Disney’s live action remakes of classic animated films in the past decade reflect a multifaceted corporate strategy driven chiefly by financial motivations and the powerful draw of nostalgia.

These remakes, including highly successful titles such as Cinderella (2015), The Jungle Book (2016), Beauty and the Beast (2017), Aladdin (2019), The Lion King (2019), Mulan (2020), Pinocchio (2022), and The Little Mermaid (2023), generate significant box office revenue by leveraging the fond memories that generations of viewers associate with the originals.

Studio executives recognize that repackaging familiar stories lowers economic risk, as built-in brand recognition reassures investors and audiences alike.

Importantly, these projects often serve as a bridging mechanism, engaging audiences who cherished the animated films while introducing new generations to these enduring narratives .

To remain relevant, Disney systematically adapts stories and characters to align with contemporary sensibilities.

This evolution is manifest in The Little Mermaid (2023), where Ariel’s age is increased and her relationship with Prince Eric is made more reciprocal, with both characters’ desires and backgrounds developed in greater depth .

Across recent remakes, female protagonists are crafted as more empowered and aspirational—Snow White, for example, shifts from longing for rescue to aspiring for leadership .

Contemporary casting choices, such as a Black Ariel in The Little Mermaid or inclusive reinventions in Peter Pan and Wendy (2023), reflect broader diversity and strive to modernize classic narratives for a more global and socially aware audience .

Storylines are frequently expanded, providing additional context or fresh perspectives, as seen in forthcoming titles like Mufasa: The Lion King .

Public and critical response to these remakes remains mixed.

Disney’s live action remakes of classic animated films in the past decade reflect a multifaceted corporate strategy driven chiefly by financial motivations and the powerful draw of nostalgia.

Title:

Content: Alert
Operation Blue Bird continues … 30,000 people surround the Legislative Yuan in the evening to protest against the delay of the Beijie Red Line and the Blue Line for 15 minutes.
“If you can ’ t afford it, don ’ t give birth to me ” … A middle school student laments that his parents will not be able to pay their tuition fees after remarriage.
Mobile signal analysis crowd provoking... Wang Yichuan shouted "Christmas City also did" blue committee exposed the New Taipei City government 's statement
Can't you watch it from your own family?
"Little Mermaid" director points to Disney's problems
Disney has been the first brand of American animation, bringing many beautiful memories to children around the world, including the early years of "Snow White", "101 loyal dogs", as well as described as the "Renaissance" period of "Beauty and the Beast", "Aladdin" and so on.
However, the recent Disney animation or live-action film, there is a big problem: each time in the casting and plot direction of the controversy, many people complain that too much "political correctness", or to put some ideas into the story arrangement, character layout and other basic details are put aside, turned into an alternative "educational film".
With such a big change, audiences can ’ t fail to feel that last year ’ s five most expensive movies, Disney Group accounted for four, even celebrating the centenary of their own animation as “Star Wish ”, both at the box office and in word of mouth have lost.
Recently, the director of "Little Mermaid", "Aladdin", "Hercules", "Treasure Island", "Ocean Strange" and other famous Disney animation director John Musk admitted at the seminar on animation and special effects, video games: "I think they should carry out a part of the course correction, put the concept of the secondary, the entertainment of the film, the story and whether the characters attract people should be more important." "
In John Musk ’ s eyes, the traditional Disney classic is not a concept that you want to put in, but rather an audience into the story and the characters and the world in the film, which he believes should still be the core of the current Disney film, “You don ’ t have to completely put aside the idea of putting in, but before that you have to create characters that the audience can empathize with and feel eye-catching. ”
"He said.
John ’ s past Disney animations also included “The Princess and the Frog, ” the first black princess to be the main character. Even so, he said the film was not built to promote an“ awakening culture, ” although he could understand the criticism.
As for the past few years, Disney has become more and more frequent remakes of old animations into live-action versions, he believes that the film companies are always looking at how to reduce the risk, and when they see that the audience likes something, they are thinking, is there a way to change the appearance and sell it to them again, or even do it better than the last time?
Just a few Disney classic animation remakes, audience word-of-mouth or film ratings are not as good as the original animation, based on their own history, John Musk did not take last year caused a lot of controversy of the live-action version of "Little Mermaid" to open: "They do not ink on the story of the father and daughter, that is the core of the whole movie, and that crab, you can see the real animal in the zoo, They all have a much richer expression than the ones in the movies, and so does the Lion King."
Extended reading
Who is the most handsome and beautiful Romeo and Juliet? Leonardo almost matched Natalie
"You made Johnson the Boulder look like Beckham," the wax image, the skin color, the deliberate whitening... he cited the little mermaid infarction controversy.
Rachel Zengler in "Snow White" was accused of not being white enough "Little Mermaid" to support her: the perfect princess
Related News
2 Responses to “Thank You, Brother. ”
A fire broke out in a community building on the 28th floor of Hsinchu City ’ s “Sky Tree ” on the 26th, resulting in the deaths of two firemen, Li Yongzhen and Zhou Lixin. Today (28th) Hsinchu City Fire Department...
Can't you watch it from your own family?
"Little Mermaid" director points to Disney's problems
Disney has been the first brand of American animation, bringing many beautiful memories to children around the world, including the early years of "Snow White", "101 loyal dogs", and what has been described as "the Renaissance".
May Tian Xin said! Donate billions of dollars to Taiwan Kaohsiung, Hualien, Yilan
In May, Ahsin ’ s words, “We Chinese, come to Beijing to eat roast duck, ” set off a rift between netizens on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, and was later poached to donate 9 million yuan (about 40.5 million NT dollars).
Huang Hao Ping shares the first step in fraud prevention
Fraud news layer is endless, accidentally fell into the trap of bad people, "Social Now What" invited artist Huang Hao Ping as a guest host, the first video was invited to the Bureau of Criminal Affairs Prevention Division...
"China has no market" by acid, can not earn RMB Yang Xiuhui counterattack
Recently, many artists have taken the initiative to express their support for mainland reunification of Taiwan, and Yang Xiuhui is shouting "I am Taiwanese", which has won a lot of praise from Taiwanese netizens, but there are also many people who question her in mainland China.
Korea 's first beautiful woman married for 17 years! Certified "love and marriage are not the same"
South Korea 's first beauty Kim Hee-sun' s latest suspense psychological drama "We, Home", partner Bawant film after Lee Hui-ying, about Kim Hee-sun 's famous psychologist "Lu Ying-yuan" is threatened by mysterious people,...
Product recommendation
udn Forum

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

By turning classic animations into live-action films with major stars

What motivates Disney to keep producing live-action remakes despite mixed reviews?

