Rating: 
Summary: Good, but not great
Review: I think that my title just about sums up my feelings on this movie. Like the majority of movie sequels that are not planned on when the first movie is realised, it does not have the calibre of the original. The story-line was pretty much a rehash of its predessor, which made it very predictable. The songs, though, are nice, but they don't stick in your head the way the old ones used to. The animation is in most parts good, but at times gets a little sloppy - kind of like a cut and paste rendition. Still, Melody is very likeable and Sebastion is the same as ever. But, as the editor's review says, this movie lacks heart. It also lacks that little spark that gave THE LITTLE MERMAID its life.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Addition to anyone's Disney Collection
Review: I myself dislike the idea of the straight to video movies that Disney put's out. But because I have 2 young girl's in the house this was a no brainer, and we loved the movie ! Mariah age 4 says the singing is the best part, it is a very cute movie with a few lessons for the little ones to learn.
Rating: 
Summary: Jodi Benson's Slide Down Under (the sea, that is...)
Review: I am a product of the generation raised on the Little Mermaid. I loved it more than my own sister. I used to pretend I was a mermaid, and even tried to mold my legs into fins one day in the bathtub. Although this did not work, I still listen to the soundtrack twice daily. It goes on in the car, on my way to work....EVERYWHERE! Needless to say, this movie fell VASTLY short of my high expectations. Ariel and Eric turned into clueless parents that think secrecy is a valuable parenting tool-and then they are surprised when Melody runs away.Ya think?? These songs were so unoriginal they made me cry when I heard them, and now I have to listen to the original soundtrack at full volume just to recover. The animation was sloppy, Ariel's head almost popped off in one spot--and given that I think she may be my real mother, this was obviously quite disturbing. This movie should be recalled IMMEDIATELY to avoid further damage to those out there like me, the hidden merpeople who are forced to live on the shore every day (as opposed to under the sea). Then again, the seaweed is always greener in somebody else's lake....But back to my main point, this movie damaged my psyche and is an unbelievably terrible evil loosed into our society. Please take this off the marklet immediately-help save the lives (and legs) of so many young girls out there. Sincerely, Ariel (I legally changed my name)
Rating:
Summary: It's not as good as the orginal but still pretty neat
Review: Brushing aside the comparatively lax animation standards and the overpredictable plot (with some very obvious important and interesting reversals) this was a very enjoyable movie. Finally, we get to see what happens at different stages of a Disney character's life---lo and behold, Ariel has become as headstrong and overprotective as her father was of her. Eric (who oddly remains a Prince while Ariel becomes a Queen) is good for window dressing, but does not appear to have any real function or talent beyond looking good and being nice. In addition to the return of Flounder and Scuttle, we meet new friends who guide Melody on her quest of self discovery and dream fufilment. Although her mother tries to protect her from the sea, the same thing that once guided Ariel to the land tells Melody she has a special destinty all her own. Sure, the other land kids in the film laugh at her, but she is ultimately whole when she discovers the real truth between the weird dreams that she had been having all of those years. THe only real disappointment is Morgana. Instead of the sensual and psychotic Ursula, this sea witch looks like she is long overdue for some serious psychotherapy of any kind. Even though it might be scary for today's young kids, this "monster" will no be frightening at all to people like myself who remember seeing the original movie.
Rating:
Summary: Mediocre
Review: Cotrary to what a previous reviewer thought, I do not recommend the lion king 2 as a good sequel, but neither is the little mermaid 2. Apart from the sloppy animation (eg king Triton's head growing peaked when he lifts it up, Ariel's elongation of the neck and apparent jaw deformity towards the end of the duet with her daughter, the oversizedness of her head in many frames), the songs seem very spiritless, especially in comparison with the stellar repertoire of the original. One thing which might prove slightly annoying to the viewer was the cliched political correctness of the ending song. There seemed to be a few shallow attempts at addressing 'issues', such as family values, sibling rivalry, etc, but these were lost in the disappointing script. Morgana fell sadly short of the expectations set up by Ursula, and came off looking more like a crazed old hag. As King Triton himself mentioned in the show, a 'madwoman'. What a force to be reckoned with.
