Disney's Live Action The Little Mermaid

[erasure fan1]

Not necessarily. Take the glee club example I provided above. If the song is sung by or to those who don’t know the scene, the lyrics may not be interpreted as meant.

Well in that instance, maybe that is warranted. Context means a lot. This isn't being sung to a group unfamiliar with story. Even if by some chance they have never seen the original. There's no way to take the song the wrong way. Unless of course they have significantly changed the story. Maybe that's the answer, it's no longer about Ariel pursuing Eric. So if Ariel no longer needs Eric, it might be him chasing her now.

In this instance, a few select changes to two songs—made with the backing and involvement of one of the original songwriters—are being framed in rather alarmist and exaggerated terms as another battleground in the culture wars.

It's being made into a battleground because there really isn't a reason to do it outside of either (a) they're looking for things to be offended by. Or (b) the context of the story changed like I said above. As of now, all the arguments have been about times change, some things are no longer appropriate... But none of that applies to this song, in the context of the original film. So that's why people are making a bigger deal out of it.

 

[DavidDL]

I personally think the changing of the lyrics for the reasons they gave are silly given both their context and who sings them in the film.

But really, who cares? Those songs and the original film are readily available all over the place. No one is forcing me or anyone else to go and see this new movie. I hadn't planned on watching it but that doesn't mean I want it to fail or be bad for those who are going to. Hell, I hope they love it. Because unlike an attraction shutting down forever, nothing is truly getting replaced here. There are now just more options for more people to choose from and enjoy.

I do wish Disney would stop giving live action remakes to franchises that are already popular, though and instead focus those efforts towards something new. Or, if they want to go the remake route, how about remaking films didn't do well and actually need it?

 

[Phroobar]

Just wait until Disney pulls a George Lucas and asks Jody Benson to re-sing the song with the new lyrics and they release it in the original movie.

 

[LSLS]

This issue is always presented in such dichotomous terms. There are so many shades of grey between "This is problematic! I'm offended" and "There's no issue here. Why are people so sensitive?" No-one is condemning the original lyrics as beyond the pale. Menken's own words on the issue (which those criticising the change here seem totally unwilling to engage with) are temperate and considered.


Why do you refuse to look it up if it's something you want to know the answer to?

I took a quick look and didn't see anything, and I wasn't about to go through whatever trademark Govt. sites I'd need to if someone knew an answer. I think you are reading nefariously into what my intent was with the question, it was genuine. I asked because I wonder if say WB does own the rights to the song (note I'm not looking for who wrote it, I'm looking for who owns the publishing rights), if changing lyrics could potentially make it so they don't need to license the song for the new movie (I'm way over my legal knowledge, genuinely I'm just looking for the money aspect, cause I do believe this is way more about either money or ego than anything).

Let me point out here I'm not against change. I don't mind lyrics being changed for remakes/covers of songs. There are definitely times I think it makes things better (and let me also say I'm not saying this song is worse for the change, I can't stand people saying it's great or terrible without even hearing how it is). My take is I don't think the words are problematic in the least, and to be totally honest I still have trouble seeing how they could even be interpreted as such. I'm thinking there was something else that is the catalyst, and this is a convenient excuse (similar to my Splash take). That said, I honestly don't really care they changed the lyrics. It could be a great change, I don't think there is any way to judge it. And if the author of the song was in favor, he's certainly better at writing these styles of songs than I am, I'll defer to him.

 

[LittleBuford]

As of now, all the arguments have been about times change, some things are no longer appropriate... But none of that applies to this song, in the context of the original film. So that's why people are making a bigger deal out of it.

But we’re not talking about the song in the context of the original film; we’re talking about it in the context of its 2023 remake. Are you really going to maintain that nothing has changed in terms of how entertainment is produced and perceived in the more than three decades that have passed since 1989? Why shouldn’t the new film reflect how things are done today?

 

[Animaniac93-98]

Okay I do have to ask this question. In what way, shape, or form did Eric EVER force himself on Ariel? Can someone PLEASE explain that?

He simply leaned in for a kiss to see if she was receptive. She was so, they kissed.

The whole argument also ignores that, in the context of the movie, Ariel signed a "binding and completely legal" contract stating that if Eric didn't smooch her by the end of day 3, she'd forfeit her soul to Ursula.

...which is, you know, also not good. And why her friends sang the dang song.

 

[LittleBuford]

I think you are reading nefariously into what my intent was with the question, it was genuine.

Nefariously?! I simply asked why you refused to look it up yourself (based on your own statement that there was "no way" you would do so).

At any rate, I don't know the answer either.

 

[DavidDL]

Just wait until Disney pulls a George Lucas and asks Jody Benson to re-sing the song with the new lyrics and they release it in the original movie.

If this is a joke then ignore what I'm about to say. It's hard to tell sometimes online.

If it's not, then I don't think it's likely to happen. -and even if it did, it still wouldn't change the widespread availability of the original version. Even Song of the South, a film Disney has tried to bury, is readily available to everyone with even the most minimal effort and an internet connection. The absolute worst I could see down the line someday would be a disclaimer at the beginning a la Peter Pan or Dumbo. But even that seems like a stretch to me right now.

