Ever since the beginning, Walt Disney animated features have given new life to wonderful classic fairy tales - Snow White, Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty . . . but I think that no other fairy tale is more beloved than the tale of the Little Mermaid.

In this version of the classic Hans Christian Andersen tale, our little mermaid is a headstrong, red-headed teenager named Ariel; gifted with an amazing singing voice, she is the youngest of her father's seven daughters, but she has a secret: she is curious about the world above the waves where humans walk on two legs and soak up the warmth of the sun. However, King Triton is very protective of his young daughter, seeing humans as "fish-eaters" that could hook any vulnerable merperson within their hooks and nets, so when he learns of her reaching the surface, he forbids her to go up there again for her own safety. But this plucky teen is not going to let her father stop her from being curious, and the next time she breaks the waves, she instantly falls head over fins in love with a dark-haired prince named Eric, saving his life when his ship suddenly explodes and sinks. Her voice wakens him, but before he can see clearly, Ariel escapes . . . but now, unknown to each other, both of them have fallen in love with one another and after a harsh father-daughter argument, Ariel is ready and willing to do anything to become human.

This is when this gets interesting - Ursula, a tentacled sea-witch, offers to turn Ariel into a human for three days and says that if Eric kisses her with "the kiss of True Love", she will remain human forever. But such magic comes with a price - if they don't kiss by sundown of the third day, Ariel will belong to Ursula forever . . . and in order to become human, Ariel has to give up the one thing that Eric will recognize her for: her voice. Mute and naked, Ariel reaches Eric's castle (with the help of her friends - Flounder, Sebastian, and Scuttle) and starts to bond and interact with her Prince, but a turn of events could cause Ariel's life to turn for the worst . . . but I'm not going to spoil it for you.

Disney's take on the classic fairy tale is actually really wonderful and magical. Ariel is a very likeable and relatable character, and her voice (by the awesome Jodi Benson - Jodi, we love you!) fits the part perfectly to a T. The other voices are done well too, but it's ultimately Ariel that makes the movie. The animation is superb, especially for the moments when Ariel is a human. Since she is unable to speak, her actions and facial expressions have to speak for her, and they really work well! I especially like her design - Ariel gives off such youth and natural curiosity which truly makes her one of the most beloved Disney Princesses to date. Ursula, on the other hand, is a great villain - she's big, she's a sea-witch, and she's willing to do whatever in her power to take the Sea King's control of the oceans and seas for herself. (I just like her because she's plus-size, and not afraid to flaunt it if she's got it! More power to ya . . . evill sea lady!) Triton is the natural cutout of the stereotype of the "overprotective parent" that we see in a lot of today's DTV sequel releases - he loves all of his children, but Ariel, the youngest, is the one he knows is his favorite for her lovely voice. He wants to protect her out of love, but Ariel is too headstrong and independent for his rules and regulations, even if he is the master of the Seven Seas.

Of course, the original story of the Little Mermaid ends . . . quite tragically, unlike Disney's spin on the story (Note: that wasn't a spoiler, by the way), and a few other details are left out of the animated version; however, the title character still maintains that child-like innocence within the wonderful world that the Walt Disney Studios has created for their retelling. The addition of the sudden "turn of events" adds a ton of suspense, leaving you rooting for true love and goodness to triumph over evil.

The songs are catchy and make you understand the different situations that are going on throughout the film's plot - whether it be about Ariel's passionate dream to be "Part of Your World" or Sebastian's many reasons to stay "Under the Sea". Comedy, drama or the typical villain theme, each song works well. The backgrounds are beautifully colored, which really captures one's attention to the situations. The animation is, in my opinion, rather flawless - even the bubbles work whenever a character swims or flaps a fin underwater!

In conclusion, The Little Mermaid is a classic fairy tale of love and following your dreams. Disney has completely transformed the Danish story into an international film that families and children can enjoy. It tells of the warmth of family, the relationships of fathers and daughters, and the difficult journey after falling into the seas of true love (I know - it's a bad punny joke).

This is a must-see film for everyone - buy it, rent it, whatever works best for you! (I'm just not sure why I'm not giving this a perfect 4 stars if it's so good!)

My Rating - 3.5 stars

I was never a fan of The Little Mermaid when I was a child, but after re-watching it, I find it to be a very funny, sweet and charming Disney film. It has everything that's typical of a good Disney movie - great music, a cool villain, likable protagonists, amusing sidekicks and a gripping plot.

