you understand a bit!
From my POV, I think the marketing was the major failure here. I saw tons of ads for this movie, but literally none of them even contained the TITLE of the movie until after the movie bombed. All the ads I saw were stuff like “Krakens vs Mermaids” or other vague clickbaity stuff that somehow totally fails to even clickbait. It was really weird, felt robotic. Anyone else experience that weird shit?
I saw this movie on Tik Tok with some edits, but other than that No I didn't see anybody talk about it
This video is the first time I’m hearing about the movie
I saw one trailer for it and I don't remember it actually SAYING the title. I also remember thinking how awful the trailer was as it utterly spoiled the climax. It probably could have done better if somebody competent had been in charge of marketing.
Yeah the movie was good but the marketing was poor😬
@@justsomeguywholovesberserk6375same
I think the marketing would have been better if they made us question why the mermaids are considered evil by showing clips of Chelsea the mermaid being nice. That way we would want to watch the movie to figure out why they're evil
Exactly!
Just montage of Chelsea being a friend with the grandmother or whatever talking over it about them being evil.
my farts are better than Saberspark’s farts 💨
They literally did tho
Chelsea seems so much like a one note villain for me, I never watched the movie but the first trailer I saw gave it all away for me on what this movie is going to be about.
WHY IS NOBODY MENTIONING HER "HUMAN" DESIGN?! IM GOING CRAZY - she's blue.. she's boneless... she DOESN'T HAVE A NOSE. She has TENTACLES for hair.... IS SHE SUPPOSED TO NOT REALIZE SHE'S A KRAKEN? IS SHE SUPPOSED TO LOOK HUMAN?!??!?!?!?
I would have taken this movie more seriously and wanted to see it more if they did it like Luca. And while it may be a stylistic choice / a gag, having it be a main plot point for the entire movie is... Slightly absurd. Especially when you have deep and completely serious narratives in that same movie 💀💀
She knew she was a kraken, just didn't know she could become giant. The trailers were definitely misleading about this tho
I dunno… maybe the point of giving all the actual human characters such odd appearances was to so muddy up what “normal” was so that you could have actual sea people walking among the “regular people” and nobody would comment on it too much.
@@mattpyson6181Agreed
I remember a similar thing happening in The Bad Guys in which no one at the gala could see through their disguises
Her design is actually pretty good as she's a squid like creature with a different physiology to humans such as having no skeleton,
who's trying to pass herself off as a human while also coming across as an actual teenager rather than an impossibly glamorous model pretending to be a teenager like Bella from Twilight.
The real question we should be asking is who thought those human designs were passable? They look like a smartphone bot tried to render the bastard children of Popeye the Sailor and Wallace and Gromit.
FRRRR
I was so disappointed that Chelsea didn't have a cohort of evil mermaids to team up with if she was going full bad guy. The poster showed 3 mermaids, not 1.
same.
I think those were just the statues from Grandmamah’s throne room.
Check out the scene where Ruby and Grandmamah are in the throne room and she’s explaining the various foes she’s faced. The statues of the mermaids are the exact same as the ones on the poster.
The 1 thing that bothers me is... why does nobody notice Ruby is blue? She's blue with weird tentacle hair? How does nobody know she's a sea creature? How did her parents explain the whole staying out of the ocean thing when they look like fish people?
I had the same thought at first, but then I remembered Invader Zim, and was like “Okay, to hell with that. I’ll just accept this as this lil’ gag about society being kinda dumb and naive and move on”
@@PurpleHoodie666 honestly I would have been okay with an Invader Zim gag but they just don't question it at all 💀
the whole family knows they are sea people, but rather Ruby and her brother didn't know they were krakens, other than that... guess everyone just accepts that canadians look like that lmao
They’re from “Canada”
@@TheJoxterrcan confirm as a Canadian, we do in fact look exactly like that
I feel like a good way to make this movie redeemable would be for Chelsea to 'not' actually be a villain. In that she legitimately thinks that the triton is the key to settling the conflict between the Mermaids and Krakens, maybe she doesn't know why and has just been gaslit by her family into believing so. However, the problem is the triton itself causes power incontinence (hence why Chelsea goes full villain mode) and Ruby uses their time bonding to talk her down.
Then grandma could come in, ready to destroy Chelsea but Ruby stands up to her. She demands Ruby give the trident back and it's then Ruby realizes 'the solution'. Destroy the trident. Grandma is incensed, but Ruby's mom talks her down. Ruby offers a hand out to Chelsea and admits that she was right, the trident was the key. So long as it existed, there'd always be conflict.
Amends are made, Chelsea and Ruby are still friends with each other and their friend groups intermingle.
fr reading this made me feel like i actually watched the movie lol p much what i wanted to happen when i saw the trailers
Bro made a better plot than a million dollar company
The way this would've made the movie better is crazy
omg that’s really good! your description was so interesting and detailed, that it sounds like the plot of a real movie that already exists!
That would’ve been a much better plot
I read the summary on Wikipedia and really thought they were setting us up for a misdirect where the mermaid girl Chelsea was actually good despite looking so very obviously evil in the ads. And then the two would work together to stop Chelsea s mom. That would’ve been such a better movie.
This is what I was really hoping for in this movie! It could have been a friends to rivals conflict. But no let's just make her a boring twist villain without any depth
@@KgEclispe252 It's very poor show from Dreamworks, a company that has a history of some truly fantastic villains. Lord shen, Death, Fairy Godmother, Jack horner, Drago, Titan and their portrayal of Ramses was superb.
That's also what i was expecting. My other ideas were that she'd just have a redemption...? Or maybe she turned out to be sent by her mermaid clan to befriend and betray the kraken, but then realizes she's been manipulated. It's simple but I think it would've given more opportunities for Chelsea to have a more interesting character and story idk i'm not a writer.
Like, anything else than what was obviously stated would maybe be better imo... reallg no clue why they would market it like that.
@@fartinfpooping8801 Same. I was expecting Chelsea to betray her to get her “mom” back but then the mom would declare that she didn’t care about her daughter and wanted to destroy the world and kill all the krakens. Leading to a team-up to seal the mom away. It’s oddly similar to an episode of Ben 10 but it could’ve worked really well here
I thought the same thing. I thought, surely they didn’t just spoil the WHOLE movie in the trailer, there has to be something else going on.
But then the first reviews came in and no, the trailers was all there was to it.
I think Cartoonshi said it best when he said that at LEAST Dreamworks is trying to be experimental. They're trying radically different concepts and art styles. Not all of them are gonna be bangers, but that's what Dreamworks does, they experiment. You got, Bad Guys and Last Wish then you got Ruby Gilman. I would take a studio at least TRYING to be creative and innovative, then Disney constantly pumping out remake after reboot after same story just different shapes ANY day. Same goes for Sony and Illumination, at least they're TRYING
i mean lets be real, everyone says that up until it flops
That’s true.
One day they give you a fun Ocean’s 11-style heist movie with anthropomorphic animals, and the next, they give you 🎶Your favorite fearless hero🎶 as he confronts his mortality inside a star that can grant one wish.
@thejuiceking2219 well I guess people only say that when they don't understand or appreciate true creative vision. Disney and Pixar set up everyone's expectations way too high (which at first wasn't a bad thing) so now everyone expects other studios to be the next Pixar and make banger after banger like in their early years. The true creative process lies in trial and error, not everything sticks, and that's okay
except.... this movie literally ripped off turning red???
fr sometimes most people just don't get creativity
Personally, Ruby Gillman felt like a multi episode show scrunched into an hour and a half movie. So much of it really needed more explanation and extra time to really get fleshed out.
It's like The Adventures of the American Rabbit
I gotta agree. There was alot of good content, but most of it needed time to breath. Heck, even some time to build up TwistVillain, and maybe insert she opted to rule the seas with Ruby with an actual companionship. But with how short the movie was, that kind of development wasn't possible.
So true! It had so much potential, but there wasn’t enough time put into anything. The grief after the betrayal, the family bond, the time to change what you thought of someone… all of it happened too quickly for me! Also, I wanted to throw the dialogue in the trash because it was so overused and egotistical.
Hopefully they'll improve in the sequel or TV show
It sounds like a perfectly fine concept for a late 2000s tv show inexplicably forced to be a 2020s movie instead. I can vividly imagine Ruby Gillman in a thick-line artstyle airing inbetween Juniper Lee and Danny Phantom
I was only interested in the movie initially because of the hints of chelsea and ruby being friendly in the trailers despite everything else being said and shown about mermaids; i honestly *did* think that it would be one of those friendships where the introvert and the popular girl are unlikely pals, with the added opposition of their mermaid/kraken lineage aggression. I always really liked stories with that type of dynamic, i find it sweet, heartwarming, and more relatable than you'd first think. but nah. they just went with the obvious.
Had they pulled the wool over our eyes and subverted the expectation by having a depth of character not shown in the trailer, it may have been a way better movie.
Either that, or maybe have it be where Chelsea is genuine, but the triton was hidden for the mermaids good. Say it had some corrupting influence so Ruby was forced to fight her friend. That could’ve had some emotional punch.
