Disney is doubling down on nostalgia. The studio has filled its upcoming slate with sequels and remakes, from “Toy Story 5” in June 2026 to “Frozen III” in late 2027, and even “Incredibles 3” sometime after that.
Add in “Zootopia 2” this November and a live-action “Moana” remake in 2026, and it’s clear Disney is relying heavily on familiar stories instead of creating new ones.
The fifth “Toy Story” film will explore how toys compete with technology for kids’ attention, but many fans feel the franchise already had a perfect ending with “Toy Story 3” back in 2010.
Pixar once promised to focus on original ideas with “Toy Story 4” in 2019, yet here we are. Similarly, “Frozen III” will come eight years after the second film, and “Incredibles 3” is in development even though the last installment pretty much wrapped up the Parr family’s story.
Disney’s sequel strategy does not stop with animation. Live-action remakes are everywhere, with “Snow White” hitting theaters back in March 2025, “Lilo & Stitch” recently breaking box-office records and “Moana” returning as a live-action film only a decade after its original release.
Critics argue these projects feel more like cash grabs than creative risks. While some remakes, like “The Lion King” and “Beauty and the Beast,” have earned billions, others, such as “Snow White,” have struggled, raising questions about whether audiences are tired of recycled ideas.
So why does Disney keep doing this?
Money and nostalgia. Sequels and remakes are safe bets in a shaky box office market. Disney CEO Bob Iger admits the company has made “too many sequels,” but says they will not stop because the older they get, the more popular they remain.
The problem is that this approach comes at a cost. Disney was once known for bold storytelling, from the original “Snow White” in 1937 to “The Lion King” in 1994. Today, the studio relies on proven formulas instead of taking risks.
Critics warn that stretching stories too far removes their magic. The “Toy Story” franchise is a prime example. What started as groundbreaking now feels like an endless epilogue.
Box office numbers show why Disney clings to sequels. “Inside Out 2” earned over $650 million this summer, and “Lilo & Stitch” surpassed $600 million in two weeks. Compare that to Pixar’s original film “Elio,” which flopped despite strong marketing; audiences flock to what they know and Disney takes advantage of it.
However, this success is short-term. Recent disappointments like “Snow White” and Marvel’s “The Marvels” prove that familiarity doesn’t guarantee hits.
Streaming has made the problem worse. Disney+ conditions viewers to expect quick access to films, so theatrical releases need to feel like “events.”
Sequels deliver that sense of importance, while originals struggle to stand out. This cycle pushes Disney to double down on franchises rather than invest in new ideas.
The bigger question is what this means for the future of storytelling. If Disney keeps prioritizing sequels, the industry could lose its creative edge.
Independent filmmakers already fight for attention against billion-dollar franchises. Audiences deserve fresh stories, not just reheated leftovers.
For now, the sequel train is not slowing down. Disney calls it giving fans what they want, but at what point do fans start asking for something fresh?