Rating:
Summary: Kids will love it, but the original was FAR better
Review: Even though this sequel to the 1989 Disney classic "The Little Mermaid" has many of the same voices as the original (such as Jodi Benson as Ariel and Samuel Wright as Sebastian), it's missing a little something. Namely, it's missing great animation, a plot that makes sense to adults, and, of course, the classic Menken/Ashman score and songs that made the original such a smash. The biggest weakness, frankly, is the songs, which display all the creativity and spirit as your average Barbie commercial; come to think of it, maybe that was the goal. The animation also lacks spirit and could easily be from any Saturday morning cartoon; sorry, Disney, that's not why we pay good money to see your product. It's kind of unfortunate that Disney insists on cheapening its brilliant animated originals (especially this one and "Beauty and the Beast") with lame straight-to-video sequels. I'm sure the economics of a straight-to-video sequel are compelling, but take the case of the only sequel they didn't handle this way - "Toy Story 2." Originally, the sequel to "Toy Story" was to be a straight-to-video job as well, but it was decided that it should be produced for theatrical release instead. The result? The film was a massive commercial and critical success, and was better than the original (no small compliment) in many ways. Maybe the "Toy Story 2" experience will convince Disney to stop the straight-to-video dreck specials like "Little Mermaid 2," but I doubt it. I guess the good news is that this film is harmless fluff for the kiddies to watch, but I found it telling that after she watched this film, my four-year-old daughter said the original "Mermaid" was far better. Well said.
Rating:
Summary: The legend lives on!
Review: The story of THE LITTLE MERMAID continues with this great sequel! Ariel (Jodi Benson) and Eric have been blessed with a little girl called Melody, and they cannot wait to show her to her Grandfather, Sebastian, Flounder, Scuttle and all of the mer-folk. But, during the visit, the sister of the dead Ursula (Pat Carroll) arrives, intent on avenging her sister's death at the hands of Ariel and Eric. She is called Morgana (and is ALSO voiced by Pat Carroll!) Ariel and Eric realise that Melody will not be safe if they disclose the fact that her heritage is that of both a human and a mermaid, so they decide to keep it a secret. Ten years later, Melody is a young girl, who is drawn to the sea. Her parents realise that the sea is a part of her, and reluctantly decide to reveal all, but it is too late, as Morgana has found the girl, and makes her into a pawn in her plan to rule the Seven Seas. A great sequel, and, for someone who has grown up with the original film, it was like being reunited with old friends (and a few new ones, too!).
Rating: 
Summary: The Power of Music and Scripting
Review: "The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea" met my expectations for a direct-to-video film. It did not exceed them nor did they fall short. The 1989 original "The Little Mermaid" is a very formidable film, making the artistic success for a sequel a great challenge. To its credit "The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea" did unfold in a different direction than I had anticipated. The story was not innovative but some of the particular plot situations were well thought out. In any story you have conflict and resolution and those are the aspects that I liked about this film. Some of the dramatics did rely on prior events, which took place in the original. That was thematically important to the overall story. One weakness of this film was the lack of character development. Character development was one of the strong points of "The Little Mermaid." I watched "The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea" twice trying to determine if the film digressed in such a way to bolster my contention of this. What did the "The Little Mermaid" achieve in roughly the same amount of time that this film didn't? And then it struck me that it was the music or more specifically the songs in the original that advanced the story line and defined the characters. That was the brilliance of lyricist Howard Ashman. He and composer Alan Menken developed songs in the original that in several minutes clearly defined Ariel's reckless but innocent curiosity about the humans above and her yearning to discover that world. Every song in the original bolstered the characters, advanced the plot or enhanced the significance of a scene in addition to being very melodic and well written. So in the "The Little Mermaid" we were given a substantial amount of information and entertainment in a minimum amount of time. There is not a single frame of wasted footage in that film. "The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea" does not have the advantage of Alan Menken and Howard Ashman compositions. The instrumental score is very good but the new songs feel superficial. The animation especially during the underwater scenes is good. Morgana is not as menacing as her sister Ursula was in the original. Other than Ursula I believe all the main characters are back. Melody, Ariel's daughter gets to mingle with the old characters as well as meet new ones. I thought that was significant seeing that the scriptwriters were determined not to have Melody just copy what Ariel did in the original. It would have been a very good sequel for theatrical release. If that was done, there would have been a bigger budget and the various shortcomings could have been corrected. I liked "The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea" but I did not feel it was as good as Disney's other direct-to-video, "Pocahontas II." However, I believe that "The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea" will have a definite audience with younger family members and there are actually some nostalgic moments that will no doubt attract teens and up who loved the original. I highly recommend this movie.
Rating:
Summary: Not as good
Review: Sure, I loved the Little Mermaid 2: Return to the sea, but I found that the story seemed far shorter, less interesting and the animation in places was odd. Much Better then most sequels do but not that great. Still love to watch it though, the songs are catchy. ^_~
Rating:
Summary: Quickie Disney Film
Review: If you're curious about this second part, it's worth renting, but not buying. Disney seems to be throwing stuff out there to make another buck. One more business gone commerical. The animation and singing is like the animation series of the "Little Mermaid". When they start to sing I want to roll over and cry. It might entertain your children, but why expose them to such bad quality work when we have seen what Disney is really capable of.
| 