Agreed there was so many things they could of did to make it interesting yet they stuck with the basics
@@Ghostrnaut Wow I would've loved it if it played out like that.
I originally thought it would be cool if Chelsea was genuine and her mom and/or the other mermaids are hungry for power and Chelsea was just being used to manipulate Ruby. But with time, their relationship becomes real and they try to find a solution together. The Krakens were so one dimensional as the "good guys" I would've wanted them to have some sort of misunderstanding of the other sea creatures too.
Ruby and Chelsea were both such adorable characters who I thought made a great friendship. I was really hoping the entire time I was watching for the ending to not be EXACTLY what they showed in the trailers.
side note: Did we even see any other mermaids in the film besides Chelsea??
Yeah, it's disappointing. If I had a penny for everytime the popular pretty girl was the bad guy I'd have too many damn pennies
I think what repelled me most was that Ruby was supposed to be this "normal girl trying to blend in" but I found it difficult to get around that when she's literally blue with flimsy limbs? I don't know...
exactly, maybe if the krakens functioned a bit more like the sea monsters in Luca then it would make more sense from a blending-in aspect
I saw it similar to The Bad Guys.
Remember that scene when they walk into the gala with obvious disguises yet no one noticed ?
@@RB01.10 ive never seen the film yet but hearing of that sounds like plot convenience but yeah, how do you not recognise animals like that
@@emZeyB33Z I think it’s the joke?
@@RB01.10 oh alright, sorry I didn't get it
What's sad is that the poor marketing for Ruby is still miles more existent than the marketing Disney did for Strange World.
I give DreamWorks props for going outside the box and trying something new. They've always been the company to take more risks than others and that's why they have so many hit or misses.
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
Too bad they didn't do the same for this movie's writing.
Yeah, it is very rare for a mermaid not to be a villain. This was same ol’ same ol’
The entire movie was spoiled in the trailers
@zooker7938might have been more interesting if she had started in the water, had some cultural exchange or something to go to the human school, then met the mermaid. Maybe even have a tentative friendship between then, in spite of knowing of each other families/culture.
A Netflix show is inevitable. The way they were "marketing" Ruby's powers like it was a superhero movie. A TV show with different sea creatures that she has to face is a no-brainer
You’re gonna give them more ideas than they already have
Uh, after this flop? Yeah all that is in the trash.
i heard something about this originally being intended as a netflix show so maybe?
Even the name sounds like a netflix show lol
@@Dac85 I don’t really think
Would've been nice to have a sort of "Wicked" story where people assume Ruby is evil because she's a kraken and Chelsea tries to help her fit in and is her friend.
I really don't care for Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken, but I love this idea for some reason.
Someone who can animated, do this please.
That would’ve been absolutely cool in my opinion.
You know its deadly serious when Saber's voice feels defeated
He feels disappointed because This came after Puss in Boots 2
He sounds ill, if he is, I hope he recovers soon.
Edit: In the time it took to get from this comment, up the page and back to the video I got a like and the notification that it occurred... How?
Bro i swear we are subbed to all the same people lol
🤣🤣 He really was rooting for his home studio DreamWorks to start some animation Renaissance when the majority of their films are just average to mediocre. He NEVER learns 😂
@@JinxSanity Dreamworks does have some very high peaks. Shrek 1 and 2, the Kung Fu Panda trilogy, the HTTYD trilogy, Prince of Egypt, Puss in Boots 2, and Megamind are all phenomenal films. The problem is they insist on putting out 2 films a year, which leads to their product getting very diluted and some films just whiff.
This movie’s entire existence was everyone collectively going “oh wow she looks like Ariel” and then being completely forgotten about.
The only selling point is dreamworks making fun of disney again... but they spoiled the whole movie so... why watch it?
I knew who the villain was from the trailers. but had no idea there was a family aspect. you would think you would advertise that family bit more than the TWIST.
And the movie is actually Amazin'
You forgot the second part. Unlike that other darker one 😂.I used darker because id I use the word they used, I'd be banned.
I saw the trailers, and was really predicting/hoping that Chelsea would get a redemption! Popular girl characters are villainized and pitted against more nerdy girls too often, and I also just don't really like the essentialism of "Krakens good, mermaids bad".
It's fantasy racism. :D In the current year. Racism never went away, we just call it different things now.
It is SO weird for the movie to have a "omg Krakens are discriminated against of looks!!!" and then to be like "Ew mermaids care about their looks, such bitches amiright?!!!" Like what??
i thought there were gonna make a story about bought of kraken and mermaid have flaws.
it would have been better come , 100 percent mermaid are bad and the kraken are good.
it kinda a bad message
Okay sport.
Making the beautiful/rich/popular character as evil is less of a moral story and more of a wish fulfillment story.
I think the problem is that they very clearly tried to market this movie as petty competition for the Little Mermaid, a competition that DreamWorks was destined to lose. Maybe this movie could have done better if they marketed it with genuine passion and creativity instead of a gotcha moment for Disney.
True they deserve this
Ironically, wasn't Dreamworks initially made to spite Disney?
@@AwesomeGamer-om4hmwell idk but they do have a tendency to mock them
I remember so many people on Twitter hyping this movie up, saying it was going to destroy the live action “Little Mermaid” because it was an original idea. Just another reminder that social media rarely reflects the real world.
Animation is cinema fans seething.
They’re blaming the “marketing” when the Marketing is good enough. Just spoiled the movie.
As well as the predictions of Ruby beating up Elemental LOL
My two local theaters only have one show a day for Ruby Gillman now compared to Elemental which still has several shows a day
Still a better movie than the live action Little Mermaid though
@@RB01.10Same here. Two of the theaters that are in the towns next to mine have only one showing for Ruby Gillman each day. Meanwhile, the theater that me and my family usually go to has literally pulled Ruby Gillman from the list of movies they’re currently showing, while they still have Elemental on there. Granted, it’s a small theater attached to the mall and because they have very few rooms, movies are pulled out earlier than in other theaters to make way for the new ones. However, they’re still showing that new Transformers movie which came out way before Ruby Gillman.
@@RB01.10I was pleasantly surprised by Elemental, whereas this movie was exactly what I expected and not in a good way.
Dunno if this makes me some kind of kraken-racist, but I was never sold on the idea of krakens being goodguys. I was sold on mermaids being bad guys though. I think the story would've been WAY more interesting and tied into generational trauma better if it turned out BOTH krakens and mermaids ate people together at some point; krakens being the muscle that takes ships apart, and mermaids picking off the stragglers and/or luring sailors to the krakens. Then maybe, when a kraken finally turns up dead on the shore (tied into the real life discovery of the giant squid), the krakens stop hunting humans out of FEAR, and their amicable nature towards humans is just a recent development and the krakens deny their history of eating people. Whereas mermaids keep at it and are salty (hehe pun) about being abandoned by the krakens they relied on for protection. Also Ruby and Chelsea should've both been the same age, no 1000 yr old teenager thing going on. It would make them develop a real friendship, start a redemption arc for Chelsea, and make the real villains be the grandma and maybe Chelsea's parents/grandparents.
I like this idea a lot more!
such a good story, love this
That would have been a much better story already
It’s not considered racism if you’re talking about krakens, if you know what I mean.
The Little Mermaid really gaslit us into forgetting that Sirens/Merfolk in tales are like 70% man-eating monsters
After watching the movie we were leaving the theater and my 3 year old looked back at the movie poster on the theater wall and complained “hey! I didn’t see those fight!” I looked again at the poster and they were right. In the promotional poster Ruby’s family fights multiple Mermaids. But in the movie Ruby fights one giant mermaid that looks nothing like the poster. What’s up with that? Even my 3 year old noticed
Reminds me of when I first saw Cars 2, in theaters and was confused wondering why that camera the lemons used didn’t blow up McQueen. Little kid me was even like “Why didn’t it shoot?” It wasn’t until a repeat viewing, and a lot of rewinding, that I heard the hippy van say something about Sarge swapping out McQueen’s fuel for something that wouldn’t explode, when the camera shot him.
Based on the cut content, it seems DreamWorks was originally going for a more conplex storyline in which Chelsea and Nerissa were separate people
It's very likely that either the story became too complex for 90 minutes or production was running against a deadline, so they scrapped the original concept and went for something simpler
@@davidhong1934well i also found out the movie are to rushed. It's like they're trying to catching with little mermaid release date lol
Tried to competing. But truly this last month june-ags isn't the best month to release a movies, specially the competition already to much with _Oppenheimer, spiderman the spider verse, elementals, little mermaid, ect_
Definitely not the best months to release a movies with those many competition
@@davidhong1934the final fight in the storyboards was a LOT better than what we got. Ruby somehow got the ability to manipulate water and grew four extra arms (or those were her feet tentacles she was using as hands) and there was a lot more stuff. Ruby just taunted Nerissa the whole time while absolutely destroying her and I wish that was realised on screen. I’ve always had this idea that they could reuse the fight, or elements of it like Ruby manipulating the currents and taunting Nerissa, as a rematch of sorts in a potential sequel. Then they could introduce THE main antagonist (Leviathan. Make it happen. It’s the closest equivalent to Godzilla.)
