One of the biggest surprises of the Nintendo Switch 2's reveal was its proposed accessibility. For years, Nintendo has been known for accidentally stumbling on accessibility solutions while stubbornly refusing to engage with the broader subject. Yet, in the Switch 2, there appeared a more holistic approach to accessibility for which disabled players have been crying out. This was supported by a webpage dedicated to the Switch 2's hardware accessibility.
However, specifics were thin and no further information emerged ahead of the Switch 2's debut. Now, having spent the last week with the Switch 2, I've found that this limited information hid, aside from a few missteps, an impressive suite of system-level accessibility considerations and advances that somewhat offset the otherwise gradual update the Switch 2 represents. But as we finally answer lingering accessibility questions over the Switch 2, there's a nagging sense that this information should have been readily available ahead of launch.
How intuitive is the setup? Very, but blind players may need assistance
I tend to find setup procedures dense and unapproachable thanks to cognitive disability. Yet I was pleasantly surpris …
Spotlight and themes are in the limelight. | Screenshot: Antonio G. Di Benedetto / The Verge
At WWDC, Apple announced its new Liquid Glass design language, which is coming to all of its devices, including Macs. I've been tinkering with the macOS Tahoe 26 developer beta on the M4 MacBook Air for about a day. So far, the aesthetic changes range from slick to slightly overwrought, but the new Spotlight search features are nifty and useful.
There are new touches of glassy transparency all over macOS 26, including the Dock, Finder, widgets, and built-in apps. It's more subtle than on the iPhone, mostly because the Mac's much larger screen real estate makes the Liquid Glass elements more like accents than whatever this mess is supposed to be. I'm not very fond of it just yet, but maybe it will grow on me, like UI changes tend to.
The Dock now has a frosted background that's more translucent than Sequoia's flatter design. The hazy, frozen glass aesthetic also extends to widgets, like the calendar and weather, and drop-down menus - though the latter have much higher opacity. The pop-ups for volume and brightness now use this distorted glass look as well, though they've moved to the top-right corner of the screen instead of being centered above the dock. Frankly, they're ugly, …
Apple's WWDC 2025 had new software, Formula 1 references, and a piano man crooning the text of different app reviews. But one key feature got the short end of the stick: Siri.
Although the company continuously referenced Apple Intelligence and pushed new features like live translation for Messages, FaceTime, and phone calls, Apple's AI assistant was barely mentioned. In fact, the most attention Siri got was when Apple explained that some of its previously promised features were running behind schedule.
To address what many saw as the elephant in the room, Apple's keynote briefly mentioned that it had updated Siri to be "more natural and more helpful," but that personalization features were still on the horizon. Those features were first mentioned at last year's WWDC, with a rollout timeline "over the course of the next year."
"We're continuing our work to deliver the features that make Siri even more personal," Craig Federighi, Apple's SVP of software engineering, said during Monday's keynote. "This work needed more time to reach our high quality bar, and we look forward to sharing more about it in the coming year."
Chairman Brendan Carr and Democratic commissioner Anna Gomez are the last remaining members of the panel.
After the departure of one Republican and one Democratic commissioner on Friday, the Federal Communications Commission is down to two members, falling below the quorum threshold for what's typically a five-person panel.
Commissioners Nathan Simington and Geoffrey Starks stepped down at the end of the week. That leaves Republican Chair Brendan Carr and Democratic Commissioner Anna Gomez as the two remaining voting members. President Donald Trump has nominated Republican Senate staffer Olivia Trusty to the commission, but the chamber has yet to vote on her confirmation, which left the agency deadlocked even before these departures. The FCC is in charge of everything from broadband regulations and subsidies funds, to telecommunications mergers enforcement, to spectrum auctions. Without a three-member quorum, some of that work, and the agenda of Trump-aligned Carr, is left in limbo.
Starks and Simington both announced the date of their departures earlier this week, though Starks indicated in March that he planned to step down; neither offered specific reasons for their departure. Carr indicated he intends to keep up the pace, writing in a blog post that "the show must go on."
