105 reviews
Not bad, but not great
I loved The Little Mermaid, it's one of my all time favorite Disney movies, I grew up with it and I still watch it every once in a while. I just showed it to my 5 year old cousin for the first time since it was recently released on DVD, so she wanted to see the second one when we were at the video store and we just watched it and we over all had a good time. While I wasn't that impressed, it was better than most Disney sequels that are normally lame and predictable.
Ariel and Eric have had a daughter, Melody. Mel is now becoming a teenager and cannot understand why she has such a great love for the sea, but Ariel forbids Mel from going to the sea not knowing when the right time would be to tell Mel about all her family history. But Mel has had it and wants to be a mermaid when Morgana, the evil sister of Ursela, grants Mel's wish, she can stay a mermaid if she steals her grandfather's trident so Morgana can become leader of the sea.
Over all, I would recommend this for a family afternoon, it was a charming cartoon to watch. The Little Mermaid will always be the best, but The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea was a nice follow up that you very rarely see in today's Disney sequels. Again, what freaks me out though is typically they change the voices again and again for the characters, but I think I had a better time excepting it for this film.
5/10
Ariel and Eric have had a daughter, Melody. Mel is now becoming a teenager and cannot understand why she has such a great love for the sea, but Ariel forbids Mel from going to the sea not knowing when the right time would be to tell Mel about all her family history. But Mel has had it and wants to be a mermaid when Morgana, the evil sister of Ursela, grants Mel's wish, she can stay a mermaid if she steals her grandfather's trident so Morgana can become leader of the sea.
Over all, I would recommend this for a family afternoon, it was a charming cartoon to watch. The Little Mermaid will always be the best, but The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea was a nice follow up that you very rarely see in today's Disney sequels. Again, what freaks me out though is typically they change the voices again and again for the characters, but I think I had a better time excepting it for this film.
5/10
- Smells_Like_Cheese
- Dec 30, 2006
- Permalink
New review
Back in June 2005, I reviewed this movie and basically just slammed it repeatedly without really giving it a chance. Of course, when you're 14 and a troll, slamming movies that don't appeal to your age group or tastes is easy. So after a 9 year old review, it's time to give this movie a much better review.
First of all, This is a direct sequel to the 1989 classic that revitalized Disney as a serious movie making company. The original 1989 classic is loved for it's portrayal of a curious young mermaid who longs to discover what life is like on land. Now skip ahead 12 years. The sequel is a mirror image, with a young girl who dreams of life in the sea.
So the story begins a year or so after the events of the first movie. by this time, Ariel and Eric are now parents of their infant Melody. During the celebration of the newborn child, The sister of Ursula appears and threatens Melody's safety, but is driven back into the sea and into hiding. But as long as she's still at large, Ariel refuses to let young melody know about her true history, which eventually comes to bite Ariel on the tail 12 years later, as the rebellious Melody sneaks underneath a wall constructed to keep her out of the sea. She soon discovers a seashell pendant with her name on it, and longs to discover why, leading her on a fun adventure with some interesting characters.
For what it's worth, this movie isn't what one would call "mass appeal" like the movie that came before it. However, the character of Melody, whose voice belongs to the legendary voice actress Tara Strong, seems to have a cult following among girls, whereas other extra characters (Tip & Dash, Undertow, Cloak & Dagger) didn't seem to be accepted as well, even if they had some fun moments at points. Personally, I thought Tip & Dash were fun and Undertow was funny, but Cloak and Dagger were just hacks. they didn't say anything and didn't really have the same demonic effect as their predecessors, Flotsam & Jetsam did.
As for the returning characters, Ariel is a bit more mature and mother-like, but lacks the strength she had in the original movie. Luckily, Jodi Benson came back to do the voice again. Flounder is more or less the same. Triton is more or less the same guy but more trusting of his daughter. Sebastian is still the fun crab but with less musical routines. Scuttle is more one-dimensional and lacks the humor he had from the first movie. The only person I felt was an improvement was Prince Eric, because his original voice actor didn't return. I'm not saying the original prince Eric was bad, i'm saying the greatest voice actor of all time, Rob Paulsen, took over the role. And Paulsen makes any movie, TV show, or video game better with his voice.
Overall, This one's a fair sequel. It's aimed at girls in the tween range, but the supporting characters just might keep their older brothers entertained for the hour and a half.