Also they should make it so Chelsea was either in one of these scenarios instead of being Nerissa:
A) Corrupted by the Trident’s influence (or a higher power, like The Leviathan)
B) Used as a sacrificial lamb by the REAL Nerissa, her mother
C) Posed as Nerissa to honour her deceased mother
Even apart from the issues with the marketing and plot, the whole “teenager trying to fit in” plot has been done nearly as many times as the “monster in a horror movie represents an abusive parent” thing.
and also the whole 'ugly monster thing that everyone hates turns out to secretly be great and nice'
I mean that technically could have worked since it’s a universal troupe that worked off very good execution. The movie itself was trying to (but fails since diseny itself technically knows mermaids are bitch ie Peter Pan) specifically version and not something general
to be fair this time around it was more Ruby's perception not matching up with reality as opposed to her not being accepted, but like most of the movie's ideas it was really underexplored and underused.
Def see that as a missed opportunity with Chelsea. Would’ve been more of a worthwhile plot if Chelsea was actually manipulated to betray Ruby by parents and then pivots to wanting to help Ruby at the end and stop the war.
So basically Raya and the Last Dragon?
Ya, the motivation that Chelsea spoke about, like not wanting to hide anymore, but also not having a friend when she left home was so realistic! Plus, being a mermaid princess would show that she’s being pressured to do what is best for her people, even if it means betraying her best friend. All of that beautiful stuff was thrown out the window when “Oh, it was all a fake! Narissa never had a daughter!” Plus, isn’t it kind of gross for an older person to manipulate a teen?
@@mackeylin9387 True, and it seems they wanted to try and make a villain to teach teens about that kind of danger,
but this kind of fake nice manipulation villain was done way better in Sky High, Guardians of the Galaxy 2 and Cats Don't Dance.
Yeah but the smaller kicker is they also missed the opportunity to release it on Canada Day since they have a Canada joke in there, they even have O Canada in the credits.
@@mackeylin9387it’s only gross if it’s sexual manipulation
I think it would've been cool if instead of Chelsea being the side character she was made into the main character. We could see how evil the mermaids are in her perspective but its normal. Maybe the mermaids dont like the humans because of how they treat the ocean. She then meets Ruby and befriends her which causes issues between betraying her friend and her family while also questioning everything. I think it would be a lot better that way
Yeah that probably would have been a little better
The movie's plot straight up would've benefitted from Chelsea and the mermaids being an actual side we got to see. If Chelsea and Nerissa weren't the same person and we saw what the mermaids in exile were like it would've benefitted the movie. Plus the film wants to say activist-y words like "patriarchal colonialist institutions" but we never see the mermaids' side, they were banished by a totalitarian monarch....
@@Nightman221kyeah! And the only we thing we get is the Chelsea wants to rule the ocean which was mentioned like one time, and not even by her.
It's weird but honestly if Chelsea actually got a redemption in the end the movie would be better.
They made the mistake if giving Chelsea's character too much actual good involvement. Let me explain: when Ruby is complaining about not feeling like she fits in Chelsea gives a look that seems like genuine concern and empathy, but then to Ruby she light-heartedly brought her spirits up showing Ruby Ruby that she shouldn't feel bad about being a Kraken or that she has to be a ruler of something she doesn't want to/or is prepared for....
Why did the movie give us that look of almost madness from Chelsea, that was clearly only for the audience? So they could be like "SIKE! YOU THOUGHT!" specially when the grandma already tell us mermaids are evil?
Because both Ruby's grandma and mum have problems in the way they're handling their situation with Ruby, and weirdly Chelsea was actually HELPING Ruby have some self-esteem, so when you end up making her the obvious bad guy in the end I just look at like.... And who is Ruby gonna have now to understand what she's dealing with? I guess her land friend's can help to an extent but they can't go to the sea, they aren't trapped in the world of expectations Ruby is. It actually makes me kinda sad for Ruby?
@@violetiolite Agreed, I was hoping Chelsea wasn't going to be reduced to just a one note villain. There was more potential there that could've been done. The mermaids vs krakens thing felt a bit dubious narrative-wise when we only hear one side and it just seems like "one side banishes the other" with neither being the good side or the evil one.
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
I used to work for Kroger. Fun fact: Those characters are called Krojis. Which is Kroger plus emojis. Kroger insisted that every corporate associate and store management create a Kroji that looked like themselves. I never made one. It really annoyed me because they were not emojis. They were avatars. So the name Kroji did not make any sense. No one cared for my opinion though since I was not in marketing. Shortly after, Kroger stores and commercials pushed them hard. I still hate them today.
Kroji? Krovatar. One of these sounds way cooler. Sorry you had to put up with that corporate nonsense
I'm glad I chose to work at Publix. Don't have to deal with in-your-face marketing stunts like that....yet.
@@minerman60101I suggested that name. Marketing had no idea what I was talking about. They thought I was talking about “the movie with the blue people.”
@@krisrk1YOU MEAN TO TELL ME THOSS GROWN-ASS PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHY THAT MOVIE IS CALLED "AVATAR"?? THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WORD "AVATAR" MEANS??
Jesus, this is why I doubt the intelligence of anyone higher-up in a major company.
@@krisrk1That is just PAINFULLY stupid 🤦🏼 I'm so sorry
I honestly think there has to be some kind of corporate meddling that changed the plot. The biggest thing was Chelsea being a twist villain. She’s so obviously villainous that me and many people thought there would be a redemption or something.
That’s not even mentioning the other problems like the awful trailers, the animation style which really doesn’t work for the human characters, and then how it’s never explained how Ruby is literally blue with tentacle hair and is able to make people believe she’s human. At least Chelsea is believable.
Like I genuinely can’t believe that a movie with this story would’ve been green lit as it is.
I feel that most of her friends knew she was a kraken but were just fine with it, it was just cartoon logic like in The Bad Guys when no one noticed them at the gas despite the obvious disguises LOL
I wonder if it's a budget thing; the movie is *short*, maybe they realized they didn't have money for the extra 20~ minutes they'd need to do that justice. So they folded Chelsea together and had a shorter runtime.
That said, I do defend the skin; one of the things the movie did do is show how being in the closet is scary even if people really don't actually care and would accept you. People in the town accepting the skin, captain aside, is a sign they could live in the open no prob, they just don't realize it. Ruby's hurt by her mother's need for secrecy, not any real need for securecy, and they have evidence to show it.
This was inevitable. Not only wasn't the first teaser released until three months before it hit theaters, but they spoiled the big twist villain reveal, and almost everything else in said teaser. That, and the film itself is kinda lackluster, especially compared to the masterpiece that came before. Plus, it was the 5th animated film we got in a single month, AND released on the same day as the massively better, _Nimona._ the film was kinda doomed.
You're not wrong.
All very good points.
Being released at the same time as Nimona wasn't really a problem...
i didnt even hear about nimona at all or see trailers for that
Agreed
From what the trailers showed us (and Chelsea’s unfeatured lines) I thought Chelsea wasn’t even going to try hiding that she was evil towards Ruby. I thought Chelsea was going to spend most of the movie trying to villify Ruby and set her up to look like a monster. Meanwhile, Chelsea was going to make herself look like a hero by defeating Ruby and make everyone trust in her. Then come prom night, Chelsea would arrive with the Trident of Oceanus and Ruby would be forced to choose between letting the people who hurt her be destroyed by Chelsea, or save them despite their belief in Chelsea’s lies. The story we got with Chelsea fooling Ruby was NOT what I was expecting.
They literally could make chelsea a gaslighter who kept reducing ruby's morale with psychological tricks, and it would make better sense if they show her as a villain in the trailer, and at least make 1 character that isn't a cardboard
Same! They sorta forgot to make Chelsea evil in the movie until the "reveal." I was also thinking she was going to be an attention hog making everybody love her to paint herself as a hero, or at least to suck up the adoration and use that to power up.
If they wanted to make Chelsea a villain, they should’ve done it THIS way tbh.
My biggest worry is about the industry is that they're gonna think it's original animation that's the problem.
And they'll continue to push out soulless reboots/ live action remakes.
@@kittykittybangbang9367 soulless reboots and live action remakes are also not doing well. Tbh nothing looks interesting enough to go and watch. That's the problem.
Suzume and across the spiderverse are the only films I've watched this year
True! I love to see original animation but the problem with Elemental and Ruby Gillman was poor advertisement and the plots were safe. I mean, come on, the pretty girl being a bad person has been done a million times. The "I'm just a weird not-popular kid" getting some sort of unique power that makes them special, has also been done a million times. It's way harder to stand out if you have original animation but not an original plot.
Because you basically get no audience. People who like original plots don't like safe/predictable stories. They like movies like The Last Wish. And people who like safe stories, they want animation they are more familiar with, so they go watch stuff like the Mario Movie.
