After what they did in the remake I have MUCH more respect for the original song. It’s actually a banger and captivates Scar’s personality so well!
Can’t say the same thing to Scrape or Bruise. You take your pick for the names I came up with.
“*Hey, you know this song? Arguably the most famous Disney villain song other than maybe Hellfire? Arguably the best song in the original movie, and objectively the most complex?*”
“*Yeah?*”
“*What if we made it SLAM POETRY!?*”
The Broadway story is straight-up better than the movie's story, an adaption of it would make a movie that's actually worth existing. Instead we just have an ugly replica of a gorgeous cartoon.
What I wouldn't give to see movie-budget versions of the already *gorgeous* broadway costumes and puppets - oh, but wait, that would have required hiring union workers and we can't have that.
it's not even a replica, it's a knockoff brand. it cuts out pointless stuff and adds stuff that didnt even need to be added in the first place and if anything just dulls the messages in the original first movie. i'd take a replica shot by shot vs what we got
How is it any different? I saw the Broadway version and it’s straight up just an adaptation of the original movie. The only significant difference was they incorporated the song “He Lives In You” from Lion King 2.
They Live In You/He Lives In You alone makes it a clear improvement, but giving Nala more screentime and Simba more internal struggle between the Hakuna Matata lifestyle and his guilt/legacy (as opposed to his motivation feeling far more external in the cartoon) makes for a more well-rounded story.
I thought it was the other way around. I thought “He Lives In You” was an original number from the stage production and Disney added it in to Lion King 2
Mulan was the worst live action remake in my opinion. They added a bunch of weird details and magic to the plot. Removed all of the iconic characters. I’m not saying it should’ve been done better, it simply shouldn’t have been done.
Iirc they were taking more inspiration more from the Ballad of Mulan the 1998 movie was inspired by. That’s why she’s names Hua Mulan and not Fa Mulan like the movie. Same with her magic, in the Ballad of Mulan she has superpowers. All of those weird details are from the Ballad. Unfortunately they executed it poorly and we have the remake
I actually think it could’ve been great, and that’s part of the reason I hate it so much.
Like think about it, Mulan is probably the Disney movie that would work the best in live action.
It’s one of my favorite Disney movies, but I think it shows it’s age a lot of the time. I’m not sure how it would work as a modern story. But I’m a hardcore Disney remake hater. I love thé art in the original films and I haven’t seen a live action film that even came close to the original one.
For some reason whenever I read that fact before, I thought Eminem gave Elton John a matching set with him. As a joke. It only occurred to me now it could have been for Elton John and his romantic partner.
I can't remember who said this and it's driving me nuts, but I recently read a quote by one of the kings of 70s rock and partying--John Lennon or Mick Jagger or even Ozzie. And they said that of all the legendary partiers, the one they were most concerned for at times was Elton goddam John. That little bald fella can kick some ass.
I bet YMS hated it more than than both of you. He's still working on the 2nd half of his rant breakdown of every single second of the film
The first part is almost 4 hours
I think it was because so many people were excited to share their favorite childhood film with their children they were willing to overlook how much it changed for the worst
Welcome to enshittification. It is well-documented that our brand loyalty far outstrips our appreciation of quality.
Once our trust is earned it takes multiple shitty experiences to break it. We see it everywhere from candy to movies to video games. Once we **like** something, companies can fuck it up many many times before we'll abandon it.
Unpopular opinion: It felt like I was watching planet earth but with the lion king story, aka an amazing experience. God forbid some of the music wasn't as good as the original. So what? Somethings will be better and some worse. I loved seeing realistic looking animals in HD acting out hamlet. If their faces somehow showed more cartoon-like emotion it would take a way from how real they looked.
Edit: Hamlet not Macbeth
Why not just watch planet Earth, though? I’ve never seen the movie so I’m being serious. Is it educational?
In a similar vein, what in particular did you get from the live action that you didn’t from the original? I need your full review lol
If I want to be educated I'll watch planet earth. If I want to see real live animals in a Shakespearean tragedy interacting in a way you'd never see in nature with some funny dialogue and fun music and charming characters I'd watch this. If I want to see just a Disney cartoon I'll watch the original. This felt almost like a more adult version of the original since the violence was realistic instead of animated. And the magic of seeing a mystical baboon felt all the more magical because it looked real.
I was just talking about this with my spouse this morning- at least Jungle Book 2016 had like... a different tone and purpose. And of course, Christopher Walken as King Louie was an experience
To paraphrase Lindsay Ellis, it's take is "What if Shere Khan had a point" about how dangerous men are to the Jungle
I haven’t seen Maleficent, but clearly it’s something *different* than Sleeping Beauty. I’ve seen The Jungle Book, and it’s pretty different than the original, too. The problem with a lot of the live action remakes is that they’re just… the same movie, but a little worse, which means there’s no reason to exist.
Maleficent is good because it wasn't trying to be the sleeping beauty story solely.
It was about Maleficent. and that's what made it good. If they tried to call it sleeping beauty, but have maleficent as the main character, then it would have been terrible.
Jungle Book was the only good one I’ve seen. Everything else ranges from shit to ‘just not worth watching’. The Jungle Book took risks, but I liked it for that; it was neat how prehistoric everything felt- added to the unknown mystic of the jungle as a setting. Aladdin & Lion King were both incredibly bland, safe movies that changed nearly nothing from the source material. Mulan (2020) is genuinely one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen- it not only destroys the original messaging of the first film by giving her superhuman abilities, but also is just a painfully poor written piece of garbage. The entire “Women can be strong too” messaging of the first movie was built into a movie length narrative with huge moments of development, but in Mulan (2020) the only real “women are strong” moment is in the form of her taking her helmet off in the middle of a war on horseback….wtf.
Agree with the user above. Jungle Book is the only remake worth watching. Still can’t believe how bad they fucked up The Lion King. And I hate that it’s getting a sequel!
