Why are these Disney live-action films failing?

For my entire lifetime, Disney has led the charge in fantasy storytelling and has brought beloved animated classics to life. However, since 2016, the studio has shifted some focus to live-action remakes of its classic animated films, starting with The Jungle Book (1994). While some have been box office hits, opinions have been trending downward, with many people wondering: What are they messing with the classics?

Initially, the concept seemed promising—nostalgia is a powerful force. Disney correctly anticipated that audiences who grew up with these films would be drawn to modernized versions, which resonated for a time. However, as Disney keeps announcing more live-action remakes, audiences' interest has become indifferent. No longer anticipating these remakes, audiences have begun to grumble, feeling that their cherished classics are being tarnished and labeled as money grabs, unnecessary, and, in some cases, devoid of the original charm.

So, why are people less enthused about these remakes? The answer could be found in a few issues:

1. They feel like straightforward money grabs without adding anything new.

2. Without animation, a certain level of magic is lost, resulting in lifeless storytelling.

3. Changes to the original stories leave audiences scratching their heads as to why they even remake the movie.

With Snow White releasing this week, Disney might have hit a breaking point with these remakes. The film has been receiving overwhelmingly negative press, with many critics and fans expressing concerns about the changes made to the original story and the casting choices. Controversies about the actors' opinions on the story, and Disney trying to change perhaps too much of the original classic, Snow White is predicted to be a considerable profit loss for Disney. Let's break down why Disney's live-action remakes are failing and what they could do to fix it.

Disney's live-action remakes are not born out of artistic ambition—they are a transparent money grab. The studio is not reviving these classics because they need enhancement or because there's a fresh, innovative way to tell these stories despite changing character ethnicities.

Snow White (2025)

Instead, it relies on nostalgia to sell tickets and the belief that audiences will pay to see familiar stories reimagined with updated CGI and recognizable actors. But changing storylines entirely or not including actual humans seems like chipping away at the classics and making them soulless money grabs.

At first, audiences were excited about seeing the classics take on a modern feel, and this strategy was successful. Films like The Jungle Book (2016) and Beauty and the Beast (2017) grossed over a billion dollars, making a strong case for these remakes.

The Jungle Book (2016)

However, as Disney continued rolling out more remakes, the movie-goers started to roll their eyes and become more critical. Casting choices, story changes, and bad special effects began to take a toll on audiences, leading to a growing discontent with the direction of these remakes.

The Lion King is a perfect example of "live-action" discontent. It was marketed as a "live-action" remake but was almost shot for shot-for-shot CGI recreation of the 1994 animated classic. While technically impressive, the hyper-realistic animation not only stripped away all the charm and expression that endeared the original characters but wasn't a "live" film. It was a different version of animation, but still animation. Why make the film at all? Fans could have stayed home and watched the original, which had better pacing, performances, and emotional impact.

Other remakes have suffered from the same problem. Aladdin (2019) added some tweaks, but nothing significant enough to justify its existence beyond Disney cashing in on one of its biggest franchises. Not to mention highlighting how much the lack of Robin Williams in it hurt the remake.

Aladdin (2019)

Meanwhile, Pinocchio (2022) and Peter Pan & Wendy (2023) were so forgettable that they were dumped directly onto Disney+, signaling that even the studio had little faith in their box office draw.

Rather than conjuring new Disney magic, using these old classics and trying to market them as new or updated is starting to ring hollow to most people. New animated Disney movies have been a hit with audiences, so why retread the oldies?

I understand Disney has been trying to move away from the stereotypical white Disney princess for some time now with movies like Princess and the Frog, Moana, and Mulan. However, reimagining the classics with girls of different ethnicities isn’t helping tell their stories. It’s shoehorning them into a dated movie, making people wonder why they’re being remade.

Let me explain...

I have no problem with Rachel Zegler being cast as Snow White. However, if Disney had consciously decided to cast a Latina in the role and then did not acknowledge her ethnicity, how much would it have helped explain the Latin experience to the audience? Through Coco, Disney tells a story highlighting the Latino community and its traditions. And on the flip side, I had no problem with Halle Bailey becoming a mermaid because mermaids aren’t real. So, I highly doubted there was a specific African American experience to bring to that story.

All in all, I don't know what Disney's goal is for these live-action remakes if all they are is a poor attempt to diversify without depth. It’s a missed opportunity for truly colorful, diverse stories to be told, leaving the audience with a sense of unfulfilled potential.