Fun fact, in the original when she gets feet she actually struggles to swim. Flounder helps push her to the surface because she clearly shows she'll drown.
Fun fact: The deeper you are underwater the less color there will be as it gradually gets filtered out. Fun fact #2: Avatar ignored this fact because they realised that it would look like complete shit
The mermaids are already magic, why not have magic streetlights and shit? Just cool glowing orbs that that illuminate the scene that kids aren't gonna question since the fish is already talking????
The saddest thing to come out of these movies to me and something Adum brings up briefly in the video is just how many kids are dragged to the theaters to see these movies that, for the most part, aren't even appealing to them. There was this one young relative I had who was brought to see The Lion King (2019) in theaters. He and his father came over to my house to borrow some DVDs to watch for Family Movie Night, so I asked if he had seen The Lion King. He says he saw the new one in theaters and, out of curiosity, I asked him how he had liked it. All he could say was "it was alright, I guess" in the most unenthused, bored manner. I asked if he wanted to check out the original, but even then, he seemed to have already lost all interest in The Lion King franchise, even hitting me with a "No thanks, I'm good." Imagine all the kids who are growing up with these bland, watered down versions of these Disney Classics. It's just such a sad concept to me that they aren't getting the good movies they deserve at this age and then the movies end up being so bad that they just don't want to see the originals either. Disney blew their first impressions and now they don't want to experience the original classics at all and miss out on them.
And there are some people who defend these remakes claiming that they're for *"tHe NeW gEnErAtIoN"* If you want to introduce them Disney classics, just watch the Disney classics and ignore the remakes.
@@cloudshines812 for real and in my opinion Cinderella is the only good one they’ve made so far which Is insane since Cinderella 2015 like you said is gonna be 10 years in 2 years.
@@blackosprey2219 I think they could make amazing works that'd be adorable as f*ck if they'd just give up on the utterly stupid super-realistic crap. It's such an utter waste of computation to render animals that mostly look like the actual real animal... Not only would it be _more_ realistic just using a f*cking real animal at that point, but it COMPLETELY DESTROYS the emotional expression. They're literally less expressive than real animals. Disney has achieved something _worse_ than just filming animals at a zoo... and they get paid for it. This world is doomed.
- The seashell bra being turned into scales is weird to me. Like it that just part of her body now? Triton has armor, they could have just given her a top. - It's a movie about mermaids, the fish don't have to look 100% realistic. It's not gonna break immersion if Flounder is blue and yellow and a little more cartoony so he can be expressive. - they do not look like they're under water at all. It looks like they're in front of a backdrop. - AAAAAAAGH
With her top, because it doesn't look like it's part of her skin, I first assumed that those were scales she shed. But having a dark mind. Since Ariel's tail is more green. And the top is purple. I assumed that her top is made from a different mermaid. HOW she got it, is up to your imagination.
Wtf I’ve watched the trailer so many times and only just now realized you’re right and the “bra” is just part of her body. The resolution is so bad I had to look incredibly closely but damn if it isn’t true. That is such a weird choice?! Was Disney Like “haha now it’s physically impossible for this woman to accidentally show anything potentially inappropriate for American children’s eyes”? Does that mean mermaids aren’t mammals if they don’t have nipples? Or DO they?
Why do the 3 main animals look like they were each done by different animators??? Flounder looks decent given his design looks nothing like the original, the gannet(which I'm assuming is scuttle) looks somewhat uncanny, and my god Sebastian's design is the most horrifying thing I've seen
The remake turned Sebastian into a Ghost Crab, who can't go into the water. He has a song called "Under the Sea," and his kind can't go underwater. This has the same energy as "Can You Feel the Love Tonight" taking place in the afternoon from Lion King 2019.
It's so crazy because Halle Bailey is an incredible vocalist. She has the training, she has the technique. That held note at the end is somewhat impressive! I quite enjoyed her and her sister's last album Unholy Hour! But like, being able to sing and being able to sing musical theatre are 2 very different things. And for a musical that is specifically based around the protagonist LOSING HER VOICE, I have no idea why they'd cast someone with a great voice but minimal acting ability and zero awareness of subtext. Though this is the same director who started the trend of James Corden in movie musicals, so I can't be too surprised.
I still hate how the line "wish i could be." is sung. It has basically turned the whole song into a superbowl performance for me. Especially with the way she sing the word be
@@lolbuster01 She sounds great. I've seen "The Little Mermaid" on stage many, many times, each singer has their own style. There's nothing wrong with hers and I'm glad they followed the Broadway version for the reprise. Excited for a good soundtrack.