These remakes, including highly successful titles such as Cinderella (2015), The Jungle Book (2016), Beauty and the Beast (2017), Aladdin (2019), The Lion King (2019), Mulan (2020), Pinocchio (2022), and The Little Mermaid (2023), generate significant box office revenue by leveraging the fond memories that generations of viewers associate with the originals.

Title:

Content: A new part of The Lion King.
The story of Mufasa as you never knew it.
About five years after the release of The Lion King in 2019, Disney is offering a live-action version of the film, Mufasa: The Lion King, a new story that takes audiences back to the familiar tale of the film, as Simba explores the history of his father, Mufasa, and his father ’ s relationship with his younger brother. Reer Scar.
The film also comes on the 30th anniversary of the original Lion King, released in 1994, as part of Disney ’ s experiments in turning animated films into reality, such as Cinderella, The Mermaid, and Aladdin.
It is a safe strategy to ensure a financially successful product, without risking capital in new experiences that may not generate revenue.
The film is expected to be released on May 5, 2024.
Simba explores the history of Mufasa
The first real-life version of The Lion King in 2019 grossed nearly $1.6 billion worldwide.
The new version of The Lion King is expected to surpass the previous film because it explores an old story never presented before, while retaining all the reasons for the success of the original film, the story of the evil brother "Scar" and his relationship with his brother "Mufasa", a focal point in the main film, and the audience always wondered about the causes of the great evil inherent in the character "Scar".
Disney is looking to make an artistic epic, or a series of films as a result of the film ’ s manifold story, which carries more than one story, especially if its makers can find clues to the stories, because despite the worlds of Disney and its large production of films, it has never produced a major series like Star Wars, for example, and the story of the Lion King can be the beginning of movie series, especially as it moves narrative between the past and present....
Heroes of the New Story
The film was officially announced by Barry Jenkins, and Jeff Nathanson, the screenwriter of The Lion King (2019), completes his role as the writer of the new work "Mufasa".
Genghis said that there are many familiar characters will appear in the next film, and that the version will include new stories about the characters that the audience knew and associated with, and the story will go back in time with the heroes, to know the audience history and how they became what they are in the end, as the film tells how "Mufasa" came out of a modest life to reach the top of power, after he was a young cub roaming alone in life.
The film includes some changes to the voices of the heroes from the previous film, where the voice of young "Mufasa" will be performed by Aaron Pierre, while the voice of Mufasa was provided in the previous film, and in the older film of 1994 James Earl Jones.
Familiar voices that won ’ t change include John Kanye, who will cast Mandrel Reviki, Billy Eichner, who will cast Timon, Seth Rogan, who will cast Pumbaa, Kelvin Harrison, Jr., who will cast Scar, and Beyoncé, who will cast Nala.
Why is Disney bringing back the old stories?
Although audiences on social media complain about reproducing Disney ’ s classics, the box office always favors reproducing the classics, and there are many reasons for audiences to watch animated films in their real-life versions, including the attraction of old fans and the desire of the new generation to explore the modern context of the tale.
From here, such films have a double audience, especially in that story that touches on fatherhood, family, friendship, love and life. Mufasa remains one of the most famous Disney characters, and did not explore his story as befitting his fame and the story of his sad death in the original film, which separated the audiences against their will.
Source: Al Jazeera + Websites

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

By turning classic animations into live-action films with major stars

How successful was the 2019 live-action version of The Lion King?

Worldwide revenues exceeded one billion dollars

What motivates Disney to keep producing live-action remakes despite mixed reviews?

Studio executives recognize that repackaging familiar stories lowers economic risk, as built-in brand recognition reassures investors and audiences alike.

According to John Musker, why does Disney rely on live-action remakes rather than producing new stories?

As a safer option
As a risk-reduction strategy

Compared to new franchises, what is the risk and return of remakes and sequels?

Lower risk but smaller long-term returns.

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

By turning classic animations into live-action films with major stars

Importantly, these projects often serve as a bridging mechanism, engaging audiences who cherished the animated films while introducing new generations to these enduring narratives .

Title:

Content: ×
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why Spider-Verse And Mario's Soaring Success Leaves Disney Animation In The Dust

It's a good time to be making movies.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought the film industry to a screeching halt, forcing theatres to shutter their doors as studios shuffled their theatrical slates. With the future of the theatrical model uncertain and studios itching to gain income quickly, potential blockbusters like "Soul" and "The Tomorrow War," which were initially slated for theatrical release, debuted on streaming.

It's now 2023 and the box office is slowly approaching pre-pandemic levels, largely in part due to studios and theatres deciding to work together. However, while films like "Top Gun: Maverick" and "Avatar: The Way of Water" brought audiences back to cinemas, its animated juggernauts like "The Super Mario Bros. Movie" and "Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse" which are compelling audiences to stick with the theatrical experience. The success of "Mario" and "Spider-Verse" can't solely be attributed to the fact they're IP. Both films, alongside their contemporaries, are doing something different.

Since theatres returned to capacity, Disney and its subsidiary Pixar's animated footprint has been microscopic when compared to rival studios, with Illumination and Sony Pictures Animation making strides at the box office and in the culture. The House of Mouse's animation division is going through a crisis. In 2019, Disney boasted 3 billion dollar-grossing animated flicks: "The Lion King," "Frozen II," and "Toy Story 4." Since then, no animated flick from the studio has managed to gross over $250 million, with the company debuting two unprecedented bombs with "Strange World" and "Lightyear."

What happened? While others are innovating, Disney has found itself running in place, failing to adapt on several fronts. Through a series of managerial missteps and uninspired decisions, Disney Animation has quietly handed its throne over to the players who were once playing catch-up.

Super Mario is the simple family-friendly adventure that millions wanted

When it comes to box office supremacy, it's Illumination that's at the top. With its crowd-pleasing stories and eye-popping visuals, the Universal-backed studio has managed to create three inoffensive billion-dollar franchises with "Despicable Me," "Sing," and "The Secret Life of Pets." While critics might label their films as safe, they're known quantities for families and children who want to be whisked away for 100 minutes or less.