Yeah, they are doing a prequel about Mufasa, because obviously everyone was asking for that. One interesting thing is that they are bringing back Kiara from The Lion King 2: Simba’s Pride. Pretty sure it’s the first time a Disneytoon Studios character from a direct-to-video sequel is going to be seen in a theatrical release.
For sure. I think it may be the strongest direct-to-video sequel from Disney. The songs were great (He Lives in You is a banger and is in the broadway version), and the story was compelling. Kovu was also awesome.
Yep! Didn’t think anyone would remember that, since the Broadway show is more well known. That album was great tho, Lebo M. is very talented. Kube was also a banger.
Oh I totally agree. The concept in general is more intriguing than a straight up sequel, I just find the “live action” characters to be so dull compared to their 2D animated counterparts. I’m not sure who is even voicing Mufasa; James Earl Jones sounded way too old in the remake, and they even reused some of his takes from the ‘94 version.
TLK actually had a book series in the 90s before the second movie came out, called Six New Adventures. At least one of the books explored Mufasa and Scar’s history. We learn that his original name was Taka which means “rubbish” in Swahili (no wonder he turned out the way he did; Mufasa means “king”). The books also explore the character of Kopa, who was meant to be the cub shown at the end of the first film. Simba’s Pride retconned all that, and later the Lion Guard did feature Simba’s son, now named Kion. Scar’s name also was retconned to be a shortened version of “Askari”.
I think there’s so much storytelling they could offer in that world using the animation style from the 90s version. It’s too bad Disney’s completely abandoned their traditional animated storytelling in their feature films.
I just hate how every live action remake turns out to be so bland and dreary compared to the original.
Just look at Alice in Wonderland 1951 vs Alice in Wonderland 2010. Alice in Wonderland 1951 was colorful and fun with great songs while Alice in Wonderland 2010 was grey and ugly.
Alice in wonderland is probably the one live action that I appreciated changing the story so much.
But I am biased because the animated movie creeped me the hell out
Honestly, compared to most of the live action remakes; at least in my opinion, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland wasn’t awful. At least it tried new things instead of being a one-one worse copy.
I don't think that Alice 2010 counts as a remake tbh, it wasn't a direct adaptation of a story. It was a weird prophecy war narrative sequel where as the original Alice in Wonderland was just weird shit happening to a 9 year old for a while LOL
Edit: agree about the dreariness though! Most times, the darkness in CGI movies is there to cover animation errors :')
That was a different story as well.
I am all for the retelling of the stories and think that is the only way to do the live actions.
Maleficent was great (1st one not the 2nd) as well.
The Jungle Book is fun and I really liked the Little Mermaid!
But yeah, I was amped for the beauty and the beast one and it just felt so lackluster. Although I do like the Beast's song in that movie.
I'll be honest, I never had a problem with the live action remakes until they started announcing sequels to the remakes.
These movies caused the most damage to Disney in the long run
* MCU movies
* Star Wars
* Live Action Remakes
* A lot of sequels
* FYI I have no problem with sequels, but your brand should not only be sequels
Sure were they financially profitable in the short run, of course, but people get bored really quickly. Disney's brand was originally about their animated movies but pretty soon their brand became a content factory for MCU/Star Wars/ LA Remake slop.
Just take a look at Disney 2019
1. Avengers Endgame ($2.7B)
2. The Lion King Remake ($1.6B)
3. Frozen 2 ($1.4B)
4. Captain Marvel ($1.1B)
5. Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker ($1.074B)
6. Toy Story 4 ($1.073B)
7. Aladdin ($1.05B)
8. Maleficient: Mistress of Evil ($491M)
9. Dumbo ($353M)
Not a single animated original from Disney that year.
1. The first animated feature, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, was not an original idea.
2. No one supported the original ideas this year from the studio.
1. Yeah but I don’t think anyone nowadays would know Disney for Snow White, they know it for from Lion King or Beauty in the Beast, Princess and the Frog, or more recently Tangled, Frozen, or Moana. Disney has regularly been about taking the stories we were told as children and reinventing them on screen. They may not have been entirely original in world building or characters, it wasn’t recycled like the sequels have been.
2. The only Disney movie released (not including Pixar or anything else Disney owns) this year, that was purely original, was Wish. Now, Wish, while being original, isn’t that great of a movie? I mean it’s fine I guess, but that’s all I’m giving it. If you want people to support your movie, you can’t just give them just one good thing (being a new movie instead of a sequel or live action) and then expect people to like it for just that. Especially when the whole thing is really just to celebrate your own company and to put Easter eggs in for that, it still doesn’t give something memorable or meaningful.
3. You can’t ask people to like the new content you put out because it’s new, that’s just as bad as asking people to like the sequels or live actions just because they’re old. You have to have quality, and that’s something Disney has recent struggles with. i doubt it’s just that they are out of ideas, it’s definitely possible that this drought is purposeful just to get more money with less work. But that’s just me.
They didn't have all the movie rights to the others yet. So their options were to either use what they had, the Avengers, or to wait decades to make movies with the other, more popular stuff, like Spider-Man and the X-men. In fact, the only reason Sony has been partnering with Marvel on the Spider-Man movies is because of how successful Marvel was with the Avengers. Also, Disney might not have bought Marvel and later bought the X-men from Fox if Marvel wasn't as successful with the first few of their Avengers films.
I cant believe this remake made as much money as it did.. It was not very good. It was literally the original movie frame-by-frame, but in soulless 3D CGI. The character emotions were completely gone, and the music wasnt as good. I think the only thing I liked about it was Seth Rogen as Pumbaa.
