Profit over product: Why live action remakes are replacing original content
In recent years theaters have been flooded with live action remakes of classic animated films like “Beauty and the Beast” and “Snow White.” These movies can be a fun, nostalgic watch, but when they are made over and over again they start to get old and leave audiences longing for more unique content.
Disney is the largest culprit of this surge in remakes. Their first live action remake of “The Jungle Book” came out in 1994 followed by the release of a total of 16 remakes, with most of those coming in the last 10 years. Since 2014 they have released at least one remake a year, with 12 in all. This past year, Walt Disney Pictures has released five movies, two of which are live action remakes and only one, “Elio,” being an original animated movie.
While Disney leads this trend, others have begun to follow. Over the summer Dreamworks released their first live action remake, “How To Train Your Dragon.” The studio plans to continue with “How To Train Your Dragon 2” in 2027.
Animated movies produced by large studios like Disney and Universal tend to be aimed at children, which can create the notion that animation is a less sophisticated form of media. Animation and live action are two very different forms of media. They both have their places, but there are so many elements to animation that simply cannot be conveyed in live action. The style of animation is important to the aesthetic of movies, and when remade as live action they lose an integral part of their way the stories are told. The “Spider-Verse” movies, for example, would be nearly impossible to recreate in live action. Technically it could be done, but there would be no way to replicate the power that animation gives this story. For those who haven’t seen these movies, they depict many different universes all with their own version of Spider-Man. In these movies unique styles of animation are very important to differentiate each different universe especially as they overlap. The animation styles also literally illustrate different characters’ personalities. For example, one Spider-Man has a very nonconformist personality, and the aesthetic of his universe reflects that, with erratic, constantly changing animation inspired by the 1970’s punk scene.
Regardless of its complexity, animation is a form of art. If someone were to recreate a painting as a photograph it wouldn’t be the same; it would lose part of what makes it what it is. This is the same with animated films and their live action remakes. Animated films should be valued as their own medium, not just a step away from live action.
The initial wave of live action remakes were of animated films that had been made decades before, like “Cinderella” and “The Jungle Book.” But as of recent years studios have begun to remake movies that are not that old. For example, the original “How To Train Your Dragon” came out in 2010, and Disney has plans to release a live action remake of “Moana” (2016) next year. At this point these new remakes are not drawing in new audiences. When there is such a short time between an original and a remade version, the point is no longer about introducing the movie to new generations, but instead about making money off of a guaranteed audience.
When you look at reviews, live action remakes almost always perform worse than their animated counterparts. On average Walt Disney Pictures originals had a score of 86.2% on Rotten Tomatoes while their remakes average 57.6%. So why do they keep making these movies rather than creating original content? Ticket sales are almost guaranteed to be substantial, and studios make massive profits, so they keep being made. Most of Disney’s live action remakes have made exceptional profits at the box office. The 2025 remake of “Lilo and Stitch” for example, while highly controversial because of changes made to the original plot, has still made over $1 billion in the box office since coming out in May. The production costs were only about $100 million.
The monetary success of these movies has given studios the excuse to prioritize safe movies over original ideas that don’t have guaranteed financial gain. Original films, both animated and live action, are still being created, but they feel diluted by the deluge of nostalgia bait remakes and useless sequels. Rather than investing in original content, studios are choosing to recycle old ideas over and over. Large studios have stopped taking risks. In fact, according to a study by Adam Mastroianni, in the top 20 highest grossing movies since 1977 there has been a sharp increase in the amount of remakes and sequels. Prior to 2000 only about 25% of movies being made were remakes or sequels, but in recent years this number has increased to around 90%. What do we lose when we stop investing in creativity and original thought?
Storytelling has always been an important part of the human experience. It is something that brings light to important issues and creates connections across different groups of people. If we stop making original stories we will lose a part of what makes us human. Movies are a type of storytelling that is available to almost everyone so when studios prioritize profits over new interesting ideas they are directly contributing to the death of storytelling.