With "The Super Mario Bros. Movie," they've delivered their biggest hit to date. Nintendo and its roster of characters have defined the video game medium, with characters like Mario and Luigi holding the same universality worldwide as a bottle of Coca-Cola or McDonald's golden arches. The animated picture, which debuted in early April with little competition at the multiplex, has grossed over $1.3 billion and has racked up nearly $100 million from Premium Video on Demand.

Why is "Mario" so successful (particularly when the 2023 film is compared to its divisive 1993 live-action predecessor)? It's simple. In keeping with Illumination's mantra of creating crowd-pleasing films, "Mario Bros." doesn't alienate. It capitalizes on its IP by treating it with reverence and respect. It doesn't go beyond its means and tries its best to create a piece of mass-market cinema that isn't overly complex, which allows it to be easily translated. Nearly 60% of the "Mario" gross is thanks to international markets, where the film was dubbed with local talent to match audience expectations. Unlike Disney's contemporary films, which primarily deal with Western-centric trials and tribulations, the appeal of "Super Mario" was wholly universal — audiences across the globe knew they were getting a simple, family-friendly comedy with the right amount of heart the moment they walked into cinemas.

Spider-Verse, meanwhile, innovates at every turn

If "Mario" is a testament to the power of IP and simplicity, then "Spider-Man: Across the Spider-Verse" is the opposite, an exposé on how IP can serve as a gateway to expand upon new and bold ideas. In the case of "Spider-Verse," it's the franchise's ability to chart a new path with its inventive animation, bleeding traditional hand-drawn looks with contemporary CG, creating a fluid, immersive visual language. "Into the Spider-Verse," which debuted in 2018, quickly became the blueprint for contemporary animation, with films like the upcoming "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Mutant Mayhem" taking cues from it. And the film's 2023 sequel has truly penetrated pop culture on another level, with many dubbing it as one of the best animated films of all time.

"Across the Spider-Verse" taps into both superhero and multiverse tropes with grace, capitalizing on audience expectations with its fair share of cameos and easter eggs. But it's the film's visuals that set it apart, proving that audiences are ready to digest animation styles that don't just replicate reality. "Spider-Verse" swings for the fences by playing with a variety of contrasting images and designs to create something that truly has to be witnessed on the biggest screen for possible. As superhero films lose their general hold over audiences, "Spider-Verse" stands out from the crowd because its "it factor" isn't the multiverse, but rather, its liberal use of several different animation techniques.

For Disney, this should be a wake-up call that their animation style is getting stale — audiences are ready for more visual risks.

Disney needs to balance between magic and strategy

The light on Disney's kingdom seems to be dimming, at least on the animation front. Illumination and Sony Pictures Animation –and arguably, DreamWorks Animation — are filling in for the once mighty behemoth, delivering hits that hold actual staying power. What's gone wrong for Disney? It's important to recognize that the slump is because of two things: (1) a lack of innovation and (2) business blunders that have robbed the company of its prestige. After diminishing returns with "Meet the Robinsons" and a failed return to hand-drawn animation with "The Princess and the Frog," Walt Disney Animation Studios found itself in a slump, while sister company Pixar was soaring to new heights. Their luck changed with 2013's billion-dollar grossing "Frozen," a film that playfully toyed with the studio's reputation for creating princess-centric films. With "Frozen," true love wasn't conventional heteronormative love, but the power of sisterhood, a subversion that proved Disney was moving beyond traditional, boxed-in themes, like Pixar.

Since that striking turn a decade ago, WDAS (and Pixar) have found themselves in a corner with one core theme: generational trauma. "Frozen II," "Turning Red," and "Encanto," among others, have focused on the sins of the past manifesting in the present. Repetitive narratives and themes are fine if there is visual diversity, but WDAS has largely followed in the footsteps of Pixar, trying its darndest to create 3D computer-animated films that emphasize realism. If "Spider-Verse" has proven anything, it's that audiences can value adventurous forms of animation that aren't wholly uniform. Pixar and WDAS were once the face of taking risks by focusing on realism, genre-bending narratives, and diverse characters. Today, that isn't enough.

Disney has no one to blame but itself

"Toy Story 4" and "Frozen II" grossed over $1 billion in 2019. If "Toy Story 5" and "Frozen III" were to hit cinemas this calendar year, it's difficult to imagine them grossing over $800 million. IP matters, right? Not when it's diluted. In a bid to boost Disney+'s clout during the COVID-19 pandemic, Disney sent several of Walt Disney Studio Animation Studios and Pixar films to the service, robbing instant classics like "Soul" and "Turning Red" of profitable theatrical runs. Even "Raya and the Last Dragon," a film that should have been widely celebrated for its diverse story and roster of characters, was sent to Disney+'s Premier Access to squeeze up a quick profit. The result? Families across the globe realizing that their $7.99 a month subscription to Disney+ was a far better bet than buying tickets for the company's latest animated effort.

"Lightyear," what should have been a surefire hit, dropped the ball with middling critical reception and a gross of $218 million. The kooky sci-fi epic "Strange World," which boasted out-of-this-world visual aesthetics, couldn't take flight with a $69 million cume — one of the company's biggest financial failures. And "Elemental," the closest thing to a riff on "Inside Out," debuted to shy of $29 million –  just $2 million less than the third-weekend gross of "Spider-Verse."

Disney knows they fumbled the bag by sending their films to Disney+, with Pixar chief Pete Docter telling Variety that the company trained audiences to expect films on the service. It also doesn't help that their films cost way too much. In pursuing realism, Disney's bank accounts are being drained, with "Elemental" and "Lightyear" boasting $200 million price tags. "Spider-Verse" and "Mario," meanwhile? $100 million, shortening the amount of success they truly need.

Disney will persevere

The success of "Super Mario Bros" and "Spider-Verse" should scare Disney. The once-mighty powerhouse needs to figure out a way to bring audiences back to cinemas because, frankly, the Disney magic is dissipating as each day goes by. Luckily, "Mario" and "Spider-Verse" provide the necessary steps for Disney to rebound.

Disney should continue to focus on cost-cutting, bringing down the budgets for its animated flicks. If both "Mario" and "Spider-Verse" can become record-breaking and genre-defining films with small budgets, Disney should be able to do the same. Another way to save money? Actually release films in theatres. Recent flounders like "Lightyear" and "Elemental" should not signal that the theatrical model is dead. Treat Disney+ as the company's archive, not its saving grace. Allow future and recent projects like "Elemental," to premiere on PVOD after their time in the cinema is done. Give it months before sending the film to Disney+, where it can live forever. This is what Disney does with its Marvel films and, most recently, "Avatar: The Way of Water."

