When you think “Disney musical,” what comes to mind? You probably think of colorful animated set pieces, charming animal sidekicks and lilting princess ballads. You probably don’t think of anything live-action — something Disney is clearly trying to change. In the past decade, Disney has released eight live-action adaptations of their beloved animated musicals. All of these adaptations are obvious cash grabs, but some succeed in standing independently, while others are nothing more than hollow imitations of their source material.
In this messy landscape of live-action adaptation, it’s hard to determine which films are worth your time. In this article, we guide you through all eight theatrically released Disney musical adaptations, ranking them according to both their musical and cinematographic merit. The highest ranked films are those that complicate or expand upon their source material, while the lowest ranked fail to even meet baseline Disney standards. This article serves as a thorough analysis of the live-action adaptation trend, assessing the genre’s origins and discerning its place within the greater Disney canon.
8. “The Lion King” (2019)
During its inception in the early ’90s, Disney did not have high hopes for “The Lion King.” The original animated film was simply too different. Instead of pulling from the Brothers Grimm, the film’s screenwriters crafted a Shakespearian plot which featured an all-animal cast instead of princesses. Elton John replaced famous Disney composers Alan Menken and Howard Ashman, breaking Broadway tradition to take on a rock sensation. Yet despite these uncertainties, not only was the original film a hit, “The Lion King” was adapted into the highest grossing Broadway musical of all time.
It follows that a movie celebrated for its risk-taking should have a live-action remake that does the same. But this time around, the “risks” amounted to two hours of CGI lions running around a computer-generated Sahara underscored by Beyoncé songs.
The most overt issue with the live-action “Lion King” adaptation is the use of utterly soulless CGI to tell a story that primarily relies on the audience’s emotional attachment to its original characters. While many scenes are visually impressive from afar, when the camera zooms in on Simba’s (Donald Glover, “Solo: A Star Wars Story”) face during the emotional high points of the film — such as his father’s death or Scar’s (Chiwetel Ejiofor, “12 Years a Slave”) betrayal — all of the tension deflates as we are met with the blank stare of a CGI lion. Furthermore, the monumental beauty of Pride Rock is greyed out and dulled with hyperrealism. Even in its best shots, Simba’s pride lands look no better than an Animal Planet documentary.
As for the music, not only did Disney have both the animated classic’s soundtrack and the highest grossing Broadway musical to pull from, but they also had star power like Glover and Beyoncé. Yet, the film’s soundtrack still managed to feel underwhelming. While many of the vocal performances are stellar — notably JD McCrary’s (“Little”) enthusiastic Simba and Lindiwe Mkhize’s (“Mufasa: The Lion King”) rendition of “Circle of Life” — the reimagined soundtrack lacked imagination. Instead of pulling showstoppers from the musical for Beyoncé’s star moment, Disney instead requested she write an original song. Despite “SPIRIT” being vocally grand, it relies too much on a modern (literal) stomp-clap rhythm and reverb to fit with the rest of the film, both instrumentally and spiritually. Worse, in “Be Prepared,” which has been hailed as one of the most menacing Disney villain songs, Scar is utterly declawed — blandly talk-singing while his hyenas build into discordant screaming instead of classic harmonies at the end of the track. The remade soundtrack follows the same pattern, relying on a less grandiose version of Hans Zimmer’s original moodscape and failing to do anything innovative with its powerhouse vocal performers.
Hopefully, it is now clear why “The Lion King” has been banished to the bottom of our list. Not only did the remake fail to live up to its source material, it sucked the soul out of a childhood classic. Instead of making us feel nostalgic, watching this film just made us feel old.
Daily Arts Writer Siena Beres can be reached at sberes@umich.edu.
7. “Snow White” (2025)
“Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” should never have been adapted into a live-action film. The original 1937 film was a monumental turning point in cinematic history — the first full-length animated feature film ever and the springboard for the entirety of Walt Disney Animation. The film is so singular and significant that it feels almost sacrilegious to adapt it into a cheap-looking live-action film — which is exactly what Disney has done with “Snow White.”
This new take on the Snow White story doesn’t even attempt to maintain the charm and artistry of its original source material. Instead, “Snow White” is a cut-and-dry modern Disney musical: It opens with expository voiceover and ends with an overblown wedding dance sequence. In between, the film is full of terrible CGI dwarves, cheap costumes and muted green screen backdrops. The most interesting part of the film is its choice to do away with the generic Prince charming character, replacing him with a swashbuckling bandit named Jonathan (Andrew Burnap, “The Front Room”). Jonathan isn’t particularly interesting, but he’s got a harder edge than the idealistic Snow White (Rachel Zegler, “Y2K”). When the two first meet, they have some genuinely tense exchanges about class and politics, setting the stage for a fairly compelling slow-burn romance. Beyond Jonathan’s addition and some extended song-and-dance sequences, “Snow White” feels like nothing more than a weak copy of the original film.