I like Ariel's headstrong nature. She's rebellious and passionate without being 'bratty' like the 'adolescents' we see in cheap direct-to-video sequels. There is not a single sidekick that I found annoying. They all had their fair share in the story, and weren't just there for the sake of it. Ursula is one of Disney's best villains. She has a fabulous song and believable motives. I think she's pretty much the standard that many Disney villains are judged by.

The music is fun to listen to. The songs are unforgettable (if a bit too numerous for my liking). 'under the Sea' is especially catchy, but my favourite would have to be 'Kiss the Girl.' It's atmospheric without being over the top.

The animation is a little dated, but aside from that this is a must see Disney movie. It brought Disney back up to the top and revived animation. Too bad Disney made a crappy sequel (and a third one is coming soon).

I love the fairy tales from Hans Christian Andersen, and "The Little Mermaid" is one of my favorite fairy tales from him. Like I said I like a little twist in a fairy story now and then; like the ending...the little sea princess gets her prince (it's a change from Andersen's original ending).

The animation and backgrounds are very beautiful and the characters are appealing,and also the casting is very good too; I love Ariel, she's one of my favorite Disney Princesses along with Cinderella & Aurora from "Sleeping Beauty." Ariel's voice actress Jodi Benson has an excellant singing voice for the film; and also suits her character.

The last time that Disney had done a fairy tale (insofar as Little Mermaid is one) was back in 1959: that film was Sleeping Beauty. After that there had been films based on books of one sort or another, with various degrees of success; fact I might say that the success of the films in this period was counter-reflective in the number and length of songs that said film had. Whichever and whatever way you look at it Disney had not done a fairy tale for three decades.

To be honest, I had yet to fall for any of the Disney films made from Lady and the Tramp till this one. True a spark was still there, brighter in some films than others; but Disney was in my opinion, at the time of this film’s release; a company whose greatest work was behind them, decades in the past. Then the tide turned…

The Little Mermaid was a film I caught on video (I wouldn’t get a chance to go to a cinema to watch a Disney until the release of The Lion King); but its strengths belied the problems of mere format ratios. Looking at it as a adult, it is still an enchanting example of what animation can be, it also helps that I can understand the concepts behind it better.

The Little Mermaid is an un-regarded landmark in animation history, though not for reasons that are really clear at first. Mermaid was a very transitional film; it was the last of their full length classics to utilize cels and the old Xerox photography system of transferring the drawings. It was also the last to use the aging multiplane camera.* It is also a transitional piece in another way, as Disney’s newly developed Computer Animation Production System (CAPS) would get its trial run here. After Mermaid the new digital CAPS, would become the studio standard.

Hans Christian Anderson’s tale has been simplified yes, but then so have so many other film adaptations of classic stories (and not just in animation). What matters to me is whether or not the whole of the story remains intact; does it still have it soul? In Mermaid’s case I would happily say that the film does maintain its essence, while giving it a nice, contemporary spin in the process.

Much of the credit for this film has to go to the late Howard Ashman and Alan Mekken, whose music is a wondrous weaving on melody and whose song would give hope to the future of the company’s animation department. Not since the heydays, when Walt Disney himself was acting as the collective creative force has a Disney movie had such a powerful score and memorable songs. Although everyone of course remembers “Under the Sea,” it is “Part of that World” which pulls at my heartstrings these days. Ariel is singing about her hopes and dreams, I can relate to that.

Imagine yourself in Ariel’s fins, as glorious as the undersea world may seem to those in the dull real world, it is in much the same terms as one’s own hometown: you’ve grown so use to it that it becomes the mundane. Someone from elsewhere will always look in awe at what to the locals, is possibly regarded as a eyesore at worst, or uninteresting at best. This is what Disney’s of Ariel is doing, to her, this beautiful world is nice but the actual day-to-day living must be as dull as anywhere else.

POSSIBLE SPOILER...

I kind of put myself in Ariel’s place, imaging that what may have been, if my parents had not only hated the idea of me thinking that an artist was a worthwhile career choice; but whose techniques at stopping me was to destroy any and all artwork I did and then destroy the means with which I could make more. Such a scenario may sound completely ludicrous, but that is what the scene in which Tritan destroys Ariel’s collection, her hobby and her passion, ultimately is.

SPOILER ENDS...

