Disney has been on a role with it's recent trend of live action remakes of their animated films. While not so much critically, finacially speaking they're some of the companies most successful films outside of Marvel and Lucasfilm. The Lion King though is an interesting example of because aside from one shot, the entire movie is completely animated with photorealistic CGI. This has had many people questioning it's purpose for existing if the original was already animated. In this post, I'd like to explain what separates this film from the original animated masterpiece and why it's a solid film in it's own right.
While it's easy to point the finger at the financial success of these live action remakes, the actual teason for this film's existence is far more telling. After The Jungle Book (2016) was given positive feedback for the visual effects on the animals, Jon Favreau pondered the idea of an entire feature film using the same photo realistic technology. He's not the first man to pitch such an ambitious concept to Disney (as they have films such as Dinosaur and A Christmas Carol in their library), but the goal with this film was what convinced Disney to give it the greenlight. The goal of Jon Favreau's The Lion King was not to outshine the original, but to set a new standard for the use of photo realistic CGI in a feature film. Yes, this is an animated film, but it's how it utilizes the medium that sets it apart from any other animated film made today.
But why The Lion King as opposed to a book or comic that also has a strong absence of humans? Well, this is because Jon Favreau was a fan of the original film as well as the Broadway show and he wanted to honor both of them. This is why he brought back Hans Zimmer, Lebo M, Elton John and Tim Rice to compose the music as opposed to getting someone else. He also brought James Earl Jones back to reprise his role as Mufasa and Shahdai Wright Joseph as the voice of Nala as a cub (like she did in the Broadway show). That said though, he still brought in new voices for his version, such as Chiwetel Ejiofor as Scar, JD McCrary and Donald Glover as Simba, Beyonce as adult Nala, and many more. In addition to using the old songs, the film incorporates a new song from Beyonce called Spirit, which plays as Simba is returning to the Pride Lands. There's also a new song from Elton John that plays during the credits called Never Too Late, which perfect captures the arc Simba goes through. All that's well and good, but how's the plot and characters? Well, in my opinion, both are handled really well.
It's understandable why people were disappointed that this film recreated some of the best moments from the original film as opposed to doing something new. That said, it does have plent of new material that make it stand on it's own. Scar is given more of an edge (similar to Shere Khan in the 2016 Jungle Book), Shenzi has a more prominent role, as does Sarabi, Billy Eichner and Seth Rogan bring their own personal improve to Timon and Pumba, the oasis they reside in feels more lived in, and thanks to the amazing technology, this film captures the beauty of the African Savannah in the style of a nature documentary instead of a painting (both work great mind you). All that said, I'm glad the film stayed true to the original film's message of growing up and accepting responsibility. I'm glad it still maintained that iconic father and son relationship between Mufasa and Simba, as there would've been something missing if that wasn't in the film. Also, I like how they incorporated the songs into this more grounded take on the film as it found creative ways to enhance the visuals without losing its aesthetic. I especially like how in the "young warthog" segment of Hakuna Matata, not only do we see Pumbaa as a baby warthog (and he's so adorable) but he even sings the word farted, which gave me a good chuckle.
That's not to say it all works as there's a reason why as good as this film is, it was never going to top the original in terms of quality. Because most animals don't have cheek bones, the characters in this film have limited facial expressions. This makes it difficult to understand what their feeling outside of their tone of voice and their actions. The song Be Prepared is more of a chant this time around, which I understand, but it doesn't quite leave the same impact as the other songs in the film. Lastly, the climax is adequate, if not a bit underwhelming because you can't clearly tell who's fighting who; not even Jon Favreau himself could tell as seen in the commentary on the Blu-Ray.
Overall, I get why many prople disliked Jon Favreau's The Lion King. It's got it's fair share of problems, but overall is still a good watch. Something that has always rubbed be the wrong way is when people claim this undermines the hard work and talent of the original. I do not believe this to be true at all as not only do the filmmakers of the original film get credit for the film, but in the behind the scenes featurettes and in interviews Jon Favreau has had nothing but admiration for the artists who worked on the origin. It was never his goal to make the original inferior, but rather honor it with this new film. Still, you're free to dislike this film and prefer the original, same as I'm free to enjoy this film and give credit where it's due.
No comments:
Post a Comment