The changes did NOT improve "The Little Mermaid," Disney!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 жов 2024
- Sprites by Sill:Draw
The creative behind the 2023 remake of Disney's "The Little Mermaid" went on and on about how they were going to fix the story and characters this time around. However, I humbly disagree with that sentiment. In fact I would argue in some ways it's worse.
Support the channel:
buymeacoffee.co...
Sorry this video is so late. We moved and things were hectic. Hope that's OK.
There are tons of shills outhere defending this crap and calling it a masterpiece.
It’s ok. Better late than never.
@@Invidente7I didn't hear anyone calling it a masterpiece besides paid magazines. Most said it was enjoyable because it was. This video seems slightly disingenuous because we don't micro analyze every film we see while watching it.
Sure Aquafina was annoying to adults but kids prob thought it was funny. Personally I disagree with everything said about Eric in this video except his song was kinda soulless. But at least he had a song 🤷🏾♀️.
Movies have one purpose and that is to entertain, it did that for most people and the lyric changes were so unnoticeable most that saw it can't even tell you what changed. Also the acting was great, at the end of the day, it's a Disney remake. I'm not expecting it to have much of a soul.
one change did really suit it, was the engagement party instead of the wedding. That part never made sense to me even as a child, what ruler of a kingdom let's their child marry someone the DAY after they met them. It was ridiculous because only Eric was Brainwashed. I do wish it all still happened on a boat, but that was a proper change.
@@ljeans531we"? Speak for yourself, dummy.
Acting was great? They could have replaced Ariel with a red mop and I'd not have noticed.
Disney has gotta stop treating heroines having a crush as a weakness and ‘not feminist enough’.
Exactly
Yeah right… Just die alone, bitter and deranged of being stronger then other people
They’re so against women pursuing romance or a man but they do realize that can lead to families and children, right? The things they need to sustain their brand, their parks and their movies?
Sooner or later nobody's gonna watch American movies anymore because of this politically correct stuff.
@@goyam2981 yeap. Im not American and nowadays I dun even bother to watch them in the cinemas. Just pirate them and after watching, delete. Not even worth keeping. Lol
I really hate this timeline we’re living in.
Me too. I think the biggest problem with these remakes is that they're trying too hard to make female characters independent. It's understandable that they want them to have more agency, but that brings this sexist impression that if a woman needs help she's pathetic and useless regardless of how much she's shown to hold up on her own, but it's perfectly fine for men to need help just to make women look empowered. It doesn't matter whether your male or female it's ok to get help no matter who you are. These new Disney remakes are giving off bad messages rather than good messages when you think about it.
Go tell Disney that. They’ll probably try to make you feel better with another crappy live-action movie 😐
To think, we could have been in the Lindsay Lohan Little Mermaid universe 😭
It feels like for the past 10 years we’ve been just getting remakes, sequels two already existing films that are perfectly fine on there own.
Nobody threw a fit about Disney’s “The Princess and the Frog”. Their artistic take on it was so far removed from the original story. It was a much beloved take on a classic story and featured black people. Nobody was upset about it, despite it literally being a race swap from the original. People loved it. Nobody complained about it or accused Disney of race swapping. I guess Disney forgot about that one. I don’t understand why Disney feels the need to race swap with the remakes and then have the nerve to accuse everyone against it of being racist. So if and when they get around to a live remake of “The Princess and the Frog” are they going to be diverse and inclusive and have it feature a German prince turned frog accidentally cursing an impoverished American girl? Stir the pot both ways, Disney.
It’s still hilarious to me that they got rid of Shang for the remake of Mulan. Because yes, he was her superior but he barely started to have a crush on her until the very end of the film.
It didn’t even cross his mind before that because he had other things to worry about such as the death of his father, the safety of his men, the emperor and you know…The war.
Also, at the end of the film, Mulan is seen almost as goddess for saving china. Chang is clearly seen bowing to her (along with the rest of the crowd) so if anything, she has power over HIM and prior to that, there was no romance aside from her having a little crush on him.
There are subtle hints of him feeling attraction to her before he knows she's a woman and being a little uncomfortable about it because it makes him question his sexuality, but they are *really* subtle moments in blink and you miss it expressions, so him being interested in her doesn't entirely come out of nowhere. But yes, the war efforts always come in before he can really dwell on and consider those feelings.
@@cheezemonkeyeatershang was a bi icon and disney removed him because they’re cowards (and so they could make money in China, where the movie STILL flopped)
@@theroyaljules39 That is quite a stretch though. But they still try to pander to China while also try to alienate the gan base and cater to the woke mob. I am actually suprised we don't have bigger backslash from arabian, asian and african countries though.
the new Mulan was a Mary Sue in the mold of Rey from Star Wars. No weaknesses, no growth, she just has to learn that she was POWERFUL all along!
@@veeclash4157 Mulan was worse than Rey by a wide margin. In Chinese culture, the character arc of growing stronger from a weak starting point actually has huge religious significance for all three of the main belief systems there, to the point that it's just a major part of the culture. To strip Mulan of the character arc is not only bad storytelling, it's insulting to the culture it's borrowing from in a way the original wasn't. That adds whole layers of awful to the film.
Disney trying to “make these remakes better” is the equivalent of trying to put out a grease fire with alcohol. I can appreciate the effort. But… Everything became so much worse 😭
The worst part is the self congratulatory praise they heap on themselves afterwards
That analogy suggests it needed fixing. I think it's more like trying to fix a rare steak with a grease fire.
@@Vincent.E.M.Thorn.Author the grease fire is the bullcrap from the internet, not the movie itself. It's like someone came into the kitchen and messed with your steak, and started a grease fire, then you grabbed the first thing you came across in an attempt to put out the fire, which turned out to be alcohol.
It’s equivalent to artist on Twitter going around “fixing” other artists’ drawings.
If it's not baroque, don't fix it.
I have a mad respect for you guys.
With so many people misunderstanding old Disney movies, it’s refreshing to see someone who finally gets it.
Same
Thank you.
@@Lilstiffsocks69 the worst thing is that tiana spends most of her movie being told to not work too hard on her dream and find herself a man, she resigns to being a frog (abandoning everything she worked for) and marry naveen AS A FROG and the spell only breaks on a technicality, what kind of message is that??? Patf is not the feminist movie its praised to be, its only seen that way because tiana is a great character, but the message of her movie sucks
The only people who seem to misunderstand Disney movies... Is Disney. Everyone else gets them. Ok maybe I'm wrong and it's Disney and people under 35.
@@Lilstiffsocks69Tiana wasn't a princess and her story was stolen FROM a princess. That's literally the most misunderstood Disney movie. That movie comes from the German story The Princess and the Frog! Ironically the one movie that they blackwashed they downgraded from a princess!
The fact that people are unironically defending Scuttlebutt in this movie makes me weep for humanity lol
Slight chance that at least some of them are Disney shills
Wake up wake up wake up 😵😵😵😵😵😵😵😵😵😵
I saw that song from a video on UA-cam. It was so bad, why did they have to cast Akwafina in that role🤦🏻♀️
@@cobrakaier238 because she's a legend.
Awkwafina is simply AWFUL! The Scuttlebutt song violates the Geneva convention against torture of human beings!
I hate that the director said that original Eric had no personality and pretends that the remake gave him one. OG TLM is in fact a pretty emotionally complex movie. And I dare even say that Ariel and Eric are the healthiest Disney couple ever. They're even the only ones that had a child together (a child that I wish had a better movie, but still)
Prince Eric is first introduced by the movie narrative as adventurous young man who despite his royal heritage is not above the “dirty work”: the audience is initially exposed to him helping other sailors on the ship as well as showing consideration and concern towards Grimsby in addition to being a good listener and quite an experienced storyteller informed about the subject he takes it upon himself to talk about hence the sailors discussing Triton and the sea with Eric while Grimsby sceptically brushes their theories off. Thoroughness, open mind and a down to earth attitude are established among Eric’s primary characteristics from the get go and not for the sake of forcibly and obnoxiously presenting him as a multi-dimensional morally/intellectually superior protagonist - in fact, he can hardly even be deemed as one seeing as the movie essentially revolves around Ariel and her struggles with inability to obtain independence and fulfill herself outside of a place she feels like she belongs whereas every other character, no matter how significant, plays a part of a supporting cast - but in order to showcase his interests thus, in so much as the first few minutes of the movie we already learn up on not only the hobbies Eric is intensely invested in but the extent of his love for the sea, conflicted relationship with his guardian figure (Grimsby) and are provided with a raw sketch of his mindset and the lens through which he observes the world.
All of it could have easily been left out seeing as Eric’s individual emotional investments are not particularly related to Ariel’s story, but those aspects are outlined regardless because Eric isn’t merely a love interest of a fiery red head: he has a personality, a character of his own.
Next time Eric comes off as “the guy with a flute”, it being the immediate impression he gives off once Ariel first sees him, confronted with not so much his mesmerizing attractiveness as the way his eyes lit up when he produced music for his own pleasure (poignantly, the same exact way Ariel preferred to go about her musical skills: away from the crowds or pretentious grand celebrations, using a melody for self expression. It’s hardly a coincidence that Melody ended up being a name of her and Eric’s daughter) or when he played with his dog or when he was clearly not impressed with the the statue of himself. Speaking of which, that is a good character moment because it shows that Eric is burdened by expectations and is seen as a powerful future king when in reality, he is a shy introvert.
This allows Ariel to relate to him. Eric, however, was thankful for the attention and love coming from Grimsby regardless of how inexplicably insufficient and misinterpreted the latter’s perception of Eric generally was, which is rather unfortunate given that Grimsby played some sort of a father figure role to him while being entirely unable to get the grasp of how the young man’s mind functioned. Which brings us to another point: according to all the evidence Eric’s parents are most likely dead, considering they didn’t show up on either of his weddings - the fake one with Vanessa and the real one with Ariel - nor did they attend Melody's christening.
Admittedly, being left in charge of no one other than Grimsby who hardly understood what Eric essentially was about, and having to prepare himself to be a future effective ruler of Tirulia.
Eric is the epitome of a person who built one self up independently, firmly standing his ground confronting the standards imposed on him that he was unwilling to conform to - such as being forced into getting married before determining whether there was a right woman (“the one” as Eric referred to a person he hadn’t yet been lucky enough to meet and want to spend the rest of his life with, not settling for any less) among his suitors for the sake of fitting into a certain ideal of a proper prince. His attitude of a dreamer was a part of his established characterization but he was also exceptionally analytical about his concepts of romance.
Having survived a horrific incident Eric sincerely believed he had found true love and his ideology of a dreamer took a strong grab at his outlooks on relationship seeing as he was set out to find a girl with the gorgeous voice at any cost due to said voice being quite literally the only connection to his rescuer. As some people mistakenly imply, Eric did not fall in love with a voice, in fact, at that point his feelings were all over the place and not exactly what stands for actual love, a mature fully formed feeling. Being drawn to the idea of a girl who saved him Eric - genuinely and irreversibly - projects his certitude regarding her being “the one” onto the only representation of her he had been left with so far - her voice. And subsequently his idealistic but slightly immature romantic notions backfire with a cunning irony once he meets a girl who has everything a man can dream of but lacks what he seeks out the most. A beautiful stranger doesn’t talk therefore cannot be “the one” nor would she ever - as he firmly believes - pass for “the one” hence why Ariel’s beauty is essentially irrelevant to Eric. His one and only goal concerning relationship at that point revolves around finding that person he believes to be one in the whole world who is right for him.
