Directed by:
Jon FavreauScreenplay:
Jeff NathansonCinematography:
Caleb DeschanelCast:
Donald Glover, Seth Rogen, Chiwetel Ejiofor, Beyoncé, James Earl Jones, Alfre Woodard, Billy Eichner, John Kani, John Oliver, Florence Kasumba, Eric André (more)VOD (4)
Plots(1)
Simba idolizes his father, King Mufasa, and takes to heart his own royal destiny. But not everyone in the kingdom celebrates the new cub’s arrival. Scar, Mufasa’s brother—and former heir to the throne - has plans of his own. The battle for Pride Rock is ravaged with betrayal, tragedy and drama, ultimately resulting in Simba’s exile. With help from a curious pair of newfound friends, Simba will have to figure out how to grow up and take back what is rightfully his. (Walt Disney US)
(more)Videos (21)
Reviews (13)
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.
()
The essence of sterility. Beautiful yet pointless. I wonder what Favreau's role as director was. It couldn't have been more than sending out two mass emails: one to the actors "put on The Lion King and say the same thing", and the other to the thousands of hopefuls behind the rendering computers "put on The Lion King, forget the emotions in the faces and otherwise do the same thing using CGI and share the result with me in a few years". There is not a single ounce of invention, no interpretation, let alone an original idea. On the other hand, the glitz is so intoxicating and the original material and music so catchy that if you have to take your kids to see it, at least it won’t a complete waste of time.
()
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%
()
A verbatim remake that, while visually stunning, is an identical copy of the famous original without any additional ideas, improvements or moments of surprise (except for the dung beetle). Favreau thus remains just a hitmaker who can deliver a film that will hit the hundred-million mark at the box office, but the soul of the original is nowhere to be seen. Commercially, it’s fine, perhaps, but otherwise it’s a pointless update of something that was already almost perfect.
()
A new version of the classic Disney story about Simba, who grew from a little lion cub into the king of animals and avenged his father's death. The new Lion King looks incredibly realistic, but the moment the animals start talking and singing, it starts to fall apart. The fairytale atmosphere where no one bothered with the chatty animals is gone, and in its new form it all feels a bit out of place. Still, it's an inoffensive adventure that will appeal to older viewers with its nostalgia and younger ones with its songs and lots of animals. But it is far from an exceptional film.
()
Gallery (48)
Photo © Walt Disney Pictures
![The Lion King - Photos](http://image.pmgstatic.com/cache/resized/w663/files/images/film/photos/163/612/163612933_5cacf3.jpg)
Ads