Make it or break it: Who asked for all these live-action remakes?
Live-action follow-ups can’t be a movie studio’s only trump card. They fail more than they succeed. Leave our animated classics alone
Once upon a time, Disney chanced upon a miracle. In 1996, it released a live-action version of 101 Dalmatians. The real dogs were cute. Glenn Close revelled in her role as Cruella de Vil. The story seemed as magical as its 1961 animated predecessor.
Let’s do more, Disney said. They rolled out Alice In Wonderland in 2010. Bright, overproduced, stiff. Weird? Yes. Fun? No. Then, in 2015, they did a live-action remake of Cinderella. CGI, Richard Madden as Prince Charming, floaty dresses. It still lacked sparkle. In 2016, they unleashed Jungle Book. Dark, rich, haunting. But no songs, no Kaa. Why?
Each remake was lacklustre but profitable, so Disney persisted. There’s been a Beauty and the Beast, a Dumbo, an Aladdin, The Lion King, Pinocchio, even The Little Mermaid. Older fans can’t recall a single scene from the remakes. Here’s what the studio still hasn’t realised: Sometimes, two-dimensional drawings are more evocative than actual actors.
Other studios have tried live-action remakes over the decades. There remains, to date, no good live-action version of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Masters Of the Universe (1987) ruined everyone’s He-Man memories. The Flintstones movie (1994) was a prehistoric mess. Ghost in the Shell (2017) was an insult to the anime series.
Netflix’s new show Avatar: The Last Airbender, which began streaming last month, appealed mostly to viewers who hadn’t seen the 2010 film and the animated show (2005-2008). The plot was unchanged, the visual effects were stellar. Appa, Aang’s six-legged flying bison, stole the show. But on the whole, the series paled in comparison to its predecessors. And just this week, a live-action Popeye has been announced. How are they going to get those muscles to pop?
It’s possible to get live-action adaptations right. Disney did it with Mulan (2020), which offered stunning visuals and a fitting soundtrack. Graphic novels such as Sin City (2005) and V for Vendetta (2005) knew exactly what moviegoers wanted from the original graphic-novel experiences. Bong Joon-ho attempted Snowpiercer as a decent-ish film in 2013, and improved on it with a series in 2020.
It’s what keeps viewers optimistic. It’s also what feeds our fears. What if Disney ruins Anastasia (1997) with a less-than-dashing hero? What if they make a live-action Inside Out (2015); could any human be as cute, calming and adorable as Sadness? What if they decide to re-do Toy Story with a new generation of actors and realise that no one can measure up to the voices of Tom Hanks and Tim Allen? What if a Kardashian child plays Bo Peep?
Drawings do what human actors can’t. That’s their special magic. That’s why live-action versions of the Archie Comics stories have largely bombed. Zoya Akhtar’s version had to draw in kids from famous film families. But it still didn’t feel like the comics we’ve grown up on. Netflix’s Riverdale (2017-2023) skewed the plot to sidestep unfavourable comparison. Archie sleeps with Ms Grundy. Jughead has an alcohol problem. Veronica’s dad has mafia connections. It’s not a remake when a childhood favourite is unmade before your eyes.
