- Walt Disney Studios
- Disney continues to remake its basic animated movies for brand new generations.
- Followers and former animators critique a lot of them for feeling like carbon copies of the originals.
- However are they?
- Insider went by way of Disney’s remakes since 2010, and, apart from remakes of beloved ’90s movies like “Aladdin” and “The Lion King,” the bulk are significantly totally different.
- “Dumbo,” “Maleficent,” and “Pete’s Dragon” are three of the most authentic Disney remakes.
- Go to Insider’s homepage for extra tales.
Disney retains remaking its animated classics and lots of followers say they really feel like carbon copies of the originals. Even some former Disney animators have instructed Insider “The Lion King” nearly seems like a shot-for-shot recreation.
However are they simply easy cash-grabs?
“Some adhere nearer to the unique tales. Some, like ‘Aladdin,’ take greater leaps,” “Aladdin” producer Dan Lin instructed Insider in 2019 when requested what Disney is striving to do with these reimaginings. “The visible types are all very totally different. So it’s nearly like [the original animated films] are used as books or IP that these filmmakers are allowed to interpret in their very own means.”
Insider went by way of Disney’s latest remakes since 2010 to discern how totally different they really feel from their authentic animated counterparts. We’ve ranked the movies from most to least authentic.
The outcomes? An excellent portion of the movies, exterior the newest remakes of beloved ’90s motion pictures, are literally fairly totally different than you might bear in mind.
“Maleficent” (2014) and it’s sequel “Mistress of Evil” (2019) are essentially the most authentic remakes of all of them.
What if “Sleeping Magnificence” was instructed from the villain’s perspective? What if the character we thought was the actual villain of the 1959 fairytale wasn’t actually the villain in any respect?
Disney made followers of the unique rethink all the things by making us empathize with Angelina Jolie’s fairy and making Aurora’s father into the actual villain.
Backside line: That is as authentic as its getting. After the success of the primary movie, Disney ought to have thought-about this strategy with extra of its villains. Hopefully, that’s precisely what we’ll get with 2021’s “Cruella.“
“Christopher Robin” (2018) was an authentic tackle an older model of the character years later.
An outlier within the checklist of remakes, the 2018 movie seems to be at Christopher Robin all grown up, years after he’s forgotten about his childlike surprise. Pooh returns to assist him strike a greater work-life steadiness along with his children.
The movie references and highlights a number of of A.A. Milne’s Winnie the Pooh tales.
Backside line: We’ve by no means seen something like this from Disney earlier than in the case of Pooh.
“Pete’s Dragon” (2016) is way totally different from the unique.
The unique 1977 movie is a musical set within the early 1900s with a bunch of outdated scenes. It has concepts from 2019’s “Dumbo” the place individuals needed to seize Pete for their very own profit. There’s additionally a bar scene that feels quite a bit like Gaston’s tune from “Magnificence and the Beast” the place persons are making enjoyable of an older man for saying he noticed a dragon.
In one other scene, Pete is pressured to put on a dunce cap by a instructor and is then crushed and reprimanded with a stick for telling tall tales about his dragon pal, Elliot, and showing to misbehave.
The brand new model is extra grounded in telling the story of a younger boy who misplaced his dad and mom in a automotive accident within the 1980s after which will get discovered within the woods years later after dwelling with Elliot. The younger boy nearly seems like Tarzan. The brand new movie isn’t a musical.
Backside line: The brand new film is much less problematic and stuffed with embracing the surprise of Pete’s magic. Although the principle premise is identical, the 2 tales are considerably totally different.
“Alice in Wonderland” (2010) and its sequel, 2016’s “By means of the Trying Glass,” really feel fairly totally different.
Each adhere extra to the Lewis Caroll textual content than the 1951 animated movie. The movies stand out due to director Tim Burton’s darker, grittier visuals and storytelling that resulted in Alice preventing a creature named the Jabberwocky and restoring peace in the realm.
