Live Action Lion King in the Works - Page 2

*ranger_scout* · 08-07-2017, 04:05 PM

Alfre Woodard and John Kani have joined the film as Sarabi and Rafiki.

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/new...tion-lion-king

http://www.thewrap.com/john-kani-rafiki-lion-king/

*TigerClaw* · 08-07-2017, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ranger_scout

Alfre Woodard and John Kani have joined the film as Sarabi and Rafiki.

http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/new...tion-lion-king

http://www.thewrap.com/john-kani-rafiki-lion-king/

That's pretty good casting for those two.

*Autbot_Benz* · 11-01-2017, 05:50 PM

Spoiler:

Full Cast released

*Utrommaniac* · 11-01-2017, 05:59 PM

Huh...looks like they changed the names of Banzai and Ed. I am okay with this.

There is no replacing James Earl Jones as Mufasa, and they knew it!

*Cure* · 11-01-2017, 06:36 PM

Azizi and Kamari. Gaaaaaaaaay.

*sdp* · 11-01-2017, 11:27 PM

If done right this movie is going to be huge, unlike the other live action hits to their old movies this one has mass appeal from both sexes and any age.

*Utrommaniac* · 11-02-2017, 12:29 AM

I don't know how I didn't notice Beyoncé is Nala.

Does this mean she's doing a cover of Can You Feel the Love Tonight?

*Candy Kappa* · 11-02-2017, 03:42 AM

I love the cast

*ranger_scout* · 04-24-2018, 10:22 PM

People at Cinema Con got to see a special sneak peek of the film. Here are the details.

Quote:

As for Lion King, it’s shot for shot with the 1994 feature toon, but what a difference real animals (or what looks like real animals) makes. Baby Simba looks great, and there’s a shot of Rafiki rubbing his forehead with red dust and raising him to the other animals. A big cheer from the exhibitor crowd here in the Colosseum at Caesars Palace.

http://deadline.com/2018/04/dumbo-ti...on-1202375647/

*Shark_Blade* · 11-02-2017, 04:42 AM

I expect this to be as good as Jungle Book live action.

Quote:

Originally Posted by sdp

If done right this movie is going to be huge, unlike the other live action hits to their old movies this one has mass appeal from both sexes and any age.

Don't be stupid; all the other live action has mass appeal too.

*TheSkeletonMan939* · 11-02-2017, 06:54 AM

Hans Zimmer is scoring the film (despite having scored the original).

*sdp* · 11-02-2017, 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shark_Blade

I expect this to be as good as Jungle Book live action.

Don't be stupid; all the other live action has mass appeal too.

You're telling me Beauty and the Beast live action has the same mass appeal than the Lion King will?

*sdp* · 11-22-2018, 04:39 PM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYK6GUWCbPE

"live action" Lion King is all CG and the uncanny valley is strong with this one. I'm still super excited tho.

*Shark_Blade* · 11-22-2018, 05:10 PM

Can’t wait.

*NinjaPug* · 04-25-2018, 08:09 AM

Sounds like the same footage they released at D23 last year

*FredWolfLeonardo* · 04-25-2018, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shark_Blade

I expect this to be as good as Jungle Book live action.

I think its gonna be even better. I think Jon Faverau's style will work better with something as grand and big as the Lion King. Even the Jungle book 2016 showed Lion King elements, and he managed to do the the film well despite the source material (and the animated film) having a more quiet and mysterious tone in comparison.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TigerClaw

I really wish they released the footage. I'm curious to see how the Lions look like. They all have a distinctive look in the original. So I hope they kept that in this remake.

Me too. With that recent Dumbo footage, I really, really hope we get some leaks for this. I'd especially like to see Scar and how they animate "a bad guy" Lion differently from the others while still keeping the whole thing realistic looking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSkeletonMan939

Hans Zimmer is scoring the film (despite having scored the original).

First, James Earl Jones as Mufasa and Now This? This film is going places!

*Allio* · 11-24-2018, 12:46 PM

It just looked “okay.” I can see why people want to see it but I’d it is going to be another BatB remake I’m good.

*MsMarvelDuckie* · 11-24-2018, 05:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZariusTwo

So watch the original then.

And Beauty and the Beast sucked.

Well, we all know how impossibly high your standards are, so... relevance here? Also, if BatB LA sucked, what does that say for the original, since it was nearly identical ( save for the added scenes)? Your logic baffles me here. Praise the animated version, but panning the LA when it's THE SAME D@MN MOVIE??!! Inexplicable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBlueTurtle1

Beauty and the Beast sucked, This OOZES rehash and LACK of originality. CGI ages, traditional animation rarely does.
I want to see new stories told, not watch some cheap imitations, and so what if Mufasa is still Jones, lol, more than half the dialogue he will say in the movie you have heard before.

THIS IS A CASH GRAB, we're just gonna be seeing these realistic looking animals talking to each other which won't have the same charm that the original had.

