Lilo & Stitch (2025) Review

The early 2000s were, admittedly, a rough period for Walt Disney Animation Studios. After experiencing one of the most successful runs in their history thanks to the Disney Renaissance, the studio quickly found itself having a far more difficult time achieving that same level of critical and commercial success once the new millennium rolled around. While there were various factors behind this turn of events, arguably the most prominent of the bunch was the rise in success of computer animated films that was spearheaded by the likes of DreamWorks and, of course, the studio that Disney had begun to partner with in the 90’s before buying them out wholesale in 2006, Pixar. As a result, a bunch of the films that Walt Disney Animation produced during this time, such as 2000’s The Emperor’s New Groove, 2001’s Atlantis: The Lost Empire, and 2002’s Treasure Planet, ended up faring poorly at the box office and, on occasion, with critics. Now, with that said, many of these films would later go on to attract considerable cult followings from the generation of kids who grew up with them, undoubtedly thanks in part to the creative risks that the studio often took during these years to deviate from their long-standing narrative formulas of reimagined fairy tales full of Broadway-esque musical numbers. Ultimately, though, it’s safe to say that there’s a very good reason as to why, in the mid-2000s, Disney Animation opted to move away from making traditionally animated films in favor of making computer-animated features. However, if there was one undeniable bright spot during these so-called ‘dark ages’, that would be the first of two films that the studio produced in 2002: a little offbeat sci-fi themed ‘Hawaiian Roller Coaster Ride’ known as Lilo & Stitch.

Directed by the duo of Chris Sanders and Dean DeBlois, who would later go on to co-direct DreamWorks’ highly acclaimed adaptation of How to Train Your Dragon in 2010 (which, on an incredibly ironic note given today’s review subject, is getting its own live-action remake in a few weeks), the film followed the adventures of its titular duo; Lilo, a young Hawaiian girl living under the care of her older sister Nani following the death of their parents, and her new pet dog Stitch. It’s just that, unbeknownst to Lilo and company, Stitch is secretly a destructive alien creature who was created by a mad scientist and is hiding out on Earth disguised as a dog to avoid being captured by intergalactic government forces. Unlike many of the other films that Disney Animation was producing at the time, Lilo & Stitch, which was the second of three films that were produced primarily from Disney’s now-defunct animation studio located within Walt Disney World’s Hollywood Studios theme park (the other two being 1998’s Mulan and 2003’s Brother Bear), was one of the studio’s cheaper productions from a budgetary standpoint. Whereas their other release of the year, Treasure Planet, was a costly $140 million flop, Lilo & Stitch only cost $80 million. And thanks in large part to a buzzworthy marketing campaign that saw Stitch wreak havoc across other Disney classics such as Beauty and the Beast and The Lion King, the film performed quite well for itself critically and commercially, earning over $273 million while also garnering largely positive reviews from critics and an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Feature. As a result, Lilo & Stitch would go on to spawn what is quite arguably the most expansive media franchise of any Walt Disney Animation film of the early 2000s.

Its most prominent spin-off was the animated TV series Lilo & Stitch: The Series, which ran for 65 episodes over the course of two seasons and debuted on September 20^th, 2003, on ABC via Disney’s ABC Kids programming block. The series, which was preceded by a direct-to-video feature-length pilot film in Stitch! The Movie, followed the franchise’s titular duo as they went on various adventures across Hawaii to find and rescue the 625 experiments that Stitch’s creator, Dr. Jumba Jookiba, had created before he made Stitch AKA ‘Experiment 626’. During its run, the show notably pulled off one of the most ambitious crossovers in pop culture history by having not one, not two, not even three, but four whole episodes where Lilo & Stitch interacted with characters from some of Disney’s other hit shows at the time; Kim Possible, Recess, The Proud Family, and American Dragon: Jake Long. The show ultimately concluded in 2006 with another direct-to-video film, Leroy & Stitch, and during this time, the franchise also got another direct-to-video film in 2005, Lilo & Stitch 2: Stitch has a Glitch, which, unlike the show, opted to be more of a direct sequel to the original film. After that, the franchise would go on to spawn another pair of television series; Stitch!, which ran for multiple seasons from 2008 to 2015, and Stitch and Ai, which was only a single-season show released in 2017. Unlike the bulk of the franchise’s media, however, these shows were considerably different in tone and execution, adhering more to the animation styles of the countries they were produced in (anime in the case of the Japanese-set Stitch! and donghua for the Chinese-set Stitch & Ai) and notably having Stitch paired up with new female protagonists instead of Lilo; Yuna in Stitch! and Ai in Stitch and Ai.

Simply put, there’s no denying that Lilo & Stitch is one of Disney’s most profitable IPs. Thanks to all the films, shows, merchandise, and numerous attractions at Disney theme parks (yes, that even includes the admittedly notorious Stitch’s Great Escape, which replaced the notoriously mature fan-favorite ExtraTERRORestrial Alien Encounter at Disney World’s Magic Kingdom), the franchise has earned nearly $3.5 billion worldwide which, according to recent reports from Disney, now makes it one of their Top 10 best-selling franchises. And because of all this, Stitch has become such a fan favorite in the eyes of Disney fans that it could even be argued that he could give Mickey Mouse a run for his money as one of Disney’s most beloved mascots. With all this in mind, I guess you can say that it was practically inevitable that Disney would attempt to make the original Lilo & Stitch the latest installment of its long line of animated classics to get a live-action remake. Thus, that’s where we are now with the live-action remake of Lilo & Stitch, which makes the 2002 original the latest in the Walt Disney Animation canon to get remade after the past few years of us getting remakes of most of the Disney Renaissance releases. In the director’s chair for this one is Dean Fleischer Camp, who had the breakout hit of his career in 2021 when he adapted Marcel the Shell with Shoes On, the trilogy of short films that he made with his then-wife Jenny Slate from 2010 to 2014, into a feature-length film that, despite being a live-action/animated hybrid, managed to earn an Oscar nomination for Best Animated Feature. With a background like that, it’s no wonder that Fleischer Camp imbues this new version of Lilo & Stitch with almost the same exact level of heart and soul as its animated counterpart, even with its rather controversial (yet, in several cases, effective) changes to the source material.     

In a far-off galaxy, the United Galactic Federation arrests mad scientist Dr. Jumba Jookiba (voiced/portrayed by Zack Galifianakis) for his illegal genetic experiments as exemplified by his latest creation, Experiment 626 (voiced by Chris Sanders), who is touted by Jumba as an indestructible force of nature. Immediately realizing the threat that 626 poses to the galaxy, the UGF Council promptly orders them both to be imprisoned; however, 626’s superior intellect helps him escape captivity and flee to another galaxy, where he ends up crash-landing on the planet Earth on the Hawaiian island of Kaua’i. With both Jumba and the Galactic Federation’s Earth ‘expert’ Agent Wendell Pleakley (voiced/portrayed by Billy Magnussen) now on his tail as part of a deal that the former makes with the UGF’s Grand Councilwoman (voiced by Hannah Waddingham) so that he can avoid going to prison, 626 disguises himself as an Earth dog and is subsequently taken in by a young girl named Lilo Pelekai (Maia Kealoha), who has been living under the care of her older sister Nani (Sydney Agudong) following the death of their parents. Thanks in large part to Lilo’s troublemaking habits, Nani has struggled to be a proper caretaker for her sister, thus putting her in increasingly hot water with their family’s social worker, Mrs. Kekoa (Tia Carrere), who pushes for her to get her act together or else lose Lilo to child services. Naturally, this stressful situation is only exacerbated further by the arrival of 626, whom Lilo names ‘Stitch’, as the two sisters quickly discover that their new ‘dog’ is quite the handful.

Now, despite everything that we’re going to get into when it comes to its narrative changes, this new version of Lilo & Stitch still follows in the footsteps of practically all its fellow live-action Disney remakes by recreating several key sequences and iconic lines from its animated counterpart in live-action form. However, unlike something like the CGI-animated remake of The Lion King from 2019 where any changes made to its source material were arguably minimal at best, the Lilo & Stitch remake doesn’t end up feeling like nothing more than a ‘shot-for-shot’ remake of the original animated film as it does make a few noticeable changes to its story. And yet, as was seen with the 2020 remake of Mulan with its notable omissions of elements such as its music and characters like Mushu and Shang, this then leads to the exact opposite kind of reaction from those who question the need to remake an animated classic; one where, instead, fans of the original are angered by all the things that the remake leaves out that they find to be some of the original film’s best aspects. Sure enough, the remake of Lilo & Stitch has faced tons of scrutiny from fans of the original over the changes that it makes to its source material, such as the exclusion of one of the franchise’s most prominent villains and the subsequent re-working of a long-standing series protagonist into being this film’s main antagonist to make up for the lack of that other villain. However, what has easily been the most controversial change is this film’s reworked ending; without spoiling exactly what happens in it, many have argued that it betrays the original film’s key message stressing the importance and beauty of ‘ohana. After all, as Lilo famously declares in both versions of this story when Nani attempts to get rid of Stitch, “‘ohana means family and family means that no one gets left behind or forgotten”.

And yet… I don’t think that this film’s reworked ending is harmful to that theme. In fact, I’d argue that a lot of the criticism revolving around it seems to stem from those who only read about what happens and then proceeded to take it directly at face value without paying any attention to the key bits of narrative context surrounding it, which helps to convey the genuinely positive developments behind this turn of events. As a result, I’d say that this new ending still manages to convey the beauty of ‘ohana, even if it goes without saying that it goes about this in a drastically different manner than the original film. And more importantly, the remake does retain much of the same level of heart and soul as the original, much of which is, of course, thanks to its iconic titular duo. Stitch is still the same adorably chaotic dog-like alien that he’s been throughout the entire franchise, especially thanks to the pivotal move of having his longtime voice actor, none other than the original film’s co-director Chris Sanders, return to voice the character even if some of Stitch’s lines are clearly lifted directly from previous installments of the franchise. And while your mileage will most likely vary on how effectively this film translates the franchise’s alien characters into live-action (a recurring criticism of Disney’s recent live-action remakes), Stitch’s CGI design is easily one of the best instances of this being done. Then, on the human side of things, you have the utterly adorable Maia Kealoha, who shines in her film debut as she flawlessly exudes Lilo’s silly yet wholly sympathetic qualities.