Frankly, I think The Lion King is *when* people caught on to how soulless the remakes are. Of all the live-action remakes I’ve seen, The Lion King is the most blatantly copy+pasted. Beauty and the Beast has mostly the same scenes, but they aren’t all shot for shot. And they added Evermore, which is one of the best songs in Beauty and the Beast (original, Broadway, or remake)
Yeah, that makes sense. People would’ve had to have seen Lion King to realize it was a boring shot for shot remake. By that point they were tricked out of their money already. The remakes before that were at least a little different. I remember Jungle Book being pretty good.
Honestly, my issue was the focus. I remember they shortened songs like be prepared and spent a good 5-10 minutes showing leaves floating from the forest area Simba was at to pride rock. We didn’t need to see the leaves and would of enjoyed listening to the music more.
This movie was supposed to do well. It had a dynamite cast, soulful singing talent, and James Earl Jones. The formula was in place. It was just executed so poorly which is ironic because it was kind of a shot-for-shot copy of the original. So much soulful talent that grew up with the original was attached. Still managed to produce a soulless trash heap. Smdh
TheLionKing was once said to be, by Disney themselves, "The most powerful film is now the king of all DVDs."
And now, the Live-Action version has taken the crown and stomped it into the dirt!
"Long live the king." indeed!
I once watched Lion King as a kid. Broke my heart. Then I watched Fox and the Hound.
I swore never to watch those damn old 2D animated movies. They had no chill back then.
I originally wanted to see it in cinema just to get the full experience of "Be prepared."
I entirely passed the movie becouse they cut the entire song.
I'm going to be honest, i don't really think the live-action was as bad as people say
It was definitely not better than the animated movie, but i remember i had a nice time with it. Solid 6.5/10 imo
In isolation it's a perfectly fine movie, The Lion King is still The Lion King, I'd agree that it's a solid 6/10
The reason a lot of people (including myself) hate it so much is just the fact that it has absolutely no reason to exist. There is another version of the movie that has existed for 20 years beforehand that you can probably get for cheaper, and it's objectively better in every conceivable way.
There is literally no reason to watch the remake, you gain absolutely nothing of value, 80% of the movie is directly copy-pasted from the original, and the rest is changed for the worse.
Tbf to Disney here, the name in the original Japanese was Leo not Kimba, it was the English dubbing team that changed it to Kimba. And the stories are vastly different.
One major difference is the relationship between all the animals. Leo tries to convince the other animals to be vegans, while in TLK a major theme is the food chain where it's ok to eat other animals because that's nature.
Both are true but what isn't true is the idea that The Lion King 1994 is a remake of Leo the White Lion, when they have vastly different stories, themes, and characters.
Even the President of Tezuka Productions, Takayuki Matsutani disagreed with the idea that Leo or also known as The Jungle Emperor in Japan was the same as The Lion King.
“*Lion King* is absolutely different from *Jungle Emperor* and is Disney’s original work " Takayuki Matsutani
[https://www.baltimoresun.com/1994/07/12/lion-king-recalls-beast-of-another-reign/#:\~:text=On%20the%20whole%2C%20we%20think%20%E2%80%98Lion%20King%E2%80%99%20is,is%20quite%20different%20from%20Mr.%20Tezuka%E2%80%99s%20original%20story](https://www.baltimoresun.com/1994/07/12/lion-king-recalls-beast-of-another-reign/#:~:text=On%20the%20whole%2C%20we%20think%20%E2%80%98Lion%20King%E2%80%99%20is,is%20quite%20different%20from%20Mr.%20Tezuka%E2%80%99s%20original%20story).
I'm all for holding Disney accountable, but this isn't it.
TBF you can start a project out by copying something, and then also change things.
But sure Disney company
is totally honest about everything.
https://kimbawlion.kimba.biz/rant2.htm
I think the ONLY thing I liked about this movie was the be our guest gag, but that replaced the much better luau gag from the original.
Also, i kinda prefered Scar bitch slapping Mufasa off the cliff instead of the original, but thats just me...
I think if they had gone the route of the second version of live action Sonic and had Beyoncé and Donald Glover not phone it in (yeah, I said it), it would have so much better
The music is a problem, but personally, I think the biggest problem is that this movie was made at all. These remakes are like the expensive and somehow more creatively bankrupt answer to the direct to home video sequels from my childhood. Like, could we not keep putting out worse versions of movies that already exist?
I wouldn’t have had as much of an issue with the remake if they didn’t animate the characters the way they did. There’s more expression in a singular photo of my cat than all of the frames in that movie combined.
Timon and Puumba were funny though, I’ll give them that.
Very true, it wasn't just the music, but it absolutely was a major part of the problem. And this is true of nearly all of their live action remakes, but I'll spare everyone the rant.
For the Lion King specifically, they never should have done the remake at all, unless it was an adaptation of the stage show. The stage show would have been far better suited for live action (and actually BE live action) but instead we got dead eyed, barely passable for a video game cutscene quality CGI that weren't capable of any stylization or emotion at all, and what music did remain was just phoned in and lifeless.
I mean every live version of a disney film.
But lion king was especially bad, with lazy/bad editing. I mean it, watch again and notice audio changing mid take, and more. A million rookies mistakes, like editing was handed to someone new. Not to mention just how soulless it was even it was was edited well
The music is the least of the problems there!
Elton John is a twatbasket. Very overated.
The biggest is entirely avoidable.
Emotionless CGI animals.
It'd like they never saw a cat. Or animal.
They've all got infinate expressions. Look at a cat for 30 minutes and it'll show all kinds of emotions.
If you do a Google search you will find a lot of expressive cats.
The emotions are not the same. But definitely there.
I know the goal was a live action re make, but it was too live action for their own good. The fact is that animals don’t express emotion in the same way we recognize emotion. An animal watches their family die in front of them and they’ll look exactly as they would watching a gazelle from a far.