The music in “Snow White” is similarly unremarkable. Disney increased the number of tracks in this adaptation, adding five original songs to the existing track list. While the original 1937 film is more of a proto-musical, “Snow White” is a full-blown musical spectacle, replacing the simple original tunes with garish Broadway numbers reminiscent of modern pop musicals like “The Greatest Showman.” This new “Snow White” soundtrack hits all of the modern Disney musical requirements: There’s a soaring “I Want” song, an ominous villain lament and a romantic ballad. Unfortunately, none of these tracks are particularly memorable. The villain song is monotonous, the love song trite and the ensemble numbers embarrassing to witness.
Of all these forgettable songs, the most disappointing by far is “Waiting On A Wish.” As the film’s aforementioned “I Want” song, “Waiting On A Wish” should clearly outline Snow White’s wants, introducing her to the audience as a compelling protagonist with specific goals and dreams. Unfortunately, “Waiting On A Wish” does none of this. Snow White does not mention a single specific desire within the song. Instead, she sings about holding out for a “miracle,” expecting that “somehow, some way” her life might begin to get better. It’s a frustratingly vague character introduction. Sure, she’s “waiting on a wish,” but what exactly is she wishing for? We never really find out. The entire film comes and goes without any deeper character development.
It’s fitting and ironic that “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs,” the very first film that enabled Disney’s success, has now been corrupted by that same company, molded into a lukewarm imitation of the studio’s bygone genius. “Snow White” is a boring, unnecessary film. For the purposes of this article, we’ve ranked it higher than “The Lion King,” simply because some surprising choices were made. Between the new songs and the addition of Jonathan’s character, it’s clear that there was an attempt at something original and artistic — even if that vision never came to fruition. The original Snow White story changed the course of film history. The new “Snow White” changes nothing at all.
Senior Arts Editor Lola D’Onofrio can be reached at lolad@umich.edu.
6. “Mulan” (2020)
A victim of the year 2020, “Mulan” grossed roughly $69.9 million in the box office despite its production budget of $200 million — the widest profit gap of all on this list.
While timing is partially to blame, even if this remake was released a year earlier, it likely would have suffered the same fate due to its utter dullness. After removing the musical aspect and multiple characters (including Mulan’s beloved grandmother and comic-relief dragon Mushu) all that remains is a movie that feels more akin to historical drama than a Disney classic. While other remakes have distanced themselves from their musical origins successfully, “Mulan” loses the appeal of its original duality.
Mulan is not a classic Disney princess. She is a warrior, but she is also a warrior who still sings. This combination of the masculine and feminine overtly demonstrates Mulan’s (Liu Yifei, “Hanson and the Beast”) central conflict and keeps her story fresh. By dropping the musical element in favor of historical grit, the film loses a piece of its identity and alienates its audience. Not to mention the missed opportunities — imagine epic live-action fight scenes underscored by classic Disney songs!
Furthermore, the removed soundtrack only serves to sap the emotional depth of Mulan’s character who, despite a charming performance from Liu, comes off as stale due to clunky writing. This narrative flatness is only exacerbated by replacing the Huns with individual villains — a warrior and a witch — whose inclusion lowers the stakes of the original and makes for a more convoluted narrative overall. Even the central romance of the film, now between Mulan and a fellow soldier rather than Captain Li Shang (Donnie Yen, “The Prosecutor”), feels stiff and detached from the original.
Overall, “Mulan” fell short of both its box office budget and, worse, our expectations.
Daily Arts Writer Siena Beres can be reached at sberes@umich.edu.
5. “The Jungle Book” (2016)
The live action version of “The Jungle Book” (2016) is a genuinely good movie. At least, as good as a mostly-CGI film can be. Director Jon Favreau (“The Lion King”) was open about his desire to make this adaptation “tonally different” from the original 1967 film. It is a goal that he undeniably achieved. “The Jungle Book” eliminates all traces of the original film’s lighthearted rollicking, turning the story into a restrained, soaring drama. In this solemn adaptation, Mowgli (Neel Sethi, “All You Need is Blood”) is trapped in a tense game of cat-and-mouse with the cruel, human-hating tiger Shere Khan (Idris Elba, “Sonic the Hedgehog 3”). Shere Khan’s sharp gaze misses nothing in his jungle domain, and Mowgli spends the film’s runtime desperately trying to escape to the safety of the human world. This journey forces Mowgli to confront some pretty complicated jungle politics, raising genuine questions about human-animal relationships, and suggesting a future where both parties can coexist.
