Disney, Opinions

Reimaginings: The Updated List of Disney Remakes

Share on Pinterest

Disney has started a trend that most fans find upsetting: the constant announcement and production of ‘live-action’ remakes of classic animated films. Or, as Disney calls them, ‘reimaginings.’


Aside from the incredibly loose use of the term ‘live-action,’ this trend isn’t exactly new. Disney had a smattering of live-action/hybrid remakes in the 1990s: 101 Dalmatians, starring Glenn Close, and The Jungle Book (yes, Disney did it before). What is especially astonishing with the recent trend is both the amount of remakes and the unnecessary frequency of the films. We’re more likely to see remakes in the next few years than original live-action films from the creative giant.


One could argue the trend began in 2010, with Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland, but that hardly drew from the original Disney animated adaptation, if at all. Instead, many recognize the start of the ‘live-action’ remake list as Maleficent in 2014. Maleficent was, really, a reimagining of the most epic villain in Disney history – giving her an origin story that both explained her and reduced her bad-a** standing drastically. This was followed by Cinderella, in 2015, which featured a stellar cast and gorgeous costumes, but not much of the animated classic; The Jungle Book, in April this year, which was not live-action (save for Mowgli) but hyper-real CG animation, directed by Jon Favreau; and Pete’s Dragon, which premiered last month, modernizing the live-action/hybrid animation classic. As we pause to catch our breath, here’s a gentle reminder: we’re not even close to done yet.


Next year, we’re treated to the next reimagining of Disney’s classic fairy tales: Beauty and the Beast, starring Emma Watson (Harry Potter series). After that, things get a little messy. Disney has, according to Wikipedia, seven untitled live-action films on their slate, spanning from mid-2017 through late 2019. Of those seven, six films are referred to as “fairy tale” films – we don’t know if that means remakes or new adaptations. The safe bet, though, is on remakes.

Now, onto the ever growing list of Disney animation ‘reimaginings.’ Last year, around June, I compiled a list of remakes announced; it numbered nine films (not including those recently released this year). Today’s list, including the most recent announcements, includes nineteen twenty films:


In late 2013, with Maleficent on the horizon, Disney announced its interest in Cruella, an origin story for the villainous fur-loving fashionista. Aline Brosh McKenna (Cinderella, 2015) penned an early draft with screenwriter Kelly Marcel (Saving Mr. Banks) following, with producer Andrew Gunn (Sky High) and executive producer Glenn Close, who portrayed the villain in the original live-action adaptation. Emma Stone has, more recently, signed on to play the title role.


Untitled Chip N’ Dale Film

Announced in early 2014, Disney picked up a script from Robert Rugan, well-known commercials director, for a story highlighting the mischievous chipmunks in a live-action/CG hybrid film reflecting the original “Rescue Rangers” stories. Mandeville Films/TV, headed by David Hoberman and Todd Lieberman, is producing.



In mid-2014, the reimagining of Dumbo was announced. Supposedly live-action, with an expected amount of CG animation, the film crew includes Ehren Kruger (Transformers) as screenwriter, Justin Springer (Tron: Legacy) as producer, and Tim Burton as director.

Nottingham & Hood

In late 2014, around the time Sony was looking into Robin Hood, Disney announced development for its own Robin Hood franchise. This will be a revisit for Disney, who adapted the story to live-action in the 1950s. Under the title Nottingham and Hood, the new franchise aims to create a series tonally similar to Pirates of the Caribbean. Brandon Barker wrote the script.



Early last year, a live-action Mulan was announced, from writing duo Elizabeth Martin and Lauren Hynek. Chris Bender and J.C. Spink (We’re The Millers) are attached to produce. Rumors are already circling concerning the main cast, as are petitions to ensure that Disney doesn’t whitewash the film with such actors as Jennifer Lawrence or Zac Efron.



Also early last year, Disney took on a script from Peter Hedges (What’s Eating Gilbert Grape?), for a Pinocchio adaptation closer to the original novel. This adaptation might face competition from Guillermo del Toro’s adaptation, though his seems to be stalled.


