Top 20 Worst Changes In Disney Live Action Remakes
#20: Not Being Musicals
Top 10 Worst Changes from Disney Live Action Remakes
Various Disney’s animated adaptations of “Alice in Wonderland,” “Sleeping Beauty,” and “Cinderella” all became classics thanks in part to their timeless songs. Their live-action counterparts, however, stuck to straightforward narratives with no traditional musical numbers. Covers of songs like “Once Upon a Dream” and “Bibbidi-Bobbidi-Boo” are merely relegated to the credits, which leaves something to be desired. Even the remakes that remained faithful to their musical roots, like “Beauty and the Beast,” have struggled to recapture the magic of the originals. Emma Watson is a charming actress, but her singing chops aren’t exactly on par with Paige O’Hara’s. Also, we’re not sure whose idea it was to have Christopher Walken sing “I Wan'na Be Like You” in “The Jungle Book,” but the performance could’ve used more cowbell.
#19: Birds, Why’d It Have to Be Birds?
Top 10 Things Birds of Prey Got Right & Wrong
“Aladdin” (2019) In the climax of the original “Aladdin,” Jafar goes beast mode. We mean that quite literally, as he turns into a giant cobra, which felt on-brand for the character. Instead of showing the street rat how snake-like he can be in the remake, Jafar turns his parrot Iago into… a bigger parrot. Talk about a massive downgrade. To the film’s credit, this is a somewhat clever reference to the roc, a giant bird of prey that appears in “One Thousand and One Nights,” which inspired Disney’s “Aladdin.” Nevertheless, a big bird simply isn’t as menacing as a towering snake. Now, had Gilbert Gottfried returned to voice a giant Iago, that could’ve been legendary! Sadly, the late comedian doesn’t even make a cameo.
#18: Pink Elephants on Strike
“Dumbo” (2019) We figured going into this remake that Dumbo wouldn’t partake in underage drinking, although we do get this lame line: “No booze near the baby.” But hey, just because Dumbo can’t get plastered doesn’t mean they can’t work in the Pink Elephants sequence. It’s one of the most memorable moments from the 1941 classic and with a director like Tim Burton helming the remake, the results are bound to be a trippy thrill ride, right? Alas, Burton left his freak flag at home, reducing the wildly creative sequence to a bland bubble show that’s not especially strange, enchanting, or intoxicating. We’d rather watch the GOP play with one of those giant Bubble Things at the Republican National Convention. At least that would be another surreal sight involving elephants.
#17: Sucking Out the Color
Various Like music, bright, vibrant colors have always been a staple of Disney’s animated features. To be fair, some live-action Disney remakes are actually quite vivid, particularly Kenneth Branagh’s “Cinderella.” But then you have something like Tim Burton’s “Alice in Wonderland” where the colors were generally muted, dreary, and bizarrely lacking in wonder. While the production design is still pretty impressive, the lack of inviting colors leaves us longing for the animated version. The same can be said about some of the locations found in “Maleficent,” “The Jungle Book,” and “Beauty and the Beast.” On a related note, the fact that Belle isn’t the only person in her town who wears blue is a missed opportunity to visually convey her individuality like the animated film did.
#16: Animals Should Be Seen AND Heard
Top 10 Characters Who Can Communicate With Animals
“101 Dalmatians” (1996) The remake’s Dalmatians are admittedly adorable, not to mention pretty good actors. Pongo even won a Kids’ Choice Award! However, the remake lacks much of the 1961 classic’s personality, and part of that’s because the animals don’t talk. It’s not like talking-animal effects were beyond the realm of possibility in 1996; “Babe” came out a year earlier. Granted, talking animals can get obnoxious in some movies, but with John Hughes penning the script, we feel like he could’ve made the Dalmatians’ dialogue funny and timeless. With none of them able to talk, the Dalmatians all blend in with each other. Half of the time, we can’t even tell Pongo and Perdita apart. For a film called “101 Dalmatians,” it seems more concerned with the humans.
#15: Alice Is the Chosen One
Top 10 Alice In Wonderland Trivia
“Alice in Wonderland” (2010) Whether we’re talking about Lewis Carroll’s original story or Disney’s animated adaptation, one thing has always remained a constant when it comes to “Alice in Wonderland”: Alice is an ordinary, everyday girl who accidentally stumbles into a fantastical world. In Disney’s live-action update, however, Alice is depicted as the chosen one who’s destined to slay the Jabberwocky. Yes, because if there’s one person who’s qualified to fight a giant dragon, it’s a nineteen-year-old with no supernatural powers or military background. This change makes the film feel less like “Alice in Wonderland” and more like a knockoff of “Harry Potter” or “Narnia.” On top of all that, why would Wonderland – a place that’s not supposed to run on any logic whatsoever – have a prophetic scroll?
