With the recent announcement that The Lion King is the latest classic Disney film to get a live action reboot, I decided it’s time to evaluate the necessity of these reboots. Because let’s face it: the movie industry is all about reboots and remakes, and it’s not Disney. Warner Bros’ The Legend of Tarzan hit (and flopped) the theaters this pastsummer, and Universal Pictures' reboot of The Mummy hits theaters next year. Yet, this year Disney released two live action remakes, Pete’s Dragon and The Jungle Book. And while everyone is getting excited for Beauty and the Beast starring Emma Watson, I can’t help but feel like this is beating a dead horse.
The first question we need to ask is “are they necessary?” This could be said about any film, but in the transition from an animated media to a live action one, several things happen. Within animation anything can happen. You’re not limited by real world physics. Yet, the suspension of belief when watching cinema isn’t altered. You’re still whisked away into a new world and captivated, regardless of it not looking real. Without today’s technology, animation was the tool to anthropomorphic characters. We could share the emotions of a deer or fox or even a bear. Mice became your best friends and could sing. The limited became limitless within animation.
Now animals can be rendered in CGI, making them look almost completely real. While you can still change their look to give them human qualities, they still can retain a life-like appearance. Suddenly, The Jungle Book can look real. Yet, does it have to? Do we need to see a realistic looking Lion taking his place at Pride Rock? Of course not. Yet, the demand for these films has skyrocketed. And while not everybody, like me, is not on board with this trend, there doesn’t seem to be an end in sight.
There’s also the idea that older films need to be corrected for outdated ideas. Maleficent’s motherly kiss awoke Aurora in the remake centered around her. Maleficent, who called herself the “mistress of all evil” in the original 1959 film. There’s a shift to turn away from the true love’s kiss doctrine the genre loves so much. Yet, delivering this new message in the form of a remake isn’t needed. Let the originals be, and instead use new films to address these ideas.
The reason behind this is that Disney is making their bank with these remakes. The Jungle Book (1967) originally made $73 million during its run. The Jungle Book (2016) however made $364 million domestically. The Lion King (1994) made $312 million during its first domestic run. Imagine how much that could make in a live action film? That being said, the production value of the film would be much higher than its original film. Honestly, I can see the remake being less profitable than the original, but we’ll see about that.
Will Disney stop these remakes soon? Probably not. Yet the need to bring in new ideas should be expressed in new movies, not it's remakes. While Disney movies are always a treasure, there isn’t a need for more live action remakes.