Not only doesn’t he fall for Ariel’s looks but is entirely indifferent to said looks due to thinking that woman is not the one he needs (frankly, the assumption about Eric being easily smitten with visual appeal is extensively incorrect considering the fact that, due to his royal status, chances quite a few attractive female suitors were eager to have his hand only to be rejected because Eric at one point explicitly stated he wasn’t interested in superficial relationship and was waiting for the right person). Which doesn’t mean Eric is immune to primordial instincts and cannot appreciate physical attractiveness - he does, in fact, acknowledge Ariel’s captivating outer exterior once she dresses up for a dinner but it isn’t until she makes him laugh for the first time in few days by being her overly excited, imaginative and adorably dorky self that he starts taking a more insightful look into her and is willing to take her on a Kingdom tour - while still not being ready to open up to her or let the endearing mysterious girl into his life due to being committed to his unrealistic ideal.
Next day Eric spends actual time with Ariel who proceeds to behave excessive and enthusiastic, never failing to amaze him. She is more invested in exploring various layers of the city life rather than paying a consistent attention to him (but… but Ariel totally “left her family behind to be with a man” and had no other agenda, right? Right?!), however, Eric is perfectly content with dedicating time and effort into making her feel happy and content, not being put off by her overflowing craziness in the slightest, but getting more and more intrigued by the unusual, eccentric nature of his accomplice - to the point of becoming largely conflicted hence the boat scene where Eric wants to get to know Ariel while still being unsure of his own feelings and pulling away when she tries to initiate a kiss - because yes, he still takes relationship incredibly seriously and is unwilling to allow himself so much as an innocent romantic interaction without being fully confident that this person is truly the one for him. He challenges himself and his initially established concepts of idealistic romance, gradually deviating from a strong commitment to an image of a girl with a sing song-ish voice he had created in his mind in favor of opening the door into the possibility of forming a bond with a real person regardless of this blooming relationship being enormously confusing, awkward and opposing to everything he had led himself to believe in before. He was GROWING out of exaggerations and teenage angst and exposing himself to a new perspective of building a mature relationship. The segment with him throwing a flute into the ocean is the ultimate representation of his character development.
Eric’s love for Ariel was powerful in both dimensions: back when he was an avid dreamer with a controversial concept of romance who invested considerable amounts of emotional energy into the idea of “the one” and when he was no longer a happy go lucky kid indulging in his dreams but a man willing to fight for a person he loves both in a figurative (choosing the real Ariel over the romanticized ideal) and literal sense (once slipping out of the hypnosis Ursula had inflicted him with all of his thoughts and actions were inevitably and directly related to Ariel, to making her feel loved, to instantly accepting the immensely shocking fact of her being a mermaid and to throwing himself into the waves where he couldn’t even breathe at risk of getting killed in order to make sure she doesn’t remain subjected to her captor) - and in neither of those cases was Eric drawn to Ariel’s looks. Prince Eric is the kind of character to represent self awareness, intelligence, ability to respond to emotional challenges rather than cowardly running away from them and giving all of himself to his nearest and dearest and his story contains more than enough of an evidence to back it up.
Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.
And some people even dare say they have more chemistry in the live action, yea right 😂
the audacity of Disney of thinking that more bloated dialogue is more character is preposterous, film making is a visual art, the first movies didn't even had dialogue at all, dialogue should be used sporadically when something can't be convey in actions. as for Eric, it's understandable that his character was more subtle and not that fleshed out because you don't want your protagonist being overshadowed by your deuteragonist and also make a good foil for ariel's over the top persona
The fact I read all of this is amazing but I 100% agree
Well done.
If ya turn this into an essay for a writing class you'd be sure to get an A. Very good breakdown.
"modern audiences" is such a massive red flag to me that if the team working on a movie or show throws that term around I won't even give it a chance
Exactly. The definition of “modern” changes with every generation, the original has remained a classic because they creators just focused on telling a story with themes that any people universally enjoy and relate to regardless of time period.
Same. Saved me a ton of otherwise wasted money on games as well.
There is a saying "If you are trying to make something more modern you will make it more dated"
"modern audiences" or "LGBT friendly" or "suitable for western audiences" and similar. Nothing against homosexual couples or unknown sex characters if they are good written like in most anime but for some reason the west can't do them correctly. They made them a huge red flag.
Modern now means stupid 😂
Usually people who are lost in a foreign country without knowing how to communicate they usually cling on to the people they are familiar with to guide them around.
Ariel wondering off on her own in a foreign land without knowing the surrounding is actually pretty dangerous and should give her a sense of danger and loneliness. The original made more sense because she felt safe with Eric.
She wandered off because she’s curious about the human world. In the original you barely see her actually experiencing the human world
She’s a mermaid princess whose entire character hinges on an obsession with knowing and exploring the human world.
Let’s bffr .
Narrative wise they also took away how Eric gets to know Ariel as a person.
The more they push them apart, the less convincing their relationship is. Even if it's just as friends.
And it seems like their only fix for this was turning Eric into an Ariel clone.
@@MidnightRaindrops well you are wrong about the original. Also curiosity doesn't mean lack of self preservation. Afterall when she was a mermaid in the original animated movie she was constantly at the surface watching humans from a far and collect human objects and admiring them form afar and never been discovered. She also experience being human by being with a human aka Eric. You don't get the human experience being a fish out of water going alone.
In the new movie she never been to the surface at all which is why the new Scuttle becomes a bird that is also aquatic and speak underwater. Rob Marshall the director said “I wanted to make it that Ariel had never ever been to the surface. Ever,” “That was the goal for me. She’s never broken that rule, [so that helps] raise the stakes for that moment when she finally does it."
How could you be curious about humans and willing to make a huge risk if you never saw them before especially in the surface?
@@DaddyZhong. it only make sense if the director didn't change to back story and made Ariel never even been to the surface of the ocean until the movie. The original animation has her been to the surface watching the humans before and listening to humans and collecting stuff from those humans. That her fascination with humans wasn't just their objects fallen to the oceans but because she saw them from the surface from a far. She was always cautious when she was in the surface even when curious.
As a Black British/Caribbean, who Hasn't watched the live action remake, bit grew up on the awesome animation, I'm Devastated on how they destroyed "Under The Sea" and "Kiss The Girl"... From what I've heard.
They should've hollered at me to voice Sebastian.
Yeah the fact that they had a chance to remake it and STILL chose to have someone do a fake accent? Just hire someone Caribbean ffs
You're "devastated" by "what you've heard"? Are you being serious? 😂
BTW, "Under the Sea" was a bit muted because they weren't doing animated animals playing musical instruments. However, "Kiss the Girl" was perfectly fine.
@@hoos3014 damn.. I forgot I'm on the internet where everyone is Drax, taking everything literal.
But yeah, I've heard those new versions and they suck. Next you'll say Aquafina's rap was excellent too 😒
@@kmdreacts Say what you mean, we can't read your mind.
It's fine if you don't like the new versions of those songs.
Because I have basic media literacy, I understand the intent of the "Scuttlebutt" song. It's a comedic, annoying song from a comedic, annoying character (played by a comedic, annoying actor). It is not *supposed* to sound good. If you watch the clip, Ariel has pulls the pillow over her ears. This is stuff that little kids understand intuitively but apparently is too much for adults to handle.
@@hoos3014 if it's That deep bruh, I'll write you a rousing speech on my absolute disdain for Disney and the knuckle-dragging consumers who claim to also hate Disney, but still funnel money back into their pockets by paying and watching these dreadful live action remakes...
Would that please you?
Would you like some tea and crumpets as you spool through my essay too?? 😒
Jeezus... The internet
So her forgetting about the kiss
WHERE IS HER AGENCY?!
EVERY attempt they are trying to girlboss her SHE REGRESSES EVEN MORE and takes 300 steps back
Thanks disney I hate it
Ariel was already a girlboss in the original movie; they didn't need to do it.
@@kittycatmeowmeow963 THANK YOU about time someone acknowledged that
She did not one or 2 BUT FIVE rescues in the movie, 3 of which were for Eric and Eric paid her back as he rescued her twice and he did a total of 4 rescues from what I remember
Really these 2 balanced each other so well, and the live action ruined it
Edit: Eric did also five rescues in the movie now that I remember
Ariel:
1st: saving flounder from a shark
2nd: saving Eric from drowning
3rd; saving Sebastian from getting eaten
4th:: saving Eric by crashing the wedding
5th: saving Eric one last time from ursula while she was firing trident at him, Killing ursula's sidekicks in the process, you know, the ones who made her do this bargain
Eric:
1st: during the storm he got the safety ships and saved his crew
2nd: he got back to save his dog max
3rd: he threw a harpoon at ursula while ursula was threatening ariel
4th: he saved ariel again by stabbing ursula by the ship
5th: he saved Ariel's dad by killing ursula and all the ones who were tricked by her too
What more do i need to prove that THESE 2 WERE EVEN IN THE MOVIE?
When it comes to "strong" and "agency", I can't help but think that these writers have a strong case of "you use that word, but I don't think you know what it means." It really reads like checking off buzz words on a PR department's list.
@@corvidaegudmund1186 it's even worse it's like a grocery list
Something to be consumed not valued
Honestly what are they thinking? Or what were they on while writing the script?
@@corvidaegudmund1186 It reminds me of how feminist misuse the terms "realistic" and "unrealistic" when they go on about the appearances of women in video games, movies and superhero comics. :-(
This is a trend I've noticed in most if not all the remakes. They'll make changes to the story because they misinterpret or overreact about the old movie being problematic, but they never think far enough to consider how this would effect the world building. The Coral Moon ceramony is a perfect example, they switch the musical in the original with that to make the women seem like strong leader types which is fine but they never explain the purpose of the ceremony nor bring it up again after it served its purpose
There was no audience or spectators either. The coral moon must not have been that important if no one was there to watch it
@@QueenMariposa5 Hot take : it's probably too difficult and time consuming to replicate cause of all the movements the sisters were doing in the animated version, the movements are already unnatural in the final live action movie product so I can imagine the crews are dying trying to finish them if they had to
@@alexandersmith4731 I'm thinking that's the real reason too, especially since they had Ursula kill her clients, removing the scene of them being freed at the end. They really didn't want to spend the extra money on the citizens of Atlantica
That's not the issue - the original animated movies also modified the stories of their source material, partly due to media watchdog pressure. The problem is that the story the live action remakes put in their place has no drama and tells no life lessons that benefit society.
@@alexandersmith4731 I just chalk that to another reason these live action remakes are lousy, they can't get it to look as good as the animated versions (the animal companions for another example)
It’s crazy how they insist on trying to “fix,” things in these remake’s despite failing to understand all the nuances of the original. Thus making them ether soulless, or over complicated or both.
I find the changes to be frustrating. By changing something that isn’t broken, there are unique problems that never existed if they didn’t bring their political views into the story
Just a note, Rodger Rabbit was the reason Disneys higher ups were willing to do Little Mermaid.
I was a animation assistant then, it proved cartoons were profitable.
Such an amazing and underrated movie. A cornerstone of my childhood. I wish it got talked about more
@@theroyaljules39 I miss the old Disney. Disney haven't made a decent animated film since the Lion King. They've been relying on Pixar to create movies for them. Once Disney began using Pixar for animation, I think Disney got lazy and stopped hiring talented artists.
@@80snostalgiacritic60 respectfully I disagree. I absolutely love the Hunchback of Notre Dame, Mulan, The Emperor’s New Groove, Lilo and Stitch, The Princess and the Frog, Tangled, Wreck it Ralph, Big Hero 6, Zootopia, Moana, and Encanto. All great movies that came after The Lion King and didn’t involve Pixar. Though I agree that Disney animation is far past its peak at this point.
