The Lion King 2019 - Review

I'll start this one off by saying that I'm not a huge movie person. I never have been. That being said, I have grown a deep fondness and love for the Lion King franchise over the past couple years. Seriously, ask anyone who knows me and they'll tell you. It's honestly probably just annoying to those people at this point. So I figured that with my new appreciation for the franchise, along with the new Mufasa film that came out over this past weekend (at the time of publishing this), that I'd give being a movie critic a shot. Now I know this is coming several years late. But hey - if the Nostalgia Critic can release a review for a film made years ago in the 2010s, then so can I! When I heard that Disney was going to make a live action ("live action" is such a… strong phrase) Lion King film, I've I was skeptical about it. And this was before I started loving the series too, so bias wasn't a concern. After having seen it, I have to say that I think my skepticism, along with everyone else's, was warranted. So, on with the review. Obviously, there will be a lot of comparisons to the original movie. Needless to say, but SPOILERS AHEAD! Don't say I didn't warn you!

PROS:

Given that everyone both inside and outside the Lion King fandom love to crap on this film, and I have no shortage of crap to give it myself as you'll soon find, I want to start off with what I liked about it. Because there are good things about it. First and foremost, the CGI looks absolutely incredible. The landscapes, the photorealism of the animals, and everything else about the animation in the movie is stunning. It's so easy to forget that you're watching CGI and not real animals because the CGI and animation are done so well. The people who animated this film worked their butts off on it, and there's not a single second of the film where it doesn't show.

I also really love some of the small changes that they made to this version from the original. For example: In the original film only Simba, Timon, and Pumbaa were in the Jungle where Simba ran away to and grew into an adult. However in the 2019 adaption, they are living with many other animals of different species. They live and coexist peacefully, and all view each other as equals no matter how big or small any of them are. Unless you're a grub, then you're SOL. Another of these small change ups is when adult Nala comes to the jungle. In the original, Pumbaa breaks off from Timon while they sing "The Lion Sleeps Tonight" to try to catch a bug, and Nala tries to sneak up and pounce on him. In the remake, Timon, Pumbaa, and several other animals are singing the same song when Nala comes in out of nowhere in a jump scare to try to catch one of them for an afternoon snack. There are other small changes like this that I like, but I won't get into all of them. Some may not welcome them, but I think they help this version to stand apart from the original and give it its own identity. There are also some dialogue changes that are made that help do the same. They don't stray far from the original dialogue, but it's different enough that it's noticeable. One scene that comes to mind here is when Simba and Nala are talking with Zazu right before "I Just Can't Wait to be King" starts. The lines are different, but it comes to the same effect. They also at least one point bring in some dialogue from the Broadway show, which I think is cool.

The remake also features some new scenes that were not in the '94 film that I think helped to flesh the story out more. The first is the scene in which Scar asks Sarabi to be his Queen. The scene starts with Zazu updating the lionesses with his morning report before being caught and chased off by hyenas. Sarabi is then summoned by Scar, who proposes to her. When she refuses, Scar declares that the lions will eat after the hyenas, who don't leave much. The '94 film was going to have another version of this scene in which Scar makes a pass at Nala. It was removed from the final cut, presumably because Scar was - to put it lightly - a total creep in that scene. A modified version of it made it into the Broadway production. The second main scene added in comes directly after this one, and shows Nala escaping Pride Rock. There is very little dialogue in this scene, but it is still one of the more tense scenes in the film. Nala is trying to leave, but Scar picks up on her presence and almost catches her. Zazu distracts him, allowing Nala to get away. These added scenes in the remake do so much more to show how bad things are under Scar's tyranny. Not only for the Pride Lands as a whole, but on a more individual level as well. They allow the audience to see the struggles of the characters rather than being told about them through dialogue. The original film shows wide shots of the decaying Pride Lands, but doesn't really do much to show how bad things really are aside from the hyenas complaining about the lack of food.

