Disney’s Live-Action Moana Sinks with Critics as Remake Faces Harsh Reviews: Disney’s highly anticipated live-action adaptation of Moana is heading to cinemas on July 9, but early reviews suggest the remake has struggled to win over critics. Despite bringing back fan-favorite Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson as the shape-shifting demigod Maui and introducing newcomer Catherine Laga’aia in the title role, the film has been widely criticized for failing to capture the magic of the beloved 2016 animated original.
The remake currently holds a 36% critics’ score on Rotten Tomatoes, based on 77 reviews, marking one of the weakest critical receptions for Disney’s recent live-action projects. By comparison, the original animated Moana boasts an impressive 95% critics’ rating from 288 reviews, underscoring the challenge of recreating a modern classic.
While audiences will ultimately decide the film’s commercial fate, many reviewers have questioned why Disney chose to remake an animated feature that is less than a decade old. Unlike earlier live-action adaptations of classics such as The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, or Aladdin, critics argue that Moana remains culturally and visually fresh, making its remake feel unnecessary.
A recurring criticism has been that the live-action version offers little that is new. Many reviewers described the film as a near shot-for-shot recreation of the original, replacing hand-drawn animation with computer-generated imagery and live performances without adding meaningful creative ideas or expanding the story.
Several publications were particularly blunt in their assessments.
The Independent described the film as “a waste of everyone’s time and talent,” arguing that Disney’s growing catalogue of remakes increasingly resembles an attempt to sell audiences the same story multiple times. The review suggested that despite the talent involved, the remake lacks a compelling reason to exist.
The Guardian echoed similar concerns, calling the film “competent but basically pointless.” While acknowledging that the production values remain high, the publication argued that the project feels more like commercially driven content than a creative reinterpretation of a beloved story.
The New York Times offered one of the harshest verdicts, suggesting that the film may be both the most unnecessary and the weakest entry in Disney’s expanding slate of live-action remakes. The review questioned the purpose behind revisiting a story that remains widely admired in its original animated form.
Critic Alissa Wilkinson also challenged the rationale for the remake, asking, “Why? What’s the point?” before concluding that it was difficult to avoid viewing the project as a cynical attempt to capitalize on an already successful property.
Entertainment outlet Polygon criticized the production as “a glossy digital clone of the original,” arguing that there was little artistic or aesthetic justification for recreating a film that already achieved widespread acclaim through its animation. Rather than offering a fresh interpretation, the publication suggested the remake closely imitates the original without delivering a new cinematic experience.
Similarly, Vulture argued that Disney’s ongoing remake strategy appears increasingly motivated by financial considerations, suggesting the studio is seeking to maximize revenue from its existing library of successful franchises instead of investing in more original storytelling.
The criticism reflects a broader debate surrounding Disney’s live-action remake strategy. Over the past decade, the studio has transformed numerous animated classics into live-action films, including Cinderella, The Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, Mulan, The Little Mermaid, and Lilo & Stitch. While many of these films have generated hundreds of millions of dollars at the global box office, they have frequently divided critics over their artistic value.
Supporters argue that remakes introduce beloved stories to new generations while allowing advances in visual effects and filmmaking technology to offer updated interpretations. Critics, however, contend that many recent adaptations rely heavily on nostalgia rather than innovation, often reproducing familiar stories without adding meaningful creative depth.
Despite the negative reviews, Disney is likely to remain optimistic about the film’s commercial prospects. Family audiences, particularly younger viewers who may not have experienced the original in theaters, could still drive strong ticket sales. The enduring popularity of Moana, one of Disney’s most-streamed animated films in recent years, may also help attract audiences regardless of critical opinion.
Dwayne Johnson’s return as Maui has been viewed as one of the remake’s strongest assets. His energetic performance was widely praised in the original film, and many fans have welcomed his return to one of his most recognizable family-friendly roles. Catherine Laga’aia, meanwhile, makes her major feature-film debut as Moana, taking on a character that has become one of Disney’s most popular modern heroines.
Whether audiences agree with critics remains to be seen. Disney’s previous live-action adaptations have often succeeded financially despite receiving mixed reviews, demonstrating the powerful appeal of the studio’s iconic characters and stories.
However, the early critical response suggests that Moana may reignite questions about the future of Disney’s remake strategy. As the company continues to revisit its animated catalogue, critics increasingly argue that audiences are looking not only for familiar stories but also for fresh ideas and creative risks. For now, the live-action Moana appears to have struggled to convince reviewers that its voyage was one worth taking. Will Oil Prices Crash? OPEC+’s Latest Decision Explained | Maya
