"Better a fallen rocket than never a burst of light."
~ Tom Stoppard, The Invention of Love

Friday, October 4, 2019

The Lion King (2019, PG)


I’d put The Lion King at the bottom of the Disney live-action (or in this case, photo-realistic CGI) remakes. Not that I’d go so far as to call it bad, but despite the of-course impressive CGI and the star-studded cast, the end result is lackluster. While I don’t regret having seen it, I’m in no hurry to see it again.

As in the original animated film, this “kids’ version of Hamlet with Serengeti animals” follows young Simba, the only son of King Mufasa and the heir to the Pridelands. Simba can’t wait to grow up and be king, but an unexpected tragedy – along with some manipulation care of his grasping, ambitious Uncle Scar – leads him to feel he doesn’t deserve his birthright. As he grows, can he face up to the hardships of his past and become the king the Pridelands need?

No, I’m not really asking, because of course you already know. Like its live-action predecessors, this is a movie fueled mostly by the nostalgia and good will you have for the original. I’ll admit it’s been a good many years since I watched the ‘90s Lion King, but it was a definite favorite in my house growing up and I later grew to love the Broadway cast recording (I mean, “Endless Night”?? Goodness gracious.) But my impression here is that there’s very little that isn’t pulled pretty directly from the animated film. I mean, with Beauty and the Beast, you’ve got inventor Belle and “Evermore,” and with Aladdin, you’ve got Jasmine’s royal ambitions and Aladdin’s sweet dance moves. I can’t think of anything really major in The Lion King that stuck to me as “oh, that’s new!”, or even, “Wait, was that in the original? I can’t remember.” (Is this whole thing a sign that I need to watch the original again? Probably.)

Which, again, isn’t exactly bad. After all, the original’s a classic for a reason! But it isn’t all that interesting. Basically all these Disney remakes are, on the whole, pale imitations of the classic movies we loved, but one thing that can make them rise above that are the little twists they add to the story, taking these beloved characters somewhere we haven’t seen them go before. This movie doesn’t have much of that going for it.

Much has been said about the CGI, and it’s all true. It’s gorgeously-detailed and almost uncanny in places. However, that realism means a trade-off with expression. This CGI animals can’t emote the way the cartoon ones did, and that flattens the impact of the more intense scenes. (Not to mention, it can make things harder to follow. I absolutely cannot tell one lioness apart from another unless they start talking and I hear which actor’s voice it is.)

As for the acting, I don’t think the CGI is helping anyone’s case, as it’s hard to give a strong vocal performance when the visuals aren’t really backing it up. But even with that under consideration, not many of the performances stand out. It’s a shame, because I like plenty of the actors, but they really don’t make a big impression. Donald Glover as Simba, Beyoncé as Nala, Chiwetel Ejiofor as Scar? Fine, but nothing special. James Earl Jones reprises his role as Mufasa, John Kani is effective as Rafiki, and John Oliver gets the job done as Zazu (although I agree with whoever said online that Oliver the person somehow looks even more like the original Zazu than the photo-realistic CGI bird does.) The most memorable voice acting comes from Billy Eichner as Timon and Seth Rogen as Pumbaa – the two of them have a really fun back-and-forth together, and Eichner was my pick for Most Surprisingly-Good Singer. I also want to single out Florence Kasumba (the “move, or you will be moved” Dora Milaje from Captain America: Civil War,) who really brings some presence to the hyena Shenzi.

Warnings

Scary moments for kids, some CGI animal violence, gross-out humor, and thematic elements.

No comments:

Post a Comment