The most prominent movie announcements these days seem to be of live action remakes of previously animated shows and movies. There’s an up and coming live action “How to Train Your Dragon!”
Leaving it alone wasn’t good enough.
As long as the remakes are done well and either retain or expand upon the elements that made the original good, they can be wonderful additions. But there can be so many controversies or poorly executed decisions announced that I most often feel a sense of exasperation when I hear about a new live action remake. Can’t they come up with something new?
Solon High School junior Jesse Moore said he feels “a little bit worried” when he hears an announcement for a new live action remake, partially due to the first butchered live action of “Avatar: The Last Airbender,” not to be confused with James Cameron’s CGI “Avatar.”
“[It’s] because of… my experience with the first ‘Avatar [The Last Airbender]’ remake [which was a movie], because that was really, really bad. So anytime I hear of animated movies coming to live action, it’s like, God, I hope they don’t butcher it as badly as they did [with] ‘Avatar [The Last Airbender.]’ But in recent times I’ve actually seen live [action] remakes [get] much better in quality because they’re starting to understand how to properly adapt it… so, [I’m] not as worried as I used to be.”
The first “Avatar: The Last Airbender” live action adaptation is widely considered terrible by many fans of the original animated series. ScreenRant said it was “universally derided” as one of “the year’s worst films, and is a frequent presence on lists of the worst movies of all time.” The more recent Netflix adaptation, in the form of a show rather than a movie, has also been criticized, but it is far more accurate and true to the original.
However, when discussing the show with other students, I have heard one sentiment echoed many times: it’s very difficult for an adaptation to live up to the original, especially when directors always seem to want to change something.
SHS senior Ashley Rhee said that when doing a live action adaptation, it’s necessary for the adaptation to retain the things that made the original so good.
“I don’t know why they choose to do these things,” she said, speaking about the absence of the beloved character Li Shang in the live action “Mulan.” “…If you’re gonna do a live action movie, I feel like you have to have the structure of what made the original story good. At that point, if you’re going to change the entire story, just make an original story.”
Moore said that these changes can be a turn-off, something with which I agree.
“I… tend to stay away from Disney’s stuff,” Moore said. “Mostly because of the, ‘oh, they’re casting this actor who doesn’t look anything like the original character’ controversies and stuff like that…It’s a bit overwhelming.”
It certainly can be. Many times, changes that directors make in live action movies are made for social reasons. Business Insider reveals that Li Shang was cut from the live action “Mulan” because of concerns over the #MeToo movement. The dwarves in the live action “Snow White” are all CGI because an actor with dwarfism, Peter Dinklage, criticized Disney for remaking what he called a “backwards story.” In the live action version of “The Little Mermaid,” many people criticized the choice to have Halle Bailey play Ariel, the lead, because she was black. Many people felt that “race-swapping” was a bad call, though their reasons for feeling this way were not all the same. Some people thought it was a disservice to the original to have Ariel, originally a white woman, played by a black woman. Others felt that it was a disservice to Bailey to put her in such a role while Disney makes little effort in the meantime to give people of color empowering stories of their own. But maybe it doesn’t have to be so complicated, not when it comes down to one casting choice.
“If the actor’s doing a good job… it doesn’t matter what [their] race is,” Rhee said. “Moments where a little child can see themselves in a princess or a heroine or something like that [are important]… it shouldn’t matter what the race of the character is.”
But back to the bigger question: what value do live action movies have?
I think that they are most valuable when they can exceed the viewer’s imagination in crafting a real-life version of an animated scenario. For example, when it comes to books, every viewer has their own notion of what the scenes should look like, but a live action movie brings these together and can often exceed expectations. This was the case with “Harry Potter.” Those movies easily became the face of the series, and arguably one of the best book-to-movie transitions ever completed. But when remaking an animated film like “The Lion King,” or anything else Disney for that matter, the live action has to have something that sets it apart from the original and improves it. Many live actions seem to be lacking any such element.
SHS senior Anna Li said that live action adaptations of books can be fun and worthwhile, but for films and TV shows it is less so.
“I don’t think they’re needed, that’s the thing,” Li said. “Unless you add more to the story, like… how ‘Wicked’ is getting a live action, and they’re also adding [extra content] in [that wasn’t in the musical.] So I feel like if Disney or other shows did that, it’d be a lot better than just remaking it.”
Moore feels differently about it.
“One of my favorite movies of all time is a live action remake of an animated movie. It’s ‘How the Grinch Stole Christmas,’ actually, and it’s solidified its place in my heart so much so that I watch it every Christmas. So, I think they are quite valuable for new audiences to [see]. However, I think that if you make a live action remake of a movie that hasn’t really been out for long enough… it’s not going to hit the same for your generation because [you’ve] seen ‘Moana’ three years back.”
Rhee said that it depends on how the remake is done.
“They can hold value,” Rhee said. “Like I said, with the casting choices there can be some value in that for young people to see someone that looks like them on the big screen, but ultimately if I’m given the choice between an original story or a live action remake… I’m just gonna choose the original story even if the original story might be of worse quality because I appreciate that a film studio is willing to take a risk with a new story.”
Indeed, the influx of remakes and sequels has seen a fall in the presence of new, quality stories in the industry. Many audience members reacted poorly to Disney’s recent attempts at originality. It’s time to strike a balance between re-imagining and creating something new.