Winnie the Pooh

Disney hired writer-director Alex Ross Perry (Queen of the Earth) to pen a new adaptation for the Winnie the Pooh franchise. This film, intended to be a live-action/animation hybrid (surprise!) will focus on a grown-up Christopher Robin. It’s unclear if the animation portion of the film will be hyper-real CG or more two-dimensional like the original films.



Announced mid-2015, Reese Witherspoon is set to star as Peter Pan’s companion, Tinker Bell, in her own film. Witherspoon will produce with Bruna Papandrea, partners at their production banner, Pacific Standard. Victoria Strouse (Finding Dory) was reported to be the screenwriter for the project, but the project is in development without a director as yet.


Night on Bald Mountain

In early development, reportedly, Matt Sazama and Burk Sharpless (Dracula Untold) are set to write the script for this project, which was announced summer last year. They are also executive-producing. This announcement led into an announcement earlier this year: the Nutcracker Suite sequence is to become its own film, too, tentatively titled The Nutcracker and the Four Realms.


Prince Charming

Cinderella and Snow White both received various live-action roles in the past dozen years. Last year, Disney announced Matt Fogel‘s project to center on the brother of the ever-desired Prince Charming; as yet, it’s unclear who’s Prince Charming it is. David Hoberman and Todd Lieberman will produce with Tripp Vinson.



Originally announced last year with the intention to use some of Robin Williams unused voice recordings from Aladdin, this project will be a live-action adventure/origin story (shocker!) for the comical genie. Unfortunately, Williams’ recordings will not be used, according to a stipulation in his will. The script is being written by Damian Shannon and Mark Swift (Friday the 13th), with Tripp Vinson producing under his Vinson Films banner. The long-term plan is to have this ‘prequel’ lead into an Aladdin live-action movie (which would make this list twenty films long).


The Sword in the Stone

Clearly, last year was the year for all announcements. The Sword in the Stone is set for a live-action reimagining, with a script from Bryan Cogman (HBO’s Game of Thrones) and to be produced by Brigham Taylor (The Jungle Book).


Chronicles of Prydain

And just when we thought The Black Cauldron would languish in the Disney vault forever, Disney announced earlier this year that they’re planning a return to the original series. Although the 1985 animated film flopped in the box office, the studio is looking at developing Chronicles of Prydain into a full movie franchise.


Rose Red

Also announced earlier this year, Disney is developing a live-action fairy tale film titled Rose Red. Pitched by Evan Daugherty (Snow White and the Huntsman) with a script by Jason Merz, the film puts a new spin on Snow White by using the point of view of Snow’s sister, Rose Red, making her a key active player. The script clearly disregards the fact that Rose Red is from a fairy tale completely unrelated to Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, save for the similarity of her sister’s name. Tripp Vinson is also producing.

snow white kiss

Peter Pan

Yet another live-action trip to Never Land is in the works from Disney, according to an announcement earlier this year. David Lowery (Pete’s Dragon) is set to direct this adaptation, with Toby Halbrooks (Pete’s Dragon) screenwriting. According to Lowery’s interview with Collider in June, we at least know it’s unlikely to be any kind of origin story.


The Little Mermaid

Recently, Universal announced its intention to make a live-action Little Mermaid adaptation, and rumors abounded in May that Disney was also interested, but more in a remake of its own popular animated adaptation. This August, that vision became a reality. Pairing Lin-Manuel Miranda (Hamilton, Moana) with Alan Menken, Disney plans to create a live-action reimagining with a blend of old and new songs.


James and the Giant Peach

Not part of the Disney canon, as it was released under the Touchstone Pictures banner, Disney is also in early talks, as of August, to develop a live-action James and the Giant Peach. Sam Mendes (Skyfall) is in talks to direct, with Nick Hornby (High Fidelity author) taking on the screenplay.