Then, there are some of the voice actors. The most recognizable VA in this is obviously James Earl Jones (R.I.P). Come on, how can anyone not love James Earl Jones? It's impossible to fully replace him as Mufasa! If you try, you will fail. It's just the natural order of things. Though the show The Lion Guard gave it a good shot with Gary Anthony Williams. When it comes to the other voice actors, there were two that really stood out to me. The first was the VA for Young Nala, Shahadi Wright Joseph. Joseph actually had prior experience playing Young Nala, having played her in the Broadway production of TLK. Contrary to a lot of the other performances which feel stiff and somewhat forced, Joseph's line delivery was much more dynamic, felt more natural, and flowed really well. She was one of very few VAs who actually made me feel like she was her character and wasn't forcing it or just phoning it in for a paycheck. The other VA who accomplished this was Florence Kasumba as Shenzi. Holy. Crap. This woman did an amazing job. She made the character much more threatening and intimidating than Whoppi Goldberg did in the '94 Lion King, and commanded the few scenes that she was in. I wish she would've had a little more screen time. In fact, all of the Hyenas in general were a lot more malicious than in the original movie, which I really like. There were some other good VAs, but none as good as these two. John Oliver, as corny as he tends to be, I think did a good enough job voicing Zazu. He definitely made the character more his own rather than trying to emulate Rowan Atkinson's performance in the original film. Though there were times when he delivered his lines as if he was doing an episode of Last Week Tonight rather than voicing a character for a film.

I think people are too quick to hate on this film which leads to them overlooking the parts that are good. Because they are there. However, I fully understand where those people are coming from. With the good things also come the bad. And boy, does this movie have an abundance to pick from.

CONS:

The first thing that struck me and countless others with this adaptation was the lack of facial expressions. Since animals in real life don't talk (unless you want to make an argument for parrots), or think or act as humans do, it's the job of the people making films involving animals to make the animals more humanlike. This is called anthropomorphism, which essentially lets nonhuman characters act and behave more humanlike, which allows the audience to better relate to them. While the thoughts, decisions, and motives of the characters in this adaption are fine, the facial expressions are glaringly lacking. With cartoon animation, both human and nonhuman characters are given more exaggerated facial expressions and body movements to help further convey the emotions of the characters. When done correctly, they're exaggerated to the point where you can clearly see the emotion but still subtle enough that it's not ridiculous. When you take that away, the difference is astounding, especially in scenes where there is no dialogue and the audience only has facial expressions and body language to rely on to figure out a character's feelings.

The most striking example of this with Lion King is when Simba sees the stampede coming at him in the gorge. In the original film you see his facial expression change from confused when he first hears the stampede, to a look of sheer, unadulterated terror when he sees it coming straight at him. With the remake, the photorealistic style they gave it means giving the animals the facial expressions of their real-life counterparts, which is barely anything. That means that when Simba sees the stampede coming in the remake, they turned his expression of "OH SHIT, I'M ABOUT TO DIE" from the original into, "oh look. A stampede of wildebeests is charging toward me. I think I am going to run away so I do not get trampled to death." That means when the characters do have dialogue, when they are speaking and expressing emotion through their voice - whether they're excited, worried, scared, or sad - their faces don't reflect it. It just goes to show how important facial expressions, and by extension body language in general, is in visual media involving humans or humanized beings. So essentially, while the photorealism in this film is astoundingly impressive and the film's biggest selling point at the time of release, it ironically enough is the root of one of the film's biggest downfalls.

Credit: Unilad
Please don't sue me for using this, Unilad. I'm not profiting on this blog in any way. If was trying to, I wouldn't have waited 4 1/2 years between my last post and this one. I'll buy you all ice cream to smooth things over if you want.

And on the note of the speaking, that brings me to my second major problem with the film, which was some of the voice acting. The voice acting in this film for the most part was just… awkward. I know I said before that there is some good voice acting in this movie, and I stand by that. However, the rest of the voice acting leaves a significant lot to be desired. Young Simba, voiced by JD McCrary, was the first character I noticed this with. Young Simba is supposed to be energetic, curious, impatient, and cocky. Jonathan Taylor Thomas did a phenomenal job of conveying these personality traits in his portrayal of young Simba in the original film, and as a result made the character lively and interesting. McCrary sounded unenthusiastic, and it felt as though he was just reading his lines for the first time in the recording booth and those were the takes they went with. Now to cut him some slack, he was only 12 years old during recording and still learning how to be an actor, so there are going to be some rough spots here and there that I have confidence he has and will continue to overcome as he grows. The potential was there, it just wasn't met.

