Search
Search results
Lee (2222 KP) rated The Lion King (2019) in Movies
Jul 20, 2019 (Updated Jul 20, 2019)
Disney's 1994 animated version of The Lion King was a huge hit. Not only did it win Academy Awards for original score (courtesy of the amazing Hans Zimmer) but also for original song "Can You Feel the Love Tonight" by Elton John & Tim Rice. It also won a Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture - Musical or Comedy and went on to become a huge Broadway stage show in 1997, winning further awards and proving to be one of the most popular shows ever. Some movie sequels quietly came and went, along with a couple of TV series, but it's the original movie which is still loved by millions to this day. While Disney currently feels the need to rework their animated back catalogue, and with considerable advances in photorealistic computer animation technology, it was only a matter of time before The Lion King had it's turn in landing a remake.
Right now, I'm neither for or against this current wave of remakes. I don't think they're entirely necessary, but I've been pleasantly surprised by one or two of them so far, so I'm happy to give them my time for now. The Lion King is the third remake to emerge this year though, following the disappointing Dumbo and the not as bad as I was expecting Aladdin. The term 'live action' has been used to describe this version of The Lion King, although it's not really live - more of a CGI upgrade - and it's been getting a lot of negativity online too, more so than any other Disney remake so far. Most of the backlash appears to be down to the fact that this is a beloved film, with the remake being more of a shot by shot recreation than any of the others so far, supposedly rendering it unnecessary in the eyes of the haters. But, while I agree that the original is an incredible movie, that certainly didn't stop me, or millions of others, from going to view the stage show production of The Lion King - a retelling and re-imagining of the story and characters you know and love, just with a different set of tools to do the job. So, why not treat this new movie in the same way, at least until you've actually seen it? And, even if you do hate the new version, the original is still going to be there for you to enjoy afterwards.
The story here, as mentioned earlier, is the same as the original movie, with a pretty impressive cast lending their voices to the characters. We follow young lion cub Simba (JD McCrary), who is destined to succeed his father, Mufasa (James Earl Jones reprising his 1994 performance), as King of the African Pride Lands. But his uncle Scar (Chiwetel Ejiofor) has other plans, murdering Mufasa and forcing Simba into exile where he meets a warthog called Pumbaa (Seth Rogen) and a meerkat named Timon (Billy Eichner). As an adult, Simba (now voiced by Donald Glover) reconnects with childhood friend Nala (voiced by Shahadi Wright Joseph as a child, Beyoncé as an adult) and mandrill Rafkiki (John Kani) and returns to the Pride Lands in order to take his rightful place as King. The circle of life, etc...
The visuals are incredible. Director Jon Favreau, who also directed the 2016 version of The Jungle Book, has taken what was done on that movie to a whole new level here. But the imagery is both the movies strength and it's weakness. As we sweep across the African landscape, in and around the animals as they go about their lives, you feel as though you are in a beautifully well shot documentary, the animals are that realistic. But that realism also means that animals cannot realistically convey human expressions or emotions, and there's a lot to be conveyed in the story of The Lion King - laughter, anger, sadness - and the majority of the voice cast cannot seem to stop it all from just feeling a bit flat and lifeless.
The first half meanders along, hitting all the right beats and songs from the original, but never really feeling like an improvement on it. And then Timon and Pumbaa arrive on the scene, providing much needed laughs and proving to be the movie's saviours. The film finds its feet, lightens up a little and becomes more enjoyable for its remainder, but it isn't enough. This is yet another remake where it's all style and not enough substance. Worth seeing, but certainly not better than the original.
https://www.cinechat.co.uk/the-lion-king-2019-review/
Right now, I'm neither for or against this current wave of remakes. I don't think they're entirely necessary, but I've been pleasantly surprised by one or two of them so far, so I'm happy to give them my time for now. The Lion King is the third remake to emerge this year though, following the disappointing Dumbo and the not as bad as I was expecting Aladdin. The term 'live action' has been used to describe this version of The Lion King, although it's not really live - more of a CGI upgrade - and it's been getting a lot of negativity online too, more so than any other Disney remake so far. Most of the backlash appears to be down to the fact that this is a beloved film, with the remake being more of a shot by shot recreation than any of the others so far, supposedly rendering it unnecessary in the eyes of the haters. But, while I agree that the original is an incredible movie, that certainly didn't stop me, or millions of others, from going to view the stage show production of The Lion King - a retelling and re-imagining of the story and characters you know and love, just with a different set of tools to do the job. So, why not treat this new movie in the same way, at least until you've actually seen it? And, even if you do hate the new version, the original is still going to be there for you to enjoy afterwards.