@@theroyaljules39that movie is a classic and a masterpiece
@@theroyaljules39I think they meant in terms of cartoon animation. With the exception of Mulan, Emperors New groove and Lilo and Stitch. The rest you listed are still good films especially Zootopia. I also love The Incredibles. The Diseny Renessaince ran from 89-99 where Disney was practically untouchable releasing classic after classic in just one decade. Disney May or many not ever do that again
So in other words, the writers took away some of the best traits of Ariel and Eric? (Ariel's curiosity and kindness, Eric's heroism and thoughtfulness) Good job writers, way to make the story a little creepy.
Not to mention make them more wooden and have less personality.
@@bluecollie55_movies25It's so wooden and emotionless that Ben Stein is jealous
Ariel still has her curiosity and kindness and Eric is way more thoughtful in the remake
This is absolutely not true. The new film shows us more of both characters' personalities. The descriptions given here are lacking to say the least.
@@hoos3014 exactly
It's rather rich that they claim to do all this for nostalgia baiting and pandering to nostalgia, but in reality, it's more for rewriting beloved classics that people held dearly in their hearts. It's such a greedy and selfish thing. That being said, we do get some good videos from MJTanner and others, and it's laughably frustrating and pathetic how these so-called "improvements" just make things more questionable, stupid, or worse.
I feel like it was made for teenage girls who don’t want to watch the original film because they’re too embarrassed their friend circle would mock them for liking a “kids movie”.
How is changing a story “greedy and selfish” you just sound dumb
@@Drixenol86
You know what, that makes sense now that you mention it
@@Drixenol86 I wouldn't be surprised. Though at the same time, I feel teenage girls would be more obsessed with junk like TikTok rather than stuff like this.
@@maskedblanks7774plus something like Bluey which is for kids yet gets Billions of views on tiktok makes jt even more worse for Lil Mermaid
I also think that the amnesia thing they added to Ursula’s spell really hurt Ariel’s character.
The little mermaid seeking affection from her prince knowing it’s the key to her becoming fully human is so essential to even the original fairytale. Making Ariel forget that she needs to get a kiss from Eric(while also being overly convoluted) takes away some of her agency and determination.
It also puts her fate in the hand of her animal friends rather than herself, makes her sorrow when she finds out Eric is marrying Vanessa less believable, and takes away the main focus/aim from her antics on land.
Not *ONE* part of it was "better" than the original Disney Little Mermaid.
Or any other movie.
No shit, Sherlock.
@@xgray2012 you mean Disney is shit shirlock.
I couldn’t agree more not one bit of it not one song that one scene nothing if anything all this movie did was make me love the 1989 that much more.
When you could go home and stream the original for a better experience, why see this flick in theaters? It's sadly a pointless remake.
One critism rarely mentioned (and to be fair, it's small) is that Ariel's dress on land is boring and not particularly flattering on her. Wish they gave Halle a warmer colored wardrobe. Saw Hot Topic selling it for $60 bucks. Could find a similar peasant dress for $20-30 elsewhere.
*Those clothes reminds a lot of people of Slavery and also Amish people.. where Women don't really have a choice!*
@@scarlett19b Yeah, it was ironic how 2023 Ariel was dressed in contrast to how Disney Corp was trying to make her an "improved, stronger" feminist heroine and race-swamped her to Black.
Actually that was mentioned in a previous video.
@@ronanjager3829 I must have missed that. Thanks for the correction. 😁
@@scarlett19b That’s exactly what it reminded me of! Did they even realize how she looked when wearing that?
Prince eric coming to save the day was a key point in the story to show how much he loved ariel and show king Triton that humans aren't as bad as he thought. Only a bad adaptation couldn't see this
Nope, women have to save themselves now because they are perfect in every way and have no weaknesses. This is a super unrealistic way to look at the world but hey if you don't agree with Disney that makes you a SEXIST!
In the original, Triton turns Ariel human because he loved her & saw her love for Eric; he looked past his views of humans for his daughters happiness. Pretty sure in the OG & live action he didn’t see Eric save Ariel. In the live action he is however told by Ariel that Eric helped her immensely to save her from Ursula. In the live action, Triton was dead. In the original animation, he was a polyp (?) & couldn’t see.
@@ann6878 BINGO. In the animation, there is actually no sign or proof that King Triton witnesses Eric kill Ursula. He may have seen a few moment (Eric throwing the harpoon underwater), but the whole closing act where Ursula grows in size is probably not witnessed by polyp King Triton. AND King Triton literally turns Ariel into a human right after the battle. At least that is the implication because we can see Eric pass out on the beach and then as he wakes up, he is greeted with a human Ariel. so was Triton ever filled in on the details before turning his daughter human? Sebastian and King Triton's conversation doesn't mention it at all. The conversation is about letting kids grow up. I would wager that Triton turns Ariel human because he loved her, first and foremost. His approval of Eric is based purely on the fact that Ariel loves him. It was only about his daughter's happiness.
It is really interesting to see that so many people have this preconceived notion about Eric having to be the hero to gain Triton's approval. It is not explicitly stated or portrayed in the actual movie. It is something that audiences have added on which could speak to idealized notions regarding romance.
@@fizzychizzyWhat? Why do you think polyp King Triton couldn’t see anything when he was right there the entire time? There’s no reason to assume he didn’t see it. Eric saving his daughter and both of their kingdoms most definitely did earn his respect because he saw the whole thing.
@@ann6878Triton could most definitely see the entire battle as a polyp. Why would you assume he couldn’t? There is no reason to believe that.
I rewatched the original recently after seeing the remake and they must've forgotten the part where Ariel says shes 16 YEARS OLD!!!!! Her actions make so much more sense when you take into account she's a literal teenager! The way she boldly admits she's in love with Eric when Triton finds her grove is like... The most teenager thing she did aside from swimming to the surface despite being forbidden to. I was also so confused how they said Eric had no personality? The way he went to save Max the moment he saw his dog was on a burning ship? The fact he grimaces at the statue gift he was given and has a playful personality during the first part of the movie. His kind nature to take care of Ariel when he finds her and his willingness to hang with her while they house her. Like... Dude was full of life before Prince Charming's glow up in Cinderella 3.
I was especially sad they didn't do the cute musical in the beginning due to it making waaay more sense of why the daughters names were spoken to the audience. 😔 There's so much this movie changed and every change was for the worst. This was like one of the first remakes I saw and my expectations were low but god... It was still super disappointing
I also noticed that saving Max is parallel to how Ariel saved Flounder. Both are already kindred spirits! And it was about a prince bored by golden cage, similarly like Ariel is a true princess. I'm shocked by the idea that they explained Eric's casual behavior with the fact that he was only adopted by the black queen, and it*s like "I wasn't born for this----ect."
It's weird that they kept the statue, but it's of a random dude that happened to be on the ship and the camera keeps focusing on it during the shipwreck. It wasn't as impactful when Triton blows it up
And even when you factor in the time period for her story, her actions still made sense, in her time period 16 is identified as "young adult" and it's also normal for young adults to do that kind of things when they find someone they're attracted to.
@@QueenMariposa5 according to Andersen, the statue reminds the little mermaid of the prince, it's never stated exactly that the statue is clearly depicting him; and so the statue is more a symbol for her obsession with the human world; and they wanted to avoid that Ariel falls in love with the prince for his looks...with all these changes, "Ariel" and "Eric" are more or less the "Disney names" for the characters in the tale of The little mermaid....
See the EXCUSE from Disney is that if you don't like the changes you're a SEXIST! And if you're female and don't like the movie that makes you an "internalized misogynist!" ROFL The IDIOCY at the House of Mouse never stops! When your movie FLOPS, BLAME the Audience!!!
Scuttle was an absolute unit in the animated film.
He's the one who conducted the espionage mission that led to the discovery that Ursula was going to marry Eric. He gathered air and sea units to lead a joint operation to stall the wedding, with himself leading multiple bombing runs. He went toe-to-toe against the sea witch, hitting her with a deafening scream which resulted in him getting choked; even through the asphyxiation, he grabbed the locket and pulled until its string broke, crashing the locket to the ground and returning Ariel's voice where it belonged.
Now he's just Awkwafina.
These changes didn’t make it better. It made it unnecessary and annoying. Especially with Prince Eric. These changes took away his character and autonomy while getting rid of Ariel’s weak and vulnerable moments. 🙁
Live action Eric is way better. He actually felt like a person with goals instead of just a guy
@@MidnightRaindrops But Eric did have goals in the animation. Similar to Ariel, Eric wants to go beyond his ordinary life. He wants to explore and experience something new. Eric also wants to find right bride for himself instead of his father choosing for him. Eric is immerse with sailing and exploring the sea.
@@titanblade3706 I love the original but Eric did not have goals. His mainly just wanted to find the girl that rescued him. The remake showed more of Eric’s love of exploration and learning about other cultures.
@@titanblade3706 I love the original but Eric did not have goals. His mainly just wanted to find the girl that rescued him. The remake showed more of Eric’s love of exploration and learning about other cultures.
@@MidnightRaindrops Having goals does nothing if the character is stripped of their agency and the only way they achieve these goals is because the narrative brings it to them on a silver platter. Plus Eric *does* have a goal in the OG, he tells it right before the sea storm starts, it's simple but simple doesn't mean ineffective, moreso it's very relevant to the core of the plot. You don't don't say "hey this character is competent at this and this" and dumbs them down just to prop up another for "GiRl EmPoWerMent", that's cheating and insults the audience's intelligence because there *is* one such thing as power balance, one that came across in the OG in the form of Ariel saving Eric and Eric saving Ariel in turn; this served an important full-circle narrative about reciprocity, and that's why these "fixes" are extremely detrimental to meaningful messages in favor of bad-faith pandering driven by tokenism. It's calling the audience suckers under their nose.
It's quite baffling how the people who made the remakes fail to understand the originals.
Rob Marshall is literally friends with Jodi Benson and she loved the remake
@@AttmayAt least he’s still a better director of musical films than Tom Hooper. And at least Rob Marshall had experience in the theatre as a choreographer for musicals and directed the 1998 Broadway revival of Cabaret. I’d still support him over Tom Hooper any day.
@@MidnightRaindrops dude jodi benson has to say that shit. Who knows what her real feelings are. You will get crucified and cancelled this day and age if u don't pander along.
@@macsdf1 she’s not being held against her will. You can see videos of her at the premiere. She was genuinely happy about it and even made a small cameo in the movie
@@MidnightRaindrops Yeah, being happy is called being a good actress.
That face is gonna haunt Halle Bailey for the rest of her career. She looks more like a humanoid version of Lola the devil fish from Shark Tale.
What’s also going to haunt her for the rest of her career is how she pretty much calls anybody who doesn’t like this movie racist now look I don’t care if Disney told her to say those things or she just said them on her own you do not do that if you want people to come and see something that you were in because it turns people off because you think they get the impression that you are and I don’t mean you are talking about Holly. They get the impression that you are a stuck up diva and that’s the impression she gives off so of course that among every other problem with this movie turn people away and she and disney are scratching their head and wondering why this movie didn’t do well well geez let’s think about it for a minute.
@@Leamichellefan2244because some of y’all give the stupidest reason to hate this movie💀 trying to hide the racism behind those stupid reasons
1. Ariel B is interested in the surface but has never even been to the surface until Eric happened... seriously?
2. Ursula make Ariel B sign a rigged contract that includes literal unbeatable failsafe that erases Ariel B's memory of her goal, that could only be possible to bypass if Eric is a literal SEX OFFENDER that kisses her without CONSENT. AND SHE STILL HAD TO USE MIND CONTROL ERIC IN THE END! WTF?!