Ok, so it's a cash grab. SO WHAT?! These are fairy tales that have been rehashed COUNTLESS TIMES BEFORE, so it's not a "new" thing to remake them. But as beautiful as the animated ones were, there is something more magical about seeing your favorite stories "come to life" via LA/CG. You may feel it's unneeded, but so were the animated ones, since the stories are far from new or original. They are fairy tales. (Or in the case of Lion King, Hamlet on the African savannah....)

As for charm, is it any less charming than the "LA"(CG) versions of Jungle Book, Charlotte's Web, Pete's Dragon, or any other talking animal movies? (Babe, anyone?) I feel the realism gives it MORE impact, not less. (Who wouldn't love to have a lion or bear just start talking to them?)

*Candy Kappa* · 11-24-2018, 05:44 PM

Trailer did not grab me, I hope they fixes the dull colors before releasing cause it's almost BvS' lack of color. It's especially noticeable when comparing it to the original movie which is rich in color.

~~Leo656~~ · 11-24-2018, 06:01 PM

I'unno man. I really think this is one of those "Some people just really, REALLY love CGI" kind of things, and if you don't care about that, then you don't care at all.

I. HATE. CGI. So again, while they've already got me to commit, it's begrudgingly, as there really, TRULY is no point outside of, "We push button, make shiny thing."

To go back to my earlier comparison, I've asked many people who claim to love movies why Van Sant's "Psycho" is "a piece of sh*t" but the Disney CGI reboots are so magical. NOBODY can really explain it satisfactorily, which tells me everything I need to know.

Paint-By-Numbers is still just coloring inside someone else's artwork, even if you do an above-average job. If I draw a picture, and you trace over and recolor it, and we both try and sell it, there's something inherently unethical about that. If *I* do it, well... that's somehow a little more absurd, because now I'm selling you the same exact thing twice. But now Malibu Stacy has a new hat, so... that's okay? I'm not sure that's okay.

But, as some have openly said, "Who cares if it's a cash grab?" Who cares, indeed. The answer, being, "Some people, obviously."

I don't think the problem at all is that it's one more of a countless number of reissued fairy tale stories. Like Duckie said, that's nothing new. I think it's more that Disney is now blatantly showing off how little they have to actually do to make people give them money, often years in advance of these films even existing, and it rubs people the wrong way. They can literally Xerox old work, pass it off as new, and make three times as much as they did the first time. It's vulgar.

Like I said, I had a decent time watching "Beauty and the Beast", I absolutely don't hate it but it has NO point in existing, and it doesn't exceed the original in any way. These things are a trifle, a novelty, like anything borne entirely out of a sick fascination with technology usually is. PS4-level CGI might be enough to justify this stuff to some people, but nobody should be yelled at for pointing out that the whole thing is still pointless and creatively bankrupt.

Multiple things can be true at once. The movies can be entertaining AND still be creatively bankrupt, pointless cash-grabs. I feel like people are becoming demonized in recent years simply for not being slavish Disney acolytes, and pointing out that the company has done things it needn't have done, for reasons that are less than noble. Frankly, they've gotten so much money from me that I feel like I can criticize them all I want.

They really win, anyway, because as I said, despite my distaste for the "Why" of it all, it's "Lion King" so I'll see it. As will every single person swearing up and down they won't. That's the real rib of it all; part of why they keep doing these things is because they KNOW it's already in the bag, moaning be damned. Every single person saying "What's the point? This is stupid" is still gonna go see it in theaters - which is wise, because I have a feeling this isn't gonna look half as good on TV as it does in the theater. Y'know, like all CGI stuff. It all ages like grapes left in the sun. Sh*t, for all the money "Avatar" made, nobody even talks about it anymore except to joke about the 8 sequels nobody wants.

It makes me wonder why everyone continues to be awestruck by these things when they all unavoidably look dated 5 minutes after they're out. Yet you still have people insisting "The CGI is what justifies the entire ordeal." Eh. That's an opinion, but questionable. I'unno if anything "justifies" it, but I'll agree that the CGI is the one and only reason to even bother.

Some people simply aren't entranced by putting a shiny HD coat of paint on an old toy that still works just fine. People need to learn this.

11-01-2017, 05:50 PM	#3
Autbot_Benz Hellblazer Join Date: Jun 2014 Location: Ventura California Posts: 9,192	Spoiler: Full Cast released __________________ I respect what FW cartoon did for the turtles franchise but it is the most overrated and hard to watch of the 3 turtles cartoons.

11-01-2017, 05:59 PM	#4
Utrommaniac Resident overthinker Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: what is going on.......... Posts: 5,318	Huh...looks like they changed the names of Banzai and Ed. I am okay with this. There is no replacing James Earl Jones as Mufasa, and they knew it! __________________ DeviantART

11-01-2017, 11:27 PM	#6
sdp Detoxed Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Tokio, Italy Posts: 11,222	If done right this movie is going to be huge, unlike the other live action hits to their old movies this one has mass appeal from both sexes and any age. __________________ *Trapt* *urself Page MiscRave!!!* Click to join The Drome Discord server

11-02-2017, 12:29 AM	#7
Utrommaniac Resident overthinker Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: what is going on.......... Posts: 5,318	I don't know how I didn't notice Beyoncé is Nala. Does this mean she's doing a cover of Can You Feel the Love Tonight? __________________ DeviantART

11-02-2017, 03:42 AM	#8
Candy Kappa The Agenda of Existing Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Vikingland Posts: 14,596	I love the cast __________________ devianArt Instagram Youtube Tumblr Art Blog Patreon

08-07-2017, 04:05 PM	#1
ranger_scout Foot Elite Join Date: May 2014 Location: Texas Posts: 3,776	Alfre Woodard and John Kani have joined the film as Sarabi and Rafiki. http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/new...tion-lion-king http://www.thewrap.com/john-kani-rafiki-lion-king/

11-01-2017, 06:36 PM	#5
Cure Y'all need Jesus Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: New Jersey Posts: 8,938	Azizi and Kamari. Gaaaaaaaaay.

