Not to be "that guy," but...

[TheOtherTed]

...did anyone else notice the strong discrepancy between Rotten Tomatoes' and Metacritics' audience reviews of "The Little Mermaid"?  I tried to backtrack ownership of those sites to see if there were vested interests behind one or the other, but I came up empty.

 

Disclaimer: I have no interest in "The Little Mermaid" one way or the other.  I check out movie reviews for "controversial" flicks whenever they pop up in my social media feeds, and the Rotten Tomatoes audience review did a complete about-face since the last time I checked looked.  I briefly thought that review bombing might be in play, but that should have affected both sites.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

RT changed to a new system in May 2019, following some organised review bombing.

Captain Marvel being a main target of The Neckbeard Menace, but there'd been a few others up to that point.

 

So there are now two Audience Scores...

• All Audience Score - as reviewed by any registered user
• Verified Audience Score - you have to be able to prove you at least bought a ticket (if not saw the damn movie) before you talk about it.

The default one you see on RT is the Verified score. If you click on the popcorn bucket it'll bring up a popup, where you can switch to the All Audience score. The difference is kinda striking. For Little Mermaid...

• All Audience: 57% / 3.1 out of 5🌟
• Verified Audience: 94% / 4.7 out of 5🌟
• Metacritic (for comparison): 21% / 2.2 out of 10

Mild Aquatic Spoilerage And Sidetracking Commentary:

Spoiler

Having seen the flick, I'm inclined to believe the Verified score. I didn't think it was my cup of tea going in: but being a good Auntie, I'm happy that it kept one small person quiet, enthralled and beaming for two whole hours (and wanting to go to more waterparks, which is BRILLIANT). 

 

Plus I got Mel McCarthy chomping the scenery as Ursula: and sweet Freya in Asgard, that new kid Halle can holler. Even if Hollywood holds no more for her, Broadway will welcome her with open arms.

 

It ain't perfect: for one thing, it's nearly an hour longer than the original, and not all of the extras need to be there. And in tribute to the fact that it's a Scandi legend, Prince Eric couldn't be more flimsy and wooden if I'd got him in an IKEA seconds sale. Gurrrrl, there are plenty more fish in the sea for you... But a solid B / 3.5 from me, which is enough for a positive aggregate score.

 

(And I still don't understand some of the comments about why you can't have a mixed-race mermaid. I mean, half woman, half dolphin seems fairly mixed to begin with. But if we want to talk about the genetic pathing of homo linnaeus, maybe we should ask a local expert, like the reggae-singing lobster over there.)

 

Is this system perfect? Probably not. From the point of view of someone who used to run messageboards, and now works in an industry that takes negative comments very seriously:

 

PROS:

• You'd be amazed how fast people moderate their opinions when they realise the Internet is the least anonymous place you can be, especially when faced with an angry site Admin/BOFH (cue demonic laughter). But it takes that nudge to connect your online personality to your real one.
• It does limit the conversation to people who've seen the movie, rather than reposting prefab opinions based on YouTube vids, talking heads on cable news, the peer consensus from dank Subreddits (which tends towards negativity for Fake Internet Cool Points) or scripts they got from a political/religious/special interest group/death cult mailing lists. Yes, people do that last one, and my work has been on the receiving end of it lately. It ain't fun.
• It helps RT manage the volume of spam comments and flame wars.
• It stops RT becoming a "problem" for Whollyodd execs, which... well, doesn't end well in some cases.

CONS:

• It's US-only, and limited to large ticket providers like Fandango.
• There's a certain bias in that - unless you absolutely loathe the movie - you don't wanna admit you paid money for a dud.
• It does limit protest on certain subjects, especially when you don't wanna put money into the hands of the folks you're protesting about.

All that considered, I'd give that... a solid B / 3.5 out of 5. It's an improvement on what they had before. Needs some work.

 

What do you lot think?

Edited June 12, 2023 by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[TheOtherTed]

I'd heard it was good, from some surprising sources - but the dramatic flip from "meh" to 90+ percent in a week or three surprised me.

 

Never really cared for the story itself, though, even the original.  All those head-over-heels love-at-first-sight stories just leave me shaking my head and saying "yep, no good can come of it."

[GM Crumpet]

4 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

RT changed to a new system in May 2019, following some organised review bombing.

Captain Marvel being a main target of The Neckbeard Menace, but there'd been a few others up to that point.

 

 

 

 Maybe using the tern neckbeard menace might not be the best thing. You might offend the neckbeards...... 😛

[Bionic_Flea]

I thought I saw the Neckbeard Menace hanging around Mercy Island . . .