@@prettyoriginalnameprettyor7506
Was Suzume good? I really wanted to watch it but but couldn't because in my local cinema it was only shown 3 times (with one of them being the dub) and i just didn't have the time.
This really feels like a movie with a premise that would have made a better TV show. A fun, monster of the week show with the Chelsea plot as the seasonal arc.
Agreed
A tv show would’ve been more fitting, and / or sending this film straight to on demand.
Because man, it did *not* pay off shipping it to the box office.
As of this writing, it’s only netted $36 million worldwide off its $70 million budget.
That’s a colossal failure
I’m honestly very sad and disappointed that this has happened. After TLW, everyone has given DreamWorks this very unrealistic expectation to now make masterpieces when DW has always made hit or miss movies. I still wanna see this movie but with this failure, it makes me fear that movies from DW will become cancelled due to the failure.😞
That already happened back in 2014 with Me And My Shadow, Bureau of Otherworldy Operations and Campfire Jack. Please do not let this happen again! Ruby Gillman still has a few more months to run in theaters, so we can not count it out as an immediate failure because of the first week. Guardians of the Galaxy Volume 3 exceeded box office expectations by doing much better in the second week than in the first week, so it is possible for Ruby Gillman to do the same.
Why would they be cancelled when they have boss baby and trolls? They still have jinging keys movies
What's TLW?
The Little Wermaid?
wait nevermind I'm dumb
Wasn’t it said that this was getting a show or sum? If so maybe it’ll have a better story and new characters
@@stary_kartofel2137+
Pretty sure it's the abbreviation for "Puss and Boots 'The Last Wish'"
I hated the art style and that was a major turn off for me. Even the “human” characters (especially the love interest boy) ALSO looked like fish people. It was just too weird looking.
I didn't find the character design very strange (I even liked it), but I don't know, it doesn't have that "DreamWorks" style, but each to their own
@@KBsales171It was alright honestly but some adjustments could've been made to make them less look uncanny and fit better in the shapes they were trying to do
I hate it too. Saber's Kroger ads people comparison is pretty spot-on. It also irked me how it seemed like they had a differing amount of limbs. I don't know if the reason for that was explained in the movie, but it's still a weird choice.
It's the bean mouths
At least it’s not as bad as Mars Needs Moms, where the humans look more like Martians than the actual Martians.
I think the "every character looks really messed up and ugly" thing is a style that works better in 2D, but when they're textured and moving around it makes them look really uncanny and creepy, same as most of the human characters in the 3D addams family movie too. They remind me of those 'hideous on purpose' cartoons from the 90s, which were barely tolerable to look at in 2D but in 3D they'd just be nightmares. IDK my friend group and I are always usually really excited for new animated movies but the LOOK of this one just made us go 'eugh' and decide not to bother.
The super cartoony rubber hose style can look good on paper. I don't think it looks good on computer. The Krakens look fine, but the humans look off.
Honestly yeah the lack of nose on the main character just looks really off. A lot of the other characters look off too.
Yeah i felt that also turned a lot of people off from it. I think it suited the krakens but thats it
totally unrelated but "hideous on purpose" and "barely tolerable to look at" reminds of Ren and Stimpy and Ah! Real Monsters and I still wonder how did kids even get hooked on that stuff
But true, both would be worse in 3D
@ameliag.9940 i was absolutely thinking of klasky csupo when i wrote that, they were responsible for a lot of those ugly ass 90s cartoons
My mother said she really disliked how the reason Chelsea used to manipulate Ruby is extremely weak, she says it’s either Ruby being far too stupid or the movie thinks the audience is stupid. (My mom didn’t see the trailers). My mom said a better reason would’ve been
Chelsea really wants to save her mother Nerissa, who is imprisoned in the depths of the ocean. And the key is none other than the trident itself.
She believes she can save her mother and bring her to the light side.
In order to truly restore peace, setting the mermaid Queen free, and then sharing the trident between the two reigning forces, can truly bring peace.
Chelsea really wants to redeem her mothers past war crimes, and she said she and Ruby could show her there is another way. Her mother wanted to force this destiny of hurting the Krakens and taking over the ocean, but Chelsea never wanted that. She just wished she could find a way to end it all, so she risked her life to find anyone, someone who would listen to her, and she found Ruby.’
This will make the audience wonder if some mermaids are really good. Then we can go ahead with the big reveal, that there is no Nerissa in a cage, for I am Nerissa.
Also the trident is wayyyy to weak- Trident should have more powers:
-Absorb other peoples powers and amplifying them. Having silvers power of levitation will really help.
-Create waves, whirlpools
-Resurrect and bring back the dead
A better way to defeat Nerissa:
Something smarter will be to utilise, shrinking and enlarging of the Krakens themselves to battle against Nerissa who couldn’t do that.
Chelsea also gives her side of the story, saying that her injured fin is the result of a kraken negotiation gone wrong, making viewers truly question who is good and who is evil.
‘My mom is trapped deep beneath the trench, encased by the deep ocean volcanoes. Only the trident can subside the heat and unseal my mother.’
‘It’s been 15 years since I last saw her… Ruby, I just wanted to be loved. But she was lost, blinded by revenge… but what if we can change that? What if we show her there’s another way?
All the kraken queens going ham and using different powers on Nerissa at nearly the same time, showing off their unique styles and skills?
It’s just this movie is so repetitive and feels woke too, it looks like Turning Red alongside Luka rewritten in the image of Ariel vs Ursula. What a disappointment. If my mom could write a better version, that’s intimidating. I also added my own ideas in there, but the reason my mom thought of, took her less than 1 minute of thinking to develop. Originality WHERE??? So disappointed with dreamworks.
Love her idea! :D
@@ramenyamakazu same! My mom’s concept is quite adorable, and it sells the theme of family pretty well too
@@mochijuice8074 Yea :D
@Huckjusta I’d make sure she hears that compliment! (Unless you’re satire ofc then ;-;)
I think that the reason why animated films don't really have villains anymore is because we are moving away from the idea that there is *only* a good or bad side. I personally really like this approach with movies like Encanto where the plot is about something very real and close to home for many. BUT, for stories that are less grounded in reality, having a villain would make everyone go crazy for it!! We've seen how successful being daring with stories, animation styles, etc. is. Why not having a great villain too?
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
I’ve played enough video games to know that villains are a great way to strengthen the development of the heroes, and to know that there often is a bad side, or at least a corrupted version of a good side that strayed from the right path.
Point is, villains freaking matter.
I think too many modern movies take too many notes from the Ghibli films, where there aren't many bad guys. And when there are antagonists, they are also well-rounded, human, show admirable morals, and are sometimes even justified. Redeemed antagonists have also become a thing. But I think most animated movies don't understand that just becasue the appeal is popular, it doesn't mean it works for every story.
I didn't mind having a big bad villain but Chelsea was already spoiled as a twist villain so it was disappointing to find out the trailers just revealed everything.
If the actual big villain was either Chelsea's mom instead of Chelsea being the Mermaid Queen ( at least the trailers didn't spoil that detail) or Ruby's grandmother it would've been better. Or at least it could've been enjoyable if the trailers showed Chelsea as Ruby's friend and you had to see the movie to see her as a villain.
@@Scrofar
Animated films like Across the SpiderVerse and The Last Wish proves that there can be a balance between anti-hero characters (Spider-Man 2099 and Goldilocks) and pure-evil villains (The Spot and Big Jack). Even Castle in the Sky (a Studio Ghibli film) did the same thing. Tbh, I don’t mind the lack of villains or the usage of morally grey characters but it does loses value when it becomes too constant.
A rumor I heard from some folks at DW (not on this project so take it with a grain of salt) is that this story was going to be different but then Universal saw the impact of Turning Red and they leaned more into that vibe-- cuter, smaller finale, centered around generational issues stemming from matriarchs. Personal note: I wish Chelsea was actually the daughter of a badass mermaid warrior. And maybe her mom would make her befriend and trick Ruby, but later she would genuinely become friends, and at the party maybe see the way Ruby's mom has her issues but actually cares about protecting her kid as opposed to sending Ruby out to trick a dangerous enemy. And maybe the finale could have been either Chelsea's mom being an unapologetic evil mermaid, and/or Chelsea snatching the trident and deciding to smash some stuff out of frustration and Ruby has to talk her down and maybe they provide a safe space for Chelsea idk... ramble over!
If you write this fanfic I will read it
You just fixed the premises of both Ruby Gillman and Rya: The Last Dragon in one paragraph. Hollywood needs people like you.
i was hoping there was some twist regarding her because the trailers already showed her being the villain, would have been cool if they subverted our expectations and did something interesting
The plot you made is so much better!! “Narissa never had a daughter” was such a trashy plot twist becuz it destroyed all of the realistic motivations they put into Chelsea. Plus, I found that twist they wrote as kinda creepy cuz it was like an old person manipulating a young teen.
