1. That's okay you can treat me as you would treat anybody else 13 or not!MovieMusicals.net wrote:Timon/Pumba fan,
I'm a very agressive debater and this tends to make me seem offensive. And I remember you said you were only 13 or 14, so I will have to try to be nice...
1) Hunchback has an 80% fresh value at Rotten Tomatoes, while Mermaid has 89%. Both have mostly positive reviews - I don't know what you're talking about with Hunchback getting bad reviews. All films will have negative reviews, but at the reviews listed at Rotten Tomatoes, they are mostly positive for both films, while both having their share of negatives.
2) Unforgettable? Hardly. You don't see Little Mermaid characters in the parks now, do ya? Except for Ariel in the parades, who is part of the Princess line. Esmeralda is not a princess and marketed in the Princess line, so she wouldn't be featured. Even still, I often see her in the theme parks for photo opportunities. Both films were mass merchandised. Both hadstill, I often see marketed in the Princess line, so she wouldn't be featured. Even her in the theme parks for photo opportunities. Both films were mass merchandised. Both had sequels. Both have/will have stage musicals done. Both have/had theme park shows.
And of course Little Mermaid will be more popular than Hunchback. It was the film that rebirthed the Disney musical. Plus it was a better film. It doesn't make Hunchback a BAD film. Hunchback was very good. In my opinion, better than Mulan and Hercules.
3) No, even with the price difference, Hunchback would have still done better in the box office than Mermaid:
http://www.natoonline.org/statisticstickets.htm
In 1989, average ticket price was $3.99 and in 1996 was $4.42. That's less than fifty cents. Mermaid would barely have made the $300million mark. So no, Little Mermaid did NOT pass Hunchback.
Little Mermaid "crushed" Hunchback?? There is no proof Mermaid did better in video sales/records. This information is not publicly available. It was released 7 years earlier, so I would imagine it might have done better because it had more time. Find the initial rental/sales information and I'll believe you.
4) The only thing I SLIGHTLY agree with was calling Hunchback "disappointing." It was SLIGHTLY disappointing because it wasn't as good as Mermaid, Beast, Aladdin, and Lion King. Hunchback, Mulan, and Pocahontas were not as good. And then Hercules and Tarzan would be group-ranked third.
2. According to Rotten Tomatoes The Little Mermaid has only 28 reviews and The Hunchback only had 30. As you can se not very many reviews. If you actually got alot more reviews I think The Hunchback percent would drop.
3. Are you kidding me! ARIEL IS EVERYWHERE!!!
http://welcome.goingtocalifornia.com/pa ... grotto.htm
http://www.wdwinfo.com/wdwinfo/guides/m ... grotto.htm
http://disneyland.disney.go.com/disneyl ... actionPage
http://www.wdwinfo.com/wdwinfo/guides/m ... ermaid.htm
http://www.laughingplace.com/Lotion-View-75-1.asp
Still say The Little Mermaid isn't at the parks! While the Hunchback was popular when it was released and was popular for a little bit but now the the shows at Disneyland and Walt Disney World are gone, I haven't seen a single character from The Hunchback.
4. Well I'm not sure how you would adjust box office scores, but I think The Hunchback's scores would go lower so Ariel would just barely pass Hunchback. But if The Little Mermaid didn't pass The Hunchback at all, it at least did better than Hunchback in America and Japan(the countries that sell the most movie tickets).
5. Actually Tarzan and Pocahontas did very well in terms of box office and popularity. The Hunchback would still be second to last place behind Hercules. Mulan did worse box office wise, but really did well with reviews and video records.
), making her cry. I know that story isn't 100% exciting, but this debate reminded me of Frollo and Ariel's dispute...