But no managerial switch-ups and financial cutbacks can change audience perception. Audiences want something new. If "Mario" was the power of IP and general breeziness coming to life, then "Spider-Verse" is proof that risks can be taken. Disney, pick your fighter. Instead of regurgitating IP, like with "Lightyear," allow Pixar to bring the world of "Avatar" or "Star Wars" to animation. Or switch up your tried-and-tested 3D animation style for something that pops, forcing audiences to witness the latest visual marvel on the biggest screen possible.

With "Wish," Disney seems to be doing just that, blending 3D animation with watercolors to create a look that no one else is doing. Now, will Disney succeed with this upcoming "risk?" That's up to the audience members.

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

By turning classic animations into live-action films with major stars

To remain relevant, Disney systematically adapts stories and characters to align with contemporary sensibilities.

Title:

Content: Walt Disney Animation Head Jennifer Lee On Setting Up The Next Generation Of Artists [Exclusive Interview]

We're technically in the middle of Disney's centennial celebration, but for the iconic animation studio, the party is just getting started. After news came out earlier this month that nearly 30 restored animated shorts from the Walt Disney Animation Studios vault will be released on Disney+, the studio had a triumphant presentation at the Annecy International Animation Film Festival to reminisce on the past while also looking at the future.

First, the studio presented their latest animated short, "Once Upon a Studio," directed by Dan Abraham and Trent Correy, possibly the most magical thing they've done in years and a short that pays homage to the studio's 100-year-old history, the characters, and the animators that made the studio what it is. Then, audiences were treated to about 20 minutes of "Wish," the upcoming Disney animated musical feature which brings back the Disney villain, and does some cool things with its visuals. That film is directed by Chris Buck and Fawn Veerasunthorn (in her feature directorial debut), and written by Allison Moore and Jennifer Lee, the latter of whom also wrote and co-directed "Frozen" and serves as chief creative officer of Walt Disney Animation Studios.

/Film caught up with Lee shortly after the footage presentation of "Wish," where she talked about the future of Walt Disney Animation Studios, bringing back an actual villain for "Wish," and why animation is so special.

Note: This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and brevity.

'Technology and the artistry are merging'

The short film "Once Upon a Studio" includes a lot of different animation styles, while "Wish" looks different than many Disney films. What sort of experimentation is in store for the studio going into its second century?

Well, what I think particularly with the short and "Wish" is, and I think it's happening across animation, we're finally arriving at that place where technology and the artistry are merging in a way that I think is everyone's dream. I think of the incredible production designer, Lisa Keen, and the painting she did for "Frozen," but then they'd be translated into CG and they'd sort of be degrees away. But now, those paintings, that look, can make it onto the screen. And we've all been working on this for a long time. It's mattered. And with us, we were able to build it on a short scale, but to build it for a feature, we started, I think, when we met with the design team, the dream they said would be to be able to honor those watercolors from "Sleeping Beauty." "Sleeping Beauty" was such an inspiration for "Frozen" in terms of framing, but to get to do it, and we said, "Well, it's our hundredth, we have to have that goal, and they've been working on the technology for years."

I was saying just a couple months ago, we bumped into an issue where we didn't have it lined up to do water. So we had to brainstorm and work together and they figured it out because the scene was too important and they wanted to earn it, and there's nothing like a challenge for a technologist. That's what they want. "What's the next challenge?" So now we're hitting this place, we're going, "Okay, the look can go in many directions. That is so exciting," and it's really going to come down to the identity of the artists themselves coming through more. I think that is the best case scenario.

Building foundations

You talked during the studio presentation about the pairing of fresh talent with veterans, and you yourself were mentored by a veteran of the studio. Why is that important not just at an animator level, but on a key role like a director?

Well, I mean, all of these films are hard. Every one of them is hard to make. One of the things that our veteran filmmakers have is, they've been through it. They've been through a lot. They've had to redo things a lot. They felt the pain of failure, they felt the joy of success, and they have the layers of life. The new generation has talent. I mean, more and more talent out there. And they come in, and to go through your first film, I always say it's going to break your heart a little bit, over and over again, because it's not enough to dream. We all have dreams that we think, "Oh, if we could only make that." You look back at Walt and what it took for him to make "Snow White," and how it almost failed and it was a fight for every frame. There's never a shortcut in every movie.

So with our veteran filmmakers — and obviously you have someone like Eric [Goldberg, veteran Disney animator] who is everything, he is the talent and the years and the fight in him, and we've got an apprentice program that we've formed for the new generation of hand-drawn. And he's not just bringing skill this way, he's bringing those layers of life. To me, none of this is for the faint of heart. I think being creative, you are always vulnerable. So what we can do is build a good foundation and it's just important. For me, that's the big focus of where I want to go from here, is getting those voices that I'm finding so fresh and exciting, but how do you help them succeed? Because that takes more than just talent. [laughs] We all know, it's a fight. So I think that's what I'm most excited about.

'We've wanted to really celebrate a delicious villain for a while'

One thing that was really exciting about the footage was the villain. Why was that important to have in the film, and from your perspective, what makes a great Disney villain?

Yeah. We've wanted to really celebrate a delicious villain for a while. And we've had fun really straying where, I think in life, for a period of time we were exploring how the villain is not always so clear. Sometimes it's ourselves or thematic. But that idea of those villains, and the song, and we love that deliciousness of their evil. [laughs] So the daunting task of creating one, I think what really worked for us with this is we listened to our story artists, we listened to our audience, and people are saying, "I want him not just to be arch, though, I want to know" what we didn't always do, which was tell you why or how did they make those choices? You sort of meet them fully formed and they could be wonderful, but what makes Magnifico different? So we said, "Okay, from the first frame of the film, you're going to feel the journey of this person from the relatable part of ourselves." You get to see, as you saw in a scene when the villain and the protagonists are completely aligned and then you see as their philosophies diverge, you get to watch ... because we never want to say, "Anyone like this will make this choice." It's that this man makes this choice, this woman makes that choice, and it's so fun to watch. And Chris Pine was big on that and it's part of why we wanted to work with him. He's so smart, he holds the character accountable. So it was just so fun to build Magnifico with him, because you couldn't just take anything for granted. So for me, what's been great is getting ... you only saw the first couple of scenes, but getting to that place with him that we think is delicious, but watching him get there has been such a thrill ride for us.