11-22-2018, 04:39 PM	#13
sdp Detoxed Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Tokio, Italy Posts: 11,222	https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rYK6GUWCbPE "live action" Lion King is all CG and the uncanny valley is strong with this one. I'm still super excited tho. __________________ *Trapt* *urself Page MiscRave!!!* Click to join The Drome Discord server

11-22-2018, 05:10 PM	#14
Shark_Blade Emperor Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 7,909	Can’t wait.

04-25-2018, 08:09 AM	#15
NinjaPug Foot Elite Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 4,390	Sounds like the same footage they released at D23 last year

11-24-2018, 12:46 PM	#17
Allio Foot Elite Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 4,208	It just looked “okay.” I can see why people want to see it but I’d it is going to be another BatB remake I’m good.

11-24-2018, 05:44 PM	#19
Candy Kappa The Agenda of Existing Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Vikingland Posts: 14,596	Trailer did not grab me, I hope they fixes the dull colors before releasing cause it's almost BvS' lack of color. It's especially noticeable when comparing it to the original movie which is rich in color. __________________ devianArt Instagram Youtube Tumblr Art Blog Patreon

11-24-2018, 06:01 PM	#20
~~Leo656~~ Banned Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: nWo Country Posts: 27,703	I'unno man. I really think this is one of those "Some people just really, REALLY love CGI" kind of things, and if you don't care about that, then you don't care at all. I. HATE. CGI. So again, while they've already got me to commit, it's begrudgingly, as there really, TRULY is no point outside of, "We push button, make shiny thing." To go back to my earlier comparison, I've asked many people who claim to love movies why Van Sant's "Psycho" is "a piece of sht" but the Disney CGI reboots are so magical. NOBODY can really explain it satisfactorily, which tells me everything I need to know. Paint-By-Numbers is still just coloring inside someone else's artwork, even if you do an above-average job. If I draw a picture, and you trace over and recolor it, and we both try and sell it, there's something inherently unethical about that. If I* do it, well... that's somehow a little more absurd, because now I'm selling you the same exact thing twice. But now Malibu Stacy has a new hat, so... that's okay? I'm not sure that's okay. But, as some have openly said, "Who cares if it's a cash grab?" Who cares, indeed. The answer, being, "Some people, obviously." I don't think the problem at all is that it's one more of a countless number of reissued fairy tale stories. Like Duckie said, that's nothing new. I think it's more that Disney is now blatantly showing off how little they have to actually do to make people give them money, often years in advance of these films even existing, and it rubs people the wrong way. They can literally Xerox old work, pass it off as new, and make three times as much as they did the first time. It's vulgar. Like I said, I had a decent time watching "Beauty and the Beast", I absolutely don't hate it but it has NO point in existing, and it doesn't exceed the original in any way. These things are a trifle, a novelty, like anything borne entirely out of a sick fascination with technology usually is. PS4-level CGI might be enough to justify this stuff to some people, but nobody should be yelled at for pointing out that the whole thing is still pointless and creatively bankrupt. Multiple things can be true at once. The movies can be entertaining AND still be creatively bankrupt, pointless cash-grabs. I feel like people are becoming demonized in recent years simply for not being slavish Disney acolytes, and pointing out that the company has done things it needn't have done, for reasons that are less than noble. Frankly, they've gotten so much money from me that I feel like I can criticize them all I want. They really win, anyway, because as I said, despite my distaste for the "Why" of it all, it's "Lion King" so I'll see it. As will every single person swearing up and down they won't. That's the real rib of it all; part of why they keep doing these things is because they KNOW it's already in the bag, moaning be damned. Every single person saying "What's the point? This is stupid" is still gonna go see it in theaters - which is wise, because I have a feeling this isn't gonna look half as good on TV as it does in the theater. Y'know, like all CGI stuff. It all ages like grapes left in the sun. Sh*t, for all the money "Avatar" made, nobody even talks about it anymore except to joke about the 8 sequels nobody wants. It makes me wonder why everyone continues to be awestruck by these things when they all unavoidably look dated 5 minutes after they're out. Yet you still have people insisting "The CGI is what justifies the entire ordeal." Eh. That's an opinion, but questionable. I'unno if anything "justifies" it, but I'll agree that the CGI is the one and only reason to even bother. Some people simply aren't entranced by putting a shiny HD coat of paint on an old toy that still works just fine. People need to learn this.