Over the years, scholars of the Dead Sea Scrolls have analyzed the ancient parchments with various methods: for example, X-rays, multispectral imaging, "virtual unfolding," and paleography, i.e., studying elements in their writing styles. The scrolls are believed to date back to between the third century BCE and the first century CE, but those dates rely largely on paleography, since only a handful of the scrolls have calendar dates written on them.
However, the traditional paleographic method is inherently subjective and based on a given scholar's experience. A team of scientists has combined radiocarbon dating from 24 scroll samples and machine-learning-based handwriting analysis to create their own AI program—dubbed Enoch. The objective was to achieve more accurate date estimates, according to a new paper published in the journal PLoS ONE. Among the findings: Many of the scrolls are older than previously thought.
As reported earlier, these ancient Hebrew texts—roughly 900 full and partial scrolls in all, stored in clay jars—were first discovered scattered in various caves near what was once the settlement of Qumran, just north of the Dead Sea, by Bedouin shepherds in 1946–1947. (Apparently, a shepherd threw a rock while searching for a lost member of his flock and accidentally shattered one of the clay jars, leading to the discovery.) Qumran was destroyed by the Romans, circa 73 CE, and historians believe the scrolls were hidden in the caves by a sect called the Essenes to protect them from being destroyed. The natural limestone and conditions within the caves helped preserve the scrolls for millennia.
I recently did something sort of unusual: I went to a preview event for a game that's been out for almost three years.
I've played around 400 hours of Pokémon Scarlet, according to my Nintendo Switch, since it was released in late 2022. It's safe to say I know the game pretty well. And yet, when I was invited to preview Pokémon Scarlet and Violet on the Nintendo Switch 2 ahead of the new console's launch, I gladly took the opportunity to see three-year-old games I already own. I wanted to find out just how much they'd improved.
I have a high jank tolerance with games - it builds character - but I'm well aware of Scarlet and Violet's shortcomings on the original Switch. There's lag. The frame rate is… inconsistent. There are online connectivity issues. For a lot of people, performance problems overshadowed what was otherwise a great new generation of Pokémon games. With the release of the Nintendo Switch 2, and the accompanying free performance update for Scarlet and Violet, that might finally change.
Starting up the demo of Pokémon Scarlet on the Switch 2 at The Pokémon Company International's office in Bellevue, Washington, I knew immediately where I wanted to go firs …
Though the first Nintendo Switch era of Pokémon games was undeniably rocky at times, it brought the series' trading and organization systems into a new level of maturity. It wasn't always easy to complete Pokédexes in remakes like Brilliant Diamond and Shining Pearl and new entries like Sword and Shield. But those games helped The Pokémon Company create a more seamless way to move your monsters from one title to another, or swap them with friends. And with the Pokémon franchise about to make its big debut on the Switch 2 with the cross-generation game Pokémon Legends: Z-A, it feels like The Pokémon Company is getting ready to take the trading system to the next level.
In the Pokémon games, filling up your Pokédex has always been an exercise in patience, planning, and understanding that Nintendo and The Pokémon Company want you trading with other players rather than trying to catch 'em all on your own. The games' trading mechanics evolved as the series jumped from the Game Boy to new hardware. By Generation IV (the DS games), players could swap monsters remotely over the internet without needing to use wired link cables. And after years of many legendary and mythical pokémon only …
In 2010, Disney began releasing live-action remakes of some of its classic animated films in earnest.
While most were successful at the box office, their artistic value has been questioned.
In almost every case, the original animated film is superior to its live-action remake.
Remaking animated films or TV shows in live-action is becoming more frequent in Hollywood — just look at shows like "Avatar: The Last Airbender," "One Piece," and "Cowboy Bebop."
But the studio that has done this most successfully — and most frequently — is Disney. There have been 19 live-action remakes or reimaginings of its classic animated films, give or take a few additional sequels.
