Really? So you don't think they'll remake the animated sequels?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney and Jon Favreau Joining Forces on “The Lion King”
- Thread starter ShoalFox
- Start date
Really? So you don't think they'll remake the animated sequels?
Tony Perkis
Well-Known Member
The direct to video trash? No. Those are almost universally considered pure garbage.
RunningKoen
Well-Known Member
" oh perfect, we moved to the theatre district. "
The new version of 'He lives in you' from the soundtrack is amazing by the way.
jt04
Well-Known Member
Yes, but a new story. Not sure about favreau. Might be on to bigger projects. Just a guess though.
I also think Jungle Book and Aladdin will get sequels.
Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Aren't we still waiting on Jungle Book 2 first?
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
This article is excellent and applies to all Hollywood....not Just Disney and this movie.
But it REALLY applies to Disney
www-m.cnn.com
But it REALLY applies to Disney
'The Lion King' sinks its teeth into critic-audience divide | CNN
As "The Lion King" counts up receipts from a big opening weekend while still licking its wounds from negative reviews, you can almost hear the familiar murmurs -- that critics are "out of step" with the audiences they profess to serve.
www-m.cnn.com
jt04
Well-Known Member
This article is excellent and applies to all Hollywood....not Just Disney and this movie.
But it REALLY applies to Disney
'The Lion King' sinks its teeth into critic-audience divide | CNN
As "The Lion King" counts up receipts from a big opening weekend while still licking its wounds from negative reviews, you can almost hear the familiar murmurs -- that critics are "out of step" with the audiences they profess to serve.
"Critics" are less and less relevant when anyone can write and post a review.
What matters now is it a film can entertain a large audience. If it is can't it likely should have gone to streaming instead. Netflix, Disney+, Amazon Prime Video etc.
Jedijax719
Well-Known Member
Box Office Guru said it well. While divided by critics, Lion King, like Aladdin, was not made for the critics. Pretty much says it all. There are Disney fans (like me) who are critical of it but who aren't going to tear it apart as we are not movie critics.
The movie could, if it keeps the current legs that TS4 has, end up with $650 million domestic and around $1.8 billion WW.
The movie could, if it keeps the current legs that TS4 has, end up with $650 million domestic and around $1.8 billion WW.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Huh??
One point is that Disney has been boosted by critics in notable instances...and suffers immunity at other times
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
There were analysts in the spring that predicted the lion king would be the biggest movie of the year.
Think about that for a second.
Now -
They are wrong...but it was a pretty safe bet to make a ton of cash.
The problem with the lion king now - and it’s not really a “problem” - is that it isn’t really a good movie.
Neither was the original. It reaped the rewards of the 3 animated movies that “woke sleeping beauty” prior and really built the momentum.
I believe as tangled did for frozen.
Mermaid, beauty and Aladdin were much better stories than lion king...which didn’t have much of a story...some catchy tunes and not too much else.
Jedijax719
Well-Known Member
What makes Mermaid, BatB and Aladdin so much better than the LK from a story standpoint? I don't think I understand what you mean by "It reaped the rewards of the 3 animated movies that “woke sleeping beauty” prior and really built the momentum.". What does that even mean?
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Watch “waking sleeping beauty” by the great don Hahn and it will make sense.
The growth of Disney as the modern power it is today as well as their recommitment to making great movies lead by Roy from 85-95 really culminated with the lion king...but the heavy lifting was done by the other 3.
Lion king had the great opening scene...but other than Mufasa it didn’t make a lot of sense. Maybe it was the talking animals? I don’t know. This isn’t hindsight. I had the same feeling in 1994 when I saw it: “it was good...yeah...it was...but”
Not beauty or Aladdin...not toy story or Nemo or Up...
Solid...but unspectacular. My take.
I had very similar reaction in 2015 to another movie ...but let’s not go there.
jt04
Well-Known Member
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
That was the point of the article. Short term there is no problem
Disneyfanman
Well-Known Member
I saw it tonight in a packed, sold out theater. Multi-generational crowd and many of the adults sang along. I enjoyed it for what it was, but was amazed at how close it was to the original. I was anticipating dialog and even the camera shots. I’m a big fan of the original and thought this remake was a bit pointless, although interesting. The best parts for me were the musical numbers, including a new Elton John tune over the credits. Considering how much I liked Aladdin, this one fell flat for me.
jt04
Well-Known Member
Keep in mind that Disney now makes movies for a global audience. Light years beyond when the original lion king was released.
For most of them I imagine this is their first time experiencing the story. The overseas box office is reflecting this as it is doing very well. Looks like it might have had one of the best Mondays ever domestically also. Might reach 1 billion by the close of the weekend.
Magenta Panther
Well-Known Member
The original Lion King had no trouble winning over a global audience. What's driving this current film is not its quality, but nostalgia and Beyoncé. Just like the new Beauty and the Beast's appeal was nostalgia and Emma Watson. The appeal with these remakes is that people get to relive their childhoods/ and share a pivotal movie experience with their kids, even if that new take on the movie is less than the original (although IMO The new Jungle Book is more than the original. I think it's the superior film, but not just because of stellar CGI. The script was excellent, much more Kiplingesque than the original, which, in its defense, was never meant to be a Kipling film. It added more menace, more authentic animal behavior, and a stronger Mowgli. Just really excellent overall). I do wonder when audiences are going to realize that remaking an already-perfect film like The Lion King is just an exercise in cynicism, and how long they're willing to bankroll it?