|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 19, 2019 0:15:40 GMT
Whatever preconceived notions you guys have, you’re right. Disney spent $260 million on an inferior tech demo. So much I’m gonna get into when I sit down to review this. If you had no interest in it before, just don’t. I’m honestly in disbelief.
|
|
|
Post by theycallmemrfish on Jul 19, 2019 0:33:29 GMT
I still think my favorite reaction to this was "this is to the original what Gus Van Sant's Psycho was to its original" (paraphrasing).
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 19, 2019 0:39:27 GMT
I still think my favorite reaction to this was "this is to the original what Gus Van Sant's Psycho was to its original" (paraphrasing). I hate the fact that Twitter’s gonna parrot that with nothing original to add, but yes, it is. It’s an easy contender for year’s (maybe decade’s) most pointless movie.
|
|
|
Post by Christ_Ian_Bale on Jul 19, 2019 1:00:46 GMT
And with probably no awareness of the irony.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 19, 2019 3:27:31 GMT
And I’m not gonna spoiler tag this, because why bother? But you remember that short scene where Rafiki collects the dust that informs him Simba is alive? That’s given an extended three minute tangent, where a piece of Simba’s mane PAINSTAKINGLY makes its way to him. It was getting downright Lucas-esque.
|
|
morton
Based
Posts: 2,811
Likes: 2,954
|
Post by morton on Jul 19, 2019 8:13:50 GMT
And I’m not gonna spoiler tag this, because why bother? But you remember that short scene where Rafiki collects the dust that informs him Simba is alive? That’s given an extended three minute tangent, where a piece of Simba’s mane PAINSTAKINGLY makes its way to him. It was getting downright Lucas-esque. That was actually one of the few things that I did like about it because it reminded me of the feather in Forrest Gump, lol. Other than that though, I didn't really enjoy it that much. I mean I enjoyed the songs; although, I think the songs still sounded better in the original. (Sorry Bey.) In fact, I preferred most of the voices from the original over this version even James Earl Jones sounds a lot better to me in the original when I would think that would be a push. About the only voices that I thought were as good as the original were the voices of young Simba and Nala, but oh how I missed the 1994 version during "I Just Can't Wait to Be King". The kids and John Oliver gave it their best shot, but there was none of the humor and fun of the original which could be said for most of the musical numbers or really the whole movie in the new version. The worst was definitely Scar though, and "Be Prepared". That was such a showstopper in the original, but here it was just yawn same with Scar. Plus, after seeing the trailer for Cats, I didn't expect the CGI here to freak me out, but there were some rough moments there where some of the animals looked terrifying to me especially more often than not whatever they were doing with Scar at times. Seriously I almost walked out because of how boring the first part of the movie is and how I could barely stand to look at Scar in some shots. Finally when Pumbaa and Timon come on the screen, things finally get a little better, but again the original did it so much better. No offense to Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen who should team up again just not anything like this again. Sorry this might be TMI, but my Icee and the air conditioning was getting to me, so I was like, "I'll wait for a slow moment and run out real quick". So I waited until right after "Can You Feel the Love Tonight", and then it was like 10 minutes later the movie was over. Okay it was more than 10 minutes, but it seemed like it took forever to finally get to the few good parts of it, and then it's over so abruptly. There's the big fight and everything, but it was so dark that at times I couldn't see anything, and even aside from that, it was just so boring. It's been a long time since I've seen the original, but from what I remember it was paced pretty well. It didn't just end. There was a good build up, and you could easily get the sense that Simba was torn apart about what happened and that he still felt incredibly guilty later. I didn't get any of that in this version, and Simba kept flip flopping so much that I got whiplash. As much criticism as Dumbo rightfully got, I think I would still place The Lion King below it and way below Aladdin when ranking the Disney remakes this year. I'm sure kids will enjoy this, but I can't believe how bad this was.