While not all of them have been well-reviewed — and, arguably, they're mediocre at best — most of these movies made a lot of money at the box office. For example, "Beauty and the Beast," "Alice in Wonderland," "Aladdin," and "The Lion King" all crossed the $1 billion mark, according to Box Office Mojo data — and with the way that "Lilo & Stitch" has been overperforming this month, the House of Mouse may have another billion-dollar movie on its hands.
Here are all 19 live-action remakes, ranked from worst to best — in our opinion.
19. "Alice in Wonderland" (2010)
"Alice Through the Looking Glass."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
"Alice in Wonderland" has aged poorly, from its star to its aesthetic. It's been 15 years since it was released in 2010, and since then, director Tim Burton has only become less beloved by audiences ("Wednesday" on Netflix and the nostalgia of "Beetlejuice Beetlejuice" aside). His whimsical goth vision ages this movie — everything sort of looks like it came straight out of Hot Topic.
Additionally, Johnny Depp's performance as the Mad Hatter, which was grating at the time, now feels harder to watch after his myriad controversies.
This movie did make over $1 billion worldwide (enough to justify an even worse sequel in 2016, "Alice Through the Looking Glass"), but we venture to say if you turned this on now, you'd barely make it to Alice falling down the rabbit hole.
18. "Pinocchio" (2022)
"Pinocchio."
Disney+
Point-blank, "Pinocchio" is scary to look at, and the less we say about this 2022 movie, the better.
Pinocchio, the character, has veered so far into the uncanny valley that it's hard to look at him. Add in a new (and unnecessary) seagull, aggressively voiced by Lorraine Bracco, the sanitation of the original movie's intentionally horrific Pleasure Island sequence, and some bad CGI … and this movie is just a dud.
It went straight to Disney+, so we'll never know how successful it actually was with audiences.
It doesn't help that a superior adaptation of the fairytale this is based on was released the same year: "Guillermo del Toro's Pinocchio." If you want to watch a talking puppet, we'd recommend you stick to that version.
17. "The Sorcerer's Apprentice" (2010)
"The Sorcerer's Apprentice."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
You might not even remember that the 2010 film "The Sorcerer’s Apprentice" exists.
This is a loose adaptation, but we're counting it. It's based on a segment from the 1940 anthology film "Fantasia" and its 1999 sequel, "Fantasia 2000." In the original short, Mickey Mouse plays an impatient apprentice who is sick of doing chores and decides to steal his master's magic hat, to disastrous effect.
The 2010 live-action version stars Nicolas Cage as the wizened sorcerer, while Jay Baruchel takes on the role of the apprentice.
This movie's main issue is that it's forgettable. It suffers from being, above all else, boring. It has very 2010 action and special effects, and as a result, made $215 million against a $150 million budget, the Los Angeles Times reported in 2010.
This movie is also part of why director Jon Turteltaub and Cage never made "National Treasure 3" — at least according to Cage's 2022 interview with GQ — and we'll never be over it.
16. "Dumbo" (2019)
"Dumbo."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Was anyone desperate for a remake of the 1941 original "Dumbo," which has very questionable racial politics, a harrowing scene in which Dumbo, a baby elephant, gets drunk and hallucinates, and not much else? We think not.
The 2019 remake, once again directed by Tim Burton, pretty much does away with all of that. There are no crows, no Timothy Q. Mouse, or any talking animals at all — Dumbo is silent. Instead, the action is moved to entirely new human characters, who are all forgettable.
That's this movie's biggest sin — it doesn't justify its existence at all. And judging by its poor box-office numbers, audiences weren't sure what to think of it, either.
15. "Lady and the Tramp" (2019)
"Lady and the Tramp."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
The original "Lady and the Tramp" from 1955 is another example of Disney's problematic past coming back to bite it. "The Siamese Cat Song," sung by cats Si and Am, is so racist that Disney added a disclaimer to the beginning of the film on Disney+.
So, the 2019 remake, which went straight to the streaming service, gets points for fixing that by adding two new cats, Devon and Rex.