3. Mermaids in this remake have mind control voice powers but this issue is never brought up again...
4. Humans and Mermaids are aware and hated each other in this remake. This has basically turned into a Romeo and Juliet story... In the end, it just magically solves itself.
5. Triton, instead of being rendered powerless by the contract and was forced to make a hard choice to save Ariel, he just die like a weakling in this remake... and then gets easily revived? what?! This has more deus x machina than all of disney movies combined.
6. Eric so useless in the final battle, he might as well not even exist.
7. Ariel B, without any knowledge of PILOTING A SHIP and NO LEGS was able to perfectly drive the damn thing to stab Ursula.
There's a lot more I want to complain but, this list is already too damn long....
You really summarized it all 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽. Eric was very useless in the movie cos Ariel did all the saving .
I'm not sure where this Sex Offender stuff comes from. Some of y'all have issues 😂. All he had to do is fall in love with Ariel. Which he did.
Y'all are weird.
@@hoos3014 There are some lyric changes in 'Kiss the Girl' because people have gotten very sensitive about the idea that [Prince Eric] would, in any way, force himself on [Ariel]," Menken told Vanity Fair in March.
The idiot literally misunderstood a wingman song, thinking it sounds "rapey". They also didn't even realize Ariel is the one on the offensive, using her body language to convey her intentions because because she is mute, while Eric is hesitant and would not make any move.
Ariel B got cursed with forgetting at a crucial moment, causing her to look like an ass that just baits someone to kiss her. That is so damn awkward and somehow Ursula still panics. Ursula would have nothing to worry about unless Eric is the type to FORCE HIMSELF on a girl. Which the idiot who rewrote this thing is worried about when making this movie.
@@dio9344 The purpose and meaning of the song don't change one iota because of the lyric update. In fact, it gives Sebastian more to do because the initiative for the kiss is flipped from Ariel to Eric. He's now the ultimate wingman 😁
@@hoos3014 yes it changed. In the animated, Ariel was the one who was trying to kiss Eric to make him fall in love with her so that she can get her voice back. Then y’all sensitive feminists had to change it abd make Ariel forget her assignment so that it will be that Eric is the one who wants to kiss her. From “ It don't take a word
Not a single word” implying that she can’t talk but she’s aware that she wants a kiss to “ Use your words boy and ask her “. Sebastian was still the wingman. Animated or live.
Really enjoy watching your videos.
Also, what you said about Little Mermaid 2023 is really valid. At first, I didn't care for the remake, but when talks about how 2023 Ariel will be more modern than 1989 Ariel, I came to realize that the remake was just going to be a response to all the bad faith criticism against the original 1989 film. The novelizations that showed the changes didn't help matters at all.
But thank you for making these videos and defending both Ariel and Eric. Ariel is my favorite Disney Princess, so it's nice to see people defending her along with Eric.
Keep up the good work!
If you actually watched the movie you would know how wrong you are. The remake just had more focus on Ariel’s love for land
Racist
The problems with TLM remake:
1. The color and contrast
2. The “Scuttlebutt”
3. Ariel defeating Ursula instead of Eric
4. Making Sebastian a Ghost Crab
5. The lack of the past context of the animated film
Notice I didn’t mention the race swap of Ariel. Because that’s not the case.
I had an issue, cause I didn't think she was pretty at all. Cinderella, B&B aladdin had good looking princesses tho.
It isn't a problem in theory, but the marketing and media buzz surrounding it make it so, because it tries to make the discussion all about that to deflect criticism. It creates a bad trend.
@@cheezemonkeyeater Very deceitful. Hollywood needs to stop this.
@@Drixenol86 Disney needs to stop the live-action remakes in general. It's shitting on its own legacy.
It would be nice to have seen an ariel that looks like the cartoon character. Her race is irrelevant
Basically the people behind the film watched the movie decades ago and it feels like they never bothered to re-watch it to understand the plot or the characters. Or they are just gaslighting to cover for a bad remake. Neither make them look good and their response to any criticism doesn't help.
I could believe that most of them never rewatched the original. It seems to be a trend that writers rarely bother to research things, even something that would only take like a hour or so to sit everyone down for a movie lunch or something.
Imagine if we got a movie from people who actually *liked* the original animated version 😭
2:09 while ariel never intented to change her body ONLY TO BE with eric, she did wanted to be a human and in her song she does express disconformity with her mermaid body "flipping your fins you dont get too far, legs are required for jumping, dancing, walking down on those feet", meaning she feels limited with her tail, she has several reasons to accept ursula's deal
*Limited with her tail like a Disabled♿ person in a Wheelchair!*
@@scarlett19b I see it as an allegory for not being able to be your true self and being restrained by social norms, so you can apply it to many things I suppouse
@@jayla3282
*Especially when You're Disabled in any way/form.. because Disabled people aren't treated Equally.. if anything we get discriminated the most of all people on the planet.. simply for being born differently!*
*Or for becoming Disabled after an accident etc.!*
@@scarlett19bwhy do you write exclusively in bold?
*”That’s not a bra, that’s a part of her body”*
Wait - so Ariel is _topless_ for half the movie?! Disney, no!
Nothing these modern “artists” do improves anything, because they think too much like activists and/or politicians. If we really want good stories and memorable characters to return, we need to let artists be in charge again. Look how much of a downgrade happen to Pixar, after Disney fired all the old artists.
I think they were right to fire them considering what they were ahem working on, but you’re right. They may not have been good people, but they were talented and understood how stories worked. They need to find new talent, and let them lead and work on projects they care about, instead of those higher in the company deciding which movie to do a sequel, spinoff or remake of.
Something, something, evil cannot create anything new.
@@happyllama1160 I didn’t know anything about Disney firing artists. What exactly were they working on?
@@PikachuGirl140 Their staff 😬
@@happyllama1160 what did the staff do
I've heard people say that Halle straight throwing hands with Vanessa is somehow an improvement that makes her tougher than the original, conveniently forgetting that animated Ariel lunged at Ursula with the intent to kill and attempted to strangle her and then later pulling her hair and indirectly killing Flotsam and Jetsam (despite Ursula being MUCH bigger than her and now all powerful as opposed to live action where she was fighting someone her own size and weight class). Never mind Kingdom Hearts where she uses her whole BODY to destroy the Heartless. The only other character who does that is the BEAST. No idea what they're talking about
That and if we're talking about historical accuracy even if the Queen was a black woman, the idea that during a period where slavery was probably still legal in most parts of the Western world some random black girl could just up and charge at a white woman and start fighting her - the Prince's fiancee no less - and get away with it without getting dogpiled by palace guards or security is an awful lot to ask us to accept. It would be like asking us to accept that in the 2010s some rando could get away with kicking up a fight and attacking someone at the a black tie White House event in front of Obama and secret service would be like "oh its fine" just because the President was black at the time
And that scene is very wrong with how none of the people attending the ceremony tried to assist the bride that was getting asaulted by some random girl that appeared out of nowhere with the clear intend of robbing the bride xd
@@dustymcwari4468 omg, yes. i genuinely don't understand how her ripping the necklace out is an improvement instead of scuttle doing it, bc in the remake, she just looks like a deranged intruder willing to ruin an engagement
@@Crawlingdreams418 That and it was completely untintentional on Scuttle's part because she was trying to choke him to death simply for squawking in her face which was disproportionate retribution/animal cruelty and he was pulling on her necklace if only to get her to let go (worst part is we don't get the Homer Simpson "Oh why you Little!!" inside joke which I STILL think was intentional LOL)
FOr some reason it made me think of that Family Matters episode where Eddie dreams that Greta crashes his wedding to Myrtle and the two start randomly duking it out in front of the guests who just cheer them on and laugh which I don't think is the look they were going for 😆😅😂
Fun fact about the whole Triton and Ursala being siblings thing; in the broadway musical of TLM they give more backstory about the two being siblings, including Ursala singing about how she killed their other siblings, and at the end of the musical, Triton and Ariel learning that Ursala was the one who killed Ariel's mother, not humans. Not really important, but just a fun fact!
😱 That kind of a plot twist could’ve made this movie better!
The constellation bit was actually explained. Eric had JUST pointed it out. The boat ride gave him time to mention two or three constellations, and Aries was one of them. Easy to miss though. I have more of an issue with Ariel steering the ship. I guess you could say it was also just _barely_ explained, because she saw Eric take control of the ship just before it crashed at the start of the film, so it's plausible that she understands that turning the wheel means turning the ship, but that really should have had her actually being taught it at some point, if they wanted Ariel to crash into Ursala.
I am very, very, tired of Disney crapping on older movies though. I went along with it for the Beauty and the Beast Remake, with the Stockholm syndrome accusation, but started rethinking it as this situation kept happening, and I watched videos arguing against constantly trashing older characterizations, and it's going to absurd new levels with deciding to not even hire the Moana voice actress for the new liva action because she's not "diverse" enough, even though they celebrated her when the animation was released. They will ALWAYS find something to go after in the original when they do a remake. I cannot believe how much I've come to detest Disney in just 5 years or so, after a lifetime of loving it.
The way Ariel steered the ship almost looked like an accident or a shot in the dark. Unlike the picture book, she grabs the wheel and flops over.
To be fair about the moahana thing, the actress herself said she would've refused to play in the live action, showing that she has enought respect for the original movie and herself than take part into a soulless garbage of product
And they expect me to believe that a woman who barely has any experience as a human is just going to pilot a ship with no experience in a storm that would test an experienced sailor like Eric and have no problems doing it?
It’s such pandering bullshit.
No, no, don’t you know it’s only feminist if we expect young girls to be unexplainably good at everything they do for the first time, and to hold them to unreasonably high expectations of perfection and independence?! We can’t have any young impressionable girls thinking they are allowed to make any mistakes or are ever allowed to be bad at anything even when it’s their first time trying something new for the first time. We must teach young girls you have to be absolutely perfect at all times… /s
The whole point of Ariel taking control of the ship is not to show that she's a fast learner but to take Eric's heroic moment away because they don't want a male saving a female in a "made for modern audience" movie! The problem with this change is that it takes away the moment that finally earns Triton's respect for Eric and finding him worthy to marry his daughter despite being a human. SMH.
Now, I did not watch the live action remake and have little intention of doing so. So, I'll be honest, I have little to offer in my argument but one confusion:
Why is it now important to highlight consent in "Kiss the girl"? Back in the original, Ursula's deal was quite clear. If Ariel wanted to stay human, then Eric had to give her a kiss of true love. She was in love with Eric (or at least had a crush), so consent was not the issue - she wanted to be kissed by him so she can stay human. I mean, one of the scenes in the original clearly shows Ariel is trying to kiss him, but he backs away to HER frustration. So the consent was missing on Eric's part and he needed some gentle push to kiss her.
It's a very weird change I have a hard time to wrap my mind around, to be honest.
And, as was mentioned, Ursula sneaking in that amnesia spell (where Ariel would forget a kiss was needed any time someone brought up the necessary kiss to her) made it impossible for Ariel to consent to a kiss - making the whole line change pointless.
To add - also kind of funny that Eric needs Ariel's permission to kiss her; but she doesn't need any consent to physically touch him when teaching him her name. (got to love those double standards).
Apparently, according to the folks involved with this film, any man who wants to kiss a woman without expressly asking her is forcing himself onto her even if she's the one leaning in and initiating. I have absolutely no idea how anyone with an ounce of media literacy could interpret "Kiss the Girl" as ERIC wanting the kiss.
Because apparently the screenwriter has only heard of verbal consent and thinks we must all act like bureaucratic robots when we date someone.
Anyone who knows anything about women should know they are usually turned on when their date kisses them spontaneously.
@@vetarlittorf1807 I dunno my dude you “sneak” in for a kiss nowadays sounds like you’ll end up handcuffed in the back of a squad car.
