MovieChat Forums > Mufasa: The Lion King (2024) Discussion > Origin Story vs. Sequel

Origin Story vs. Sequel

posted a year ago by Ace_Spade (9546)
8 replies | jump to latest

I saw the title and thought this would be a "rise to power" for the wise, noble king we knew and loved - Simba's father. I doubt I'd have bothered with it anyway, but when I saw it was basically a rehash of Lion King 2: Simba's Pride, I felt the potential was less interesting.

If this were a prequel, we could see Mufasa and Scar growing up together. If well-written, Mufasa could try and help Scar, feel guilty over being the "favourite," but also maybe just kinda take the kingship, anyway. With the care and top-grade writing that Disney is actually capable of (sometimes) we'd see brothers torn apart, feel empathy for both Scar and Mufasa, and the next time we watched the Lion King, we'd be even more upset that Mufasa died - but also a little upset that Scar was too selfish to avoid his fate.

Plus, we'd get a little more James Earl Jones.

[–] StrongRex (1319) a year ago

James Earl Jones is done. His tired performance in the CGI remake is proof of that. He deserves a well-earned luxurious retirement.

But I agree with everything else you proposed. It's the type of movie any Lion King fan or Disney fan in general would have wanted Disney make. But their recent releases have shown they don't care about quality, so I have enormous doubts this will be the movie we get. Plus, it's connected to the CGI remake which is crap.

[–] Ace_Spade (9546) a year ago

I didn't hear his performance in the CGI remake because I haven't really been interested in the remakes. The one I was most interested in was Mulan - because it was actually going to do something different from the original - but I heard it kinda sucked. Is it possible that, with a more inspiring project, Jones might still have some more good stuff in the tank?

Look, it's possible that this sequel will have good ideas, but I doubt it. Of course, with Disney's lackluster track record of late, I would be doubtful if they pitched the prequel idea, either.

[–] StrongRex (1319) a year ago

“I didn't hear his performance in the CGI remake because I haven't really been interested in the remakes.”

Consider yourself lucky.

“The one I was most interested in was Mulan - because it was actually going to do something different from the original - but I heard it kinda sucked.”

It was HORRIBLE. Disney completely squandered that said opportunity to do something different.

“Is it possible that, with a more inspiring project, Jones might still have some more good stuff in the tank?”

If we were talking 20 years ago, I’d say sure. But he’s 92 years old and it really showed in the remake. So I stand by my retirement comment because of that and another reason I’ll get into with your next comment.

“Look, it's possible that this sequel will have good ideas, but I doubt it. Of course, with Disney's lackluster track record of late, I would be doubtful if they pitched the prequel idea, either.”

Yes, it just comes down to the fact that Disney is not willing to make anything good anymore. This is an opportunity they should have taken a long time ago. In the 90s it would have been awesome, in the 2000s it would have been at least decent or even very good. But I don’t trust Disney with this project now. And I haven’t even mentioned The Lion Guard 🤮.

[–] Ace_Spade (9546) a year ago

I'm pretty sure staying away from the CGI retread of The Lion King wasn't luck, it was just prudence. TLK seemed like the worst of the remakes to me, because it was just taking the same thing but making it computer animated. It wasn't even offering the fun of seeing characters like Belle and Ariel in live-action, it was just saying, "Oh, we remade that cartoon using computers." Rowan Atkinson got replaced by John Oliver? What a lateral move. That's the whole film.

Yeah, I heard about Mulan and stayed away. Shame. I hate that the remakes are basically just the same movies warmed over with a little live-action. Heck, the animation was magical, so that's not even really a selling feature. I think, if they're remaking this stuff, they should at least explore different story opportunities. I'd be interested in the controversial updates to Snow White if I thought they were making story decisions, but they're obviously just pandering to whatever they think loudmouthed activists want.

Disney will cycle down for a while and then come back. It happened when they flailed around for a while after the "classic" era. I'm not saying there aren't reasons to love films like 101 Dalmatians, I'm just saying it ain't no Sleeping Beauty or Fantasia or Bambi. But they got their groove back. The Disney Rennaissance - Little Mermaid, Aladdin, Beauty and the Beast, et al. - are great! They fell off again for a while, then got on a "hot" streak with Wreck-It Ralph or Tangled, and rode that until a couple years ago. Encanto did big numbers and made most viewers pretty happy. With people souring on the remakes, and films like Raya and the Last Dragon and Strange World being less well-received, they're probably entering another "valley" phase.

Lion Guard?

[–] StrongRex (1319) a year ago

It wasn’t even fun seeing characters like Belle in live action because she was so badly miscast, couldn’t sing, and her character was so drastically changed and not in a good way. And you have the actress herself to thank for that if you read about her behind the scenes.

I honestly think you’re giving Disney way too much credit. You said that you hadn’t really been following Disney’s updates and it’s kind of showing in your posts no offense. This era is far different than the 70s and 80s when they were struggling and hit rock bottom with the movie Black Cauldron. At least in that era we got some pretty good classics even if they weren’t exactly up to par with movies that came before it and even if Disney themselves is ashamed of those projects. But this is way different from when they were struggling in that era. There were still animators back who started with Disney and wanted to stay true to his mission and it was their influence that helped bring in the Renaissance.

Now Disney is a multi-billion dollar conglomerate that wants to take over and monopolize the entire entertainment industry, and they’re extremely close to doing so with them buying up franchises that they didn’t create originally and buying the studios behind them. All they care about now is indoctrinating children into their toxic far-left agenda. I wish I could have the same optimism you do that Disney will come back from this and have another Renaissance, but there is a reason I said they don’t care about making anything good anymore. I think Disney is beyond saving now, and everyone should withdraw their support from them and let them suffer the consequences of their actions.

And yes, Lion Guard. Lots of shows aimed at little children are very low quality and insult their intelligence by talking down to them, and the Lion King has fallen prey at to that with Disney Channel’s new show The Lion Guard. It is insulting to everything that made the Lion King such an amazing franchise.

[–] StrongRex (1319) a year ago

It’s another reason why I do not trust Disney to make this movie if they make shows like The Lion Guard. To get a taste of just how mind-blowingly atrocious this show is, this blog post gives a pretty good idea. Keep in mind this was posted back in 2016 so the show has gotten a lot worse in its progression since then.

https://unshavedmouse.com/2016/01/26/if-i-said-i-was-happy-id-be-lion/

[–] StrongRex (1319) a year ago

I just wanted to respond to this little comment right here:

"I hate that the remakes are basically just the same movies warmed over with a little live-action."

They're either shot-by-shot remakes in live-action and are the sucky versions of the wonderful original classics, or Disney decides to make them different in a way that butchers the original classics (or they did both in the same version). Either way, they're taking away everything that made these films great and giving us a version that sucks.

[–] Ace_Spade (9546) a year ago

That was more-or-less what I was driving at, yeah.

With Disney's remakes, they're also trying to do both at the same time. They're going, "Remember this classic film?" and selling them on nostalgia, but then changing them. If it's not Sleepy, Dopey, Grumpy, etc., people don't want to watch *if* they've been told, "Come and see the cartoon in live-action!" If they said, "Come and see an old story in a new way!" I think they'd get a better reaction.

The other reason people are cooling to these new films is simply because they're clearly committee-built. They're pandering and people don't like that. It smacks of desperation. Like, "Love me, please! Love me!" That simpering is always annoying.