Besides that, there's not much else to say about this live-action/CGI hybrid. Unlike "The Lion King" remake, Lady, Tramp, Jock, Trusty, Peg, etc., are played by real dogs and aren't just photorealistic creations. But we'd argue it's just not as fun to see two real dogs doing the famous spaghetti kiss.
14. "101 Dalmatians" (1996)
"101 Dalmatians."
Buena Vista Pictures Distribution
This 1996 remake was the first true live-action adaptation of a Disney movie. We're not exactly sure why this remake of the 1961 animated film was Disney's first attempt, but we like it: It updates the setting to modern-day London, switching Roger from a composer to a video-game designer.
Glenn Close's deliciously unhinged performance as Cruella is what elevates this movie — it's probably why we got a Cruella prequel 25 years later.
This was a box-office success — grossing $320 million worldwide, according to Box Office Mojo — and spawned a 2000 sequel, "102 Dalmatians." Only Close returned from the main cast.
13. "Maleficent" (2014)
"Maleficent."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Instead of making a straight-up remake of 1959's "Sleeping Beauty," Disney took a different approach with 2014's "Maleficent."
Rather than centering on Aurora, aka Sleeping Beauty, this film is the story of Maleficent, who is only seen as an evil sorceress in the original. This movie gives her a backstory and a relationship with Aurora's father, Stefan.
While this sounds good in theory, "Maleficent" is perfectly average. Angelina Jolie gives it her all as Maleficent, but the special effects are dated, and the story isn't memorable.
It took five years for a sequel to come out ("Maleficent: Mistress of Evil"), and by then, the momentum from the financial success of "Maleficent" had apparently slowed.
12. "Snow White"
"Snow White."
Disney
It was only a matter of time before Disney took it all the way back to its first animated theatrical release: 1937's "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs."
Sure, Snow White is iconic as the first Disney princess movie, and "Whistle While You Work" and "Heigh-Ho" are permanently part of the Disney canon, but have you watched this movie recently, as an adult? It's boring! That made it ripe for an update.
Unfortunately for almost everyone, the 2025 update just isn't good. Aside from the many, many controversies that plagued this movie from the beginning, there are a few insurmountable problems with the film itself.
First: Gal Gadot. She was compelling in the (first) "Wonder Woman," but she's quite wooden in this role, nowhere near the deliciously evil villain performances we've gotten in other live-action remakes (e.g., Cate Blanchett in "Cinderella" and Melissa McCarthy in "The Little Mermaid). Instead it's what Vulture's Jackson McHenry aptly called a "remarkable anti-performance."
Other issues include the CGI uncanny valley dwarfs (a misguided attempt to reckon with the mistreatment and fetishization of little people across decades of pop culture), confusing (and pointless) lore updates, and new songs that would've been at home in "The Greatest Showman," not paired with songs written in the '30s.
If there's one saving grace in this movie, it's its star, Rachel Zegler. As usual, she is a winning presence on screen, radiating compassion and kindness in every frame. She also has an undeniably beautiful voice, which is more than we can say for some other people who have been cast in these musicals.
11. "Peter Pan & Wendy" (2023)
"Peter Pan & Wendy."
Disney+
"Peter Pan & Wendy" proves that we should probably cool it on "Peter Pan" for a while; did you even know a live-action remake of "Peter Pan" starring Jude Law as Captain Hook, Yara Shahidi as Tinker Bell, and Jim Gaffigan as Mr. Smee was released on Disney+ in 2023?
It's a pity, because this movie is relatively OK. Law is locked in as Captain Hook, and director David Lowery showcases his talent for sweeping landscapes (as seen in "The Green Knight") in his version of Neverland.
Unfortunately, though, this movie just … isn't that interesting.
"Peter Pan" as a story might be cursed — "Hook" is only good if you have nostalgia goggles on; 2003's "Peter Pan" was a flop; "Pan" stars a white woman, Rooney Mara, as the Native American character Tiger Lily; and this adaptation is barely remembered.
Give these characters a break, Hollywood.
