The Lion King

A mechanically generated remake that looks beautiful and has a couple of ideas of its own, but that’s also something that nobody who didn’t expect to profit from it needed in this world. I haven’t watched the original since I was a kid and I don’t have many memories about it, that’s probably the reason why I was able to endure this version unharmed and don’t need to condemn it to a below-par rating. And of course, I praise the superb voice acting, among whom Seth Rogen as the faithful warthog stands out (only Jeremy Irons was missing). 60% (16/03/2020)

I felt as uncomfortable watching the new Lion King as I would have felt watching natural history documentaries with narration that jokingly imitates the “voices” of animals. At the same time, it is an inordinately long (and drawn-out) film, very dark (the hyenas could sign up for a horror-movie casting call) and verbose, i.e. not very suitable for younger viewers who would most likely appreciate the talking fauna. I very much enjoyed Caleb Deschanel’s camera work, which was adapted to the characters’ point of view, and one wordless scene including the odyssey of a dung beetle with a ball of giraffe droppings. Otherwise, a negative feeling of inappropriateness predominated. When you see a photo-realistically animated (and talking) warthog and a (talking) meerkat tame a (talking) lion cub and turn it into an entomophage, it is more disturbing than funny or cute. Whereas I can still be impressed by the original to this day, the reboot just makes me want to cry over the idea that it will be a huge commercial hit and Disney will continue to churn out such empty, asexual, absolutely unsurprising remakes of its successful films. The Jungle Book had a faster pace and more convincing characters, and it did not merely copy the original film, but developed it in a meaningful manner. It was unique in some way. Conversely, The Lion King is only a soulless imitation, perhaps technologically perfect, but almost worthless artistically. 50% (18/07/2019)

The animation is so amazing that after a while I didn't even see it as animation anymore, indeed I almost caught myself at times thinking the animals were talking – it's simply pure movie magic, nothing less. It was like how I was impressed by the monkeys in the new Planet of the Apes films, for example; the only difference is that the story wasn't just about them. In The Lion King, it's now exclusively about digital animals and supposedly digital landscapes and everything we see (I almost don't want to believe it). Really amazing. But what would it be without a good story, right? They didn't experiment too much in that regard, and relied on the tried and tested certainties, augmented with nice little touches here and there (more space for Timon and Pumba was definitely a good move), which actually applies to Zimmer's tried and tested music and Elton John's songs. Aside from a few added "jokes for a more advanced audience", John Favreau's direction is what makes The Lion King a more mature spectacle. Like Steven Spielberg in The Adventures Of Tintin, he could do anything with a digital camera, but he tends to keep a low profile and doesn't make any flourishes. Everything looks like it's filmed in the real countryside with real animals (the desert shots put Lawrence of Arabia to shame), and when Favreau lets go of the reins we getan amazing scene with a tuft of fur that makes winking referenceto Forrest Gump, or a few horror segments (within the bounds of accessibility). In short, it's well done; and while I haven't had the urge to see the new Jungle Book again since I saw it in the theater, I suspect quite strongly that it will be different in the case of The Lion King. (17/07/2019)

The animators have done an excellent job in terms of authentic portrayals of living creatures and nature, ensuring that the animation is absolutely breath-taking, and many shots look as if they came from natural history documentaries. The problem is that The Lion King is not a documentary from the African savannah, but rather a musical from Disney, in which the animals talk and sing, and this truly does not work well together with photo-realistic animation. In order to achieve the greatest possible credibility, the animal heroes were deprived of all "human" facial expressions, and therefore the only emotions in their dialogues are the voices of their voice actors, which leave something to be desired. The story (basically Hamlet) is no different from the animated version (except that it’s half an hour longer) and it's still understandably great, but it just doesn't have much to surprise you with if you've seen the original The Lion King. The new The Lion King is a technologically perfect, but otherwise somewhat soulless copy of its much better predecessor. (03/10/2020)

Jon Favreau got probably excited about new animation technology because after beautiful The Jungle Book he filmed  no less amazing The Lion King. And even though the story is well known and you heard the music a hundred times, it is still brilliant and I was captivated by this remake. And it is precisely this technology that makes me feel as if real living creatures were wandering through that bush. I was even horrified a little by the thought I had while watching this movie that the kids in the future might watch this kind of movies and think what a wonderful world we used to have... (24/12/2019)