'That did a lot for us in terms of trust'

From a production standpoint, we're three years into the pandemic. How has that impacted the way the studio looks at new projects? Has anything changed in your approach to either the stories you want to tell or the animation pipeline?

I think, in a good way, what we learned about ourselves during Covid was, we built "Raya" and "Encanto" completely [separately]. No one was together and the whole productions were done from home. So I felt like we showed that we understood each other enough and we could carry the same vision from multiple homes. And that did a lot for us in terms of trust. So what we have now is this place where, as people are coming back and this collaboration that it's kind of like we've been through a lot together, so there's no formality, and that makes, for me, I think that makes for a much more wonderful creative space. But I think the big thing is, it's not even about Covid, it's about, as I say, that new generation. I'm more aware than ever of their power and what they can do, but I'm also more aware of that responsibility.

So where I look at is what excites people about storytelling evolves and it's hard when you're getting old to look to yourself. I have certain things I can bring, but it's my job to make sure that I'm spotting that talent and giving them that platform and support and then letting them take it. And I think that's how Eric is helping new generations. That's what we've done that keeps us Disney, is continuing to let that new generation help us evolve, but setting them up for success. So I feel like that has less to do with Covid and just more to do with, here we are. I mean, I've been in this role five years. I've been in the studio 12 years. I came in under 40 and now I'm over 50. So it's time. I think of that. And you hear them banging on the door and they challenge the storytelling, and it's great.

'They're artists. They're not Disney artists. They do work for Disney, but they bring their soul and their tastes come with them'

Serving as both a writer and a producer on "Wish," what was the key element that made this right for the hundredth year celebration?

Well, what I love though is we all started talking as a group, all the directors would get together and we'd meet with story artists and just leave it open and talk about all these fantastical fun ideas. But what kept coming back were certain things — yes, the villain, but this idea of the wishing on stars. That little clip we showed [a montage of Disney characters throughout the years looking at the stars], that was put together before we had the film. Someone just put it together who was inspired to say, "This is something that's a part of us." And you felt it come. Then Chris, he didn't set out to direct it originally, but it spoke to him so clearly. And Fawn, she was such a powerhouse right away.

Then what happened with us is as we were developing the character, Star changed quite a bit. Star originally could talk and took different forms, sometimes human form. And it was really saying, "But that's not what Star is. Star is hope, possibility, wonder — those things don't have the power, they have the power to inspire you." And then I started watching panda bears and how ridiculously funny they were and felt that curious innocence and we said, "What if Star is just that?" And then they said, "You can see this. I think you need to write a draft." And luckily Allison Moore was there in the room every day, but I could come in. But it didn't happen where it was no moment of an order. It was more of, as people were drawn to it and they got it, they just formed the team. And I felt very lucky that, when they asked me to write it and I had no time, but how could I not? It was such an honor.

Disney has always been a studio strong in its traditions, and its recognizability. I'm curious, with something like "Wish," where do you look for pushing boundaries while also keeping those traditions?

All our artists are looking all the time. They're artists. They're not Disney artists. They do work for Disney, but they bring their soul and their tastes come with them, and what they see in the world inspires them. That's great about this industry. Every day there's always buzzes of what's going on. But I think if I look at "Tangled" as a good example of understanding the fairytale, our first sort of CG princess and this nod to the past, but this embracing of this technology, which was a little scary, I'm sure. I wasn't there, so I can only guess. But to say, the approach they took, it kind of showed us where we could go and be more playful. If there hadn't been "Tangled," there would not have been "Frozen." So I'm very grateful that we took some bold steps.

'It's the greatest form of flattery, I guess'

There's been a lot of live-action remakes of Disney movies, both classics and newer ones. From an animation standpoint, does that push you to make visuals more distinct or even just "easier" to adapt? Does it at all affect the mentality going into a new project?

No, I mean, very, very politely, we completely build these independently. We don't think ahead of the live-action. We're honored if it happens. It's the greatest form of flattery, I guess. But I do think, one of the things I love — to me, what defines animation is it is truly transportive in a way that it speaks to your imagination, not to your reality. And so I think in terms of, personally, the looks that I'm inspired by, of where I do feel I'm in a believable world and it feels alive, but it is wholly nothing of our world. It's a place that I can truly escape to. I think that means a lot to a lot of us. So to me, the easy part of it is, if the goal is reality, the technology can go that way. But animation is not about that. What I love about animation is, it starts with a dream and everything is built and the more we can be transported to something we've never seen, the more excited I get.

Lastly, when it comes to "Wish" or any future projects as you are working through development, especially just that first brainstorming phase, what is the balance or even just your personal feelings in terms of wanting to look back at the history of Disney versus looking at what is possible now with new technology and new ideas?

Yeah, yeah. For me, there's not an overall philosophy about it. I do think it's director and artist by artist. And so what we'll do on one film, we won't do on another, and we'll try a whole different ... "Zootopia" and "Wreck-It-Ralph" are nothing like "Frozen." And I think that we'll do that for everything where we take it one film at a time. I think what I always have to trust is what inspires those artists. But I do think when we think about the legacy, to me, there are certain things that I think are wholly Disney, which are films that give hope. Films where you can escape, where you feel like you belong, that you feel that it can become yours. And there's always an element, hopefully, of joy. But we're not afraid to go into deep, dark places. All fairytales do.

But I think that's what we do say is a part of who we are. And I think for so many of us there, it's this thing we share, which is for so much of our lives, starting from our first memories to now, Disney was a place for us to go no matter what was happening in the world, and we could feel this escape. And it was an escape that left you feeling things are possible. I do think that's part of who we are, foundationally, that we all think about. How we get there should be very different each time. And obviously the musicals, the musicals, the musicals, because we love them.

"Wish" arrives in theaters on November 22, 2023.

This evolution is manifest in The Little Mermaid (2023), where Ariel’s age is increased and her relationship with Prince Eric is made more reciprocal, with both characters’ desires and backgrounds developed in greater depth .

Title:

Content: Filed under:

The Little Mermaid live-action remake actually fixed the right character

The biggest story changes aren’t for Halle Bailey as Ariel

Whenever a new Disney live-action remake of an animated classic comes out, there’s always a hullabaloo about what, if anything, changed from the source material. Specifically, fans question whether the latest remake updates anything to take modern standards into account, or a creator boasts that it does — whether it’s giving LeFou an “exclusively gay moment” in 2017’s Beauty and the Beast or canning the Siamese cat song in 2019’s Lady and the Tramp.