But, of course, as any fan of this series will remind you, Lilo & Stitch is more than just the wacky escapades of its titular duo. Alongside the hilarious hi-jinx that ensue from Stitch pretending to be a dog, there’s also the emotional saga that is the relationship between Lilo and her sister Nani in the wake of their parents’ death as the latter works tirelessly to ensure that they stay together. In the case of the original film, this was one of the first major instances where a Disney film’s plot largely revolved around sisters more than a full decade before it was, admittedly, overshadowed by the billion-dollar juggernaut that was Frozen. And while the remake’s take on Lilo and Nani’s relationship does end up revolving around the aforementioned ‘reworked ending’, it’s still just as strong as it was in the original film and Sydney Agudong deserves just as much credit as Maia Kealoha’s been getting for her performance as Nani, especially thanks to the perfectly sweet on-screen camaraderie that she shares with Kealoha. All in all, the film succeeds in maintaining the strong characterizations of its three leads, and while this does mean that other recurring characters of the series don’t get as much to work with by comparison, everyone else in the cast is solid in their respective roles, such as Kaipo Dudoit as Nani’s good-natured love interest David and Courtney B. Vance as the enigmatic Cobra Bubbles, who’s reimagined here as a CIA agent investigating Stitch’s antics who only poses as a social worker (his role in the animated film) when he’s undercover. Meanwhile, Zach Galifianakis and Billy Magnussen provide plenty of laughs as the bickering duo of Jumba and Pleakley and the film even features a few cameos from the stars of the original animated film. OG Nani Tia Carrere takes over Cobra Bubbles’ role as Lilo and Nani’s social worker Mrs. Kekoa while Amy Hill, who played the elderly shop owner Mrs. Hasagawa in the original film and TV series, plays Lilo and Nani’s eccentric yet kind-hearted neighbor Tūtū, who’s also David’s grandmother.

At this point, I’ve become the very definition of a broken record when it comes to my controversially positive stance toward Disney’s recent trend of live-action remakes. At the risk of rehashing the same exact statements that I’ve made in my other reviews of Disney’s live-action remakes, I don’t believe that these new films are ‘harmful’ to the legacies of their animated counterparts, mainly due to the alleged implication that they make them feel ‘lesser’ by comparison. Instead, I feel that, as long as the original films are still available to watch thanks to services like Disney+ (their controversial habit of removing content from the service notwithstanding), there’s nothing wrong with seeing new spins on these animated classics. And when it comes to Lilo & Stitch, I’d say that its live-action remake is one of the best of the bunch, even if many will undoubtedly argue that this isn’t saying much. Director Dean Fleischer Camp does a fantastic job of maintaining the exact same level of emotional poignancy as the original film, even when taking its polarizing (yet largely solid) narrative changes into account. On that note, as notorious as some of these changes have been in the eyes of Lilo & Stitch fans, they do, at least, help to give this film its own unique identity rather than it being just a straightforward retelling of the original animated film. But above all, with the dedicated efforts of both its cast and crew to honor its story’s Hawaiian roots on full display here, Lilo & Stitch succeeds in being just as delightfully hilarious as it is beautifully touching on an emotional level.

Rating: 5/5!

Disney Retrospective - The Medfield College Anthology

(Today’s retrospective is dedicated to Disney Legend Tommy Kirk (1941-2021), who starred in numerous hit projects for Disney including 1957’s Old Yeller, where he directly participated in one of cinema’s most devastating sequences, and 1959’s The Shaggy Dog, in which he played the young inventor who transformed into the titular character. He also appeared in two of the films that we’ll be covering today, where he played the son of one of Disney’s most notable recurring antagonists of the ’60s. Rest in Peace, Mr. Kirk.) 

Today’s Disney Retrospective is going to be a little different than most of the ones that I’ve done so far since I’m not necessarily focusing on a single franchise. Instead, we’ll be looking at a bunch of films that share one thing in common, their setting. In the ’60s and ’70s, several live-action Disney films were set at the fictional Medfield College, which was named after a town in Massachusetts where several friends of Walt Disney lived. Many historians have noted that Walt visited them frequently and often used to land one of his planes on their property on a private airstrip that is partially still around today. So then, what films will we be looking at today if I’m not doing a single franchise? Well, there are two main series of Disney films that took place at Medfield College. The first of them follows the exploits of a well-meaning but forgetful science professor who creates an incredibly rubbery substance that he calls ‘Flubber’. There were two films made in the ’60s about this character and the original film would end up getting remade in the ’90s, resulting in a film that I’m sure many folks of my generation are decently familiar with. The other series of films is a trilogy (plus a 1995 made-for-TV remake of the first film) that centered around a student at Medfield named Dexter Riley, notably played by Kurt Russell, who tries to help keep the college from falling into financial ruin via various inventions that end up affecting him in unique ways. In fact, every single film that we’re about to discuss in today’s retrospective consists of a plot where the main characters try to help the college get out of debt, so I apologize in advance if it seems like I’m starting to repeat myself at times. Thus, without further ado, it’s time to head back to school, Disney style, as we look at the seven Disney films that were set at Medfield College. This is the Medfield College Anthology.

Also, just a quick disclaimer before we begin. While the following 7 titles were the only Disney films that were specifically set at Medfield College, another Disney film, 1976’s The Shaggy D.A., is set in the town of Medfield, which means that it’s technically set in the same location. However, since that film doesn’t feature the college at any point, I won’t be looking at it today.

ACT 1 – THE FLUBBER SAGA

THE ABSENT-MINDED PROFESSOR (1961)

We begin today’s retrospective with one of Disney’s earliest live-action hits, The Absent-Minded Professor, which was based on a 1942 short story titled A Situation of Gravity by Samuel W. Taylor as well as being partially inspired by Hubert Alyea, a chemistry professor at Princeton University who was known for his explosive (figuratively AND literally) science demonstrations. It was one of many classic live-action Disney films directed by Robert Stevenson, whose work with the company includes the likes of 1968’s The Love Bug and, of course, the one and only Mary Poppins. With a pedigree like that, it shouldn’t come as that big of a surprise that this film is another well-made family-friendly Disney comedy that features plenty of entertaining sequences that fully capitalize on the concept of a miraculous rubber substance that can defy gravity, such as the famous scene where the main protagonist, Professor Ned Brainard, uses it to help Medfield’s struggling basketball team. Fred MacMurray headlines the film nicely as Professor Brainard as does Nancy Olson as Brainard’s fiancé Betsy Carlisle, who he, unfortunately, keeps forgetting to get married to. This is also notably the first appearance of a recurring Disney villain, Keenan Wynn’s greedy land developer Alonzo Hawk, who would go on to appear in this film’s sequel and the previously reviewed Herbie sequel, Herbie Rides Again. In short, despite the usual ‘dated politics’ that are often seen in an older film like this and the fact that it gets a bit meandering near the end despite a modest 97-minute runtime, The Absent-Minded Professor is another indisputable classic of Disney’s early forays into live-action films.

Rating: 4/5

SON OF FLUBBER (1963)

Thanks to the success of the original Absent-Minded Professor, a sequel was announced not long after its release, thus making it one of the first major Disney films to get a sequel. Really, though, the fact that this occurred at all is quite fascinating given that this was back when Walt Disney was still alive. As anyone well-versed in Disney history will surely point out, Walt wasn’t too keen on the idea of sequels, famously quoting that “you can’t top pigs with pigs” in response to the idea of doing follow-ups to the studio’s iconic Three Little Pigs short. And to be fair to Walt’s stance on the matter, Son of Flubber does often come off as one of those sequels that, for the most part, simply rehashes a lot of the same beats as its predecessor. You’ve got Professor Brainard’s various experiments and the wacky antics that ensue, a scene where he pranks his romantic rival with said experiments and a major sporting event where Medfield’s group of underdogs use them to beat their physically superior rivals from Rutland (only here it’s during a football game instead of a basketball game). There are also a few plotlines that are very much in line with what some sequels end up falling victim to by undoing elements of the previous film’s happy ending, such as a love triangle subplot involving an old flame of Professor Brainard’s that ultimately goes nowhere. But for what it’s worth, Son of Flubber still manages to be another enjoyable comedic romp thanks in large part to the return of all the major cast and crew members from the first film, from director Robert Stevenson to stars Fred MacMurray, Nancy Olson, Keenan Wynn, and Tommy Kirk. Thus, while it’s very much a sequel that’s not as good as its predecessor, there’s still just enough of all the things that made The Absent-Minded Professor an enduring staple of Disney’s live-action catalog to make this a worthwhile watch.

Rating: 3/5

(Now, before we continue, I just want to note that there are technically two other Absent-Minded Professor films that served as pseudo-sequels to the original. These two made-for-TV films starred Harry Anderson of Night Court fame as Professor Henry Crawford, the late Professor Brainard’s successor as Medfield College’s chemistry professor who rediscovers Brainard’s lost formula for flubber. However, due to issues regarding the availability of these films, I won’t be covering either of them today. While the 1988 Absent-Minded Professor film can currently be found on YouTube, the same can’t be said for its 1989 follow-up, The Absent-Minded Professor: Trading Places. At the time of this retrospective’s publication, I cannot find it anywhere online, and to be perfectly blunt, I personally feel that attempting to find it would be too daunting of a process for the sole purpose of covering it here.)

FLUBBER (1997)

Just one year after he wrote and produced the live-action remake of 101 Dalmatians, John Hughes tackled a different Disney remake with the remake of The Absent-Minded Professor, Flubber. It was also notably the second time that he had collaborated with director Les Mayfield, who had previously helmed a different Hughes-penned remake, 1994’s Miracle on 34^th Street. Overall, Flubber is a lot like the 101 Dalmatians remake in that it generally maintains all the main story beats from the original; missed weddings, flying cars, a big basketball game, etc. Likewise, any changes that are made to Bill Walsh’s original script, outside of making this film’s version of Flubber a sentient substance, mostly come in the form of aesthetic differences that are in line with the remake’s more modern setting. For example, instead of a loyal canine companion, this film’s Professor Brainard is accompanied by a flying robot assistant named Weebo (notably voiced by The Little Mermaid herself, Jodi Benson). However, despite doing quite well at the box office, where it earned over $178 million worldwide ($93 million of that domestically), Flubber didn’t exactly do well with critics. And for the most part, this stems from something that I mentioned a few months ago when I reviewed the 101 Dalmatians remake in that this was during a time when John Hughes’ work underwent a considerably noticeable tonal shift. In other words, whereas Hughes had made his mark on the industry with his sharply written (and often edgy) comedies, his 90’s films were known more for their juvenile slapstick humor, and Flubber is undoubtedly a prime example of that with pratfalls and head smacks galore.

