Top 10 Remakes of Animated Movies No One Asked For

It’s not that the trailer doesn’t look promising. It’s just that the original was a masterclass on powerful storytelling, stunning visuals, awe-inspiring animation, and exemplary voice acting. There’s so much life in the trilogy but especially in the introductory movie as we’re brought into the world and get to know the characters. While it helps that original co-director Dean DeBlois is at the helm of the remake, we still have doubts about the film’s ability to replicate the same magic through live-action. From trailers, it seems to be a nearly shot-for-shot remake and, so soon after the animated trilogy’s release, we think a remake could have benefited from a little – or a lot – of breathing room.

This is another case of “why?” Even the animated sequel was met with head tilts and furrowed brows, but a live-action reimagining has us straight-up puzzled. 2016’s “Moana” was well received by audiences and critics alike. It’s a moving story with important themes and stellar music, not to mention a worthwhile tribute to Polynesian culture. But, a lot of its charm stems from its animation. There are Maui’s dancing tattoos, the way the sea moves to express itself… Tamatoa, the giant crab. It’ll likely be difficult to capture the essence of it all without the boundaries that animation can push – which is probably why there wasn’t really a lot of demand for a live-action re-telling.

1992’s “Aladdin” is a childhood movie treasured by so many. It’s one tons of us watched on repeat growing up, and we fell a little more in love with it every time. There’s something so real about the characters, most notably Aladdin. His personality is made apparent within minutes of knowing him, and it’s all thanks to the phenomenal animation and voice work. Scott Weinger brought so much warmth and endearingness to his character, and the animation team absolutely understood the assignment. Between the fantastical elements, like magic carpet rides, and the song that won Disney countless awards, “Aladdin” is up there with the untouchables. Which is why it’s so surprising that Disney… touched it.

Another nostalgic classic, “Lilo & Stitch” is a comfort film for so many. There’s something really warm about the vibe of the setting and the way it was crafted. Oftentimes, live-action versions lose that special something, so it’s unsurprising that there weren’t any rallies for a retelling of this beloved story. Plus, Lilo and Stitch are both two very fleshed out, distinct characters. It would be challenging for any actor Lilo’s age to capture her essence and, as for Stitch, why bother with live action if it requires so much CGI? As we’ll see in many entries on this list, that’s quite a frequent theme with remakes.

Directed by Tim Burton: good. An expansion on the original storyline: also good.A remake that relies heavily on CGI… less good. One can do a lot with the original source material, seeing as it was put out so long ago. It really wouldn’t have been a bad idea to craft a new iteration of the story – to give it a general face lift or tell the narrative from a different angle. Dumbo in a Tim Burton-style animation could have been a huge opportunity to put out something innovative; a stylistically distinct take on a classic. No one really asked for it but, if we were going to get it, it didn’t seem like the worst idea. Unfortunately, in execution, we lost the original’s emotional charm and traded it for a plot that felt overstuffed and deviated substantially from its main character.

This wasn’t necessarily a bad adaptation. They used real dogs which was a welcome alternative to the fully CGI route they could have taken. But there just wasn’t a lot of buzz for it. This was a streaming-exclusive release, meaning it never made it to theatres, and Disney didn’t do a ton to promote it. There’s also the fact that, while “Lady and the Tramp” is a classic Disney staple, it doesn’t have quite the same fanbase as some other adored childhood favorites, so no one was really eagerly waiting around for this one.

“Pinocchio” was dark and problematic enough that they would have probably been better to just leave well enough alone. The whole puppet thing doesn’t really translate well to live-action either. This is another movie that suffered from being a Disney+ exclusive with an underwhelming amount of hype. To make matters worse, the retelling lost the magic of the original and resorted to tired, formulaic beats, even with its new elements and changes. What resulted was an ultimately forgettable adaptation no one was really looking forward to in the first place. Even Tom Hanks and Cynthia Erivo couldn’t save it.

A shot-for-shot remake without a lick of what made the original so adored. Of course, audiences weren’t really gunning for an entirely photo-realistic CGI version of “The Lion King” but its release still gained a good amount of traction. It benefited mostly from hitting theatres at a time when audiences weren’t quite so disillusioned with retellings just yet. Ultimately, though, the adaptation left something to be desired. It was dull in color, emotion, and innovation, and deemed a less expressive, weaker copy of the 1994 original. Even less needed was the 2024 sequel, “Mufasa: The Lion King”.

Forget “remakes no one asked for”. This is one people begged the company not to make. For one, it’s widely believed that Walt Disney himself would have opposed it. He considered “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” a standalone and a timeless masterpiece. In fact, he even cancelled a sequel before it could enter production, ultimately maintaining that it was a perfectly complete story. If that wasn’t enough of a reason to hold back, even before “Snow White’s” release the remake faced widespread criticism for a variety of reasons. From casting choices to personality changes, fans deemed this movie a mutilation of Walt’s original work before it was ever even released.

We’ve been going on about a lack of originality in these live-action remakes but this is an adaptation that might actually have the opposite problem. It’s safe to say nobody predicted this kind of reimagining would ever make it to the big screen. Directed and written by Rhys Frake-Waterfield, it’s the first film to explore a horror version of the classic characters, following a surge of interest in dark adaptations of familiar childhood stories. While the idea is a bizarre and unconventional take, the response was better than you might have expected. Some did feel it was too over-the-top, but “Blood and Honey” was also praised for its novelty in certain sectors and quickly amassed a cult following.





Which live-action remake are you upset about? Rant about it in the comments.