For whatever reason, though, most of the filmmakers behind these projects seem determined to also “fix” the stories’ main heroines — usually losing what made them so appealing in the first place. The most nefarious case in point is Beauty and the Beast’s Belle, a character beloved by young bookworms everywhere. Making her a book-lover wasn’t enough for the 2017 remake, which also turned her into an inventor for some reason — and then did absolutely nothing with that plot point.

But in the case of the new Little Mermaid, director Rob Marshall and screenwriter David Magee actually picked the right character to update.

That isn’t Ariel, who for the most part keeps pretty much the same personality she had in the original, though she certainly gets more moments to flesh it out. Ariel is a beloved heroine, and Marshall and Magee understand what made her so appealing in the original animated Disney film. She’s curious, passionate, and idealistic, and the 1989 movie takes great care to highlight those things, while also embracing her faults, like her absent-mindedness and stubbornness. Halle Bailey’s stellar performance as Ariel in the live-action version bolsters all of those points. Even with some added moments, her Ariel is pretty much recognizable. She isn’t the one who needed to undergo a modern makeover, after all.

The character who really needed a change was Eric.

The original animated Eric is a hero of his era. He meets the minimum requirements to be a Disney Prince, in that he’s handsome and brave, and not much else. In the 1989 film, Ariel sees him on a ship, playing with his dog, and immediately falls in love with him. That’s pretty true to the original Hans Christian Andersen story — not to mention the Disney fairy-tale movies that came before — but in 2023, we need more evidence that this is a man worthy of Ariel’s time, and worthy of her giving up everything to try and be with him.

The 2023 live-action version of Eric, played by Jonah Hauer-King, isn’t just a hunk. He feels restless in his palace, and he wants to explore the world beyond his island nation, but he feels trapped by his mother’s rules. That’s a direct parallel to Ariel’s story, so it makes sense that she would relate to him. Her bargain with Ursula (Melissa McCarthy) is more about her desire to escape her father’s controlling rules about her being in love. (Ariel’s “Daddy, I love him!” line doesn’t make the cut in this version.) There’s a sense of comfort in knowing that there is at least one person on land who would understand her choice to leave the ocean. In Eric, she sees more of a kindred spirit than a soulmate.

The new Little Mermaid also gives Ariel and Eric more time to get to know each other. Instead of the dinner scene where Ariel bungles basic social interaction, now Ariel and Eric bond over Eric’s vast collection of trinkets he found on his adventures. As it turns out, they’re both total nerds when it comes to their interests, and they’re both just squirming to talk about what they love with someone. Ariel still can’t talk because of Ursula, but she’s still an active participant in the interaction, showing Eric a thing or two about his treasures from the sea, and eagerly poring over his maps. All their interactions are fueled by an awkward yet adorable attraction that just makes their romance all the more believable, and worth rooting for.

There are some superfluous changes to the live-action movie that don’t really add anything meaningful. For instance, Ariel’s sisters are rulers of their own seas, not Triton’s decorative choral singers, but they still don’t contribute much to the plot. Ursula has added motives, but that doesn’t come up beyond her introduction. Scuttle the seagull (voiced by Awkwafina) raps for a bit, because sure, why not? If you think too hard about some of the more consequential world-building changes in 2023’s The Little Mermaid, the movie begins to unravel.

But what makes The Little Mermaid isn’t whether the fish look good, or what exactly fuels Triton and Ursula’s feud. It all comes back to Ariel and her journey, which is fueled by the central romance between her and Eric. Just because Ariel falls in love doesn’t mean she’s not a strong and beloved protagonist, and just because Eric is a handsome and dashing prince doesn’t mean he lacks the substance behind that charming smile. By updating their romance, the 2023 Little Mermaid makes the love story more satisfying — and resonant for a new generation.

The Little Mermaid swims into theaters on May 26.

News

Disney to remove Willow, Y: The Last Man, and original movies from Disney Plus and Hulu to save cash

Movies

How The Good Dinosaur’s director found his perfect Elemental cast

A Century of Disney

50 years after release, Disney’s Robin Hood is still a life-changing furry phenomenon

View all stories in Disney

Sign up for the newsletter Sign up for Patch Notes

A weekly roundup of the best things from Polygon

According to John Musker, what should Disney prioritize in its remakes?

Across recent remakes, female protagonists are crafted as more empowered and aspirational—Snow White, for example, shifts from longing for rescue to aspiring for leadership .

Contemporary casting choices, such as a Black Ariel in The Little Mermaid or inclusive reinventions in Peter Pan and Wendy (2023), reflect broader diversity and strive to modernize classic narratives for a more global and socially aware audience .

Storylines are frequently expanded, providing additional context or fresh perspectives, as seen in forthcoming titles like Mufasa: The Lion King .

Title:

Content: Advertisement

The four Disney executives who could succeed Bob Iger as CEO in two years

Share

Walt Disney Co. Chief Executive Bob Iger has prevailed in the company’s shareholder fight against billionaire dissident Nelson Peltz. But the celebrated executive’s most challenging task still looms: selecting someone to fill his big shoes.

The 73-year-old chief is set to retire in 2026 — assuming he steps down as planned.

For decades, succession planning has been among the Burbank giant’s most vexing issues. During Iger’s first, highly successful 15-year run, he delayed his planned retirement multiple times, and potential successors, including former Chief Operating Officer Tom Staggs, left the company in frustration.

Peltz and others pointed to the bungled hand-off to parks head Bob Chapek as proof that Disney’s board of directors, who oversee the succession process, weren’t up to the job. Chapek’s tumultuous tenure lasted less than three years; Iger returned in late 2022 to replace him.

Advertisement

Peltz’s failed bid to join the board gives Iger and the board some breathing room as they assess candidates to eventually take over the storied company. But shareholders, during the contentious proxy campaign, made it clear that Disney can’t whiff again.

Disney shareholders reject billionaire investor Nelson Peltz, who wanted changes, for a board seat. The hard-fought battle exposed Disney’s challenges.

April 3, 2024

Succession is “the board’s No. 1 priority,” Iger said Thursday during an appearance on CNBC. Leading the process is Disney Chair Mark Parker. The company’s succession committee also includes General Motors Co. CEO Mary T. Barra, Morgan Stanley Executive Chair James P. Gorman and Calvin R. McDonald, chief of Lululemon Athetica Inc. The group met seven times last year to address succession, Iger said, and they “intend to meet even more this year.”