I’d respect Disney if they just re-released the original film in theaters like in the 70s and 80s. Imagine how many Disney Adults would flock to the theaters to experience their childhood on the big screen again.
This and also they can just...reroll on one's that bombed? Everyone who hasn't seen something like Atlantis or Treasure Planet can hype over a 2d animated movie hitting the theater, and you got the crowds that already know what they are getting when they sign up for "Emperor's New Groove but literally nothing is ruined"
@@jakethedragonymaster1235 This is why I don't agree with anyone who says that Disney should remake their underrated films. They already screwed their classics. What makes you so sure that they wouldn't do the same to their underappreciated movies?
Gotta also mention that the crab they chose to be Sebastian ISNT A CRAB THAT LIVES IN WATER!! Those crabs will drown underwater. I feel it's pretty irresponsible on Disney's behalf to use a creature that couldn't survive underwater. All i can think is the amount of people and kids who will see this kind of crab and throw it into the ocean because "that's where Sebastian lives". Mark my words, i have no doubt there'll be people throwing those crabs into the ocean.
Odds are, that will actually happen. I mean, there's millions of humans around the world, millions will probably watch the movie and yeah, some of them will take it at face value to that point. Let's just hope they won't doom a lot of animals... Oh, and this sort of thing has already happened before, regarding Finding Nemo. I don't know if the fish that were killed by people misunderstanding the movie were a lot, but eh...10 would be too much already.
@@tentativaX I wonder if Disney actually considers the impact that they have through their films. I remember with Finding Dory, a lot of people would hunt the fish she was to sell it. Same kinda with 101 Dalmatian, Dalmatians became incredibly popular after the film, though Dalmatians aren’t necessarily known for their calm temperament/definitely not family dogs. It’s wild stuff, the impact that happens afterward
You know it sound really off now if Sabastion will sing " under the sea" in the movie if they do it..... just how you said the crab they choise for him should be Dying at that point when he get in the ocean and aside from dying he should not even be Down there with Ariel to begin. So how does this even work?!?!
Disney can't pay animators because then they won't have enough to fund the film based park attraction that will be closed and shown on Defuctland in 12 years
I kinda hope it doesn’t happen. Disney is kinda overburdening itself with all these film and park projects. Not every movie needs a ride, Disney! You’re a film company. Make movies! And make good movies. Forget about making 20 movies a year. Make like five good ones! We’ll be fine.
@@cloudshines812 Jokes on them, the Disney Vault is in my parent's basement and it's a box full of DVDs and VHS tapes. (That and you can just find this shit online pretty easy.)
Seriously, considering how well they aged compared to 3D movies, there is really no reason NOT to show the originals to your kids instead of wasting time with remake devoid of any color.
@@SammEater Kids don't even seem to be the target audience for these movies anymore. It seems more like for nostalgia-baited adults more than anything
Here's an Observation. Look how damn D R Y everyone's skin looks? It's super visible in the shots with Triton and that one snipped with the Porcupine fish. Their skin just looks super oily, and it's apparent that production didn't even try to make it look like they're underwater beyond hairflow. Under The Sea looks like it'll include some lesser known sea-life, which is kinda cool. At a glance, there are Basket Stars, Sea Robins, and Mimic Octopuses, which I'd appreciate if they were in a better movie. Flounder looks like someone tried slapped a Beetlejuice cosplay onto an emo kid, and did so extremely poorly. Aquafina Gannet manages to make Gannets look extremely disheveled and ugly, and they're phenomenal birds. Sebastian is still a Stereotype, and the way his mouth moves while talking is horrific. Additionally, they designers majorly screwed up his appearance. I think they were going for a Fiddler Crab, but instead of making the claw itself longer, they elongated the pre-claw part of the Chela. Sincerely, -A Marine Biology Major with too much time on his hands.
That’s part of why I liked Wakanda Forever. Those actors actually looked submerged based on the lighting. Light refracts underwater and the marvel team made it look that way. This just has a blue tint.
In their next film, Disney’s introducing a revolutionary cost-cutting technique where they film at 1 frame per second and then use AI to interpolate it to 24. The genius part is that all the smeary generated inbetween frames will hide all of the bad color grading and the rushed VFX💰💰💰
Instead of trying to have talking animals that look uncannily and boringly realistic, they could have given Sebastian and Flounders roles to Ariel's sisters. Not only would that make it more 'realistic', you would have more if an overt feminist lean by having Ariel get support from her sisters as well as bring the story closer to that of the original fairy tale. I'm just saying Disney, you could do something interesting and actually cool.
