HIT OR MISS?

Story by Heather Wheeler

First, there’s “Maleficent” (2014), an adaptation of “Sleeping Beauty” (1959). The animated version is about how, after not being invited to the baby princess Aurora’s christening, an evil fairy puts a curse on her, forcing her to prick her finger on a spindle when she turns 16 and fall into an almost eternal sleep.

As for the remake, I love it. It keeps the same narrative of the original movie, but adds a whole new perspective on the villain’s relationship with Aurora and gives Maleficent more of a reason for cursing the princess than “FOMO.” It also adds complexity to the world itself, adding a fantasy world called the “Moors,” which explains where Maleficent came from. Overall, while “Maleficent” adds a lot to the story of “Sleeping Beauty,” it does so in a way that is natural and enriches the plot and characters.

Then, let’s look at a classic: “Cinderella.” The original movie came out in 1950, and follows a young girl who was forced to be a servant by her evil stepmother who goes to a ball and falls in love with the prince. The remake of the same name came out in 2015 and did a great job expanding on Cinderella’s story while still keeping the irreplaceable feeling the original movie created. While it takes some liberties, like making “Cinderella” a nickname instead of the princess’s real name and adding scenes between young Cinderella and her parents, it stays true to the original plot and tone. In fact, the live action movie added a song that Cinderella’s mother sings to her, and it still gets stuck in my head eight years later. Both movies are good, and the 2015 film does a great job at adapting a classic.

Next, there’s 2019’s “The Lion King,” an adaptation of the 1994 version. While it’s not technically live action, it uses CGI to make the animals look real. The animated movie is about a young lion prince who, after his father gets killed by his uncle, runs away and is raised in the jungle by a meerkat and warthog. However, he is eventually forced to return to his kingdom and take back his rightful place on the throne. This movie is not very good. It doesn’t add anything to the original story, so it didn’t make too much sense to add a remake in the first place. The CGI is good, but the realism sucks the life out of the characters. The emotion you see on the animated characters just isn’t present in this remake, and it really just turned out to be a disappointment. The original movie is incredible, and the remake does not meet its standards.

Lastly is an adaptation that came out in 2020: “Mulan.” The original movie came out in 1998 and tells the story of Mulan, a girl who disguises herself as a man to take the place of her ailing father in the war against the Huns.

Mulan is a great film that has likeable characters and catchy music. However, the remake doesn’t live up to the standards the original movie set and, as a remake, fails where the Cinderella remake succeeds. Mushu, one of my favorite characters, is not in the movie, and there is none of the original music I loved. But beyond the lack of the animated movie’s charm, it adds in new plot points that just don’t support the original movie, like two brand new villains and a complete misrepresentation of Chinese cultural aspects. For example, the Chinese concept of qi is a life force present in every living thing, but “Mulan” (2020) treats it like superpowers. While the movie does have good cinematography, it is nowhere near true to the 1998 version, and does a terrible job at representing the culture it’s set in.

Disney remakes are very hit-or-miss. I love seeing new takes on these nostalgic films, but if it’s not done right, it’s not going to be a movie that respects the magic in the animation while still expanding on the plot and characters. But, as we can see in “Cinderella” and “Maleficent,” it’s possible to make good movies, so I have high expectations for remakes in the future.

Feng Cha

Open Mon. - Sun.

12-8 p.m.