EDIT: James and the Giant Peach was produced by Skellington Productions (Burton and Henry Selick’s stop-motion team) and released in 1996 with the Walt Disney castle banner instead of Touchstone, likely due to The Nightmare Before Christmas’ success in 1993. It is still not part of the Disney canon.


The Lion King

And, finally, the latest in our long, long list: Disney announced Jon Favreau is taking the helm of The Lion King reimagining, featuring the hyper-real CG animation used in The Jungle Book earlier this year. The announcement came as a shock to many fans, who considered the classic as one of the movies Disney would never touch, a never-happening scenario along the lines of Disney acquiring Anastasia. Unfortunately, The Lion King is not sacred. As yet, we have no idea how similar the remake will be to the original animated film, whether it will be a straight-up musical remake or an entirely new interpretation of the story.


What do you think about all these remakes/adaptations?

Sources: Variety and The Hollywood Reporter

Edited by: Hannah Wilkes

Share on Pinterest

About Kajsa Rain Forden

Kajsa is a writer from foggy San Francisco, living in sunny LA. She spends most of her time writing, binge-watching animated movies, and working in web design. With a soft spot for stop-motion, her favorite films are Coraline, Castle In The Sky, and The Thief and the Cobbler (Recobbled). You can find her on Twitter, or Pinterest, and most other social media @TheKajsaRain, or at Disneyland.
  • PabloRuiz7

    I remember reading DisneyWar and being fascinated by the story of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire?. This was a HUGE hit for ABC and it was a limited event that made it must-watch TV.
    But Michael Eisner, being Michael Eisner, decided to air the show 5 days a week. Obviously people lost interest and stopped caring.
    It’s only been around 15 years since but Disney is releasing 2 Marvel movies + one star wars + 67 remakes every year. It’s so stupid. They don’t learn from their mistakes.

    • It’s just become a real problem. The fact that we’ll see more “reimaginings” than original films, which is what the studio is known for, is kind of heartbreaking. It’s clearly decisions made for business purposes which is messing up Disney’s creative equilibrium. It’s a waste of opportunities.

    • Jeremiah Bok

      Are people losing interest in the Marvel movies? They’re still doing well. As they should, they’re super freaking good.

      • Manuel Orozco

        Even I’m enjoying Marvel

  • Phin68

    I still think it’s a missed opportunity for “Tink” not to be based off of DisneyToons’ take on Tinker Bell. Would have had me rolling.

    • It does seem weird that they would do so much with her in one direction and then change course. To be fair, though, we don’t really know how Tink will compare with the recent animated films.

  • Dante Panora

    Reimagining seems like a bit of a stretch for most of these movies. Alice in wonderland at least felt like it was trying to do something different than the original. All the others feel more like “remixes”. Alot of the same elements but attempts to add new ideas to the formula. I

    • Manuel Orozco

      Well I do have a soft spot for nostalgia but not all this stuff interest me. I did like Alice In Wonderland and Maleficent. But Cinderella topped them

  • This was a wonderful article Kajsa, really enjoyable and informative! The only ones here I’m really excited for are Sword in the Stone and The Black Cauldron as I think there’s more scope in adapting films that had good ideas but kinda lacklustre executions. However I should add that these remakes tend to make a hypocrite out of me, as I tend to roll my eyes every time one is announced, yet the only one I’ve disliked so far was Alice. Ideally Disney would chase ideas that leave more room for originality but as long as remakes make money and sell merchandise that’s what they’ll pursue.

    For better or for worse I feel like I’ve become numb to all the remake announcements now. I’m just going to try enjoy the ride.

  • Patrick Bright

    Ah, that Robin Hood picture is a tease. The Robin Hood series that they were speaking of is an all human cast, as I recall.

    • Yes, live-action cast. I was on the edge for the picture but I was going with a general theme of calling back to the animated classics. As a tease, it’s completely unintentional. 😀

      • Patrick Bright

        No worries. Just briefly got my hopes up that they might remake that particular version into something less….cheap.