There are problems, but they are slight and mostly not worth mentioning. Of course, the main issue is with the Prince… renowned for being the hardest and most thankless task an animator can be given. Personally, I think that Prince Eric is a vast improvement on Disney’s previous Prince, for whom the term personality and vacuum go hand in hand. True, he’s never as interesting as Ariel or many of the other incidental characters.

These incidental characters and the main villain Ursula steals the show, given the fact that they have the bulk of the film’s comedic scenes this is hardly surprising; what is surprising is the more gentle flow to them, it doesn’t seem to try as hard as some more modern features and seems the more natural for it.

Yet the last time I watched this film, the only moment that I really laughed was when Sebastian fell into the kitchen and the chief starting singing his song about chopping and serving little fish. This laugher (more of a smirk really) was induced because of the empathy I felt with the crab as he listened to a song that, from his perspective, is about murder and butchery (yes I can have a morbid sense of humour).

It does have to hurry things along somewhat at the end, tying up all the loose-ends with barely enough time left for the finale. It has a bit of musical overkill, with practically everything that one would use Foley artists for being supplied by musical instruments and incidental music. As the films that followed got most choosey with their use of music, I can let that problem go.

On the technical side. Although the water effects look impressive on the backgrounds, they were, even back then, a standard composite shot of the bottom of a swimming pool: still at least the effect looks nice. Something else that looks nice is the attention to underwater effects on details like the always flowing hair and the use of colours in certain scenes to convey mood; this use of colour is something that big and little studios seemed to have lost the understanding too.

One thing in its long history was that Disney never really lost their ability with character animation; that ring true here, with what where once the new guys on the block, now the regular crew. In particular Gene Keane, having previous been the supervisor head animator on minor characters (the bear in The Fox and the Hound and the Eagle from The Rescuers Down Under), is able to show of his talent for character animation in Ariel that would serve him and the corporation well in the upcoming years.

In the end though, The Little Mermaid is a simple story, that is well told without a great deal of fussing over big issues. After its release the Disney would go from strength to strength, in many ways, if not in others. For then at least, the Disney Fairy Tale, had returned.

*In fact one element from the old Silly Symphony “The Old Mill” is used in the film.

Wow, just... wow.

I just got finished watching this on the special edition DVD and I've forgotten what a great movie this is.

The truth is, I haven't seen this movie all the way through since...oh, I dunno... 3-4 years ago? And that was on a really old VHS tape.

The animation is great, the story is great, the songs are excellent and there are a ton of funny moments.

The scene with Sebastion and the Chef is a classic a truly hilarious scene.

Who cares that they changed the ending? Who cares if the romance isn't deep? Who cares if the story isn't a super deep commentary on human existence and the meaning of life? This movie is great on it's own! It's a FUN movie.

John Musker and Ron Clements must be very proud. They are truly two amazing directors and I am very much looking forward to 'The Frog Princess'.

It was nice to get a break from all the pop-culture ridden sassy furry talking animal CGI films to see good 'ol traditional animation at it's very best!

I adore this film ever since I was a little girl. This film has everything I love... the mystical creature, the deep sea, fairytales, beautiful music, and best of all... the amazing animation. I have also learned that computer animation was not used in the making of this film, even the lightning storm scene. Absolutely magnificent, both storytelling and animation.

Brilliant.
This is one of the best animated movies ever-amazing music, extremely powerful story. Beautiful in every way, what more can I tell you?

Little Mermaid is one of Disney's best. The characters are great, the score is wonderful, and the story is interesting.

The characters of this film are quite enjoyable. There wasn't, to me, any really annoying comic relief characters. There were some characters just for that purpose, but they were tastefully done. Ariel, although seeming a little bratty at times, was still a loveable character. Eric's character really could have been devoloped more, but he was in it more than most "Prince Charmings" in earlier Disney films, with the exception of Sleeping Beauty. The villian was, for the most part, the typical type villian, but she was fairly interesting. There was just enough background on her to know why she hated the mer-folk.

The songs were great. All fit where they were put in the film. The score was awesome as well. Of all the films of that time I think it had one of the best soundtracks.

The animation is some of the best that Disney had put out in the 80's. It was smooth and clean. At times it was very bright and colorful.

The story was interesting. It was fast paced and enjoyable. It doesn't follow the original Little Mermaid story, but movies rarely do. I myself have never read the story, but I have heard that it didn't end happily, so that's probably why Disney changed it so it could follow the "Happily Ever After" theme.

Overall this is one of Disney's best. It has a few flaws, but the good parts greatly outweigh them. In my opinion, it's worth buying.

