Adaptation, like scholarly discourse generally, is predicated on the assumption that there is always something new to say about beloved texts. Plays like Hamlet and Le misanthrope, novels like Anna Karenina and Dracula, and comic-book franchises like Batman and Spider-Man have generated dozens of adaptations, with more doubtless on the way. From time to time, however, an adaptation appears that seems so definitive that it preemptively halts later aspiring adaptations. Taking off from the outrage fans have expressed over recently announced reboots of the Twilight and Harry Potter franchises, this chapter considers the paradoxical ways some apparently definitive adaptations complicate the endless dialogue assumed by the process of adaptation by proposing a last word that either stops that dialogue in its tracks or continues to dominate it after other adaptations have spoken. The paradox of the film that maintains a canonical priority over its successors is illuminated by considering the different fates of what Richard Schickel has aptly called “the Disney version”: animated features that frequently eclipse the stories on which they are based. It aims to explain why so many Disney versions (e.g., Pinocchio, Dumbo, Bambi, Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmatians) have become definitive and why a smaller number of others (e.g., The Jungle Book, The Sword in the Stone, The Hunchback of Notre Dame) have not. The reception of Disney princess films raises questions about what it would mean to become the definitive version of a fairy tale. I conclude by arguing that no matter what they say, audiences are never looking for definitive adaptations; instead, they are looking for authentic adaptations. And since authenticity, as Walter Benjamin has observed, is a function projected by audiences rather than inherent in texts, audiences’ protests against remaking adaptations they call definitive reveals a great deal about the paradoxes of both definitive and authentic adaptations.