Top 10 Worst Changes from Disney Live Action Remakes

Top 10 Worst Changes from Disney Live Action Remakes

Also in:

Top 20 Worst Changes In Disney Live Action Remakes

If it’s not Baroque, don't fix it. Welcome to WatchMojo and today we’ll be counting down our picks for the Top 10 Worst Changes from Disney Live-Action Remakes. For this list, we’re taking a look at the most misguided alterations Disney has made in the live-action remakes of their animated classics. We’re not saying these remakes are bad, just highlighting the more questionable creative choices.

#10: Not Being Musicals

Also in:

All the Live-Action Disney Remakes: RANKED

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 straight-forward 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 no 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.

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.

#8: Why Doesn’t Cinderella Leave?

Also in:

5 Live-Action Disney Adaptations That Worked & 5 That Killed the Legacy

“Cinderella” (2015) Many have criticized 1950’s “Cinderella,” arguing that the titular character just waits for her dreams to come true instead of taking action. To be fair, though, Cinderella lost her father as a child and was raised by a wicked stepfamily. When a person grows up in a cruel household, it’s not uncommon for them to fear leaving. After years of abuse, it’s understandable that Cinderella would feel trapped with nowhere else to turn. In the live-action version however, Cinderella loses her father as an adult and has a social life, giving her no real reason to stick with her stepfamily. Cinderella stays because of her sentimental attachment to the house, but she ultimately moves into the Prince’s castle. So why didn’t she simply leave sooner?

“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 half-way 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.

#6: Alice Is the Chosen One

Also in:

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?

#5: Cinderella Doesn’t Try to Escape

Also in:

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.

“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.

#3: Weird CGI Looks

Also in:

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 comes off as especially realistic, which takes the audience out of the experience. Some characters are simply easier to accept in animation.

#2: The Beast’s Book That Can Take You Anywhere

Also in:

Top 20 Best Changes in Live-Action Disney Remakes

“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?

#1: Making the 3 Fairies Dumb

Also in:

Top 10 Movies That Are Only Good For Making You Cry

“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.