6/10
First of all, This is a direct sequel to the 1989 classic that revitalized Disney as a serious movie making company. The original 1989 classic is loved for it's portrayal of a curious young mermaid who longs to discover what life is like on land. Now skip ahead 12 years. The sequel is a mirror image, with a young girl who dreams of life in the sea.
So the story begins a year or so after the events of the first movie. by this time, Ariel and Eric are now parents of their infant Melody. During the celebration of the newborn child, The sister of Ursula appears and threatens Melody's safety, but is driven back into the sea and into hiding. But as long as she's still at large, Ariel refuses to let young melody know about her true history, which eventually comes to bite Ariel on the tail 12 years later, as the rebellious Melody sneaks underneath a wall constructed to keep her out of the sea. She soon discovers a seashell pendant with her name on it, and longs to discover why, leading her on a fun adventure with some interesting characters.
For what it's worth, this movie isn't what one would call "mass appeal" like the movie that came before it. However, the character of Melody, whose voice belongs to the legendary voice actress Tara Strong, seems to have a cult following among girls, whereas other extra characters (Tip & Dash, Undertow, Cloak & Dagger) didn't seem to be accepted as well, even if they had some fun moments at points. Personally, I thought Tip & Dash were fun and Undertow was funny, but Cloak and Dagger were just hacks. they didn't say anything and didn't really have the same demonic effect as their predecessors, Flotsam & Jetsam did.
As for the returning characters, Ariel is a bit more mature and mother-like, but lacks the strength she had in the original movie. Luckily, Jodi Benson came back to do the voice again. Flounder is more or less the same. Triton is more or less the same guy but more trusting of his daughter. Sebastian is still the fun crab but with less musical routines. Scuttle is more one-dimensional and lacks the humor he had from the first movie. The only person I felt was an improvement was Prince Eric, because his original voice actor didn't return. I'm not saying the original prince Eric was bad, i'm saying the greatest voice actor of all time, Rob Paulsen, took over the role. And Paulsen makes any movie, TV show, or video game better with his voice.
Overall, This one's a fair sequel. It's aimed at girls in the tween range, but the supporting characters just might keep their older brothers entertained for the hour and a half.
6/10
- The_Light_Triton
- Feb 15, 2014
- Permalink
While not as bad as some DTV sequels, this was still a huge disappointment!
I highly recommend the stunning original, and the inspirational TV series, but I don't recommend this, I'm sorry.
The animation was a lot of the time very flat and too garish, especially in the scenes with Morgana. Speaking of Morgana, never have I seen such a bland villainess. Ursula scared me so much, as I repeatedly watched the Little Mermaid. Morgana was just a wannabe, which is always ill-advised Disney. Why didn't they recreate the Evil Manta, who after Ursula, was the most convincing of the villains in the TV series? The characters were a mixed bag. Ariel was alright, though rather childish,but Melody was annoying at times. (I did think the story, on a parallel with the original, was rather unoriginal and rushed despite some effective scenes) Sebastian was the best character here, but he was also ruined to some extent. So was Scuttle and Flounder. Scuttle wasn't funny, whereas Flounder put me off with his nasal tone, since when did Flounder have a nasal tone of voice? Tip and Dash were also uninspired, and Undertow wasn't mean enough. And the flying bat creatures? They weren't even scary, they were nothing like flotsam and Jetsam, who were scary! Even the chef wasn't funny. Him chasing Sebastian was badly underplayed, really unfunny.
However, there were some positives. Kenneth Mars does a great job as King Triton, the only character I cared for completely, but you don't see him that much. The songs weren't bad but nowhere near as good as the original, and I love Jodi Benson's voice, though "For a moment" sounded a little like the song featured in the episode "wish upon a starfish" or the beginning of it did anyway. The beginning wasn't bad either, in fact the beginning was one of the better scenes of the movie. Some aspects of the story worked nicely, but I wish they showed less of Tip and Dash. The climax with Morgana was the highlight of the film, with some really colourful segments.
