REVIEW: The Lion King (2019)

Courtesy of Disney

Disney’s modern obsession with remaking iconic films from their vault has turned out to be insanely lucrative. Since 2010’s Alice in Wonderland, nine adaptations (although you could argue the trend goes back even further, to 101 Dalmatians in 1996) have taken in more than $6.5 billion worldwide.

The house that Mickey built isn’t known for leaving money on the table, so look for this trend to continue until our culture’s obsession with nostalgia begins to fade. That certainly won’t happen before this weekend, when director Jon Favreau’s photorealistic, entirely CGI adaptation of 1994’s The Lion King (perhaps the greatest animated film of all time) hits theaters.

Anticipation is off the charts. Industry analysts are estimating a domestic debut north of $170 million, and it’s already grossed $54.1 million (and counting) from China since opening there last weekend. Anecdotally, people started asking me if I’d seen it a few months ago, even though press screenings are rarely earlier than a couple of weeks before release.

So, yeah – this thing is going to be massive.

But is it good? Well, that depends on what viewers are hoping to get out of the experience. Those looking for a visual extravaganza that pushes their nostalgia buttons will be in heaven. However, those expecting a creative interpretation of a classic tale will come away disappointed.

This is much closer to the Aladdin style of remake (fine, but unnecessary) than Pete’s Dragon (taking a basic premise and reinventing it). Nothing wrong with preferring one style over the other, of course. I’m just more of a Pete’s Dragon guy.

For those who’ve somehow never seen the 1994 version, it’s basically Hamlet with a happy ending. Young Simba (JD McCrary) leads a privileged life as the only cub of King Mufasa (James Earl Jones again, because you don’t mess with perfection). But when his evil uncle Scar (Chiwetel Ejiofor) makes a play for the throne, the young prince finds himself exiled and heartbroken.

He soon meets two fellow outcasts, a warthog named Pumbaa (Seth Rogen) and a snarky meerkat named Timon (Billy Eichner), and they become pals as the years pass. But when Simba (now played by Donald Glover) reunites with former friend Nala (Shahadi Wright Joseph as a cub, Beyoncé Knowles-Carter as a lioness), he realizes he must return home and fight for his rightful place as king of Pride Rock.

Favreau has somehow improved upon the astonishing magic trick he accomplished with 2016’s The Jungle Book, transforming adorable animated critters into stunningly lifelike animals who still talk and sing the songs we remember from the original. It’s like watching a trippy version Planet Earth.

But when I say the characters talk and sing like we remember, I mean precisely that. Narratively, this new adaptation of The Lion King is almost the exact same film, down to the same lines of dialogue. I’m genuinely shocked that Jeff Nathanson got a solo screenwriting credit – huge sections of the original script are essentially copied and pasted here.

There are even close approximations of specific camera angles. For example, Favreau’s re-creation of the devastating stampede scene has that smash zoom on Simba’s terrified face that destroyed me as a kid. But animators can create wide-eyed expressions of fear, while photorealistic animals don’t emote. The difference is jarring.

Granted, this version is a half-hour longer than the original, but none of the changes are substantial. The extra time is devoted to showcasing brilliant animal and landscape design; Scar, Nala and the hyenas get a little more to do; and there’s a new song (might as well take advantage of having Beyoncé on the payroll), but these elements pale in comparison next to the perfection of the original material.

For the first hour or so, I actually started to lose focus when the initial wonder of the visual spectacle wore off. But things get a lot more interesting once Pumbaa and Timon show up. Not-so-coincidentally, those characters are also the ones who deviate the most from the original film.

That’s probably because Rogen and Eichner are ridiculously talented at improv, and those skills lead to them stealing the entire movie. When they’re on screen, life is suddenly injected into what was previously an intriguing filmmaking experiment. I’ve seen more than a few critics liken The Lion King to a kid-friendly version of Gus Van Sant’s infamous 1998 shot-for-shot remake of Psycho, and I’m mad I didn’t think of that comparison first – it’s stunningly accurate.

Perhaps the most disappointing aspect of the film is that after all the hype surrounding Beyoncé joining the cast, she’s barely in it. I estimate she has less than five minutes of dialogue, although I’m sure they backed up a Brinks truck to get a song and her name in the marketing materials.

Despite my ultimate indifference about the film, it’s not bad by any stretch – just unnecessary. Still, in our remake and nostalgia-obsessed culture, it could’ve been a lot worse. The stunning visuals make it a must-see, but I can’t help but wonder what might’ve been if Disney trusted Favreau enough to let him deviate more from the source material. I mean, it’s The Lion King, not the Bible.

The Lion King is rated PG for sequences of violence and peril, and some thematic elements.

Grade: B-