That's not a horrible idea. But, they're always surface level. Just look at what they did with Peter Pan: "Look, instead of including the fairies we already have in canon and hiring women from many backgrounds, we're just going to change the main fairy black!" They literally chose the racist option that also hires less "diverse" people, as they like to call it. (Personally, I prefer a diversity of thought, but, shallow as shallow can be, I guess).
honestly, I thought a pirates of the carribean vibe would be cool. just completely overhaul the aestetics of it, could even make prince eric a pirate or something. having her sisters play a more active role would be cool too! but these are ideas that require creativity and thought, something disney is short of as of late.
That's actually perfect. Since in the original the sister gave up their hair to get her a knife to turn back into a mermaid. The sisters being her companions would make sense. It would even elaborate on the family dynamic. Like some sisters support Ariel's hobby, while others side with their dad.
Disney knows what it is doing with this controversy. Had there not been an outrage over the casting, nobody would be talking about this movie, especially since it looks so bad. I’m not insinuating that disney only casted the mermaid just to raise eyebrows, but it has been one of the only means of publicity the movie has received.
I'm pretty sure they rely on racists getting mad at it. Twitter controversy is just free advertising. I honestly think nobody would've given a shit about Dahmer and Velma if Twitter wasn't freaking out about them.
@@YMSHighlights These changes make way more sense if you think about Disney and co in the worst light possible, as just absolute evil monstrous corporate entitites that exist soley to steal your soul(like Ursula, ironically). Not only does changing such established characters create outrage marketing in the form of online debate(which boosts sales for the original, as Adum points out) but it also devalues what a character even is. If your beloved childhood character can have any personality and any look then really they dont represent anything but what the current audience will pay for, like a politician and a mascot all in one. In a similar vein a lot of people will complain when their favorite establishments change logos or brand styles to something with less character than the original, but thats missing the point. All the Bland redesigns that happen across the corporate landscape only serve to create more nostalgia and interest in the brand as a whole, and rarely do they ever hurt the sales of an established brand. They keep us coming back to the collective slop trough long past when we are no longer satisfied, maybe forever. This is how art and the human soul is devoured by capitalism. Rant over.
@@YMSHighlights I do think the returns on that free marketing are diminishing. People just watch their favorite RU-vidrs make fun of them now. Even Velma I think only got a second season out of spite.
@@YMSHighlights Honestly, having already known about Hans Christian Andersen's original tale, I'd argue that the new stuff they added to the remake is not the problem... the real problem is having an adaptation deviate so much from the ORIGINAL source material, that it should've been called something else (At least Frozen has an excuse, as it was nothing like the original Snow Queen fairy tale; I'd argue that "The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe" was more like Hans Christian Andersen's original Snow Queen tale).
It’s simply a publicity stunt. It was blatantly obvious from the teaser trailer. If they really just thought she was a good person to portray Ariel they wouldn’t keep her in the shadows until the ending stinger. It screams corporate
"You're a mermaid!" Triton sounds like he found out his daughter was a mermaid for the first time. Also in the original Ariel needed help from Flounder and Sebastian to get to the surface because she was drowning due to not knowing how to USE HER BRAND NEW LEGS TO SWIM. But that's not empowering! Let's have this mermaid know how to use these limbs she just got! Good thing her lungs won't collapse after breaching the water, too!
The Way of Water came out not that long ago, and the underwater effects looked way better there than in this remake. It's like the visual effects crew only made the characters' hair flow and called it a day.
I know what you mean, and the annoying end with her and the dolphins do NOT look like they are in the same lighting, water, CGI moment... it looks terrible
You are not about to compare the way of waters water effects to this movie. The time and resources that went into avatar to make the special effects look like it does isn't a normal occurrence for a film.
To be fair, if the human characters look out of place in Pandora, I doubt they’ll look any better underwater. The underwater shots looked good TBH because of the Na’vi being cgi renders, fitting into their digital environment. Humans don’t look good in digital environments is what I’m tryna say lol
This was also a big criticism from the Lion King YMS, but there's such soullessness to what Disney is doing. What credence does 'live action' bring to the Little Mermaid story? What benefit do we, the audience, receive when we can't even interpret Flounder or Sebastian's facial expressions? It just feels purposeful at this point; Like they're denigrating what made the animation lively and special just to bum us all out. And/or burn through money as a way of laundering it. I don't know, I'm cynical as hell these days.
