|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 7:50:29 GMT
I have only watched 25 minutes so far and it feels so hollow and pointless, even more so than most of the other Disney remakes. Great effects and I appreciate the different approach they took with Scar, but aside from that there isn't much to offer.
It is a movie that seems like it will be effective only for people who have never seen the original animated movie.
What are your thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Aug 27, 2023 8:03:06 GMT
Some people say Lion King 2019 is equivalent to 1998 Psycho.
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Aug 27, 2023 8:03:22 GMT
The cartoon animals emote much better over their live action counterparts.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 8:15:12 GMT
Some people say Lion King 2019 is equivalent to 1998 Psycho. I had that same thought while watching it actually, though The Lion King (2019) is definitely the better movie. Psycho is more interesting to watch though, so I don't know what that says about The Lion King remake.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 8:18:02 GMT
The cartoon animals emote much better over their live action counterparts. Yes, that is one of the major issues with trying to make animated animals look photorealistic. The same is the case with Flounder and Sabastian in The Little Mermaid remake.
|
|
|
Post by jcush on Aug 27, 2023 8:31:27 GMT
The cartoon animals emote much better over their live action counterparts. Yes, that is one of the major issues with trying to make animated animals look photorealistic. The same is the case with Flounder and Sabastian in The Little Mermaid remake. Personally, I think talking animals just works a lot better in animation than in live action.
|
|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Aug 27, 2023 8:32:02 GMT
The cartoon animals emote much better over their live action counterparts. Yes, that is one of the major issues with trying to make animated animals look photorealistic. The same is the case with Flounder and Sabastian in The Little Mermaid remake. I don’t get this change -
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 8:36:58 GMT
Yes, that is one of the major issues with trying to make animated animals look photorealistic. The same is the case with Flounder and Sabastian in The Little Mermaid remake. Personally, I think talking animals just works a lot better in animation than in live action. That goes without saying.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 8:39:08 GMT
Yes, that is one of the major issues with trying to make animated animals look photorealistic. The same is the case with Flounder and Sabastian in The Little Mermaid remake. I don’t get this change - That is a similar problem. No lions look like animated Scar, so with the movie trying to be realistic in what the animals look like they can't make Scar look like animated Scar.
|
|
|
Post by rudeboy on Aug 27, 2023 9:03:13 GMT
I never saw it, but can anyone name a billion+ earning movie that was more quickly forgotten? The thing was a huge global smash a mere four years ago, but this is the first mention of it I've seen in ages.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 9:08:58 GMT
I never saw it, but can anyone name a billion+ earning movie that was more quickly forgotten? The thing was a huge global smash a mere four years ago, but this is the first mention of it I've seen in ages. A few come close. Do people remember Frozen II?
|
|
|
Post by rudeboy on Aug 27, 2023 9:19:54 GMT
I never saw it, but can anyone name a billion+ earning movie that was more quickly forgotten? The thing was a huge global smash a mere four years ago, but this is the first mention of it I've seen in ages. A few come close. Do people remember Frozen II? I have family and friends whose kids still watch Frozen II. Not so The Lion King, although the '94 film is of course still widely popular.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 9:22:20 GMT
A few come close. Do people remember Frozen II? I have family and friends whose kids still watch Frozen II. Not so The Lion King, although the '94 film is of course still widely popular. I keep forgetting Frozen II even exists, whereas The Lion King remake has stayed in my memory from how big of a deal it was at the time it was released.
|
|
GiantFan1980
Junior Member
@scifi1980
Posts: 3,452
Likes: 4,514
|
Post by GiantFan1980 on Aug 27, 2023 9:29:40 GMT
Marketing wise, Frozen was like the spiritual successor to Lion King back in 1994. Both were smash hits to the point people were getting sick of the overexposure. Both eras had parents complaining about their kids watching these movies ad nauseam.
Never watched the live action remake of LK. The 94 movie was untouchable and didn't need an upgrade.
|
|
|
Post by pennypacker on Aug 27, 2023 14:21:15 GMT
The Jungle Book remake wasn’t as bad, and as terrible as Dumbo was - the CGI elephant had more emotion than any of the actual actors in the movie.
I’ll never understand what went soo wrong with TLK.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 14:32:13 GMT
The Jungle Book remake wasn’t as bad, and as terrible as Dumbo was - the CGI elephant had more emotion than any of the actual actors in the movie. I’ll never understand what went soo wrong with TLK. The Jungle Book is better because it isn;t a shot for shot remake and has some heart and a human character, as bland as that character is he is still a real person in the role. I don't think Dumbo is terrible, but it definitely isn't good. As much as I hate to say this, Michael Keaton is one of the major issues I have with the movie. It is one of the few bad performances he has given. The finale is the biggest issue I have with the movie though.
|
|
|
Post by kolchak92 on Aug 27, 2023 16:52:53 GMT
It just kind of bothered me that they went out of their way to only hire black actors to voice the lions, to the point where they wouldn't even consider letting Jeremy Irons reprise his role. Lions don't have a fucking race. And if it's because it's set in Africa, I don't remember Favreau and company only casting Indian actors when they remade The Jungle Book.
|
|
|
Post by amyghost on Aug 27, 2023 17:06:13 GMT
It just kind of bothered me that they went out of their way to only hire black actors to voice the lions, to the point where they wouldn't even consider letting Jeremy Irons reprise his role. Lions don't have a fucking race. And if it's because it's set in Africa, I don't remember Favreau and company only casting Indian actors when they remade The Jungle Book. It's a 'pride' thing, dont'cha know .
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 17:17:59 GMT
My rating - 5/10
Here are some of my thoughts.
The iconic opening does not work here. It doesn't have the flow of the original and the song isn't sung anywhere near as powerful as when sang in the original. It can't capture the beauty of the animation in the 1994 movie and I think the expressions of the animals are very important in this scene.
None of the song scenes in this version are effective because they don't fit with the more realistic lions. It especially doesn't work when Scar is singing because it doesn't fit with how the character of portrayed. His evil is more subtle in this version.
There is a lack of heart throughout much of the movie.
The voicework by Donald Glover is bland and he has no chemistry with anyone.
The hyenas are just a big nothing in this version. They have almost no personality. The actors who voice the hyenas are given almost nothing to work with, which makes it especially strange that they cast Keegan-Michael Key to do one of their voices.
Here is what does work.
Seth Rogan is naturally good as Pumba and the realistic look of Pumba is quite amusing. Timone is just okay, but still one of the better voices in the movie.
Everything about Zazu works here. John Oliver is perfection and cleverly cast. He really has the only truly funny moments in the movie.
I do like the look of Scar here and think the movie was smart to not go with the theatrical way Scar is portrayed in the original. Chiwetel Ejiofor is menacing in the movie and while not as memorable as Jeremy Irons he makes the part sinister in his own way. By not doing exactly what the original does it gives the movie the feeling of at least something new.
The visual effects are mostly very impressive.
The final 20 minutes are by far the most effective parts of the movie and this is where the more majestic look or realistic lions works very well. It is in this last 20 minutes that almost captures the soul of the 1994 movie. Almost.
Hans Zimmer's score is still very good, though he changes it in subtle ways here and there that make it slightly less powerful.
|
|
|
Post by moviemouth on Aug 27, 2023 17:21:48 GMT
It just kind of bothered me that they went out of their way to only hire black actors to voice the lions, to the point where they wouldn't even consider letting Jeremy Irons reprise his role. Lions don't have a fucking race. And if it's because it's set in Africa, I don't remember Favreau and company only casting Indian actors when they remade The Jungle Book. I am actually glad they didn't re-hire Irons. For more details read my comments.
|
|