The Little Mermaid (live action reimagining)

[Russ Smith]

I root for all live action remakes to fail on principle. They're gross cash grabs and I want to see new IPs. Not retreads. It goes for most remakes, reimagines, etc. too.

I do agree with this take.

 

[Stout]

He’s the same poster who gets up in arms about all of this type of crap slung at geekdom movies with female leads or not catering to the letter of dork lore.

I thought that was Doctor Jones?

 

[Zalixar]

P.S. Halle Bailey was brilliant. Not only did she have the characters voice inflections down to a "T"? She has a set of pipes.

She is an actual singer.

 

[Dr. Jones]

That's definitely a huge part of the problem. Far too many people are just sheep buying whatever Disney (or other companies) put out there.

This is a huge problem. Remakes are lazy IMO

He’s the same poster who gets up in arms about all of this type of crap slung at geekdom movies with female leads or not catering to the letter of dork lore.

Ha. Just don't turn Galadriel into something she's not for the sake of "the message". That's all I'm saying. Writers rooms these days are trying everything they can to fit things in to boxes rather than tell the best stories they possibly can. Just look at the Oscars requirements this year and going forward. sheesh.

Of the remakes, this is probably in my top 5. I thought it was way too long (about an hour longer than the original) and that stress showed up in way too much dialogue being drawn out and boring. Lazy CGI at times and the I hated Awquafina's (sp?) voice acting personally but that is just my take. Halle Bailey was fine. She nailed all of the singing but she's supposed to do that. Acting was ok to good but again, personal preference.

It's amazing to me how much calisthenics Disney does to fix everything in to the boxes they do. Sure, it's a fantasy land but the dress and style of clothing fits it in to one era but the actors, messages, and writing fit it in to present day. That will always be super odd to me.

As far as gender roles, it's clear (to me at least) that Disney doesn't want any female lead to ever need the help of, or love of a man in her life. And boy do men typically spend a lot of time bumbling around in movies and shows these days all over Disney +. Even the Mandalorian needed help in season 3.

I'm just not sure this franchise needed this. If i was going to recommend to my friends or family to watch a movie this week that had a similar storyline, I just don't know why anyone would recommend this over the original.

In fact, it would be criminal to recommend this over the original IMO because it was a much neater, more tightly packed story in a shorter run time. The music is better (or at best, the same), the animation is world class, and the story is much more cohesive.

 

[Covert Rain]

She is an actual singer.

This is only the jumping off point for her.

 

[Yuma]

What I wish is folks just do what I do. They came out with a whole new Magnum, PI. Did I watch it? Hell no. I am loyal to the Tom Selleck version. However, I don't go on every forum and post about how they can't remake it, it's a money grab, etc. I just don't watch it, and I keep my YAP shut about it.

 

[Dr. Jones]

What I wish is folks just do what I do. They came out with a whole new Magnum, PI. Did I watch it? Hell no. I am loyal to the Tom Selleck version. However, I don't go on every forum and post about how they can't remake it, it's a money grab, etc. I just don't watch it, and I keep my YAP shut about it.

You are basically saying that you agree with the goal I seek..... but can't agree with the methods. That's fine.

I used to do the same thing about Disney. I absolutely LOVE Disney. Then I found out that they don't always make choices because it's best for the story. They make choices (sometimes casting choices) because it is a bold political act. When this happens we all lose IMO.

 

[Dr. Jones]

He’s the same poster who gets up in arms about all of this type of crap slung at geekdom movies with female leads or not catering to the letter of dork lore.

I thought that was Doctor Jones?

It was me.

rant Goggles on….. (Sorry, just saw this)
And cheese….. calling your paying customers names really hasn’t worked out for anyone these days. But your a writer in Hollywood so you should already know that.

Its not working out for the Star Wars universe, the Marvel universe, The Tolkien fandom, Willow, Almost all of Disney plus, Cleopatra, and the many other steaming piles of turd these writers are bringing to the table.