Seriously, who is behind the awful decision of making every live action remake have muted color tones that resemble more a post apocalyptic movie than an adaptation of their extremely colorful cartoons?
Remember when the concept of a remake was exciting? Remember when people were excited to see the idea of a movie being revisited with a cool new twist, spin, adaptation or improvement was being applied? I do! And there used to be great remakes. We had great remakes before! We had Ten Commandments in beautiful color with a bigger set. We had King Kong with Peter Jackson! We had the Magnificent Seven as a western spin on Seven Samurai. And then we had some really great horror remakes! We got a remake for the Blob! The Thing! Some really great Dracula remakes! But then! *WE FUCKING GOT DISNEY!* And we didn't know what we were doing. We did not know what we were creating because eventually Disney started shoving these fucking live action remakes down our throats! And now a remake leaves a bad taste in your mouth! Remakes went from this cool idea of trying to add a new spin or find a cool way to differentiate itself from the source material. Not anymore! Remakes are just rehashing the same story told worse with a bunch of nostalgia and fan service to distract the audience.
@@michaelstrong5383 Since 2010 Disney has released _seventeen_ remakes. I believe that _Strange World_ might be the first original thing they've done since _Frozen_ or maybe even _Treasure Planet._ And that's just Disney. I think _Back To The Future_ and _Gremlins_ are the only eighties movies without a remake. Good new stuff is few and far between with these big studios nowadays.
13:00 1000% certified my belief that Disney needs to just re-release their old movies in theatres if they want this generation’s children to enjoy it. That is genuinely terrifying.
I've been told by numerous people that these live action remakes aren't for people like me who grew up with the original and that it's for a new generation of children. And that argument will never make sense to me because everything about the marketing and the movies themselves contradict that statement. Because not only do they purposefully use songs from the movies in their trailers to tug on the heartstrings of fans of the originals (why do you think Mulan's trailers prominently had "Reflection"'s melody featured), but if you've actually seen these movies, their experience is entirely dependent on people having seen the original to get the proper experience. The worst part is, even if what people tell me is true, then they're for kids who basically aren't even interested in these movies. They're for kids who are dragged by their parents to the theaters to get a nostalgic experience that their parents will get, but they won't, because they didn't even grow up with these movies. The irony being that children will likely enjoy the originals more, because the style of animation in those originals is more likely to capture their imagination. So yeah, these movies are for nobody. To quote Syndrome from The Incredibles, "when everyone is special, NOBODY is special".
Agreed. I have not seen a SINGLE child excited for this movie. The only people I've seen actually be hyped (or only hyped for Ariel for some reason; a lot of people seem to ignore the rest of the movie 🫣) are grown Disney adults that tend to bootlick anything Disney releases.
So I just realized... HOW ARE THEY GONNA DO THE FORK SCENE WITH DREDS??!?! Also, her top looks like she de-finned another mermaid and used it to sew a bikini top. The original Ariel used shells, iirc. 👀
THIS WAS MY QUESTION!!! Like don’t get me wrong dreads are absolutely gorgeous but how tf are they going to that scene? And are dreads even possible underwater??
@@nameless.artist1513 and to answer your question yes dreads are possible underwater especially if you have tightly coiled hair since it basically locs itself. You can wash dreads with way less issue if your hair is curly as opposed to straight or wavy.
He’s right about the lighting. Black people know putting dark colors against dark skin doesn’t always flatter. It mAtures you, and it ages the space around you too. Doesnt matter what colors you have on, if its drowned in muddy darkness, it’s just a mess and an eye sore.
To be fair, the original 1989 film already has issues. This is just proving why having it tied to Hans Christian Andersen's original tale was a mistake.
Video technician here. To save space, in lossy codecs in general dark colors recieve less bandwith, because the human eye is actually less sensitive to changes in dark tones. The squares are called quants, they're the bricks that the frame is made of. The ones where there's little to no change just repeat themselves from frame to frame instead of being stored as full information. Given that the dark tones recieve less bandwith, in a low bitrate file this may result in dark parts of the picture being degraded to just dark squares of solid color, if there's not enough bandwhith to encode the details, while bright parts appear more detailed. This results in a situation where the character looks okay, but if they are in a dark environment, they get surrounded by a grid of dark squares. But the worst part is that 1080p on RU-vid can actually look better if you employ some video encoding tricks and exploit some RU-vid encoding shenanigans. The people who are doing their job with encoding and uploading the trailers just don't care.