One of the other actors that I don't think gave a very convincing performance was Chiwetel Ejiofor as Scar. While he did seem to put a bit more emotion in his performance than McCrary, Ejiofor's line delivery was fascinatingly strange. While listening to his performance, the way he inflected his voice was off-putting, as was the pacing of his line delivery. Both of those things together made for probably the most awkward performance in the whole film. A shining example of this is when he says "long live the king". In the original, Scar says this in a sly, low, elongated manner that was evil and merciless, then yeets Mufasa off the cliff. In the new one, he shouts his words in a staccato fashion like he was asked to repeat them for the 23rd time in recording, then pimp-slaps Mufasa off the cliff. Now to be fair, he did have his moments where his line delivery was spot on. And when it was, it was really effective. Most of them are when Scar is showing his more menacing side. However, those moments are overshadowed by the awkward moments when he's supposed to be more sly and deceiving but still just comes off as menacing or brooding. I get it - this version of Scar is supposed to be more menacing. But it seems like they forgot about the sly and conniving side of Scar, which made up so much of his personality in '94, resulting in the performance coming off as angsty.

Even James Earl Jones' voice acting was unimpressive (*runs away from stampede of angry Disney fans*). I know that I put JEJ being back as a good thing earlier, but I only said that he was recognizable. I also said that no one could fully replace him as Mufasa, and I stand by that. The problem is that not even James himself seemed to try to live up to his own performance of this character that he originated. Mufasa is supposed to be caring, alert, and proud, while still having a good sense of humor and a playful side. In this remake he just sounds tired. And honestly, kind of bitter too. Look, I know that James Earl Jones was 88 years old at the time of recording, and that his voice changed over the almost 30 years since since recording the original. But with how renowned he was as an actor, I expected a little more from him in this. Compared to his original portrayal, this doesn't even come close. His pacing, his feeling - none of it lives up to his reputation or his original performance as Mufasa. Again, he has his moments, but not enough of them.

Speaking of pacing, the pacing of the story as a whole is another thing that wasn't right. There are several points throughout the film where the pacing is distorted. When this happens it either slows down the progression of the story to the point that it drags, or it makes it feel so rushed that the viewer doesn't even have time to process one event before the next happens. One example of this is with the mouse that Scar tries to eat at the start of the film. In the original, we see it for about 5 seconds before Scar snatches it up. In the remake, the film focuses on it for about a minute or so before we finally see Scar stalking up on it. Then there's a chase scene. I understand that the creators of the film wanted to make it longer. However there were other, more appropriate scenes they could have done that with. They could have elongated Simba running away a little more than they did; maybe showing a struggle or two that he had to face to survive before Timon and Pumba found him. The scene I really wish they would've fleshed out more the most was Simba and Nala's laughably rushed reunion in the jungle, which I'll touch on more shortly. In short - they meet, they're excited for .64792 seconds, then Nala is telling Simba to go back to the Pride Lands without any kind of transition. But instead, they apparently felt it was more important to focus on the lock of Simba's fur that makes its way to Rafiki through miraculous means that not even God herself could've thought of that leads him to realize that Simba's still alive for an excessive almost two minutes. And yes, I counted.

All of these things contribute to the overall lack of emotion and connection that this film has. The original film may have been shorter than the remake, but it had so much more clarity and relatability. Let's go back to the Simba and Nala reunion. In the original film it still happens quickly, but all the emotion of their reunion can be properly felt. After Nala pins Simba (again) during their fight, it takes her a second to register that it really was Simba that she had just been fighting with after he says her name. In the moment following him saying her name, you can see on her face and hear in her voice her confusion at how Simba knows it. You see and hear both of their excitement when they realize that they are who they are. Their subsequent falling in love happens, and you can tell that that's what's happening even without any sound because of their body language and actions. It all flows so well, and it feels natural. In the remake, there is all of NO chemistry between the two. Like, none. At all. Whatsoever. When Simba realizes it's Nala that he's fighting off from eating his friend after she pins him (again), there is absolutely no hesitation and very little confusion on Nala's part when Simba says her name and she responds with his. She then goes from,"OMG, my best friend who I loved, played with, and talked to every day who I thought was dead for years now is still alive!!!!!," for .64792 seconds, straight to, "Yippie, you're alive 😑. Okay Simba, get TF back to Pride Rock". There's next to no emotion, and it goes way too fast. When they start falling in love with each other, the biggest indicator that they are indeed, falling in love, is the song "Can You Feel the Love This Afterno"... er, I mean "Tonight?" playing during the sequence. Sure, they nuzzle a couple times and Nala gives Simba a quick lick on the muzzle. But those are two "blink and you'll miss it" moments. As opposed to their wrestling, pranks, constant nuzzling each other, and THAT look Nala gives Simba in the original that I'm still convinced was what sparked the furry movement.

