• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Deleted member 50454

User requested account closure
Banned
Dec 5, 2018
1,847
Looks better than most of the other Disney remakes (which are invariably rubbish).

Not sure about Chiwetel Ejiofor's Scar though so far.
 

Toriko

Banned
Dec 29, 2017
7,711
Scar is worse. Not a patch on Jeremy Irons. Completely lacks any sort of expressiveness of the original. Here is hoping ppl who see this also give the original a shot if they have not.

What a cash grab from one of the worst live action production houses in the business today.
 

Bradbury

Member
Oct 28, 2017
1,857
The cgi is out of this world. It looks live action. But the realistic animals lack the charisma from the original design, not feeling it
 

Deleted member 14663

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
749
As soon as I saw that it was the same director as the Jungle Book, I knew it was gonna be FIRE. This looks SO good.
 

RDreamer

Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,114
I really don't get some of y'all lmfao.

Some friends/alumni of mine from my film school have been putting their heart and soul into this.

The original will always be there - it's not going anywhere. And regardless of why it's being made, it's clearly a different take on the material - artistically. All this talk about not being colorful enough like the original, or not being expressive enough like hand drawn animation completely boggles me as that's clearly not the point. The point IS for it to look photo-realistic in a sense.

My sort of issue with these is that they're kind of half trying to be something new and half not. Like I'd totally respect a new envisioning of The lion King with realistic visuals that kept that mood reinforced throughout. Something more somber and real. But they can't skip out on fan favorite songs so those get jammed in and it becomes this weird Frankenstein. The original was made for that in every way and this really won't be. That was my issue with Jungle Book. The tone just felt weird especially during musical numbers, which obviously were cut down.
 

stan_marsh

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
8,688
Canada
I still don't get what's the point of recreating 90% of the original movie's shots 1:1 :/

It feels like just a different coat of paint, that - while technically really impressive - deviates far from the colorful and expressive original. I'm just kind of getting "The Lion King - in bad", honestly :(

But good for those engaged in this film, though.

cash grab

nostalgia is fucking blinding.

original came out in 1994, this is perfect timing to get into the wallets of those since they grew up.
a five year old in 1994 would be 30 now. perfect time to extract cash via nostalgia.
 

Bliman

User Requested Ban
Banned
Jan 21, 2019
1,443
That is just beautiful. Congratulations on all the people who worked on this. Breathtaking.
 

BWoog

Member
Oct 27, 2017
38,483
Jesus, between this, Endgame, and Star Wars, Disney is making 80 trillion this year.
 

Finaj

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,379
The CGI is incredible, but the characters look worse off for it.

Scar doesn't look anywhere as unique as his original design, I can barely tell young Nala and Simba apart at all, and the characters are so... expressionless.
 

shinobi602

Verified
Oct 24, 2017
8,500
Good LORD. CGI voodoo.

Can still only ever see Jonathan Irons as Scar but I'll take it.

Edit: JEREMY. Goddamnit.
 

jph139

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,448
Yeah, the lack of expressiveness hurts it here. Animation lets you bridge that gap so much easier.

Like, the original Jungle Book is kind of a snooze, so the remake was easy to make an improvement. But this is the Lion King - best not miss.

God bless that soundtrack though. 90s Disney really brought the heat with their scores.
 

chezzymann

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,042
Meh. I feel they could have taken advantage of it being cg more. They barely emote. Just sorta move their mouth a little.
 

DonMigs85

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
2,770
The characters seems unexpressive. The models are really true to what real animals look like, but that's a problem when you're trying to portay human emotion.

That scene where scar walks past a few females lions towards the end of the trailer is a good example. When it cuts to the shot of the female lion's face, what exactly am I supposed to get from that?
Yeah I imagine it could be even worse for Timon and Pumbaa
 

Fliesen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,281
Good LORD. CGI voodoo.

Can still only ever see Jonathan Irons as Scar but I'll take it.
HxdQ2h.gif
 

HustleBun

Member
Nov 12, 2017
6,076
The new dialogue is really strong. I actually see where the story can be expanded upon now.

I'm so happy they are reinterpreting the original score instead of writing completely new music. The voices are excellent too, Scar sounds awesome.