 

[Jedijax719]

Decontextualised, the words can read rather differently:

Yes, you want her,​

Look at her, you know you do,​

Possible she wants you too,​

There is one way to ask her.​

It don't take a word,​

Not a single word,​

Go on and kiss the girl​

Take away the narrative as we know it and you’re left with lyrics that seem to be encouraging someone to kiss a girl without seeking her consent or knowing for certain that she would reciprocate. This would be an uncharitable interpretation that ignores the circumstances of the scene, but I can certainly see why such words may not resonate so innocently among today’s young people.

I know I've been out of the dating business for 20 years, but when did males ever have to actually ask if it was okay to kiss a girl that already seemed read and was already leaning toward them? Anyway, not trying to split hairs. I am very excited about the movie. Just another one of those overly sensitive issues that is not really even an issue.

 

[LittleBuford]

I know I've been out of the dating business for 20 years, but when did males ever have to actually ask if it was okay to kiss a girl that already seemed read and was already leaning toward them? Anyway, not trying to split hairs. I am very excited about the movie. Just another one of those overly sensitive issues that is not really even an issue.

Young people today often ask each other before going in for their first kiss. I realise it’s not how things were done when we were their age, but times really do change, just as they did between our parents’ younger years and ours.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I know I've been out of the dating business for 20 years, but when did males ever have to actually ask if it was okay to kiss a girl that already seemed read and was already leaning toward them? Anyway, not trying to split hairs. I am very excited about the movie. Just another one of those overly sensitive issues that is not really even an issue.

Key word: “seemed.”

 

[Disstevefan1]

*TIME FOR A DERAIL*
I watched Creed III last night. It was GREAT

 

[Jedijax719]

Key word: “seemed.”

LOL-she closed her eyes, puckered her lips, and moved right in toward him. I think that passes the "maybe yes maybe not" category.

 

[Disney Irish]

I know I've been out of the dating business for 20 years, but when did males ever have to actually ask if it was okay to kiss a girl that already seemed read and was already leaning toward them? Anyway, not trying to split hairs. I am very excited about the movie. Just another one of those overly sensitive issues that is not really even an issue.

This gets into a larger complex topic which is best not had in these forums. As it involves the topic of consent, when it is explicitly given and can be taken away. But I will say its not something that one should be considered overly sensitive.

 

[LittleBuford]

I think one of the reasons such conversations don’t go well is that those asking questions aren’t really looking for descriptive or informational answers. Rather, they’re posing an impossible challenge: “Convince me of something I can’t be convinced of!” One can dispassionately acknowledge the reasoning behind a certain viewpoint without personally endorsing or agreeing with that viewpoint.

 

[erasure fan1]

But we’re not talking about the song in the context of the original film; we’re talking about it in the context of its 2023 remake. Are you really going to maintain that nothing has changed in terms of how entertainment is produced and perceived in the more than three decades that have passed since 1989? Why shouldn’t the new film reflect how things are done today?

Of course things change, we all get that. What I will maintain, is that there is zero wrong with the song, even through todays lens. So I've come to the assumption that we are going to see a major change in the story, like I said earlier. I'd guess Ariel won't really need Eric anymore. If not, then what was the point? I guess we'll see when the film releases.

 

[Californian Elitist]

LOL-she closed her eyes, puckered her lips, and moved right in toward him. I think that passes the "maybe yes maybe not" category.

You presented a general situation where a man assumed a woman wanted to be kissed because it seemed like she did. I’m just going based on what you wrote.

 

[LittleBuford]

What I will maintain, is that there is zero wrong with the song, even through todays lens.

My point is that there are those today who are viewing things through a different lens from you. You may not share their perspective or even consider it valid, but it exists nonetheless.

 

[erasure fan1]

I think one of the reasons such conversations don’t go well is that those asking questions aren’t really looking for descriptive or informational answers. Rather, they’re posing an impossible challenge: “Convince me of something I can’t be convinced of!” One can dispassionately acknowledge the reasoning behind a certain viewpoint without personally endorsing or agreeing with that viewpoint.

The reason this one isn't going well is because one side is saying it's justified to change the song. It's ok because of modern sensibility, times change... But then no one can explain what the issue ith the song is. And yes, the context of the film might have changed, we'll see. So yea it's a bit of convince me. But it shouldn't be an impossible challenge. Not if there is a logical answer.

 

[LittleBuford]

The reason this one isn't going well is because one side is saying it's justified to change the song. It's ok because of modern sensibility, times change... But then no one can explain what the issue ith the song is. And yes, the context of the film might have changed, we'll see. So yea it's a bit of convince me. But it shouldn't be an impossible challenge. Not if there is a logical answer.

I’m not looking to convince you—that’s precisely my point. I’m simply explaining how the discourse has changed, regardless of where each of us may personally stand on the issue.

Google the words “university” and “consent”—many of the top results will be university websites discussing the need to continually check in with one’s romantic/sexual partner. This is the kind of discourse that young people today are immersed in, and that we didn’t grow up with. Again, you don’t have to like or agree with it, but to ignore it is to wilfully remain in the dark about the context in which Ashman’s lyrics have been revised.

Let me add (though I think I implied as much earlier) that I myself do not regard the original lyrics as problematic. That doesn’t mean, however, that I can’t at least try to understand why others may feel differently.