In conclusion, a sometimes colourful, but hugely disappointing sequel to one of Disney's finest. Mind you, the Cinderella and Jungle Book sequels were worse. My sister will probably hate me when she reads this. 5/10, maybe too harsh? Bethany Cox
The animation was a lot of the time very flat and too garish, especially in the scenes with Morgana. Speaking of Morgana, never have I seen such a bland villainess. Ursula scared me so much, as I repeatedly watched the Little Mermaid. Morgana was just a wannabe, which is always ill-advised Disney. Why didn't they recreate the Evil Manta, who after Ursula, was the most convincing of the villains in the TV series? The characters were a mixed bag. Ariel was alright, though rather childish,but Melody was annoying at times. (I did think the story, on a parallel with the original, was rather unoriginal and rushed despite some effective scenes) Sebastian was the best character here, but he was also ruined to some extent. So was Scuttle and Flounder. Scuttle wasn't funny, whereas Flounder put me off with his nasal tone, since when did Flounder have a nasal tone of voice? Tip and Dash were also uninspired, and Undertow wasn't mean enough. And the flying bat creatures? They weren't even scary, they were nothing like flotsam and Jetsam, who were scary! Even the chef wasn't funny. Him chasing Sebastian was badly underplayed, really unfunny.
However, there were some positives. Kenneth Mars does a great job as King Triton, the only character I cared for completely, but you don't see him that much. The songs weren't bad but nowhere near as good as the original, and I love Jodi Benson's voice, though "For a moment" sounded a little like the song featured in the episode "wish upon a starfish" or the beginning of it did anyway. The beginning wasn't bad either, in fact the beginning was one of the better scenes of the movie. Some aspects of the story worked nicely, but I wish they showed less of Tip and Dash. The climax with Morgana was the highlight of the film, with some really colourful segments.
In conclusion, a sometimes colourful, but hugely disappointing sequel to one of Disney's finest. Mind you, the Cinderella and Jungle Book sequels were worse. My sister will probably hate me when she reads this. 5/10, maybe too harsh? Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- Mar 3, 2009
- Permalink
I cried until I...cried some more
While watching this entry in Disney's endless parade of DTV (direct to video) sequels, I didn't know whether to laugh, cry, or vomit when I saw what they had done to the movie that first got me interested in Disney movies. I just don't know where to start badmouthing this one.
While watching the movie, I saw that Ariel had developed a non-existent personality. What have they done to her?? I know she's grown up, and I know she's no longer the focus of the story, but that's no excuse to make her dull as dishwater. However, maybe good old Ariel might have been a better protagonist than the one we were given. There was something about her daughter, Melody, that didn't sit right with me at all. Maybe it was her many attempts to try to sound "cool" without ever once failing to sound annoying. "What's shakin'??" Ariel would never, NEVER have said that! Nor would Sebastian, Flounder, or Scuttle acted the way they did in this movie. It's as if they took their humorous parts from the original movie and overemphasized it. I was especially mad that Scuttle wasn't only dumb; it was as if he had received a lobotamy! What was up with him? This isn't the Scuttle that introduced us to the dinglehopper and the snarfblat!! I'd be surprised if this Scuttle knew his beak from his...well, let's move on. The villains were lame! Using Ursula's sister as the villain was an uninspired choice, but she was my favorite of the baddies. Undertow was completely uneccessary. Or maybe he was, seeing as how Cloak and Dagger NEVER SPOKE! Cloak and Dagger were a sorry attempt at redoing Flotsam and Jetsam. F&J were eerie; they sent chills up your spine everytime they spoke or slithered around. C&D were...well, they were there. And speaking of ineffectual duos, let's discuss Tip and Dash. What exactly was their purpose in the movie, other than comic relief that was sorely missing comedy? There are so many other flaws in characters, but I don't want to go into that right now.
Art direction, design, etc. was sorely lacking as it is in all DTV Disney films. The characters looked kinda like their original counterparts, but the coloring was way too bright and garrish. It's as if they threw away the subtle coloring scheme used for "Little Mermaid" (including ariel, the color they invented for Ariel's fins) and traded them for happy little pastels, taking away any depth or realism the look might have had.
Voices, voices, voices. Most of the original cast came back for this one (thank goodness), but the performances didn't seem to have that energy from the first movie. As for the new voices, Tara Charendoff's Melody was rather annoying. She's just great as Bubbles on "Powerpuff Girls", but that doesn't seem to translate well here. Maybe it was just the stupid lines fed to her. Prince Eric's new voice would be okay if it wasn't friggin' Yakko Warner from "Animaniacs"! Don't get me wrong; Rob Paulsen was wonderful on "Animaniacs", but he sounds nothing like the original Prince Eric. (Compliment or criticism? You decide.)