The greatest weakness of “The Jungle Book” is its reliance on CGI. A live-action adaptation of “The Jungle Book” necessitates a cast of computer-generated animal characters, automatically draining much of the original film’s innate charm. In order to combat this lifeless CGI, Disney wisely selected a bevy of hugely talented actors to play these animal characters. From Lupita Nyong’o (“The Wild Robot”) as Raksha to Christopher Walken (“Dune: Part Two”) as King Louie, the film’s primary cast of actors bring such gravitas to these CGI animals that their bland character models are easy to overlook. The actors tapped to play Baloo (Bill Murray, “Ghostbusters”) and Bagheera (Ben Kingsley, “Gandhi”) are particularly standout — Murray’s take on Baloo is warm and affable, contrasting beautifully against Kingsley’s rigid, refined Bagheera.
Despite its technical merit, “The Jungle Book” cannot be ranked higher because it removes the most memorable part of the original film — its soundtrack. Composed by George Bruns, the original film’s soundtrack consisted of six original songs, each of which helped color the film’s on-screen world with distinct, clever musical vignettes. Who can forget the jovial, Gershwin-inspired “The Bare Necessities,” or “I Wan’na Be Like You (The Monkey Song),” the ominous jazz lament sung by the imperious King Louie (Louis Prima, “Rafferty and the Gold Dust Twins”)? From Beatles-esque vultures to psychedelic singing pythons, the 1967 soundtrack elevated the original film into a culturally engaged art piece, rooting it in the sounds and styles of the 1960s.
Although “The Jungle Book” recreates a couple of these original songs, they’re performed without any energy or artistic flair. The film leans so heavily into its “serious drama” veneer that it forgets to retain any of the kitschy musical iconography that made the 1967 film so beloved. “The Jungle Book” is perhaps the most neutral installment on this list: It’s a genuinely good movie without any lasting impact.
Senior Arts Editor Lola D’Onofrio can be reached at lolad@umich.edu.
4. “Aladdin” (2019)
You may not remember it, but 2019 was a Disney summer. Both the live-action remakes of “Aladdin” and “The Lion King” were released within two months of one another, each grossing roughly $200 million in the box office. We’ve already talked about “Lion King,” but what did “Aladdin” gross in our hearts?
Unlike “The Lion King,” the “Aladdin” remake is visually stunning. The streets of Agrabah are busy and vibrant, inviting the audience into a rich reimagining of the classic film. On the other hand, the costumes were a bit more wishy-washy, with ornate showstopper looks from Jasmine (Naomi Scott, “Smile 2”) but a complete disregard for Jafar (Marwan Kenzari, “The Return”), who looks more Spirit Halloween than supervillain. One of the best costumes was actually worn by Will Smith’s (“Bad Boys: Ride or Die”) Genie — of whom I am a staunch defender. As the only major celebrity-bait casting in the film, Smith’s performance was shockingly fresh and funny. He did not try to be Robin Williams (“Dead Poets Society”) and instead delivered his unique take on a character with the most ambitious and rewarding musical numbers of the film: “Friend Like Me” and “Prince Ali.”
Speaking of music, the soundtrack of “Aladdin” fails to invent but is overall listenable. Compared to Brad Kane’s (“The Adventures of Tom Thumb and Thumbelina”) emotive original performance as Aladdin, Mena Massoud (“Wish You Were Here”) falls short vocally but manages to make up for it with his physical acting, especially his dancing. Unlike other live-action adaptations, Aladdin is not afraid to lean into its musical origins, with multiple flash-mob musical dance numbers, making the film feel monumental yet charming. Another welcome addition to the remake is Jasmine’s song, “Speechless,” which hammers home the independent spirit of her character.
Despite this, there is an unforgivable issue with the original film that the remake failed to address: It’s still racist. Most glaringly obvious are the accent differences. While our protagonists, Aladdin and Jasmine, speak with American accents, Jafar and other villainous characters speak in thick stereotypical Arabic accents. Furthermore, the kingdom in which Aladdin is set perpetuates orientalist stereotypes by lumping together different cultures, resulting in an uneducated Westerner’s imaginary version of the Middle East. While there’s no harm in having a made-up city like Agrabah, it’s not OK when negative stereotypes are children’s first introduction to different cultures. Or adults for that matter, as four years before the release of the Aladdin remake, 30% of GOP voters supported the bombing of Agrabah.
In the end, “Aladdin” is a fun surface-level watch. However, not only does this remake fail to envision a whole new world — it chooses to preserve the worst parts of the old one.