There are other small things about this movie that bothered me, but I won't go into detail with them because A.) most are pretty minuscule things, and B.) this review is already way too long. In short:
-There were a couple times were the soundtrack didn't quite fit the mood of the scene. Like, let's be honest here - did they really need that Beyonce song in the film? (the correct answer here is "no", BTW)
-The hyena's humor wasn't done well. First they're hungry, ravenous, and dangerous. Then all of a sudden, with all of no warning or transition, they're arguing about… personal space? Yeah. Sure. Why not. Let's go with that. There was limited room for it to be done subtly, but what they did was straight up Jekyll turned Hyde without a hint of subtlety.

-Where the original was so colorful and vibrant, they seemed to really tone down the colors this time around.

-Timon and Pumba just don't work well in this film. The whole improv comedy thing they were going for doesn't fit the tone of the film at all, and it gets really old really fast.

-Some of the dialogue just wasn't good at all. For example, Nala's "LIONS, ATTACK!!" line??? - just… I don't… why did……… Ugh, you know what, I'm just gonna let Jade West from Victorious do the talking on this one. Or shouting.

Overall, I don't think that this remake lived up to the hype that it got. While I haven't seen many of the other live action Disney remakes, based on what I've heard about them this one seems to fit the mold of being nothing more than letdown money-grabs. I get remaking a movie. It provides the chance to fix plot holes that may exist in the original, introduces the story to new generations, lets the writers amend the script so that anything that might not have aged well since the original came out is changed, lets the story be put it in a more modern setting if desired, and it also gives the chance to add some new elements to it if they fit. Heck, sometimes remakes are better than the originals (I'm looking at you, Parent Trap). I'm okay with movie remakes, but I think there needs to be a purpose to doing it. I also think that a certain amount of time should pass before a remake is even considered. The Lion King remake had no purpose. It made no attempt to recreate the story to its full potential, and it barely added anything new. It just felt like Disney was trying to make a quick buck by appealing to millennial nostalgia. Yeah, it's effective from a business and marketing standpoint, but it's extremely shallow and cheap from a consumer standpoint. And while I think 20 years isn't quite enough time, it's a heck of a lot better than the less than 7 years Disney let Moana age before green lighting THAT for a live action remake. Because reasons.

When it comes to the problems the movie has, I like to think it was just bad direction. It's hard to tell for sure though. As a whole, I really can't say I dislike the Lion King remake, because it does have some redeeming qualities. However, by no means can I say I love it either, because - in case you didn't pick this up - its redeeming qualities are outweighed by its problems. I'd say that it's something that I would have on in the background if I saw it was on TV or something, but wouldn't necessarily pay that much attention to. Or I wouldn't veto the movie if I were hanging out with friends who wanted to watch a movie and this was one of the options. I just wouldn't go out of my way to watch it again. Of course if you yourself watched the remake and liked it, that's great! I'm glad that you can enjoy something that I don't like so much.

Thanks so much for reading this guys! I really appreciate it, especially since this is a longer post! Be sure to stay tuned for more posts in the future!

Okay, you know what? Now I really want to get into this-

"LiOnS, aTtAcK!!!!!!!!" 🤨😑🤦🏻‍♂️

Seriously, what were they thinking with this line?! Why was this line necessary?! Shouldn't the lions have just started attacking without any kind of prompting when they saw the hyenas attacking Simba?! Isn't that what real lions do?! It should've been like baseballers when a fight breaks out on the field and the dugouts clear - it should've just been second nature! It shouldn't have required any kind of verbal command! But nOooOOoOoOo, Beyonce just HAD to have some sort of supposed-to-be-epic line of dialogue! Unless Jon Favreau thinks lions have some secret way of communicating with telepathy that the who-mans haven't found out about yet and this was his attempt at verbalizing that theory. IDK. I mean that would be kinda cool if that was a real thing, but still. Whatever the case, it's a stupid line that I hope Beyonce is ashamed for having agreed to speak into a microphone and subsequently gone through with it. Okay, I'm done now. Bye.