The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea

2000 "Return to the sea."
5.5| 1h15m| G| en| More Info
Released: 30 August 2000 Released
Producted By: Disney Television Animation
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Set several years after the first film, Ariel and Prince Eric are happily married with a daughter, Melody. In order to protect Melody from the Sea Witch, Morgana, they have not told her about her mermaid heritage. Melody is curious and ventures into the sea, where she meets new friends. But will she become a pawn in Morgana's quest to take control of the ocean from King Triton?

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Disney+

Director

Producted By

Disney Television Animation

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Jeanskynebu the audience applauded
Comwayon A Disappointing Continuation
Ketrivie It isn't all that great, actually. Really cheesy and very predicable of how certain scenes are gonna turn play out. However, I guess that's the charm of it all, because I would consider this one of my guilty pleasures.
Aubrey Hackett While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.
christylouis89 The Little Mermaid had always been my favorite movie ever since I was a kid. When I heard that there was a second one I was so excited. So, I went to watch it and I was highly disappointed. It will NEVER be anything compared to the Original. The plot had absolutely NO thought or creativity in it being made. It's basically the same plot as the original but reversed. *SPOILER* So sweet, naive, adorable, curious 16 year old Ariel gets turned into a dull, boring, no personality mother. Her child, Melody,grows up to be a little 'adventurer' and wants to explore the ocean. But, evil Morgana, Ursulas "Sister" that we never recalled her even having, tricks the her into stealing the Trident then all hell breaks loose.The Penguin and the walrus are just franchised versions of Timon and Pumba. Flounder, cute silly little flounder,is turned into some fat, nasal congested blob. Prince Eric sounds a hot mess and he is absolutely USELESS. The girl,Melody, is such a freaking nuisance.And may I advise you to wear some shades the animation is too bright, and colorful. There's just no magic in it as the first. This isn't even a sequel its the original movie is what's real. The new people in Disney are just unskilled, uncreative gold-diggers.Please don't give them the satisfaction. Don't waste your money.
licedwar When I was 10, I watched this movie for the first time and loved it. This is because I was 10 and was entertained by any animated movie. You could have shown me a 90 minute cartoon solely about talking garbage cans and I would've thought it was great.The other day I was babysitting some girls, and they wanted to watch a Disney movie, so I pulled out an old box consisting of several Disney classics and this one. They picked Little Mermaid 2, so I thought that this would be a good excuse to relive some childhood memories. At the end of the movie, I realized that the sequel that I used to think was awesome was actually a nauseatingly bad piece of...ship. The old characters have no personality, and Ariel and Eric have been reduced to cardboard cutouts. Melody, their daughter, is supposed to be the lovable misfit, but she is far too sickening and and perfect to be lovable. The plot is extremely similar to the original, except that Melody wants to be a mermaid whereas Ariel wanted to be a human. The songs lack any of the first movie's charm, and it feels like the creators just stuck them in there for the sake of putting songs in. The animation is flat and boring, lacking the subtleties in the first movie (noticing a pattern here?). Flounder is not nearly as adorable, Scuttle has become so dumb that it hurts to hear him speak, and Morgana, the new villain, is like a much less intimidating version of Ursula. Morgana's sidekicks are not especially menacing either- her pet shark is more oafish than frightening. Two new characters, a penguin and walrus duo, are forced comedy relief. Their shtick is that they are cowards who aspire to be heroes, and at the end of the film they finally get to become heroes. Very original. The day after I watched this, I watched the original to remind myself that The Little Mermaid is, in fact, a great Disney movie with great characters, memorable music, and beautiful animation, unlike the travesty I've just lambasted.Naturally, the girls I babysat for loved it.
ohsta62 Love 'em or hate 'em, most of the Disney direct to video films which are often sequels are worse than the originals. Beginning in Aladdin's sequel, The Return of Jafar, lots of them are poor quality and are made to cash in. Ironic as Walt Disney didn't like sequels with this quote he once said, 'I do not like to repeat successes, I like to go on to other things.' Then would he be disappointed with this string of supposedly sequels? Of course.One of the worst sequels Disney has ever made is The Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea. This is a low quality sequel to the beloved and high quality 1989 film, The Little Mermaid. Not only was the original a commercial success in the box office and met with critical acclaim from critics and audiences but also saved the animation industry which had been in a decline for some while sometime after W.Disney's death in 1966.The film's narrative is almost the opposite of the original. Instead of Ariel wanting to come to the human world as a mermaid, in here, Melody wants to come the the mer-world as a human. Ariel is a dull hollow shell of herself here. Yes, she is no longer the main character