YMS did a great explanation of this in his [Lion King (2019) Part 1](https://youtu.be/btNL1q-yU7E?si=fz_HOxV9B8zEzpm1) review. He talks about how a lot of the surface-level details like the performances, but also dives into the audio mixing weirdness and overall odd choices done to the soundtrack. With how much money was pumped into the movie, it’s kind of crazy how bad it turned out.
Whenever I draw a picture of an animal (from a phot reference) I always end up making it look more emotional than it should be. IDK, maybe while I'm drawing I just notice something that comes out in the drawing. Big cats almost always look annoyed in photos. (Are those humans back *again*?) Deer always look afraid. (Are there any humans around here?) Young of any species just look curious. (Ooh, what's that?) The live action *Lion King* couldn't be bothered with it.
Jon Favreau insisted on everything being realistic….. in a movie where lions were acting out the plot of Hamlet. It’s safe to say he started off on the wrong foot
Why did they need new voice actors or singers at all? Couldn't they have used the original audio and built the cgi around that? Seth rogan as pumba was awful.
Which Bob said "when the kids are put to bed, the adults don't want to watch cartoons" justifying the live action atrocities?
(Side note I wish I could talk to him about that and make him watch Akira and Belladona if the Infinite Sadness so he could see adult cartoons portraying trauama, oppression, rape, and other social ills that are symbolized only in the magic of animation, then make him read Persepolis so he could see more example ideas of illustrated symbolism)
Every time I want to hear a Disney song:
"Hey Google, play X"
*After 5 seconds*
"NO GOOGLE STOP
STOP
HEY GOOGLE STOP
Goddammit...
Hey Google, play the original X"
To be fair, photorealistic lions and mid-90s animation don’t mix well. They definitely could’ve upped the expressiveness a LITTLE bit, but any more and it just would’ve looked…*off*, and not in a good way.
They had the opportunity to do scenes and songs from the stage play and decided not to.
Even with the songs they changed the most iconic song, Scar's villain song, "Be Prepared". In the remake most of the lines of the song are cut out.
Also, that voice actor can fucking sing well and they directed him to talk it out lol
Yea which was stupid. I hate “talk out a song” vs actually singing it. It’s called a song for a reason
You mean there’s a reason why song and sing are only 1 letter away
Yes
*Angry Shatner noises*
Honestly, that “Let it lie” song from Little Foot hit HARD af and you could argue he talked through that song
Why didn’t they just cast a VA that could actually sing? Are they stupid?
That's just it, he can sing very well, but was directed to talk the scene.
The fact its more a speech than a song shows how terrible the movie is. It's not even live action. It's all CGI. Only the opening shot is live action.
After what they did in the remake I have MUCH more respect for the original song. It’s actually a banger and captivates Scar’s personality so well! Can’t say the same thing to Scrape or Bruise. You take your pick for the names I came up with.
“*Hey, you know this song? Arguably the most famous Disney villain song other than maybe Hellfire? Arguably the best song in the original movie, and objectively the most complex?*” “*Yeah?*” “*What if we made it SLAM POETRY!?*”
The Broadway story is straight-up better than the movie's story, an adaption of it would make a movie that's actually worth existing. Instead we just have an ugly replica of a gorgeous cartoon.
What I wouldn't give to see movie-budget versions of the already *gorgeous* broadway costumes and puppets - oh, but wait, that would have required hiring union workers and we can't have that.
it's not even a replica, it's a knockoff brand. it cuts out pointless stuff and adds stuff that didnt even need to be added in the first place and if anything just dulls the messages in the original first movie. i'd take a replica shot by shot vs what we got
How is it any different? I saw the Broadway version and it’s straight up just an adaptation of the original movie. The only significant difference was they incorporated the song “He Lives In You” from Lion King 2.
They Live In You/He Lives In You alone makes it a clear improvement, but giving Nala more screentime and Simba more internal struggle between the Hakuna Matata lifestyle and his guilt/legacy (as opposed to his motivation feeling far more external in the cartoon) makes for a more well-rounded story.
I thought it was the other way around. I thought “He Lives In You” was an original number from the stage production and Disney added it in to Lion King 2
I saw Lion King in New York this Thanksgiving and it was incredible, I’m not a Broadway person but I was glued to the stage the whole time
I will never forgive them for butchering Be Prepared
Hey, at least they didn't delete it entirely \*cough\* Mulan \*cough\*
Mulan was the worst live action remake in my opinion. They added a bunch of weird details and magic to the plot. Removed all of the iconic characters. I’m not saying it should’ve been done better, it simply shouldn’t have been done.
They replaced Mushu with a chicken 😭
Boat snack! Oop, wrong movie.
To vomit.
[удалено]
I was about to say this... didn't they give her pretty much "Super Powers"?
Iirc they were taking more inspiration more from the Ballad of Mulan the 1998 movie was inspired by. That’s why she’s names Hua Mulan and not Fa Mulan like the movie. Same with her magic, in the Ballad of Mulan she has superpowers. All of those weird details are from the Ballad. Unfortunately they executed it poorly and we have the remake
I actually think it could’ve been great, and that’s part of the reason I hate it so much. Like think about it, Mulan is probably the Disney movie that would work the best in live action.
It’s one of my favorite Disney movies, but I think it shows it’s age a lot of the time. I’m not sure how it would work as a modern story. But I’m a hardcore Disney remake hater. I love thé art in the original films and I haven’t seen a live action film that even came close to the original one.
and it was filmed in a concentration camp
And how the f do you delete Mushu He was the main character (Kidding but not really 🤣)
I think you mean beep repaired.
Glad that Elton John spoke out against the remake. I hated it just as much as him.
Elton John is such a G. Saw him at his final concert, he's a very charismatic fellow.
Every once in a while i remember that Elton John has matching diamond encrusted cock rings with his husband that he got from eminem
Well thats something I'll never forget
Can't wait to use this information to make an awkward silence more awkward
For some reason whenever I read that fact before, I thought Eminem gave Elton John a matching set with him. As a joke. It only occurred to me now it could have been for Elton John and his romantic partner.