 

[Yuma]

It was me.

rant Goggles on….. (Sorry, just saw this)
And cheese….. calling your paying customers names really hasn’t worked out for anyone these days. But your a writer in Hollywood so you should already know that.

Its not working out for the Star Wars universe, the Marvel universe, The Tolkien fandom, Willow, Almost all of Disney plus, Cleopatra, and the many other steaming piles of turd these writers are bringing to the table.

IDK, I like Mandalorian, Andor, big fan of Marvel Universe, etc.

 

[WaywardFan]

It is a demonstrable fact Hollywood hates their customers. It's quite tedious.

 

[Chaplin]

It is a demonstrable fact Hollywood hates their customers. It's quite tedious.

Please demonstrate that.

 

[WaywardFan]

Sure thing. Turn on the tv. Go to the movies.

 

[Covert Rain]

Sure thing. Turn on the tv. Go to the movies.

Your assuming everyone doesn't like the content. Many TV show ratings and movies would seem to factually disagree with your assessment.

 

[jf-08]

Weird that someone (I think BiM?) posted in another thread that non-original content crushed it this weekend while new content struggled. I don't get it, as I am really not interested in sequels, remakes, etc., but I'm probably not the type of person that Hollywood caters to.

 

[Devilmaycare]

Your assuming everyone doesn't like the content. Many TV show ratings and movies would seem to factually disagree with your assessment.

We actually don't know that for most of the new shows that are complained about due to the streaming services not releasing numbers. And when they do give a number they do something meaningless like minutes watched. Ever notice how Prime and Netflix shows have 10 minutes of credits? That's to pad the minutes watched number since they know people leave the credits running as they get up for the bathroom, kitchen, etc. This is the big thing that I really hope Cheese and his mates can crush the studios on.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

The Little Mermaid Made A Big Splash At The Domestic Box Office, But It's Drowning Overseas

The Little Mermaid Made A Big Splash At The Domestic Box Office, But It's Drowning Overseas - SlashFilm

The studio's latest live-action remake still has a ways to go before becoming profitable.

www.slashfilm.com

Memorial Day weekend tends to be a big one for the box office, with "Top Gun: Maverick" absolutely shattering records over that coveted spot on the calendar last year. Disney decided to get in on the good this year with the much-discussed live-action remake of "The Little Mermaid." On the one hand, things panned out quite well, with the film doing exceedingly well with audiences in North America. On the other hand, the film has struggled mightily to gain a sizable audience overseas, especially compared to other recent Disney remakes, which could spell trouble. Let's dive into the numbers, shall we?

Director Rob Marshall's "The Little Mermaid" washed ashore with $95.4 million domestically, easily taking the top spot away from "Fast X," per The Numbers. When accounting for the Monday holiday, the film's total grew to $117.5 million. That makes it the fifth-biggest Memorial Day opening ever. Seems great, right? If the overseas numbers matched it, Disney would have reason to pop the champagne. Unfortunately, that's not the world we live in.

The film, which stars Halle Bailey and Melissa McCarthy, took in just $68.3 million internationally from more than 50 markets. That is an exceptionally rough start. With a $185.8 million global opening, the remake is pacing well behind "Beauty and the Beast" ($350 million global debut/$1.26 billion finish) and "Aladdin" ($207.1 million global debut/$1.05 billion finish). That's to say, international audiences simply aren't responding to this new take on Disney's 1989 animated classic with the same level of interest as the studio's other recent remakes.

Read More: https://www.slashfilm.com/1300068/l...splash-domestic-box-office-drowning-overseas/

 

[Dr. Jones]

We actually don't know that for most of the new shows that are complained about due to the streaming services not releasing numbers. And when they do give a number they do something meaningless like minutes watched. Ever notice how Prime and Netflix shows have 10 minutes of credits? That's to pad the minutes watched number since they know people leave the credits running as they get up for the bathroom, kitchen, etc. This is the big thing that I really hope Cheese and his mates can crush the studios on.