but there was no need to suck out her personality and put it to an irregular fashion to her daughter.Eric sounds different and has little dialogue in the film. Melody is not that likable. Sebastian is not quite the same he was in the original, in fact, he doesn't appear as regularly now. Why is Flounder, now a father, even fatter now? Being overweight does NOT make you look older. Scuttle rarely appears as well.The new characters included are not very good. Morgana is rubbish at magic unlike her dead, skilled at magic sister Ursula, in fact, she even 'takes' a potion of Ursula's magic. She copies her; She does wriggles her tentacles while everything except her eyes fade to black, the same her obese sibling did in the original film. Besides, she is not a very practical villain. You don't immediately go and threaten to have a beloved person dead for something important. That's like if you held someone at gunpoint for the bank's money in real life. Morgana then realizes she needs to manipulate an idea for the trident like Ursula did.It's like she wants to be like her sister. Despite envying her as she was their mother's favourite. Morgana is determined to be only be her mother's favourite by having her hands on the trident. The final battle from her evil doings i.e. making an ice fortress with anyone bowing down before her wasn't very comfortable but hardly that scary. Ursula's final battle was possibly the darkest Disney ever produced. The enormous, powerful Ursula controlling the ocean like a sinister god with the menacingly dark colours at night scared the living daylights of quite some people and they also feared the obese cecaelia alone. Her much thinner sister is only a faint trace of her wickedness.A penguin and walrus named Tip and Dash seemed Artic equivalents to Timon and Pumbaa in both appearance and personality. Undertow is not needed especially as a grumbling piranha. Morgana's minions which are manta rays Cloak and Dagger are silent but not intimidating. Ursula's minions which are eels Flotsam and Jetsam who are also dead, were possibly intimidating by their irregular voices and hideous look like their master. The French Chef, Louis was his name? Still wants to cook Sebastian. Man, really. As he said, he's old(er) and too small for a meal.Grimsby and Carlotta never(if not rarely) speak as well as barely them appearing in the whole film. Triton looks younger and why did he did nothing when Morgana kissed Melody? The animation is poor quality. It's bright,garish and quite a rough frame rate. I don't like it when there's that smooth visual thing by rough frames that is also probably present in The Return of Jafar. The original was much better, possibly one thing that built its success. Compared to the labour of hand drawn and painted cels, this is merely digitally coloured ink and coloured done with little effort. Although the film's animation is not as bad as the 1992 TV series with the same name which is indeed poor at times.The songs are childish and possibly forgettable. I can't sit more than 6 seconds on one continuously. The original film had a good variety of songs as well as better ones. From a Calypso music themed 'Under the Sea' which won an Oscar to a spirited music like one 'Part of Your World' particularly the last reprise of the latter.Fortunately, most of the original cast reprised here. This was also Buddy Hackett's final voice-over for a film, who plays the often absent Scuttle here and in the original, d.2003. Eric's original voice-over hasn't reprised and he sounds embarrassingly different. The others are fine though Ariel sounds deeper as she is now grown up and all. Morgana sounds like Ursula as it was the same voice-over as both the cecaelia sisters, Pat Carroll.Another sad thing is this was released on my birthday. I got good news and bad news about the Disney's direct to video films. The good news is Disney will finally end production to them. The bad news is some more will be made i.e. Tinkerbell prequels. Why is it CGI whereas Peter Pan is traditional yet set after them?Well, that's about what I could say. This is not a good film. It is indeed better off never made and is needless like most of Disney's DtV films Watch if you're a die hard TLM fan and rent it instead of buying it unless you want it to fill your collection.
rumblinglove I'm not saying that this is a very bad movie, but it's closely to being one. This movie is a much of a remake for the original than being a sequel and it's true that remaking is not always a curse but apparently this sequel is semi to be a curse. I found the events of this movie to be semi interesting but I didn't find any event not even remotely interesting for real; this movie had my interests in it's events killed by just every second when first I watched it and I was about to give up but hey why should I be so harsh? let's handle the events and see what's the end with the story. All I'm saying is that this movie needs to improve itself over 600,000 time to at least be as good as the original. You may say I'm totally overreacting but that's how I see it. My preschool brother and 2nd grader sister at the time didn't like this movie at all. Both of them actually borrowed this movie for movie time at school and guess what, the both reported us of how everybody were bored from the events and their teachers eventually ended up replacing another movie instead of this just when it wasn't even close to the middle. If you want to watch this movie just go to youtube or download it but my advice to you: never pay a penny over this for even rent cause you might cry from believing that you've waisted your money over this.