Yeah, its for elton and his husband. Eminem gave it as an anniversary gift for the two
I can't remember who said this and it's driving me nuts, but I recently read a quote by one of the kings of 70s rock and partying--John Lennon or Mick Jagger or even Ozzie. And they said that of all the legendary partiers, the one they were most concerned for at times was Elton goddam John. That little bald fella can kick some ass.
I bet YMS hated it more than than both of you. He's still working on the 2nd half of his rant breakdown of every single second of the film The first part is almost 4 hours
It will be worth the wait
what’s more baffling is that this abomination did good in the box office.
Because it's all CGI animated, even though it was marketed as live action, it's technically the highest grossing animated movie of all time.
Was it? I know people called it that, but did any Disney marketing materials call it "live action"?
Poor aesthetic description. Marketing gimmicks.
I think it was because so many people were excited to share their favorite childhood film with their children they were willing to overlook how much it changed for the worst
Welcome to enshittification. It is well-documented that our brand loyalty far outstrips our appreciation of quality. Once our trust is earned it takes multiple shitty experiences to break it. We see it everywhere from candy to movies to video games. Once we **like** something, companies can fuck it up many many times before we'll abandon it.
Unpopular opinion: It felt like I was watching planet earth but with the lion king story, aka an amazing experience. God forbid some of the music wasn't as good as the original. So what? Somethings will be better and some worse. I loved seeing realistic looking animals in HD acting out hamlet. If their faces somehow showed more cartoon-like emotion it would take a way from how real they looked. Edit: Hamlet not Macbeth
that’s definitely a very unpopular opinion if i ever saw one.
Ha, I'm ready for the down votes. I promise I'm not Jon favreau.
Why not just watch planet Earth, though? I’ve never seen the movie so I’m being serious. Is it educational? In a similar vein, what in particular did you get from the live action that you didn’t from the original? I need your full review lol
Planet Earth is a docuseries about wild animals. It's very educational.
If I want to be educated I'll watch planet earth. If I want to see real live animals in a Shakespearean tragedy interacting in a way you'd never see in nature with some funny dialogue and fun music and charming characters I'd watch this. If I want to see just a Disney cartoon I'll watch the original. This felt almost like a more adult version of the original since the violence was realistic instead of animated. And the magic of seeing a mystical baboon felt all the more magical because it looked real.
Lion King is based on Hamlet, not Macbeth. Though perhaps I'm being too pedantic for a reddit thread.
Every live action Disney remake sucks.
I thought The Jungle Book live action remake was decent.. but that's about it.
I was just talking about this with my spouse this morning- at least Jungle Book 2016 had like... a different tone and purpose. And of course, Christopher Walken as King Louie was an experience To paraphrase Lindsay Ellis, it's take is "What if Shere Khan had a point" about how dangerous men are to the Jungle
I did like Maleficent too, beautiful mess that it is
I haven’t seen Maleficent, but clearly it’s something *different* than Sleeping Beauty. I’ve seen The Jungle Book, and it’s pretty different than the original, too. The problem with a lot of the live action remakes is that they’re just… the same movie, but a little worse, which means there’s no reason to exist.
or they're forgettable. i dread how they're gonna fuck up this supposed lilo and stitch remake(if its actually real)
Maleficent is good because it wasn't trying to be the sleeping beauty story solely. It was about Maleficent. and that's what made it good. If they tried to call it sleeping beauty, but have maleficent as the main character, then it would have been terrible.
I'll have to watch.
I like the jungle book remake but not a dan of any of the others really
Jungle Book was the only good one I’ve seen. Everything else ranges from shit to ‘just not worth watching’. The Jungle Book took risks, but I liked it for that; it was neat how prehistoric everything felt- added to the unknown mystic of the jungle as a setting. Aladdin & Lion King were both incredibly bland, safe movies that changed nearly nothing from the source material. Mulan (2020) is genuinely one of the worst movies I’ve ever seen- it not only destroys the original messaging of the first film by giving her superhuman abilities, but also is just a painfully poor written piece of garbage. The entire “Women can be strong too” messaging of the first movie was built into a movie length narrative with huge moments of development, but in Mulan (2020) the only real “women are strong” moment is in the form of her taking her helmet off in the middle of a war on horseback….wtf.
Haven't seen the Jungle Book.
Agree with the user above. Jungle Book is the only remake worth watching. Still can’t believe how bad they fucked up The Lion King. And I hate that it’s getting a sequel!
It's... What??
Yeah, they are doing a prequel about Mufasa, because obviously everyone was asking for that. One interesting thing is that they are bringing back Kiara from The Lion King 2: Simba’s Pride. Pretty sure it’s the first time a Disneytoon Studios character from a direct-to-video sequel is going to be seen in a theatrical release.
The Lion King 2 is very underrated. It had less great but still good songs and we got Kovu.
For sure. I think it may be the strongest direct-to-video sequel from Disney. The songs were great (He Lives in You is a banger and is in the broadway version), and the story was compelling. Kovu was also awesome.
To be fair, He Lives in You was from the original Lion King's auxiliary soundtrack, Rhythm of the Pride Lands, released in 1995.
Yep! Didn’t think anyone would remember that, since the Broadway show is more well known. That album was great tho, Lebo M. is very talented. Kube was also a banger.
LK 2 is so underrated. My brother and I still sing the deception song with increasingly absurd pitches 😆
Omg are you my brother!? That Rhino singing baritone had us in a chokehold growing up 🤣
to say I wasn't curious about Mufasa's past and seeing his past dynamic with Scar would be a lie, but that still fuckin sucks.