I just find it funny how Sebastian in the original movie has a song literally titled "Under the Sea" and can clearly swim and then in this movie they base his design off a ghost crab. Of all the crab species in the world they could have modeled him after, they chose the one that can't fucking swim.
of all the criticisms that have been annoying me having just seen the movie (and enjoyed it yes, i like music) this one is probably the most valid to me 😂i had no idea he was modeled after a ghost crab. i for one just like crabs i think theyre cute so him being realistic didnt really upset me the way it did other people. crabs look real cute when they eat bananas and ramen and stuff and i love their eyes so i feel like all the stuff i like about crabs was played up by the animation. HOWEVVERRR youre right, if its modeled after a ghost crab then they shouldve chosen a different crab lmao
I'm so sick of how dark all these new movies are. I could watch one of these in the pitch black of my room in the dead of night and still couldn't see shit.
I swear, the Meh Emoji's have better acting range and emotion than any of these Live Action remake actors. Also these CGI animal designs seriously make me dread how they're going to destroy the Lilo and Stitch characters.
Just dropped by to highly recommend the 1976 Czech Little Mermaid film and to aggressively agree with how movies being pitch black is an unforgivable eyesore. Stop locking the animators in your basement Disney you guys certainly have enough money to let them take their time.
Disney: Hey, do you want a new remake? Pretty much everyone at this point: Disney please stop, this is the 100th remake you’ve released already- Disney: *tOo LAtE*
disney: we made Ariel black because we care about being progressive and being with the times! audience: that makes no sense for many reasons but how about making Ursula played by a drag queen because that's what her character was literally drawn, modeled, and based off of? disney: i uhhh pfft uhh.. mm. nooo.
You know what would be a cool idea. If they do a fun thing where Ariel sees her fish friends as more cartoony, and the regular humans just see them as regular animals. Like from her POV flounder looks like a cartoony, childish fish. But the other humans just see her as some weird girl talking to an ugly crab. Idk. Might have been a nice balance and creative idea. It could be like a nice balance between “realism” and stylization. 🤷🏻♀️
@@Patrick3183 No. it’s a stylization choice. It’s more to illustrate how she sees the world with her optimistic and magical world view rather than her literal perception. Plus, she does genuinely understand what flounder says.
I legit think that the reason why companies release trailers in 1080p is because they know most people will probably just watch it on their phones anyway where the screensize would make it hard to see detail
@@FunFilmFare Well...not in theater, and beside that, been able to re-watch old movies should not be an excuse for entertainment companies to put out such low level garbage. Also ..I already saw these movies I wanna watch new stuff ffs!
Honestly.... I cant believe how disconnected disney is from their old work... And how little they know about fish.... They unsebastioned Sebastian using a species of crab that can DROWN And Scuttle isnt a seagull theyre a BOOBY now. Despite Boobies not being in norway at all and in the Galapagos! Hell in a poster for the movie there is a Arowana in the poster. A FRESH WATER ONLY FISH!!! They clearly didnt do research for this film at all!
You know considering the portion of time we had when a bunch of teens and young adults thought liking disney was a childs thing only when disneys output was just kinda mediocre, Im real curious to see the result of the era of a bunch of kids being dragged to these live action remakes by their parents.
When I started watching this, I just laughed knowing what YMS was going to say about the compression and darkness. The reaction to all the bad graphics is nothing to the reaction to Ariel and Triton's poor acting. I laughed so hard when I saw it thinking the whole time what YMS was going to say about this.
as much as I don't like amber heard, Mera in Aquaman really puts this to shame since she basically has ariel's coloring and it looks good. It might've been they tested the brighter hair color and it didn't look good with the actress' coloring, but with how dark it is, I'd guess it's to hide the mistakes of the underwater CGI. Honestly Aquaman's and Avatar 2's underwater sfx show how bad this movie looks since we know underwater scenes CAN look good.
@@PhoenixRoseYTyeah I love how they said “mermaids can be any color” and then gave her “realistic” strawberry blonde hair with dreads (and the actress has commented on keeping her hair this way being important due to her race - so more contradictions as far as the casting simply being the best choices considered) instead of giving her Ariel’s hair
Melissa McCarthy is the poorest of substitutes for Pat Carrol and I'm so glad she didn't live to see this. And also sad that she's gone. :C This trailer evokes such complicated emotions in me.