[GM Crumpet]

I was watching a video by Nerdrotic last night that made a good point. This was about the new Indiana Jones film. They have opened up review viewings to every tiny blog and newsletter they could find for Wednesday, and one of his commentators mentioned that you'll see the "all critics" score go up massively in the run up to the films release. It's currently at around a 50% critic rating so the top critics will be mid range rotten, but the all critics will be really high as the nerds with 10 followers will want to keep getting access in the future. 

The viewers score is tweaked to remove the lowest ratings, so the zero and half aren't counted, and a lot of the 1 star seem to disappear too. Media reports think we are stupid and compare box office takings today with box office 30+ years ago. I actually saw one crowing that the Little Mermaid remake had already passed the box office for the original film. Really? It has taken more than the originals 87 million dollars run? It made the equivalent of 250 million dollars at the US box office where ticket prices were a fraction of what they are today and didn't open in many countries round the world. so far the remake has struggled to make 211 million in the US and will be lucky to reach the same inflation adjusted figures of the original.

[Techwright]

5 hours ago, TheOtherTed said:

Never really cared for the story itself, though, even the original. 

 

Same.  While the original wasn't bad, and had some really shining moments (mostly involving a crab), the character of Ariel never stood well with me.  Must have something to do with being the firstborn in a classic psych sense: following the rules, straighten up and fly right, yadda yadda.

 

So is the current movie's struggle in any way due to the remnant effects of the COVID pandemic?

[GM Crumpet]

1 hour ago, Techwright said:

 

Same.  While the original wasn't bad, and had some really shining moments (mostly involving a crab), the character of Ariel never stood well with me.  Must have something to do with being the firstborn in a classic psych sense: following the rules, straighten up and fly right, yadda yadda.

 

So is the current movie's struggle in any way due to the remnant effects of the COVID pandemic?

The original was crafted very carefully to give proper motivation to move forward, the new version removed a lot of that motivation. From Triton destroying Erics statue to Ursulas manipulation and gaslighting, even to changing the ending, it was all done to remove any trace of the possibility that Ariel was doing it to be with the man she loved. They also added several dreadful new songs that don't fit. Or sound good. The Skuttle rap is an abomination.

[Captain Fabulous]

I thought it was amazing. Incredibly well done. And this is coming from a big fan of the original.

I never pay any attention to reviews, simply because I know the incels always find a way to skew them.

 

6 hours ago, TheOtherTed said:

I'd heard it was good, from some surprising sources - but the dramatic flip from "meh" to 90+ percent in a week or three surprised me.

 

Never really cared for the story itself, though, even the original.  All those head-over-heels love-at-first-sight stories just leave me shaking my head and saying "yep, no good can come of it."

But that's not what it's about. It's a story about a girl trapped in a world in which she feels like she doesn't belong and desperately yearns to find a place where she does. The falling in love at first sight bit is secondary to the larger narrative and is just there to drive it. Particularly powerful for anyone who's ever felt like an outcast or who exists on the outside of the world looking in.

[TheOtherTed]

@Techwright I actually (does usage of that term make me an honorary neckbeard?) meant Hans Christian Andersen's original story (which did have a sort of kind of happy ending, although very metaphysical, and not involving a handsome prince).  Never saw Disney's take on it, in no small part because I already hated Disney with a burning passion back then.

 

As for the current state of movies or shows, I don't think it's COVID-related.  I think it's the culmination of trends that started in the first decade of the current century.  For example, though I watched and enjoyed them (kind of), not one of the reboot Star Trek movies could hold a candle to the OG cast movies (except maybe "The Final Frontier," but we don't need to talk about that one).  I have my ideas about why that is, but I also have ideas about other people's ideas about my ideas, so it's probably best to let it drop...

 

 

Edited June 12, 2023 by TheOtherTed
those zany Danes and their zany names...

[Mr. Vee]

Haven't seen it. Does she still trade in her voice for a man? Always seemed a bit on the nose even by problematic fairy tale standards 😛

[biostem]

This whole thread sounds like bait to me, trying to spark the ire of people for or against the remake.

[GM Crumpet]

43 minutes ago, biostem said:

This whole thread sounds like bait to me, trying to spark the ire of people for or against the remake.

well so far it's still polite and people are accepting opinions without screaming, so I'm quite happy. There does seem to be a massive discrepancy in Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic which kind of defeats the purpose of them, but ultimately it's like Twitter. Interesting to the people who go there, but for the majority of the rest of the world largely ignored. I've never had one person go see a movie because they've checked the reviews on those kinds of sites. Or not go see a movie. They will read a review in a newspaper and that's the limit of their decision making. 