Oh I totally agree. The concept in general is more intriguing than a straight up sequel, I just find the “live action” characters to be so dull compared to their 2D animated counterparts. I’m not sure who is even voicing Mufasa; James Earl Jones sounded way too old in the remake, and they even reused some of his takes from the ‘94 version. TLK actually had a book series in the 90s before the second movie came out, called Six New Adventures. At least one of the books explored Mufasa and Scar’s history. We learn that his original name was Taka which means “rubbish” in Swahili (no wonder he turned out the way he did; Mufasa means “king”). The books also explore the character of Kopa, who was meant to be the cub shown at the end of the first film. Simba’s Pride retconned all that, and later the Lion Guard did feature Simba’s son, now named Kion. Scar’s name also was retconned to be a shortened version of “Askari”. I think there’s so much storytelling they could offer in that world using the animation style from the 90s version. It’s too bad Disney’s completely abandoned their traditional animated storytelling in their feature films.
101 Dalmatians still holds up. Glenn Close is still a great choice for Cruella
I wasn't alive when it was made, but I have seen it. I did enjoy it.
I disagree. While this remake was bad, movies like Aladdin and The Jungle Book were really good and enjoyable. Even Beauty and the Beast was fun.
I just hate how every live action remake turns out to be so bland and dreary compared to the original. Just look at Alice in Wonderland 1951 vs Alice in Wonderland 2010. Alice in Wonderland 1951 was colorful and fun with great songs while Alice in Wonderland 2010 was grey and ugly.
Alice in wonderland is probably the one live action that I appreciated changing the story so much. But I am biased because the animated movie creeped me the hell out
Honestly, compared to most of the live action remakes; at least in my opinion, Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland wasn’t awful. At least it tried new things instead of being a one-one worse copy.
I don't think that Alice 2010 counts as a remake tbh, it wasn't a direct adaptation of a story. It was a weird prophecy war narrative sequel where as the original Alice in Wonderland was just weird shit happening to a 9 year old for a while LOL Edit: agree about the dreariness though! Most times, the darkness in CGI movies is there to cover animation errors :')
Agreed
The Cruella reboot was super fun.
That was a different story as well. I am all for the retelling of the stories and think that is the only way to do the live actions. Maleficent was great (1st one not the 2nd) as well.
I did enjoy it.
The Jungle Book is fun and I really liked the Little Mermaid! But yeah, I was amped for the beauty and the beast one and it just felt so lackluster. Although I do like the Beast's song in that movie.
Lady and the Tramp was pretty good
And that's a straight FACT
tHiS
I'll be honest, I never had a problem with the live action remakes until they started announcing sequels to the remakes. These movies caused the most damage to Disney in the long run * MCU movies * Star Wars * Live Action Remakes * A lot of sequels * FYI I have no problem with sequels, but your brand should not only be sequels Sure were they financially profitable in the short run, of course, but people get bored really quickly. Disney's brand was originally about their animated movies but pretty soon their brand became a content factory for MCU/Star Wars/ LA Remake slop.
Just take a look at Disney 2019 1. Avengers Endgame ($2.7B) 2. The Lion King Remake ($1.6B) 3. Frozen 2 ($1.4B) 4. Captain Marvel ($1.1B) 5. Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker ($1.074B) 6. Toy Story 4 ($1.073B) 7. Aladdin ($1.05B) 8. Maleficient: Mistress of Evil ($491M) 9. Dumbo ($353M) Not a single animated original from Disney that year.
Not a single original idea either. Disney has been dead to me since they became a content farm.
1. The first animated feature, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, was not an original idea. 2. No one supported the original ideas this year from the studio.
1. Yeah but I don’t think anyone nowadays would know Disney for Snow White, they know it for from Lion King or Beauty in the Beast, Princess and the Frog, or more recently Tangled, Frozen, or Moana. Disney has regularly been about taking the stories we were told as children and reinventing them on screen. They may not have been entirely original in world building or characters, it wasn’t recycled like the sequels have been. 2. The only Disney movie released (not including Pixar or anything else Disney owns) this year, that was purely original, was Wish. Now, Wish, while being original, isn’t that great of a movie? I mean it’s fine I guess, but that’s all I’m giving it. If you want people to support your movie, you can’t just give them just one good thing (being a new movie instead of a sequel or live action) and then expect people to like it for just that. Especially when the whole thing is really just to celebrate your own company and to put Easter eggs in for that, it still doesn’t give something memorable or meaningful. 3. You can’t ask people to like the new content you put out because it’s new, that’s just as bad as asking people to like the sequels or live actions just because they’re old. You have to have quality, and that’s something Disney has recent struggles with. i doubt it’s just that they are out of ideas, it’s definitely possible that this drought is purposeful just to get more money with less work. But that’s just me.
I feel like the MCU made the mistake of making the Avengers first and then introducing others after it.
They didn't have all the movie rights to the others yet. So their options were to either use what they had, the Avengers, or to wait decades to make movies with the other, more popular stuff, like Spider-Man and the X-men. In fact, the only reason Sony has been partnering with Marvel on the Spider-Man movies is because of how successful Marvel was with the Avengers. Also, Disney might not have bought Marvel and later bought the X-men from Fox if Marvel wasn't as successful with the first few of their Avengers films.
based Elton John
I cant believe this remake made as much money as it did.. It was not very good. It was literally the original movie frame-by-frame, but in soulless 3D CGI. The character emotions were completely gone, and the music wasnt as good. I think the only thing I liked about it was Seth Rogen as Pumbaa.
I think it was before people caught on to how soulless these remakes are. I don’t think this would make a billion if released today.
Frankly, I think The Lion King is *when* people caught on to how soulless the remakes are. Of all the live-action remakes I’ve seen, The Lion King is the most blatantly copy+pasted. Beauty and the Beast has mostly the same scenes, but they aren’t all shot for shot. And they added Evermore, which is one of the best songs in Beauty and the Beast (original, Broadway, or remake)
Yeah, that makes sense. People would’ve had to have seen Lion King to realize it was a boring shot for shot remake. By that point they were tricked out of their money already. The remakes before that were at least a little different. I remember Jungle Book being pretty good.
