The Moana Misfire: Disney's Live-Action Formula is Finally Dead

Let's be clear: the problem with the live-action Moana isn't the story, the characters, or the IP. It is the formula.

As reported by CityNews Toronto, the film debuted to a lukewarm $43 million in the U.S. and Canada, contributing to a $95 million global opening. For a movie that cost a reported $250 million to produce, these numbers are anemic. But if you look closer, this isn't a failure of the Moana brand—it's a rejection of Disney's current creative philosophy.

Consider the track record of the source material. According to Nielsen, the original 2016 animated Moana is the most-streamed movie in the U.S. since 2020. Furthermore, CityNews Toronto notes it remains the most-watched movie on Disney+. Even more telling is the performance of Moana 2, which earned over $1 billion and set a Thanksgiving record in 2024. The audience clearly loves this world.

So why did the live-action version, featuring Dwayne Johnson as Maui and Catherine Lagaʻaia as Moana, crash to shore? The answer is written in the reviews. CityNews Toronto reports that critics blasted the film for being essentially a "shot-for-shot remake" of the original, resulting in a dismal 34% to 35% rating on Rotten Tomatoes.

Disney has spent years coasting on a strategy of translating animated hits into live-action spectacles. While this worked in the 2010s—with The Lion King, Beauty and the Beast, and Aladdin each taking in almost or more than $1 billion, as noted by the Financial Post—the well has run dry. The Financial Post reports that ticket sales for recent remakes have broadly halved compared to those 2010s entries. While Lilo & Stitch was a recent billion-dollar exception, other efforts have floundered. Last year's Snow White made only $205 million worldwide, opening with $42.2 million—a figure nearly identical to Moana's $43 million debut.

Some analysts, like Paul Dergarabedian of Rentrak, suggest the issue is simple market saturation. He points to the presence of Universal's Minions & Monsters ($20.5 million) and Toy Story 5 ($18.5 million) as evidence of a "ceiling" for PG-rated films. Others, like newsletter author David Gross, argue the timeline was the issue. Gross told the Financial Post that the typical gap between an original and a remake is 27 years; releasing a live-action version just 10 years after the original and only 19 months after a sequel is simply too short a turnaround to cultivate a new audience.

I disagree that this is a matter of timing or competition. When a movie is a compelling vision, it finds its audience regardless of who else is in the theater. The failure here is creative laziness. Disney bet big on a franchise that is already thriving, yet delivered a product that added nothing new to the table.

When you produce a shot-for-shot copy, you aren't making a movie; you're making a corporate asset. The audience has finally caught on to the grift. Moana didn't fail because people are tired of Polynesian adventures; it failed because they are tired of the cash-grab formula.