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Jul 19, 2019 10:05:18 GMT
The photo realistic animation makes for detailed and realistic looking visuals but it isn't awe inspiring or anything. The timeless story and songs makes it a worth watch but that's a problem if those are the only ones that makes this remake worth. Why bother spending money when you can stream the original at your home? The voice work is alright. The classic songs were greatly rendered and Zimmer's score is pretty good too. The biggest problem is director Favreau didn't inject an ounce of energy into this remake which the original had tons of it. Not to mention it is 20 min too long. Mufasa's death was well shot but 'Can you feel the love tonight' could've been so much better. Not gonna lie, i had a good time but none of that had to with what they did in remaking it- 7/10
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 19, 2019 19:54:08 GMT
I went off on this one. I’m so disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by bob-coppola on Jul 21, 2019 3:23:46 GMT
Can't say it's *bad*, that would be too cynical of me. But can't say it's good either. It's more of a documentary on taxidermy than an attempt at original, refreshing filmmaking. It's the same plot with the same beats, so it kind of works because it worked once? It's a very good plot, so it's hard to completely fuck it up. But then, it's the same plot minus emotion, facial expressions and remarkable musical sequences. There's good things here. The VFX is perfect, it's something no one can take away from this film and should be winning every award for how groundbreaking and realistic it is. On the big screen, it also doesn't looked *so* grey and muted as in the promo videos, so there's that. But the problem is: whenever there's talking or plotting instead of just gazing, none of those lions feel like something more than a walking manequin, or as if someone decided to voice-over on animal planet footage. The thing is, the hyperrealism in VFX isn't the only thing that makes it so hard to relate to the characters, but also the overtly serious tone of the narrative. Almost every voice-work, every framing decision, everything seems to have been chosen to take away every ounce of fun of the Lion King experience. The lions can't emote, and their surroundings can't emote for them via colors, fast-cutting and framing. Everything seems so boring, pretentious and generic. Even Scar sounds like a generic villain. It's hard to develop characters when they can't express themselves properly in any way - and everyone seems like underdeveloped pawns bureaucratically doing whatever needs to be done to get the plot moving. You feel like the only reason why you should root for Simba is because you've seen the movie a hundred times and you know you just have to. Another aspect of the picture that is let down by its realism and seriousness is, of course, the musical numbers. In the cartoon, there were explosion of colors, dancing, fast editing and cuts. It was fun, dynamic and powerful! And here, they follow the Mamma Mia! school of musical numbers: just have the actors walk around the sets doing nothing but walk and jump and chanting previously known and beloved songs. Be Prepared is DULL AND LIFELESS! Seeing a richly detailed, hyper rendered digital version of Africa and its animals highlights something funny and silly about the simple notion of the movie: it's lions reencating Hamlet. Of course you have to be a bit silly and fun to pull this off, and it didn't diminish the gravitas and serious moments of the original movie. There's no reason why this remake had to be that pretentious and take itself so seriously. Ironically, Timon and Pumbaa - the two characters you could NEVER spin into serious and sober figures - are the obvious clue of what's the problem with Lion King 2019. They're fun, their voice-acting is full of life and energy, and even their musical sequences are dynamic (despite being just them walking around the jungle). It even has tap-dancing antelopes! The movie needed more Timon and Pumbaa, the only three-dimensional, rootable for "people" in this flick. Some rating between 5 and 6. I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Martin Stett on Jul 21, 2019 3:52:34 GMT
Since I watched a production of Hamlet on Thursday night, I have to ask all of you people that say "this is Hamlet WITH LIONS" these questions:
Is Simba as much of an evil piece of shit as Hamlet? Does TLK have the Ophelia character randomly go nuts and die when she seemed perfectly fine before her father's death? Are Timon and Pumbaa in Scar's employ? Does everyone die in the end through their hilarious ineptitude?
I can understand saying that TLK is inspired by Hamlet. It totally is. But Disney did its own thing, and Shakespeare did his own (inferior) thing. If all of this sounds like I'm venting because I watched a serviceable production of a pretty terrible script, that is because I am doing precisely that. Feel free to ignore this post and go on with your day, in your world that inexplicably sees Hamlet as a masterpiece when it is an amateur work from a great author.
|
|
avnermoriarti
Badass
Friends say I’ve changed. They’re right.
Posts: 2,388
Likes: 1,271
|
Post by avnermoriarti on Jul 21, 2019 17:45:52 GMT
The negative reaction from critics towards the film is ridiculous ( as if we needed one more excuse to not read that Indie Wire hipo guy ). I think we're missreading this installment, because more than a movie, this is an statement, is Disney showing off how big its c_ck is, the studio is dominating the entertainment industry and they just did this because they can.