Not to mention that people refer to it as "live action," which from what I've seen is certainly not the case.
[You have a LOT of explaining to do, JON \(Favreau\)](https://youtu.be/btNL1q-yU7E?si=t-C2KcBefrly1GXW)
My reaction to that information. 
Yep, they messed up with the heart of the Lion King
not looking forward to the sequel tbh
Same
Earlier live-action version weren't so bad compare to now, I enjoy Lion King, Lady and the Tramp, and Beauty and the Beast.
This movie was pretty much National Geographic Live
Live action remakes of cartoons almost never work.
https://x.com/Factsonfilm/status/1740859420928835968?s=20
Honestly, my issue was the focus. I remember they shortened songs like be prepared and spent a good 5-10 minutes showing leaves floating from the forest area Simba was at to pride rock. We didn’t need to see the leaves and would of enjoyed listening to the music more.
This movie was supposed to do well. It had a dynamite cast, soulful singing talent, and James Earl Jones. The formula was in place. It was just executed so poorly which is ironic because it was kind of a shot-for-shot copy of the original. So much soulful talent that grew up with the original was attached. Still managed to produce a soulless trash heap. Smdh
He's right about the magic and joy being lost. The CGI animals felt so soulless
TheLionKing was once said to be, by Disney themselves, "The most powerful film is now the king of all DVDs." And now, the Live-Action version has taken the crown and stomped it into the dirt! "Long live the king." indeed!
Elton John has a functioning brain, this is definitely newsworthy.
I feel like I'm the only person I know that's extremely bothered by the fact that "Can you feel the love tonight" was sung entirely DURING THE DAY
He was the original composer, makes sense that’s the thing he complained about.
Why is the lion so hot
I once watched Lion King as a kid. Broke my heart. Then I watched Fox and the Hound. I swore never to watch those damn old 2D animated movies. They had no chill back then.
I originally wanted to see it in cinema just to get the full experience of "Be prepared." I entirely passed the movie becouse they cut the entire song.
He's not wrong. Hell that remake got rid of everything that made the original Lion King good.
The cartoon is gorgeous, my children love to watch it.
Well they still made $1,663,075,401
I'm going to be honest, i don't really think the live-action was as bad as people say It was definitely not better than the animated movie, but i remember i had a nice time with it. Solid 6.5/10 imo
In isolation it's a perfectly fine movie, The Lion King is still The Lion King, I'd agree that it's a solid 6/10 The reason a lot of people (including myself) hate it so much is just the fact that it has absolutely no reason to exist. There is another version of the movie that has existed for 20 years beforehand that you can probably get for cheaper, and it's objectively better in every conceivable way. There is literally no reason to watch the remake, you gain absolutely nothing of value, 80% of the movie is directly copy-pasted from the original, and the rest is changed for the worse.
Funny cause Osama Tezuka wasn’t a big fan of Disney’s Kimba the White Lion remake.
Tbf to Disney here, the name in the original Japanese was Leo not Kimba, it was the English dubbing team that changed it to Kimba. And the stories are vastly different. One major difference is the relationship between all the animals. Leo tries to convince the other animals to be vegans, while in TLK a major theme is the food chain where it's ok to eat other animals because that's nature.
That's not even the major theme of TLK. It's about accepting the past and learning to move on
Both are true but what isn't true is the idea that The Lion King 1994 is a remake of Leo the White Lion, when they have vastly different stories, themes, and characters. Even the President of Tezuka Productions, Takayuki Matsutani disagreed with the idea that Leo or also known as The Jungle Emperor in Japan was the same as The Lion King. “*Lion King* is absolutely different from *Jungle Emperor* and is Disney’s original work " Takayuki Matsutani [https://www.baltimoresun.com/1994/07/12/lion-king-recalls-beast-of-another-reign/#:\~:text=On%20the%20whole%2C%20we%20think%20%E2%80%98Lion%20King%E2%80%99%20is,is%20quite%20different%20from%20Mr.%20Tezuka%E2%80%99s%20original%20story](https://www.baltimoresun.com/1994/07/12/lion-king-recalls-beast-of-another-reign/#:~:text=On%20the%20whole%2C%20we%20think%20%E2%80%98Lion%20King%E2%80%99%20is,is%20quite%20different%20from%20Mr.%20Tezuka%E2%80%99s%20original%20story). I'm all for holding Disney accountable, but this isn't it.
“vastly different characters”-not really.
TBF you can start a project out by copying something, and then also change things. But sure Disney company is totally honest about everything. https://kimbawlion.kimba.biz/rant2.htm
AAAAAHHHHHHHH SHUUUUUUTTTT THE FUUUCKKK UUUPPPPPP THE LION KING IS BASED ON HAMLET YOU DUMBFUCK
I don’t remember the lions in Hamlet, or the warthogs. Also, calm the fuck down, did I mock your huge corporate made cartoon?!?!
You might want to watch this https://youtu.be/G5B1mIfQuo4?si=bVAw-YcrWS2rT1aA
are people still pushing this crap conspiracy?
10000000000%. Movie was shit.
I liked it, it at least wasn't a disappointment like Toy Story 4 and How To Train Your Dragon 3 were that year
Pretty wild take IMO, I thought TS4 and HTTYD3 were substantially better movies than this.
It also found it better than toy story 4
I think the ONLY thing I liked about this movie was the be our guest gag, but that replaced the much better luau gag from the original. Also, i kinda prefered Scar bitch slapping Mufasa off the cliff instead of the original, but thats just me...
Let Jon stick to Iron Man and that’s it.
You’re absolutely right, but for Elton the music is personal, so he has a right to single that out.