And yet, even with that in mind, I still find this to be an enjoyable watch. Now, full disclosure, I will fully admit that what I just said is largely stemming from the fact that this is an incredibly nostalgic film for me as I watched it repeatedly growing up (and before you ask, I also watched the original a couple times on VHS when I was younger). That said, though, I also recognize WHY this one didn’t fly well with everyone (no pun intended), such as the argument that Robin Williams may not have been the best choice for the lead role since Professor Brainard isn’t exactly the most likable protagonist. And yet, Williams still manages to find some opportunities to display his comedic talents and all-around earnest persona (even in a role like this that, to be fair, wasn’t that much different from its 1961 counterpart) because… well, he was just that good. Regardless of the quality of the films that he was in, Williams’ talent was always able to shine through and serves as a keen reminder of why he continues to be missed to this day. In short, if you’re willing to ignore some of the weird narrative updates that Hughes makes to this story (e.g. the subplot involving Weebo’s romantic feelings towards Brainard) and a couple instances of incredibly dated 90’s CGI, Flubber is a relatively harmless remake of The Absent-Minded Professor. The original is still the better film at the end of the day, but to be perfectly frank, I can’t bring myself to be too hard on what was very much a childhood favorite of mine.

Rating: 3.5/5

ACT 2 – THE DEXTER RILEY TRILOGY

THE COMPUTER WORE TENNIS SHOES (1969)

We now move on from the antics of Professor Brainard to the adventures of Medfield student Dexter Riley, originally played by Kurt Russell who, for those who are unaware, mainly got his start in the business as a prominent male lead for Disney in the ’60s and ’70s. As for the first installment of what is called the Dexter Riley trilogy, 1969’s The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes, it very much establishes the key recurring beats that would define these three films. Each installment revolves around an incident in which Dexter gains incredible powers from the latest Medfield experiment as he works with Medfield’s bumbling Dean Higgins (Joe Flynn) to help win money for their financially struggling school while dealing with the threat of corrupt businessman A.J. Arno (Cesar Romero), who also wants to capitalize on Dexter’s newfound abilities. In this first film, an electric shock that Dexter sustains while working on Medfield’s newly acquired computer ends up turning him into a walking supercomputer, and while this ultimately results in a largely by-the-numbers plot, this is still a solidly entertaining family flick that’s fully bolstered by the series’ three main leads. Even in the early stages of his career, Kurt Russell successfully showcased the strongly charismatic screen presence that would end up defining him as an actor. Joe Flynn, meanwhile, provides solid comedic relief as Dean Higgins while Cesar Romero is enjoyably over the top as main antagonist A.J. Arno. As such, while it’s admittedly a rather average outing as far as Disney’s live-action filmography is concerned, The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes does succeed in being a pleasantly easygoing crowd-pleaser.

Rating: 3.5/5

NOW YOU SEE HIM, NOW YOU DON’T (1972)

The lead trio of Kurt Russell, Joe Flynn, and Cesar Romero all returned for a follow-up in 1972, Now You See Him, Now You Don’t. The film also saw the return of the original’s director, Robert Butler, a veteran director of television who has notably helmed the pilot episodes of several classic shows such as Batman with Adam West (and, of course, Cesar Romero) and the original pilot for Star Trek that featured Jeffrey Hunter’s Christopher Pike rather than William Shatner’s James T. Kirk. In this film, Dexter and his friends come up with a special formula that can turn them invisible. This results in what is quite frankly the most entertaining premise of the entire trilogy, especially since this film does a better job than its predecessor did when it comes to capitalizing on the potential of its premise with plenty of fun invisibility-related set pieces such as the one where Dexter helps Dean Higgins win a game of golf. And while some of the film’s invisibility effects have obviously dated quite a bit, the whole film, in general, is better-paced and a lot more consistently humorous than the first film was. All this helps it to overcome another straightforward plot that, dare I say, kind of feels like it straight-up ignores the events of the previous film at times. In other words, there’s not a single mention of everything that Dexter went through in the first film, including the fact that A.J. Arno tried to have him killed (which, as you might have guessed, is not brought up at all once Arno makes his first appearance in the film after being released from prison). Still, for what is undoubtedly another one of those often forgotten live-action Disney films from the studio’s ‘darker days’ (especially seeing how it surprisingly isn’t on Disney+ at the time of this post’s publication unlike the other two films in the trilogy), Now You See Him, Now You Don’t is, against all odds, a superior sequel.

Rating: 4.5/5

THE STRONGEST MAN IN THE WORLD (1975)

The final installment of this trilogy, 1975’s The Strongest Man in the World, saw a notable change in direction. This time, directorial duties were handled by the brother of trilogy writer Joseph L. McEveety, Vincent McEveety, whose work we’ve previously discussed on this site via the Herbie the Love Bug retrospective that I did a few years ago as he had directed two of that franchise’s films and a few episodes of its short-lived TV series. Unfortunately, this is easily the weakest installment of this trilogy as it’s derailed by some questionable narrative and production decisions. It’s not outright terrible, per se, as there are a decent number of sequences that properly maintain the kind of wacky scientific antics that these films are known for. However, the film suffers considerably from some incredibly weak pacing, with some sequences dragging on for way longer than they need to be. Not only that, but the film has a surprisingly limited amount of screentime for Kurt Russell as Dexter, who’s literally absent for at least a third of the runtime. Instead, more time is spent with Dean Higgins, A.J. Arno and his right-hand-man Cookie, and new characters like Eve Arden and Phil Silvers as the owners of rival cereal companies, the former of whom teams up with Medfield to promote the super-strength formula that Dexter and his friends come up with. Now, granted, this may have had something to do with Kurt Russell beginning to transition into non-Disney projects at this point in his career, but nevertheless, the severe lack of his trademark charisma is quite noticeable. As such, the Dexter Riley trilogy ends up concluding on a mediocre note as The Strongest Man in the World is, unfortunately, a major dud that’s largely undone by a messy plot that, despite having just enough of its predecessors’ most recognizable elements, almost feels like it’s from another franchise.

Rating: 2/5

THE COMPUTER WORE TENNIS SHOES (1995 REMAKE)

Finally, we conclude today’s retrospective with the made-for-TV remake of The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes, which first premiered on February 18^th, 1995 on ABC. This was one of four remakes of classic live-action Disney films that aired on the network during the 1994-95 season, with the other three being remakes of The Shaggy Dog, Escape to Witch Mountain, and Freaky Friday. It also notably served as the directorial debut of Ant-Man trilogy director Peyton Reed who, just two years later, would helm another made-for-TV old-school Disney ‘remake’ via The Love Bug with Bruce Campbell. But whereas Reed’s Love Bug was admittedly more of a sequel than a remake given the role that the series’ main protagonist Jim Douglas played in it, this new version of The Computer Wore Tennis Shoes is a more straight-forward remake that, like Flubber, doesn’t make a lot of noticeable changes to the original’s script. Outside of the usual modern aesthetic updates, the only major narrative differences include things like having its main antagonist be the resident genius from Medfield’s rival Hale University (who happens to be 12 years old, by the way…) instead of a corrupt businessman and a decently improved role for the film’s female lead and Dexter’s love interest Sarah Matthews. That latter difference is particularly notable seeing how, in the original trilogy with Kurt Russell, all three films paired his Dexter up with a different female lead who barely factored into the main plot.

In the remake, Dexter Riley is played by Kirk Cameron, who does a solid job in the role overall even if his version of Dexter is arguably cockier than Kurt Russell’s Dexter was in the scenes from the original film where Dexter’s fame started to go to his head. Still, like with any of Lindsay Lohan’s star-making roles, a project like this shows that, despite Cameron’s current reputation, he was a genuinely talented young male lead. Here, he’s joined by 90’s comedy mainstay Larry Miller in a scene-stealing turn as the remake’s equivalent of Dean Higgins, Dean Valentine, and Dean Jones (who, of course, would then go on to reprise his role as Jim Douglas in The Love Bug two years later) as Hale’s Dean Carlson albeit in a relatively minor role compared to everyone else. As for the film itself, I’ll fully admit that there’s not much else for me to talk about as it’s very much your standard made-for-TV film. Despite a few overly campy moments and some plotlines that don’t really go anywhere such as a pair of government agents who think that Dexter’s been responsible for a recent string of high-profile government hacks, it’s an enjoyable little piece of 90’s nostalgia. Granted, I don’t recall ever watching this when I was younger (although I wouldn’t be surprised if I had) but I do believe that I would’ve enjoyed this as a kid just as much as I did with the likes of classic Disney Channel Original Movies from the ’90s and early 2000s like Halloweentown, The Luck of the Irish, and Smart House.

Rating: 3.5/5

And that concludes today’s retrospective on the 7 Disney films that were set at Medfield College. Thanks for following along and be sure to sound off in the comments below with any childhood memories that you have of these films.

Cruella (2021) review

We’ve seen plenty of iconic Disney villains throughout the studio’s extensive filmography, and yet, there are arguably none who are more famous than the villainess of Disney Animation’s 1961 outing, One Hundred and One Dalmatians: the fashion-obsessed heiress turned sinister dognapper Cruella de Vil. Ever since the original film’s release, Cruella has been regarded as one of the most famous villains in cinematic history and this status was thoroughly maintained in 1996 when 101 Dalmatians became one of the first Disney animated films to get a live-action remake. In said film, Cruella was portrayed by the legendary Glenn Close, and while the film itself wasn’t as well-received as its animated counterpart, Close’s performance was widely regarded as its greatest highlight, promptly earning her a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actress in a Comedy/Musical. She then proceeded to reprise the role in the film’s 2000 sequel, 102 Dalmatians, and while that would basically be it for the 101 Dalmatians live-action film franchise at the time, plans were set into place for a prequel film based entirely around Cruella herself in 2013. And while this did mean that Close wasn’t going to be reprising her iconic role, she still ended up being involved with the project as an executive producer. Thus, Emma Stone took on the role for this new film, which is the latest from director Craig Gillespie who, like previous directors of the live-action 101 Dalmatians films (Stephen Herek and Kevin Lima), has done a bunch of films for Disney in the past such as 2014’s Million Dollar Arm and 2016’s The Finest Hours. And thanks to his strong direction and a top-notch lead performance from Emma Stone, Cruella is a strikingly stylish and edgy new take on the story of its titular villainess.