Standing ovation to Jon Favreau, just like 10 years ago with Iron Man, this is a new step, and one can only wonder the posibilities of the medium, in and out of the film industry. A couple of years ago if anyone with straight face told me was an expert in VR I would laugh my ass off, not now, not after this. With that said, I'm not going to ignore the fact that 2019 version is not as charming as the original, but have to admit, gave me the chills a couple of times, even when I knew what was coming. And the voices, with the exception of Rogen, Eichner ( even some of their lines feel improvised ) and Ejiofor ( true MVP, the combination of his voice work and the look of the lion made him really fearsome, gives Irons a run for its money ) everyone else is flat or out of their elements, it's too somber for its own good and many times it felt like we're hearing the thoughts of the animals not their conversations. For now, I prefer the Babe aproach. But yeah, this is one of those before/after moments.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jul 24, 2019 21:52:38 GMT
The old-fashioned handdrawn-style Disney logo at the start of the movie has got to be the trolliest thing they've done yet.
This was predictably rubbish. All the complaints about emotionless animals and the beat-by-beat copying of the original are totally on point but one thing that hasn't been emphasized enough is just how boring this makes "The Lion King". Even when I had considered the 1994 film to be overrated, I never once thought it was dull. But this totally unimaginative rehash manages to drain not just the emotion but also the fun out of the original. Timon and Pumbaa are the best thing about this new failure by default because their scenes are basically the only instances in which this film allows itself to be joyful. The rest of it is just dreary and dull, soulless and lifeless, despite all the attempts to make it oh-so-close to reality.
I don't know why Favreau was so obsessed with the idea of making it look and feel like a documentary (like, who the fuck thinks about TLK craving for it to be a documentary??) but this very idea is what kills the project and its technically impressive VFX. Of course I applaud the animators who surely spent hundreds of underpaid hours working on the details of the rocks and the grass and the fur and all that but I'm afraid that all that hard work was in service of a fundamentally wrong idea which simply does not work. And thus the effects, while formally impressive, just can't help but feel underwhelming. They're more realistic and detailed than in "The Jungle Book" but it's still quite obviously computer-created creatures which seem to lack weight which makes it look like they kinda float through the incredibly realistic (though boring) digital spaces.
And holy crap was that voice cast dull except for, again, Timon and Pumbaa. Donald Glover is simply sleep-inducing as Simba. His 'performance' is completely dead. Barely anyone else does anything to make their performances memorable. Beyonce is boring as hell too and don't get me started on how awkwardly and stupidly her rubbish pop tune is inserted in this movie.
Actually the songs somehow turned into the worst scenes of the movie because they really showcased just how stupid the whole documentary idea was in the first place. It's kinda tolerable when animals are merely talking to each other with their mouths moving slightly as if they were realistic dolls (Zazu is the worst example of that because, guess what, a beak can't fucking move at all except up and down - the other animals' mouths at least resemble proper speech) but when this 'realistic' zoo breaks into songs...it's just so stupid.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 24, 2019 23:21:40 GMT
JangoB , In a way, I’d argue that the CGI is arguably worse than The Jungle Book. For all it’s technical dazzle, Book still understood that this was taking place in a fantasy world. There’s a better balance in that regard, because the film rolls with that, and actually lets it’s characters emote (I felt more from Raksha’s teary goodbye than this movie’s Mufasa death). The Lion King feels like it’s caught between two worlds. It wants to embrace the fantastical nature, but it’s emphasis on Nat Geo hyper-realism means it shackles itself and doesn’t feel as stylized. It’s no secret why Timon and Pumbaa run away with the show, because they’re the one exception to everything wrong with this movie. They’re familiar but very distinct and fresh from their counterparts, they’re genuinely fun when everything is so serious, their models are by far the most expressive, and there’s no other characters to confuse them with. That’s been my hang up since before the film released, is that the animals look the damn same. No one’s gonna confuse Simba with Mufasa in the hand-drawn film, but here they both look like standard lions. I almost laughed at the reflection scene, because I couldn’t actually see any difference. Nala and Sarabi, too, who I couldn’t even tell apart unless they were talking. But the hyenas were the worst of them. That’s especially irritating when Shenzi has a greater role here, but I couldn’t actually tell you which one was her, the models looked so indistinct. When all the animals are battling on Pride Rock, I couldn’t even follow who was fighting who. And I know The Jungle Book had those wolves, but at least they had distinct coating (Raksha’s all white, Akela silver with white mane), and what they did here was a catastrophic error of judgment.
