Somewhere in the African veldt, a pride of lions rule from Pride Rock. As the film begins, the current King and Queen present their newborn son, Simba, to the gathering animals.
As Simba grows, his father Mufasa endeavours to teach him about the responsibilities of kingship and the "circle of life", which connects all living things. I think it is fair to say that the elder lion is only partly successful in this regard. The bright but somewhat self-satisfied Simba is much more interested in the power and prestige of kingship than in its responsibilities.
Also very conscious of the benefits of the crown is Mufasa's scheming brother, Scar. Recognising an opportunity in Simba's naivety and over-confidence, this wicked lion plots the downfall of both his brother and his nephew, along with his partners in villainy, a cackling clan of hyenas.
This is of Disney's "live action" remakes of its successful animated films, although given that this entire movie is actually photo-realistic CGI, the quotes around "live action" are very much in full effect.
I was not much impressed by Disney's live action Beauty & the Beast, so I never bothered to see this version of The Lion King at theatres. It took a steep discount on Disney+ to tempt me to return to Africa.
So how's the movie? Well, it's better than the Beauty & the Beast remake, but it still feels wholly unnecessary except as a money-making exercise.
Let's start with the visuals. The hyper-realistic CGI is technically very impressive, but ironically its fidelity to true life saps it of the energy, verve and relatability of the original. In particular, it is hurt by the fact that the character's faces are much less expressive. It may not be realistic to have lions and other animals smile in a recognisably human-like way, but that kind of "unrealistic" artistic adaptation makes for a much more emotionally invested experience.
The remake is also hampered by how much of film feels like a shot for shot remake of the original. There are a few minor changes; the dynamics between the hyenas are different and there are occasional brief alterations of dialogue, but not much more. I wonder if this was a reaction to complaints about the changes in Beauty & the Beast? If so, Disney missed the point - the issue wasn't that the remake had differences to the original cartoon, it was that the specific differences were bad ideas.
Let's start with the visuals. The hyper-realistic CGI is technically very impressive, but ironically its fidelity to true life saps it of the energy, verve and relatability of the original. In particular, it is hurt by the fact that the character's faces are much less expressive. It may not be realistic to have lions and other animals smile in a recognisably human-like way, but that kind of "unrealistic" artistic adaptation makes for a much more emotionally invested experience.
The remake is also hampered by how much of film feels like a shot for shot remake of the original. There are a few minor changes; the dynamics between the hyenas are different and there are occasional brief alterations of dialogue, but not much more. I wonder if this was a reaction to complaints about the changes in Beauty & the Beast? If so, Disney missed the point - the issue wasn't that the remake had differences to the original cartoon, it was that the specific differences were bad ideas.
Despite how little is actually different here, this version is somehow nearly 30 minutes longer than the original. Admittedly some of that is due to the near 20 minutes of credits!
Are there any pluses? Well, I appreciate the decision to cast African American actors for Simba, Scar and Nala. Also, the singing vocals are strong. Technically they're better than the original in some cases ... but I don't feel like the songs have the same show-stopping impact as the original. The most obvious case here is Scar's "Be Prepared". Jeremy Irons is not a particularly gifted singer, but his version is still more memorable to me.
Ultimately it comes down to a simple thing: even nearly 30 years after it came out, there are multiple segments of the 1994 film that still give me chills. This movie meanwhile was ... okay. In isolation, I'd probably give it a qualified recommendation. But in a world where we have the option of watching the original instead, I'd never pick this one.
Are there any pluses? Well, I appreciate the decision to cast African American actors for Simba, Scar and Nala. Also, the singing vocals are strong. Technically they're better than the original in some cases ... but I don't feel like the songs have the same show-stopping impact as the original. The most obvious case here is Scar's "Be Prepared". Jeremy Irons is not a particularly gifted singer, but his version is still more memorable to me.
Ultimately it comes down to a simple thing: even nearly 30 years after it came out, there are multiple segments of the 1994 film that still give me chills. This movie meanwhile was ... okay. In isolation, I'd probably give it a qualified recommendation. But in a world where we have the option of watching the original instead, I'd never pick this one.
No comments:
Post a Comment