Growing up, Estella Miller (Emma Stone) was known for being quite the troublemaker which, in her eyes, may have made her responsible for the death of her mother Catherine (Emily Beecham) at a luxurious party hosted by ‘The Baroness’ (Emma Thompson), the owner of one of the top fashion houses in London. Now orphaned, Estella ends up taking on a life of thievery alongside her newfound friends, Jasper (Joel Fry) and Horace (Paul Walter Hauser) Badun. Eventually, her creative sensibilities manage to attract the attention of the Baroness, who promptly hires her as one of her new designers. But while Estella steadily works her way up into being one of the Baroness’ key assistants, she soon discovers that the Baroness has come into possession of a necklace that had been given to her by her mother but had been lost on the night of her death. Now realizing that the Baroness was the one responsible for her mother’s death, Estella, with the aid of Horace and Jasper, promptly embarks on a plot of revenge. Adopting an old persona of hers from childhood, she becomes the rebellious Cruella de Vil and begins to pull off a series of publicity stunts to one-up the Baroness, thus locking the two of them into an intense rivalry that only proceeds to get more complicated once Estella uncovers the Baroness’ darkest secret.

Cruella very much follows in the footsteps of 2014’s Maleficent by presenting a story where the main antagonist of one of Disney’s classic animated films is portrayed in a more sympathetic light as they enact their revenge against those who wronged them. Granted, it’s not like the film makes her a full-on protagonist or anything; in fact, I’d even argue that this one gives its title character more opportunities to be a devious renegade. But overall, the version of Cruella seen in this film doesn’t seem like she’s destined to become as villainous as she’s known for being in other films. Thus, just like Maleficent, I think it’s safe to say that this take on the character hasn’t gone over well with everybody, namely due to the attempt of trying to humanize a character who, at least in other films, wanted to kidnap puppies and kill them for their coats. However, given the context of how this story plays out, it isn’t too big of an issue in the long run because turning Cruella into a rebellious antihero fits perfectly with this story’s 1970’s London setting. And thanks to Craig Gillespie's visually-driven direction, the film excellently captures the punk rock aesthetic of the time, which is only strengthened further by other great elements such as the incredible costume design done by two-time Oscar winner Jenny Beavan and a rocking soundtrack full of classic tunes. Really, the only things that hold this film back are relatively minor at best such as it being perhaps a bit overlong at a little over two hours and some rather predictable final plot twists that reveal the true connection between Cruella and the Baroness.

As noted in the intro, Glenn Close’s performance as Cruella in the 1996 live-action 101 Dalmatians film and its 2000 sequel, 102 Dalmatians, is so iconic that she’s arguably the definitive incarnation of the character for at least one or two generations. As such, one can only imagine the pressure that Emma Stone was under to deliver a version of the character that was just as memorable by comparison… and yet, she fully succeeds in doing so thanks in large part to her indisputable on-screen charisma. She also works incredibly well with Emma Thompson, who basically serves as this film’s version of the kind of villain that Cruella is in other films as the Baroness, a role that Thompson gleefully revels in. And really, it’s simply a delight to see these two go to war with one another over the course of the film’s proceedings. The two Emmas are then backed by some terrific supporting turns from Joel Fry and Paul Walter Hauser as Cruella’s famously bumbling sidekicks, Jasper and Horace. The laid-back persona that Fry brings to Jasper makes him the most grounded member of the group and the one who keeps Cruella from going too far with her actions while Paul Walter Hauser, as is basically expected from him at this point, makes Horace one of the film’s best sources of comedic relief. And while they admittedly don’t have as much to work with by comparison, Mark Strong and Kirby Howell-Baptiste turn in solid work as well as John, the Baroness’ valet, and this film’s interpretation of the 101 Dalmatians franchise’s primary matriarch, Anita Darling.  

As we conclude this review, I should probably preface this final section of it by admitting that, regardless of my overall thoughts on the film, Cruella will always be in my good graces since it was the first film that I was able to see in a theatrical setting in more than a year after everything that happened due to the COVID-19 pandemic. That said, though, this is not just a case where I’m simply being sentimental about how I first viewed it as the film itself is a highly entertaining comedic crime adventure that prides itself on its incredibly stylish visuals and costuming and then proceeds to back it all up with a genuinely unique way of reimagining the story of one of Disney’s most iconic antagonists. Sure, it may go against the traditional ways in which Cruella de Vil has been portrayed on film before, but thanks to Emma Stone’s outstanding performance in the title role (not to mention an equally terrific supporting cast), it still works in a way that doesn’t end up betraying the source material. Simply put, the enthusiasm that the cast and crew clearly must have had for this material couldn’t be more apparent in a film that also manages to have the kind of edge to it that you normally wouldn’t get from a Disney production. With all that in mind, it’s easy to see why this has managed to be the very definition of a crowd-pleaser that was recently confirmed to be getting a sequel. And while it’s currently unclear as to what route it’ll end up taking, perhaps they can go with the suggestion that was made during an interview that the two Emmas had with Rotten Tomatoes and make it a Godfather II-style prequel/sequel that could potentially see Glenn Close returning to play an older Cruella.

Rating: 4.5/5

And don’t forget to vote for your favorite theatrically released film from the summer of 2021 by going to the link below. Voting ends September 15^th!

Click Here to Vote in the 2021 installment of Rhode Island Movie Corner's Annual End of Summer Fan Vote

Raya and the Last Dragon (2021) review (Disney+ (Premier Access))

As far as the various eras of Walt Disney Animation Studios are concerned, many would agree that 2008’s Bolt marked the start of what is widely referred to as the ‘Disney Revival’, when the studio finally managed to overcome the rough stretch that it endured in the early 2000s and produce some of its most critically acclaimed films in recent years. Because of this, Disney fans have been treated to a bunch of modern animated masterpieces such as Frozen, Zootopia, and The Princess and the Frog just to name a few. And while it could be argued that the studio is still in this period of its history given the strongly consistent track record that it’s maintained since the late 2000s, it could also be argued that a new era for the studio began in 2018 when Frozen co-director Jennifer Lee became the studio’s new Chief Creative Officer. Lee’s gone on record stating that one of her main goals for the studio moving forward is that they take greater initiative when it comes to crafting stories and characters that reflect our increasingly diverse world and you can certainly see that with the studio’s latest endeavor, Raya and the Last Dragon. Directed by the duo of Don Hall (Winnie the Pooh (2011), Big Hero 6) and Carlos López Estrada (director of the critically acclaimed live-action dramedy Blindspotting), Raya and the Last Dragon is entirely based around Southeast Asian culture and notably features the studio’s first Southeast Asian princess. And as we’ve come to expect from Disney at this point, it all comes together wonderfully in a beautifully animated and emotionally poignant film.

Long ago, the people of the mystical land of Kumandra lived in harmony with the magical dragons who shared a home with them. Unfortunately, they soon found themselves invaded by sinister creatures known as the Druun that turn their victims into stone, and while the dragons were able to successfully thwart these spirits, the people of Kumandra became so divided by their greedy aspirations that they split into five tribes: Fang, Heart, Tail, Spine, and Talon. Many years later, the Heart tribe’s leader, Chief Benja (voiced by Daniel Dae Kim), attempts to reunite the warring factions but this only results in the destruction of the powerful orb that the dragons created to protect Kumandra from the Druun, thus resulting in their resurrection. With tensions between the five tribes fiercer than they’ve ever been before, Benja’s daughter Raya (voiced by Kelly Marie Tran) embarks on a journey across the land to find the last of Kumandra’s dragons, Sisu (voiced by Awkwafina). Together, they and the various allies that they meet along the way embark on a quest to hunt down the broken pieces of the orb so that Sisu can use it to stop the Druun once and for all. However, they also find themselves having to deal with various threats such as Namaari (voiced by Gemma Chan), the princess of the Fang tribe whose duplicitous actions towards Raya were the primary catalyst behind their current predicament.

Raya and the Last Dragon has been getting a lot of attention for its action sequences, and sure enough, they’ll are brilliantly done, so much so that some of them apparently had to be toned down so that the film could maintain a Disney-friendly rating. But, of course, at the end of the day, this film is another phenomenal showcase of Disney’s amazing animation staff, especially seeing how they were all forced to work remotely on this one for… well, obvious reasons. Following in the footsteps of other regional-based Disney films such as Frozen (Norway) and Moana (South Pacific/Polynesia), the filmmakers use this film’s Southeast Asian setting and culture to their fullest effect, thus creating an utterly beautiful and effortlessly fascinating world to explore in Kumandra. But this clear-cut respect for Southeast Asian culture also carries over nicely to the film’s main plot which, on the surface, may seem like a traditional action-adventure story but is ultimately one that is steeped in some incredibly timely themes of unity. After all, the whole plot revolves around the quest to rebuild a land that’s been thoroughly divided, and while long-time readers of this site know that I usually don’t like to bring politics into my reviews… well, let’s just say that these past few years have made this story a particularly relevant one.  

In the early stages of the film’s production, Raya was to be voiced by Cassie Steele of Degrassi: The Next Generation fame. However, a few months before the film’s release, it was announced that the role was recast due to the desire to make Raya a more light-hearted protagonist rather than the ‘stoic loner’ that she was originally developed as. Luckily, they found just the right person for the job in Kelly Marie Tran, who brings all the same great qualities that she brought to the role of Rose Tico in the Star Wars sequel trilogy (sorry, racist trolls, but it’s true…) for Raya as well, from her spunky attitude to the strong emotional beats that define her character. Raya’s then joined by one of the most entertaining groups of Disney sidekicks in recent memory, all led by Awkwafina as the utterly hilarious Sisu, whose endearing optimism contrasts perfectly with Raya’s more world-weary mentality which, given the context of the plot, is completely justified. Other memorable allies include Boun (Izaac Wang), a smooth-talking entrepreneurial 10-year-old from Tail, and Little Noi (Thalia Tran), a mischievous con-baby from Talon who’s always joined by a trio of monkey creatures known as Ongi. The film also gives Raya an excellent rival in the form of Gemma Chan’s Namaari who, despite what the marketing may have implied, isn’t just a traditional ‘antagonist’. Instead, it’d be more appropriate to refer to her as Raya’s foil since many of her actions, as threatening as they often are, are done with the intent of protecting her people which, at the end of the day, was a much better route to take with this character since making her more of a straight-forward villain wouldn’t have gelled well with the film’s themes.  