“They are confident they will choose the right person at the right time. And they have some time to do that,” Iger said. “But again, they’re treating it with a sense of urgency because it is so important.”

Disney historically promotes from within, but board members currently are looking at potential external candidates as well as four top executives: Disney Entertainment co-Chair Dana Walden, who oversees television; fellow entertainment co-Chair Alan Bergman, who runs the film studios (Walden and Bergman share oversight of streaming); parks, products and experiences czar Josh D’Amaro; and ESPN boss James Pitaro.

Corporate bake-offs can be fraught. Passed-over executives often depart, and Disney cannot afford to have an exodus of its top talent at such a crucial moment as it tries to transition its television business to streaming. More than a decade ago, Time Warner lost two key executives when it chose from among a trio of Warner Bros. executives to lead that Burbank studio.

Disney’s leading contenders have their own areas of expertise, as well as blind spots. None has the experience of running a $220-billion, multifaceted media and entertainment empire such as Disney. But then again, neither did Iger before he ascended to the throne in 2005.

Advertisement

Disney executives declined to comment for this story.

Dana Walden, boss of all TV

One of the savviest executives in Hollywood, Dana Walden oversees a vast portfolio of properties and programming crucial to Disney’s legacy TV business and its streaming future. She’s in charge of Disney’s television studios, the ABC network, ABC News, children’s and young adult programming, Freeform, National Geographic, FX, Hulu and Hulu Originals.

Walden arrived at Disney five years ago when the company bought much of Rupert Murdoch’s 21st Century Fox. One of Iger’s motivations for the deal was to boost Disney’s TV executive talent by bringing over successful Fox personnel, including Walden, FX’s John Landgraf and former TV head Peter Rice. The pricey Fox acquisition, while lambasted by Peltz and others, gave Disney a programming arsenal to support its streaming ambitions.

Among the four CEO candidates, Walden may be the most similar to Iger in terms of career trajectory and soft touch with talent. He climbed the rungs of the ABC broadcast network before ascending to Disney’s No. 2 job in 2000. Like Iger, Walden is a skilled manager and polished communicator who instinctively understands creative executives. She has deep relationships with, and the respect of, Hollywood’s producers, writers and other talent. She grew up in Studio City and got her start in television as a publicist (including a stint promoting Arsenio Hall).

Disney’s $71-billion purchase of Rupert Murdoch’s entertainment assets, including ‘The Simpsons,’ ‘Avatar’ and Hulu, has also been a financial burden for the studio, which recently said it would eliminate 7,000 jobs to reduce costs.

Feb. 18, 2023

Walden’s long collaboration with Ryan Murphy (“Glee,” “American Crime Story” and the “Feud” franchise) has proved beneficial as he now is working more closely with Disney following a stint at Netflix. Walden also was instrumental in bringing the Kardashians to Hulu from their cable home on the E! Channel.

She has presided over a revitalization of Disney’s youth programming after a fallow stretch, with the popular “Percy Jackson & the Olympians” and “Goosebumps” — shows that are core to Disney’s family entertainment brand.

The 59-year-old executive could become Disney’s first female CEO. Perhaps the biggest knock on Walden is that she didn’t come up through Disney’s ranks, leading some in the rank and file to question whether enough Mickey Mouse DNA is present in her cells. She’d also have to overcome the perception that she’s “just” a TV exec. That’s not the case, given her streaming purview.

Advertisement

Alan Bergman, the non-flashy studio chief

At Disney’s core, it all comes back to movies, and it’s been that way since Walt and Roy Disney founded their studio in 1923. To this day, theatrical film drives most other parts of the business, including theme park attractions and toy sales.

As such, entertainment co-Chair Alan Bergman, 58, sits atop an extraordinarily important part of the company, shepherding storied brands including Disney Animation, Pixar, Marvel Studios, Lucasfilm and Searchlight Pictures (known for recent four-time Oscar winner “Poor Things”).

Bergman is a true Disney veteran with a deep and detailed understanding of business and finance, having joined the company in 1996. He was promoted to president of Walt Disney Studios in 2005 and fully took over the division in 2020, succeeding Alan Horn after a period of unprecedented box office success, including hits such as “Avengers: Endgame” and “Star Wars: The Force Awakens.”

He’s not flashy. A UCLA graduate in business economics, Bergman has avoided the spotlight, preferring to let his deputies, such as Marvel’s Kevin Feige and Disney Animation’s Jennifer Lee, take their due credit. Yet he commands the respect of those high-powered creatives and has worked for years with the likes of Peter Jackson, James Cameron and Ryan Coogler.

‘The Marvels’ fell out of the top 10 at the box office after three weekends. The studio has been struggling with quality control, according to some.

Dec. 5, 2023

Bergman, like his counterparts, has his hands full. Lately, the studios have suffered from a number of high-profile flops, including “The Marvels” and “Haunted Mansion.” Even last year’s “The Little Mermaid,” which was hammered by racist online attacks, struggled to achieve the heights of past remakes from the Disney vault. The studios — particularly Marvel — were stretched painfully thin by a mandate to crank out material for Disney+, and that showed in the waning quality of the superhero franchise.

Efforts are underway to get Disney’s all-important theatrical film business back on track. Iger has allowed his division heads, including Bergman, to slow their output and focus on quality over quantity. This year’s Disney slate includes big franchise extensions: “Inside Out 2,” a “Moana” sequel and “Mufasa: The Lion King.”

Advertisement

Josh D’Amaro, keeper of the Magic Kingdom

To legions of superfans, the charismatic Josh D’Amaro is Mr. Disney. Since joining the company in 1998 in a position at the Disneyland Resort, D’Amaro has steadily climbed the corporate ladder. Under his leadership, the parks have embarked on major capital projects, including new lands such as Star Wars: Galaxy’s Edge and the Avengers Campus.

Today, D’Amaro, 53, serves as chair of Disney Experiences, giving him an expansive portfolio that includes oversight of the company’s theme parks, its famed Imagineering division, Disney’s cruise line and its consumer products (think Baby Yoda dolls and Elsa dresses).

In all, D’Amaro is in charge of 180,000 employees, many of whom are unionized or part time, meaning he’s used to leading large teams and wildly capital-intensive initiatives. The parks are Disney’s biggest profit center, showing he can navigate a massive budget. The “experiences” segment accounted for 60% of Disney’s operating income during the most recent fiscal year. He’s in charge of a roughly $60-billion effort to expand Disney’s parks, a huge bet on live, in-person entertainment.