10. "The Lion King" (2019)
"The Lion King."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
If this were a silent film, 2019's "The Lion King" would be an unparalleled achievement in special effects. But, unfortunately, it's not — making the characters photorealistic instead takes all the joy out of the film.
We were forced to sit through some of the most iconic musical sequences in Disney history, like "I Just Can't Wait to Be King," "Hakuna Matata," "Can You Feel the Love Tonight," and "Be Prepared," being sung by photorealistic animals who can't emote, in a relatively colorless virtual desert.
Part of the magic of animation is that you can make the animals do anything you want — that's why we love the 1994 original so much.
We'll always be thankful that we got Beyoncé's "The Lion King: The Gift" companion album out of this movie, but that's it. "Mufasa," the prequel that was released in 2024, wasn't anything to write home about either, even if it was slightly better.
9. "Lilo & Stitch" (2025)
"Lilo & Stitch."
Disney
Disney's latest live-action offering, "Lilo & Stitch," is a remake of the 2002 animated original — that makes it the newest animated film to get a live-action remake. And even though this movie is quite charming (in parts), there's an argument that we could've let another 20 years' worth of kids fall in love with the original movie, an underrated gem.
The live-action remake is fun, but it shares many of the same issues as the other remakes. The colors don't pop in the same way, and the character designs of the aliens don't translate to real life.
The biggest issue that many fans have with this movie is that the ending is completely different from the 2002 classic — we won't spoil it for you, but just know that the emphasis on ohana and no one getting left behind from the original is, well, undercut by the resolution the live-action movie finds.
8. "Beauty and the Beast" (2017)
"Beauty and the Beast."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
"Beauty and the Beast," released in 2017, was the first of Disney's new wave of live-action remakes. As a result, it was graded on a curve at the time and made $1.2 billion, per Box Office Mojo.
But if you go back and watch this movie eight years later, you might notice something: Emma Watson, for all her charm, is simply not a great singer. And Paige O'Hara, who voiced Belle in the 1991 original, has one of the clearest voices in all of Disney's history.
There are a few other issues with this movie — it's so long, adds unneeded backstory, switches the amazing Beast song from the Broadway adaptation ("I Can't Love Her") in favor of the boring "Evermore," the underwhelming "exclusively gay moment" — but our biggest problem is Belle.
7. "Aladdin" (2019)
"Aladdin."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
"Aladdin," released in 2019, also made $1 billion around the world. In this case, we have no qualms with Mena Massoud or Naomi Scott, who play Aladdin and Jasmine wonderfully.
Who we can't whole-heartedly support is Will Smith, who plays the Genie. Simply put, no one is competing with Robin Williams' iconic performance in the 1992 original. It's a tour-de-force, one of the best voiceover performances ever.
Smith was never going to be able to compete, and the off-putting design of his character and his rap-singing did him no favors.
Also, this movie was, for some reason, directed by Guy Ritchie. Ritchie is known for his action films, and he tried to inject as much action as he could into "Aladdin." But we'd argue this movie doesn't need it! It's a fairy tale about a street urchin falling in love with a princess!
6. "The Little Mermaid" (2023)
"The Little Mermaid."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Halle Bailey was a perfect choice for Ariel. She has an amazing voice, plays the physical comedy of voiceless Ariel well, and has great chemistry with Jonah Hauer-King, who plays Prince Eric. Melissa McCarthy also turns in a solid performance as Ursula.
What prevents this movie from being truly fun to watch is all the underwater stuff. Everything looks so fake and lifeless. The colors aren't bright enough, and we've once again run into the "Lion King"/"Lady and the Tramp" problem: Flounder, Sebastian, and Scuttle can't show any emotions on their faces. That's a shame when compared with the 1989 original, where Sebastian, especially, is hilarious in his exasperation and anxiety.
Plus, the new songs are so obviously written by Lin-Manuel Miranda (see "The Scuttlebutt") that they don't mesh well with Howard Ashman's originals.
5. "Mulan" (2020)
"Mulan."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
"Mulan" is the live-action remake that was released during the COVID-19 pandemic, so we'll never know how it would have fared at the box office.