#14: Gaston Leaves Maurice to Die
“Beauty and the Beast” (2017) Gaston is one of the most complex animated villains in the Disney canon. Rather than being evil from the get-go, he begins as a pompous pig who won’t take no for an answer. As Belle continually turns him down, Gaston takes greater measures to force her into marriage, culminating in a battle against the Beast. The live-action version of Gaston starts off similarly, but halfway through the film, he attempts to murder Maurice, who deems him unfit for his daughter. Gaston goes from just being a jerk to nearly killing an innocent man in a heartbeat, derailing his natural progression into full-blown villainy. Having Gaston commit such an unforgivable act so early on also detracts from the climax where he’s revealed as the real beast.
#13: How Jafar I’ll Go
All the Live-Action Disney Remakes: RANKED
“Aladdin” (2019) Jafar is one of Disney’s most sinister characters thanks to actor Jonathan Freeman, whose line delivery oozed with such evil delight, and animator Andreas Deja, which specializes in Disney villains. Jafar’s devilish charm is lost in the remake, which tries to flesh out his backstory. While we like the idea of Jafar being a thief who manipulated his way into the palace, Marwan Kenzari plays the character with little charisma, humor, or sense of dread. If it weren’t for the hat and staff, you wouldn’t even guess this genetic baddie is Jafar. Kenzari is a fine actor, but he doesn’t seem to be having much fun in the role. The most interesting aspect of this Jafar is the internet’s reaction to how hot he is.
#12: Botching “Be Prepared”
“The Lion King” (2019) “Be Prepared” is easily one of the most exhilarating villain songs ever. There was naturally an outcry when it was rumored that Scar’s showstopper wouldn’t be in the remake. Ultimately, “Be Prepared” was in the 2019 film… kind of. Where the original built tension with every verse, culminating in a banger finale, Chiwetel Ejiofor talk-sings his way through the number, which is cut short with more forgettable lyrics. We have no idea why the filmmakers took this approach, especially since Ejiofor can sing. And even if he couldn’t, we’re sure Jim Cummings was available. It makes about as much sense as setting “Can You Feel the Love Tonight” in broad daylight. We see why Elton John criticized the remake, saying “They messed the music up.”
#11: Wonderland at War
“Alice in Wonderland” (2010) There’s a big difference between fantasy and epic fantasy. “Alice in Wonderland” is a fantasy whereas “The Lord of the Rings” is an epic fantasy. Tim Burton apparently got a little mixed up because his interpretation of Wonderland is an all-out war zone. The Red Queen has seized power from the White Queen following a devastating attack. Now with a rebellion on the rise, it’s up to Alice to restore order by conquering the Jabberwocky. Sorry, but words like “war,” “rebellion,” and “order” just don’t mesh well with a nonsensical environment like Wonderland. Maybe that’s why it’s called Underland here. In any case, when you have the Mad Hatter on the battlefield instead of at a tea party, it’s clear that something got lost in translation.
#10: Removing/Downsizing Side Characters
Various Alright, we understand why Disney remakes would exclude some side characters. Nowadays, the “Dumbo” crows just wouldn’t fly. Still, Timothy Q. Mouse deserved better than a (sort of) cameo. The same can be said about Jaq and Gus in the “Cinderella” remake. The most glaring omission is Mushu, who’s substituted in the “Mulan” remake with a phoenix. Whatever your thoughts on the wisecracking dragon are, Mushu is an unforgettable character. We couldn’t name a single side character from the remake other than a soldier named Cricket. We sense these remakes were trying to be more “serious” and “adult” by downplaying the comedic sidekicks. If this is what being “adult” entails, though, we’d rather stay at the “kids’ table” where all the fun, interesting characters are.
#9: Making the King the Villain
Top 10 Movies That Are Only Good For Making You Cry
“Maleficent” (2014) This film reimagines the Mistress of All Evil as an antihero, teaching the audience that people aren’t just one-dimensional villains… except King Stefan. Yeah, for a film that paints its infamous protagonist in an empathetic light, Stefan is a pretty irredeemable monster, undercutting the message. At times, the film attempts to make us sympathize with Stefan, who’s separated from his daughter, loses his wife, and goes mad with power. However, early in the film, he cuts off Maleficent’s wings while she’s sleeping so he can be king. From that moment on, it’s impossible to forgive him. Rather than expand upon the notice of good vs evil, the filmmakers just trade one villain for another. And they do it again with Queen Ingrith in the sequel.
#8: Weird CGI Looks
How Daniel Radcliffe Prepared to Play Weird Al
Various People panicked when they thought Will Smith’s Genie might not be blue in the live-action “Aladdin.” Of course, once audiences got a look at the Genie in all of his blue, CGI glory from the trailer… well, you know the phrase, “Be careful what you wish for?” Yeah. CGI has come a long way in recent years and these advances have even been exemplified in some of Disney’s live-action remakes; “The Jungle Book” won an Oscar for its visual effects. In many cases, though, the CGI characters in these remakes just look awkward, creepy, and weird. A lot of them don’t even come off as especially realistic, which takes the audience out of the experience. Some characters are simply easier to accept in animation.