  • Manuel Orozco

    I’m not super excited for any of these remakes. However, I’m cautiously optimistic for Tink, Prince Charming, Peter Pan and Rose Red! I’m not even a big Disney fan to begin with and most of their cool stuff these days are from Marvel and Star Wars.

  • Rachel Wagner

    I have no real interest in any of these but that doesn’t mean they won’t be good movies. So far Disney is 50/50 for me with these remakes.

    • Jeremiah Bok

      The only one I don’t see is Reese Witherspoon as Tink. What? I’d love for a good theatrical Tinker Bell movie, I’m a fan of Tink’s character since childhood, both in the movie and book. But Tinker Bell is a young woman and Witherspoon is… not. I also just don’t see her capturing Tink’s tood.

      • Manuel Orozco

        I actually think Reese would be wonderful as Tink.

        • Jeremiah Bok

          Oh good! We’ll see then.

          • Manuel Orozco

            Besides she’s the original Elle Woods for godsake (happy 15th anniversary to Legally Blonde)

      • Rachel Wagner

        Yeah that’s the same issue I have. Reese is in her 40s so I can’t imagine her as Tinker Bell

  • Katie

    Mostly excited for The Chronicles of Prydain. What can I say- I’m a huge fantasy nerd.

    • I have to admit some excitement for this one, too. In addition to enjoying both the books and the animated adaptation (to some extent), I’m hoping this version will garner some film success for the series, which it really deserves.

    • Jeremiah Bok

      High five. Have same every flavor beans, pipeweed, Turkish delight, and so forth.
      Hopefully Prydain will be done by a fan of the books who wants to get it right this time, we’ll see.

  • How come I never heard of Nottingham & Hood before?

    My feelings on these remakes: I’m against them, in principle, but if I like any, I’m not shy to say.

    • I’m in a similar place. I’m cautiously optimistic about the upcoming adaptations. I liked Alice, I didn’t like Maleficent. I liked Cinderella, I felt indifferent toward The Jungle Book. It seems to be fifty-fifty for me, but it’s mixed reviews across the board.

      • k

        Hello Kajsa, I enjoyed this well researched piece. Can you do another on all the non-Disney live action remakes? Like little mermaid, Peter Rabbit, Wicked (I know this wasn’t an animation) etc.?

        • Thanks, I’m glad you enjoyed it! We’ve covered some of the non-Disney remakes before on the site, but we might compile something looking toward future releases. Keep an eye out, and keep visiting our site!

    • Manuel Orozco

      I don’t remember Notthingham & Hood either. I’m not against all of them just most of them.

    • Callum J

      Nottingham & Hood has nothing to do with the animated movie, it’s just a normal Robin Hood movie. Don’t expect a CGI fox.

  • The only one I’m excited for on this list is Mulan. I recently rewatched it, and completely fell in love.

  • No not James and the Giant Peach!!! I know the original doesn’t make a whole lot of sense but no that is one that shouldn’t be touched! But man this list is seriously getting me not as excited….at least the ones that seem pointless, some of them hold promise

    • I was also surprised about James and the Giant Peach, having grown-up with the original. I’m hoping we get more information about it sooner rather than later!

      • Manuel Orozco

        I saw bits of it as a kid but not the whole thing until six years ago. I’m a little skeptical about it but maybe visual development will make up my mind.

      • Same on both accounts! Ahhh they better have a good idea or interpretation for this….

    • Jeremiah Bok

      Well they’re not touching the (rather lousy) movie necessarily. There’s a far better and more famous book.

      But seriously, how is James and the Giant Peach more sacred than Mulan or Pooh or Pan or anything on this list? Count me mystified Haley. 🙂

      • Manuel Orozco

        I wouldn’t be surprised if they keep Randy Newman’s music and hire him to write new songs.

        • Jeremiah Bok

          Ugh, I didn’t think of that. Please don’t keep those songs. 😛

          • Manuel Orozco

            Just a thought

          • Jeremiah Bok

            Randy Newman is an excellent artist. If he composes new songs I’ll be all for it.

