# Talk:The Little Mermaid (1989 film)

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)

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)

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

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)

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)
+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)
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)
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)

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)