#7: Changing Mulan’s Entire Character Arc
Top 10 Game-Changing Hollywood Movies
“Mulan” (2020) 1998’s Mulan is an ordinary young woman with no fighting experience. Regardless, she joins the army to protect her father, risking her own life and reputation. It’s not an easy adjustment, but through hard work, Mulan emerges triumphant. In the remake, Mulan is simply a skilled warrior from the get-go because her chi is strong. Of course, the film doesn’t really analyze what chi means in Chinese culture, treating it more like Midi-chlorians. While this lowers the physical stakes, the remake tries to put emphasis on Mulan’s internal struggle. That would be fine if Mulan had any personality, but where her animated counterpart was brave, funny, compassionate, a little awkward, and commanding when she needed to be, the live-action Mulan is brave… and that’s it.
#6: Adding an Evil Businessman
“Dumbo” (2019) While the original “Dumbo” certainly has antagonistic figures, there isn’t an outright villain. Meanwhile, the remake introduces the most stock bad guy you can think of, an evil businessman who only cares about money. At least Michael Keaton looks like he’s having fun as V.A. Vandevere, playing him like an eccentric Ray Kroc. Yet, there’s an irony to the character that Disney doesn’t seem to recognize. Vandevere is a theme park owner who acquires the circus, although he’s only interested in one property. So, once he has Dumbo, he fires everyone else. Oh, and his office looks like Emperor Palpatine’s throne room. We’d like to think that Disney is doing a meta-commentary on itself, but we’re pretty sure this film is oblivious.
#5: Cinderella Doesn’t Try to Escape
Top 10 Behind the Scenes Facts About Cinderella (1997)
“Cinderella” (2015) Cinderella may occasionally come off as submissive in Disney’s original film. When Lady Tremaine locks Cinderella in her room, though, she does everything in her power to escape before the Duke leaves with the glass slipper. Refusing to give up, she ultimately prevails with some help from her animal friends. For all the development Cinderella is given in the new version, she isn’t nearly as determined to break free from captivity. Rather than banging on the door or screaming for help, she just happily sings and dances without a care in the world. Fortunately, the mice open the window, allowing her song to be heard by the Prince. Still, Cinderella doesn’t take any initiative and only achieves her happily ever after through sheer dumb luck.
#4: The Beast’s Book That Can Take You Anywhere
5 Live-Action Disney Adaptations That Worked & 5 That Killed the Legacy
“Beauty and the Beast” (2017) 2017’s “Beauty and the Beast” actually cleared up a few questions people always had about the original film, but it also created a gigantic plot hole. One of the magical items the Enchantress gives the Beast in this version is a book that can transport the reader anywhere. But wait a minute! Why doesn’t Belle just use this book when her father is about to be sent to the asylum? She could literally teleport to town, grab Maurice, and then disappear without a trace. Belle is supposed to be smart for crying out loud! Not only does this make no sense, but also the Beast already has a mirror that allows him to see the outside world. Isn’t giving him a transporting book kind of overkill?
#3: Making the Three Fairies Dumb
Top 20 Famous Actors That Keep Making Bad Movies
“Maleficent” (2014) The three fairies are the unsung heroes of “Sleeping Beauty,” not only helping to save Princess Aurora, but also getting Prince Phillip out of a couple tight spots. Well, in “Maleficent,” they’re reduced to three stooges who constantly put Aurora in danger and contribute nothing of value to the plot. Okay, technically they’re pixies instead of fairies in this version and they aren’t even called Flora, Fauna, or Merryweather. Instead, they’re named Knotgrass, Thistlewit, and Flittle, which makes their presence slightly easier to swallow. Considering how strong-willed, likable, and important the fairies were in the original film, however, giving them such incompetent substitutes feels like a complete slap in the face. Maleficent might’ve cursed a baby, but these three feel like the real issue here.
#2: Pinocchio: Practically Perfect in Every Way
Top 10 Differences in Pinocchio 1940 and 2022
“Pinocchio” (2022) Walt Disney realized that Pinocchio was too unlikable in the source material, striving to make him easier to root for in the 1940 film. At the same time, the filmmakers understood that Pinocchio needed to be flawed so that he can grow throughout the story. 2022’s “Pinocchio” (the Robert Zemeckis one) missed the point by removing all of Pinocchio’s negative attributes. Pinocchio attends school as he’s told, but he gets rejected. He doesn’t go to Pleasure Island willingly, and when all the other kids are misbehaving, he acts like a total narc. This Pinocchio is already brave, truthful, unselfish, and an all-around good boy. There are no lessons for him to learn. So, why does he need Jiminy to be his conscience?
#1: Choosing “Realism” Over Believability
“The Lion King” (2019) With his remake of “The Lion King,” Jon Favreau sought to capture the majesty and authenticity of a nature documentary. If that was the intent, though, why have the animals talk and sing? The 2019 film tries to have its zebra and eat it too, which backfires enormously in what are supposed to be emotional moments. The remake’s Simba looks more like an actual lion, but you don’t believe for a second that this CG cub is grieving the loss of his father, especially when you compare it to the original scene, which overflows with heartbreak in every frame. Sure, it’s commendable just how realistic these animals and landscapes can look, but technology fades over time. The original’s raw emotion and hand-drawn artistry won’t.