          • Manuel Orozco

            I would be too. Mainly because the original movie should have had a big musical ending

      • I don’t consider it more sacred, but simply surprising. The studio’s original adaptation has never been reintroduced under the actual Disney banner, nor was it a particular success. It’s unexpected from the business side of the equation.

  • Alexandra S.

    I know that these live action remakes get a ton of hate, but I tend to really enjoy them. The reason is that you can’t get everything you want in life, so I like to appreciate whatever I can and just have fun. Though I do appreciate all of the original animated films/television shows, it is a mix of likability for me. Not all of them were perfect so unless it was really terrible in my opinion, then I have no problem with the ideas or movies. The live-action Cinderella is one of my top favorite movies of all time, and in my opinion, severely under appreciated. I love all of these stories so much, that I wouldn’t mind seeing them again, and its fun to have a variety of things. I guess I don’t need something brand new or groundbreaking, just different and fun. My family and I love seeing these together, as well as seeing the originals, so I am quite excited to see every one of these and to build fun new memories with them. I just like to have fun and not over-analyze everything like most people do with these films. Even if they are considered “unnecessary”, as long as they’re entertaining, that’s good enough for me.


    • Míriam

      I feel the same way! I really, really, REALLY liked Cinderella, so I’m looking forward for all the movies that are adapting, not changing the original like Beauty & the Beast and little Mermaid. I’m also excited for Mulan and Sword in the Stone. As for those movies that had little or nothing to do with the original (Maleficent, Alice) I’m unimpressed. For me, the problem is not so much changing the story but the fact that the new one isn’t good at all. So I don’t have any hopes for Cruella or Tink (despite loving the actresses that were casted). But like you said, we won’t know until we see it and I don’t mind the live-action trend (or any Hollywood trend) as long as the movies are good.

    • Manuel Orozco

      I loved Cinderella too. I agree that as long as one of these remakes is entertaining, that’s absolutely manageable for me.

    • Jeremiah Bok

      Severely under-apprecieated? It has 84% on Rotten Tomatoes (previously it was even higher.) Fan sites went crazy, all my disnerd fans loved it, the Morgan Mason and Chelsy liked it, etc. (I… personally loath it. Let’s make Cinderella a stronger character by having her just dance when she’s locked in her room instead of trying to get out like she does in the original. Let’s not have her even call to people for help when they’re AT HER HOUSE. Let’s just have the mice get her out. Yep, that’s how you make her stronger.)

      • Manuel Orozco

        Her thinking about the ball while locked up in the attic seemed suitable to keep her hope alive.

        • Jeremiah Bok

          Hope alive, yes. Hope to escape. Which she never once tried to do.

          That’s not making her more active, despite what Kenneth Branagh claims in interviews. That’s the definition of giving up and doing nothing. In the movie she bangs at the door, she yells, she gives order to the mice when they launch the attack to get her out. (“Get Bruno! Quick, get Bruno! GET BRUNO!”)

          • Manuel Orozco

            Well I sort of like it better when the mice get her out instead of Lady Tremaine by force.

          • Jeremiah Bok

            I don’t follow. Lady Tremaine gets her out? In the live action version? I don’t recall, I thought it was the mice. Which annoyed me because A. Really? Little mice save the maiden in distress who does nothing. Yay. B. She doesn’t have much of a relationship with the mice in this one.

          • Manuel Orozco

            Ella sings Lavender’s Blue through the window and Lady Tremaine is ordered by Kit in disguise to unlock the attic door. Tremaine convinces Ella not to try on the slipper by order of her mother and Ella says truthfully she is not and never will be her mother.

          • Jeremiah Bok

            By accident, if I recall. The mice open the window as she’s signing and she sings to them by mistake.