The story here, as mentioned earlier, is the same as the original movie, with a pretty impressive cast lending their voices to the characters. We follow young lion cub Simba (JD McCrary), who is destined to succeed his father, Mufasa (James Earl Jones reprising his 1994 performance), as King of the African Pride Lands. But his uncle Scar (Chiwetel Ejiofor) has other plans, murdering Mufasa and forcing Simba into exile where he meets a warthog called Pumbaa (Seth Rogen) and a meerkat named Timon (Billy Eichner). As an adult, Simba (now voiced by Donald Glover) reconnects with childhood friend Nala (voiced by Shahadi Wright Joseph as a child, Beyoncé as an adult) and mandrill Rafkiki (John Kani) and returns to the Pride Lands in order to take his rightful place as King. The circle of life, etc...
The visuals are incredible. Director Jon Favreau, who also directed the 2016 version of The Jungle Book, has taken what was done on that movie to a whole new level here. But the imagery is both the movies strength and it's weakness. As we sweep across the African landscape, in and around the animals as they go about their lives, you feel as though you are in a beautifully well shot documentary, the animals are that realistic. But that realism also means that animals cannot realistically convey human expressions or emotions, and there's a lot to be conveyed in the story of The Lion King - laughter, anger, sadness - and the majority of the voice cast cannot seem to stop it all from just feeling a bit flat and lifeless.
The first half meanders along, hitting all the right beats and songs from the original, but never really feeling like an improvement on it. And then Timon and Pumbaa arrive on the scene, providing much needed laughs and proving to be the movie's saviours. The film finds its feet, lightens up a little and becomes more enjoyable for its remainder, but it isn't enough. This is yet another remake where it's all style and not enough substance. Worth seeing, but certainly not better than the original.
https://www.cinechat.co.uk/the-lion-king-2019-review/
BobbiesDustyPages (1259 KP) rated Westworld - Season 1 in TV
Sep 5, 2017
Characters (2 more)
plot
That season finale
Though a remake it is still such a unique concept.
Westworld started off as being just interesting enough for me to keep coming back for more but at the same time I didn't fall in love with it as fast or as hard as a lot of other people did, but by the season finale I was so hooked even though I guessed the major plot twist part way through the season that the thought of waiting for season 2 was heartbreaking.
The concept of the show is such a unique idea and I love how it shows people at their worst when they have free reign of their own stories, there are a lot of plot twist and even though I figured out most of them it really didn't takeaway from the show at all.
The concept of the show is such a unique idea and I love how it shows people at their worst when they have free reign of their own stories, there are a lot of plot twist and even though I figured out most of them it really didn't takeaway from the show at all.
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Omen (2006) in Movies
Mar 1, 2018
Bafflingly superfluous and redundant mid-budget remake of the classic horror blockbuster. American diplomat and his wife discover their adopted son is a right little devil.
In no way an actively bad film, but given it cleaves so closely to the original, what exactly is the point of it? You would expect that the inclusion of a top-billed Julia Stiles would mean the character of Thorn's wife would be beefed up and given a little bit of agency in the plot (heaven knows she could use some); but no, the focus is still on the manly men doing masculine male things together. Pretty well cast, but you could guess who's playing which part just from looking at a list of actors, it is that unimaginative and unsurprising. Worth watching only if you've never seen the original and are unlikely ever to do so.
In no way an actively bad film, but given it cleaves so closely to the original, what exactly is the point of it? You would expect that the inclusion of a top-billed Julia Stiles would mean the character of Thorn's wife would be beefed up and given a little bit of agency in the plot (heaven knows she could use some); but no, the focus is still on the manly men doing masculine male things together. Pretty well cast, but you could guess who's playing which part just from looking at a list of actors, it is that unimaginative and unsurprising. Worth watching only if you've never seen the original and are unlikely ever to do so.