@@ThatOneGuy0006I loved "Raya and the last Dragon" tho! Unpopular opinion but this movie was amazing!
guess the Dreamworks streak of great movies had to be broken at some point 😞
They went from Bad Guys (a fun movie) and Puss in Boots 2 (a great movie) to this...... Yikes
The most consistent thing about Dreamworks is its inconsistency
It’s always been like that and it will most likely not change. But don’t worry, give it a year or two and they’ll be back with another banger film
Still, two good AND successful films in a row! That's gotta be a new record for the studio!
@@JAProductions494I mean they made Shark Tale and Shrek 2 in the same year 😂
@@JAProductions494
Dang, but what about Disney? They REALLY haven't been doing good lately!
Really is a shame that marketing murdered this movie. You can tell just by watching the characters move, especially Ruby in the last 5 minutes how much fun the animators had with this film. The art style was solid for 3D and everything just looked and felt super fun, but you're absolutely right, in that you can watch the trailers for the movie and see the movie in its entirety...
The movie isn’t anything special though anyway, it’s a low rental at best.
Some cute and funny moments yes, but it’s overall pretty bland and forgettable
i wouldve loved the mermaids fr disappointing ;/
why tf is it the marketing team's fault? lmao
The movie has an extremely cliché plot with an extremely cliché animation that looks like your generic Disney, Pixar or Illumination movie, no identity at all. This movie simply wasn't good
its actually really disappointing that some of the most stylized animated movies with original stories are the ones doomed to fail, it really doesnt seem fair, like they're purposely marketed to fail so the higher ups can avoid making something similar
and then you get stuff like the live action remakes which do everything worse than the originals. or have superhero movies flopping in recent years like the flash, or pay a huge load of money to make in indiana jones case while not making enough money to get what they lost
my farts are better than Saberspark’s farts 💨
Maybe they can slap a copyright onto their movie?!?!?! i dont know stuff like this :(
did you pay to watch this movie?
Puss in boots the last wish?
Putting it up against Spiderverse was sewerslide. It’s a shame because the movie looks cute, I hope I can see it soon.
Spider-Verse came out a month before Gillman. That's usually enough space for a newer film to stretch its legs, but it seems Gillman was born without those.
"Putting it up against Spiderverse"
Bro, it's DreamWorks we are talking about. Other movies should be afraid of putting anything against them.
Bro just say suicide not "sewerslide" that some tiktok bs
This, though. I watched Spiderverse for the third time the other day and saw the poster for this movie when entering the cinema, and it really got me thinking about how I've paid to see ATSV 3 times but never even considered watching Elemental or Ruby Gillman on anything other than streaming.
@@lilboi4694fr lmao
One thing I do have to give this movie props for is the monster mermaid design. It's nice to see a good balance between the "disneyfied" fish people and the nightmare fuel from the Harry Potter movies. The Krakens were a bit too soft and friendly looking but I get it, it's a kid's movie.
my farts are better than Saberspark’s farts 💨
Both “Ruby Gillman” and “Luca” would be Lovecraft’s worst nightmares brought to life.
The merpeople in Harry Potter weren't merpeople in the classic sense. Technically they were sirens, not merpeople. mermaids and sirens is not the same thing.
@@Oozaru85I don't know why people keep confusing:
Mermaid == human torso fish legs
Fishbpeople == fish torso human limbs
Siren == human torso and arm, bird wings and legs.
@@Oozaru85 not my point but cool
the betray was so predictable but i was not expecting a "Sky High" kind of twits💀, i rly wanted chelsea to actually be the mermaid queen's daughter and that she was looking for revenge bc she was all alone and yada yada and in the end ruby was like "oh you don't have to be alone, this is not the way" redemption arc kind of thing (i'm a chelsea apologist😭 i rly wanted her to be redeemable)
yes!
I loved Sky High !
Very underrated film
One thing I noticed just from these trailers is that the shape language is just so... round. Like everything looks so bubbly and soft and friendly and there just isn't much diversity there. I think that's what's been bothering me with these past few movies like elemental and this is that everything about the designs is bright, soft, round, it feels like everything is playing it safe by its very design.
I've been trying to figure this out because I've been a huge advocate for unique styles between movies, but the attempts at this that I'm seeing here really haven't done it for me, and I think this is part of it. I'm reminded of great designs like the dragons in how to train your dragon, there seems to be something lost there, which is interesting considering the focus on style that spiderverse brought. I think there is even a way to do a bubbly style like this that has more character to it. I feel like there's another piece to this I'm missing but it makes sense. What also confuses me is that I like the styles of Luca and Turning Red, which followed a similar style.
I actually don't like thestyles of Luca and Red either. I'm all around tired of seeing the same style in every movie, especially these unexpressive bean mouths, please make it stop lol
all the blobby art styles are kind of reminding me of corporate memphis
I believe they want to make them soft and round so that it's easier to make marketable plushies (and toys in general) out of them later on.
YES thank you for putting it into words
@@Thornskade Same.
I know this is kinda tragic for the animation industry as a whole. But I still find this hilarious after having so many “DreamWorks is murdering Disney” memes shoved in my face
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
Technically they still are. Disney ain’t doin too hot either.
Disney and Pixar's have had miss after miss. Lighyear, Onward, Elemental, and quite a few others didn't do very well. Blame it on the pandemic if you want, but they still flopped on Disney+ (except for Elemental, but we'll see about that).
Satisfying to see those guys get humbled.
@@p-__ you know what his farts are like?
I wanted so desperately for Ruby and Chelsea to be friends. Would have been interesting to see the grandma and society itself actually be the villains as they try to keep Ruby and Chelsea apart from one another.
Sounds too close to Wolf Walkers
@@rootfish2671 To be fair, Wolf Walkers isn't exactly a brand new premise. Fox and the Hound, How to Train Your Dragon, Etc.
I do know a movie that does that sort of thing, it’s a Japanese movie I watch a few yers ago called Arshi No Yoru Ni which I really enjoyed, to be honest I cried watching it though Im very sensitive. It still felt like a good movie though, would suggest it
@@meh8396one stormy night?
@@kittykittybangbang9367 yeah, that one
I liked how the main character's "intelligence" and obsession with shouting random calculations was brought up. It became more of a quirky, so random catchphrase esque thing instead of an actual part of her character. It'd be different if they did the mermaid turning on the mc like it was something she knew was highly plausible, too. Then the movie could delve into what its like trying to fit in with people whose entire personality is centered around popularity. And still respect the mc's intelligence
The very doughy, squisy style of the whole movie really doesn't lend itself at all to any kind of grand battle, unless its very slapsticky. If it was just the krakens (cause they ain't got no bones) maybe they coulda made it work but all the humans and mermaids have the exact same boneless bendy stretch and squish so when there's this big high stakes fight its more like a pillow fight cause everything's made of marshmallows.
I think the art style should've been either cuter or uglier. I'm in the 'make them uglier' camp pretty much every time but ik that wouldn't sell as well for a kids movie lol
that’s exactly what i was thinking but couldn’t put into words! they like doughy playdough!
@@detroitmetrodolphinskullWholeheartedly support the "make them uglier" party
Yup I *hate* this design style. Everything looks like it's made of jelly and it does something in my brain that makes me feel icked-out ahaha
@@detroitmetrodolphinskullthis movie is already ugly af, tho. Especially the "human" characters.
After meeting the grandma, I'd assumed she'd turn out to be a "twist" villain. She lied to her daughter and granddaughter because she's a warmonger, and the mermaids just wanted some semblance of peace.
Then the protag realizes the mermaid is lying about who she is, giving the trident to her grandma. Real heel turn happens, everyone fights grandma, power passes on to the mermaids.
The movie is fine, honestly pretty good imo. Its just that it could have been a lot more interesting. Did love the mermaids kaiju design tho.
I think it's a combination of a number of things. The price of going to the movies keeps growing, while paychecks are not. The mindset of waiting for the movie to come out on streaming (something you already must pay for) is far more appealing than paying a fortune to take your family to the theaters. The pandemic definitely affected the movie industry in a negative way, and I don't think the reliance on franchises and lack of confidence and support of independent or new concepts is helping. People seem to prefer the familiar, and new or innovative storylines don't connect as well. On the other extreme, doing any semblance of a common storyline has audiences accusing the film of copying others. It's just a perfect storm for mediocre movies
lot of these companies don't seem to understand entertainment is one of the first things that get cut out of the average person's budget, people need food and shelter FAR more than they need to be subscribed to a dozen host channels. And neither pay or anything else for that matter is getting 'cheaper' or more accurately 'livable'
my farts are better than Saberspark’s farts 💨
Movie tickets prices have soared in many countries, I used to go to the movies almost once a month, but after the pandemic I only watched few movies in the theater once things came back to normal. This year I've only seen Mario and Spider-verse 2 because they were the ones I was more interested in seeing
I think it's about what movies really repay being viewed on a big screen to be best enjoyed, too...? Something like Avatar with it's sweeping vistas or Spiderverse with its very densely filled action screens really justifies splurging for the cost of an expensive movie ticket, whereas looking at the Ruby Gillman clips, that seems more like something that was designed for the small screen... From the trailers & marketing people can usually tell if somethings going to look great on big screen, and I think that really impacts their decision on whether to stream or go see in theaters?