Well, I suppose I should wrap this up now; I'm sure I'm over the word limit and that this is the longest review I've ever written. I'm not really sure why I'm wasting this much space on a movie that's such a waste of space. I suppose I had to defend the honor of the original "Little Mermaid", but the movie can prove itself. I say that we burn all copies of DTV sequels, especially this one and the upcoming "Hunchback II", which looks like it will be another tragically horrible treatment of a Disney classic.
While watching the movie, I saw that Ariel had developed a non-existent personality. What have they done to her?? I know she's grown up, and I know she's no longer the focus of the story, but that's no excuse to make her dull as dishwater. However, maybe good old Ariel might have been a better protagonist than the one we were given. There was something about her daughter, Melody, that didn't sit right with me at all. Maybe it was her many attempts to try to sound "cool" without ever once failing to sound annoying. "What's shakin'??" Ariel would never, NEVER have said that! Nor would Sebastian, Flounder, or Scuttle acted the way they did in this movie. It's as if they took their humorous parts from the original movie and overemphasized it. I was especially mad that Scuttle wasn't only dumb; it was as if he had received a lobotamy! What was up with him? This isn't the Scuttle that introduced us to the dinglehopper and the snarfblat!! I'd be surprised if this Scuttle knew his beak from his...well, let's move on. The villains were lame! Using Ursula's sister as the villain was an uninspired choice, but she was my favorite of the baddies. Undertow was completely uneccessary. Or maybe he was, seeing as how Cloak and Dagger NEVER SPOKE! Cloak and Dagger were a sorry attempt at redoing Flotsam and Jetsam. F&J were eerie; they sent chills up your spine everytime they spoke or slithered around. C&D were...well, they were there. And speaking of ineffectual duos, let's discuss Tip and Dash. What exactly was their purpose in the movie, other than comic relief that was sorely missing comedy? There are so many other flaws in characters, but I don't want to go into that right now.
Art direction, design, etc. was sorely lacking as it is in all DTV Disney films. The characters looked kinda like their original counterparts, but the coloring was way too bright and garrish. It's as if they threw away the subtle coloring scheme used for "Little Mermaid" (including ariel, the color they invented for Ariel's fins) and traded them for happy little pastels, taking away any depth or realism the look might have had.
Voices, voices, voices. Most of the original cast came back for this one (thank goodness), but the performances didn't seem to have that energy from the first movie. As for the new voices, Tara Charendoff's Melody was rather annoying. She's just great as Bubbles on "Powerpuff Girls", but that doesn't seem to translate well here. Maybe it was just the stupid lines fed to her. Prince Eric's new voice would be okay if it wasn't friggin' Yakko Warner from "Animaniacs"! Don't get me wrong; Rob Paulsen was wonderful on "Animaniacs", but he sounds nothing like the original Prince Eric. (Compliment or criticism? You decide.)
Well, I suppose I should wrap this up now; I'm sure I'm over the word limit and that this is the longest review I've ever written. I'm not really sure why I'm wasting this much space on a movie that's such a waste of space. I suppose I had to defend the honor of the original "Little Mermaid", but the movie can prove itself. I say that we burn all copies of DTV sequels, especially this one and the upcoming "Hunchback II", which looks like it will be another tragically horrible treatment of a Disney classic.
Bad.
It wasn't good. The characters were underdeveloped and the only personality were from the memories I had of the previous movie which contrasted with the 'new' personalities (or lack thereof). I seriously thought the opening scene was a nightmare by Ariel because of how absurd it was. It was serious. It just reminded me of all the annoying characters on the Disney channel-everyone is hyperactive and the story jumps from action to embarrassing scenes without any really connection.
The most disappointing part was the horrible songs-not catchy, not amazing. In the original Ariel had an amazing and powerful voice and all the song are catchy and fun. You remember them and want to sing them. But the songs in this movie weren't creative in the least; it's as if they're talking in a annoying sing-song voice-quite weakly, disappointing. I don't have that want-to-sing-them feeling you normally get from a Disney movie.
It's as if not one wanted to do this movie, so they barely made an effort . . . this movie would needs a new story line, new catchy songs and more warmth and enthusiasm without the annoying "look at me! look at me! I'm so annoying!" mentality of this generation of Disney. :'(
The most disappointing part was the horrible songs-not catchy, not amazing. In the original Ariel had an amazing and powerful voice and all the song are catchy and fun. You remember them and want to sing them. But the songs in this movie weren't creative in the least; it's as if they're talking in a annoying sing-song voice-quite weakly, disappointing. I don't have that want-to-sing-them feeling you normally get from a Disney movie.