Well, folks, in a completely unexpected turn of events, Walt Disney Animation has delivered an animated masterpiece… actually, it’s not that much of a surprise because that’s just what they do. Still, Raya and the Last Dragon is yet another top-tier outing from them as it delivers a highly entertaining action-adventure story that’s fully bolstered by some incredibly timely themes that directly stem from the Southeast Asian culture that’s well-represented here. Ultimately, though, I’d argue that the greatest aspect about this film is the prospect of what all its successes will mean for its lead actress, Kelly Marie Tran. At this point, I’m sure that most of you are aware of the utterly horrible crap that she ended up going through following the release of The Last Jedi when many of that film’s hostile critics took out their hatred for it on her specifically. Even more than three years after the film’s release, this still stands as one of the most tragic examples of the dark side of fandom that, if you ask me, has only gotten worse these past few years. But now, thanks to this film, Kelly Marie Tran can lay claim to the honor of being Disney’s latest badass princess, and to be perfectly frank, I can’t think of anyone more deserving of this accomplishment than her. And so, in conclusion, this is an undeniable must-see whether you’re able to see it in theaters or, if a certain pandemic is keeping you from going out and watching it that way, by viewing it via Disney+, where it became the service’s second film after the live-action remake of Mulan to be turned into a ‘Premier Access’ release.

Rating: 5/5!

Mulan (2020) review (Disney+ (Premier Access))

 

In the 90’s, Walt Disney Animation Studios experienced the creative resurgence that they desperately needed after an incredibly rough stretch in the 80’s where the studio was nearly shuttered completely. Officially known as the ‘Disney Renaissance’, this era saw the release of many of the studio’s most beloved and critically acclaimed works such as The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, and Aladdin. However, some might argue that, commercially speaking, the Disney Renaissance reached its peak in 1994 with The Lion King, which stood as the studio’s highest-grossing film for nearly two decades until Frozen overtook its top spot in 2013. While the films that were released after that (up until 1999’s Tarzan, for the record) weren’t necessarily commercial duds, none of them really managed to match the box-office success of the era’s initial outings. Nevertheless, these films have managed to maintain a genuinely positive reputation amongst those who grew up with them, and one of the most popular of that bunch is 1998’s Mulan. Directed by the duo of veteran Disney animators Tony Bancroft and Barry Cook, the film was inspired by the legendary Chinese ballad that told the story of Hua Mulan, a young woman who went against tradition to take her father’s place in the Imperial army. Upon its release, the film grossed over $304 million worldwide and was one of the better-received outings of Disney’s post-1994 Renaissance lineup, and now it’s become the latest installment of Disney’s current trend of live-action remakes of their animated classics with a big-budget epic directed by Niki Caro (2002’s Whale Rider, 2017’s The Zookeeper’s Wife). However, just like many other 2020 releases, Mulan became yet another unfortunate victim of the devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Originally set to release back in March, the film was pushed back twice before it was decided to have the film be released on Disney+, but unlike other films that were turned into Disney+ releases, Mulan was made a premium offering with users having to pay a $30 fee to watch it. And while I’m going to save my thoughts on this development for the end of today’s review, what I can say right now is that the new Mulan manages to be one of the best live-action Disney remakes yet largely because of its willingness to be different.

In a peaceful little village in the heart of China, a young woman named Hua Mulan (Yifei Liu) finds herself struggling to adhere to the expectations that are set upon her by long-standing traditions where the only way for her to bring honor to her family is through an arraigned marriage. However, this all changes when China finds itself under attack by invaders from the North; specifically, a group of warriors known as the Rourans led by Bori Khan (Jason Scott Lee), who seeks vengeance against the Emperor of China (Jet Li) for killing his father, and Xianniang (Gong Li), a powerful shape-shifting sorceress. In response to this development, the Emperor sends out an official decree that one man from every family must join the Imperial Army to combat this threat, and since Mulan doesn’t have any brothers, her father Hua Zhou (Tzi Ma), a highly respected veteran of the Imperial Army, promptly volunteers to re-enlist. Realizing, however, that her father is in no condition to fight, Mulan boldly decides to take her father’s place in the army and disguises herself as his ‘son’, Hua Jun, so that she can save him from an inevitable death. Despite this, though, Mulan now finds herself having to consistently hide her real identity as a woman from everyone she comes across, from her superior Commander Tung (Donnie Yen) to her fellow soldiers such as Chen Honghui (Yoson An). If her secret is ever revealed, not only would she bring dishonor upon her entire family, but the strict laws of her country could also potentially result in the worst possible fate of all… death.    

Over the past few years, much has been said about how many of the recent live-action Disney remakes usually don’t tend to make a lot of changes to the stories of their animated counterparts. And while I’ve certainly gone on record stating that this doesn’t bother me in the slightest when it comes to what I think about them, it goes without saying that it’s one of the main reasons why they have been so controversial amongst animation fans, with many arguing that they rarely add anything new to their iconic stories. But when it comes to Mulan, this is one of the rare cases where it does make a considerable effort to make some major changes so that it can’t just be accused of being a clone of its animated predecessor. Namely, in this instance, Mulan opts to be a more serious action film rather than the traditionally family-friendly Disney musical that the animated film was. Apart from Christina Aguilera’s re-recorded cover of ‘Reflection’ and a new song of hers, ‘Loyal Brave True’ (both of which are played during the credits), none of the songs by Matthew Wilder and David Zippel appear in the film. Instead, they’re only alluded to in referential dialogue and parts of Harry Gregson-Williams’ score. The film also notably excludes the character of Mulan’s ancestral sidekick, Mushu the dragon, in favor of a different ancestral guardian, a phoenix, that occasionally comes to Mulan’s aid. But despite the negative reactions that these changes have garnered from fans of the original (more on that later…), this film more than delivers on its promise of being an epic female-driven action flick. It boasts incredibly gorgeous cinematography thanks to cinematographer Mandy Walker, which naturally paves the way for a whole bunch of visually stunning and amazingly choreographed action sequences. And while the film probably could’ve benefitted from a bit more levity in certain places, the fact that its largely serious tone was clearly intentional on director Niki Caro’s part to contrast with the light-hearted atmosphere of the animated film means that it’s ultimately not too big of an issue.

The film also deserves quite a lot of credit for properly maintaining an ethnically accurate cast, especially since fans were quite vocal about how they didn’t want it to be a case of studio whitewashing. Thankfully, this isn’t one of those situations, and as a result, the film features an excellent cast headlined by Yifei Liu, who does a phenomenal job in the title role of Mulan. Not only does Yifei prove to be an indisputable badass when it comes to the action sequences, but she also does a wonderful job in capturing the endearing nature of Mulan’s emotional journey thanks in large part to her strong charisma. She’s then backed by an equally terrific supporting cast, who all do wonderful jobs whether they’re one of the main characters or they’re only in a few select scenes. This includes everyone from well-respected stars such as Donnie Yen as Commander Tung, Jet Li as the Emperor, and Tzi Ma as Mulan’s father to incredibly promising up-and-comers like Yoson An as Chen, who basically serves as the live-action equivalent of Mulan’s love interest from the animated film, Captain Li Shang. That said, though, the film doesn’t really go too far when it comes to developing a potential romance between the two which, given the mixed reactions that some critics had towards the romance between Mulan and Shang in the original, may have been for the best. Finally, there are this film’s villains, and whereas Hun leader Shan Yu was far from being one of the best villains to come from an animated Disney film, the live-action Mulan ends up boasting a far superior pair of antagonists. Jason Scott Lee brings the right amount of fierceness to the role of Bori Khan, but at the end of the day, the biggest standout of the bunch is Gong Li as Xianniang the witch. Bringing in a new female character into the story is easily one of the remake’s best updates as Xianniang serves as a perfect foil to Mulan, especially since it’s established that she’s also experienced a lot of gender discrimination, namely from Bori Khan. And without spoiling anything, this ultimately paves the way for her having a unique and solidly handled conclusion to her overall character arc, thus making her much more than just a traditional magically powered villainess.

As has been the case with all these recent Disney remakes, the live-action Mulan has faced its fair share of controversy; however, you may be surprised to learn that, in this instance, it wasn’t really due to the whole ‘is it really necessary’ debate that is usually the case with these films. Aside from one rather scandalous political controversy that I won’t be getting into here, much of the backlash towards this film… has been due to all the things from the original animated film that it left out. Yes, it seems as if the biggest issue that many have had with this film… is the fact that it doesn’t feature Mushu, any of the original’s songs, or a proper live-action equivalent of Mulan’s love interest Shang. And yet, I find all this to be incredibly ironic since I’m 100% certain that those who have criticized the new Mulan for all its changes were most likely the same people who were critical of the remakes of The Lion King and Beauty and the Beast for not making a lot of significant changes to their source material. In other words, as much as I’ve gone on record stating that I’m not bothered by all these recent Disney remakes adhering closely to the key aspects of their animated counterparts, I’m legitimately surprised that Mulan isn’t getting a lot more credit for the fact that it dared to do things a little differently. And because of that, it’s easily one of the best films yet to come from this recent batch of remakes. Under the excellent direction of Niki Caro, the live-action Mulan is a gorgeously shot action-packed epic that’s fully bolstered by an outstanding lead performance by Yifei Liu in the title role. And while it doesn’t try to be a direct adaptation of its animated counterpart, there are still plenty of great nods to what many consider to be one of the most underrated installments of the Disney Renaissance.