I don't think people are opposed to new stories (Little Mermaid also flopped), it's just the new concepts we're getting from the big players are bad. There's plenty of amazing original content out there, plus unique stories coming from unexpected names (Nimona, Arcane, etc.). People want knew stuff, they just want good stuff.
I think a big problem right now for films is just that... everyone is poor. I mean I can't say much for other countries, but I know here in the UK bills are rising, wages are not... and it's honestly not super feasible for most people to drop so much money on going to see things in theatres if they're not dead set that it'll be something they're going to enjoy. My family has been to see one film in cinema since covid lockdowns ended, and that was the Avatar film because we knew it'd be worth seeing it on the big screen. With a lot of these films, you don't lose out on anything by waiting and watching them at home. You can get the same level of enjoyment (if not more, it depends on how you are with other people) for a lot less money.
I think one of the best examples of how marketing is important and box office not determining quality is The Iron Giant.
Mostly most of WB animation movies
Dreamworks has been known to make shows from their animated movies, and I get the sense that was the intention of this movie, to launch a show.
I can definitely see this premise being made into a show; about Ruby balancing her double life; living amongst humans while defending the seas. Each episode she’d fight a new sea monster of the week from her Grandma’s gallery. They could do a Hannibal Lecter approach with Narissa where the Captain keeps her locked in an aquarium and Ruby goes to her for information. There could be an arc about how the Grandma wants to retire and for Ruby to take the throne and there’s this question of “will she or won’t she?” And if she doesn’t then the Uncle becomes King. If they really wanted to be ballsy they could somehow kill off the Grandma in the season/series finale which would force a successor, but I don’t think they’d do something that dark.
@@hobbitjack5275 yeah, although who knows if Dreamworks will move forward with this franchise given how much the movie is flopping.
I would personally watch a Ruby Gillman animated series. I liked the characters and the worldbuilding. They can do interesting stuff.
I think the word you're looking for is merchandising, yes, a show is a form of merchandise. Ever since Madagascar it feels like DWA has been trying to mimic Disney in the way they expand their properties into multimedia projects. Shrek was kind of it, but the most successful were Kung Fu Panda and Dragons
i actually hope that happens because they've laid the groundwork for something with lots of potential here
I think it'd be better if they make Chelsea and Nerissa separate characters, make it so that Chelsea is only pretending to be Nerissa or something like that. The most enjoyable part of the movie was seeing Chelsea interract with Ruby anyway , would be nice to flesh out her character
This entire movie gives me vibes that Dreamworks tried to pull another Shrek to take jabs at Disney, but were too busy showboating with the marketing that they forgot everything that made Shrek good to begin with.
It felt like I already watched a good chunk of the movie with the trailers alone, due to how much they showed. It’s also pretty sad how this is the movie Dreamworks released after The Last Wish, which made people have incredibly high hopes for Dreamworks and their new outputs, and this movie might’ve just decreased that respect a bit, but lets just hope Dreamworks can recover
It’s kinda odd how there was a big wave of box office failures and huge flops
Also the dialogue in the trailers was pretty bad, especially the first one where it was mostly completely unrelated lines badly spliced together with unfitting bg music and weird audio mixing like???
@@thekitkatlizard8661 It's a weird trend with Dreamworks movies. I remember the dialogue splicing for trailers on the bad guys made the movie seem really cringy.
when indiana jones is even in that catagory cause it was extremely expensive to make and despite the money its making its still considered a flop cause its not making up for the cost that it had for making it. and even the flash was a flop to a point where the dc cinematic universe is being rebooted
Ngl, I was expecting these expectations made by the trailers to be broken in the film; I was thinking that the big fight was supposed to be a Turning Red type of argument taken to the max, & that they'd be friends but were dealing with the fact that their races were essentially at war or something, throwing a wrench into their companionship... but no.
I hope one day I can make my own version if this movie to fix this rather unfortunate but average film. Idk if it'd be too much better rn, but I'd like to provide a version that's the way I hoped it would be.
I definitely think that the better movie would have not made Chelsea the villain. Instead make it more about this friendship between two individuals whose families are at war, and them trying to learn how to calm things down amid everything. Might be a bit more Roneo and Juliet than intended, but given people are already shipping the two... Eh, it'd be fine.
It felt like a Mockbuster to me... every ad i saw was talking about the mermaids being evil, and it just felt like a shameless jab at Disney that did NOT connect.
I feel like the mom’s line about hydration was an obvious excuse as to why they’re near the ocean. I think-consciously or not-Agatha couldn’t stray too far from the ocean in case it called her.
I feel like the biggest issue was the fact that it came out at the wrong time.
Weird Al once talked about how his film UHF came out during the Summer of 1989, which was quite possibly the worst time to release a new film since it had to compete with Indiana Jones 3, Lethal Weapon 2, and Batman, among many other blockbuster hits.
If it had come out earlier or maybe even late July, then it might have had a chance.
My take on Ruby is even though it’s super-cliched, I could see a young child eat it up who isn’t as familiar with such cliches. Ruby’s nervousness and Chlesea’s pompousness would come off as hilarious.
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
I didn't expect Ruby Gillman become a biggest flop due to low marketing and too much spoilers from the trailer, but I love this movie, it's sad to see DreamWorks Ruby Gillman having low received money from the Box Office as low compared to Elemental
ruby Gillman
@@tomkatt8274rub Gilman
Element zootyopia is low for pixar
@@ncrveteranranger4454 rupee kill men
I know it's Ruby Gillman
I messed on that name 😔😕
Elemental has such beautiful animation that definitely couldn't be done even 10 years ago. And I love how it's a love letter to the story creator's immigrate parents. It's a shame it's not getting the love it deserves.
Agreed
Thankfully though, it’s made quite a rebound at the box office likely because the positive word of mouth really helped (I’ve already seen it twice and it’s easily my favorite Pixar film in years)
As of this writing, it’s netted $356 million worldwide and while it’s not technically great at least it surpassed its budget.
Unlike Ruby Gillman, which has only made $36 million off its $70 million budget which is a colossal failure.
Ruby wasn’t a great film either though
@@RB01.10Yeah
Elemental is doing Good now, The Movie already have the love that deserved.
I’m really hard to please but I really enjoyed elemental
Someone recently said in their review for Puss in Boots: The Last Wish that mediocre isn't acceptable anymore given what new potential animation studios have to offer.
I do agree, this was a hard act to follow after The Last Wish but at the very least helps with a case study of the good and not-so-good ways to follow after a studio's oscar worthy achievement.
People were dickriding DreamWorks so hard and I was so confused. this is the same company that made Home and Boss Baby 2 they have a track record of making Booty ass movies but you trust them because of the first good one they made in like 7 years
@@jamalwalker Dreamworks is such a weird company. They can make one of the best animated movies one year and the next movie will be like “ALIENS THAT FART”.
The little marketing that exists for this movie literally spoiled 80% of the movie's whole plot. Like, seriously, who thought that was a good idea? why would I watch something when the trailers already show me everything about it?
The only reason I can think of is they probably thought no one was gonna see a plain slice of life high school movie so they added "see big MCU fight go see it!". It sure did backfire didn't it
I wished it was more character focused on a smaller scale but when I saw super powers and giant monsters... meh...
My guess? They wanted to show that the movie has a kaiju fight to pique the interest of the preteen boys.
This may or may not be an outdated reason. But I remember a few years ago it was revealed that the reason why film trailers for kids typically tend to spoil almost everything is because the parents are more inclined to take their kids to see the film the more they know about the plot going into it
it worked with Sing
There are so many cool, interesting and fun characters, but the writers only care about writing a plot of Ruby. I really like Connor, Ruby's friends (which I actually do not remember their names, cuz they're cute but not memorable) and especially Chelsea, who is easily the most charistmatic character in the entire movie.
I was so disapointed that Chelsea was a one dimentional film, she is very funny, cool, and I would have wanted her to be a misunderstood villian or at least a flashback backstory animated explaining her
Like okay what about her using ruby to get the trident, bc some mermaid leader told her to or just the mermaid trying to get it to hurt the krakens, but as their friendship progresses she feels actually attached and stuff, and later idk maybe goes against her betrayal and they both try and have both sides make up
Idk it just feels they couldv’e done so much mor eman
I think one of this movie's biggest problems is that they decided to spoof something that isn't even a current trend in pop culture. Shrek and Megamind both worked because at the time of their release, the things they were parodying (fairy tale adaptations + superhero movies) EVERYWHERE, so poking fun at the tropes of those genres was a lot easier + better received due to how oversaturated the market for both had become.
Ruby Gilman is so odd in comparison because it feels like Dreamworks was trying to predict a trend, rather than tackle one that's been happening for a while. I mean, I'd argue that mermaid media kinda hit its peak in the mid 2000s-early 2010s, and the Little Mermaid remake hasn't exactly started a new demand for mermaid media that I've seen.