[Captain Fabulous]

2 hours ago, Mr. Vee said:

Haven't seen it. Does she still trade in her voice for a man? Always seemed a bit on the nose even by problematic fairy tale standards 😛

She trades her voice to be human.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

16 hours ago, Bionic_Flea said:

I thought I saw the Neckbeard Menace hanging around Mercy Island . . .

There's also the Ghost of Cap'n Neckbeard over in Port Oakes, and his fearsome Pedants Of The Caribbean. 

Men quake across the Seven Seas, at their battlecry of "...actually..."

 

13 hours ago, GM Crumpet said:

The Skuttle rap is an abomination.

Thanks, I'd tried to scab over that particular bit in my memory. Not Lin's best work, I'm afraid, and should have ended up on the cutting room floor...

 

...dear goddess, I hope the kidlet doesn't start playing that one over and over in the car. I mean, I love a showtune, me, but some days I just wish they'd let it go, let it go...

 

6 hours ago, Captain Fabulous said:

Does she still trade in her voice for a man?

Yes, it's a bit on the nose, whether she trades her voice/soul/identity/self-esteem (delete as applicable) for a disturbingly average guy... or for acceptance into another world.

I'll be teaching the kidlet not to do that, literally or metaphorically. That kinda thing rarely results in Happily Ever After. But do keep your True Friends around to bail you out when needed.

 

7 hours ago, GM Crumpet said:

I've never had one person go see a movie because they've checked the reviews on those kinds of sites.

True enough - or at least on its own.

 

1) When there's a movie I've never heard of that I decide to go see because of great word-of-mouth: and one way of getting that to my notice is an absurdly high RT score. Like Can You Ever Forgive Me?, which was Mel McCarthy's crack at an Oscar-bait flick - but absolutely worth the watch.

 

2) When there's a flick that I'm not sure if it's gonna be good, like the D&D movie. That wasn't just a critical hit (pun intended, if not good), real humans liked it too. I have a very limited amount of time for leisure these days that doesn't involve herding kidlets, so the Audience score punted me from "wait for streaming" to "popcorn time".

 

...which leads me on to...

 

14 hours ago, Techwright said:

So is the current movie's struggle in any way due to the remnant effects of the COVID pandemic?

 

That's an odd one, and another reason not to believe some of the more negative reviewers. It ain't struggling, no way, nohow.

US domestic open exceeded predictions by nearly 20% at $117.5m. Pretty darn good post-COVID, and the fifth largest Memorial Weekend open of all time. If it's been weak anywhere, it's the overseas $68m take - but had more competition around that time.

 

(For comparison, the "movie that saved the movies" post-plague - Top Gun 2 - clocked $160m in the same time period.

And on a side note, check out the top list: it's remarkable how many Memorial Weekend hits also suck quite badly.)
 

So regardless of what narrative people wanted to spin, the money don't lie. Butts are on seats. Neither the 'vid nor the politics stopped the movie.

The question is whether this movie has legs (EDIT: pun not intended, but better than the last one). The production budget was $250m - not eyewatering by modern standards, but the usual rule of thumb is they'd need 3x that to breakeven. $750m seems like a stretch. They might cheat like WB did and assign a massive fee for the D+ streaming rights, but investors notice stuff like that these days...

Edited June 13, 2023 by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[TheOtherTed]

8 hours ago, biostem said:

This whole thread sounds like bait to me, trying to spark the ire of people for or against the remake.

Nope - I just wondered if it was another IMDB/ROP situation, but the circumstances don't track, and OG's explanation is good enough for me.

 

Believe it or not, it is possible to have a fascination for pop culture weirdness without having some sort of agenda.

[Captain Fabulous]

9 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

Yes, it's a bit on the nose, whether she trades her voice/soul/identity/self-esteem (delete as applicable) for a disturbingly average guy... or for acceptance into another world.

I'll be teaching the kidlet not to do that, literally or metaphorically. That kinda thing rarely results in Happily Ever After. But do keep your True Friends around to bail you out when needed.

But that's the moral of the story, to not do that, and for God's sake don't ever make a deal with a Sea Witch! There are other ways to achieve your goals without having to sacrifice your soul. In the HCA original she didn't get a happy ending. But of course the Disney versions are different.

Edited June 13, 2023 by Captain Fabulous

[TheOtherTed]

"You, poor little mermaid, have tried with your whole heart to do as we are doing; you have suffered and endured and raised yourself to the spirit-world by your good deeds; and now, by striving for three hundred years in the same way, you may obtain an immortal soul."