But now it’s time for me to address the elephant in the room that is this film’s status as a ‘Premier Access’ release on Disney+. The $30 price tag that this film is currently going for has been a topic of considerable debate online, with many feeling that it’s way too much for just one single film. And to be fair, I completely understand why some people feel that way, especially given everything that’s going on in the world right now that has thoroughly affected tons of folks on a financial level. $30 IS a hefty price to watch one film, which is the reason why I admittedly haven’t watched a lot of the similarly priced ‘Theater at Home’ films that have been released On-Demand in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic apart from Scoob and, sometime in the next few days, a certain highly-anticipated threequel. However, while it’s quite arguably too much for a single person, I’d say that this price is a lot more reasonable if at least one more person is watching it with you to balance it all out. Plus, unlike all those other recent On-Demand releases, the film will stay in your Disney+ library if you purchase it and isn’t just a rental that expires after a certain time. Now for the record, if that price is still too much for you, the film will become free to all Disney+ users sometime in December. However, I’m going to go out on a limb and strongly suggest that you should buy it now if you can. Not only is it a legitimately terrific film, but it’s also a female-led, female-directed big-budget epic that made a truly admirable effort to be an ethnically-accurate adaptation of its source material and a Disney remake that wasn’t just a straight-forward retelling of its animated counterpart. And given everything that’s been happening recently and how it has left a serious impact on the industry, I’d argue that a film like this deserves all the support that it can possibly get.

Rating: 5/5!

The One and Only Ivan (2020) review (Disney+)

 

In our ever-continuing series on films that got royally screwed over by the COVID-19 pandemic, we have a film that was originally intended for a proper theatrical release about a week ago before obvious circumstances forced it to shift over to Disney+ as the streaming service’s latest original release. The film in question is The One and Only Ivan, an adaptation of the 2012 children’s novel of the same name by author K.A. Applegate. Upon its publication, the book, which was based on the true story of a clever gorilla named Ivan, immediately became a big hit with its target audience and would end up winning the 2013 Newbery Medal, the most prestigious award for children’s literature in the United States. In other words, it was simply another bona fide success for K.A. Applegate, who’s had a respectably lengthy career as a writer. While The One and Only Ivan may be one of her more recent books, folks of my generation will most likely be familiar with one of her most famous works, the Animorphs series from the ’90s, which she co-wrote with her husband Michael Grant. Not only that but the film adaptation of The One and Only Ivan isn’t the first time that she’s worked with Disney since she also notably wrote several literary spin-offs for both Aladdin and The Little Mermaid. But now this brings us to the film adaptation of The One and Only Ivan, which is directed by Thea Sharrock (who had made her directorial debut in 2016 with the romantic drama Me Before You) off a screenplay by veteran screenwriter Mike White (School of Rock). And thanks to both their combined efforts and a solid cast that’s headlined by an impressively stacked voice cast, it’s easy to see why The One and Only Ivan more than succeeds at being an immensely charming family flick.

For the past several years, Ivan the silverback gorilla (voiced by Sam Rockwell) has been the headlining attraction of a daily circus show held at the Big Top Mall in Florida that’s run by his owner Mack (Bryan Cranston), who had raised Ivan since he was a baby. But while Ivan and his fellow performers such as his best friend Stella the elephant (voiced by Angelina Jolie) are more than content with their lives, Mack soon finds himself having to deal with the increasingly likely prospect of dwindling crowds. Luckily for them, Mack ends up finding a new star attraction in Ruby (voiced by Brooklynn Prince), a baby elephant that he purchases from a fledgling circus in New Jersey. And while Ivan is initially displeased with Ruby immediately stealing his thunder as the show’s newest ‘headliner’, her arrival proves to be exactly what they needed to draw in more crowds and he does legitimately begin to grow fond of the young pachyderm. However, despite all the newfound success that their show has managed to achieve, Ruby begins to learn more about the outside world from Stella and what it’s like to truly be ‘free’. Not wanting her to live the rest of her life in captivity in their small enclosure at the mall, Stella personally asks Ivan to take care of Ruby and to ensure that, someday, she’ll be able to be free. And while Ivan is initially unsure if he could even remotely make this happen, Mack’s increasingly inconsiderate behavior towards them is what ultimately convinces him to go through with it for Ruby’s sake. Thus, with the help of the other animals, the circus’ janitor George (Ramón Rodriguez), and George’s daughter Julia (Ariana Greenblatt), Ivan begins to utilize the artistic talents that he’s had since childhood so that the rest of the world can understand their current predicament.

The One and Only Ivan is the very definition of a good-natured family film. It has a pleasantly relaxing pace throughout and is fully anchored by a lovable collection of main characters. And while I’m aware that many have noted that the film tones down some of the darker elements of its source material (i.e. it lessens the severity of Mack’s harsher actions towards his animals, thus making him more of a decent albeit incredibly short-sighted owner rather than a traditionally cruel antagonist), it still hits its big emotional beats quite well. Much of this is due to the film’s excellent cast, both in terms of its human characters and its animal voice actors. When it comes to the former, Bryan Cranston headlines the film nicely as Mack who, as noted earlier, isn’t the same villainous character that he is in the book but still plays a huge role in how many of the story’s most poignant moments pan out. And as for the latter, Sam Rockwell delivers an incredibly earnest and charismatic performance in the title role of Ivan. He’s then backed by a great supporting voice cast that’s full of big names such as Danny DeVito, who plays a stray dog named Bob who isn’t a part of the show but regularly hangs out with Ivan, Angelina Jolie as the wise old Stella, and Helen Mirren as the show’s actual dog performer, Snickers the poodle. Admittedly, most of the other animals don’t get that much to do in the grand scheme of things since the film primarily focuses on the quartet of Ivan, Stella, Ruby, and Bob, but at the very least, it does seem like everyone involved had a great time working on the project. And so, because of all this, The One and Only Ivan is an incredibly sweet and well-made family film that very much wears its heart on its sleeve. It may not be the most groundbreaking or thought-provoking film ever made, but its largely uncynical nature and terrific handling of its pertinent themes makes it easy to see why its source material has become a staple of children’s literature.

Rating: 4/5

Ranking the Live-Action Disney Remakes

I’m going to start this post off with a quick disclaimer. If you’re someone who is by no means a fan of Disney’s recent trend of producing live-action remakes of their animated classics, you’re not going to get much out of this post since it will be a generally positive take on these films. Yes, since 2010, Disney’s live-action output has primarily been focused on live-action re-imaginings of some of their most iconic animated films. However, while these films have been quite successful at the box-office, they’ve been far more polarizing in terms of their overall reception. While general audiences seem to be fairly receptive towards these new spins on Disney classics, there are a sizable number of folks who have been highly critical of this trend for the exact same reason that folks would take issue with any remake in general. Why would anyone even bother remaking something that’s been regarded by many as an undisputed classic? And yet, as someone who recognizes that the original animated films will always be there regardless of how these new films turn out (which is why I’m thankful for the advent of Disney+, which prominently features both incarnations of the films that have recently gotten the live-action treatment), these recent remakes have never bothered me in the slightest. In fact, I’ve recently started to detest the use of the adjective ‘unnecessary’ when it comes to reviews because I feel that it’s become one of the most overused words in critical vernacular, especially since you could easily apply it to any film that comes out and not just the ones that are remakes/sequels/reboots. In other words, while many of these films are re-imagining some of my favorite Disney films of all-time, I try not to let my affinity for the originals overly cloud my judgment towards the remakes because I personally feel that doing so would be largely unfair to them. And so, with that in mind and in honor of the latest Disney remake Mulan’s impending ‘Premier Access’ release on Disney+, today I’m ranking these live-action remakes from ‘least favorite’ to ‘favorite’. While their placement on this list will primarily stem from overall preference, I will also factor in their efforts to present a new spin on their classic stories.

Before we begin, though, I just need to lay out the ground rules for this list. For starters, I won’t be including the two sequels that were spawned from these recent remakes, 2016’s Alice Through the Looking Glass and 2019’s Maleficent: Mistress of Evil. The reason for this is quite simple; from a subjective standpoint, they’re not ‘remakes’ anymore. Instead, they’re just ‘sequels’ to the remakes. However, I will briefly address them when I go over their predecessors. Also, for this list, I’m only going to be focusing on the remakes that have been released since 2010 since this is when this current trend first began to take shape. Because of this, there are two films from the ’90s that won’t be appearing on this list even though they are technically the first big Disney remakes. The first is the original live-action remake of The Jungle Book (that’s right, Jon Favreau’s version wasn’t the first time that a live-action adaptation of Disney’s Jungle Book was made) which was directed by Stephen Sommers and released in 1994. Admittedly, I haven’t seen it at the time that I’m writing this, but I’ll probably do some kind of post on both it and a different Disney-produced Jungle Book film from the ’90s, 1998’s The Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Story, in the future, perhaps when the sequel to Favreau’s Jungle Book comes out. The other big remake that won’t be included here is the 1996 adaptation of 101 Dalmatians, but again, that’s because I’m saving my thoughts on that film and its 2000 sequel, 102 Dalmatians, for a different occasion; in this case, the upcoming spin-off Cruella that will hit theaters next May. Lastly, while it does technically count as a ‘live-action remake’ and can genuinely be considered as a part of this recent subgenre, I’m also not going to include the 2016 remake of Pete’s Dragon since it’s a remake of a live-action film rather than an animated one. Yes, for this list, I’m mainly focusing on the live-action remakes of animated Disney films, and while two of them are technically more like ‘sequels’ than ‘remakes’, I believe that they still count here given that they are primarily based on their animated counterparts. And so, without further ado, I present my current rankings of the live-action Disney remakes that have been released since 2010.   