But yeah you need express verbal consent to even consider getting into someone’s space. Even then that verbal consent seems like it can be retracted at anytime.
Because the me two happened and people was coming out on sexual assault?
I liked that in the original ursula kept the mermaids as trophies because after she dies, all the mermaids go free as mermaids. So it shows that ariel and eric saved them by defeating urusla its better.
Can we also talk about how Halle’s facial performances are giving Kristen Stewart in the Twilight movies?
Please don't disrespect Kristen like that.
In Kristen's case, they made sense, tho. Bella viewed herself as completely average before the vampire transformation, so there isn't much to work with. It actually shows that Kristen did a good job in portraying this mild girl
Lol
yes halle's face is just...not expressive enough. she looks bored.
@@lunathekuduruk1311As if she deserves respect
It begs to question, if Ariel had never been to the surface before that night she spied Eric's ship sailing by, what was the 'Part of that World' song all about? At that point she sang the song, she never once laid eyes on a human, seen their behavior, saw how they interacted with one another etc and her only info about them is what she finds in the shipwrecks and the misinformation she gets from that scatterbrained bird. So, what is she pining for?
Also, from what I understand, there was a scene in the movie where Eric was showing Ariel constellations (using a star chart?) and that's how she knew which constellation was Aries (it was probably a 'blink and you miss it moment). The better question would be how she knew what a cannon was for in the beginning of the film, considering she had never been to the surface before that point; so never saw sea fairing folks battle it out at sea.
If only they could have put in a scene of Eric showing Ariel how a boat works in order to explain that boss fight at the end of the movie (that boss fight still wouldn't make a lick of sense, but it would at least have explained how Ariel knew what a helm was/what it was used for).
Ariel was sitting in the skiff on the side of the ship watching Eric at the helm at the beginning of the movie. Turn right, turn left, it's not rocket science. This is the weirdest point.
@@hoos3014 And how is Ariel supposed to tell the ship is moving left or right based on what Eric's doing at the helm? It's the dead of night, overcast (due to an approaching storm) and no land marks visible to indicate the ship is turning in one direction or another.
i.e. all Ariel is seeing is a human male holding a strange looking wheel; it doesn't tell her what it is/how it works/what it's used for.
I wish they had teamed up someway instead, but it wouldn't have mattered since Triton was too dead to witness it
@@madamefluffy4788 So, you can suspend your disbelief at the Giant Octopus monster but not on Ariel (who's been studying shipwrecks her whole life) knowing how to turn a wheel left or right?
@@hoos3014 😂😂😂😂😂 I can't with these folks
I love the fact that they wanted to change the movie to make it look like Eric wasn't pushing Arial into doing some she didn't want to do and make her look powerful, only to make Arial look like the predator and the one emotional manipulateing Eric. Congrats Disney. You fixed a good story and made a problem.
It’s clear you didn’t watch the remake. Explain how did they make Ariel look like a predator?
I Don’t Even understand this narrative that Eric violated her consent at any point in the original. Ever since he found her on the beach, he was nothing but kind and generous to her. And even though it was clear he was attracted to her since he saw her, he was always nothing but respectful and non judgmental.
This whole thing about the writers and Halle acting like Eric was some kind of predator in the original is really annoying. The only thing the guy is guilty of is being stupid and not realizing Ariel is the one sooner.
@Jason 2 things. 1. No I didn't watch the remake. Why would I? I'm not giving Disney money for something I didn't want. 2. The gave Arial a Siren Song, which, in the movie/book's (whatever she is reading in the video) words, puts the other person in a trace so they can do what she wants. Sounds pretty predatory.
I don't think anyone was expecting this to be better than the original. Not even Disney.
I used to be afraid that people were going to love the remake more than the original because I've lived under the critisim the original film has been facing for years and it wasn't easy for me because this movie started the Disney Renesance. But, despite its importance, people prefer to trash it as a bad movie which still makes my blood boil. But, when the remake came out, despite these "updates, improvements, and changes", boy was I wrong.
@@jonnyboy4289 Well, now you know that the 'criticisms' about the classic '89 movie are all made up and promoted by the media, which has been disguising it's OWN hatred of the movie by using actual fans as a cover. The fans don't hate original, HOLLYWOOD and the associated 'press' does.
It’s pathetic, it really is.
Not only did the changes suck and ruin important plot elements, but their attempts to get rid of any (non-existent) nonconsensual themes actually MADE things nonconsensual. First, Ariel used her siren's song on Eric, so Eric's feelings for her can actually be called into question. Second is that "Kiss The Girl" actually comes across as nonconsensual now. In the original, Sebastian was trying to create the mood, in the remake, Sebastian straight up says they need to, quote, "influence" Ariel and Eric into kissing without Ariel noticing. Fail.
Ariel having a different skin color doesn't bother me, if her personality is different that's a problem... which is the case in this movie. Apparently, she is strong and independant instead of being curious and kind. It was fun seeing her exploring the kingdom with Eric, their ballad on the boat was cute. Both saves each other's life, learn to know the other person. It was a good romance! Here, she got amnesia and can't remember that she has to kiss him? Why? That makes no sense, don't add much to the story and doesn't make Ariel more interresting. This change is stupid! Thank's for that Disney. You try to make this character better but failed cause you don't understand her, nice job 😂
They gave her amensia so that their romance feels organic instead of Ariel having an agenda. Making her stronger in the remake doesn’t take away her kindness and curiosity
There’s no way you watched this movie if you’re out here insisting that Halle’s Ariel is no longer curious and kind.
@@MidnightRaindrops i think instead of the amnesia, Ursula could've omitted the part about them needing to kiss.
@@QueenMariposa5 it wouldn’t really be a deal if she omitted the kiss though. Ursula needed Ariel’s blood to make the deal fullproof against trition.
@@MidnightRaindrops I worded it kinda weird, I meant to say, have the kiss part of the deal, but Ursula doesn't tell her about it, she just says he has to fall in love.
The worst problem was not having Eric kill Ursula. That's what convinced Triton not all humans were bad in the original. That's important as I see it.
One thing that i found weird is how they handled the reconciliation between humans and merfolk. since eric didn't kill ursula, triton has no reason to change his mind (especially since he was in a fakeout death atm). the queen literally calls ariel and ursula the local equivalent of a slur and tells eric to forget about her, but suddenly they're all chill even though she has no reason for it
I'd like to mention another change: triton looks bored as hell. i'm supposed to be scared of messing with him, but here he barely even yells. and i think her going to the surface for the first time is their way to cater to people complaining that she was a bad role model (kinda like how pinocchio didn't smoke and drink in the remake on pleasure island, despite bad habits being literally the point). which is counterproductive if that's what they wanted, because she still disobeys him by exploring shipwrecks. Speaking of the music, there was an article where the director "explained" the changes (i'd say "made pathetic excuses"). he basically said he wanted to "raise the stakes" by her going to the surface for the first time and that he found triton's obsession with music odd (which is why the sisters were turned into weird girlbosses)
As for the changes in general, they were clearly meant to pander to those who never cared for the character or this fictional universe at all. And some fans (even those who like the casting)
Ariel clearly tells trition “I didn’t fight alone”
@@MidnightRaindrops yeah, but considering they upped the stakes with humans HATING mermaids instead of not thinking much about them, this makes her look like an unreliable narrator, especially given her bias towards humans. in the original, however, the man saw it for himself, which was a more valid push for change.
@@Crawlingdreams418 the whole reason why Ariel killed Ursula was to show to Triton that *she* is responsible and he can trust her judgment. Therefore she’s not an unreliable narrator.
@@MidnightRaindrops she'd count as unreliable due to her bias towards humans. a positive one at that. eric killing her was a more valid verification than her weak (in comparison) "daddy, not all humans" ever will be
The lesson Disney should take from Disney Renaissance is that they should stick to fairytales. But now they should adapt the fairytales from around the globe.
@@AttmayWhich ones? As far as I know, nearly all Disney movies except Wreck it Ralph and Lilo and Stitch were derived from myths, fairy tales or books.
Well, I think we need to differentiate between Disney and Pixar. Disney has mostly made movies based on fairy tales. Pixar has done movies about different things.
I’m surprised you didn’t mention the confusing detail of Triton’s daughters all being different ethnicities despite Triton being white and his wife being black. That’s not how family genetics works.
But it is how the results of a bunch of one-night stands work
You see... With fish, the eggs are impregnated outside (apart from) the mother. So the father "has sex" with the egg, rather than the mother. Because of this, Triton could impregnate eggs from different ethnicities and still be a father to them all. So it is possible, but a very stupid idea for this movie...
@@blindlobster more likely that his wife's friends fertilized most of the eggs before he had the chance to add his part to that cocktail
@@blindlobster Some fish do live birth Not eggs. Such as the sword fish.
Just because mermaids have The tail the fish doesn't mean they'll have the same biology as a Fish.
Also at least with the little mermaid she doesn't have gills. So how do the mermaids breathe underwater if their top half is human.
If there human half still breathes water like a fish, And I don't see why their fish half can't get Impregnated and give birth like the human half.
@@dustymcwari4468
*Facts!*
I am so glad that I didn't go see this movie in theaters because it's not really worth purchasing tickets for.
In 2020 Disney purchased the film rights to a Trinidadian musical called “Once On This Island” which was inspired by The Little Mermaid fairytale, but infused with Trinidadian mythology. It has a revival on Broadway in 2018. Hailey could have been cast to voice Ti’Moune, Alex Newell who played Asaka (the earth goddess) can revive the role. But more importantly it would highlight the work of Rosa Guy who is also Trinidadian.
Rihanna is Bajan not from Trinidad. Plus ripping of a European fairytale for the sake of making it Black is disrespectful to the creator no matter how many changes are made. Just as it would be despicable to steal a West African tale and pretend it took place in Britain with Caucasian actors.
Btw Disney is already adapting Once on this Island for Disney+. 🤮
@@NK-mn6zuI think if it’s in the public domain, people should be allowed to do what they like. I don’t like the idea of Disney working on something like that, purely because of the poor quality work they’ve been putting out recently but in the hands of another company it could be wonderful. The Little Mermaid is a very simple and melancholic story about unrequited and impossible love, you could put a million spins on it, that would all work beautifully.
Exactly! I would have loved a movie version of Once on This Island to have come out instead of a remake of The Little Mermaid. They also have the rights to Aida another fantastic musical. I know both stories are tragic but Disney could change the endings to appeal to children.
Why not both?
@@hoos3014 because one will always live in the shadow of its superior original. The only reason “A Star Is Born” worked was because it never changed anything about the overall story. Each remake made slight changes to make it work for the current day, but the overall story is still the same. It didn’t diminish a character or make major story changes because someone on Twitter found some things to be “problematic”. Unlike this version which made extremely unnecessary story changes that only created more plot holes where there weren’t any and completely misunderstood Eric’s and Ariel’s relationship. If they had done something like “The Wiz” then maybe the film would have done better in the box office.
I have no faith in Disney making a good remake of the Black Cauldron, but you are right, that movie needed a remake more than any other Disney has put out this last few years.
LOL any Remake Disney does now is DOOMED to fail because they are Creatively Bankrupt. Just STOP IT already!!
They're trying so hard to make modern heroines so much "better" by pushing this idea that they should never pursue men that I worry it's actually telling girls that the crushes they develop are *wrong*. Getting crushes on boys and either pursuing or interacting with them because of it is a thing most girls go through, and constantly announcing that that behavior is problematic comes off as pretty....insulting to girls. Adolescence is a very important time period for social and emotional development, and teens need to interact with each other as well as work through their own emotions. Of course Ariel declared she loved Erik without ever properly meeting him, she's a teenager probably feeling infatuation for the first time! Also telling girls they can only be strong by doing heroic-esque deeds is...well, a way to make the average girl feel inadequate I think.