Agreed. And when they do release some deeper data the results, they are usually, very troubling. I really hope Cheese and his group wins this for all of us.

Rings of power had abysmal watch ratings. But rarely do people actually get these types of numbers. Disney+ is hemorrhaging money monthly.

Only 37% of US viewers (and 45% internationally) finished season 1 of the rings of power if I remember correctly. Amazon said it was viewed 100 million times and called it their "biggest show ever" but rarely goes deeper than that. Indie wire reported on this in the last 60 days. That's a loss of two-thirds of their audience in season 1 for a billion dollar budgeted show. That's nuts homie. Source

Getting back to the Mermaid. They need to retain this audience for a bit if they hope to recoup the 250mm budget and the 500mm marketing that went in to it still. that's where only having 25% being kids in week one really hurts the staying power here.

Kids saw Mario Brothers multiple times in the theater.

 

[Covert Rain]

We actually don't know that for most of the new shows that are complained about due to the streaming services not releasing numbers. And when they do give a number they do something meaningless like minutes watched. Ever notice how Prime and Netflix shows have 10 minutes of credits? That's to pad the minutes watched number since they know people leave the credits running as they get up for the bathroom, kitchen, etc. This is the big thing that I really hope Cheese and his mates can crush the studios on.

If people are completely disengaged with a series it will get cancelled. We see it all the time. If a streaming service can't provide consistent quality people will jump from the service. We see that too. It doesn't really matter what streaming services try and hide. It eventually all comes out in the wash. Netflix is a perfect example. They went through a massive cancel curve even though people didn't have the inside numbers. People simply were not watching those shows. Disney+ is doing something similar.

My original point though about your comment still stands. Hollywood doesn't hate their customers. They need their customers. They need hits to keep them happy. We see so many retreads or sequels not because they hate their customers but because it's risk averse to something original. It sucks but a built in audience gives them a head start. I wish we could see more originality but it's not like audiences rush to that stuff. I have seen original and great content go unwatched multiple times over the years by audiences.

Hit shows do exist and prove that if something is good, people will watch. Streaming services are desperate for market share right now and they know the only way to get it is through content they think people will enjoy. If anybody hates anybody? It's audiences that tend to hate original content makers because they would rather flock to Fast and Furious 100 then see something original. Case and point. 3 original movies were relased this weekend, The Machine, About my Father and Kandahar. Guess which movies audiences went to?

 

[Zalixar]

Just saw it today.

The manufactured outrage that has nothing to actually do with the movie is honestly mind blowing, ridiculous, and shameful.

Had been meh on some of these remakes, but it was better than expected. The original was far from my favorite, but it was my wife's favorite.

 

[UncleChris]

Going today.

 

[UncleChris]

An absolutely outstanding picture. The bride and I went with two friends, and we all enjoyed it a LOT!!!

The good: Halle Baily has some chops.... the girl can SING and she is soft on the eyes, too. Wowzers! Melissa McCarthy was excellent....Just the right amount of evil and over the top haminess. Underwater stuff was very good (Not quite the level of Avatar II, but still good). Following the storyline was also very good.

The not so good..... "Under the Sea" was a disappointment. Daveed Diggs tried hard. but it was nowhere close to Samuel E. Wright's Sebastian, particularly on that song.

All in all, an A-, or 4.5 out of 5 in it's genre. Not exactly Shakespeare, but great entertainment, nonetheless.

 

[Chaplin]

It was definitely good, and a lot of nostalgia (Little Mermaid is one of my favorite of the "princess" movies).

Spoiler

The changes weren't that bad, but it seemed to drag a little in the middle. One big thing I noticed, is the removal of the kitchen scene from the cartoon, although it is referenced by Sebastian when he climbs up the balcony to Ariel's room.

 

[Chris_Sanders]

The Scuttlebutt!