And also - Shrek was an ogre (a common bad guy in fairy tales), and Megamind was an alien supervillain (a common bad guy in superhero media). Meanwhile...krakens aren't really a common bad guy in mermaid movies? A lot of mermaid media I've seen has either evil wizards/witches or, ironically, the popular mean human girls as antagonists. But again, these movies and shows were all from at least a decade ago. It's such a bizarre movie to me because it feels like it's trying to respond to a trend that has never really existed.
honestly every time ruby said something and chelsea looked guilty and bad or something i honestly thought she was genuine about ending the war, and so that whole movie i was kinda just hoping that there would be a change. especially since i got some villainous vibes from ruby’s grandmother. but no, it turned out to be the exact same plot as the trailers suggested. no twist about chelsea and the mermaid also being misunderstood or something.
i loved Chelsie's character in the trailer, i was reeeeaaallly hoping it wouldn't end of her being just a basic villain, yet here we are. i would of loved her to be a chaotic neutral or idk be forced to go against ruby because of the other mermaids, but sadly that's not the case
Chelsea and Ruby hanging out and just being teenagers were some of my favorite scenes.
I remember seeing a comment about "What if the whole story was a pull on how there's never really good or evil spsciex" and I feel like that could've worked so well
@@Snowstriken That would've been a better twist than good vs evil
I think they should have leaned more into Chelsea being an Ariel parody by having her just be selfish and not outright evil. Chelsea just wants her freedom from her mermaid family and have her shiny dingle hoppers or whatever and be worshipped by the humans like a Princess and doesn’t hold any particular malice against humans nor krakens. Like, she steals the trident to get her family off her back, until her mother, a separate character, uses it to invade the surface and by extension attack Chelsea’s followers, which forces her to work with Ruby not because she’s magically a good person now, but because it suits her motives.
The fish of the sea will always eat each other, so what difference does it make who owns the trident? Not to mention, it would hark back to Ruby's mom, who just wants to carve out a space for her own family on the surface.
@@Flash-FireCC If they really wanted to also play into the mild familial trauma, maybe we could a different angle in while it's also about not being obliged to forgive your family if they've hurt you, it would be a story not only about how presumptions and that evil vs good isn't stagnant, but also a subverse on how familial family trauma stories are currently going. Both Chelsea and Ruby being children of that abuse and realizing they don't have to forgive the people who hurt em. FUCK
I agree so much on chelsea being better as a friend and actually flipping the obvious betrayal on its head, it also would have helped fit the growing up and making her own decisions story in a way. It was unfortunately predictable
From what I saw of the movie in clips, I was much more invested in Chelsea and Ruby being friends and overcoming their differences. An anti-climactic twist villain sounds like a let down. What if the nerd learned to be a little more charismatic and outgoing and the popular girl learned a little humility? That sounds like it could be super interesting.
I actually really enjoyed this movie a lot. Very sweet and entertaining. Definitely doesn’t deserve to bomb this hard, but it never stood a chance against the competition
I agree I really enjoyed the movie but sadly was against some strong competition (minus elemental that one is ok)
People ship Chelsea and Ruby
@@undertale-perseverance it's Ruby related
I hope that the Film sells well on digital.
I liked Ruby and her mother, the scene where she helped Ruby get through a meltdown was actually very sweet. The movie was a fun one, it just didn't do a lot of twists we haven't already seen. I was getting throwbacks to Halloween Town and Sky High watching this.
In the original story, Chelsea was a teenage mermaid and develops a genuine friendship with Ruby but she’s still a very toxic person. And it’s about how Ruby learns to see Chelsea for what she is and where she goes from there. I don’t know if she ends things with Chelsea or if she convinces Chelsea to be a better person. But honestly, that was a much better idea than having her be a generic twist, villain from the frozen era.
Yeah...I feel like the stakes were too high.
That also works by making clear that races are not evil by default, like the final movie kinda does.
@@sweetparriz Hayao Miyazaki proves that stories don't need high stakes to be fun.
I didn't even know this movie was released 😂, Dreamworks really didn't bother marketing and also the artstyle looks so bland and childish especially compared to Puss in Boots 2
The trailers and posters didn't have any release dates, i thought it still hadn't come out lol
You know I keep seeing people say this but I saw ads for this movie all over the place online. I couldn't get away from it and I never even clicked on them. That makes me think that maybe they were just targeted REALLY badly or something.
I saw plenty of ads for the movie but for as many as I saw I never remembered seeing a release date and didn’t even know it came out when it did
Damn, I knew it existed because of all the animation channels (the ones I'm subbed to, and the ones recommended because I watch such content) were hyping this up as the 'anti-disney' animation film that was gonna wreck them and show how it's done. Saw some ads on youtube too.
@@YouAreStillNotablazeIt kinda is and kinda isn’t. Chelsea is a bit more than just “evil Ariel”. There’s some neat lore going in. Was hoping this would be a good alternative to Trolls as far as girly Dream Works films go. My 5 year old and I were not disappointed with the movie. The theater was empty which made my daughter super happy. I do wish we weren’t the only ones there. This movie needs love.
This movie would be better if Chelsea genuinely became friends with Ruby and Nerissa was her mother. The movie seems to send the message that racism can be acceptable if it's against the "right" group of people. I'd have liked if the grandma realized her views against mermaids were wrong, and that mermaids and krakens had teamed up at the end.
LITERALLY THIS YOURE SO RIGHTTT
Yeah I wish Chelsea was written with more nuance and was given a more three dimensional character. Like more of a redeemed anti hero
With them literally giving away the ending of Chelsea being evil in the trailers, I was hoping that there would be a twist that she’s genuinely good and there’s some other villain (like the grandmother) but unfortunately that wasn’t the case. It really was that shallow.
From what I hear this was a film that Dreamworks had on development since 2015, and didn’t really know what to do with, so they just threw it out there with little to no marketing.
Shoot, if they released it way back then it might have done better since the competition was less hard to top. (I googled animated movies of 2015 and didn't see a big amount of bangers)
@@Nightman221k In development since 2015, dude. That means it would've probably came out in 2018 or 2019 if the development went smoothly.
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
You win some, you lose some.
I’m not surprised that Dreamworks Ariel was a flop :/
No..just no😑 this is ruby gilman
@@RoboStewieBrianCrewThey clearly tried to do a Shrek and make fun of the Little Mermaid
@@justsomeguywholovesberserk6375 And be racist because it’s trying to insult that Hailey who’s a black female was Ariel. Lol. Good thing it flopped. Lol Hailey was awesome. Disney the little mermaid was ok but Hailey saved it with her singing skills. Puss and boots 2 was a great woke movie. And conservatives are losing. It’s all good now.
@@Golems_victory okay..that's true cause I am Black
*my oc is a green stick figure..so yeah*
@@justsomeguywholovesberserk6375I thought they were trying to be the Mermaids from the 2003 Peter Pan film.
You hit the nail on the head with the marketing spoiling everything! Then the actual movie made the villain kinda fun and likeable until the "reveal." I was almost expecting a TV series by the end where Ruby will have to face new threats to the ocean and she and Chelsea would have to work together until they become actual friends. That would be cool.
Same, this is very shame honestly 😔
It's a shame that Ruby Gilman is going to be remembered as this infamous flop by Dreamworks. I had the opportunity to go see it and I thought it was quite good. Obviously, it was never going to be as amazing as The Last Wish, but I enjoyed it. While the characters look weird at times, it has this cartoony and bouncy art style that they really know how to use (Similar to the art style in Hotel Transylvania) and they basically created lore and world for a really fun superhero concept. An underwater super heroine for both young boys and girls. They even name-dropped creatures like the Leviathan, the Hydra and the Umibozu, so I would love to see a Ruby Gilman show or sequel that follows her adventures as protector of the ocean, this movie was just her origin story.
But yeah, not only the marketing itself was almost non-existent, but the only trailer that they dropped spoiled everything. They wanted to show off how Chelsea, the mermaid, was the villain. So they could take their shot against Disney's The Little Mermaid. But that was a bad idea. I think the movie would've been a lot more interesting if they actually tried to sell Ruby and Chelsea's friendship, only to have her betrayal to be a real surprise. Basically, they wanted to have their cake and eat it too.
I agree with you. I liked the movie, but it's story was nothing really new. I've seen the generational disagreements in Halloween Town and the twist villain who's secretly the parent's arch nemesis in Sky High. I did like Ruby as a character and her mom seemed sweet (Ruby's family was a highlight, imo). I was hoping that Chelsea wasn't going to be Nerissa (though I saw that coming a mile away, given the trailer) because the movie had potential to have two friends bridge a gap between sides in a war. Instead the movie only shows one mermaid. We never see if all mermaids are as evil as the grandma said they were so we just assume she's right and they're all bad. Plus the friendship moments would have been more interesting if they didn't project "don't trust this girl" so blatantly.
