[Movie] The Lion King (2019)

[hellhamster]

These are numbers for the movies that make the most money, which are remakes, sequels or parts of a franchise for the most part, and you can blame the consumers if you don't like that. But loads of movies that aren't top grossers are released that are very much original movies.

Which are flopping because they don't sell and Hollywood has stopped making them, as per my original post.

[LiiLoSNK]

It'd be stupid to suggest hollywood doesn't crank out cash grab reboots/sequels/remakes/franchise garbage.

It'd also be stupid to suggest that original movies aren't being made just because they often don't have the marketing budget of movies guaranteed to sell well due to already having an established fanbase.

You're both arguing over nothing, since you're both right.

[Arrowstormen]

Which are flopping because they don't sell, as per my original post.

They don't always "flop", usually because they don't cost a lot to begin with, and while you half-said that in your original post, the other half you claimed EVERY movie from Hollywood is an unoriginal cash grab.

[Svifnymr]

They are remaking something that doesnt need remaking again?

For me the odd part isn't the remake stuff, but unlike even Jungle Book, there are NO humans in Lion King. Remaking an animated movie into a CGI movie is just odd to me. It'll probably be good, though I didn't bother watching Beauty and the Beast. Maybe I'd watch a live action Aladdin, but eh.

The diversity subject will be sort of hilarious. It's an African setting, so it should be African actors, on one hand. It's also a retelling of Hamlet, which means it should be all Danes, right? Like the remake of Death Note got shit for not having enough Asians even though it wasn't the original. Can't imagine anyone but James Earl Jones though. Not sure on Glover, though he's a lot of fun. I'm sure it'll be well done, and equally sure it'll be shit on by the internet while making so much money it'll need a new off-shore account to hide it all in.

[SinR]

at least they brought James Earl Jones back.

I mean, I really can't think of anyone else that could do Mufasa

[hellhamster]

at least they brought James Earl Jones back.

I mean, I really can't think of anyone else that could do Mufasa

Now I wanna see the original again just for "Remember who you are".

[Shadowspire]

Mufasa is still mufasa so I'll give it a shot.
As for a cash grab....really? Disney has been remaking thier successful films for a decade now.its clearly the thing for them and it works, plus the important part is that it is more likely that it is being remade for the new young generation, you know, not us adults bitching about it being redone.

Also let's be honest,half if not more of you will go and see it.

[Orby]

I dont think I have liked a single Disney live action remake so far... I don't see this being any different, just a CGI fest.

[Daedius]

Just... why?

Lion King was the pinnacle of Disney's animation renaissance... why make a CGI adaptation of it? :|

[therealbowser]

They are remaking something that doesnt need remaking again?

Speak for yourself. No movie needs to be made, but so far every single real life adaption of classic Disney films has been phenomenal and I see no reason why this wouldn't be. But hey... feel free not to watch it, if it's not your thing.

Disclaimer: I am assuming this is a "real life" (as opposed to cartoon) adaption... if it's not the case, then I'll adjust my opinion accordingly. This is the first I've heard of it as I don't keep track of what Disney is doing.

[Deleted]

Just... why?

Lion King was the pinnacle of Disney's animation renaissance... why make a CGI adaptation of it? :|

Because they can make money of it?

That's all the 'moral' explanation Disney needs to justify projects like this.

[therealbowser]

Just... why?

Lion King was the pinnacle of Disney's animation renaissance... why make a CGI adaptation of it? :|

Why not? It's not replacing the original, it's a different film. They are not 'remaking' anything, they are just using a similar story to make a different movie.

I dont think I have liked a single Disney live action remake so far... I don't see this being any different, just a CGI fest.

I mean if you don't like the film, don't watch it, but there are plenty that enjoy them and none of them have been remotely 'bad' in a critical sense.

- - - Updated - - -

Because they can make money of it?

That's all the 'moral' explanation Disney needs to justify projects like this.

You're saying that as if making this movie is immoral. That's kind of ridiculous, don't you think? The Lion King was an excellent movie but they aren't doing it injustice by making a live action adaption of it. If anything, you should be upset by the poor quality sequels they made instead.

If it's a good movie and people enjoy it, then there's nothing wrong with making that movie.

[Swalload]

Because it is just around the time that people usually have kids themselves, and I think many of us can attest to Disney movies bringing us good memories, so when we see that there is a "new" version of something we remember, we go see it with our kids in hopes that it will have the same positive effect.

It is actually kind of ingenious.

Also we are on a gaming website, we literally are the epitome of this poor practice

It warms my heart when I see non-retarded comments unlike bitter clowns who hate their life so much that it bubbles out in an internet forum where they think their hatred-fueled opinion matters.

Thank you for not drowning your brain in permanent rage and for using it to think rationally.

[Deleted]

You're saying that as if making this movie is immoral. That's kind of ridiculous, don't you think? The Lion King was an excellent movie but they aren't doing it injustice by making a live action adaption of it. If anything, you should be upset by the poor quality sequels they made instead.

