The Lion King once again follows the same plot as the original 1994 film, with Simba, now voiced by Donald Glover as an adult and JD McCrary as a child, leaving his home of Pride Rock after being wrongly blamed for the death of his father Mufasa, once more voiced by James Earl Jones, reprising his role from the original film. In his absence, his evil uncle Scar, now voiced by Chiwetel Ejiofor, takes over the Pride Lands and turns it into a barren wasteland. As an adult, Simba has to learn to confront his past so he can return to the Pride Lands and take back what Scar stole.
This version of the classic Disney story is directed by Jon Favreau, who also directed what is easily the best Disney remake so far, The Jungle Book, in 2016. Whereas that film was mostly CGI with one human actor, The Lion King is all computer generated, but meant to look like a live action film. There has been a massive debate as to whether or not this is truly a live action film, though no matter what side of the argument one is on, there is no denying just how beautiful the CGI is here.
The effects are easily one of this movie’s strongest elements. The Pride Lands and the jungle look stunning, with so much attention to detail given to all of the backgrounds, while the elephant graveyard and all of the areas ruled over by Scar looking absolutely bleak and horrifying. While none of this film was actually shot in the jungle, it looks so photorealistic that if one didn’t know any better, they would think they’re watching a nature documentary. The effort put into the animation team to carefully craft such beautiful scenery is commendable.
And just like the settings, the animals themselves also look incredibly realistic, which itself is both a good thing and a bad thing. While this movie does deliver on its promise of a realistic-looking Lion King, it loses a lot of the emotion that goes with it. Film is without a doubt meant to be more of a visual-based medium, and while this film gets that part right in terms of the backgrounds, it fails when it comes to its characterization.
It’s difficult to tell what emotions these characters are feeling because in real life, lions, warthogs, hyenas, and any other sort of animals can’t convey facial expressions. A lot of the emotion that stemmed from the original film was being able to see the characters’ expressions and being able to sense what they’re feeling by just looking at them. While they did say what they were feeling at times, a lot of what they said was backed up by the looks on their faces.
And a lot of that is lost with this film. When Simba saw Mufasa die in the original, he only spoke so much and the pained look on his face as he approached his father’s dead body is where a lot of the emotional impact came from. When Scar had to interact with either Mufasa or Simba in the original, it was clear just how annoyed he was by the disgruntled look on his face, which made him a much more compelling villain.
In this film, however, all of the characters simply have blank stares. Whatever facial expression they have when they’re first seen is the same expression they retain throughout the entire film. So there are plenty of moments where the looks on their faces don’t match the things they say. It’s a line accompanied by a stoic facial expression that doesn’t change. The only reason the audience will have any sort of emotional connection to what the characters are saying is due to the fact that they know the original movie, know what emotions are meant to be conveyed due to the original, and will have to rely on how they felt about those original moments in order to get any sort of emotional satisfaction with this film.
In most instances, it’s completely unfair to have to circle back to the original source material when speaking about a remake or an adaptation, because those should absolutely be judged in their own right. However, The Lion King seems to welcome the nostalgia with open arms and almost solely rely on that. It mostly goes scene by scene, with the same exact dramatic beats unfolding as they did in the original - outside of, bafflingly enough, a key character-building scene between Simba and Rafiki, this time voiced by John Kani - but without any of the emotional depth that the original had.
Whereas in the original, characters would take a moment to process information and react to it accordingly, here characters are simply reciting dialogue. They’ll say a line simply because it was a line in the original. They’ll react a certain way simply because that’s how that same character reacted in the original. There will be dialogue exchanges that are extremely rushed because there’s almost no natural pause in between the dialogue. It’s clear that lines are being read rather than acted.
And while this has partially due to the editing and direction, a lot of the blame lies in the voice acting. It’s clear about half that cast really had no desire to do this movie, as they’ll spew many of their lines with a distinct indifference. Donald Glover and Beyonce are by far the two biggest offenders when it comes to this. Nearly every line of dialogue coming from either of them is totally flat. There is no chemistry between either of them, nor is there really any chemistry between them and any of the other voice actors.
Chiwetel Ejiofor is by far the strongest of the more serious actors. While some of his delivery isn’t as grandiose as Jeremy Irons’ was in the original, he’s an actor who always maintains a great energy about him, being an actor who has to try to give a bad performance. With The Lion King, he once again does a solid job, maintaining that Shakespearean air that makes Scar an intriguing villain and one of the more enjoyable parts of the movie.
Even James Earl Jones doesn’t sound like he really wants to be involved, from the way he delivers certain lines. While he doesn’t necessarily do a bad job, and it’s comforting that he retains one of his most famous roles, he’s obviously much better in the original film than he is here. While the actor has obviously aged quite a bit since the original, it’s a bit upsetting to hear certain lines that he once spoke with booming confidence sound a bit more subdued here.
The film’s strongest voice acting lies mostly with its comedic talent, all of whom have some brilliant exchanges and laugh-out-loud hilarious moments. This includes John Oliver as Zazu, Keegan Michael Key as the hyena Kamari, and Eric Andre as the hyena Azizi, the latter two being updated versions of the original’s Bonzai and Ed. Many of these characters are the bright spots of the film, and all of them have no difficulty putting a smile on the audience’s faces.
The scene stealers though are without a doubt Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen as Timon and Pumbaa, respectively. Each time these two are on screen, the film is at an all time high, and they capture the exact same energy that the two had from the original. Their exchanges are perfectly timed, the jokes added are easily the funniest, and the spins they have on some of their classic moments from the original are welcome additions to this film. A spin-off focusing solely on these two wouldn’t be such a bad idea.
But while the comedic actors help liven the movie up, the film does get bogged down by its run time. The original film was a breezy 90 minutes that moved at a quick pace. This film, however, runs at two hours, and that two hours is felt at various points. While the film will shorten, cut out, or speed up certain key exchanges from the original, it’ll take its time to add additional scenes that don’t really add a whole lot to the story, other than to just show off the visuals. The only exception to this is a well-done scene that actually shows Nala sneaking out of the Pride Lands in an attempt to go find some help, whereas in the original, the first time she’s seen as an adult is when she attacks Timon and Pumbaa. This is by far the best additional scene to this film, as it does a solid job at creating suspense through the close encounters she almost has with both Scar and the hyenas.
Everything else added though are just purely for show. There’s an extended sequence that focuses on the mouse that Scar grabs when he’s first introduced that goes on for over a minute. There’s another scene - in what is easily the worst and most contrived moment in the film - that shows a piece of Simba’s hair passing through the hands and mouths of multiple animals before landing in the hands of Rafiki, which allows him to realize that Simba is alive. Moments like these go on for way longer than they should, dragging the movie out unnecessarily. What’s incredibly frustrating about all these scenes is the amount of crucial elements from the original that got cut here in order to make room for these moments, leading to a very uneven sort of experience.
The Lion King delivers on what it promised, which is a retelling of the classic animated film, meant to look like a live-action film. And there’s no denying that the film does a great job making The Pride Lands feel like a real place and all of its characters looking like real animals. But by doing so, this film loses a lot of the heart and soul that made the original such a classic in the first place. The dialogue exchanges don’t feel like organic conversations, and with the exception of Eichner, Rogen, and a few others, many of the voice actors seem disinterested to even be involved, reciting dialogue rather than truly acting it. This is a movie that is sporadically entertaining in certain parts - and when it shines, it truly shines - but this remake relies heavily on its audience’s love for the original, and because of that, has little personality of its own.
Recommendation: Proceed with Caution
Comments