10. ALICE IN WONDERLAND

We start things off with the first big live-action reimagining of a Disney classic from this modern era, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland. This is the first of the two films that I mentioned earlier that are more like ‘sequels’ rather than ‘remakes’ as it follows a teenaged Alice returning to the world of Wonderland (referred to in-universe as ‘Underland’). Like the original animated film, Burton ultimately went with a combination of elements from both the original Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland novel and its sequel, Through the Looking Glass, rather than just being a direct adaptation of the source material. And right off the bat, the best thing that I can say about this film is that it’s another prime example of why Burton is one of the greatest visual directors in the industry. While the film’s visuals do feel a bit excessive at times due to the scenes in Underland being almost entirely green-screen based, they’re still very much the best part of the film as they wonderfully capture the eccentric nature of the Wonderland setting through the equally eccentric style of Tim Burton. Because of this, it’s easy to see why this film won Oscars for both its production and costume design and how its production designer would go on to direct his own live-action Disney remake a few years later. That said, though, there are a few instances where Burton’s style arguably goes a bit too far for a film that’s primarily geared towards younger audiences. In other words, moments where creatures get their eyes poked out and a scene where Alice crosses a moat filled with the heads of the Queen of Hearts’ victims do make you wonder how the film was able to get away with its PG rating. But despite this and an often-uneven plot (which, yes, is saying something for an Alice in Wonderland film), the film still manages to be another solid outing from Burton, especially thanks to its cast. Helena Bonham Carter is an absolute standout as the figuratively and literally big-headed tyrant the Red Queen and the film sports an impressively stacked voice cast with big names like Stephen Fry and Alan Rickman.

Thus, while it wasn’t exactly a runaway hit with critics, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland was a smash hit financially as it managed to gross over $1 billion worldwide. This has mainly been attributed to the general lack of competition that it faced upon its release in the Spring of 2010 and the boost that came from 3-D ticket sales since this was right when the 3-D format was experiencing its peak resurgence. Because of this, a sequel was eventually made in 2016, Alice Through the Looking Glass, under the direction of James Bobin, who was fresh off the 2011 Muppets film and its 2014 sequel, Muppets Most Wanted (Burton was still heavily involved as a producer). Like its predecessor, though, it didn’t do too well with critics, and unlike its predecessor, it was a rather notorious underperformer at the box-office. But while we’re not going to spend too much time comparing these two films, I will say that there are two things that the sequel does better than the original. First off, it boasts a brighter visual style that is still a lot of CGI overload, to be fair, but is all-around more pleasant to look at. It also means that there aren’t really any moments that push its PG rating like Burton’s film did. The other key advantage is that since the first film was primarily focused on Alice finding the confidence to help her Underland friends stop the Red Queen, she is a far more confident lead in Through the Looking Glass, which is well-reflected by Mia Wasikowska’s excellent performance in the role. And so, with all this in mind, while the live-action Alice in Wonderland films are far from being my favorites when it comes to Disney’s recent live-action output, I don’t necessarily ‘dislike’ them, either. They may be far from perfect, but as much as they do have their incredibly vocal critics (especially those who love taking these films to task for not being the most faithful adaptations of their source material), there’s no denying that they also have their fair share of fans.    

9. LADY AND THE TRAMP

The most recent film on our list, Lady and the Tramp was one of the many exclusive titles that debuted on Disney+ the day of its launch, and I won’t lie, it was, in fact, the first ‘Disney+ Original’ that I watched. While most of the attention that day was directed towards the pilot episode of The Mandalorian, I was genuinely looking forward to the live-action remake of one of Disney Animation’s most underrated projects. To be clear, I’m not saying that the original Lady and the Tramp is a forgotten entry in the Disney canon, but you could also argue that it often gets overshadowed by the other Disney films of the decade such as Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, and Peter Pan. Nevertheless, it’s a charming love story that was nicely translated into a live-action film by director Charlie Bean. Now admittedly, there aren’t many deviations from the original film, with the biggest changes consisting of minor things such as giving the dog-catcher a more prominent villain role and changing the song sung by Aunt Sarah’s pair of troublemaking cats in light of the original’s often-accused case of racist stereotyping. But even though this does make this version of Lady and the Tramp one of the more straight-forward installments of the recent Disney remakes, that’s not such a bad thing in this instance. Whereas almost all the other remakes are big-budget, CGI-heavy flicks, the Lady and the Tramp remake is refreshingly simple in its approach since the original film was more of a light-hearted romp with the period setting of a classic 1900’s Midwestern town. It also helps that the filmmakers utilized actual dogs to help bring the characters to life even though it goes without saying that CGI was used for the process of making them talk. All in all, this is just an incredibly cute and harmless film that does a nice job in recapturing the charm of its source material’s timeless romance.   

8. DUMBO

In 2019, Tim Burton took on his second major live-action Disney remake with Dumbo. Admittedly, the story of a lovable circus elephant who uses his big ears to fly may have seemed like an odd choice for Burton to direct, but at the same time, it did fit his usual M.O. of stories about misfit characters. Thus, while Burton’s Dumbo doesn’t feature his traditional gothic style, its visuals are still very much on point throughout as they do a wonderful job of capturing the bright and majestic visual aesthetic of the circuses of yesteryear. The film also has the benefit of having greater opportunities for new material when compared to some of the other remakes on this list since the original Dumbo is one of Disney’s more simpler-plotted affairs, especially due to its short 64-minute runtime. As such, all the key moments from the original such as Dumbo’s mother being put into captivity after causing a ruckus and the moment where Dumbo first publicly showcases his flying ability during a clown act are covered in just the first forty minutes. After that, a new subplot occurs when a greedy theme park entrepreneur purchases Dumbo for use in his circus while the members of Dumbo’s original circus troupe work to free his mom from her captivity at the entrepreneur’s amusement park. The remake also focuses more on the story’s human characters, namely WWI veteran Holt Farrier and his two kids Milly and Joe, who take the place of Timothy Q. Mouse from the original as Dumbo’s primary allies since this film doesn’t feature any talking animals. However, the new material that’s added in ends up feeling just as simplistic as the original film’s plot which, to be fair, was reportedly the point according to screenwriter Ehren Kruger. Ultimately, though, Dumbo still works quite well as a good-natured family film with a solid cast headlined by Burton regulars such as Michael Keaton and Danny DeVito and some fun nods to the original, including the infamous pink elephants.

7. MALEFICENT

Since Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland is technically more of a sequel than a remake, one could argue that 2014’s Maleficent is where this current crop of live-action Disney remakes truly got started. Under the direction of Alice in Wonderland’s production designer Robert Stromberg, the film serves as a live-action reimagining of Disney Animation’s 1959 outing Sleeping Beauty that, as the title suggests, mainly focuses on the story’s iconic villainess, Maleficent. However, instead of just having her be the main antagonist, the film turns her into more of an anti-hero whose actions against Princess Aurora and her family were the result of her getting revenge against Aurora’s father, her former love interest, for stealing her fairy wings. And while she does curse Aurora to fall into an eternal slumber on her 16^th birthday, she ends up developing a motherly connection to her to the point where she’s ultimately the one who saves her from the curse. As you might have guessed, those who prefer Maleficent’s traditionally villainous persona weren’t too pleased with this interpretation of the character, but overall, I think that it’s a uniquely fascinating take on Maleficent and the mother-daughter relationship that forms between her and Aurora is genuinely sweet. But, of course, the biggest highlight of the film is Angelina Jolie in the title role as she perfectly encapsulates the look and persona of the ‘Mistress of All Evil’… even if that designation doesn’t necessarily apply to this version of the character. Thus, Maleficent turned out to be a big hit with audiences upon its release in the summer of 2014, ultimately grossing over $758 million worldwide. This effectively paved the way for a sequel in 2019, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, which was generally on par with its predecessor in terms of quality while also expanding upon its fantasy world, namely by introducing more members of Maleficent’s race, the Dark Feys. Really, the only major disappointment with the sequel was that there were fewer scenes between Maleficent and Aurora. Nevertheless, the Maleficent films are a solid duology of fantasy flicks that pride themselves on being female-driven stories.

6. THE LION KING

Now I’ll be the first to admit that Jon Favreau’s CGI-based remake of The Lion King (which admittedly makes this one a bit questionable to include on this list since it’s not really live-action but arguably still counts based on its status as a remake) is quite arguably the most straight-forward remake of this bunch when it comes to retelling the original film’s story. Apart from some minor additions like an earlier introduction for adult Nala and a rivalry between her and Shenzi the hyena, this is the exact same story as the 1994 film with the exact same story beats. In other words, the biggest difference between the two films is that Favreau’s version is CGI whereas the original was traditionally animated. But while this has made the new Lion King one of the most controversial installments yet of the recent Disney remakes, I’d argue that it still manages to be a solid enough film. Like Favreau’s other big remake, The Jungle Book, much of this is due to the utterly impressive visual effects that do such an incredible job in maintaining their photorealistic nature. And while this does mean that the film lacks the more extravagant moments of the original (i.e. there’s no scene of Timon distracting hyenas by donning a grass skirt and dancing the hula (although there is a brilliant substitute bit for that part)), the attention to detail is truly spot on. Plus, I’d argue that the film still manages to hit the right emotional beats from Mufasa’s death to the moment where Simba speaks with the spirit of his father. And so, if anything, I’d say that at the very least, the new Lion King succeeds as a demonstration of how far CGI has truly come in the past few years. Obviously, I’m not saying that it’s ‘better’ than the 1994 film, but with phenomenal visuals and a great voice cast that includes the likes of Donald Glover, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Billy Eichner, Seth Rogen, and the Queen Bey herself, Beyonce, it’s also quite far from being completely worthless. And yes, this is all coming from someone who lists the original Lion King as his favorite Disney animated film of all-time, but as I’ve made it clear already, just because it’s my favorite doesn’t mean that I was going to hold that against this new film. Still, I will admit that the fact that it is largely note-for-note the same as its traditionally animated counterpart does keep me from putting it any higher on this list.

5. CHRISTOPHER ROBIN

Christopher Robin is the other film on this list that’s more of a sequel rather than a remake as it revolves around a grown-up Christopher Robin being reunited with Winnie the Pooh and the rest of the Hundred Acre Wood gang. But, of course, it still counts on this list since it utilizes much of the iconography from Disney’s interpretation of Winnie the Pooh, and since Winnie the Pooh was such a significant part of my childhood, this was easily one of my most anticipated films of 2018. At the end of the day, I’m happy to report that it did not disappoint. Christopher Robin is an incredibly poignant story about the tragedy that is the loss of childhood innocence through the harsh but sadly natural process of growing up. But while this ordeal ends up being an incredibly rough one for Christopher Robin (e.g. losing his father at a young age, enduring the horrors of World War II, etc.), it is what also makes his eventual reconciliation with his friends and family incredibly cathartic. Ewan McGregor does a fantastic job in the title role and when it comes to his Hundred Acre Wood friends, it was only appropriate that they bring back Jim Cummings, the voice of Pooh and Tigger for many a generation (mine included), for his iconic roles. Now admittedly, many have noted that Christopher Robin sports a rather bleak tone, which is true if focusing solely on the first half of the film before Christopher Robin regains his childhood innocence. After that, the film takes on a more light-hearted tone and the scenes where Pooh and company get into all sorts of adventures in London are purely delightful. And really, that perfectly sums up the film in general. It’s a truly delightful family flick that’s fully bolstered by the ever-enduring charm of its timeless characters to be another great Winnie the Pooh story.  