I recently saw Live! The little Mermaid TV special, and Queen Latifah did well as Ursula,wished they gotten her than Melissa. I agree, just like Robbin Williams, you can't replace a legend like Pat Carrol..
Can we PLEASE have a Song of the South remake with a race-swapped cast?? I just want to hear the cheesiest, whitest version of Michael Buble singing Zippadee-doo-da as if he were performing “Fly me to the Moon.”
If Disney _really_ cared about minority representation, then why aren’t they creating _new_ stories and characters, instead of race-swapping old ones? The implication is that they think black audiences will love this remake, with its awful graphics and uncanny visuals, more than the original just because the main character is black this time. That sounds a bit problematic to me. Whenever these crappy remakes play the race-swap game, it’s the equivalent of giving minorities hand-me-downs. It’s exploitative, and yet you can’t call Disney out for it because there’s always some idiot waiting in the wings to pounce on you for perceived “racism.” The whole situation is sad and disgusting.
@@tiamystic she’s ginger. you have one side of the isle complaining that ginger representation was being taken away (lol what) but she IS ginger, and then the other side is just complaining that her hair isnt bright ass red which would just look kind of ridiculous
I've seen a comment of "Mermaids don't have a nationality." This ignores how the original story was written by a Danish man, and that mermaids come from northern European folklore/mythology.
6:55 i have like a coworker who watches endless masses of anime on his phone during lunchbreaks and its usually very quiet except for the ever-same-sounding high pitched female sqeals that frequently occur in appearently normal anime and just cut through his headphones
In the original movie Ariel is supposed to be around 16 I think and Eric is 19 or 20 years old which isn’t that big of an age gap but you have to remember the story takes place in the 19th-century and people would get married a lot younger back then. But the actress they hired to play Ariel she’s like what 24? She doesn’t look 16 at all. And like you said Erica definitely looks a lot older than her he looks like he’s like at least 30 to me. They can’t even get the casting right for a movie like this and not to mention Ariel‘s sisters are all like different races and skin tones which I don’t have a problem with but how the hell would that even work I mean I’m not into mermaid lore or anything but how could a mermaid have daughters that are like every single race imaginable lol it makes no sense unless Ariel‘s father had like multiple different wives or some thing I mean that’s the only explanation I can think of but it says on the Disney wiki that Ariel‘s mother is the mother of all of her sisters so he can try and only had one wife so it’s really weird how they’re shoving all of this diversity down our throats like just cast people that look like the original characters it’s not that hard!!!
I think the new movie is going by Netflix Lucifer logic; as In Triton is like a mythical god so his kids being completely different races doesn't really get questions. Which is why super Spanish Javier Bardem has an African American daughter.
Do you think race swapping and hiring actors just for their skin colour rather than their star power draw or even acting skills, is a disservice to black people to use them as tokens at the same time as saying they’re doing them a favour by letting them play a traditionally white role instead of writing a good movie for that black person in mind, like most great movies? I feel like these grifting movies are all too common these days, and they always use unknown and young actors because they would just love to get the work and exposure and don’t care about being used.
6:30 The underwater effect are just non existent in the foreground here...cool. Edit:ok, there are some effects though they really are just some weird hair physics
Ya know who I feel bad for? Black women in science fiction. Just name any show or movie from the last 17 years and you will find a black actress giving it her all to sell an emotion for a shittly written character that is quickly thrown off a cliff. Zoey Saldana is the only one able to make a career out of this and Halle Berry stopped giving a shit in X-men and Catwoman, but so many others----that never got as far as being famous---------- are giving EVERYTHING in their performance for directors and producers that don't see gold acting for what it is or know how to use it.
13:00 for real, children do NOT want to watch this garbage. I remember when I was very little, I referred to live-action movies as "real movies", and I never wanted to watch "real movies". If my parents asked if I wanted to watch some movie I hadn't seen, I would ask "is it a real movie?" and they knew what I was referring to. Kids want colorful animation. I was absolutely in LOVE with 2d animation throughout my childhood. Children do, and always will, love 2d animation, especially when it's colorful and fun to look at. All kids get now is tv shows, no full feature films.
The more I watch the little mermaid trailer the more I realize I don’t give a damn about the movie itself and I’m just waiting for the soundtrack to drop on Spotify so I can listen to the score and “Part of your world”/reprises on loop like I did with the 2019 live show. That’s honestly all I care about.