Daily Arts Writer Siena Beres can be reached at sberes@umich.edu.
3. “The Little Mermaid” (2023)
Of all live-action Disney adaptations, “The Little Mermaid” is by far the most romantic. The film is a sweeping journey across land and sea carried entirely by the glowing chemistry between Ariel (Halle Bailey, “The Color Purple”) and Prince Eric (Jonah Hauer-King, “The Threesome”). In the original 1989 film, Eric and Ariel’s love story is a fairly bland “love at first sight” situation, with Ariel given far more character development than Eric. “The Little Mermaid” (2023) rights that wrong, giving both characters fairly equal screen time and characterizing Eric as an avid sailor dissatisfied with his princely life. This helps tie him to Ariel, who also dreams of exploring places beyond her ocean home. As the two fall in love, they’re able to bond over their shared curiosity, resulting in an intellectual chemistry that the original film lacks. This love story is aided immensely by Bailey and Hauer-King’s performances. With her wide eyes and crystal-clear voice, Bailey is a pitch-perfect Disney princess, and Hauer-King easily matches her sparkling energy with his dimpled smile and earnest devotion.
This strong romantic core is helped along by a wonderful visual style, which adapts Prince Eric’s domain into a colorful Caribbean nation replete with arching palm trees, bustling outdoor markets and sandy stretches of tropical beach. It’s a fun, fully realized world that feels totally distinct from the original film’s generic European setting. Unfortunately, this carefully executed on-screen world does not extend to the underwater scenes, which lack any sort of artistic touch. The mermaid characters and sea creatures are lazily designed, dressed in generic CGI outfits and positioned against blank blue walls of rippling “water.” Nothing about the underwater world is beautiful, engaging or real. It makes for a tonally uneven viewing experience — for every gorgeous above-water scene, there’s an underwater scene that feels like a poorly rendered school project.
Luckily, the film’s stellar soundtrack makes even the blandest underwater scenes worth watching. The film faithfully recreates all of the best songs from the original, effortlessly distracting from its poor CGI. When Bailey soars into her octave-jumping rendition of “Part of Your World,” it’s hard to notice the boring ocean backdrop. The only musical weak point is “Poor Unfortunate Souls,” the iconic villain ballad delivered by sinister sea witch Ursula (Melissa McCarthy, “Unfrosted”). Ursula’s original character design was based off of the iconic drag queen Divine and voiced by a gravelly, sneering Pat Carroll (“Once Upon a Studio”). Up against such a legendary original performance, McCarthy never stood a chance. Her rendition of “Poor Unfortunate Souls” is flat, CGI-centric and deeply untheatrical.
Still, “The Little Mermaid” is a generally successful musical endeavor and one half of a really great film. Prince Eric’s island kingdom has a real fairytale elegance to it — beautiful, visceral and totally fresh. If the underwater sequences also measured up, “The Little Mermaid” would easily top this list.
Senior Arts Editor Lola D’Onofrio can be reached at lolad@umich.edu.
2. “Beauty and the Beast” (2017)
“Beauty and the Beast” is a meticulous, opulent recreation. The film lovingly revisits the original 1991 film’s French countryside setting, spinning it into a fully imagined fantasy-historical world inspired by 18th-century French fashion. There are powdered wigs and rouged cheeks, mirrored ballrooms and cinched corsets. This attention to detail makes for a dazzling, opulent and deeply textured on-screen world. The film’s talented cast fits seamlessly into this richly imagined setting. Luke Evans’ (“Weekend in Taipei”) swaggering portrayal of Gaston is particularly impressive, and Josh Gad (“Once Upon a Studio”) is the genuine standout of the film, adding a real layer of wit and charisma to his portrayal of Gaston’s ditzy sidekick LeFou. Emma Watson (“Little Women”) has enough strength and sweetness to believably portray Belle, and Dan Stevens’ (“Abigail”) nuanced portrayal of the Beast plays well against Belle’s earnestness. Between the acting, costuming and set design, “Beauty and the Beast” is a genuine pleasure to watch. It has such a confident visual style that it feels totally distinct from the original film, despite its unchanged setting.
The music in “Beauty and the Beast” adds to the film’s rich quality. The entire original 1991 soundtrack is recreated for this adaptation, and the songs land successfully for the most part. Strings come in at the right time; romantic music swells when it’s called for. In classic live-action Disney musical fashion, several songs are added to the soundtrack as well. Of these new songs, the highlight is absolutely “Evermore,” a romantic lament delivered by the Beast after Belle returns to her old life. It’s well-written, vocally arresting and infused with a real sense of yearning. As the Beast sings, he climbs through the highest towers of his crumbling palace, mourning Belle’s presence and confessing that “She will still torment me / Calm me, hurt me” — no matter how far apart they travel. It’s the sort of gothic, sweeping proclamation of male devotion that modern Hollywood musicals tend to sorely lack. The song is a strong point of the film and certainly the best original song to come out of a live-action Disney remake.