The scenes with both, Ruby and Chelsea, being teens stood out to me. The way it ends with Ruby setting out, it leaves me hoping.
i think that also didnt help them having it after disneys remake of the little mermaid
@@Nightman221kthe thing is, there is no such thing as "new." For example, a main character grappling with their mortality is not a new concept. What matters is being creative or fun with it, like The Last Wish.
It's the new Jack Frost movie flop
I remember watching the trailer and wishing it would stop because I was interested in the movie. It just kept going and revealing more and by the end I was like, "I guess I don't need to see it any more."
I always find it fascinating how different marketing can be from culture to culture. From what I hear it's actually the norm for movie/anime trailers to showcase the majority of the plot in Asia, while in the west it can cause a movie to flop
Interesting. Can you give an example on what kind of such trailer in asia? If you dont mind.
@@Crakygamez the trailers for season 6 of my hero academia are a pretty good example, they're each about 1:30 mins but give away a number of major plot points and storylines. Compare that to the official netflix trailer for Arcane, which only focuses on a single storyline without spoiling much of what actually happens in between despite being nearly 3 minutes long
@@benjaminotalora363ah ok interesting is there a reason why its successful in Asia?
@@LowTiertoji Can't say for sure, my guess is it's successful at bringing in new audiences, since from the trailer alone they can decide if that movie or series is something they wish to spend time on. Fans of that movie/series that care about spoilers can ignore these trailers since social media makes any relevant information like release date available to them anyway. Basically, they focus on different demographics
The extended titles of anime and manga now a days is reflection of this idea more people want to know if it’s worth their time rather then going in blind
Every time you say "Ruby Gillman: Teenage Kraken" I have this mental barrier that keeps making me hear "teenage crackhead" instead and now I can't stop laughing.
I saw this at the theatre last week and I have to say I really enjoyed it. The only problem I had with it was how Ruby and her family could walk around school/town with blue skin and fins for ears and nobody seems to care. After watching all the trailers I was waiting for some explanation for this but no, nothing. Speaking of the trailers, yes, they did give far too much of the plot away, and I was hoping for a twist ending where Ruby and Chelsea team up but it didn't happen. Maybe in the sequel they'll somehow get together to defeat a bigger threat, because that would vindicate this movie's premise..
They did explain it though?? It was played off as a joke but still
There’s going to be a sequel?
I'm a firm believer that story spoilers aren't really that big of a deal for most stories. I can still be surprised and invested by HOW the story is told.
Ruby Gillman though spoiled its SPECTACLE. The cool to look at parts. What reason do I have to see a movie if I know what happens, and saw all the coolest looking parts already /:
I feel that way about the new Mission Impossible film, like bro, I already know he jumps off the cliff on a motorcycle and there's another train that falls off a cliff, who cares at this point.
@@SynGirl32 There is a 'how' to the telling of the spectacle, too. Ethan Hunt will jump off the cliff on a motorcycle and get in a train, but how will he fight the baddies on the train?
I agree somewhat. I got spoiled twice by a thumbnail that I didn't even look for. It was for final boss in Pokemon. And both was supposed to be a twist villain. The only difference is that it stopped me from finishing one game fully. The other was a bigger twist than the thumbnail led me to believe.
It's like they set this up to fail. Why on earth would they show the "twist" (as if it could be called that) in the trailer? This is up there with Treasure Planet in terms of letting something flop as hard as a rock in water.
Well Treasure Planet flopped on purpose becausw Disney wanted to make cheaper CG animation which had no unions yet.
Honestly with the Kraken character idea, I would have hoped/thought they'd play more into it and the absuridty, like with Octodad games. Or that the mom is an kraken/octopus and dad a human, and Ruby is like, half human-kraken, something weird and funny.
I do generally like the concept of mixing the good/bad guys and using uncommon creatures as protags, but based on the trailer, it again feels kinda shallow (pun not intended) and small scale (not intended either) for such a big longlasting war themed movie.
I still do see this be more favored by kids, compared to Elemental, because it taps into similar stuff like Luca and making your own cool kraken OCs etc.
Coming from someone who actually saw the movie: It’s strengths lie in the relate-ability of high school drama and very witty dialogue that got a few chuckles out of me. The animation - particularly character movement - feels both hyperactive and funny to look at. It’s a solid flick from the studio that I ended up enjoying much more than I thought I would.
I also should add the villains plan is actually good. She knows straight to go after her insecurities and relate to her to get what she wants. Really fits the narcissist people teens would hang out because they show a fake persona of it.
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
See, this is one movie I kind of want a subversion to the whole "War Between Red and Blue" conflict.
Both Ruby and Chelsea are great characters, and the movie's trailers were leading me toward believing there is a big reveal of a significant change in the plot - but there never was. It was exactly as what we saw in the trailers.
Chelsea could have been another pawn in the conflict much like Ruby. I was hoping that both of them wanted to get out of this eternal war between their races, and eventually decide to end the war by walking away and start fresh as true friends.
I'm no pacifist, but i feel that it would be more meaningful than simply having good defeat evil and the day is saved.
I got to watch Ruby Gillman with some friends. I wouldn’t say the movie is “bad” but it was difficult to form a connection to ANY of the characters, it felt predictable and mindless. The whole idea of “mermaids vs kraken” was kinda unappealing and basic, just like how the idea of elemental was. What we need is an exciting and original animated movie to break the box office.
Elemental is still 100X better than Ruby. At least that’s rebounding now at the box office (my two local theaters are still having several showings a day of it compared to Ruby which only really has one a day now and that came out two weeks after Elemental).
I laughed, teared up a little, and overall felt Elemental left a far bigger impact (I’ve already seen it twice now).
Ruby just didn’t leave any impact other than a few decent moments with her and her family.
I absolutely agree!! The whole movie felt pretty shallow, not much was happening, felt like the trailer but a bit longer, the premise was good but the executive fell flat, none of the characters felt fleshed out.
It's a shame tho, I loved the design for Ruby and Chelsea.
I do agree with that, at least Elemental had a good story behind its back. I’ve just noticed many people are uninterested in the movie due to the theme/idea of the “Elements”.
Luckily, we got across the spiderverse
My biggest pet peeve with this movie is I can't exactly feel sympathetic with an oddball main character if she already has friends. It defeats the whole purpose of "I'm just trying to be a normal teenager." Or "I'm just trying to fit in."
The only "oddball" teenaged characters I can sympathize with, get invested in and relate to are characters like Carrie White.
I loved how everyone was saying the Disney's Ariel was trash and this one was amazing, but after the movie released everyone got quiet, priceless!
And how everyone thought Ruby Gillman would beat out Elemental (a far superior film BTW)
Oh how wrong they were
I love seeing the internet eat up its own words
It is a bit funny that people now see elemental is a good story now
You mean those dreamworks vs disney shorts people kept pumping out? Yeah, that was cringe. Even as someone who loves the puss in boots movie
Like do they realize that dreamworks had quite a few miss and hit throughout their time?
@@bojangles4398 I know right? Those shorts were annoying.
I work at a cinema and i've seen Ruby twice. I don't hate it, and recommend it as a safe movie for families where I'm not sure of how they feel about topics (small town). But I do recommend Elemental way more. I think it hits more with its humor and visuals compared to Ruby.
My thoughts exactly
Elemental was a far deeper and mature film and I too would recommend it more
Why not Mario movie?
@@mariobros68Because Mario movie was not in cinemas at that moment? In my case was that when I went to watch Elemental.
I was honestly excited for this movie to be about a teenage Kraken adjusting to life above the sea, as the first trailer suggested. It was down to earth and although seen before, would have brought something new to the trope. Bringing in the off version of Ariel as a school bully, not necessarily the villian, would have been a funny nod to the original. However making her the villain against the main character in a Kaju Battle that would 100% happen, as seen in the later trailers, threw me of the boat and just became other Onward situation.
I think part of the reason why it’s not doing well, aside from the marketing, is because people are just a lot more picky when it comes to what they wanna see in theaters these days. Like if this movie came out on Netflix or something it may have done better. But because it was released in theaters. People were like. “Eh. Idk. Doesn’t look interesting enough to see on a big screen when I could watch something of similar quality on my TV.”
I didn't see it because I didn't know about it and I don't have the money for it
that combined with everything being so expensive these days and streaming services being a thing just makes movie theaters be not so pratical anymore
My farts are better than Saberspark's farts.
It's also just not even in theatre yet where I live. I wanted to see it day 1 but I can't even 1 week later
I'm with you there. The Big Screen was made to showcase spectacles like action movies and thrillers in a shared space. If I can see a film on a small screen and still get the same effect, than it's not worth my movie ticket.
13:05 The poster being edited to have Subnautica creatures in it makes me wish that the villain was just like, a giant leviathan that was terrorizing the land and sea. No real human motivations, no twist. Just a big, unapologetic beast. Would've made that last fight scene like 10x cooler in my opinion. Something similar to the Gargantuan Leviathan would have been AWESOME to see in an animated movie.
Spirit Untamed: *Has the worst DreamWorks box office opening ever*
Ruby Gillman: Hold my beer.
my farts are better than Saberspark’s farts 💨
@@p-__ stupid bot 😐