            As for the tell-off, this is where it gets down to opinion. For me that doesn’t have the impact of Cinderella herself putting on the shoe and Lady Tremain’s deliciously aghast face. Especially since instead of her having and putting on the slipper, the prince does. This movie consistently removes Cinderella’s initiative.

          • Manuel Orozco

            I was able to take the plot change lightly.

          • Jeremiah Bok

            So you grant she does nothing to save herself? She doesn’t sing to rescuers on purpose?

            Okey dokie, good for you. But, I plainly wasn’t. I don’t appreciate turning a great Disney character into a passive one. One so incredibly passive you can lock her up, potentially for the rest of her life, and she does literally nothing.
            And trust me, I’m holding back. I could list reasons this movie blows it forever. I care wayyy too much about this.

          • Manuel Orozco

            Never mind let’s not begin a debate

          • Alexandra S.

            I agree though that it is stupid of Kenneth Branagh to make a big statement about her being “a stronger character”, she isn’t strong the same way she was in the original, she is strong of mind. She held up for a long time and stood up to her stepmother, that didn’t happen in the original.

          • Jeremiah Bok

            How is it strong of mind to pretend to be happy and do nothing to make your situation actually happy? Surely true strength of mind is to make yourself happy but also actually do something.
            In the original she pretty much can’t do anything to improve her situation but when she can she does. And I disagree that she didn’t hold up for a long time in the original. In the original she’s stuck with the stepmother and used as a literal slave since she’s little, yet she’s not in despair. (Unlike the remake where her stepmother turns on her as a teenager.)

          • Manuel Orozco

            I actually didn’t mind the change of her father’s death happening to when she was still a little girl to a teenager.

          • Jeremiah Bok

            I don’t mind that change either. You were saying the new Cinderella “held up for a long time” and I was just saying the original did too. Longer, even.

          • Manuel Orozco

            My bad and I’m glad we agree on something. Forgive me

          • Jeremiah Bok

            No prob at all. 🙂 This has been fun, thank you for the shamelessly nerdy discussion.

          • Manuel Orozco

            No nerdness intended but pleasure

          • Manuel Orozco

            I don’t recall the director’s statement. However, the true vision of the film is what counted.

      • Alexandra S.

        A lot of people seem to count it as just “another remake” that’s just “the same movie as the original”. Cinderella also didn’t want to break out because she was afraid Kit the prince wouldn’t be satisfied with her true self, but he was in the end. She also learned to be stronger in the end when she told off Lady Tremaine. In the end, it all doesn’t matter as long as people enjoyed it. 🙂

        • Jeremiah Bok

          No I’d say it matters a great deal. You see Cinderella is precious to me. It is in my top ten favorite Disney movies and she is perhaps my main role model in life. And I treasure Fairy Tales, and Cinderella is one of my favorites. I consider fairy tales to be the greatest genre of literature. When the world gets a poor portrayal of one of the greatest characters of all time and accepts it as accurate, it’s too bad.

          • Alexandra S.

            Whatever, I enjoy it. It came at a time when I really needed to be happy again and it did just that. Whatever people may think of it, those are my thoughts. Feeling insecure about yourself is something very common for people nowadays, and is not pathetic, just something to be helped by the people you care about, and finding yourself. I am grateful that this movie exists, despite what you say about it.

          • Jeremiah Bok

            I got the impression you enjoy it and I’m glad you do. Enjoy away, naturally.

            Yes, to be insecure is normal. To be so insecure you are willing to shut up for the rest of your life is not.

  • Rachel Barton

    I’m surprised that they’re doing a Winnie the Pooh movie, considering that their 2011 one didn’t do so well financially. I hope that if they go through with it, they use 2D animation – I can’t imagine the Winnie the Pooh characters in the same hyper-realistic style as The Jungle Book.

    • Manuel Orozco

      I’m surprised too and I didn’t bother seeing the animated one from five years ago. It is too soon afterwards

  • OK, this is just getting ridiculous! Can’t Disney make and push out more original movies?

    • Manuel Orozco

      Blame Bob Iger for that. As much as I enjoy some of what he is doing, he is a bloodsucker for profits.

