Lion King (2019)

The Disney Renaissance saw some of their animated classics change how Hollywood looked at the medium in terms of its quality. Arguably the king of that bundle is The Lion King (1994), which not only upped the ante on the animation field but inspired many while imitating Hamlet (and possibly ripping off the anime Kimba the White Lion). It inspired Broadway stage musicals, a few spin-off cartoon shows, 2 direct to video sequels, and had a level dedicated to it in Kingdom Hearts 2. While it's not in my favorites among the Disney catalog, it's certainly high royalty among numerous fans (though with a minor flaw or two). This brings us to the inevitable animated remake of The Lion King (everything in it is generated from a computer so it doesn't count as live action), which was directed by John Favreau (who helmed the Jungle book remake that used similar technology). The idea of this  beloved classic being repackaged for a newer generation is daunting pressure for the executives involved and tough for audiences to swallow. It's no secret that I dislike these new adaptations from the studio but I felt interested in checking it out for the technology usage on the big screen. After watching it, it's clear how creatively bankrupt they have been at this point.

What's it about? The story follows a young lion who must reclaim his throne following his fathers murder at the hands of his father. For better or worse, this is an exact note for note copy of the plot from the original, making it difficult to not think and compare with the 1994 original. The expansion of this by 20 more minutes comes with a share of pros and cons. Any chance a fan wants to see moments recreated with the technology is often tested with how much they feel invested with whatever types of emotional impact they can find from it.

Any differences between the 1994 and this? The major difference between these version are the technological achievements in their respective animations and how it affects the overall product. 1994 is much more colorful in letting moments and its characters have personality that lands a memorable impression, while here it's aiming for more realism in the environments and its animals. While the realistic visuals here are a wonder to behold (best thing going for it), that can only go so far before the weaknesses come out. If you're looking for something that's more facially expressive, you'll find some disappointment here as this aspect is lost and heavily relies on the vocal performances to carry the load. It's odd because I remember Jungle Book not having this problem with the near similar computer effects. I only hope Jon Favreau can find creatively better work after this because this isn't his film but more of a studio mandated project with his name attached to it (much like Dumbo 2019).

How's the voice acting? Speaking of which, the actors are given the most difficult task in delivering performances in their respective roles so that these animals find their stride in the plot. Unfortunately the end result feels like a very mixed bag with the first half fairing better than the second half. The beginning features some admirable efforts from JD McCrary as young Simba and Chiwetel Ejiofor as Scar with the former putting a valiant effort as the naive protagonist while the latter doesn't sound as if he's bored like the 2019 version of Jafar. While it was admirable to bring in James Earl Jones as Mufasa, it's hard not to listen to how tired the he must be at his age since it shows in his performance what over 20 years can do to him (the energy behind his vocals in moments shows).

The second half sees Donald Glover as older Simba and Beyonce as older Nala provide performances that are either phoned in or miscast. The former doesn't even try to change his tone in dramatic parts while Matthew Broderick from 1994 put more effort than him. Thankfully Seth Rogen as Pumbaa and Billy Eichner as Timon shine with their uplifting energy and comic relief to help make up for them while they can. A dishonorable mention goes to John Kani as Rafiki for being directed into lacking the eccentric energy to feel like a memorable character that Robert Guillaume masterfully did back then.

Are the songs good? Despite being a longer film, almost all of the songs are lackluster in their execution. Part of that is the visual aspect that's limited by its devotion to realism so the 1994 colorful spectacle is lost in favor of animals just running around or having songs cut down in their length. Another aspect are the singers involved with Chiwetel just reading his lines instead trying along with Donald & Beyonce not being well matched with each other for their duet. It's also baffling that the duet "Can You Feel the Love Tonight" is sung during the daytime instead of evening slowly transitioning to night.

Overall Consensus: The Lion King remakes stunning visuals aren't enough to overcome the lackluster effort to make this unnecessary adaptation worth watching for a new generation with mixed acting, emotionless substance, and weak songs. ⭑⭑💻 Runtime: 1 hour 58 minutes PG

Reasons to watch it: You like any of the aforementioned actors. You don't mind note for note remakes. You are a fan of the 1994 classic and want to see how it compares for yourself. You want to see stunning computer visualization.

Reasons to avoid it: You dislike any of the aforementioned actors. You hate these soulless Disney remakes. You are a fan of the 1994 classic and don't want to see an unnecessary longer adaptation.