Disney's recent animated sequels have been box office hits, so why did those movies originally go straight-to-video in the 1990s and 2000s? Before Frozen 2 grossed over $1.4 billion worldwide, Disney sequels were often much smaller movies. But as a whole, those straight-to-video sequels made over $2 billion in their first decade alone. The thing is, most of these sequels weren't produced by Walt Disney Animation Studios; instead, those movies were originally made by the now-defunct Disneytoon Studios, which produced almost all of Disney's straight-to-video sequels.

Director Tad Stones at Disneytoon Studios first pitched the idea of a straight-to-video sequel for Aladdin, which ultimately became Aladdin II: The Return of Jafar. That movie had a lukewarm critical reception, with criticisms ranging from poor production quality to a painfully obvious lack of Robin Williams, who declined to return as the genie. Despite continued poor reviews, Disney released dozens of sequels and prequels (not including spinoffs, shorts, or TV shows) only on VHS and DVD between 1994 and 2018. In an interview, Stones said that Disney CEO, Michael Eisner, and head of Feature Animation, Peter Schneider, both initially opposed the idea of making sequels, saying, "...their quality hurts the Disney reputation" (AWN). That is until they learned how much money these sequels could make.

Related: Every Live-Action Disney Remake, Ranked From Worst To Best

The production cost of Aladdin was $28 million, but it grossed over $500 million worldwide, making it the highest-grossing film of 1992. Return of Jafar raked in $300 million, but its cost to produce was a meager $3.5 million. The Lion King and The Lion King II: Simba's Pride each have similar profit margins. The Lion King grossed $766 million worldwide and had a production cost of $45 million. The pre-production for Lion King II was done by Walt Disney Animation Studios, which likely increased the budget, but Lion King II made a stunning $300 million in home video sales. Little Mermaid II: Return to the Sea and Lady and the Tramp II: Scamp's Adventure reportedly both made over $100 million. Mulan II generated at least $60 million, though it's unclear whether this number refers to domestic or worldwide sales. All of this convinced Disney to eventually make theatrical sequels to their biggest movies, an endeavor that has seen success with Ralph Breaks the Internet and Frozen 2.

The Lion King Simba's Pride

Disney’s straight-to-video sequels used cheaper production methods, hired less expensive voice actors, and re-used material. But perhaps the most egregious shortcoming of these films is that they often relied on the regression of their characters to tell their stories - this is something the theatrical sequels don't share as they're natural continuations of the original films, both story- and production-wise. For example, Mulan II and The Hunchback of Notre Dame II are among the worst offenders of regressing. The heroes either became one-dimensional caricatures of themselves or acted out of character altogether. There are standouts (Lion King 1 ½, Lion King II, Cinderella III: A Twist in Time and Aladdin and the King of Thieves each have a smattering of loyal fans), but Disney’s straight-to-video sequels are almost universally considered the worst films produced by the company.

Despite the reputation garnered by straight-to-video sequels, Disney found sequel success with Pixar. Four of Disney’s top 10 highest-grossing animated films are now sequels. Three of those sequels were animated by Pixar (Incredibles 2, Toy Story 3, Toy Story 4) and the other (Frozen 2) was by Walt Disney Animation Studios. Pixar, under the direction of John Lasseter, led Disney into a new era of fully developed sequels, with the budget and production quality to match (sometimes exceed) their predecessors. The closure of Disneytoon Studios in 2018 marked the official end of straight-to-video sequels, which had long since become obsolete due to the fall of DVD sales and the rise of streaming. However, it's the latter that allows the legacy of Disney’s straight-to-video sequels survive – thrive, even – on Disney+, while the spirit of continuing to profit on nostalgia lives on in Disney’s modern remakes. Even though the divisive “live-action” remakes of Disney classics likely won’t end anytime soon, Disney seems to have finally figured out the formula for a profitable, memorable, and charming animated sequel.

More: Why Disney Makes Proper Sequels Now (Rather than Straight-To-Video)