Depp’s Mad Hatter turned the central character within the sequel. If something, each movies felt extra like one other try at “The Chronicles of Narnia” for Disney than a replica of the unique.
Backside line: No means we’re mixing up Burton’s movies with the unique.
“Dumbo” (2019) is sort of a special film altogether.
Should you haven’t watched 1941’s “Dumbo” in a very long time, the authentic 63-minute animated movie doesn’t present the little elephant be taught he can fly till its 50th minute. He’s not seen flying till 59 minutes into the film.
As for these crows? They’re gone. The brand new film is constructed round the invention of Dumbo’s particular means and the businessman who needs to attempt to exploit him for his reward. It’s extra of a sequel and continuation than a straight adaptation.
Backside line: Largely authentic.
“The Jungle Ebook” (2016) has a deeper story about household and delivers a visually beautiful complement to the unique.
2016’s “The Jungle Ebook” is a lot darker than the unique. The primary 1967 film is centered across the notion of delivering Mowgli to “the person village” earlier than the tiger Shere Khan learns about him. Mowgli detests the thought and Shere Khan doesn’t confront Mowgli till the movie’s closing 10 minutes.
In distinction, the live-action hybrid introduces Shere Khan inside the movie’s first 10 minutes, instantly elevating the stakes. He turns into obsessive about killing Mowgli after his father burned his face years in the past.
Mowgli volunteers to depart his household out of the need to shield them from the tiger, who threatens his wolf pack. The brand new movie expands drastically on Mowgli’s familial relationship with the wolves. Whereas it’s solely hinted at within the animated movie that Shere Khan might have slain the wolves, you see the tiger toss Mowgli’s wolf dad to his loss of life within the 2016 adaptation.
Backside line: Acquainted, however with sufficient modifications to really feel utterly new once more.
“Cinderella” (2015) feels fairly cookie cutter with some additions.
All the common beats of the 1950 authentic are there, however this model provides us rather more time with Cinderella’s authentic dad and mom and places a face and identify to the prince. An opportunity encounter within the woods feels just like the movie borrowed from “Sleeping Magnificence.”
Backside line: It’s an prolonged model of the authentic.
“Girl and the Tramp” (2019) removes some problematic moments.
The movie stays true to the unique whereas giving a tragic backstory to the Tramp. Girl will get a number of extra empowering moments within the movie as she doesn’t all the time want saving from Tramp and Jock’s character is gender-swapped.
It additionally nixes the problematic “Siamese Cat Music” and is extra considerate of its remedy to animals in the movie.
Backside line: The movie is kind of the identical with some revisions.
“Magnificence and the Beast” (2017) is identical story as previous as time with a number of revisions and additions.
“Magnificence and the Beast” delivers the identical story, however provides some much-needed solutions to plot holes within the authentic movie by offering a greater reply for why Maurice will get locked up within the fortress, explaining what occurred to Belle’s mom, and telling us extra in regards to the Beast’s circle of relatives.
Gaston’s character can be tweaked so he’s a struggle hero and doesn’t come throughout as a womanizer.
Backside line: Fairly trustworthy to the unique. It’s nonetheless extra authentic than “The Lion King.”
“Aladdin” (2019) goes by way of the 1992 story with extra of a feminine focus.
Aladdin nonetheless will get his three needs with the genie, however Jafar will get a bigger backstory and extra time is spent viewing the movie by way of Jasmine’s eyes. The character will get her personal tune and isn’t simply somebody on the lookout for love who is sexualized. She needs to rule Agrabah.
Backside line: It’s “Aladdin,” however with out the male gaze.
“The Lion King” (2019), at occasions, seems like a shot-for-shot remake.
You’re kind of watching a CG-animated model of the unique, however with animals that don’t present wherever close to as a lot expression as the unique. The foremost distinction is that we get an even bigger rationalization for why Nala escapes the Satisfaction Lands to seek out assist.
Backside line: It’s a particular version of 1994’s “The Lion King” with some added extras.