Not was that bad that I expected, actually it was kinda good, funny and cute. Ariel's sisters were funny and non-perfect :DD And I love Benjamin

★★★☆☆ (3/5) Surprisingly not as bad as most Disney prequels. It adds a bit of backstory that’s actually kind of sweet. Still very direct-to-video in feel, but it has some charm and decent songs. Not great, just a solid, harmless watch.

Actually didn’t mind this one, without a doubt better than the second one, the animation looks nicer, the characters are more likeable and it’s just a nice little story nothing amazing but not too bad.

Definitely more original than the second one, it had some fun moments and it was nice to see more of Ariel's... beginning. Not something I have to rewatch though. According to IMDb, the last animated direct-to-video film, since John Lasseter changed things, cancelling movies such as Pinocchio 2, Dumbo II, The Jungle Book 3, The Aristocats II, Aladdin 4, Hercules 2 and Mulan III. I know that's for the best and those movies would be (like most direct-to-video films) not very good, but it does make me wonder what does movies would be like.

A bad prequel. 'The Little Mermaid: Ariel’s Beginning' is, unfortunately given the original and sequel are good, utterly pointless. It's just all very plain, most notably with the animation due to its dully done backgrounds. The story is useless, do we really care what happened to Ariel before 'The Little Mermaid'? No, this premise adds extremely little to the other two films - the only plus is that we find out what happened to her mother. At least the duo of Jodi Benson (Ariel) and Samuel E. Wright (Sebastian) reprise their roles for a third time, though none of the new additions leave a mark. The villains are very boring, Sally Field goes unnoticed as Marina Del Rey and Benjamin (Jeff Bennett) is entirely forgettable. Some of the songs are decent, but that aside this is a follow-up that doesn't need to exist.