It's as if not one wanted to do this movie, so they barely made an effort . . . this movie would needs a new story line, new catchy songs and more warmth and enthusiasm without the annoying "look at me! look at me! I'm so annoying!" mentality of this generation of Disney. :'(
- silverangel1983
- Mar 9, 2009
- Permalink
Return to the Sea
This direct to video (those were the days) sequel to the mega hit that was 'The Little Mermaid' is not that bad really, though it does rehash a lot of the themes/plot from the original, only now with Ariel's daughter.
With a lot of the original voice cast returning, and some nice songs/moments, this certainly is worth a watch, and not worthy of the bashing it is getting by other reviewers.
With a lot of the original voice cast returning, and some nice songs/moments, this certainly is worth a watch, and not worthy of the bashing it is getting by other reviewers.
The worst Disney sequel I have ever seen in my life.
- classicx_attraction
- Apr 1, 2008
- Permalink
Your common "Made for home video Disney sequel" movie.
If you seen Disney's other "Made for home video sequel" movies, then you know what I am talking about. Movies such as "Pocahontas II: Journey to the New World," "The Lion King II: Simba's Pride," "The Return of Jafar," etc. The problem with "Made for home video sequel" movies is that it doesn't put too much effort into creating a new and original story. Instead, it relies only on the old characters and a typical & overdone storyline to carry the movie.
There are also a new bunch of generic characters. You have the new henchmen (a shark voiced by Clancy Brown and a couple of devil rays that I guess are suppose to imitate the Flotsam & Jetsam characters) for the villain (Morgana), and your new comedic sidekicks (Tip & Dash) for Ariel's daughter (Melody). I liked Morgana's character and how she relates herself to Ursula, but I didn't care for the Tip & Dash characters. They tired to make them similar to the Timon & Pumbaa characters, but it just doesn't work! They aren't that funny and you feel as though that these two characters were just thrown into the movie because the writers felt that they needed to fill in the gap for your generic storyline where there must always be new comedic characters. With a generic storyline, there must always be the need for romance with the main character. When you watch this movie, you get a sense that they wanted to add a romantic character for Melody, but instead they hinted at it, which really stands out as a sore thumb!
The conclusion of the movie is not thrilling at all. It tries to imitate the final battle of the original, but it's just not exciting. I felt as though the writers spent an all-nighter, rushing themselves in trying to figure out how to conclude this movie with a final battle sequence all in one night!
It may seem as though that I hated this movie, but I didn't! I was just disappointed with this movie. One thing that is for sure, this sequel isn't nearly as good as the original. Still I give this movie a (B-) because if you loved the original "The Little Mermaid," you still enjoy watching the old characters in this sequel.
6 out of 10
There are also a new bunch of generic characters. You have the new henchmen (a shark voiced by Clancy Brown and a couple of devil rays that I guess are suppose to imitate the Flotsam & Jetsam characters) for the villain (Morgana), and your new comedic sidekicks (Tip & Dash) for Ariel's daughter (Melody). I liked Morgana's character and how she relates herself to Ursula, but I didn't care for the Tip & Dash characters. They tired to make them similar to the Timon & Pumbaa characters, but it just doesn't work! They aren't that funny and you feel as though that these two characters were just thrown into the movie because the writers felt that they needed to fill in the gap for your generic storyline where there must always be new comedic characters. With a generic storyline, there must always be the need for romance with the main character. When you watch this movie, you get a sense that they wanted to add a romantic character for Melody, but instead they hinted at it, which really stands out as a sore thumb!
The conclusion of the movie is not thrilling at all. It tries to imitate the final battle of the original, but it's just not exciting. I felt as though the writers spent an all-nighter, rushing themselves in trying to figure out how to conclude this movie with a final battle sequence all in one night!
It may seem as though that I hated this movie, but I didn't! I was just disappointed with this movie. One thing that is for sure, this sequel isn't nearly as good as the original. Still I give this movie a (B-) because if you loved the original "The Little Mermaid," you still enjoy watching the old characters in this sequel.
6 out of 10
Suddenly, I have a craving for sea-food...
Much better than I thought!
