Are Disney live-action remakes better than animated originals?

Elisa (No)

Many consider Disney live-action remakes ‘cursed abominations,’ ruining classics for new generations by infusing modern messages into classic stories and cheapening them with excessive CGI. While they make great cash, they rely on nostalgia, not creativity or innovation. Unfortunately, very few of these remakes can live up to an audience’s nostalgia, spoiling the classics for older generations as well. 

These remakes possess many problems, including the storytelling and uncanny photorealistic animal 'emotions.' In some cases, the stories are almost exactly the same as the originals, making them boring. And with the animal-heavy films, like Jungle Book, Lion King, and Little Mermaid, the animal characters can't emote the way their cartoon counterparts can. It should be that one of the richest companies in the world, Disney, focuses on what is new and original as it once did.

Audiences are growing tired of the seemingly endless number of remakes and wonder if Disney is simply out of ideas. Further, nobody is really asking for these remakes; the classics deserve preservation. After all, many believe the changes made to these classics are simply insulting. 

One problem with the remakes is that they are the “cover bands” of Disney films that aren’t nearly as good as the original. It is clear that these Disney live-action remakes are nothing more than a cash grab, and their original creators have difficulty even viewing them. According to Insider, Tony Bancroft, co-director of Mulan, boldly stated, ‘I think it's all about the money and growing the company and making the investors and stockholders happy.’ Disney, it’s time to leave the classics alone, as remakes are soulless and lifeless. 

Maha (Yes)

Disney is keeping the magic alive with its live-action remakes. While there are some that didn’t meet viewers’ expectations, many can fare better than the animated originals. Take The Jungle Book (2016) for example. This more respectful and faithful adaptation ranks better than the animated 1967 movie. Especially when it comes to the “astonishing technology” that allows viewers to experience the jungle the same way Mowgli does. 

In addition to featuring new technology, Disney’s live-action remakes are downright creative. Maleficent and Cruella are testaments to this. 

While both respectively were the villains of the original animated Sleeping Beauty and 101 Dalmatians, the new movies allow viewers to understand their motivations through empathetic storylines. This, in turn, makes them relatable as they show that the world is made of shades of gray. 

And on the topic of characters, Disney’s remakes go beyond rehashing old material to give secondary characters their share of the limelight. 

The 2017 Beauty and the Beast, for example, makes LeFou gay without compromising on the humor and silliness of his dynamic with Gaston. This new reveal is woven beautifully into the new songs created specifically for the movie. 

This detail is also a good example of Disney’s effort toward making its movies more diverse and inclusive. In fact, it cast Halle Bailey, an African American actress and singer, as Ariel in its 2023 remake of The Little Mermaid. And despite the backlash, Disney has been firm on its stance as the company realizes how diverse its current audience is in comparison with its viewers in the past. So, with better technology, more creativity, diverse characters, and inclusive plots, it's not difficult to see the value in or like Disney’s live-action remakes.