I really don't like how people criticize OG Ariel for being selfish like it breaks her character. Yeah, okay, she's selfish. She's also 16 years old. She gets into a lot of trouble because of her actions and has to fix her problems. And I'm glad she's not perfect. She has flaws like a normal person.
Exactly. That was even a line I remember from the trailers “Teenagers. You give them an inch, they swim all over you.” She’s in her rebel phase of life, what do they expect?
Also you can pretty much tell why she ends up doing what she does.
First her father both scares and upsets her by smashing her cave, pretty much sending Ariel straight into the arms of Ursula.
And Ursula herself is a manipulator and she clearly pressures Ariel into doing this. The song picks up speed by design, Ursula says. "I haven't got all day." an pretty much makes it seem like a now or never deal, catching Ariel in this vulnerable moment in time, then pressuring her and keeps telling her. "You're such a poor unfortunate soul. Of course you should do it. This is terrible. Let me fix all your problems for you. But it gotta be RIGHT NOW!"
We see Ariel hesitating, and Ursula laying on the pressure. Thi si important.
@@MoonPhantom Yeah Ursula being a master manipulator is important to keep in mind. She's tricked countless merfolk, you can see all of them just outside her lair, and one of them even tries to stop Ariel from going to her, but Ariel doesn't understand the intent. It's easy to understand how things transpired the way they did when you look at the bigger picture instead of focusing on one or two details.
Just for one reason this remake should no exist: the Scuttle rap.
It was pretty funny J never mentioned it, unlike every other review. She was probably numb by that point 😂
I've never wanted to curl up into ball and disappear in the theatre as much as I did then.
Disney took Mona Lisa, dyed her hair pink and designed a nose ring and tries to convince people that she's better now.
Ariel was already strong in the animated version, she's physically strong, yes, but she's also empowered in terms of her questioning her social norms.
She literally pulled a grown man up from the sea and swam all the way to the beach, my arms would be shaking before I lift up anything weighting close to the weight of an adult, but Ariel did that.
Eric has more character than what people give him credit for, it's like those people claimed that they watched the animated version but they never get what Eric was about. I remember having a crush on Eric because I like his character, in fact, the whole point of having Eric as the way he was presented in the animated version is to move towards the direction of making both the male and female lead have more character, agency to drive the plot forward and end the conflict in the plot.
Ariel decided that she wanted to be human by herself even before she was told that Ursula could help her, no one put the ideas in her head and tell her to love the human world the way she did.
Eric was first introduced on a ship with sailors of all things, we know he's a prince but that in the animated version is not the place that we expect to see a prince, and yet there he was, enjoying the sea and listening to sailors' tales about the merfolk while others may brush those tales off as some kind of superstition.
When I watch the animated version as an adult, I continue to find the good qualities that little boys today can learn from in Eric, we shouldn't say that men being strong is taking things away from women, men and women can both be strong. Not needing help isn't the same thing. It's actually really toxic to teach people that they can't ask for help as women because they're women, it's also a toxic idea that all men can be is kind of the "emotional support animals" or else they will take the spotlight from women. Overall, the animated version did a good job with the idea of men and women can both be strong in their own ways and can help each other. But the remake just take all of that away, but by taking that away, they also take away the reason why the characters feel human.
I'm pretty sure that The Little Mermaid Remake was made THIS self contradicting on purpose.
OK I am going to ask you a question and I pray you don’t find me racist but why did they let her keep the dreadlocks I thought an actress or actor was supposed to work to fit the character I didn’t think the character was supposed to be changed to fit the actress that please understand I don’t care for the race swapping no matter how you do it but I mean let’s be really we’re gonna do that anyway, so why couldn’t they have at least done the hair properly Oh and I meant they not you. I’m sorry.
@@Leamichellefan2244 I think you're right; Disney really changed Ariel to fit Halle Bailey, not the other way around.
P.S.: I heard a rumor that there will be a show with a new little mermaid on Disney Junior.
@@realistfromrussia1244thats been confirmed, only Ariel is changed to match the remake while everyone else stays the same
@@realistfromrussia1244 they did change Ariel to fit Bailey so basically it’s just Bailey with a fishtail. It’s not Ariel at all and yes they are making a new show based on this not Ariel character and no she is not Ariel and I will never acknowledge her as such.
@@Leamichellefan2244 its a war on wyite people notice how they when they made mulan or that islander moice they bragging ow they made something representing that peoplebut when it comes to wyites it must change to included non wyites
Considering how many of these changes are either unnecessary (like Eric's mother being alive and hating merpeople) or incompetent (how do you attempt to remove a perceived consent issue, only to make a new consent issue that is even worse?), I can't help but ask a very serious question. Do people actually proofread these screenplays or are people just afraid to say no?
In this woke day and age? Definitely the latter.
To be honest,a part of the original me and my dad loved was the dynamic between Ariel and king triton because of the dad and daughter relationships was beautiful and the ending where triton turns her into a human saying “there’s just one thing left, how much I’m going to miss her…” and that shows how much he cares for Ariel. But in the live action triton seems like a piece of soggy concrete that has no real affection for Ariel. And in the final wedding scene Ariel hugs her dad and says “I love you daddy” with tears in her eyes. But that scene has no value if all Ariel and Eric is going onto a boat with no dramatic impact.
This whole movie not only shows Ariel’s growth, but it shows Triton’s growth as well. That’s what’s been lost in this empty shell of a remake.
Also, her whispering to her dad at the very end always gets me in the gut.
A lot of criticism against the original ends up sounding like vicitm blaming if you think about it
Adding or altering another persons story in any way causes a ripple effect that ultimately ruins the story unless you comb through the entire story with every change you make. For example The trident has the power to bring the dead back to life. Yeah great well done Disney now you have to answer the awkward question of why Triton even hates humans anymore. Well he can revive people with the power of the trident so even if Ariel or his wife got killed by a human. Why would he care? He can just bring either of them back to life. Same with any character that dies. Next point why wouldn't the Trident revive Ursala instead? She was the rightful owner of it per a contract. Does the contract not stand if a party dies which raises questions on why the contract didn't care when Triton dies. Does the trident have a sense of self in this world and knows right from wrong? Disney you utter buffon I've got more questions than answers now.
Yeah who didn’t see this coming
You know what’s a good story with a similar premise to The Little Mermaid remake? It’s called Once On This Island. It’s a musical, African/Caribbean retelling of The Little Mermaid which is closer to the Andersen tale. Although there aren’t any merfolk in the story and that’s probably because the Caribbean doesn’t have legends of mermaids. Just mermen.
Apparently in the Caribbean all merfolk are male and all fairies are female yet they mate with each other. Anyway that aside, Once On This Island has a plot very similar to the remake. It’s about two races who are against each other and it has star crossed lovers from both sides. It’s ultimately a tragedy but one that tells a good story. Way better than what we got in the remake.
Interesting. I heard Disney bought the rights to that story while making this one. Maybe they drew heavily from it?
@@loverrlee Possibly
@@loverrlee Nah. I bet Disney just wanted to make sure that another studio wouldn't make a movie based on that story.
This movie proves why nobody cares about the writers strike.
Nothing of value was lost.
Disney: *gives Ariel brown hair because read hairs are unrealistic*
Also Disney: *gives one of her sisters pink hair because why not*
She still has red hair in the live action remake.
Having fire engine red hair would look silly. No redhead has hair that red.
I'm as feminist as they come and I don't actually hate the original Ariel or the Kiss the Girl song. The original Ariel didn't just want to become human for a man - it was her dream, which she described BEFORE she even met Eric. I also suspect she wanted to become human to escape the control of her father, who never allowed her to be herself. She spends the entire movie breaking the taboos of her people and resisting the control of her father (a man).
I’m interested in your take on this…was OG Ariel basically a bit of a feminist? Diet soda version?
Also the changes on "Kiss the Girl" makes no sense
Anyone who has seen the 1989 movie knows that Ariel came on to HIM
So the queen, a black woman, sat around and complained how their problems were someone else's fault instead of taking action to fix things for herself.
Good job, Disney. That's probably the most accurate part of the film.
Y’all constantly will try to make it about race without caring how your prejudice shines thru.. sad
@@Krish-ox1upDisney made it about race first so spare the indignance.
Netflix will probably remake her as a warrior queen as soon as those companies merge. She don' need no man!
@@angrytheclown801 you decided to make it about race since you feel like it’s being shoved down your throat.
@@BrettCaton period! That’s the girl boss energy we love and need!
Instead of letting Eric save the day, they make Ariel killed her aunt.
And after Triton revived he didn't even ask whether Ursula still alive
The only new scene that I liked was the one where they tip-toe into the castle, dripping wet and giggling… It’s such a cute scene that would have given them a nice moment… If it were not for the cardboard acting and lack of chemistry between the actors 😢
It seems like we’re forgetting the fact that Ariel never says “part of YOUR world” until the reprise. She wasn’t fascinated with the human world BECAUSE of Eric, he just became another motivation for her to become a part of the human world. She was not willing to give up absolutely everything just to have a chance with Eric, he was more like the final straw in her dream to be closer to humans and their stuff.
So mamy of the modern disney movies arent worth watching.
What an insult to my childhood.
It's an insult to cinema as a whole, and I ever saw articles that claims that Ursula is not a villian but a feminist role model.
@@Invidente7You got that right.
I don’t even care Disney can just die already. It was gonna go down eventually :(
@@Invidente7 its an insult to wyite people
The stupid thing is, in the remake she does "just leave for a man" she just doesn't remember why she left because of that stupid amnesia spell that had no point.
Also, I'd argure Eric in the remake had too much added "personality" they throw so much stuff at you for new "personality" but it's *too much*
With everything they added (except for his song, which refise to believe it's choreography wasn't insprired by that one troy song from HSM2) he still only has about as much screentime as the OG Eric, so it feels like they tried to make him a main character but wity a side character's screentime.
Ursula: the movie goes out of it's way to mention many, many times that she is Triton's sister. But for no real reason?
When Triton confronts her, she says she wants revenge "for suffering" not for beong banished, not for power, but for all the supposed "suffering". She conquers the ocean out of revenge but for what? Triton was right to banish her still, because she's an evil witch. I know villains are irrational, but in the original it made since because she wanted revenge not just for the insult of being banished but because she wanted to rule the sea and he had prevented that. It felt like they wanted remake Ursula to be sympathetic, but didn't say why. You're just supposed to assume that she was wronged, somehow.
I'm not especially fond of the original movie, i was raised with very harsh parents and it's hard for me to watch TLM because not only was it hated by my mother, but Ariel is a bit selfish (ik she's a teenager but as a kid it was annoying) and i can't stand selfish people.
Having said that, i always wished that Ariel had apologized to Triton on the cartoon, i mean, it wasn't intentional, sure, but she caused alot of problems. And Triton and her sisters were very, very worried.
But in the remake Triton literally DIES
AND SHE STILL DOES NOT APOLOGIZE. Not only that, but he has a speech about "honoring her"
I-
DUDE-
WHY?!
the absence of the apology can be blamed on one of the dudes behind the original. he wanted to have a Die Hard ending, so their original ending (the one where she genuinely apologizes and hugs him, you can find it on youtube) was scrapped
you make a good point about the apology, tho, THIS is something they could have amended. but they clearly wouldn't have done that in a billion years bc they don't care
Ariel is not selfish. If anything Triton needed to apologize to her because he was straight up abusive to her to destroy her things like that. Idk I think people who think Ariel is selfish have some narcissistic/people pleaser dynamics in their family and might want to look into therapy…
look for the little mermaid alternate ending and tell us what you think
@@melg1605 that's actually what I had hoped they would use, there was a rumor they were going to. It would've been so much better if they had
@@melg1605 exactly. we got one of the crew members to thank for the lack of an apology bc he wanted a Die Hard ending
@11:14-11:40
At least ABC's "Once Upon A Time" explained how Ursula got her tentacles.