Dean (6927 KP) rated Halloween (2007) in Movies
Feb 21, 2018
Great update
I thought this was a very good film and a great remake. It's not entirely scene for scene like some and gives a lot more time to Michael as a young boy and reasons for him to turn evil. Rather than just a madman on the run from the asylum. Although some key scenes are kept and a few are changed slightly for the update, why change what worked so well in the original. Some people will just rate down remakes just for the sake of it, but seriously Halloween might have been scary if you saw it in your teens but today? This builds on what was a great horror classic and adds a few touches, more of a back story, a bit more violent and sexed up a little for todays audience. Whether you have seen the original or not you should check this out.
JSA the Golden Age
Book
From STARMAN scribe James Robinson, and in the beautiful Deluxe Edition format, comes an alternate...
Hag-Seed: The Tempest Retold
9.0
Rate It
Book
LONGLISTED FOR THE BAILEYS WOMEN'S PRIZE FOR FICTION 2017. Selected as a Book of the Year -...
Ethan Embry recommended Oldboy (2003) in Movies (curated)
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated Planet of the Apes (2001) in Movies
Jan 13, 2021
Not The Bad
This Remake/Reboot of Planet of the Apes isnt that bad. The action is good, the acting is good, the sci-fi is good. Its that ending that made no sense. Im not sure why people didnt like this film, that its one of the worst remake's/reboots of all time. Its not their are others remakes/reboots that are worst than this.
The plot: Astronaut Leo Davidson whips through space and time to a world where apes and gorillas rule the humans. Captured, he is nurtured by Ari and hunted by General Thade as he leads a rebel group of humans and chimpanzees in search of his downed craft. This is his only hope of escape and, ironically, the planet's only hope of shaking off the tyranny of the gorillas, allowing peaceful humans and chimpanzees to co-exist.
I think its a good film.
The plot: Astronaut Leo Davidson whips through space and time to a world where apes and gorillas rule the humans. Captured, he is nurtured by Ari and hunted by General Thade as he leads a rebel group of humans and chimpanzees in search of his downed craft. This is his only hope of escape and, ironically, the planet's only hope of shaking off the tyranny of the gorillas, allowing peaceful humans and chimpanzees to co-exist.
I think its a good film.
iTouchScreen Camera
Entertainment and Games
App
One of the best Entertainment apps out there !!! Seriously funny !!! Disclaimer: This app does not...
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Evil Dead (2013) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
One of the greatest horror movies of all time would have to be “The Evil Dead” which had been spawned by Sam Raimi and his original short film “Within the Woods”. “Within the Woods” was filmed with the intent of gaining investors to collaborate on a full length film starring the then unknown God of “B” horror movies Bruce Campbell. “The Evil Dead” and its predecessor “Within the Woods” was meant to be serious and horrifying, though that proved to be hard with a smaller budget that Raimi and Campbell had originally hoped for. Little did they know that Evil Dead would become one of the largest trilogies in cult film histories.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Based on Raimi’s original 1981 script, five young adult friends set out on a short vacation in a remote cabin in the woods. Whilst reading from a book that was obviously supposed to stay hidden, one of them ends up summoning dormant demons that end up causing havoc among the group. Killing them off one by one. Though the aura of the film is somewhat similar to the original, we all know that with remakes there are always some differences. In the original the five friends go to a cabin for a care free fun filled weekend the remake centers around one friend trying to kick her drug habits “cold turkey” with the help of her three friends and older brother.
The cinematography of the film is one hundred times better (remember in the original; Bruce running from the “deadite” and you could see the lights in the rafters of the studio “that does not happen in this film”). The remake pays homage to the original in certain respects and can be spotted throughout the film if you are a true “Evil Dead” fanatic. Unlike the original movie that had been filmed in Tennessee the remake was filmed in its entirety in New Zealand. The recreation of the cabin is almost uncanny with a couple of differences here and there. As expected the special FX are much better with a bigger budget and the advancement of technology. Like the original the actors are not well known and only have done a couple other projects. The cast was well selected and the acting was much better.
If you are a true fan of the original film you may like or dislike it. I myself found it to be entertaining however it doesn’t come close to the original film. If you’ve never seen the original you may like this movie based on its own merits. I must add if you’ve never seen the original film shame on you. To all Evil dead and/or Bruce Campbell fans I can not disclose to you if Bruce makes a cameo but I will say this stay till the end of the credits and you may feel pretty groovy.
Lee (2222 KP) Jul 20, 2019
Andy K (10823 KP) Jul 20, 2019