The original cover of ‘The Little Mermaid’ VHS was not banned. Although, it did generate controversy due to a hidden image that appeared in the artwork.
In the original cover art, which was released in 1989, the character of King Triton can be seen in the background of one of the scenes. If you look closely at the artwork, you can see that the spires of his castle form a phallic shape. The image is subtle and easy to miss, but it generated a lot of controversy after this detail was discovered.
Many people felt that the image was inappropriate for a children’s movie and that it was intentionally placed there to be provocative. As a result, Disney recalled the original VHS cover and replaced it with a new one. The new cover erased any resemblance to the controversial image. Disney released new cover art in 1991 and it has been used ever since.
The Controversial Priest Scene In The Little Mermaid
There is no priest scene in the original 1989 animated version of ‘The Little Mermaid‘ that sparked controversy. However, there is a scene in which the character of the sea-faring officiant is often misidentified as a priest, which has led to some confusion.
The scene in question takes place towards the end of the movie during Ariel and Eric’s wedding. As the couple stands on a ship deck, a character dressed in a blue robe with a white collar appears to marry them. However, this character is not a priest but rather a fictional character created for the movie who is meant to represent a sea-faring officiant.
The confusion may have arisen because the character’s design resembles that of a traditional Christian priest, with a white collar and a black robe. However, the character does not perform any religious ceremony or use any religious language in the scene. The scene in question was believed to be the marriage official of Ariel’s wedding having an erection during the officiating ceremony. However, this scene is not available in any of the presently available copy of the movie on the internet.
Despite this, the scene has generated controversy over the years, with some people claiming that it promotes a Christian agenda and others arguing that it is an innocent representation of a wedding ceremony. However, it is important to note that the character is not meant to represent a Christian priest and there is no religious content in the scene.