Talk:The Little Mermaid (1989 film)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Little Mermaid (1989 film) article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1: 3 months

The Little Mermaid (1989 film) has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 11, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed

Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on November 17, 2023, and November 17, 2024.

Film: Core / American / Animated

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm
	This article is on the project's core list.
	This article is supported by the American cinema task force.
	This article is supported by the Animated films task force.

Animation: American / Films Top‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the American animation work group (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is supported by the Animated films work group (assessed as Top-importance).

Disney Top‑importance

	Disney portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disney, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of The Walt Disney Company and its affiliated companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DisneyWikipedia:WikiProject DisneyTemplate:WikiProject DisneyDisney
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Library of Congress Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

United States: Animation / Cinema Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Animation portal This article is supported by WikiProject Animation - American animation work group (assessed as Top-importance).
	Film portal This article is supported by WikiProject Film - American cinema task force (assessed as Top-importance).

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Portrait d'Ariel la petite sirène.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2023

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

change "Her father King Triton, the ruler of Atlantica, however says contact between merpeople and humans is forbidden." to "However, her father King Triton, the ruler of Atlantica, says contact between merpeople and humans is forbidden." 47.205.55.154 (talk) 05:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done SSSB (talk) 09:13, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Controversy and criticism

Sorry, but I don't understand, maybe my english is not good enough, or something, but what the hay? This whole session is based on nothing tengible, and is just interpretation of other people.

"including topics of gay rights" -> There was no such thing in the film
(the central character, Ariel, "feels constrained by her patriarchal society" and is "in the closet") -> That's just normal teen feeling, not restrained gay something
gender fluidity, -> Again, at no point Ariel feels of an other gender...
and body image issues. -> I can see something in this one. But not before she met and saved the life of Eric.
Ariel turns to "the only strong female in the entire film and thus Ariel's only female role model," the villain Ursula -> That's the plot, yes, lost teen turning to bad manipulative people, and learning to be stronger
(who was based on famous drag queen Divine, herself closely associated with gay filmmaker John Waters). -> The apparence and manierism, not the character or way of thinking... Don't mix everything
Landis invokes Laura Sells and her argument that, "Ariel learns [from Ursula that] gender [is not]...a natural category, but...a performed construct." -> Nani!? Can you provide a film extract or something? Because I don't remember this being on the movie.

In the linked source, it even goes further: the men of her life murder Ursula with a “conveniently phallic” symbol, -> What!? Everything long is now a phalic symbol? The trident is a symbol of power, yes, but not a phalic one... “the ritual slaughtering of the archetypal evil feminine character.” -> Make your mind! Is Ursula "the only strong female" or the "archetypal evil feminine character" ? I mean, she manipulates Ariel, she makes unfair and unclear deals, and she did so to gain power over all the society. It's not being strong, it's being evil (like Scar in the lion king). Ariel is strong, she goes against established rules to show an other way is possible, other strong women can be found everywhere in movies, (Nala is strong too in the lion king, she maintain a working group despite Scar opression, and she fight Hyenas) but Ursula? Manipulation and lies, don't tell me she is strong.

So, yeah, all in all, this is more like (very) personal interpretation of the movie more than anything. I don't feel it's worth of an encyclopedia. I don't say my point of view is the absolute truth, but let's be honnest 2 minutes, and try to be neutral when writing articles... Any thoughts about that? 80.14.34.97 (talk) 13:06, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't agree more, the "analysis" from whatever academic is nothing more than malicious propaganda, and why is an opinion from some actress who completely missed the point worthy of mention? The whole section offers no useful comment or information of any kind, and therefore needs to be deleted. Kuramae31314 (talk) 05:27, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1 Outside of it being questionable and not even the main aspect of the given source: A good article should not emphasize a very specific interpretation out of a single essay like that. Eiragorn (talk) 10:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree 100%, the entire section is entirely unencyclopedic and more of a left-wing political rant with totally random people's opinions 30 years after its release about how the movie is outdated or not up to modern standards. It's silly. I'd be in favor of nuking it altogether.McRandy1958 (talk) 04:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Please get rid of that entire section. It makes it seem like the film has fallen out of favour. When actually this film has held up remarkably well, and is just as beloved as ever! 2001:8003:464C:BA00:D54C:C6DB:1231:F3CC (talk) 09:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Dinglehopper" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Dinglehopper has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 13 § Dinglehopper until a consensus is reached. Interstellarity (talk) 13:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]