I'm legit tearing up. I think Favreau gets it.
 

fuenf

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
97
wow. Tossing nostalgia aside, this looks more impressive than the original to me. Don't get me wrong, the Lion King is a wonderfully animated master piece but to get this story to work, while going for photorealistic visuals is pretty much a miracle. I didnt believe they could pull it off, but this trailer feels more organic and natural than the Jungle Book ever did (lack of humans might contribute). I just hope that it isnt the scene for scene reconstruction that this trailer makes it out to be. Will see it either way though.
 

Scullibundo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,739
I really don't get some of y'all lmfao.

Some friends/alumni of mine from my film school have been putting their heart and soul into this.

The original will always be there - it's not going anywhere. And regardless of why it's being made, it's clearly a different take on the material - artistically. All this talk about not being colorful enough like the original, or not being expressive enough like hand drawn animation completely boggles me as that's clearly not the point. The point IS for it to look photo-realistic in a sense.
I think the problem people are having is that more effort has been paid to making the film look real, as opposed to looking good in terms of lighting and artistry. Why does Pride Rock at sunrise look so flat? You're in an all digital environment. You don't even have to wait for magic hour.
 

Ravelle

Member
Oct 31, 2017
17,898
The CGI is incredible, but the characters look worse off for it.

Scar doesn't look anywhere as unique as his original design, I can barely tell young Nala and Simba apart at all, and the characters are so... expressionless.

Let's hope it's just how the trailer is cut, most trailer including this one have the vocal tracks out of sync as a voice over instead of in sync with the scenes in question. We haven't really seen anyone really talk and express themselves yet.
 

Yoshi88

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,148
cash grab

nostalgia is fucking blinding.

original came out in 1994, this is perfect timing to get into the wallets of those since they grew up.
a five year old in 1994 would be 30 now. perfect time to extract cash via nostalgia.

Is it really this easy with the audiences? Fun fact: I'm 30 now and was five years old when the original released. I hold it dear to my heart and have no real interest in this. I'd argue this is more targeted at Gen Z and the likes.
 

AzerPhire

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,198
Everyone in here complaining about the expressions yet we only saw two spoken lines in the whole trailer.
 

Rand a. Thor

Banned
Oct 31, 2017
10,213
Greece
On one hand Ejiofor is no Jeremy Irons. On the other hand, I am a glutton for nostalgia and holy shit this looks glorious. Those 1:1 shots. That music, that Timon and Pumba. I don't give a shit about the lack of Be Prepared, this is the CGI/Live Action adaptation that will finally be on par with the original, and I won't agree with any other opinion.
 

Acquila

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,162
It's hard to get excited for a realistic 1:1 remake of the original movie. The Broadway musical is great because it found its own very distinctive style!

This is kinda how I feel. Majority of shots are just recreations of the original. They're playing this really safe.

I'd still totally watch it though.
 

Bliman

User Requested Ban
Banned
Jan 21, 2019
1,443
Meh. I feel they could have taken advantage of it being cg more. They barely emote. Just sorta move their mouth a little.
Are you serious? They use much more to evoke emotion. For example look at the hyena's keeping their heads low, crossing their legs when coming near . Their is so much emotion coming across. I don't get it that other people don't see these signs. Maybe they need it much more exaggerated like in the original. This looks really good.
 

Deleted member 7051

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,254
I have to admit, I was extremely skeptical for a long time but I think that trailer might have sold me. The moment I saw Timone singing, I realised that Disney made a talking raccoon work so how the heck did I ever worry they'd struggle making this work? Jungle Book was a pretty good movie too so it's in good hands.

I think Disney has nailed the concept of talking animals and is able to make them look realistic enough that it just... works.
 

johancruijff

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,237
Italy
I know that old farts like everyone here are interested in this, but do kids like this live action stuff? Or it's not even for them?
 

Vault

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,659
James Earl Jones is sounding old now, doesn't quite have the same power in his voice
 

digit_zero

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,391
Yeah, this is going to the first of this odd 'classic Disney movie -> to live action' trend that I see. First time I've watched any these trailers and didn't feel confused as to why it even existed.
 

GSG

Member
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,051
I'm gonna cry after the stampede scene, aren't I?

This looks so damn good. All the lions look amazing.
 

Jimnymebob

Member
Oct 26, 2017
19,715
They should just do the Hunchback live action remake where they remove the gargoyles, keep Tony Jay's voice, and it's suddenly a best film of all time.
 

Emobacca

Member
Nov 2, 2017
786
I'm so butthurt that the movie excluded the best Disney heel song ever, Be Prepared

Also I'm holding out hope they include the Broadway version of the He Lives In You reprise. That is the biggest highlight of the whole show