Disney's Live Action Lion King Teaser Trailer...
- Thread starter Samtemdo8_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Sadly you can make any movie good looking with a trailer.CaitSeith said:
Its when they reveal Timon and Pumba and Hakuna Matata is when shit goes down hill.
And Can You Feel The Love Tonight.
When did Disney ruin Lion King?CaitSeith said:
No, it doesn't. Y'know what it does look like? A shot for shot remake of a film that never be to remade, proving that there's no reason for this film to exist apart from the pay cheque.Samtemdo8 said:
Y'know, at least with Jungle Book we got a different story from the original, but this? Just, why?
To the point we are even getting James Earl Jones to recast himself as Mufasa.Hawki said:
But funny I get to see Lion King remade in this "Hyper Realistic" CGI animation instead of somthing like looks like Pixar/Frozen.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,802
- 3,383
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
"Live Action"
All the animals are CGI and backgrounds are CGI. There's nothing live action about it, it's a CGI movie, so what's the point of even making it? You're just doing a shot for shot remake of the animated movie but with a different animation style.
All the animals are CGI and backgrounds are CGI. There's nothing live action about it, it's a CGI movie, so what's the point of even making it? You're just doing a shot for shot remake of the animated movie but with a different animation style.
I know I only just mentioned TaleSpin but...
Can't they give these Disney CGI remakes a rest, take the characters from Jungle Book, and give us a TaleSpin movie? At least that'd be something they haven't already done before.
Can't they give these Disney CGI remakes a rest, take the characters from Jungle Book, and give us a TaleSpin movie? At least that'd be something they haven't already done before.
Ok, first of all I feel obliged to correct you on the terminology. That is not live action. Live action is when a production uses actors and actresses rather than animation. Peter Jackson's Lord of the Rings was live action. Homeward Bound was live action. Arsenic and Old Lace was live action. The Matrix was live action. Who Framed Roger Rabbit was a mix of live action and animation. This Lion King is not live action, it's computer animation.
And on that note, I have to say that I'm getting tired of this trend with Disney. It was maybe novel the first few times, and at least Maleficent tried to shake things up a bit (not unlike Wicked, really, albeit less successfully). But this looks like it's just trying to recreate the original with CGI rather than traditional animation. And that accomplishes nothing.
And on that note, I have to say that I'm getting tired of this trend with Disney. It was maybe novel the first few times, and at least Maleficent tried to shake things up a bit (not unlike Wicked, really, albeit less successfully). But this looks like it's just trying to recreate the original with CGI rather than traditional animation. And that accomplishes nothing.
'This summer, watch as beloved characters with appealing, colourful designs get turned into generic, grey, constructions with matted CG fur.'
And Disney eating its own tail continues. Can't wait for generic live-action Mulan and generic live-action Aladdin.
And Disney eating its own tail continues. Can't wait for generic live-action Mulan and generic live-action Aladdin.
The Lion King is my favorite animated movie. I don't like that they're doing this, but I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt because The Jungle Book was actually really good and this is from the same director. I don't expect it to be better than the original, I'll be happy if it doesn't take a dump on its memory.
Maybe it's because I have never seen the original Lion King movie because I can't stand talking animals , but the trailer felt so generic, if someone replaced the Lion King logo with "Ubisoft presents... FAR CRY: SOMETHING and added some random cgi footage of mercenaries with guns or something I'd believe it.
Am not feeling any personal negativity towards this. Maybe it's because I am unable to feel any attachment to beloved things, maybe it's because I want to see everybody's childhood, including mine, burn to ghostly cinders and radiated shadows upon time, or maybe it's because all of this will become meaningless in the re-education camps we will eventually live out our last few years before the Earth's boiling plastic-ridden seas enact their vengeance upon us by consuming us all for our relentless contempt as the wealthiest fly away in pristine Virgin spaceships with only a select few lucky working-class people - mainly Richard Branson's employes of recent months who just happen to be young females he finds attractive and fertile - picked for the bold, incestuous future amongst the stars of repopulating the next unsupecting victim circling a sun.
Anyway, calling it a "live-action" instead of "realistic animation" seems not much different from calling that guy in a santa suit "Santa" instead of "Nigel who recently got out of prison for being found with incriminating pics of kiddos on his home PC."
Anyway, calling it a "live-action" instead of "realistic animation" seems not much different from calling that guy in a santa suit "Santa" instead of "Nigel who recently got out of prison for being found with incriminating pics of kiddos on his home PC."
Ok dude....you need to get out of the house stop listening to such depressing stuff on the internet.Xsjadoblayde said:
And yes I know its not live action because so far we haven't seen a single human being in this movie.
Never! Even going out has to inevitably get bookended by coming back, you cannot escape it either way. And this way at least avoids the blurried shame and looming hangover. Plus I don't listen to stuff on the internet, just lie to myself instead and cut out the middle-man.Samtemdo8 said:
(Was being mildly facetious overall, it's the only effective way to compartmentalise the eternal despair
)((And the last bit was basically a convoluted way of saying "it's probably for the kids."))
Meh. I mean, if people want this remake I guess that's okay, but I don't know why I should care.
I would dig a Tail Spin movie; that show was tight.Squilookle said:
The story is a partial adaptation of Hamlet anyway so the original Lion King, outside of its music, also doesn't really accomplish anything either.Asita said:
That said, I'm looking at this as a really expensive sort of technology stress test or demo because as of this writing, Disney is less than five years away from its centenary and I am of the (probably unfounded) opinion that a lot of this re-releasing is a combination of aforementioned tech demo and fundraiser for some kind of spectacular blow them out of the water event picture in 2023.
I could of course be wrong and its merely the cynical, mercenary money making exercise that everyone else says it is. Which is fine too.
What's the point? We already have Lion King and it's great. Just like the Beauty and the Beast remake, this can only be inferior to the original, especially because of the lack of creativity.
And not live action. If it was live action, now that would be impressive!
And not live action. If it was live action, now that would be impressive!
Yeah, it's an adaption of Hamlet. Except the plot, characters, themes, species, and story are all completely different. Okay yeah, the uncle kills the king and the nephew takes revenge, but apart from that the two works share almost nothing in common.Gordon_4 said: