# Disney's Live-Action Remakes: Nostalgia, Adaptation, and the Balance Between Authenticity and Relevance

## Executive Summary

This report examines Disney's strategy of producing live-action remakes of their classic animated films over the past 5-10 years.

Based on analysis of multiple remakes including Beauty and the Beast (2017), Mulan (2020), Pinocchio (2022), and The Little Mermaid (2023), this report explores how nostalgia drives financial profits, how timeless stories are adapted for modern audiences, and how Disney balances authenticity with contemporary relevance.

The report also examines public reactions to these adaptations and the changes made to original stories and characters.

## Disney's Live-Action Remake Strategy

Disney has increasingly focused on remaking their animated classics in live-action format, with numerous releases between 2015-2023.

This strategy represents a calculated business approach that leverages existing intellectual property while introducing beloved stories to new generations.

As noted in one document, "the trend of making live-action versions of animated Disney films started quite some time back," but has accelerated significantly in recent years.

The financial motivation is clear: Beauty and the Beast (2017) grossed $1.

264 billion worldwide on a $225 million budget, becoming "the highest-grossing live-action movie of 2017.

" This commercial success demonstrates the profitability of remaking established properties with built-in audience recognition.

## The Role of Nostalgia in Driving Financial Success

Nostalgia serves as a powerful marketing tool for Disney's live-action remakes.

When Disney announced the remake of Beauty and the Beast, there was initial skepticism about whether they should "leave things as they were," recognizing that "many of the world's population had their childhood shaped by some of these Disney characters.

" This emotional connection creates a ready-made audience eager to revisit beloved stories.

The nostalgia fa

# Disney's Live-Action Remakes: Nostalgia, Adaptation, and the Balance Between Authenticity and Relevance

## Executive Summary

This report examines Disney's strategy of producing live-action remakes of their classic animated films over the past 5-10 years.

Title:

Content: Latest Fantasy News: Halle Bailey’s ‘Little Mermaid’ doesn’t make a habit of munching on her underwater friends as a ‘Harry Potter’ star admits to feeling boxed in

Image via Walt Disney Studios

Mere weeks separate viewers from the official arrival of Disney’s live-action Little Mermaid, but the film faces an uphill battle if it wants to re-seize relevance.

The appearance of some of the flick’s vital characters, including Flounder and Sebastian, has come under harsh scrutiny in recent weeks after fans got their first glimpse of the aquatic creatures and quickly recoiled. Flounder, in particular, has seen broad backlash from longtime Disney fans, as they decry his upsetting live-action look and wonder where Ariel’s cute, colorful friend swam off to.

Despite — or perhaps because of — her fishy friend’s unpalatable appearance, the Little Mermaid herself balked at a question about which of her underwater companions she’d consume if forced. The question was a bit out of left field in the first place, but Bailey’s reaction proves why she, at least, is the perfect fit for Disney’s fresh attempt at The Little Mermaid.

Once the fantasy film is released, Bailey’s name will be synonymous with The Little Mermaid — for good or for ill — for quite some time. Popular actors like Harry Potter’s Emma Watson can attest to that, even decades after the fact. The actor recently took a step back from the spotlight, after admitting that a lack of control over her projects made the actress feel boxed in. Hopefully the same won’t be true for Bailey, whose career is just starting to truly blossom onscreen.

Even if The Little Mermaid performs better than expected, Bailey’s career may be limited in the coming months, as the effects of the Writers Guild of America strike spread. Upcoming projects could see massive delays, depending on the length of the strike, but plenty of creatives are throwing their full support behind the strike. It may be bad news for anticipated upcoming releases, but The Sandman’s Neil Gaiman is standing by his fellow writers.

Neil Gaiman voices his support for the Writers Guild of America strike

The author behind The Sandman and Good Omens, Neil Gaiman, made his opinions on the Writers Guild of America strike clear. He took to Twitter in the early hours of May 2, when the strike began, to vocalize his support for his fellow WGA members. Noting his presence among their ranks, Gaiman assured fans that Good Omens 2 should proceed as planned, but asserted that he is joining the other members in the strike. He also said that, while he wishes “this wasn’t happening,” he “support[s] it absolutely.”

Emma Watson explains her step back from acting

Harry Potter’s own Hermione Granger took a step back from the world of acting several years ago, after maintaining a consistent onscreen presence for nearly 20 years. Her first gig — in Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone — was filmed when Watson was only 10 years old. She’s been in the industry for most of her life now, and after 2019’s Pretty Women finished filming, she vowed to take a break from the spotlight. She admitted to feeling “a bit caged” by projects she was engaged in but had very little control over. The effort of standing by a project she had a minor say in became difficult as Watson grew older, and we imagine at least some of that frustration stems from Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling’s close association with the trans-exclusionary movement.

No, Halle Bailey wouldn’t take a bite out of Flounder or Sebastian

Halle Bailey dazzled at the Met Gala last night, arriving at the event in a stunning white get-up that pulled attention from many of the similarly-sleek attendees. In an interview on the red carpet, Bailey gave the perfect answer to a startling question that might just border on cannibalism. Responding to a question of whether she’d prefer to eat Flounder or Sebastian were she forced to, the incoming Disney princess gave an aghast answer, noting that she wouldn’t eat either. “They’re my friends,” she insisted, securing herself as the perfect casting choice for Disney’s live-action Ariel.

Title:

Content: The Little Mermaid’ Star Jacob Tremblay Adressess Controversial Flounder Design (VIDEO)

"……what happened to Flounder."

Toronto Staff Writer

The Little Mermaid live-action remake is bringing an old Disney classic back to life, but not everyone is open to change.

Live-action star Jacob Tremblay, who voices Flounder, chatted with Narcity about the polarizing public reaction to his character's design, and he wants people to "see the movie and then see their reactions."

Flounder and Sebastian have had serious character design overhauls to align with the live-action retelling of the underwater cult classic, and some fans aren't thrilled to see Flounder looking like a CGI fish rather than a lovable cartoon.

Fans have gotten sneak peeks into the film with The Little Mermaid trailer and character posters, and not everyone is on board with the new hyper-realistic fishy design.

Many people have taken to social media to dish on Flounder's appearance, which largely deviates from his classic look – big eyes and a round yellow-and-blue body in exchange for a sharper, sleeker silver body with black fish-like eyes.

"……what happened to flounder…..," reads one comment on the posters with almost 10K likes.

Another fan commented, "Y’all did flounder and Sebastian so wrong 💀"

"Everyone upset over Ariel in the new Little Mermaid, but bruh, what did they do to my guy Flounder," tweeted out a fan, referencing the backlash over Halle Bailey's casting as Ariel.

Tremblay told Narcity that he saw the design for Flounder when he auditioned and thought it was "really cool" and said he couldn't imagine Flounder any other way.

"I thought it worked so well, and you know, I'm excited for people to see the movie and then see their reactions because I think it genuinely works really well, and I really couldn't imagine it a different way."

The Little Mermaid comes out in theatres on May 26, and fans will be able to see the film themselves and experience Flounder again for the first time – and who knows, maybe the public will walk away with a different take on the live-action fish.

Brooke Houghton
Toronto Staff Writer
Brooke Houghton is a Staff Writer for Narcity Canada's Ontario Desk focused on celebrity news and is based in Toronto, Ontario.

Title:

Content: Create

Pinocchio: 5 things to know about Jiminy Cricket

Pinocchio, the latest live-action adaptation of the 1940 animated film, will be premiering on Disney+ on Thursday, September 8, 2022. The film stars Tom Hanks, Cynthia Erivo, and Luke Evans in lead roles, and is directed by Robert Zemeckis, who also wrote the screenplay for the film.

Pinocchio's character development is dependent on Jiminy Cricket. The character was adapted from the 1883 Italian book, The Adventures of Pinocchio, by Carlo Collodi. Although Jiminy Cricket has evolved over the movies, each version has managed to capture the essence of the character.

While the trend of making live-action versions of animated Disney films started quite some time back, Pinocchio is finally joining the list of films that have been remade in live-action.

Everything we know about Pinocchio's Jiminy Cricket

1) The name 'Jiminy' only came with the Disney adaptation

Jiminy Cricket is only referred to as 'Talking Cricket' in the literary version of the story. In the fourth chapter of The Adventures of Pinocchio, the 'Talking Cricket' tries to persuade Pinocchio to behave better. Disney's decision to give the character a more realistic name increased its popularity.

Jiminy Cricket is one of my favorite animated characters and I am so happy the remake is doing him justice. His design doesn't look too uncanny, Joseph Gordon-Levitt captures the spirit of Cliff Edwards quite nicely and he's the right amount of witty and endearing. https://t.co/6d9umDDERS

While Carlo Collodi intended the Talking Cricket to be a wise old cricket who knows more than the protagonist, Jiminy Cricket was given a sense of humor in Disney's 1940 adaptation. Jiminy Cricket was chosen by the Blue Fairy to guide a skittish Pinocchio. The Blue Fairy was also known as the Fairy with Turquoise Hair in the book.

2) Jiminy Cricket doesn't exactly resemble a cricket

Jiminy Cricket is unlike any other cricket character in Disney's adaptation of the story. His anatomy is unusual for a cricket. The character has four legs, a greenish color, and short antennae.

Jiminy Cricket dresses similarly to an older gentleman from the nineteenth century. He always wears a blue hat and carries an umbrella. He is also designed to walk on two legs, giving him a human-like appearance.

3) He appears in other Disney films too

Jiminy Cricket's significance goes beyond his appearance in this film. After winning the hearts of both children and adults, the character was included in several other popular Disney films that followed. What is less well-known is that the character's name comes from an earlier film, Snow White and the Seven Dwarves.

In the Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, the dwarves substitute the phrase "Jiminy Cricket!" for "Jesus Christ!" The character was also seen in the 1939 film The Wizard of Oz. Following the 1940 animated film, it appeared as the Ghost of Christmas Past in Mickey's Christmas Carol and in the musical, Fun and Fancy Free.

4) Jiminy is a wise and conscientious cricket

The Talking Cricket in the book is mistreated by Pinocchio and plays a minor role in the plot. However, the character's wise nature is exaggerated in the Disney adaptation, as Jiminy Cricket becomes an important character who follows the protagonist everywhere.

No lie! Watch Joseph Gordon-Levitt's take on Jiminy Cricket in a clip from Disney's #Pinocchio remake: comicbook.com/movies/news/di… https://t.co/2KLwGaScDQ

Disney, ever the child-friendly brand, retains Jiminy Cricket to serve as the hero's conscience. Sent by the Blue Fairy, he takes his job of morally guiding the main character very seriously while also providing comic relief.

5) Jiminy Cricket is voiced by Joseph Gordon-Levitt in the new film

Because the character is computer generated and only requires a voice actor, the new Jiminy Cricket is voiced by Joseph Gordon-Levitt. The actor rose to prominence following his performance in 500 Days of Summer, and he is also a popular singer. He previously worked as a voice actor in Star Wars: Vision's English version.

The live-action movie releases on Disney+ on Thursday, September 8, 2022, and stars Tom Hanks as Geppetto, Cynthia Erivo as the Blue Fairy and Luke Evans as The Coachman.

Edited by Vinay Agrawal

Quick Links:

More from Sportskeeda
Fetching more content...

Title:

Content: Pinocchio (2022) review: more like Pinocchi-oh no

Pinocchio (2022) fails to live up to its animated predecessor in almost every way. Still at least Luke Evans is having fun, which is something...

Pinocchio (2022), like many of the live-action Disney movies, is a difficult movie to review. You have to balance the nostalgia you feel toward the original animated movie with the understanding that these new films aren’t really made for me. They’re made for a new generation, to get them hooked on Disney movies the same way we were growing up.

Still, I can honestly say that if the House of Mouse is trying to encourage younger people and kids to get into their family movies, they’d be better off showing them the original ’40s Pinocchio because the remake is dreadful, and I don’t use that word lightly. Everything about this film is a downgrade from the original.

The story’s basically the same, a carpenter named Gepetto (Tom Hanks) builds a wooden boy and wishes his marionette son would come to life. The Blue Fairy (Cynthia Erivo) half grants his wish and brings the puppet named Pinocchio (Benjamin Evan Ainsworth) to life but does not make him a “real boy”.

Instead, Pinocchio must prove himself worthy of becoming flesh and blood by being good and the fairy tasks Jimminy Cricket (Joseph Gordon Levitt) with serving as Pinocchio’s conscience. If you’re reading this, you know the rest of the story – Pinocchio gets caught up in a big adventure that culminates in him being eaten by a whale.

Right, let’s get to the big reason this film does not work. The VFX are atrocious. We’re talking Ally McBeal Dancing Baby levels of bad at times. While watching the film, I did not believe that Gepetto and Pinocchio were in the same room or touching, which is surprising considering this film was directed by Robert Zemeckis.

Zemeckis was the mastermind behind the comedy movie Who Framed Roger Rabbit, which made me believe Bob Hoskins and a cartoon rabbit were in the same room back in the ’80s. Unfortunately, Pinocchio has a touch of the Polar Express about it, with the characters’ eye lines failing to match up and dead-eyed CGI monsters staring off into space.

I’m sorry to say it as well, but Pinocchio is creepy. He’s a living puppet, essentially a family-friendly Chucky. The original kid’s movie managed to dodge the Uncanny Valley by being animated. Here the sheer unnaturalness of Pinocchio is laid bare by putting him next to live-action actors. Had they made Pinocchio an animatronic, they may have gotten away with it, but the fact he’s a VFX character only heightens his general weirdness.

Still, the cast is pretty stacked, so you’d imagine they’d do a good job, right? Well, they don’t do a bad job, but despite Disney expanding this adaptation, the story’s still pretty threadbare. As such, neither Hanks nor Levitt gets all that much to do, and they fail to leave any real impression. Erivo, however, is probably the worst treated of the main cast, with the Blue Fairy’s role cut down quite a lot leaving her with just one scene in the whole film.

As for the songs? Well, I’m sorry to raise the spectre of the original once again, but they’re not a patch on the ’40s Pinocchio’s tunes. The best Disney song in the film is probably ‘I’ve Got No Strings’, but it’s not even as good as the version Ulton sang in the MCU movie Age of Ultron.

If I had to say anything good about this, I liked Luke Evans as the nefarious Coachman and the Pleasure Island. While they took out the alcohol and smoking (unsurprisingly), the sequence maintains the sinister spirit of the original, and the donkey transformation is no less horrifying than the original.

Were I to be charitable, I might suggest if you’ve never seen the original, you might get something out of Pinocchio (2022), but for me, this is another live-action dud from the House of Mouse.

Pinocchio (2022) review

Pinocchio (2022) fails to live up to its magical predecessor.

2

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.

Title:

Content: Disney Remake Cancels Century-Old Love Story

in Movies

Credit: Disney

From Snow White to Frozen, Disney has been responsible for creating and adapting some of the most enchanting fairytales ever put to screen. While many of their stories are hundreds of years old, the studio’s adaptations are likely the prime example in the mind of the public consciousness.

Reimagining these classic tales has also done wonders for Disney. However, the recent controversy surrounding the upcoming adaptation of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs has sparked a decidedly volatile reception, especially since the studio has officially abandoned its first and original love story.

No Love for Snow White

Recent coverage of the film’s progress revealed that Disney is officially stepping away from the traditional fairytale elements that make up Snow White’s narrative. Rachel Zegler plays the title role, and her recent quote on the matter has more than a few Disney fans up in arms.

“It’s no longer 1937… She’s not going to be saved by the prince, and she’s not going to be dreaming about true love. She’s dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be.”

Related: Gal Gadot’s ‘Snow White’ Sabotaged by Media Frenzy

That means no dwarves, prince, or spell broken by love’s first kiss. Although Disney has several strong leading women in many of its other productions, Snow White really isn’t the appropriate story to take that approach, and fans recognize that.

Some viewers, like the creator seen here, are absolutely outraged that Disney would remove the romance and love story element from their original fairytale. While it’s true we no longer live in 1937, that doesn’t mean there isn’t still a desire or an audience for a traditional romanticized tale about princesses and magical creatures without some sort of shoe-horned message behind it.

Related: Iconic Dwarf Actor Rips Into Woke ‘Snow White,’ Says Story Is “For Dwarfs”

To put it bluntly, Disney should make a fantasy-themed female-empowerment film, but not at the expense of another established work. At this point, “Snow White” is just a namesake, as any charm or enchantment associated with the story has gone entirely out the window.

Has Disney erased the love in Snow White? Tell Inside the Magic what you think in the comments below!

Be the first to comment!

Title:

Content: Disney's Seven Dwarfs Replacement: Will Snow White Remove the Dwarfs from Live-Action Movie?

By Sam Hargrave Posted:

Disney will release its live-action Snow White remake in 2024, but will the movie feature the seven classic dwarfs?

Continuing the train of Disney's live-action remakes of animated classics, Snow White will hit theaters in 2024, starring Shazam! Fury of the Gods' Rachel Zegler as the titular lead while Wonder Woman's Gal Gadot plays the Evil Queen.

The remake and Zegler have become enthralled in controversy recently after comments resurfaced from September 2022's D23 Fan Expo in which the actress panned the 1937 classic as outdated, teasing major changes for the modern update.

Will the Snow White Remake Include Seven Dwarfs?

Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs released in 1937 as an adaptation of an 1812 German fairy tale written by the Brothers Grimm. The story sees the young Snow White cross paths with seven dwarfs - who live in a woodland cottage and work in nearby mines - who accompany her on her adventures.

Arguably Hollywood's most famous dwarf actor Peter Dinklage (Game of Thrones) commented on Disney's live-action Snow White remake in an interview with Marc Maron's WTF podcast, via The Wrap

The actor explained how he was "taken aback" by the casting of Latina actress Rachel Zegler as Snow White while they are "still telling" the original story:

“Literally no offence to anyone, but I was a little taken aback when they were very proud to cast a Latina actress as Snow White. You’re still telling the story of ‘Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.’ Take a step back and look at what you’re doing there. It makes no sense to me.”

Dinklage commented on how Snow White has been "progressive in one way" by casting a Latina actress in the leading role, but called the seven dwarfs' role in the original story "f***ing backwards:"

“You’re progressive in one way and you’re still making that f—ing backwards story about seven dwarfs living in a cave together, what the f— are you doing, man? Have I done nothing to advance the cause from my soapbox? I guess I’m not loud enough.”

To avoid any controversy over the iconic and titular seven dwarfs, Disney has opted to omit the dwarfs from Snow White altogether. According to a casting sheet that was seen by The Wrap, the live-action remake will instead fill the seven dwarf companion roles with "magical creatures."

A statement shared with the outlet by Disney confirmed they will be taking "a different approach" to "avoid reinforcing stereotypes:"

“To avoid reinforcing stereotypes from the original animated film, we are taking a different approach with these seven characters and have been consulting with members of the dwarfism community. We look forward to sharing more as the film heads into production after a lengthy development period.”

A leaked set photo from the remake's production revealed a look at Zegler's Snow White with these seven "magical creatures."

Every Major Change Confirmed for Disney's Snow White Remake

During an interview with Variety at the D23 Expo, Snow White's Rachel Zegler and the Evil Queen's Gal Gadot noted how the filmmakers have brought a "modern edge" to the story as it's "no longer 1937" - when the original movie was made.

The pair confirmed Snow White is "not going to be saved by the prince" this time around, nor will she be "dreaming about true love." Instead, she will be "dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be."

Speaking with ExtraTV in September 2022, Zegler noted how the original Snow White saw a "love story with a guy who literally stalks her," which they have opted to change. While the movie does have a Prince Charming actor, Andrew Burnap, the actress remarked "all of [his] scenes could get cut" as this movie will very much not be a love story akin to the 1937 animated movie.

These changes combined with the omission of the iconic seven dwarfs certainly paint the picture of a rather different Snow White story to the ones that multiple generations have known and loved for almost 100 years.

Snow White hits theaters on March 22, 2024.

Title:

Content: The Cast of 2017’s “Beauty and the Beast” Live-Action Movie

When Disney first announced a remake of its 1991 classic, Beauty and the Beast, there was a bit of skepticism on if it wasn’t best to leave things as they were. Many of the world’s population had their childhood shaped by some of these Disney characters.

Then again, Disney has a reputation for excellence. And so, in faith, we waited and were graced by the remarkable live-action remake. Beauty and the Beast (2017) went on to be the highest-grossing live-action movie of 2017. With a budget of $225 million, it was a box office hit grossing $1.264 billion.

It’s no easy feat to bring one of the world’s most popular fairytale stories to life. To this end, here is the iconic cast for 2017’s Beauty and the Beast live-action movie.

Belle (Emma Watson)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Emma Watson is Hollywood’s sweetheart and can practically do no wrong in the eyes of her fans and admirers. Starting her professional acting career as Hermione Granger in the Harry Potter movie series, there has always been a sense of innocence in her acting style.

No other was perfect to be cast as Belle in a live-action Beauty and the Beast remake. While most of the story and characters stayed the same, Belle’s life before meeting the Beast was slightly tweaked. Besides knowing she loved reading books from the original animated movie, there needed to be a backstory that’ll make sense in a live-action movie.

Like her father, she became an inventor who designed a type of washing machine to afford her enough time to read. Belle goes in search of her father and finds herself in a mysterious castle. She meets the Beast, and both will fall in love and help break the enchantress’s curse.

Beast (Dan Stevens)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

What’s a Beauty and the Beast storyline without the Beast? With motion capture, Dan Stevens plays the character of Beast. Beast gets transformed when he meets an enchantress who places a curse on him.

She leaves him with a rose flower, telling him to find love and receive love before all the petals fall from the flower. Beast would eventually find love in Belle.

Gaston (Luke Evans)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Luke Evans plays the main antagonist, Gaston. Gaston is a handsome, arrogant, and narcissistic skilled hunter who wants to marry Belle. However, the more she refuses to love him, the more he feels the need to have her.

When he discovers Belle has fallen in love with the Beast and not him, he jumps on an opportunity to mobilize the villagers to kill the Beast.

Maurice (Kevin Kline)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Kevin Kline plays the character of Maurice, Belle’s father. While going to the market, Maurice gets lost in the forest and flees into the nearest castle to escape attacking wolves. But, unfortunately, he’s kept prisoner by the Beast.

When his horse returns home without him, Belle sets out to find him. She pleads with the Beast to swap places with her father. Maurice is released and tries to mobilize the villagers to help free his daughter Belle.

LeFou (Josh Gad)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Josh Gad plays the character of LeFou, Gaston’s closest friend and ego booster. He loves animals, but although illiterate, he’s not one to always agree with Gaston’s decisions.

When Gaston abandons him, he teams up with the servants in Beast’s castle. LeFou realized almost too late how egoistic and unkind Gaston was.

Lumière (Ewan McGregor)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

The Scottish actor, Ewan McGregor, plays the character of Lumière. Lumière is Beast’s charming maître d’. With the enchantress curse, Lumière gets transformed into a candelabra.

Cadenza (Stanley Tucci)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Tucci plays Cadenza, the neurotic maestro and composer in Beast’s castle. The enchantress’s curse turns him into a harpsichord. Cadenza is also the husband of Madame de Garderobe.

Madame de Garderobe (Audra McDonald)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

What’s a neurotic maestro without his singer? Audra McDonald plays Madame de Garderobe, a world-class opera singer in the Beast’s court. She’s also the wife of Cadenza. She’s transformed into the ever-cheerful wardrobe character.

Plumette (Gugu Mbatha-Raw)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Gugu Mbatha-Raw plays and provides the voice-over for Plumette. Plumette is a maid in Beast’s castle and the love interest of Lumière. But, unfortunately, the curse transforms Plumette into a feather duster.

Cogsworth (Ian McKellen)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Ian McKellen is known for playing the roles of Magneto in X-Men and Gandalf in the film adaptation of The Lord of the Rings. He takes on the character of Cogsworth in this movie.

Cogsworth is the stern-looking butler in Beast’s castle. As the butler, he also doubles as the head of the castle’s staff. The character gets transformed into a mantel clock by the enchantress’s curse.

Mrs. Potts (Emma Thompson)

Credit: Beauty and the Beast

Every castle needs housekeepers and one to control its affairs. Emma Thompson portrays and voices the adorable Mrs. Potts, who gets transformed into a teapot by the curse.

American Horror Story BMF Cobra Kai Dexter Hawkeye Heels Money Heist Ozark Shark Tank Squid Game Stranger Things Succession Ted Lasso The Mandalorian
The Cast of 2017’s “Beauty and the Beast” Live-Action Movie
MCU Multiverse Saga Phase 5 Shows
The Truth Behind Ryan Vallee’s Tragic, Horrible Crimes
Action Adventure Comedy Documentary Drama Fantasy Horror Movie Lists Mystery Romance Sci-Fi Thriller
Brigitte Bardot: She Was Never Meant to Fit In
Legendary Actors Kevin Kline and Sigourney Weaver on Working Together
DeWanda Wise Says It Was Painful To Be Told No For Captain Marvel
Comics Lists News Things You Didn't Know Whatever Happened To
How Did RHODubai’s Lesa Milan Meet Her Husband?
5 Actors Who Could Help Star Wars
Star Wars Needs a Serious Overhaul
6 Chinese Animes You Should Watch In 2022
Ranking the Top 10 Jujutsu Kaisen Characters
Ranking the Top 10 Demon Slayer Characters
Revisiting Netflix’s Devilman Crybaby
Assassin’s Creed Mirage Set for Release In 2023
Who Should Play Aloy in a Live-Action Version of Horizon?
5 of The Most Ridiculous Characters in Mortal Kombat
5 Characters We’d Like to See in Mortal Kombat 2

Title:

Content: Review

Lightyear, review: Pixar’s dreariest, most spiritually empty film to date

1/5

For perhaps the first time in the studio’s canon, every idea in this ‘origin story’ of the Toy Story astronaut feels woefully half-baked

During Disney Animation’s 1990s comeback, the company came up with a clever way of squeezing every last drop of profit from their output without tainting the newly rehabilitated brand. A second-tier studio, Disney MovieToons, was tasked with producing direct-to-video postscripts to the hits: the first was an Aladdin reunion called The Return of Jafar, which made $300 million in VHS sales on just a sliver of its multi-Oscar-winning predecessor’s budget.

Naturally, an avalanche followed, and until the animation house’s broader noughties decline, it proved a win-win arrangement. Disney Animation itself could continue to craft lavish and innovative work for cinemas, while cheaper second helpings were available to customers with the appetite for them – even if the characters looked wobblier and sounded different, and weren’t liable to earn awards.

It’s a sign of how much has changed that today, the situation has reversed: spin-offs get the fanfare, while new ideas have the air of sheepish afterthoughts. The last three films produced by Pixar, a Disney subsidiary since 2006, were all entirely new stories – and all were shunted on to the Disney+ streaming service, despite two, Soul and Turning Red, being among the best things the studio has ever produced. And now here comes Lightyear, gliding effortlessly from the Toy Story series directly into cinemas, despite every last second of it screaming threadbare brand extension exercise.

The problem with Pixar’s latest feature isn’t just that it’s the animation house’s dullest, dreariest, most spiritually empty to date. It’s that it fails even on its own painstakingly contrived open-goal terms.

The premise, we’re told in an opening caption, is that this is the film which prompted the 1995 Buzz Lightyear craze – and which young Andy, the owner of Woody and Buzz, considered his “favourite movie”. But Lightyear doesn’t remotely resemble the beloved family entertainments of that time, let alone wittily and revealingly undercut them. (And isn’t it painfully easy to imagine a Pixar film brilliantly doing just that?) Instead, it looks and behaves like franchise-driven corporate content from the early 2020s, just marking time until it hits feature length.

For perhaps the first time in the Pixar canon, every idea here feels woefully half-baked. Take its scrupulously diverse cast of characters: standard practice for Hollywood these days, but unheard of when we’re asked to believe Lightyear was made. It’s nice that Buzz’s female commanding officer (Uzo Aduba) is able to talk openly and sincerely about her lesbian partner, but it’s not something one recalls happening all that much in, say, Jumanji or Babe.

That confusion runs right back to Buzz himself, who’s now voiced by Captain America’s Chris Evans, and resembles Tim Allen’s square-jawed and cheesily grinning action figure in physical terms alone. Rather than a swaggering, swashbuckling egotist – Allen’s Buzz was obviously far closer to a Saturday morning cartoon than a blockbuster hero – he’s an earnest, wounded, Matthew McConaughey-in-Interstellar type: even his halting delivery of the formerly perky catchphrase “To infinity and beyond!” sounds like an apology for his Space Ranger privilege.

The plot, which is simultaneously muddled and boring, sees Buzz and his crew marooned on a hostile planet, where his attempts to repair their ship involves a manipulation of space-time which essentially freezes him at his current age for two generations, while his contemporaries grow older around him and eventually die off. (Imagine the “Married Life” montage from Up done with the emotional force of a vacuum cleaner manual.) Decades later, the programme is finally canned, so Buzz absconds with a trio of hapless rebels (voiced by Keke Palmer, Taika Waititi and Dale Soules) in order to keep chasing his dream of escape.

These three are a bunch of relentlessly exasperating bunglers it’s impossible to imagine any child warming to, either in 1995 or now. There’s also a fourth, less actively annoying sidekick – a robotic cat called Sox, who’s like a feline Swiss army knife whenever trouble arises – but even this marketer’s dream feels like a clumsy first draft of a great Pixar creation, with his personality that awkwardly splits the difference between C-3PO and R2-D2, and comedic rule set that changes from scene to scene.

This mecha-moggy is admittedly cute, but he’s about as far as the film’s visual charms extend. Lightyear has been styled as a “live-action” production, albeit one that exists within the Toy Story universe, which means the gorgeous vibrancy and elasticity which has been central to Pixar’s house style since Inside Out is nowhere to be found. Instead, the clumpy animation and murky grey-green palette recall a first-person shooter video game – and while spacecraft explode and robots run amok, there isn’t a single action sequence here with a fraction of the wit, dynamism or emotional stakes of Toy Story’s climactic remote-control car chase. If this really is meant to be Andy’s favourite film, the kid has terrible taste.

PG cert, 107 min. In cinemas from Friday June 17

Title:

Content: You may know Emma Stone for movies ranging from The Amazing Spider-Man to Birdman, but take a closer look.

Advertisement

Have you seen these eyes before, perhaps watching you from underneath a rock?

Yes, the actress is in talks to play a young Cruella de Vil, the fur loving villain of 101 Dalmations, according to a report from Entertainment Weekly.

The original 1961 Disney animation was based on the novel by Dodie Smith, but the latest spin-off is understood to focus on the fashion-conscious de Vil's origins. The character was previously played in the 1996 live-action remake by Glenn Close, who serves as an executive producer on the upcoming version.

Advertisement

It is just one of several live-action remakes of classic Disney films, including Maleficent, Alice, Cinderella and the upcoming Jungle Book.

More like this
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement

Title:

Content: Pixar is back on top. Their latest film, Inside Out 2, is not only a hit, it’s not the top-grossing animated film in history — with a fairly substantial asterisk.

Disney and Pixar are touting that Inside Out 2, with its $1.462 billion in grosses worldwide, is now the biggest animated hit ever. Its ticket sales put it ahead of the previous record holder, 2019’s Frozen II, also from Disney, which grossed $1.453 worldwide.

Disney is also touting the fact that Inside Out 2 is the fastest animated film in history to $1 billion. (It took the movie 19 days to cross that threshold.) It’s also the top-grossing movie of 2024, as well as the only movie of the year to date to gross $1 billion.

READ MORE: The Wildest Pixar Fan Theories That Might Actually Be True

Now, with all that said, what is the asterisk? It is this: In making this bold claim, Disney is essentially ignoring its own animated movie, 2019’s remake of The Lion King. If you include The Lion King as an animated movie, then it is the highest-grossing animated movie in history, with $1.663 billion in worldwide ticket sales.

Why does Disney not count it? They apparently view the movie as a “live-action” remake of the original Lion King, akin to the studio’s live-action versions of CinderellaAlice in WonderlandBeauty & the Beast, or The Jungle Book. The difference, though, is that while all of those films did include digitally-animated characters, they also featured real flesh-and-blood actors. 2019’s The Lion King does not. All of the “live-action” animals were actually computer generated.

In fact, according to The Lion King’s own director, Jon Favreau, there is just one “real shot” in the entire movie, plus “1490 rendered shots created by animators and CG artists.” Favreau joked on Twitter in 2019 that he “slipped in one single shot we actually photographed in Africa to see if anyone would notice.”

Despite all of that, Disney does not consider this Lion King an animated movie. And if you don’t consider it an animated movie, then yes, Inside Out 2 is the box office champ.

Get our free mobile app

Every Pixar Movie, Ranked From Worst to Best

We ranked every single Pixar feature to date, from Toy Story to today. Which is the best?

More From ScreenCrush

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

Based on analysis of multiple remakes including Beauty and the Beast (2017), Mulan (2020), Pinocchio (2022), and The Little Mermaid (2023), this report explores how nostalgia drives financial profits, how timeless stories are adapted for modern audiences, and how Disney balances authenticity with contemporary relevance.

Title:

Content: What’s Disney’s legacy as it turns 100? It’s not just Mickey

The brand’s knack for innovation and reinvention has taken it far.

“100 Years of Wonder” is the theme for Disney’s year-long promotion of the company’s centenary. From special Disney on Ice events to a retrospective at the British Film Institute and limited edition Disney100 merchandise, Disney’s celebration is big business.

The wonder and magic of Disney are consistently promoted. And yet I would argue that Disney’s greatest legacy is not its animated stories or characters, but the more mundane history of its mergers, acquisitions and intellectual property rights.

The business acumen of those behind the scenes at Disney has been central to the peaks and troughs of the company’s enduring presence in the film industry and popular culture at large.

Early Disney

The Walt Disney Company was founded in Hollywood by brothers Walt and Roy Disney in 1923.

Before this, along with friend and animator Ub Iwerks, the brothers had founded Laugh-O-Gram Studio in Kansas City, Missouri. They then moved west with their successful silent Alice Comedies series, which featured both animation and live action.

Animation is what the Disney studio became known for. First with its shorts, which included Mickey Mouse’s third outing in the studio’s first sound film, Steamboat Willie, and the Silly Symphony series. And then in its feature length films, beginning with Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs in 1937.

The first two decades of the studio established Disney’s desire for innovation and profit. This was illustrated through its early adoption of merchandising (Mickey Mouse merchandise was profitable in the mid-1930s) and various technologies, such as Technicolour and sound.

Sinking most of its profits back into its expensive animated ventures led Disney to find ways to cut costs. This included making live-action nature series, television shows and opening Disneyland, its first amusement park, in Los Angeles, California, in 1955.

While its animated products were no longer as groundbreaking as they once were, its adoption of television in the 1950s was lucrative and popular, especially The Mickey Mouse Club (1955) and Davy Crockett (1954).

Furthermore, television afforded the company the opportunity to promote its products and authenticate Disney’s position at the forefront of animation. However, live-action films – quicker to make and less expensive than animation – dominated its releases in the 1960s, with stars Haley Mills, Fred MacMurray and Dean Jones appearing in multiple Disney films.

In 1966, Walt died. Roy then passed in 1971 and Walt Disney World opened in Florida the same year. In many ways, the Disney Company was never the same after the loss of the founding brothers.

Disney without Walt

The template was established for how the company would function for the next 50 years. Disney animation innovated again in the late 1980s and early 1990s through computer animation. A renaissance took place with the releases of The Little Mermaid (1989), Beauty And The Beast (1991) and The Lion King (1994).

The company also expanded into cable television with The Disney Channel and founded a distribution label, Touchstone Pictures, that focused on films for adults.

There was unhappiness among animators at the studio towards the company’s bureaucracy and the perception that profits always went back into the films and not to improving working conditions or salaries (one major strike against Disney took place in 1941).

The list of former Disney animators that went on to work elsewhere or open their own animated studios is long and diverse.

Walt had learned the importance of owning rights early in his career, after he lost the intellectual property to his first successful animated character, Oswald the Lucky Rabbit. The imperative to retain proprietorship and diversify the corporation can be witnessed in many of Disney’s deals and mergers.

In 1991, Disney agreed to make films with Pixar, which has gone on to be regarded as an innovative animated studio. It later acquired Pixar in 2006.

Disney Today

In 1995, Disney acquired the ABC television network, which also owned the cable sports network, ESPN. In April 2004, Disney purchased the Muppets franchise. In 2009, Marvel Entertainment was acquired and Lucasfilm was bought in 2012.

Through these purchases, Disney has become one of the most significant entertainment companies in the world and one of the few early Hollywood studios that still maintains name recognition (Disney bought out 20th Century Fox in 2019).

Whereas for earlier generations Disney stood for Mickey Mouse, animated fairy-tale features and family entertainment, for younger generations, Disney is a streaming service, amusement park brand and the creator of the Star Wars universe television programming.

Traces of Walt, Roy and the pioneering animation established in the early days of the studio can be seen in its animated releases, such as Encanto (2021), and company legacy through the “reimagining” of its animated films, such as the recently released live action The Little Mermaid.

The commercial landscape of the entertainment business is always in flux. While many companies are operating their own streaming services, the long-term success of these services is questionable. This is most evident in the recent writers’ and actors’ strike in Hollywood that was mainly focused on outdated royalty models that do not account for streaming media content.

Disney’s last few releases were not as successful as it had anticipated at the box office, and it has lost a significant amount of Disney+ subscribers in 2023. However, this is a trend taking place throughout Hollywood and, while Disney is struggling, it remains a significant brand in the global media market.

And there is no question that its theme parks continue to be popular with families who want to immerse themselves in all things Disney.

The magic of Disney’s animation and the memories created at its theme parks are part of its “100 Years of Wonder”. But so is its successful business model that has continually adapted to changes in the entertainment business and its persistent cultural relevance.

  • Julie Lobalzo Wright is assistant professor in Film and Television Studies at the University of Warwick.
  • This article was first published in The Conversation.

Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

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?

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?

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?

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?

The report also examines public reactions to these adaptations and the changes made to original stories and characters.

## Disney's Live-Action Remake Strategy

Disney has increasingly focused on remaking their animated classics in live-action format, with numerous releases between 2015-2023.

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

This strategy represents a calculated business approach that leverages existing intellectual property while introducing beloved stories to new generations.

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

As noted in one document, "the trend of making live-action versions of animated Disney films started quite some time back," but has accelerated significantly in recent years.

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

The financial motivation is clear: Beauty and the Beast (2017) grossed $1.

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

264 billion worldwide on a $225 million budget, becoming "the highest-grossing live-action movie of 2017.

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

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

" This commercial success demonstrates the profitability of remaking established properties with built-in audience recognition.

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?

## The Role of Nostalgia in Driving Financial Success

Nostalgia serves as a powerful marketing tool for Disney's live-action remakes.

Title:

Content: Viral

Little Black Girls Are In Awe Of Halle Bailey In The Little Mermaid

“She’s Brown like me!”

Ever since the trailer for Disney's live-action version of The Little Mermaid was released, it has been making waves on social media. Specifically among little Black girls, who marveled at the first look of a little mermaid who looks just like them. Singer and actress Halle Bailey plays the new Princess Ariel in the remake, making her the first Black woman to portray the Disney princess. While the movie’s release isn’t until 2023, Bailey has already made an incredible impact.

Since the Disney’s first teaser trailer dropped on Sept. 9, videos have been circulating across TikTok and Twitter showing “blind reactions” to young Black girls seeing the live-action trailer for the first time, which includes a short glimpse of Bailey as Ariel underwater, singing the song, “Part of Your World.” Reactions have ranged from complete shock to pure awe and excitement.

And despite the constant racism and ignorance that has circulated around Bailey since it was announced that she will play the Disney princess, many are choosing to focus on the positivity of this moment. As one Twitter user shared in her own viral thread, writing, “As I stroll on TikTok, I keep seeing parents video their children reacting to The Little Mermaid trailer. So instead of focusing so much on the negative, I thought I’d show a thread of the little black kids who are excited to see their favorite princess look like them.” Facts.

TikTok user @nickyknackpaddywack, for instance, shared a video of her daughter watching the trailer, her eyes glued to the TV. “Mommy! She's Brown like me,” the young girl tells her mother.

TikTok user @jendayis682 filmed her daughter watching the trailer and her reaction was just beautiful. “She’s Black! She looks so pretty,” her daughter excitedly says when she sees Bailey, then asks her mom, “Is Ariel actually Black?” Her mom responds, “In this Little Mermaid she will be!”

“Do you understand how it feels for our babies to see themselves in the fairy tales that the world said wasn't made for them,” @jendayis682 wrote in the caption of her viral TikTok video. “Say what you want and complain all you want ... I hear nothing over the joy and excitement that this little girl has overseeing a person that represents her.”

Digital strategist and consultant Leslie Mac created an entire Twitter thread showcasing a bunch of little Black girls’ reactions to Bailey as Ariel because, as she put it, “we could all use this joy [right now].”

The compilation of the videos even managed to get the attention of Ariel herself! “People have been sending these reactions to me all weekend and i’m in truly in awe this means the world to me,” Bailey tweeted on Sept. 12.

In a recent interview with Variety, Bailey spoke about the cultural impact her role in The Little Mermaid has had. “It was an inspiring and beautiful thing to hear their words of encouragement, telling me, ‘You don’t understand what this is doing for us, for our community, for all the little Black and brown girls who are going to see themselves in you,” Bailey told Variety for its 2022 Power of Young Hollywood issue.

The live-action depiction of The Little Mermaid premieres in theaters on May 26, 2023 and you can bet these little girls will be there.

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

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?

When Disney announced the remake of Beauty and the Beast, there was initial skepticism about whether they should "leave things as they were," recognizing that "many of the world's population had their childhood shaped by some of these Disney characters.

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

How has Disney leveraged nostalgia in recent years?

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

" This emotional connection creates a ready-made audience eager to revisit beloved stories.

The nostalgia fa