 

By the dour standards of nineteenth century European literature, that's a pretty happy ending.  Quite possibly the happiest ending that a being without an immortal soul could hope for.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

12 hours ago, TheOtherTed said:

By the dour standards of nineteenth century European literature, that's a pretty happy ending. 

The Grimms certainly lived up to their name - including one about a child so naughty that she made herself ill and died...

...but then wouldn't stay in her grave without the occasional smack.

 

Come to think of it, that's one complaint I do have about both versions of Little Mermaid. Real heroes need proper villains, and Uncle Walt knew kids love having seven shades of sriracha scared out of them. Ursula's stylish, evil and manipulative but not genuinely frightening, where quite a few others have been. Maleficient, Hades, Mei's pandazilla mom... even Syndrome has his moments (and he's quite prepared to casually murder ranks of supers, whole families and risk civilian casualties.)

[TheOtherTed]

1 hour ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

Hades

Quick tangent - James Woods as Hades seems like it would almost, almost, be worth swallowing my stubborn pride and watching one Disney movie.  Just one.  What harm could it do?

 

That said, Andersen's (presumably translated) words above struck me as a bit Disney in a sort of "can't have the kiddies crying over the protagonist's fate, now, can we?" kind of way.

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

Herc is one where the writing team were clearly on point. And the animators did the same thing from Aladdin where they watched his performance and then pretty much Rotoscoped him in, plus world events to match. 

 

Woods may have changed a little in the last 25-odd years. People do. This thread ain't about that.

But there and then, he's charmingly channelling Billy Crystal's Evil Twin. And it works.

 

 

It's also worth the watch for Danny DeVito as Herc's PT, Broadway and Cartoon Network regular Susan Egan as Hades' foil Meg, and full-on hot gospel showtunes. (No idea why on that last one, but it literally had people dancing in the aisles at the time. Whatever works.)

 

If you'd prefer just to skip to Hades' bits...

 

 

Edited June 14, 2023 by ThaOGDreamWeaver

[GM Crumpet]

6 hours ago, ThaOGDreamWeaver said:

The Grimms certainly lived up to their name - including one about a child so naughty that she made herself ill and died...

...but then wouldn't stay in her grave without the occasional smack.

 

Come to think of it, that's one complaint I do have about both versions of Little Mermaid. Real heroes need proper villains, and Uncle Walt knew kids love having seven shades of sriracha scared out of them. Ursula's stylish, evil and manipulative but not genuinely frightening, where quite a few others have been. Maleficient, Hades, Mei's pandazilla mom... even Syndrome has his moments (and he's quite prepared to casually murder ranks of supers, whole families and risk civilian casualties.)

There is a lot to love about Hercules. James Woods is superb as ever, and you do understand his motivation. Meg is almost the anti-heroine, she really isn't that impressed with Herc and is very sassy while being funny and charming. "My names Megaera. But my friends call me Meg. At least they would if I had any friends". It's quite an odd beastie to be honest. Utterly brilliant and funny, but also with a lot of depth and soul. Plus the songs are absolute bangers.

The artwork is from Gerald Scarfe so is a lot less "Disney" than usual, and it riffs on the concept of small town guy becoming a world wide sensation and forgetting his roots, with a whole sub thing about merchandising. It even manages to point out the Disney trend to monetise absolutely everything they possibly can, no matter how tenuous the link to the IP.

[Frostbiter]

1 hour ago, GM Crumpet said:

There is a lot to love about Hercules. James Woods is superb as ever, and you do understand his motivation. Meg is almost the anti-heroine, she really isn't that impressed with Herc and is very sassy while being funny and charming. "My names Megaera. But my friends call me Meg. At least they would if I had any friends". It's quite an odd beastie to be honest. Utterly brilliant and funny, but also with a lot of depth and soul. Plus the songs are absolute bangers.

The artwork is from Gerald Scarfe so is a lot less "Disney" than usual, and it riffs on the concept of small town guy becoming a world wide sensation and forgetting his roots, with a whole sub thing about merchandising. It even manages to point out the Disney trend to monetise absolutely everything they possibly can, no matter how tenuous the link to the IP.

 

You leave my Stitch Cookie Jar alone!

 

[ThaOGDreamWeaver]

3 hours ago, GM Crumpet said:

It even manages to point out the Disney trend to monetise absolutely everything they possibly can, no matter how tenuous the link to the IP.

"What... are... THOSE?"

[TheOtherTed]

Not one of you mentioned Bobcat Goldthwait.