Disney's made a fortune off of remaking famous beloved stories with their own twist.
But did they tear the soul from these classic characters to do it?
If you want the short answer - no, of course not. Characters as well-known as the ones above can't really die - they grow and change with the times just as others like Batman do every few years. But if you want to be REALLY sure, I read the original stories that each of these famous films were based on. And boy, did Disney take some creative liberties. Here's some of the biggest differences between the original stories and their Disney counterparts.
Aladdin had MULTIPLE genies, and Jafar had an evil twin brother.
Captain Hook is an honourable man - he'd never cheat or yell "Blast good form!"
Pinocchio dies in the original. Like for real.
Tarzan is SUPER racist.
Alice...well, Disney actually nailed Alice in Wonderland.
Aladdin – Padraic Colum
First and foremost, the story that I read is not the original Aladdin folktale – nor is it the definitive version. I read this author’s interpretation because it was in a compendium of children’s literature given to me by a good friend Zena Fulton. Having done a bit of research on the other versions of this story, I can say that Colum’s tale includes all of the main plot points. I can also say that this is nothing like Disney’s animated Aladdin film. The Genie isn’t freed at the end of the story. There is no discernible limit to the number of wishes one can wish, nor do there seem to be any discernible rules. I learned about lesser genies – like genies bound to rings instead of lamps. They’re not as powerful but still pretty helpful. There were aspects of this story that stayed the same, but on the whole, it was a very new experience reading this.
Aladdin is still a bit of a trickster in this version, and the way he gets the Genie is still essentially the same. He still uses the Genie’s power to elevate himself so that he can save the daughter of the Sultan from a loveless marriage, and still conceals the source of his power from her. The villain who first sends Aladdin looking for the lamp still uses trickery to steal the lamp back for himself, and is defeated – albeit in a bit more of a violent way. The big twist is that if the Disney film had been more authentic, Jafar’s wicked brother would have come in at the last second to threaten everything Aladdin had built.
A lot of people knock Disney for taking famous stories and tearing them apart to make a quick buck. But to be honest, I really think the Disney version is infinitely superior to this one. For one thing, Aladdin never really elevates the princess to his level – as far as I can remember, he keeps her in the dark for nearly the entire story. Further, the lack of coherent rules for the Genies made any problem Aladdin faced seem inconsequential. When you’ve got phenomenal cosmic powers, the fact that your crush already has a boyfriend really isn’t a big deal. And to be honest, the evil magician brother seemed like a last-ditched attempt to pad out the story a bit more. Perhaps if this story was more episodic in nature as opposed to one continuous narrative, that might have worked more effectively. Anyway, I’m glad I read a version of this story that falls more in line with the original tale, but I can’t say I experienced any kind of revelation.
Oh, and Aladdin wished for a bunch of slaves, which turned out to be 40 white slaves and 40 black slaves. What’s the deal with that? Was Aladdin trying to be diverse in his workforce, or is there a prestige thing involved in this? I don’t get it.
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland – Lewis Carroll
There’s a reason this story gets told and re-told and remade and remixed time and time again. This story is not like other classic novels, where it’s the gripping nature of the storytelling that pulls you in and leaves you desperate to turn the page and figure out what’s going to happen next. It’s not like one of those stories where there’s a killer twist at the end that re-contextualizes everything. What’s made this book so lasting is its fantasticality – there’s nothing else quite like it. The visuals of the story are wildly nonsensical – there’s something about them that just sticks in your mind. The different scenes are all completely unique and different from each other. You probably remember most of the characters Alice meets in Wonderland, but I doubt you remember the order she meets them in. That’s because the chronology doesn’t matter so much. The fun of this book is just that – the fun. You enjoy this book because of the fun in each scene, not because of the way those scenes work together.
Peter Pan – J.M. Barrie
What really surprised me about this book was how dedicated Captain Hook was to “good form”. In the Disney animated film – and its direct-to-video sequel – Hook is a lying, cheating, conniving villain. Although its been years since I’ve read Peter Pan, I remember how much Hook is concerned with doing things the right way. It also interested me that (spoiler alert) Hook dies at the end. A lot of modern adaptations or re-interpretations of Peter Pan hesitate to do this, leaving Pan and Hook to continually fight for eternity. That’s not how J.M. Barrie views Neverland – though Peter never grows up, there’s still change and a sense of permanence to the goings-on in his world.
Pinocchio – Carlo Collodi
Pinocchio was a serialized story – so think of each chapter like a TV episode. People reading it originally had to wait for each new episode to come out. What’s funny is that the author actually intended to kill off Pinnochio and end the story, but the character was so popular that he was forced to bring him back to life – literally – to continue the series.
There's not much in this book that felt like the Disney film, and the tone is totally different. That said, the boyish charm of the main character is what makes him so likeable in both.
Tarzan of the Apes – Edgar Rice Burroughs
The first act is fantastic. Learning how Tarzan figures out how to survive and thrive in the jungle is a truly fascinating progression. The author gives an almost believable explanation for how a baby human grows up to teach itself to tie knots, use a knife, and even read and write English. But once Tarzan starts encountering humans, the story takes a surprisingly racist and misogynist turn. I believe Tarzan embodies a lot of early 20th century beliefs in that regard, not to mention a sort of romanticized view of evolution – there’s an ape ‘church’ scene that really stands out as silly.
Disney really changed things up for their movie. For one thing, Sabor in the film is one character, whereas in the book Sabor is one name for pretty much any lion, I think. For another thing, Tarzan ends up in America…and doesn’t marry Jane. That ending I thought was really interesting and unexpected, which was nice considering I disliked most of the rest of the book.
I got this book as an impulse buy – Indigo had a bunch of classic novels printed in this format, and I didn’t yet have Tarzan. I was planning on saving up for it, but Jenna was with me and she begged and begged for me to buy the book for myself – she loves it when I splurge. So here we are.