Don't just trust the bad ratings. If you like the original movie you will like this one too. Its not as good, but really not that far behind. I'm glad I decided to give it a chance....seeing these ratings really had me expect nothing. It really is a nice little story, not full of violence or stupid characters and stunts as in most of the recent animated releases. It feels very true to the original, nice quality stuff indeed. I really didn't expect it, after seeing really cheap follow ups to movies like Lilo & Stitch and Ice Age, but this movie is nothing like them. Hasn't got any romance in it though, if thats a must for someone. So, if you liked the first one, do yourself a favor and rent/buy this movie. I'm pretty sure you wont be disappointed. Guess we'll never see a third one though, sadly. Would have been fun.
The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea
- jboothmillard
- Jun 22, 2005
- Permalink
Way better than it has been given credit for!
The Little Mermaid II -Return To The Sea- is a great film. it shows how Ariel has developed as a person, from mermaid, to human, to bride to mother. She has all of the same traits as she did from the original movie, and she acts just as you would think she would as a mum. Her daughter Melody (cute name or what?) is exactly the same as her, but opposite; Melody loves the sea, has a collection of under-water things, and just doesn't feel right living on land. Sound familiar? All of the cast returned, save for Prince Eric and Flounder. Jodi Benson displays her beautiful voice again, and sings several new, and fun songs, which are great! (Though not up to the standard of Alan Menken). Morgana is a lighter version of Ursula, and you love to hate her! The movie is better then what people have said about it, and as an Ariel lover, it's great to see our favourite mermaid back and loving life!
- lumos_nox_accio
- May 30, 2005
- Permalink
Serviceable Sequel With Lessons More For Parents Than Children
- moonmonday
- Apr 16, 2014
- Permalink
Was A Sequel Really Necessary?!
- filmismagic
- Aug 1, 2008
- Permalink
Terrible
Someone should be stepped on for this.
Remember the Little Mermaid? The movie that made you believe in Disney again every time you saw it (no matter how awful their current movies were?) If you liked the Little Mermaid in the least bit, do not walk within viewing distance of this movie. I loved the Little Mermaid when it was the first movie I ever saw, I love it now; this movie, which had me excited in the beginning, left me feeling that it was better off never made. Everything in it, from character development, to voices, plot, lame side-kicks, lame villains, general stupidity, everything down to the more cutesy way things were colored and drawn, and the score. The original had a sort of mature feel that also appealed to kids that not a lot of Disney movies generally have, and this movie ended up as a drop in a sea of terrible Disney sequels.
Okay, I kind of changed my mind
- SofiaHedge
- May 23, 2020
- Permalink
this movie was totally lame.
I'll say it again: this movie was totally lame. Kids will like it, sure, but adults...doubtful. The whole thing was basically a rehash of the original, which is to be expected, since they pretty much explored the whole concept in the first movie, but still, did they have to completely rehash the entire movie? I mean, everything is re-done from the Little Mermaid. The worst part of it is Morgana "Ursula's crazy sister" who appears out of nowhere and threatens Melody, which is ridiculous since Triton is there with his magic trident. Why didn't Triton do anything about it? Because the plot required him to do nothing. I could go on, but I won't. The whole thing is a shameless attempt to rake in more money from the Little Mermaid, and was obviously thrown together without any thought, because they knew it would sell. Overall it is a terrible waste of time.
A good sequel
A good sequel.
'The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea' makes for a pleasing follow-up to the original 1989 film, it's arguably Disney's best sequel up until this point; surpassing 'Cinderella III: A Twist in Time' for that honour, in my humble opinion. 'The Little Mermaid' is still superior, but everything here bar the songs are on the same wavelength in terms of enjoyment.
Jodi Benson and Samuel E. Wright both return in the roles of Ariel and Sebastian, while Pat Carroll also comes back but in a different capacity as Morgana - she voiced Ursula in the preceding production. I like Morgana's water minions, especially Clancy Brown's Undertow. Tara Strong is involved as Melody, who gets two decent sidekicks in Tip (Max Casella) and Dash (Stephen Furst).
The premise is slightly similar to the first, though they mix things up sufficiently to keep it feeling fresh; the only time it feels repetitive to me is with Morgana herself, I enjoy the rest to be honest. I'm obviously not saying it's a perfect film, but it entertained me and that's all you want from a sequel honestly.
'The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea' makes for a pleasing follow-up to the original 1989 film, it's arguably Disney's best sequel up until this point; surpassing 'Cinderella III: A Twist in Time' for that honour, in my humble opinion. 'The Little Mermaid' is still superior, but everything here bar the songs are on the same wavelength in terms of enjoyment.