If it's a good movie and people enjoy it, then there's nothing wrong with making that movie.

Making the movie itself is not immoral, the reason why is. Ofcourse we can choose to spring the trap argument that most things are done for money blah blah but let's not intentionally blind ourselves to the situation kay?

Not sure where you got the idea I'm upset over this? I'll probably watch the movie when I can torrent it and if I happen to forget about it I'll probably never see it, I don't mind either way.

- - - Updated - - -

It warms my heart when I see non-retarded comments unlike bitter clowns who hate their life so much that it bubbles out in an internet forum where they think their hatred-fueled opinion matters.

Thank you for not drowning your brain in permanent rage and for using it to think rationally.

Your stamp of approval will sure be remember as an act of selflessness and courage.

Do you want your pat on the shoulder now or when you get of that high horse?

[Dalheim]

Atleast James Earl Jones is voicing Mufasa like he did in the original...

[therealbowser]

Making the movie itself is not immoral, the reason why is. Ofcourse we can choose to spring the trap argument that most things are done for money blah blah but let's not intentionally blind ourselves to the situation kay?

Not sure where you got the idea I'm upset over this? I'll probably watch the movie when I can torrent it and if I happen to forget about it I'll probably never see it, I don't mind either way.

I apologize, assuming you were upset was presumptuous, but to be fair my assumption is not without reasoning as there is a lot of (mildly) upset people in this thread.

If you are basing the idea of 'making money' as being immoral, then really you could apply that to virtually anything in the world. I don't feel that 'making money' is immoral, as if that is the case, we might as well say that everything is immoral, hell, living is immoral. I just don't look at it that way. Too black and white for me.

[Deleted]

I apologize, assuming you were upset was presumptuous, but to be fair my assumption is not without reasoning as there is a lot of (mildly) upset people in this thread.

If you are basing the idea of 'making money' as being immoral, then really you could apply that to virtually anything in the world. I don't feel that 'making money' is immoral, as if that is the case, we might as well say that everything is immoral, hell, living is immoral. I just don't look at it that way. Too black and white for me.

This is the internet, your unintended assumptions would theoretically be enough to provoke an event of 9/11 proportions. No need to apologise.

As for the money making part, I kindly asked as to not spring that trap, because we could indeed argue over it for eternity and get nowhere.

[Swalload]

Making the movie itself is not immoral, the reason why is. Ofcourse we can choose to spring the trap argument that most things are done for money blah blah but let's not intentionally blind ourselves to the situation kay?

Not sure where you got the idea I'm upset over this? I'll probably watch the movie when I can torrent it and if I happen to forget about it I'll probably never see it, I don't mind either way.

- - - Updated - - -



Your stamp of approval will sure be remember as an act of selflessness and courage.

Do you want your pat on the shoulder now or when you get of that high horse?

I want my pat when people stop being too stupid to get on their own horse. Sorry if I offended you.
Nvm I'm not sorry at all.

[rogueMatthias]

That cast looks like a mandated diversity quota

When Dumbo was first out, the Crows were meant to be a representation of African American culture at the time. The pretty offensive "Jim" name aside, though they included many stereotypes they were never portrayed in a negative light and the crows were the only ones to feel sympathy for Dumbo and to actually help him.

It's only in hindsight decades later how cringe and bad it is.

I can't help but feel we're regularly crossing over this line now in many ways that in the future we'll look back and facepalm in embarrassment.

To voice AFRICAN lions, to avoid any "whitewashing" controversy.. of LIONS... they've hired all BRITISH and AMERICAN black actors, because of their skin colour.

Because they have the same skin colour as most people born in African, then somehow that makes their VOICES more authentic to be used for LIONS in AFRICA. It can't just be me that finds something a bit... racist.. with this.

If all the voice actors were African I'd think "fair game, it's set in Africa so why not use African talent" but Kani and Kasumba are the only African actors they're using and they're back up characters. I'd love to think it was all a big coincidence and they just hired the best actors for the parts (It is a pretty stellar lineup - and with Beyonce there maybe we'll get "Shadowland") but we all know it's not.

at least they brought James Earl Jones back.
I mean, I really can't think of anyone else that could do Mufasa

I disagree. Jones was amazing in the original, but if they HAVE to remake something they can at least try and be a bit different. His return just makes me think they're not even trying to be new or original. Wonder if he's even doing new lines or if they'll just redub in his lines from the original movie.

[therealbowser]

This is the internet, your unintended assumptions would theoretically be enough to provoke an event of 9/11 proportions. No need to apologise.

As for the money making part, I kindly asked as to not spring that trap, because we could indeed argue over it for eternity and get nowhere.

Fear not, I don't want to have that argument either and have no intention of continuing it. I realize that we have different opinions and I have no intention of starting a debate over something so semantic. I just mean to say that the immorality of it doesn't really matter that much, since the opinion on whether or not it is immoral is relative.