But we're betting it would have done well. "Mulan" is a true action movie, which fits well with the subject matter, as Mulan secretly takes her father's place in the Chinese army.
The 1998 original film has some of the best Disney songs ("Reflection," "I'll Make a Man Out of You," "Honor to Us All"), but the remake wisely removes them, as the tonal shift from hilarious songs to gritty action would be too jarring. Instead, the songs are subtly worked into the score.
We also like the addition of Xianniang, a witch who identifies with Mulan's feelings that she doesn't belong. Mulan has no female friends at all in the original, and while these two aren't friends, there's a kinship and respect between the two.
4. "Cruella" (2021)
"Cruella."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
While a prequel establishing why Cruella de Vil hates Dalmatians so much doesn't sound fun, we'd recommend watching "Cruella," since it's bolstered by the lead performances of Emma Stone and Emma Thompson.
First of all, she actually doesn't hate Dalmatians — she kind of likes them. Does that make sense with the character's future? Not really, but it is fun to watch Stone commit so deeply to the 1970s English punk scene.
Her on-screen nemesis, Baroness von Hellman, as played by Emma Thompson, is a campy delight.
Stone's performance earned her a Golden Globe nomination, and a sequel is in the works. We're excited.
3. "The Jungle Book" (2016)
"The Jungle Book."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Jon Favreau directed both 2016's "The Jungle Book" and 2019's "The Lion King," but seemingly learned the wrong lessons from "The Jungle Book," which is a delight.
Mowgli, the lone human character in the film, gives viewers a face to center them as he explores a jungle filled with familiar voices, such as Bill Murray as Baloo, Ben Kingsley as Bagheera, Lupita Nyong'o as Raksha, Scarlett Johansson as Kaa, Christopher Walken as King Louie, and Idris Elba as Shere Khan.
The remake added beautiful effects and exciting action. And — spoiler alert — it also changed the ending so Mowgli could remain in the jungle with his friends.
2. "Christopher Robin" (2018)
"Christopher Robin."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Maybe we're cheating a little bit since 2018's "Christopher Robin" isn't a specific remake of any "Winnie the Pooh" film but instead, a semi-sequel that brings Pooh and friends out of the Hundred Acre Wood into the real world, but this movie is too good to leave out.
In it, Ewan McGregor plays a grown-up Christopher Robin who has left his friends Pooh, Tigger, Eeyore, Piglet, Rabbit, Kanga, Roo, and Owl behind. By chance, he reunites with them and is reminded of the important things in life.
It is always a joy to hang out with Winnie the Pooh, and a disillusioned adult returning to their fun-loving ways is a story Disney does so well, like in "Mary Poppins."
Additionally, the score for this movie rocks. It's so perfectly paired with the film.
1. "Cinderella" (2015)
"Cinderella."
Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures
Maybe this is because we just don't think the original "Cinderella" from 1950 is that good. Yes, "Bibbidi-Bobbidi Boo" is a banger, and the animation of Cinderella's dress turning from a ripped-up rag to a shimmering princess-worthy ball gown is beautiful, but that's really it.
The prince is barely a character, the other songs aren't that memorable, and Cinderella herself has little personality besides being sweet.
The 2015 "Cinderella" rectifies all that. Ella, as played by Lily James, is kind, funny, and has a very strong sense of right and wrong, while Prince Kit, played by a very blue-eyed Richard Madden, gets an arc and a loving relationship with his dad.
The famous blue ball gown is also one of the rare pieces of Disney iconography that looks just as beautiful in real life. We must also mention Cate Blanchett as a fully committed Lady Tremaine and Helena Bonham Carter as the dotty Fairy Godmother.
We'd go as far as to say that "Cinderella," at least for now, is the only true Disney remake worth your time.
You.com launches ARI Enterprise, an AI research platform that outperforms OpenAI in 76% of head-to-head tests and integrates with enterprise data sources to transform business intelligence with 400+ source analysis.Read More
Login
