The Lion King 2019

I agree, the remake isn’t great, but I don’t think it’s bad either. Certainly not enough to warrant all the hate it picked up from the crowd always calling it a “soulless live-action remake” with “no emotion”. In fact, a lot of people really seem to hate the Disney live-action remake trend in general, and I’ve never fully gotten it myself.
 
I agree, the remake isn’t great, but I don’t think it’s bad either. Certainly not enough to warrant all the hate it picked up from the crowd always calling it a “soulless live-action remake” with “no emotion”. In fact, a lot of people really seem to hate the Disney live-action remake trend in general, and I’ve never fully gotten it myself.

I mean, the movie is pretty much a one-for-one remake of the original, except they removed scenes :p

~Thylo
 
I agree, the remake isn’t great, but I don’t think it’s bad either. Certainly not enough to warrant all the hate it picked up from the crowd always calling it a “soulless live-action remake” with “no emotion”. In fact, a lot of people really seem to hate the Disney live-action remake trend in general, and I’ve never fully gotten it myself.
I mean, the movie is pretty much a one-for-one remake of the original, except they removed scenes :p

~Thylo
And they took away the expressive faces of the characters, and much of the beautiful scenery, and branded it as a live-action remake despite that no more than two seconds of the movie had any actual footage.
 
And they took away the expressive faces of the characters, and much of the beautiful scenery, and branded it as a live-action remake despite that no more than two seconds of the movie had any actual footage.
I agree that one of its biggest problems is the lack of emotion in the animal’s faces for most of the film. Especially since they did a much better doing this with the Jungle Book remake that came out a few years before (apparently this one utilized motion capture while TLK didn’t). That, plus the lack of original material (we really could’ve used a few more new scenes) it pretty much is just a shot-for-shot remake.
That said, personally I still found more good than bad things to say about the movie. The visuals are gorgeous, I enjoyed the performance of most of the voice actors, and though many will disagree on this last one, I actually think the soundtrack is more or less on par with the original’s even if the musical numbers aren’t quite as expressive themselves. Plus, though this will only appeal to a few audience members, I really liked how, just like in The Jungle Book, plenty of lesser-known species from the region appear in the film like lesser bushbaby, banded mongoose, vulturine guineafowl, bat-eared fox, dik-dik etc.
 
I agree that one of its biggest problems is the lack of emotion in the animal’s faces for most of the film. Especially since they did a much better doing this with the Jungle Book remake that came out a few years before (apparently this one utilized motion capture while TLK didn’t). That, plus the lack of original material (we really could’ve used a few more new scenes) it pretty much is just a shot-for-shot remake.
That said, personally I still found more good than bad things to say about the movie. The visuals are gorgeous, I enjoyed the performance of most of the voice actors, and though many will disagree on this last one, I actually think the soundtrack is more or less on par with the original’s even if the musical numbers aren’t quite as expressive themselves. Plus, though this will only appeal to a few audience members, I really liked how, just like in The Jungle Book, plenty of lesser-known species from the region appear in the film like lesser bushbaby, banded mongoose, vulturine guineafowl, bat-eared fox, dik-dik etc.
But the Indian Rhino! That was still in the final version, right?
 
Actually no. It was replaced in that scene with what, according to John Favreau, is specifically a northern white rhinoceros

That would've been a nice one to have even in the original trailer for conservation education value, which is allegedly the reason for which the pangolin made it into his Jungle Book. Favreau thinks about conservation and education in his animal films, which I think is very cool. Fingers crossed this means we get some positive vultures (i.e. not just Shere Khan's dialogue-less henchmen) in the sequel, what with the Old World vulture crisis and all.

Also, can't stop thinking the random jerboas in Jungle Book would've been a better candidate than an Indian rhino to "appear" as a continuity gag in the LK trailer.
 
I think now that animators are skilled in producing large numbers of CG animals, I would like to see some new stories which were earlier impossible to film.

One example are Terry Pratchett's Discworld stories. They are enormously popular books and quite wise. But when they were written it was impossible financially to film a flat Earth on a back of a giant turtle, hundred-legged luggage, lots of dragons, trolls, dwarves, Death riding a flying horse, a photo camera powered by a little imp painting pictures and whatever.

Another is Katurran Odyssey. A wonderful book, which started as a set of animal illustrations, but has a very good story, too. Aimed at younger readers than Pratchett. There is a village of lemurs, a fossa God who is almost forgotten but still omnipresent, tribes and whole empires of different monkeys, a journey on the back of a sea turtle and much more.

But I think it may be technically and creatively too challenging for Disney. Disney is mostly about showing the same story for the nth time.
 
One example are Terry Pratchett's Discworld stories. They are enormously popular books and quite wise. But when they were written it was impossible financially to film a flat Earth on a back of a giant turtle, hundred-legged luggage, lots of dragons, trolls, dwarves, Death riding a flying horse, a photo camera powered by a little imp painting pictures and whatever.
As a massive Discworld fan I second these sentiments, the pitiful adaptations we've had so far have been pretty terrible in all aspects, even if Going Postal had it's plus points. Good Omens has shown that you can adapt a Pratchett work with a big enough budget.
But I think it may be technically and creatively too challenging for Disney. Disney is mostly about showing the same story for the nth time.
I think that Disney* were going to adapt Mort by Terry Pratchett at one point, would have loved to have seen that.

*Might not have been Disney specifically, but there was an idea floating around Hollywood in the late eighties/early nineties about an animated adaptation. :)
 
True, none of the Discworld adaptations worked so far. Some kept the serious layer of the story but failed to pass the over-the-top fun. Others looked like the filmmakers tried to make a satire into a straight action story.

I am sure some studio in future will make a fortune out of it.
 
I just thought that another good topic for Disney is a remake of Michael Endes The Neverending Story. Another one which has incredibly many fantastic characters and is good for adults as much as children. Especially the motif how lies and adverts destroy imagination is as valid as ever.
 
Back
Top