There were 2 major challenges with bringing The Little Mermaid animated classic to live-action. First, you have to fill out the story of Musker & Clements 83 minute movie...
I had the same “colonialism” thought in the marketplace, but then I had to remind myself he’s adopted and also struggling (maybe?) to be “part of their world.” Seems like something that could have been part of the story.
I did not like the memory wipe twist on the spell. I like the idea of adding something fresh. But whether it was concept or merely execution, it left me at a total loss for what Land Ariel wanted during those three days. And except for a few moments she gets to nod her head or widen her eyes, the character came off like a total blank when she had no voice and wasn’t having a voice-over song do the heavy lifting. This was managed so effortlessly with facial expressions and (cue Ursula) body language in the animated version.
The third act was begging for a scene between the Queen and King Triton, where they reconcile their parallel fears and prejudices but ultimately realize their two worlds are better together. Hackneyed, but it’s the missing scene to what they built.
If you’re going to write negative criticism about a movie, which is a perfectly legitimate thing to do, then it’s probably best to proofread your review before publishing it. Such laziness. I’m embarrassed for you.
Let me ask a question. If I've never seen the original animated movie (I even worked with Alan Menken in the early '90s without having seen the movie that won him two Oscars)... should I try to watch it before watching the new movie on Wednesday?
I had the same “colonialism” thought in the marketplace, but then I had to remind myself he’s adopted and also struggling (maybe?) to be “part of their world.” Seems like something that could have been part of the story.
I did not like the memory wipe twist on the spell. I like the idea of adding something fresh. But whether it was concept or merely execution, it left me at a total loss for what Land Ariel wanted during those three days. And except for a few moments she gets to nod her head or widen her eyes, the character came off like a total blank when she had no voice and wasn’t having a voice-over song do the heavy lifting. This was managed so effortlessly with facial expressions and (cue Ursula) body language in the animated version.
The third act was begging for a scene between the Queen and King Triton, where they reconcile their parallel fears and prejudices but ultimately realize their two worlds are better together. Hackneyed, but it’s the missing scene to what they built.
Don’t waste your embarrassment on my couple typos. Thanks.
If you’re going to write negative criticism about a movie, which is a perfectly legitimate thing to do, then it’s probably best to proofread your review before publishing it. Such laziness. I’m embarrassed for you.
"But it's not a good movie."
This gets a fresh rating from RT? Ridiculous.
As usual,David writes like he’s Socrates and comes across like Elmer Fudd. Sad..
I'm uncertain how RT turned this review into a "Fresh" review.
I've seen the animated version a few times before watching it again before my screening.
It would be more interesting to get your reaction without you knowing the original. But I really don't know what serves you better as a film critic.
Let me ask a question. If I've never seen the original animated movie (I even worked with Alan Menken in the early '90s without having seen the movie that won him two Oscars)... should I try to watch it before watching the new movie on Wednesday?