4. ALADDIN

As I’ve mentioned plenty of times before, director Guy Ritchie’s live-action remake of Aladdin ended up being quite a noteworthy success story even though, before its release, it was quite possibly the most scrutinized installment yet of these equally scrutinized remakes. Simply put, it was almost as if this film could never catch a break as it caught flak for various reasons ranging from certain casting choices to the infamous first reveal of Will Smith’s Genie in his traditional blue form. But when it finally came out, it managed to earn over $1 billion worldwide while also doing decently enough with critics, many of whom felt that it turned out to be much better than they initially anticipated. And if you ask me, that means that this film deserves a lot of credit for managing to avoid being the disaster that many predicted it would be. Now as far as being a remake of its animated counterpart, Aladdin is in the same boat as Lady and the Tramp and The Lion King by not making a lot of radical changes to the original story of a good-natured thief who tries to woo the Princess of Agrabah with the help of a wisecracking Genie. Despite this, however, one great change that it does make is letting Princess Jasmine play a far more proactive role in the story. With no disrespect to her animated counterpart, this is the best incarnation of the character to date, especially thanks to Naomi Scott doing a phenomenal job in the role. Meanwhile, Mena Massoud shines in what is surely going to be his breakout role as Aladdin while Will Smith, despite all the pressure that stemmed from having to follow in the footsteps of Robin Williams’ iconic rendition of the Genie in the original animated film, successfully delivers his own, unique take on the character. Ultimately, the only thing that holds this film back is its mediocre interpretation of Jafar, which is primarily due to this version’s more grounded take on the character. But at the end of the day, the live-action Aladdin ends up being a lot of fun, and while it may have seemed like a weird choice to have it done by a director who’s known more for making gritty crime dramas, Guy Ritchie does a highly respectable job when it comes to maintaining the original’s great atmosphere and unforgettable musical numbers.  

3. THE JUNGLE BOOK

Out of all these films, Jon Favreau’s The Jungle Book is arguably the best example of a live-action Disney remake that isn’t fully tied to its animated counterpart. While it’s still very much the story of a young boy named Mowgli who is raised by wolves in the jungles of India and pursued by the sinister tiger Shere Kahn, it’s ultimately a combination of the 1967 animated film and Rudyard Kipling’s original novel. In other words, it only features three of the songs from the animated film (“Bare Necessities”, “I Wanna Be Like You”, and “Trust in Me”) and places greater emphasis on the dramatic parts of the story such as Mowgli’s history with Shere Kahn, who killed his human father, and the dangerous power of ‘Man’s Red Flower’, fire. Favreau does an excellent job of balancing these two aspects of the story, resulting in some excellent emotional moments (e.g. when Mowgli first leaves for the man-village and says goodbye to his adoptive wolf mother Raksha) while also featuring plenty of great homages to the original. But, of course, the most notable aspect of this film is its extensive use of CGI to bring both its animals and its jungle landscapes to life. And because Favreau’s VFX team did such an outstanding job with the visuals (which ended up netting them the Oscar that year for Best Visual Effects), sometimes it’s easy to forget that Neel Sethi, who plays Mowgli, is literally the only ‘real’ thing on-screen 95% of the time. All this and a top-notch voice cast that includes big names like Bill Murray, Ben Kingsley, Idris Elba, and Lupita Nyong’o helps make this adaptation of Rudyard Kipling’s classic story a full-blown visual masterpiece. And as I noted back in the intro, Favreau and screenwriter Justin Marks are currently prepping a sequel that, according to Marks, could potentially incorporate some of the unused elements from the animated film’s original screenplay by Bill Peet that was ultimately rejected by Walt Disney himself for being too dark.

2. CINDERELLA

No matter how much these live-action Disney remakes get ragged on by their biggest critics, there will always be the select few that were genuinely well-received, and the one that started it all for this group was Kenneth Branagh’s 2015 remake of Cinderella. Unlike both Alice in Wonderland and Maleficent, which received mixed reviews upon their release, Cinderella fared quite well with critics and became the first of these remakes to secure a ‘Fresh’ rating on Rotten Tomatoes. And just like Christopher Robin, this was another one of my most anticipated films back when it was coming out due to the original Cinderella being one of my all-time favorite Disney films growing up. All in all, Branagh’s remake does a wonderful job of bringing this classic story to life. Sure, it’s another case where the remake is predominately faithful to its animated counterpart without many significant changes, but in this instance, the changes that it does make are some of the best to come from any of these recent remakes. Easily the best example of this is how it expands upon the relationship between Cinderella and Prince Charming, namely by having them meet before the ball, which also allows the latter to be a more fleshed-out character compared to his animated counterpart. And while Cinderella continues to get a lot of flak nowadays for allegedly being ‘too passive’ of a protagonist, I still stand by what I’ve been saying these past few years in that her unshakably optimistic nature in the face of all the crap she’s put through makes her a far better heroine than she’s often given credit for. Sure enough, this is well-reflected in the live-action remake, especially thanks to Lily James’ outstanding turn in the role. The same goes for Richard Madden as the superior version of Prince Charming, Cate Blanchett as the unforgettably sinister Lady Tremaine, and Helena Bonham Carter in a scene-stealing turn as Cinderella’s Fairy Godmother. And so, with a phenomenal cast, gorgeous production design, and all-around excellent direction from Kenneth Branagh, the live-action Cinderella is one of the most uplifting films to have come out in recent years.

1. BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

To be perfectly blunt, folks, I have the feeling that this film’s placement at the top spot on this list is going to garner some controversy given its usual reception. Let me put it this way; when it first came out, it did relatively well with critics. It currently boasts a 71% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, which is a decently solid score for a film to have on that site, and it also grossed over $1 billion worldwide, effectively making it the second-highest-grossing film of 2017 behind only Star Wars: The Last Jedi. In other words, it was, at the very least, clearly a big hit with audiences. However, I think it’s safe to say that this was the film that fully intensified the utter contempt that the ‘Disney remake’ critics have towards this trend, especially due to the legendary reputation of the film that this remake was adapted from. Before 2017, all the live-action Disney remakes were based on older animated films such as Alice in Wonderland and Cinderella. As such, one could argue that the overall expectations for them weren’t as intense given how long it has been since their releases. Beauty and the Beast, on the other hand, was the most recent Disney animated feature to get the live-action treatment at that point and it also happens to be one of the studio’s most beloved outings. It is, after all, the first animated film that was ever nominated for Best Picture at the Oscars, a distinction that only two other films have achieved since then. As such, this remake clearly faced stricter expectations because of how much the original has meant to my generation, and the same can also be said for the remakes of Aladdin and The Lion King that would come out later and would end up garnering far more polarizing reactions from critics. Thus, despite what I just said about the film maintaining a solid rating on Rotten Tomatoes, I wouldn’t be surprised if many of those who gave it a ‘Fresh’ review aren’t as positive about it nowadays. And yet, I’m not afraid to admit that I still love this film.

Yes, this is yet another instance of a remake that doesn’t make a lot of changes to the original’s story, but overall, I was genuinely fine with the updates that they did make. This includes, among other things, Belle being an inventor just like her father (played excellently by Kevin Kline in a uniquely more subdued take on ‘crazy old Maurice’) and her discovery as to why he has been overly protective of her all these years after her mom died from the Plague. I also loved all the new songs that were made for this remake, especially the Beast’s new solo, ‘Evermore’. And while I’m well aware that much of the criticisms towards this film have been directed towards Emma Watson in the lead role of Belle, namely due to her singing, I still think that she does a fantastic job in the role if we’re talking about all the other things that have made Belle one of the most popular Disney princesses. She’s then backed by a phenomenal supporting cast that includes Dan Stevens as the Beast, Luke Evans and Josh Gad as the scene-stealing duo of Gaston and LeFou (so much so that they’re going to get their own Disney+ series) and the likes of Ewan McGregor, Emma Thompson, and Ian McKellen as the Beast’s servants. In short, I will fully admit that there’s probably quite a bit of bias behind my decision to place this film at the #1 spot on this list. I saw it twice in theaters, with the first time being in IMAX at the film’s ‘Fan Event’ screening on my birthday. I also bought the soundtrack on iTunes not long afterward and loved the film so much that my mom asked one of her co-workers to pick it up on Blu-Ray and ship it to us so we could get the special Best Buy Steelbook*. In other words, I know that I’m probably in the minority when it comes to liking this film, which has certainly faced tons of scrutiny over the ‘necessity’ of its existence and has often been negatively compared to its animated counterpart. And yet, as this entire list has hopefully established by now, I don’t really care about any of that stuff, even if this is another case like The Lion King since the original Beauty and the Beast is one of my Top 5 favorite Disney films. Ultimately, though, that doesn’t prevent the live-action Beauty and the Beast from legitimately being one of my favorite films of the 2010s.

*(By the time that I was fully intent on getting the Steelbook, it wasn’t available at any of the Best Buy stores that were near our home in Rhode Island, hence why we needed to have my mom’s co-worker pick it up for us in Wisconsin where he’s from. As our way of saying thanks, we then proceeded to get him his own Steelbook copy of the film. In other words, as a friendly piece of advice for all you Blu-Ray enthusiasts out there, if you’re ever interested in getting a film’s Steelbook release, be sure to pre-order it in advance because it could very well go out of stock as soon as it hits the shelves, especially if it’s for a highly popular film like one of the MCU films or, say, a billion-dollar grossing remake of a Disney classic…)

And that concludes my rankings list of all the major live-action Disney remakes that have been released since 2010. Thanks for following along and be sure to be on the lookout for my review of the next big live-action Disney remake, Mulan, not too long after the film makes its Disney+ debut on September 4^th.