Funfact: In the 1989 version, they were actually gonna make Ursula sister of Triton. But later, they rescinded.
Making Eric adopted is so stupid. If they wanted a main character that was adopted, they could have gotten away with Ariel and her sisters being adopted, explaining the royal line of succession being different than humans. Eric, on the other hand, isn't a prince. Adopted children do not have the "birth rights" that biological children do in regards to royal lines of succession and titles. I like adding the adoption idea, but not with Eric. Disney had an adopted daughter, a Disney film with adoption is a nice nod to him and his family. In my opinion, Tarzan has that covered already, but still...
Still waiting for that raceswapped Tarzan real-life remake.
Come on, Disney...
So let me get this straight
They made the relationship betwen humans and mermaids worst but changed the ending so only Ariel does anything againts Ursula so the relationship betwen them shouldn't improve if anything it should have gotten worst since two mermaids menipulated the kingdom's prince and allmost killed him if not everyone
The original movie and the original fairy tail is about love so why would you change the love story into not being a love story if you don't want to make a movie about love just don't take a love story as insperation.
Also please tell me I'm seeing things and Disney isn't actualy planing to do a The Huchback of Notra Dame remake becoes we've see what they did with Mulan and what kinda changes they are willing to make now with Peter Pan & Wandy and The Little Mermaid so that is the last movie that should get a remake
hmm well the original movie wasn't about love really more like areils dream and then love just came into the picture
Eric and Ariel fight Ursula together. Anyone who tells you different is being dishonest.
"This magic belongs to no boy!!!!" Yes prepare yourself for MORE CRINGE!
They actually could have done something with Ursula being Ariel's aunt. Maybe have it be that she used to be a regular mermaid, but then she dabbled in the dark arts and that's what transformed her into... a... mertopus?... Octomaid? Oh yeah. I'm going with Octomaid.
There's a great fan-comic with this premise, although Ursula's octopus form is a punishment from Triton in the vein of 'your outer form shall reflect your inner darkness/evil'
Just imagine the opening of the live action one was a flashback and we have a poverty shot going deep in the sea and we come across a little mermaid...you Ursula before she became an octopus and it could be a segment where she does end up messing with dark arts to try to get somthing she wants and then gets banished or some kind of misunderstanding that makes her turn to being bad more believeable
Something sad about Disney is that they’ll never keep romance or do any romantic movies like before because if a female character falls in love with a man she won’t be seen as “strong” or “independent” anymore and to me that’s just really frustrating
Other than MAYBE Cinderella, none of these remakes have brought anything worthwhile that might be considered an improvement.
Some people say that The Jungle Book remake is better than the original, but I don't see it. The original had a consistent tone, memorable and even complex characters (especially Mowgli, Baloo and Bagheera), Mowgli and Baloo's relationship was more emotional, the atmosphere felt less Hollywooded, the songs were great, there were more artistic values and the ending was more satisfying. Whereas in the remake, Mowgli is a Gary Stu, Baloo is unlikable, the tone is all over the place, Shere Khan is just a discount Zira, the movie can't decide whether or not it's a musical, Neel Sethi's acting is atrocious and the ending is so pretentious and misses the point of the original.
Okay.
I think Jungle Book remake added something in showing mowgli's own destructive potential because of the fire he accidentally causes.
@@KeybladeMasterAndy Yes. And he suffers no consequences for that.
*The so called Live-Action adaptation of Cinderella is 💯% Garbage!* 🗑
@@scarlett19b no way, i loved that movie. like beauty and alladin too. all 3 casted a cute girl, then they cast fugly ass ariel.
i understood this movie as a kid, better than adults do today🙄😳
I didn't really see anything bad about this remake too much , but if there's a Disney remake that's horrible is the "Mulan remake " I liked Shang in that movie but he wasn't in it in the remake, thats all.
The fact they made the shell bra a part of her body almost feels like the weirdest change to me in a sea of head-scratching alterations. Love getting your takes on The Little Mermaid!
They spent hundreds of millions on CGI but couldn't bother with good costumes and practical effects? Sounds like a "modern" Disney movie!
Yeah, I liked the tail but the bra looked unfinished in my opinion 🤔
@@veronicageorge3825 the tail looks horrible
(Generalising) We all knew that this version of "The Little Mermaid" was going to be worse than the 1990 version. Mainly because the script writing was going to be bad, like with most recent movies. Pretty much because the modern script writers are not focusing on making good products when they write. (Although I will admit that there are other problems with the new version of the little mermaid as well, cough singing)
The only live action remake that I might be interested in is a live action remake of "Team America: World Police," but of course if the wrong person/people is/are given control of this then he/she would completely ruin the film.
don't forget the anti wyite narrative
Well seeing Team America is from the South Park guys we should still be fine in that case...
Cruella is still the best out of these simply because it just did its own thing, and at least didn't try to separate 'strength' from 'girly stuff' like fashion.
Just watched Cruella, really enjoyed it.
Im tired of the remakes but disney thinks this movie is such a huge success that they are shoving it down everyones throats with advertisements and making a tv series with it
That's because disney doesn't have the balls to admit that this movie flop.
100% getting tired of them!!
I've met grown men who went to watch the live action Little mermaid with their kids came out of the theater only to have the mindset of (I can't wait to go home and watch the REAL Little mermaid!)
"Kiss the Girl . . . . treats Ariel purely as an object of desire, encouraging Prince Erik to kiss her without any consideration for whether she actually wants that." Which version of "The Little Mermaid" were THEY watching?!
EDIT: (I really should learn to finish the video before commenting) I think it was better that Eric defeated Ursula in the animated version, because I felt that it proved himself to King Triton, showing him that not all humans are bad.
(and thank you for not bashing "The Care Bears Movie." I'm a child of the 80's and Care Bears were a huge part of my childhood).
There was a perfect opportunity for Eric having been a Merman child, who had been turned human by Ursula, and Ursula dying, breaking the spell. Considering Eric's adopted mother being so overbearing, this could have meant returning to the sea, with Ariel at his side. It could also have led the Queen rethinking how much she disliked the Merpeople.
Also they made her save Eric at the end instead if Eric doing it to show triton that humans can be trusted. Ariel who is a fish that don’t know much about stuff suddenly knows how to steer a ship. So much for girl boss moment 😂😂😂
You can tell this remake was remade by people who did not love the original 😭
And apparently people who don’t even understand consent. Wtf??
Nothing was better than the original. But when they changed the climax, the final 30 minutes I felt nothing but rage.
0:41 In 2016 Disney actually re-acquired the film rights to the book series The Black Cauldron was loosely based on, so technically a remake for the Black Cauldron is in the works.
Okay.
They'll probably find a way to screw it up
Oh no! I don't want these writers anywhere near the Chronicles of Prydain!
And that’s my main problem with the movie.
It’s not trying to tell a story. It is trying to course correct and as a result, it’s completely ruined the simplicity of the original movie and ruined almost every single character and song.
The original Ariel was PERFECT exactly as she was. And everyone that takes offense because a 16 year old girl is infatuated with a guy either never was a girl or a boy or had a really sad life. WHO in the whole wide world NEVER had a crush like this on someone?! Gimme a break. Also Ariel was interested in the human world BEFORE she even met Eric. And her father destroying her things plus her love for Eric just hardened her determination to become a human, but it wasn't the sole reason to become human. Disney doesn't even understand it's own movie.
The changes they made are simply STUPID and they try to fix "problems" that aren't even there. Also Bailey comes across as selfish and stupid in her interviews, rather than strong and independent. For example she stated that if she'd saw a black Ariel in her youth, that would have been a game changer for her life🤦🏼♀Yeah sure, because her life NOW is SO unbearable as a singer with a world career, earning shitloads of money and playing in a Disney movie. Yeah her life without seeing a black Ariel before really turned out to be truly horrible 🤦🏼♀ How stupid can it get? This live action crap is so much worse than the original, it's unbelievable. I'm satisfied it flopped so tremendously, really earned it. That's already the second flop, they tried to "modernize" it in 1998 and fans were OUTRAGED about the crappy dialogues so that Disney put the old audio onto the Blu Ray in addition to the changed one from 1998. Fand always were against changing Ariel, because the film was perfect as it was in 1989.
Whoa what did they change in 98? I was still just watching my original VHS copy back then.
@@psychotophatcat they changed lots of the dialogue to "fit the modern times". I didn't hear the english version, but the german one was HORRIBLE. They tried to let Sebastian speak carribean slang and Ariel and everyone else spoke weird. They used words of which they thought "the youth" in 98 would speak them. It was really really cringe and lots of the new voices were not nearly as good as the original ones. On Amazon the film had horrible reviews just because of the audio. So much about the racism argument. Bullshit. The race-swap is just the final drop. ANY change would have sparked outrage, and if they just made her a blonde, people would have been annoyed too. Not to mention all the weird changes they made in the plot now.
@@PattisKarriereKarten It really feels like they are using black people as a shield, doesn't it?
They KNOW these are crap re-makes and they shouldn't do it. So they hire some POC woman and go. "Oh mi gosh! You don't like our movie, you must be a racist!"
Also they are just hoping for that twitter outrage, aren't they? So they can make themselves the victim and promote their movie that way.
Never forget, this is the company that THANKED a concentration camp in China so... they don't really care.
Also as I love pointing out, yeah. the people working on these movies come in color variants now... but they are not diverse. They are ALL high elite Californians.
Same thing, different color variants. It's skin deep.
Halle Bailey does NOT represent poor black families who live in Chicago, they are worlds apart.
And Awkwafina does NOT represent the continent of Asia, they would all look at her weirdly.
They do not represent what they think they do. they are just that. Elitists Californians, and they represent California only.
Judging by this comment, you are white. So of course you wouldn't understand 🙄 the entire cast for the original movie is white. Most of the princesses are white. The cast in most movies that we grew up with are all white or predominantly white. She was saying that if she had representation, it would've done wonders to her self-esteem at the time. Not change the projectory of her life.
As a black girl, I didn't think black women were pretty until high school because I saw few good representation of black women in the media. All she was saying is that positive representation is important, and it would've made her feel better about herself as a little girl to have that. Can you even name 5 girls on TV right now that are black with locs? But I guarantee that you can name 5 white characters.
It's nice to see a beautiful black girl with locs be portrayed as a princess and not in a negative way. It's not just with black people either, I've heard Hawaiians say that Lilo and Stitch made them feel better about their big noses.
Again, representation IS IMPORTANT. Stop being mean, and maybe have empathy for people of color who didn't have the hoards of representation that you did.
@@LifeisaBeautifulting It's really sad that you're feeling satisfied with the scrappy leftovers from popular white characters rather than demanding good new original tales, or actually celebrating the black culture from around the world.
Black America DOES have a culture that is very uniquely theirs, Jazz, swing, gospel and so on. Is uniquely American black. And there's something magical about that you could write stories about.
About devils at the city street corners, deals being made, and the devil being tricked.
Then we have all the tribes of central Africa that have original tales.
The Tale of Queen Moremi from Nigeria is pretty cool.
She's a queen who saves her entire village from the forest spirits. It's an old fairytale from Nigeria. You can't tell me that can't be turned into a pretty interesting movie.
And we have Cuba, Jamaica, and so forth, also with very unique culture and stories.