The musical weakness of the film is Emma Watson’s obvious autotuning, which is especially apparent on her loftier vocal riffs. It’s a point that’s been discussed to death, so I won’t rehash it here, but the autotune certainly dulls a bit of her Disney princess charm. It’s not ideal, but not enough to tank the value of the entire film. As a full artistic project, “Beauty and the Beast” meets expectations beautifully. It’s a faithful adaptation with its own visual style and real artistic merit (at least in terms of costuming and set design). With distinct visuals, solid music, excellent costume design and consistent tone, it feels correct to rank it second on this list.
Senior Arts Editor Lola D’Onofrio can be reached at lolad@umich.edu.
1. “Cinderella” (2015)
Though the Cinderella story has been reformed and recast countless times since its inception some 2,000 years ago, when we think “Cinderella,” we no doubt think of Walt Disney’s hand-drawn blonde from the 1950s. Despite not being the first Disney princess, Cinderella is as much of a symbol of the franchise as Mickey Mouse. Oftentimes, we don’t question what has always been; we accept it. But really — does Disney deserve this Cinderella monopoly?
The 2015 live-action remake’s ranking at the top of our list says yes.
“Cinderella” is two hours of fairytale charm come to life, complete with gorgeous gothic sets, jaw-dropping costumes and a healthy dose of male yearning. Disney effortlessly strikes the balance between tradition and innovation, embellishing the original plot with welcome details like Prince Charming’s (Richard Madden, “Killer Heat”) relationship with his father and the lovely meet-cute scene that sets off the central romance. Because the 1950 original has been reinvented so many times, it felt almost more innovative to keep the bones of the original plot and instead focus on building a realistic world for its characters.
This focus on atmosphere results in the most aesthetically cohesive sets and costumes on this list, standing out due to its painstaking attention to detail. With sensibilities akin to those of “Bridgerton,” the characters in “Cinderella” are styled at the perfect medium between over-exaggeration and class. Each room in Cinderella’s (Lily James, “Mamma Mia!”) home appears lived in, especially the bedroom of the evil stepsisters, which manages to be Regency-era and teen-girl all at once. There is a surplus of artful attention in the creation of “Cinderella,” which most of the other films on this list lack, resulting in gorgeous analysis-worthy shots — for example, during Cinderella’s childhood exposition at the very beginning of the film, we see her feet hanging out of a pair of blue slippers, hinting at the ending the audience already knows.
On the musical front, the remake chooses to replace the original soundtrack with brief scenes of Lily James humming — an absence that feels purposeful instead of detrimental. Like “Snow White,” the original “Cinderella” was less of a musical and more of a movie with songs, meaning that the emotional core of the film was not tied to its soundtrack. By replacing musical performances with cheeky allusions to the classic soundtrack, the film shows its artistic sensibility. The lack of music preserves the remake’s carefully crafted gothic tone while allowing the charm of the original to shine through.
Ultimately, “Cinderella” demonstrates Disney’s ability to do a remake right. The adaptation breathes new life into its source material by creating a magical mise en scène and trusting the tried-and-true story, striking an effortless balance between classic and modern that all of our previously listed films fell short of.
Daily Arts Writer Siena Beres can be reached at sberes@umich.edu.
With the trend of remakes only persisting and the golden age of Disney long past, the classic Disney musical has taken on a new face. This new era of live-action adaptation is seemingly here to stay, with artistic integrity continuing to take a backseat to nostalgia bait. It’s an unfortunate trend, but it doesn’t have to continue. The best of these live-action films are rooted in intention and artistry, proving that Disney can successfully recreate the fairy tale magic of their classic animated canon. If Disney relies on innovation rather than nostalgia to draw audiences, their future live-action remakes have the potential to add value to the franchise instead of regurgitating the same tired formula. We deserve good musicals, and we know Disney can deliver on that promise. So stick with adaptations that innovate and improve upon the original, instead of swallowing whatever nostalgia-coated pill Disney tries to next shove down our throats.
Daily Arts Writer Siena Beres and Senior Arts Editor Lola D’Onofrio can be reached at sberes@umich.edu and lolad@umich.edu, respectively.
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/al_7327234894390430934-2000-bc90942d5ec4448eb4aefda261316ea3.jpg){kind=link}