 

[Dr. Jones]

The Little Mermaid Made A Big Splash At The Domestic Box Office, But It's Drowning Overseas

The Little Mermaid Made A Big Splash At The Domestic Box Office, But It's Drowning Overseas - SlashFilm

The studio's latest live-action remake still has a ways to go before becoming profitable.

www.slashfilm.com

Memorial Day weekend tends to be a big one for the box office, with "Top Gun: Maverick" absolutely shattering records over that coveted spot on the calendar last year. Disney decided to get in on the good this year with the much-discussed live-action remake of "The Little Mermaid." On the one hand, things panned out quite well, with the film doing exceedingly well with audiences in North America. On the other hand, the film has struggled mightily to gain a sizable audience overseas, especially compared to other recent Disney remakes, which could spell trouble. Let's dive into the numbers, shall we?

Director Rob Marshall's "The Little Mermaid" washed ashore with $95.4 million domestically, easily taking the top spot away from "Fast X," per The Numbers. When accounting for the Monday holiday, the film's total grew to $117.5 million. That makes it the fifth-biggest Memorial Day opening ever. Seems great, right? If the overseas numbers matched it, Disney would have reason to pop the champagne. Unfortunately, that's not the world we live in.

The film, which stars Halle Bailey and Melissa McCarthy, took in just $68.3 million internationally from more than 50 markets. That is an exceptionally rough start. With a $185.8 million global opening, the remake is pacing well behind "Beauty and the Beast" ($350 million global debut/$1.26 billion finish) and "Aladdin" ($207.1 million global debut/$1.05 billion finish). That's to say, international audiences simply aren't responding to this new take on Disney's 1989 animated classic with the same level of interest as the studio's other recent remakes.

Read More: https://www.slashfilm.com/1300068/l...splash-domestic-box-office-drowning-overseas/

Getting back to the Mermaid. They need to retain this audience for a bit if they hope to recoup the 250mm budget and the 500mm marketing that went in to it still. that's where only having 25% being kids in week one really hurts the staying power here.

Kids saw Mario Brothers multiple times in the theater.

The audience retention didn't help it too much from what we are seeing now.

It's still drowning overseas. Many were claiming racism as the culprit but Black Panther killed overseas and the new Spiderman movie is crushing it also with a mainly diverse (albeit animated) cast.

I think it's going to do roughly 40% of what Beauty and the Beast pulled in IIRC.

‘Transformers: Rise of the Beasts’ Ignites to $110 Million at International Box Office, $170 Million Globally

"Transformers: Rise of the Beasts" kicked the tires at the international box office with $110 million.

variety.com

After three weeks of release, the live-action remake is swimming along with $228 million at the domestic box office. But the big-budget film has been struggling at the international box office, where ticket sales have been floundering with $185 million. (Yes, that’s considered “floundering” for a movie that cost $250 million.) At one point, there was hope “The Little Mermaid” would near the $1 billion mark; after a disappointing turnout overseas, it’ll be lucky to hit $500 million.

I think the rule of thumb is that you need to at least do twice your budget to break even. Am I right on that? The best this movie will hope to achieve is to get back to flat after all the marketing costs are taken into consideration.

 

[Devilmaycare]

The audience retention didn't help it too much from what we are seeing now.

It's still drowning overseas. Many were claiming racism as the culprit but Black Panther killed overseas and the new Spiderman movie is crushing it also with a mainly diverse (albeit animated) cast.

I think it's going to do roughly 40% of what Beauty and the Beast pulled in IIRC.

‘Transformers: Rise of the Beasts’ Ignites to $110 Million at International Box Office, $170 Million Globally

"Transformers: Rise of the Beasts" kicked the tires at the international box office with $110 million.

variety.com

I think the rule of thumb is that you need to at least do twice your budget to break even. Amy I right on that? The best this movie will hope to achieve is to get back to flat after all the marketing costs are taken into consideration.

Generally more than 2x, it's more like 2.5x but it partially depends on the domestic-international split. The studio get's the highest % of sales for domestic and it varies in the other markets. I believe China gives the lowest %.

This movie most likely looses money or barely breaks even with where it's at and a reported $250m budget which was probably a little higher with reshoots.