A3.
As of late, the Walt Disney Group, well known for its classic family style movies, has been called out for its unoriginality regarding recent feature films. Critics and fans alike are disappointed by the rodent-themed entertainment company’s recent live-action remakes of The Little Mermaid (2023) and Mulan (2020), and when met with the news of a possible remake of the animated film Rapunzel (2010), they vehemently marked their disdain of the idea. Yet while detractors are blinded by their own racism and general ‘hater-ism,’ everyone’s favorite mouse is able to sneakily continue its exploitation of writers and animators.
You might be disappointed to hear that the quality of these movies is not the center of the issue here–but blaming VFX artists, writers, and other set designers who work tirelessly to please Disney executives is only feeding into the exact sentiment that modern Disney thrives off of. Not to say Disney intentionally sets its employees up for unfair criticism, but it’s safer to say that they most definitely benefit from heads being turned away from their antics.
What might catch you off guard is the aforementioned exploitation of its animators–it won’t quite make sense without a bit of context. Live-action remakes are at their core the same original animated film with a shiny new coat of paint–so it is intuitive to think that if Disney is to remake its own original animation, just in live action form, the original storymakers and everyone who made the film come to life would be compensated for their work.
Unfortunately, this is far from the case. Disney justifies this disenfranchisement by explaining how their remakes require a unique team of storyboarders–and if you pay close attention to the language in which they use to advertise their films–the company is diligent in separating their live-action films from their original counterpart. Marketers describe recent feature films as devised by an all-new director, thus making it a new movie. It would be accurate to say that the company mouses in technical jargon to avoid criticism of copying their own movies and having reason to pay their original storyboarders.
Such is the unfair lack of pay that the original animators for Aladdin (1992) spoke of after being ghosted by Disney executives when the live-action remake came out in 2019. It should come as no additional surprise then, when the CEO of Disney, Bob Iger, spoke of the “unrealistic expectations” from writers and unions that participated in the historic 2023 SAG-AFTRA strike, as he explained how the strike was performed at a bad time–as if there is ever a good time for your employees to demand fair wages when you are the CEO of a Fortune 500 company.
Of course, the situation might not be as simple as outlined above. When you pair the diminished glitz and glam of Hollywood with the fact that everything modern Disney touches turns a murky brown (see no further than Marvel box office numbers since its adoption by Disney), there are most definitely confounding variables leading to Disney disillusionment. The simple fact of the matter remains, though, that storyboarders and animators are not seeing their money.
So no, contrary to online critics and Twitter cinephiles, a black Ariel is not the downfall of Disney. In spite of their beliefs, a blue Will Smith coming out of the lamp in Aladdin (2019) did not release a spell causing Disney to suffer box office defeats. In fact, they would be delighted to hear that Disney is as traditional as it has ever been–workers continue to be subjugated to unfair business practices at the claws of the mouse as they churn out movie after movie.
This op-ed is truly amazing. It's compact, yet powerful, and the motif of Mickey Mouse throughout was quite enjoyable. As an actor the topic is one i'm far too familiar with. I feel this op-ed gave justice to the unfair treatment given towards animators and all those who work tirelessly to keep the Disney wheel spinning. My big problem with these remakes comes to the question, “why now?”. I'm curious as to why remakes are being called for and what makes executives feel necessary to bring the old generation of animated classics into a new light.
After reading your lede during our op-ed workshop day in class, I'm thrilled to see your final product. You go a step further than other critics of the live-action remakes do and spin it around to demand adequate (and much-deserved) compensation for the original storytellers. Writing this op-ed required you to do quite a bit of research on the ins and outs of how Disney operates, so props to you for doing such a thorough job. I'm curious as to whether any other critics will call out Disney on this niche of their production and if it will inspire some sort of shift at the company, especially since they preach about being such a progressive and equitable company.