The Lion King (2019): A Horrible Idea from the Beginning
The Lion King serves as a remake of the original 1994 film of the same name from Disney Animation Studios. In contrast to the traditional cel animation style of said original, this version opted for a photorealistic CG approach. Jon Favreau directed a screenplay which was adapted by Jeff Nathanson from the original material by Irene Mecchi, Jonathan Roberts, and Linda Woolverton. The film was released worldwide in theaters on July 19, 2019.
The only person to return from the original voice cast is James Earl Jones, who reprised his role as Mufasa. Those who replaced the other actors consist of Donald Glover, Beyoncé, Chiwetel Ejiofor, John Kani, Alfre Woodard, John Oliver, Seth Rogen, Billy Eichner, and Keegan-Michael Key.
The film’s page on IMDB lists this as the official synopsis:
“After the murder of his father, a young lion prince flees his kingdom only to learn the true meaning of responsibility and bravery.”
This particular review of The Lion King is 20 minutes long in the video version, but I have written a short summary here in case you would prefer to read. Either way, I hope you enjoy hearing what I have to say on this very divisive live-action remake of The Lion King.
Disney’s dangerously scary dominion over the box office continues as they keep the public happy with their superfluous, creatively inept products that they try to pass off as movies. The live-action remake of The Lion King is yet another tremendous financial success for Disney, earning over $1 billion within the first couple weeks of its release. This already exceeds the previously gargantuan success of the original film.
However, just because a lot of people are seeing a movie doesn’t necessarily mean they’re having a positive experience. The Lion King may be making a pretty penny, but one can argue that Disney is digging a pit for themselves. So many people on YouTube and other platforms are speaking out with their distaste toward what the House of Mouse is doing to beloved animated properties… myself included.
To be short of words, The Lion King is a tonal disaster.
While the film admittedly retains much of the same dialogue, storyboarding, musical sequences, and beat-for-beat storytelling as its source material, that doesn’t automatically make for a smooth transition. What that original film had in spades was personality, the likes of which comes across much better in an expressive style of animation. The talented animators at Disney knew what kind of tone their story needed to work, so they rolled with it. The result was something remarkable, for it managed to pull off being dramatic while never taking itself too seriously.
But by removing much of the color, subtleties, and exaggeration that made the original work, The Lion King remake is laughable in comparison. The creatively inept people who made the important decisions for this movie clearly don’t know that a gimmick can only take you so far. By focusing on photorealism and padding out the runtime for this version — this movie is almost 2 hours, compared to the original’s runtime that falls short of 90 minutes — a lot of problems arose.
For one thing, when the characters emote, they simply look like animals moving their mouths and nothing more. The lack of exaggerated, human-like emotions removes any sort of believability or pathos when the bland animals on the screen act and think the way humans do. (It didn’t help that most of the voice cast sounded bored while reading their lines; and, yes, that include James Earl Jones too.) Not only that, the music feels lifeless when watching these characters simply run around in dull environments desaturated of color.
I could continue on with my rant on why this film feels so superfluous, lifeless, and tonally inconsistent, but let me put it to you this way: The Lion King (2019) is basically one of those talking cats and dogs movies with a blockbuster budget. The environments and characters may be well-rendered, but because of the stilted vocal performances, weaker music, lack of subtlety, ugly color scheme, and removal of the things that made the original film special, this film is embarrassing uncanny valley at its absolute worst.
SCORE: D
AGE RECOMMENDATION: Despite being PG compared to the original film’s G rating, not much is really different here that should concern parents. The only thing is that the violence is a bit more intense due to the added “realism” of what’s seen onscreen. Other than that, this film is nearly identical to the original in terms of content, which means parents should be safe to take kids of any age. (ALL AGES)
Comments
Post a Comment