That you are not demanding this authentic presentation of blacks. But instead want a clearly European story just wearing a black-face cause it's easier... Is absolutely astounding.
It's funny how when these remakes try to "fix" things from the classics because it was deemed "problematic" but it just prove why the classics worked and aged like fine wine in the first place (except certain things that NEEDED to be change but they ignored it). Also they did Halle dirty in the wardrobe department. The fact they didn't gave her any of the renditions of the iconic dresses is very upsetting to me because she would've looked absolutely gorgeous in them and giving her that Disney princess moment.
the designer said she was inspired by actual 19th century clothing. however, let's be real, it doesn't work that well, considering people don't watch disney for historical accuracy
@@Crawlingdreams418 yeah its one thing to take inspiration..but make it look fantastical and princess like. It's sad that cosplayers, fashion designers and visual artists created way more creative and elegant rendition of the dresses than the movie did.
What NEEDED changing?
@@hassathunter2464Black Cauldron is one, the Aristicats with blatant racist caricatures, Native Americans being portrayed in Peter Pan before we had that remake. That's pretty much it from the top of my head for now.
Many of these detail changes or additions are the reason why people didn't really like the movie quality-wise. They obviously did not improve the movie at all and might even worsen it. Also Disney really robbed Ariel of her sparkly and wedding dresses. When people do complain about some of these details they are immediately labeled as "racist" just because they didn't like the storytelling or CGI or costume design of a movie featuring a black merrmaid. Halle being Ariel is the last thing people should care about when it comes to this movie. Like where did the $250 mil budget go when the movie looks like it spent less than $100 mil and Disney didn't even do anything to protect Halle from international backlash? Calling people "racist" isn't enough to increase the box office compared to the previous live action remakes. Maybe spending more of the $250mil budget on the actual film making would have been a better thing to do.
Every word is well said! 👏 The original is a masterpiece unlike this lazy "adaptation"
As a fan of Prince Eric, I can firmly say they did Prince Eric dirty in the live-action movie... Taking away the mature princely 18-year-old who understood his duty to his people and had every intention of taking the throne as soon as he found someone he loved and instead turning him into a 20-year-old brat who throws a tantrum because his mother wants him to take his princely duties more seriously and doesn't want him to sail after he nearly DIED at sea... Also, how is Ariel able to steer the ship? She was only able to watch humans steer a ship once... The movie wants us to believe that Ariel, who doesn't even know how to use a fork, can now somehow steer an entire ass ship by herself...
Another thing that made me mad was that, like Beyonce in The Lion King, they had to shove her voice into Under the Sea, and they gave her 2 different reprises for Part of Your World, gave her a whole ass new song.... Also, small gripe but, they kept the line of 'We've got a hot crustacean band' and the verse all about the different fishes playing instrument... THERE WAS NO BAND! THERE WAS NO INSTRUMENT-PLAYING FISHES! Ariel shouldn't have been singing along to it because it's supposed to be trying to convince her that Under the Sea is better than the land... In the OG she looks bored during the song sequence... You can also see the reason she disappears: Flounder comes up to her and whispers something in her ear and she runs off... In the LA, she just teleports out of there...
Also, if the trident was able to bring back Triton, how come it wasn't able to bring back the dead merfolk that we see in Ursula's lair? I mean in the OG, when Ursula dies, every merfolk she had as a polyp came back... Also, the movie wants us to believe that Ursula is this all-powerful sea witch but yet can't make a simple love spell last? Like, Ursula knew they were getting closer, knew they were falling in love... She wouldn't have left any room for error... They also left out Vanessa's villain song, reducing her to 'la-da-dee's...
I agree that Ariel shouldn’t have started singing along with Under the Sea. When I watched the video on UA-cam I just found her addition jarring and didn’t make sense with the narrative. It could have been interesting if she had started singing some lines from Part of Your World in response to Sebastian’s “argument” of sea being better than land instead of going along with it. I also thought the sea turtles “walking” on the sea floor was pointless. They could have done some really cool swimming choreography but instead chose to have them walk on the sand like they would have on land? They squandered the opportunities to make it a little fantastical in the name of keeping it “realistic” in some situations but then ignoring it in others.🤷♀
@@kendal11D Agreed
Yet Halle’s stans will blast you on other YT video comment sections for daring to say anything critical about Halle’s singing. Halle sang too Beyonce-like. It didn’t fit the scene for when she sang POYW, and then in the splish of a splash for the rock reprise, she sang very slooooow like Emma Watson did in some BatB songs. Ick.
@@mikaelafox6106 She’s a gorgeous singer. The way she chose to sing and the interpretation put onscreen may not appeal to everyone, and everyone will have an opinion on which version they like or if they like each for different reasons; I don’t think anyone should be attacked for liking or disliking it. Her voice is beautiful, but hearing her soprano tones singing in Under the Sea just didn’t mix. She was supposed to be blowing Sebastian off, not agreeing that being under the sea is wonderful. 🤷♀Just my opinion.
What I really love about your video is seeing how much you appreciate the animated original version ♥. For me it's not understandable how many people are going on about how the live action remake was so much better. But I guess to each their own. Same as you I really disliked the changes they made and I think they took a lot from the story.
So I agree with the points you made. Additionally watching the movie I had some thoghts of my own. Even when the movie just started, having the sailors go on about mermaids and how dangerous they would be, shooting an arrow because they thought there was a mermaid would actually prove Triton's point about humans. In the original he is traumatized by what happened to his wife because of some humans, making him feel bad about all of them. Which is problematic but also proven wrong later on because not all humans are like that (a point they took away with how the remake ended as well but that's another issue). So the people's behavior/ opinion about merfolk acutally would prove King Trition right. Then the event Ariel missed because of her treasure hunting... It feels just strange it was just about kind of a family gathering. It made Trition's reason to be upset so minor. I've read people saying in the original Ariel was acting selfish for missing the concert where she was introduced to the merfolk and that might be the reason disney changed the occasion but personally I don't feel it's justified (yes, it wasn't exactly right of her to do that but people making mistakes and apologizing for it isn't). Also thre Trition was more upset she went to the surface than her missing the event. In fact, he not once mentioned anything about the result of her not showing up in public. It seems to be a minor change but it just welt odd to me.
And I 100% agree with what you said about the fact she never swam to the surface before but once she saw the fireworks she did. If she really loved the surface no one would think he father's rules would hinder her from doing it before. We saw her disobeying before and now she does it because of this. Of course she doesn't know what awaits her but it's still odd. Neither the animated classic nor the original fairytale make her go to the surface because of the boat but in both cases it just happens to be there (and at least in the original source it's also when she first comes to the surface). It also bothered me they changed her first impression and the conversation she listened to about Eric (I will get to him soon). Out of context it seems weird she connects so much with him. It's like they wanted to give her a reason to relate to him and see similarities but it just seems so forced. And then there's another seemingly minor change which didn't benefit the story... Namely when Flounder enters her hideout and sees Eric's statue it's made clear Ariel brought it herself when in the animated version it was Flounder who broght it in for her (yes, everyone has been asking how hebrought it since it's so huge but maybe he asked some dolphin friends). What bothers me about this is the fact they cut everything about Ariel gushing about Eric but then she brings a statue of him which in my opinion is pretty obsessing. More than Ariel thinking about how she could meet with him again and if he likes her too. Ariel who collects everything humans dropped into the ocean and she doesn't pick up the statue but her friend does was actually showing she's not overly obsessed with him.
Speaking of the statue let's get to Eric an the changes of his character. Aside from the casting choice for his role which I still feel wasn't the best one his character felt completely bland. They tried to give him more personality but they took so much from the one he already had. I'm personally not a fan of his forced backstory of being adopted and the whole he-loves-the-ocean-but-his-mother-is-not-happy-about-him-traveling-thing (mirroring Ariel's backstory way too much). Like you said here it wasn't really important whether he would marry or not while in the original it was an issue. Making disney remove a very iconic line I always loved... Eric saying that he only wants to marry for love. Like he knows he has a responsibility towards his people, kingdom and all but he still wants to seek the freedom to not just marry for the sake of it. What's wrong about that, disney? It added entirely to their relationship in my opinion. Eric knew what he wanted and he found it in Ariel which goes to show quite to the contrary what Ursula said it was never just for her looks because I'm pretty sure since everybody wanted him to get married soon he met a bunch of beautiful noble women. He could have easily chosen any of them. Also another point that might seem trivial... When is statue was revealed his reaction showed a lot of his humble, down-to-earth personality because it wasn't the way he saw himself. He wasn't fond of how people viewed him and to get a statue of himself as a gift (thinking about it that's a really weird gift :s). Why did they remove this too? Prince Eric was always one of my most favorite disney princes (along with prince Philippe). How they changed him is beyond my understanding. He really cared about Ariel despite the fact she didn't seem to be the girl he wanted to meet again. Yet unknowingly they had a connection with each other and he was happy to spend time with her as much as she enjoyed being with him. That's why I also found it weird how she run off on her own like she didn't care about being with him. Strong idependent people don't want to be with the people they deeply care about?
But my biggest complaint would be how they changed the ending. From the way Ursula was defeated to their Happy Ending. Eric was basically useless. Which is one of the main issues I have with these movies or other media displaying women as strong and independent. Because there is always the price to pay: making the male protagonist look useless and weak (or both). If you have to do that to make another character appear strong it's missing the point. Because like you said... it's not wrong to ask for help or need it from time to time. But instead to help each other. Much like how they both did their fair share in the original for defeating Ursula. And I lvoe, love, love the way Eric says he lost her once and doesn't want to lose her a second time. How can you thik a character like that doesn't have any depth to him? He cared so much about Ariel he was willing to risk his life... pretty much like he did with Max (no wonder I had a crush on him when I was a child :D).
There might be more to say but most of the points were already covered with your video. It's just sad disney feels like fixing these movies.. I often read the argument these movies are to appeal to another generation but honestly? I don't feel like thheir message is improving anything if they lack love, passion and the charm these movies used to have. Of course a younger generation will watch and love them. Because it's what is presented to them. It's because the bar is so low right now that it might still be better than other stuff out there. But thinking about the disney classics they remain timeless. "Cinderella" wasn't produced for my generaion. Yet I loved this movie (and I still do although as an adult you view some aspects differently). Instead of changing them to fit this generation why not elaborate and explain why they were made like this? What was the purpose, message and intention. Because honestly, the points people call out to be problematic are either minor or misunderstood. And they could still create so many new stories or adapt other fairytales that have not been done before (or at least not by disney). There are plenty of stories that could be told and appeal to children (and adults).
Overall this movie was kind of what I expected it to be... a mere, vague shadow of the original and not nearly as deep or impactful. Halle did a great job but I do think if disney would have executed it differently it would have been much better and maybe there wouldn't have been a backlash.
Poor Halle…She tried her best with a bad remake(And in a way, that is respectable), but she could never save this marine garbage fire.
I agree with your points. Another problem is Disney seemed to think that animations are only for children and live action are for adults. But the truth is, animation is just a medium for art, whether the animation is more for teenagers and adult audiences or for audiences that are mostly children lies in the writing and the presentation.
The original 1989 animated version is one of the examples of a story with both male and female characters are strong in their own right. And there's nothing wrong with that, it showed us a healthy relationship like normal human beings should have. Needing help in certain situations doesn't make a person weak, it just meant that we're human.
@@clairelin0216 Yet people defending the live action version are saying it’s also made for children, same as the original. I just smh at that bit. 😂
@@mikaelafox6106 Yeah that part of their defense sounded like a joke to me😂
@@clairelin0216 Yes it’s definitely a joke! Just…not a funny one!