Disney’s Live-action Remakes: A Question of Creative Integrity

After the creation of Disney’s first animated movie, “Snow White and the Seven Dwarves,” in 1937, Disney became a source of nostalgia for millions worldwide. From amusement parks to their streaming platform, Disney provides many media sources for people to indulge in their nostalgia for epic heroes and inspiring princesses. Disney’s live-action movie remakes are no different. 

Disney is no stranger to live-action movies, with its history starting in 1994 with “The Jungle Book.” However, it was not until the mid-2010s that Disney began focusing on creating live-action remakes of everyone’s favorite stories, with the inception of live-action remakes such as “Beauty and the Beast” in 2017, “Maleficent” in  2010 and even a second rendition of “The Jungle Book.”

With the onset trend of Disney adapting their original movies into live-action ones comes the question: are Disney’s live-action movie remakes a necessary creative addition to the Disney franchise? Or are they simply duplicates of their animated counterparts?

“Yes, there were new scenes here and there, but I don’t think they did much for the original movies,” Riti Rozario, a senior at Springbrook High School, said. 

Disney largely makes live-action movies that stick close to the original plot, with some exceptions, like Disney’s 2021 “Cruella.” For example, take Disney’s “Lion King” (2019), “Cinderella” (2015), and “Beauty and the Beast” (2017). Even though the medium isn’t the same, these movies’ storylines stay relatively loyal to the originals. 

Sticking to the original plot isn’t necessarily an issue, as book-based movies always do it. However, Disney slowly loses its originality and creative integrity, with Disney recreating most of its franchise into live-action remakes.

But while some Disney live-action remakes have been questionable, especially with the lack of Chinese writers in “Mulan” despite the movie’s themes around a Chinese folk tale, most of Disney’s live-action remakes profit. Take, for example, Disney’s 2019 “Lion King,” which netted a profit of $1.66 billion, according to Screen Rant.

Realistically, Disney live-action movies will make money due to the strong sense of nostalgia Disney stories naturally invoke. Even if the only difference is the artistic medium, people are bound to watch Disney movies in theaters to revisit their favorite characters. 

That begs the question: is it a bad thing as long as people are enjoying it? 

 “Sticking to the original would have probably been the most enjoyable for me, as I love to see my favorite characters doing what they did back then in live-action,” said Aedan Shiffman, Springbrook High School senior. 

Movies like “Mulan” (2020) and “Snow White” (2025), which have tried to deviate from the original film, have seen negative backlash from the public. For one, “Mulan” is one of the only Disney live-action remakes to make a negative net income, having lost approximately $1.41 million, according to Collider.

The purpose of Disney live-action remakes is to revoke nostalgia, after all. The movies allow people to visit movie theaters to revisit childhood memories and bond over their favorite characters with their children. 

Even though most movies are creative duplicates of their animated counterparts, it is not necessarily bad. The live-action movies provide an imaginative take on what Disney’s stories would have looked like in real life. In live-action. 

Article Written by Amber Li of Springbrook High School

Photo Courtesy of WallpaperUP

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.