When The Polar Express debuted in 2004, it was hailed as a groundbreaking achievement in animation, employing motion capture technology to create a lifelike animated experience. However, despite all those technological advancements, the film faced criticism for its unusual visuals and lack of emotional resonance. While the animated approach was ambitious, a live-action version could have addressed the emotional disconnect of the animation, enhanced the film’s storytelling through authentic human performances, and created a more immersive holiday experience. Unfortunately, director Robert Zemeckis doubled down on this filmmaking tactic, employing it in his two following movies: 2007’s Beowulf and 2009’s A Christmas Carol. With this year marking the 20th anniversary of the movie’s release, here’s a look back on why a live-action version would’ve better suited it.

One of the most significant criticisms of The Polar Express is its animation style. While innovative, the motion capture technology produced characters that many found unsettling due to the "uncanny valley" effect, the character’s lifelike movements juxtaposed with emotionless eyes and stiff expressions blurring the line between human resemblance and the emotional reaction to it. While many, including myself, find it disturbing to look at, it also confuses viewers. For the longest time, I couldn’t decide if this movie was live-action or wholly animated, with the eventual realization that it’s mostly animated with motion capture acting leaving me in a place of admiration for the accomplishment yet bewildered by the decision. 

The heartwarming story of The Polar Express—centered on belief, imagination, and the magic of Christmas—relies heavily on emotional engagement. In live action, real actors could convey the nuanced emotions of the characters more effectively. Because of the animation, it is hard to relate to Hero Boy’s (yes, that’s his credited name) arc if his physicality is barely emotive. The bond between the children on the train and the enigmatic conductor would be more poignant if portrayed by real actors. A live-action Tom Hanks playing the conductor could bring more charisma and gravitas to the role, making the character more engaging and memorable.

Furthermore, the film’s climactic moments—such as the arrival at the North Pole and the protagonist’s realization of the magic of Christmas—would have felt more profound with live-action performances. The realism of live action allows for a greater suspension of disbelief because viewers can see tangible interactions between the characters and their environment. The fantastical settings of The Polar Express—from the mysterious train to the bustling North Pole—are undoubtedly imaginative. However, live-action with practical effects or seamless CGI could have achieved the same level of wonder without the drawbacks of the animation. Additionally, the North Pole’s grandeur could have been brought to life with detailed set designs and real-world textures, creating a sense of place that animation often struggles to achieve.

Since 2004, Zemeckis has only gone back to animation twice and eventually found other technical filmmaking elements to tackle: 3D in 2015’s The Walk and stationary storytelling in this year’s Here. While The Polar Express remains a cherished holiday classic for many, its reliance on animation hindered its ability to fully capture its source material's emotional depth and immersive qualities. A live-action adaptation would have allowed the story’s themes to shine more brightly through authentic performances, relatable characters, and a realistic yet magical world. Coming from a director like Zemeckis, who has spent his career challenging the technicalities of filmmaking, The Polar Express is a misstep as he could’ve gone without diving into animation.

You can follow Tyler and hear more of his thoughts on Twitter, Instagram, and Letterboxd.