MY REAL RATING IS 3.5 STARS. I AM, HOWEVER GIVING A RATING OF 1 TO EVERYTHING J-KITTY HAS RATED 4, BECAUSE I BELIEVE SHE HAS DISTORTED THE RATINGS SYSTEM WITH HER INEVITABLE, AUTOMATIC 4 STARS FOR EVERYTHING. THE TEXT OF THE REVIEW HOWEVER REMAINS UNCHANGED.

I've watched some pretty dismal animation lately, so it was a relief to re-watch this very high class Disney film.

It's hard not to include some context when talking about this film, so here goes.

The 80's had not been a good decade for Disney. In fact they were looking shakey. At the start of the decade Disney's 'nine old men', and Don Bluth and his young talent all disappeared or died during the making of 'The Fox and the Hound'. Miraculously the result was Disney's best film in a generation, but it didn't set the box office afire. Worse, the first movie that the new generation of Disney animators produced by themselves, 'The Black Cauldron', is rightly or wrongly generally regarded as Disney's worst movie, and their next one, 'The Great Mouse Detective', while more conventional was still a dismal affair.

Perhaps this explains why nobody seemed to notice that Disney had arrived back in town with 'Oliver and Company' in 1988 - a fine film that has been sadly ignored. But if the writing was on the wall in '88, 'The Little Mermaid' represented a barnstorming coming of age of the new generation. 'Oliver and Company' might have put them back in town, but with 'Little Mermaid' they bought the city.

It was a watershed movie for Disney. For the first time since the 50's (with the exception of 'Fox and the Hound') the animation seemed confident, beautifully timed, wonderfully directed. The opening sequence almost gives me a feeling of an aquatic version of Bambi's extreme realism coupled with beautifuly drawn backgrounds. This didn't last, as the film quickly becomes quite cartoony, but it was an auspicious start.

Suddeny, rather than feeling their way, the new people in Disney's creative department came out looking like pro's. The art design, the camera angles, the timing, the backgrounds, the character design, the music - everything is light years ahead of nearly everything they'd made since about 'Lady and the Tramp'. All of the characters are great to look at (the fact that Ariel is ultra-cute might explain why this didn't just go down as a chick-flick) (why couldn't Jodi Benson show this much 'animation' in her voice work in the Balto sequels?)), and the music - you've read me complain about bad, indifferent or forgettable Disney songs. This time it really works.

'Little Mermaid' was a watershed in another way, which I never see remarked upon.

Between 'Lady and the Tramp' and 'Oliver and Company' - a period of about 34 years - Disney basically made talking animal movies. Only three films in that period were mainly about humans, and one of those, 'Sword in the Stone' involved the major characters changing into various animals for half the film. By contrast, from 'Little Mermaid' onwards Disney would make 11 out 12 movies where the central characters were humans. The lone exception is 'The Lion King'. In 'Little Mermaid' the animal sidekicks (the new formula) still talk. By 'Aladdin' only one of them talked. In 'Pocahontas', 'Hunchback' and 'Hercules' none of them talked. Obviously Disney figured they'd hit a winning formula. Such was the lag that it wasn't until 'Tarzan' that some animals started talking again, and it would be 2003 before they made another film where the main characters were talking animals. And by and large the rest of the industry followed their lead (despite 'Lion King' being the biggest smash of the lot), so 'Little Mermaid's' influence was long lasting, and probaby persists to this day.

After such a run of mediocre movies - and we're talking nearly 30 years here - 'Little Mermaid' must have seemed a minor miracle. Not only was it beautifully done, but it was done beautifully in a completely new style, unlike 'Fox and the Hound', which harked back to their classic periods.

This film started a new golden age for Disney. Artistically at least, it was doomed to only last about five years, but then their previous two classic periods were probably shorter than that.

If there's something holding this back from four stars for me, it's that I feel the end of the film jars a little by switching to an action mode, and just generally isn't as strong as the rest of the movie.

I was fascinated to read that the villain, Ursula, was based on Divine, who died the year before it was released. Wouldn't it have been great if he were around to voice that character. That would have given the usual suspects something to be outraged about (not that they didn't find things to be outraged about anyway)

i think that this movie is so great! who cares if it doesn't follow the original storyline? what movie doesn't? it has the most wonderful score. alan menken really did an awesome job on the score. it has its cheesy moments like any other disney movie, but then, would it really be a disney movie if it didn't? this is a great movie and i love it and i think that everyone should see it!