The Lion King

Disney continues its summer domination with its newest "live action" - they actually never referred to it as that so let's go with...photo-realistic - remake of maybe their most revered property: The Lion King.

The original, in almost anyone's eyes, is a cherished, borderline untouchable classic (if you want a real blast from the past, click that link to go to my beta-Rath's Review blog from Australia!). 

For me personally, it's easily one of the best animated films of all time, if not the outright winner depending on what day you ask me. The story is iconic and Shakespearean. The music is second to none because of, duh, Hans Zimmer. The animation was great for its time and holds up mostly well. The voice acting was strong and it had memorable characters. 

It was the example of a movie where every facet came together seamlessly with little/nothing dragging it down. Hindsight being what it is, it's actually quite bold that Disney decided to remake The Lion King in a more realistic format despite the fact that almost all of us were clamoring for it. 

Sure it would make a ton of money...there's no risk there. But would it tarnish the reputation of the original? 

Critics would have you believe the answer to that is a resounding yes. That something is missing in this film. My audience and especially my girlfriend would tell you that it's just as good as the original. Myself? I'm somewhere in the middle, but I side more with the audience. It's not a stone cold classic like the original, but this nearly scene-for-scene remake is still a sight to behold and quite a bit of fun. 

Though it does feel like something is missing. 

I've tried to articulate what that something is, much to the frustration of my girlfriend. It's hard to put a finger on it but it's probably best described as lacking the same volume of movie magic that the original did. The emotional beats didn't hit as hard. The music didn't swell in me as boldly. At times the film, directed by Jon Favreau, feels like it's going through the motions of matching the iconic scenes frame for frame. At times, dare I say it, it feels a tad...lazy. How would I have improved it without touching the valuable scenes and story that everyone loves? I think it's the little things that could have elevated the film further. Cinematography for example. A lot of these are literal scene-for-scene remakes that are exciting, but not everything translates the same way from animation to "real-life". I try to imagine what this could have been like with some Roger Deakins magic. Given how big and well-regarded the property is, would that have actually been out of the question? But here in lies the critic in me, wanting better cinematography with a film where most will be fine with what's provided because it's what's familiar. And there's nothing wrong with that. 

How much CGI budget do you think went into Mufasa's glorious mane?

Also, and this is probably the single most significant thing that affected my viewing, it felt like the audio editing was quiet, particularly for the music and original score. I don't think it was my theater because things like lion roars were quite loud but Hans Zimmer's utterly fantastic score was there, but it wasn't pounding in your eardrums (like I remember in the animated film). With music that moving and that iconic, you should be BLASTING it a la Interstellar, Inception, etc. etc. It's likely why I emotionally didn't connect with the film as much this time given that I'm such an OS nerd. 

"Can YOU feeeel the LOVE toniiiiight?"
Oh oops, wrong scene

Otherwise though (and perhaps the quiet music was truly the theater's fault), this is the film we all love. Very little is added and very little is taken out. The story is still epic and complex, our characters are still memorable and unique, and the animation - now from a computer - is quite epic too. These animals look incredibly real and detailed and a lot of little things add up, like a lion's ear twitching around a flying bug or a meerkat twisting curiously as it stands up. Some of the more animated bits don't fully translate into the CGI mold for the sake of keeping realism, but generally everything is here that you'd want. 

In particular, this is an awesome cast where everyone at least does "good" (e.g. Donald Glover, Beyonce) and where there are a few standouts. James Earl Jones returns as Mufasa for great effect and it's chilling to hear his voice out of a lion again (though it's here the audio should have been louder too, his voice more than others should have echoed like Bane's from TDKRs). Chiwetel Ejiofor might actually have improved Scar over the original as he's truly sinister while keeping the same mannerisms from the animated film. The film really comes alive - and feels closest to the one in our hearts - when Zazu (John Oliver), Timon (Billy Eichner) and Pumba (Seth Rogen) are on screen. Eichner's dry, complaining wit in particular leads to some huge laughs as does Rogen's innocent and adorable turn as Pumba. The film feels more "animated" with them in it and, much like the original, it gains new life once they enter into the fold.

Part of me hopes that there's a real Pride Rock in Africa somewhere

Reviews for The Lion King are - to a certain extent - a bit pointless. People and YOU, the reader, are going to see it regardless. We all loved it back then, we all want to see how a "real" one turns out. My answer is that everything turned out pretty darn good, but it didn't hit me the same way the original did, in several ways. Though perhaps the theater's audio is to blame for that... 

CONS

• Shot for shot remake means that the film feels like it's going through the motions at times. There's a lot of missed opportunity here to have the same exact scenes/plot, but to translate it better to "real" footage with fantastic cinematography
• Certain things don't translate as well from animation to this more realistic version
• I swear that the audio editing is off, but on the off chance it was the theater I won't let it affect my score too much. A Hans Zimmer score though, particularly one as iconic as this, should be drowning out all the other noises in my theater and pounding like at a concert. Not timidly resting in the background

PROS

• This story, in all of its Shakespearean glory, is still fantastic and moving
• The original score, still by Hans Zimmer, is - again - still one of the best of all time and can be incredibly moving as well
• Impressive animation that feels "live action" even if Disney won't call it that. Lots of little details add up to great effect
• Well-chosen voice cast with some definite standouts
• James Earl Jones IS Mufasa
• Chiwetel Ejiofor is a phenomenal scar
• Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen bring life and tons of laughter to this film as Timon and Pumba
• Seriously, there are parts that are hilarious

Rath's Review Score | 8/10