    • Jeremiah Bok

      Okay. That’s said all the time. And I never get that remark. Disney’s animated movies are if anything far more creative than they were before, back in the Chicken Little days. So they’re not suffering. And their live-action department (that is of course responsible for these movies) was never what they were known for. Nobody really cared about most of their live-action films. They were mostly stuff you’ve probably never heard of, sports movies and such. Plus, Disney DOES still release original live-action films, (they have a quite good film out right now called Queen of Kawe set in Africa.)

      • Manuel Orozco

        I didn’t really grow up with some of their live action stuff back in the 90’s but I have grown to love some movies over the past few years. Like Floght of the Navigator, Man of the House, their remake of Angels in the Outfield, Mighty Ducks and Heavyweights.

        • racy1285

          Meh I dont have a problem with the reimaginings. Ive actually enjoyed some of them. Im also not going to hate Disney for making these movies either. They are in a no win situation when it comes to these films. Because if they dont make them. The other Major Studios sure will. In fact its already happened with the Two Snow White Films by Universal and Relativity a few years ago, the Peter Pan movie Warner Bros released last year, and of course the upcoming films like WBs Jungle Book and the Grace Chloe Moretz Little Mermaid thats been rumored. So they are screwed either way.

          At least Disney is trying to make good films with the reimaginings. Its not like they are giving us garbage like the DTV cheapquels they released in the 90s. Those garbage were the real insult to the Disney Animated Classics. Not the live action films.

          • Manuel Orozco

            I’m not going to hate Disney either for this

      • Their live-action movies are good for the most part, but many are unnecessary. I liked Pete’s Dragon and Jungle Book. But the originals were not that good to begin with. Remaking masterpieces like Beast and Lion King are just overkill.

  • Jeremiah Bok

    Wait wait wait. They’re doing the Prydain Chronicles!?!? That’s my main takeaway. That makes my morning. Get it *right* this time Disney, those books are awesome. I know you have it in you! It’s heroes and mythology and magic, you could do this in you sleep.

    Same with James and the Giant Peach. Brilliant book, hopefully Disney can make a decent movie this time. I’m all for Disney actually FIXING it’s legacy, go for it.

    • These are also most exciting for me – the ones Disney didn’t quite get right. But I’m also most nervous for these ones, especially Prydain. I’m crossing my fingers for a great team to make a great adaptation. It would be nice to have a running live-action Disney franchise that isn’t Pirates or superhero-related.

  • Ernesto Chacon

    Wasn’t James and the Giant Peach released under Walt Disney Pictures instead of Touchstone??

    Also glad James and the Giant Peach was mentioned on the site, and I am still hopeful for the film to be included as part of the Animation Addicts Podcast.

    • Made by Disney, released with the blue castle opening on home video, but originally released under Touchstone, since it was darker and more sinister than what Disney wanted their image to be. It’s the same reason Nightmare Before Christmas was originally just the Touchstone banner. Nightmare now has a castle opening on more recent releases because it became a money-maker for the studio.

      • Ernesto Chacon

        You sure? I’m not trying to be a “know-it-all” (reference to the latest Big Bang Theory episode) and I understood you got this information on Screenrant: “Though Disney funded the film, they released it under their Touchstone banner.” However, I find it very hard to believe that Disney release the film through it’s Touchstone Pictures banner (unlike Nightmare Before Christmas) since the original poster and the Theatrical trailer of James was released through Walt Disney Pictures.


        I’ll stop this converstion right now, so I don’t want the conversation to heat up and go off-topic, especially when it comes to arguing on “who’s right and who’s wrong” situation.

        • I probably should have prefaced my statement with “I believe,” as I was actually using my personal experience of watching the film when I was younger (not Screenrant). I agree though, we don’t want to start an argument. My main point – that James is not part of the Disney canon – still stands. Thanks for the point though!

  • spacelurker

    Urgh, this feels like recycling in a bad way…