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jul 24, 2019 23:47:38 GMT
Ryan_MYeah, I completely agree with you. I wasn't entirely on board with the effects in "The Jungle Book" either but they're indeed better because that film still has a layer of fantasy to it, as you've pointed out. Baloo isn't merely a Revenant-style realistic bear in it, he pretty much has the expression and the cuteness of a character in a proper animated movie. And it works better because of that. And it was indeed troublesome when this movie showed several animals of one species in a single scene. The only way to distinguish between them was thanks to them addressing each other by names. That final rumble? Good luck guessing who the heck is who in that one. Just a bunch of anonymous lions fighting a bunch of anonymous hyenas. The very ending was funny because of that - Rafiki shows us the new cub and it looks EXACTLY like Simba did at the beginning. The circle of life is indeed completed - it's literally the same goddamn critter reborn This is such an unimaginative movie too, like, why not do SOMETHING different from the original and for example have 'He Lives In You' play over the final scene? It'd both bring nice closure to the circle of life thing and it would be a fun reference to the straight-to-video sequel which has its fans too.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Jul 25, 2019 0:43:25 GMT
JangoB That song is actually in the movie in Swahili, but it’s tacked onto the end credits. How ‘bout instead of tacking on Beyonce’s non-entity single, you set that to the montage of Simba returning home? Yeah, it would have been embarrassingly literal, but it would have fit much better. EDIT: And I’m one of those people who have a soft spot for the DTV sequels. And going off on a tangent here, I feel like we need a distinction between “differences” and “changes.” When you really get down to it, any differences this movie has is mostly of the superficial variety. Most of the only real differences are tinkering with the dialogue, or reshuffling some stuff, maybe “adding” more stuff, but never actually “changing” anything. With the characters, I guess it tries to with the hyenas, but they’re so indistinct that it isn’t even worth commenting on. Probably the only significant “change” in the movie, and one I wholeheartedly approve of is midway through, where they show the damage Scar’s rule has wrought. I didn’t like that scene in the original, because it felt redundant and only there so Scar had something to do before the end. Here, they went with something far more interesting, drawing from the “Madness of King Scar” section of the Broadway musical, and worked better to show the danger of Scar remaining on the throne. I wish it hewed a little closer to that, having Nala be banished rather than making a jailbreak, but at least it was *something* new and creative. And I’m not saying that it would have been better to adapt the Broadway show (as a movie, that would be a very tough sell), but at least draw more from it. Like gender-swapping Rafiki, or any of that. Something more imaginative.
|
|
|
Post by michael128 on Jul 25, 2019 18:16:15 GMT
Some pressed people in here lol.
As someone who hasn’t seen the original, I loved it! Great story, great visual. Really meaningful themes throughout. The music I found..off. Idk it just seemed real quiet to me. And Beyoncé’s solo song was a choice to say the least. Made no sense narratively and had a different sound than everything else. Seth Roger was the mvp.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2019 16:07:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Aug 2, 2019 21:45:36 GMT
As someone who hasn’t seen the original, I loved it! Great story, great visual. Really meaningful themes throughout. I think you not having seen the first one is the key here. The story and themes are lifted straight from the old one so these filmmakers deserve no credit for them. As others have said this is like the 90's Psycho remake. The FX team did do a great job but that's the only credit the makers of the new movie deserve for anything. The script is basically word for word the old movie.
|
|
AKenjiB
Badass
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 653
|
Post by AKenjiB on Aug 5, 2019 7:38:43 GMT
I didn’t really like this. It basically met my expectations (and thus it could’ve been worse). But every aspect just came off as really bland and uninspired. I’m not sure I agree with the film being called a shot-for-shot remake. Obviously it follows all the same story bears, but the visuals actually felt considerably more drab and underlit than the colorful animated film. The voice acting ranges from bad to okay to pretty good but nothing spectacular.
Rafiki is probably the worst part because they just stripped his personality and didn’t add anything new. He’s just sorta there.
It was pretty funny when Simba was crying with barely any facial expressions but overall the film was mostly boring. Just a checklist of seeing scenes I was familiar with recreated in a shittier way. Not disappointing since my expectations were low but I actually really enjoyed Jon Favreau’s The Jungle Book so theoretically this should’ve been up my alley.
|
|