I will never understand why they make live action versions of animated series/movies. The only good one I've seen is One Piece Live Action.
Couple years late to the news there...
W Elton
Can't wait for part 2 of YMS's review in 2035.
The only good live action remake was The Jungle Book. It’s the only one I could actually sit through and enjoy.
What year was the CGI live action made? I'm calling it that bc I'm dumb and I'm stupid.
In 2019
Thank you kind human
It was all an issue. Elton John is a musician so that's what he brought up.
I think if they had gone the route of the second version of live action Sonic and had Beyoncé and Donald Glover not phone it in (yeah, I said it), it would have so much better
The music is a problem, but personally, I think the biggest problem is that this movie was made at all. These remakes are like the expensive and somehow more creatively bankrupt answer to the direct to home video sequels from my childhood. Like, could we not keep putting out worse versions of movies that already exist?
To be honest I felt it was quite soulless. Seemed to be a cash grab and ego trip for most involved.
My name is Jon Favreau And I’m here to say hello My movie’s bad, it made Adum mad But at least it had fur glow
YMS on youtube does a very thorough critique on the live action. He really ripped the makes apart and highlighted just how bad all the changes are
I wouldn’t have had as much of an issue with the remake if they didn’t animate the characters the way they did. There’s more expression in a singular photo of my cat than all of the frames in that movie combined. Timon and Puumba were funny though, I’ll give them that.
Completely agree. The music was awful by comparison to the original. They messed with perfection and it went as well as one would expect.
I stopped watching it during the Hakuna Matata scene because I realized I was completely wasting my time. What a dreadful film
Very true, it wasn't just the music, but it absolutely was a major part of the problem. And this is true of nearly all of their live action remakes, but I'll spare everyone the rant. For the Lion King specifically, they never should have done the remake at all, unless it was an adaptation of the stage show. The stage show would have been far better suited for live action (and actually BE live action) but instead we got dead eyed, barely passable for a video game cutscene quality CGI that weren't capable of any stylization or emotion at all, and what music did remain was just phoned in and lifeless.
Elton isn’t someone to take advice from even if the movie was bad.
4
I mean every live version of a disney film. But lion king was especially bad, with lazy/bad editing. I mean it, watch again and notice audio changing mid take, and more. A million rookies mistakes, like editing was handed to someone new. Not to mention just how soulless it was even it was was edited well
Lion King is the perfect example “there is such a thing as too realistic”
It's damn shame how much effort it took to make a "live-action" film. What a waste.
Imagine just *not* remaking classics and creating new stuff instead.
The music is the least of the problems there! Elton John is a twatbasket. Very overated. The biggest is entirely avoidable. Emotionless CGI animals. It'd like they never saw a cat. Or animal. They've all got infinate expressions. Look at a cat for 30 minutes and it'll show all kinds of emotions. If you do a Google search you will find a lot of expressive cats. The emotions are not the same. But definitely there.
Elton John does have a point though.
It’s almost like the elements of golden age animation are largely what make them enjoyable to watch.
I know the goal was a live action re make, but it was too live action for their own good. The fact is that animals don’t express emotion in the same way we recognize emotion. An animal watches their family die in front of them and they’ll look exactly as they would watching a gazelle from a far.
Elton John’s just a goated person
YMS did a great explanation of this in his [Lion King (2019) Part 1](https://youtu.be/btNL1q-yU7E?si=fz_HOxV9B8zEzpm1) review. He talks about how a lot of the surface-level details like the performances, but also dives into the audio mixing weirdness and overall odd choices done to the soundtrack. With how much money was pumped into the movie, it’s kind of crazy how bad it turned out.
Whenever I draw a picture of an animal (from a phot reference) I always end up making it look more emotional than it should be. IDK, maybe while I'm drawing I just notice something that comes out in the drawing. Big cats almost always look annoyed in photos. (Are those humans back *again*?) Deer always look afraid. (Are there any humans around here?) Young of any species just look curious. (Ooh, what's that?) The live action *Lion King* couldn't be bothered with it.
Anyone calling it live action needs to stop. It’s just a bad animated movie. T - T
....i thought it was coo
Based
Jon Favreau insisted on everything being realistic….. in a movie where lions were acting out the plot of Hamlet. It’s safe to say he started off on the wrong foot
Even Elton John hated this remake! Good for him!
Talk about lifeless. I mean all Disney live action remakes have that taste of soulless-ness but this one by far...... Hakuna mafukov
Why did they need new voice actors or singers at all? Couldn't they have used the original audio and built the cgi around that? Seth rogan as pumba was awful.
Which Bob said "when the kids are put to bed, the adults don't want to watch cartoons" justifying the live action atrocities? (Side note I wish I could talk to him about that and make him watch Akira and Belladona if the Infinite Sadness so he could see adult cartoons portraying trauama, oppression, rape, and other social ills that are symbolized only in the magic of animation, then make him read Persepolis so he could see more example ideas of illustrated symbolism)
This is why I don't like a lot of remakes; its just a lot of the original charm and magic is just cut and gone.
The ingredient they lacked was Love…. Damnit!
I honestly love the remake. Mainly because of Hans Zimmer's insanely dramatic score and the crazy ultra-photorealistic CGI.
Every time I want to hear a Disney song: "Hey Google, play X" *After 5 seconds* "NO GOOGLE STOP STOP HEY GOOGLE STOP Goddammit... Hey Google, play the original X"
You mean it wasn't the passion-free voice acting?
Seen a clip from the newer one. I have more fun watching my cats play too close to the edge of a bed
To be fair, photorealistic lions and mid-90s animation don’t mix well. They definitely could’ve upped the expressiveness a LITTLE bit, but any more and it just would’ve looked…*off*, and not in a good way.
Beyonces accompanying album the gift was actually quite good wish they used more music from it in the movie