Jodi Benson and Samuel E. Wright both return in the roles of Ariel and Sebastian, while Pat Carroll also comes back but in a different capacity as Morgana - she voiced Ursula in the preceding production. I like Morgana's water minions, especially Clancy Brown's Undertow. Tara Strong is involved as Melody, who gets two decent sidekicks in Tip (Max Casella) and Dash (Stephen Furst).
The premise is slightly similar to the first, though they mix things up sufficiently to keep it feeling fresh; the only time it feels repetitive to me is with Morgana herself, I enjoy the rest to be honest. I'm obviously not saying it's a perfect film, but it entertained me and that's all you want from a sequel honestly.
Another stupid sequel
If there's one thing you can count on Disney to do, it's their uncanny ability to take a story and tell it again and again and again. Even watching the commercial for Lady and the Tramp II was a horrible experience. Disney's going to ruin one of their most awesome classics ever. It even had that spaghetti meatball scene. It's been done before! And that's what I say to this sorry direct to video(the entire concept should be banned). Everything is just a rehash of the original movie and even several of Bluth's really bad movies. The penguin and walrus duo(I've even forgotten their names) are just a really poor carbon copy of Timon and Pumbaa. Morgana is another Ursula. She even repeats practically all her old lines. The songs are pathetic, really abysmal. I've never heard songs so bad from them before until now. And the dialogue is atrocious. It's pathetic and simplistic. On the plus side, at least they took the time to make the animation somewhat decent. All of the usual characters aren't as annoying as they used to be(or maybe that's a minus for Little Mermaid fans). Back on the negative, Melody is just so sickeningly cute you just might vomit. I almost did. Do yourself and your Little Mermaid fan a favor. Don't waste your money on this. True, it's not as horrific as Return of Jafar or Pocahontas II, but that's little consolation.
- pmcollectorboy
- Sep 25, 2000
- Permalink
Even the animation can't save it
- mitsubishizero
- Jul 25, 2019
- Permalink
Saw it as a kid in my friends house it was OK I guess
- lisafordeay
- Jun 9, 2013
- Permalink
Not a bad film.
Hardly ever have I seen a really disappointing Disney film, and The Little Mermaid II isn't an exception. The story is beautiful, although I thought all the time that Ariel and Eric had made a mistake in not telling little Melody that her mother had originally been a mermaid. The animation was also very good.
I liked Ariel and little Melody, but Morgana and Triton were the best of the characters. I was delighted that Triton was not as strict as in the first movie, and I have always liked wicked woman characters like Morgana. But, of course, I was glad that she was finally destroyed.
In any case, I'm quite sure that H.C. Andersen would not have been very content with this sequel, because his original fairytale was meant to be very sad. I even paid attention to that neither in the first film nor in the sequel have Ariel or Melody any pains while walking on their feet - namely, Andersen tells that every step the little mermaid takes is hurting her as if she was stepping on an edge of a knife.
I liked Ariel and little Melody, but Morgana and Triton were the best of the characters. I was delighted that Triton was not as strict as in the first movie, and I have always liked wicked woman characters like Morgana. But, of course, I was glad that she was finally destroyed.
In any case, I'm quite sure that H.C. Andersen would not have been very content with this sequel, because his original fairytale was meant to be very sad. I even paid attention to that neither in the first film nor in the sequel have Ariel or Melody any pains while walking on their feet - namely, Andersen tells that every step the little mermaid takes is hurting her as if she was stepping on an edge of a knife.
Not a bad Little Mermaid sequel, but lacking and annoying at times
Now hear me out, I know it might seem impossible, but the story actually has something in it. It has a good sequel story based heavily in "irony" hidden underneath layers of at times bad animation, really bad music, useless side characters that bring nothing to the story and "dullification", that is, making the original characters dull to give more personality to the new ones.
Maybe it's because I have some sort of personal attachment to Disney's DTV sequel movies as when I was a child I had them in VHS and saw them just as much as the originals. But some Disney sequels are actually quite good in some aspects. Of course not in all as they don't have the same budget nor the same creative team the original ones had so they have to make do with what they have. I personally think most of them add extra adventures of the main characters (Like Tarzan and Jane), very few progress their character's development or backstory (like Aladdin and the King of Thieves) or go totally different routes or go crazy (like Cinderella 3).