It’s a challenging, multi-pronged job that comes with hazards. D’Amaro recently had to navigate the fallout over Disney’s nasty feud with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis over the state’s anti-LGBTQ+ legislation and the former Reedy Creek Improvement District.

Disney and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District settle a lawsuit over the powers of the special body that controls the land Walt Disney World sits on.

March 27, 2024

But he’s popular with Disney’s enthusiastic and demanding fans, which helps. Disney guests will often stop him in the parks and ask for selfies, or query him about park design decisions. His presentations at Disney fan convention D23 are always well-attended.

One knock against him is his lack of direct experience with film and TV, as his entire career has been in the experiences sector, particularly the parks. There is recent precedent for a CEO coming out of the parks division, though it didn’t work out so well. After all, D’Amaro ascended to his current position after Chapek was named Disney CEO. But D’Amaro has the kind of Disney spark that Chapek never did.

Advertisement

Jimmy Pitaro, sports supreme

When ESPN Chair Jimmy Pitaro took the reins of the sports cable giant in 2018, he inherited a division beset by shrinking TV ratings while cord-cutting was eroding its ability to reach viewers. ESPN’s hosts were under fire over the political discourse on its talk shows in the wake of President Trump’s 2016 victory.

Pitaro, 54, who previously led Disney’s consumer products and interactive media division, is credited with calming the waters and preparing the network for the future by increasing its digital prowess and growing its social media presence to keep it relevant with younger viewers.

To further that aim, he’s overseeing the launch of ESPN’s long-awaited direct-to-consumer product, which by the fall of 2025 will give consumers access to its full suite of channels, including the flagship ESPN. Ratings at the ESPN cable channel have improved, despite dramatic declines in pay-TV subscriptions.

Pitaro is also credited with repairing ESPN’s relationship with the NFL (whose games are America’s most-watched TV programming), helping to pave the way for a new 11-year media rights deal with the league that gives the company two Super Bowls that will air on Disney’s ABC broadcast network. ESPN has also secured the media rights to its major live events for the rest of the decade, with only the NBA contract — up in 2025 — remaining as its next major test.

There are actually things to talk about in Hollywood other than the WGA and SAG-AFTRA strikes — such as the Disney-Charter deal to end the blackout.

Sept. 12, 2023

That said, sports is a smaller segment within Disney than either entertainment or parks in terms of revenue. It wasn’t long ago that analysts wondered if ESPN would even be part of Disney’s empire for the long term. When Iger seemed to muse aloud about spinning off ESPN, though, Pitaro was said to be a good soldier and didn’t complain.

The idea of cleaving ESPN from Disney no longer appears to be under serious consideration. Iger has begun touting the unit’s strong financial performance again. Though Pitaro is well-liked within the company, he’d be a novice in the Hollywood side of the business. But he’s comfortable with show business types. His wife, Jean Louisa Kelly, is a veteran film actress.

Advertisement

Public and critical response to these remakes remains mixed.

Title:

Content: Home Movies

Thought the brand of hatred Brie Larson suffered for ‘Captain Marvel’ is over? Well, version 2.0 is here

'The Brie Larson Treatment' comes for another performer with the gall to have opinions.

Image via Marvel Studios

Social media, am I right? What started out as a means for the world to communicate instantly, bringing people together from across the planet, has since metamorphosed into that slime from Ghostbusters 2 that feeds on anger.

And now we’re stuck, knee-deep in a bog of the loudest opinions, all being digitally shouted by everyone that never figured out their internet inside voices. We’ve been here for a while. We all know what it looks like. Arguably, it all boiled over around the time that Captain Marvel came out.

That’s when Brie Larson became angry-boy-Twitter’s favorite place to drag their knuckles, thanks to the way she voiced outlandish opinions like “I don’t have to smile when strangers tell me to” and “I should get treated the same as my male co-stars” and, if we’re being honest, mostly because she was a pretty lady on the internet who wasn’t going out of her way to make strange dudes feel like she’d love to meet them for coffee sometime and really get to know them. The rage was ubiquitous. You couldn’t swing a dead flerken on Twitter without hitting six burner accounts telling Larson how to be an actress.

But that was what, four years ago? We’ve probably moved on as a species, right? If nothing else, I’m sure Twitter has become a more thoughtful public square since Elon Musk took over – I can’t do it, sorry. I’m kidding. Everything is still the exact same kind of bad, only this time the boys are mad about princesses, actress Rachel Zegler playing Snow White in the upcoming live-action to be precise.

The ghost of Brie Larson’s past is making the rounds on Twitter again

The latest target for social media’s putridity is Rachel Zegler, star of Disney’s upcoming live-action adaptation of Snow White. In a recent interview with Variety, Zegler discussed some of the changes that the new film would make to its story – specifically, the lead character is driven by a desire to lead now, she is “not going to be saved by the prince and she’s not going to be dreaming about true love.”

The merits of Disney remakes aside, they’re changes that make sense. As Zegler puts it, storytelling has changed since 1937. People don’t pay to see feature-length movies about women eating fruit, taking naps, and being awoken by non-consensual kisses anymore. But not everyone agrees.

What happened next will shock you, especially if you just now got your America Online disk and you’re logging onto the internet for the first time: People got mad. Tikitok and Twitter sprayed their musk all over the story, calling Zegler’s takes “pseudo-feminism” and accusing her of “single-handedly destroying this movie.” The rhetoric was hyperbolic. It was acidic. It was, you know, Tuesday. Eagle-eyed viewers noticed a pattern.

There’s a lot that stings about the story. It’s rough, knowing that film Twitter might never stop being a free box of megaphones for everyone with a one-way brain filter and a “No Girls Allowed” sign on their bedroom door. It’s also a little bit gutting to know that conversations about live-action Disney adaptations are always going to swing back around to accusations of surreptitious political agendas and the formation of parasocial disgust targeted at opinionated female performers.
Like, these remakes (mostly lacking originality) are often pretty bad on their own merits, guys. Maybe focus on arguments that actually hold water.

About the author

Tom Meisfjord

Tom is an entertainment writer with five years of experience in the industry, and thirty more years of experience outside of it. His fields of expertise include superheroes, classic horror, and most franchises with the word "Star" in the title. An occasionally award-winning comedian, he resides in the Pacific Northwest with his dog, a small mutt with impulse control issues.

How did audiences react to the 2020 Mulan live-action remake?

Some positive reactions praising both changes and additions