This sequel belongs to the "offspring's ironic story" in which the daughter or son or both of the main couple have an emotional, physical or metaphoric journey filled with themes and tropes that the original showed us. In this one we see straight in the trailer (so it isn't really a spoiler) that Ariel's daughter loves the sea and wants to get back to it. And how ever will she do that knowing Ursulla coincidentally had also a cruel, ocean-domination-seeking crazy sister who would take advantage of this desire? Other movies that fall under this "category" of sequel is Lady and the Tramp 2 and Lion King 2 (and probably some other). I do believe there was an interesting mirror story hiding underneath the bad musical score and so-so animation, but I just can't stand the side characters here and the main characters are absolutely useless for the plot or worse they are plot devices to move the story forward.
In conclusion, it is an average movie, it's family friendly and has good messages and good entertainment. In my opinion it is not amongst the worst Disney sequels as I have seen others that don't respect the status quo with which the previous one ended. This one at least tries to have the same themes even though at times you can see some sequences and shots are copied straight out of the original movie. Still, for me it's always better to pay homage to the original one while building upon it. But that's just my opinion, objectively this movie is entertaining for kids and I loved it and understood it all and felt for it as a kid, like I felt what Melody felt with the whole "my parents don't understand me" ever-so-repeated trope. So yeap, totally kid friendly and I'm a sucker for easy to watch movies like these. (Aladdin King of thieves is superior in music, plot and characters so check that one instead!)
Maybe it's because I have some sort of personal attachment to Disney's DTV sequel movies as when I was a child I had them in VHS and saw them just as much as the originals. But some Disney sequels are actually quite good in some aspects. Of course not in all as they don't have the same budget nor the same creative team the original ones had so they have to make do with what they have. I personally think most of them add extra adventures of the main characters (Like Tarzan and Jane), very few progress their character's development or backstory (like Aladdin and the King of Thieves) or go totally different routes or go crazy (like Cinderella 3).
This sequel belongs to the "offspring's ironic story" in which the daughter or son or both of the main couple have an emotional, physical or metaphoric journey filled with themes and tropes that the original showed us. In this one we see straight in the trailer (so it isn't really a spoiler) that Ariel's daughter loves the sea and wants to get back to it. And how ever will she do that knowing Ursulla coincidentally had also a cruel, ocean-domination-seeking crazy sister who would take advantage of this desire? Other movies that fall under this "category" of sequel is Lady and the Tramp 2 and Lion King 2 (and probably some other). I do believe there was an interesting mirror story hiding underneath the bad musical score and so-so animation, but I just can't stand the side characters here and the main characters are absolutely useless for the plot or worse they are plot devices to move the story forward.
In conclusion, it is an average movie, it's family friendly and has good messages and good entertainment. In my opinion it is not amongst the worst Disney sequels as I have seen others that don't respect the status quo with which the previous one ended. This one at least tries to have the same themes even though at times you can see some sequences and shots are copied straight out of the original movie. Still, for me it's always better to pay homage to the original one while building upon it. But that's just my opinion, objectively this movie is entertaining for kids and I loved it and understood it all and felt for it as a kid, like I felt what Melody felt with the whole "my parents don't understand me" ever-so-repeated trope. So yeap, totally kid friendly and I'm a sucker for easy to watch movies like these. (Aladdin King of thieves is superior in music, plot and characters so check that one instead!)
- quiqueperezsoler
- Feb 14, 2020
- Permalink
Jodi Benson just had to reprieve her role
Disney has yet to meet a movie it couldn't make at least two sequels about. And this one was no exception to the people at Disney to give a weak story to receive a quick reward. Somehow, although I did not pay to view it, I feel cheapened by watching it.
Ariel is grown up now and had a daughter. Yet doesn't allow the daughter to go into the sea because of some idle threat made by the sister of the deceased sea-witch. So here we go again.
The daughter is tricked (of course) and helps the sea-witch. After a not-so-glorious battle, she is defeated and the mermaids and humans live in harmony. Yawn.
There is nothing to view here. Go back to your lives. "D-"
Ariel is grown up now and had a daughter. Yet doesn't allow the daughter to go into the sea because of some idle threat made by the sister of the deceased sea-witch. So here we go again.
The daughter is tricked (of course) and helps the sea-witch. After a not-so-glorious battle, she is defeated and the mermaids and humans live in harmony. Yawn.
There is nothing to view here. Go back to your lives. "D-"
- freakfire-1
- Jun 10, 2008
- Permalink