What went wrong?

Nala isn't hot enough

Oh, so all lions look the same to you, huh? Racist.

>literally my mom's lions

>muh realism
That's literally it, they went too far in trying to look real so we don't get emotions or diverse character design any more.

Why were you expecting anything but literally my mom's warthog and meerkat?

well aged meme

They look fine. Warthogs aren't supposed to look like they'd win any beauty contests, and the image quality of that screenshot is so crap you can barely even tell what the movie's take on Timon looks like.
I'm pretty impressed by the CGI in general. All the animals look a lot better than I was expecting.
Still, I'm not yet sure if this hyper-realistic look will work for the movie. Dropping all the cartoony features can make it harder to distinguish the characters or their emotions.

Attached: warthog.jpg (1020x582, 288K)

Man can you feel the love tonight is gonna be awkward as fuck

now wait til you HEARD them

Yeah, I know the target audience is millennials that are familiar with the original but they're gonna drag their kids to this thing and I can see a kid not knowing which lion is which and getting real confused.

why does it have giant bumps on the sides of its face

youtube.com/watch?v=7TavVZMewpY

I know that we're all mad this exists but how can this possibly exist? I'm still absolutely flummoxed.

That's why they call it a WARThog.
Because it'll make them money? Same reason any film exists really.

My main concern is if Scar's murder of Mufasa in this film is actually just an accident, as it was rumored long ago.

J

The guys making Delgo also thought Delgo would make them money. Who is even really the target demographic for this? Everyone who likes the Lion King, and I mean everyone, is not looking forward to this weird stain on the memory of the original. Do they really think this will bring in a justifiable amount of money compared to the cost of making it?

They have the whole "run away and never return" thing in there with the hyenas chasing Simba, so I really doubt it. The whole point of making it accidental would be to make Scar's character more grey morally, and that doesn't jive with anything we were shown in the trailer.

No, you fucking autist, not everyone is screeching about how this is different and ruining their childhoods. Most normie audiences are only looking for spectacle and the realistic CGI is certainly that, even if the movie itself is a hollow shell.

Why does adult Simba look like he has antenna? Sort of makes me think of devilman.

Dude I was thinking the same thing

Everyone shut up. Just shut the fuck up. No one is talking about the real important shit here
What the fuck is the Nala scene going to look like?

They're slightly exaggerated versions of real lion eye markings, presumably so you can tell the difference between simba and mufasa.

Attached: 130318132639_1_540x360.jpg (324x360, 33K)

Dude there’s such a lack of emotion in these voice actor’s personas of the characters. I don’t know who’s voicing Mufasa but it’s like he’s trying SO hard to sound like the original voice. It’s lack luster

My dude, it is the original actor, he's like the only one reprising his role.

I'm so pissed I have a My Chemical Romance song stuck in my head now thanks to this thread.

Oh shit dude he doesn’t sound the same dude

to protect the face from other warthogs' tucks

Scar has the Zira ear notch?

Also I'm probably not going to watch this any time soon but I can't say I'm surprised. That's what you get when you go "realistic." Maybe they should've just done a remake with humans or something, like Lion King on Broadway style, and then at least that way there'd be a solid excuse for "doesn't look like the cartoon"

The Lion King's teaser trailer is on this page right after Endgame and Infinity War:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_most-viewed_online_videos_in_the_first_24_hours
Lion King's situation is nothing like Delgo's. LK's got a lot more talent, marketing and brand recognition involved. People will go see it whether they like the idea of remakes or not, and it will make fucktons of money.

>although looks like that trend might be changing with Dumbo
God I hope so
I haven’t actually seen any of these remakes but I’m still getting sick of them
Disney should just focus on their animated films

But who actually cares about Dumbo though? It's not one of those really beloved Disney films and I'm willing to bet the attendance drop was more about that.

>Only part I’m looking forward to is John Oliver as Zazu
>They give him 0 lines in this trailer

Attached: 180DBABC-07D8-4EC7-A352-F3F9C24FAFA0.png (1136x640, 1.36M)

They also didn't give fucking Beyonce any lines either, which is weird when you're trying to appeal to normies.

>the international market giving a fucking shit about beyonce

racist

Nala is still fuckable.

>when a cheap advert has more expressive meerkats than a billion dollar movie

youtube.com/watch?v=t0AKC3wZdw4

Because they probably don't want "he sounds like shit compared to Rowan Atkinson" reactions

Isn't there a moment in the climax when Simba returns to Pride Rock that BOTH Scar and Serabi mistake Simba for Mufasa? Why not make him look almost the same but with the darker eyepatches? The model for Mufasa doesn't look close enough for Simba's model to me.

You can't say that you fucking speciesist!

Do you think Beyonce isn't popular over seas? Also, studios have separate trailers for US and international all the time.

In the original movie, why do the sclera of Simba's eyes constantly change from white to yellow and back? It's super distracting when it keeps happening in the same scene

Attached: eyes.png (969x502, 284K)

"Better" picture. I say "better" because it's still compressed to hell.

Attached: file.png (1920x1036, 2.26M)

>Nala can’t even give proper “fuck me” eyes to spawn another generation of furries

Why even remake/live?

it's a completely souless cgi adaptacion of a beautifull classic, lion king stole from kimba but at least they improved on it, this was literally a snorefest

Muh realism and muh detail fags. There's a depressingly large percent of the population that thinks the more like real life something looks the more better it looks.

Hell, even on Yea Forums you can see these retards. Just yesterday there was a dude who thought that the art in classic spongebob was as low as fucking steven universe because he's artistically tone death

Attached: Untitled.jpg (687x366, 88K)

This looks terrible

On a technical level, the goal of advanced graphics rendering is to create a 1:1 recreation of real-world objects and physics.

On a storytelling level, it doesn't matter and may in fact hinder the attempt.

Beyonce involved in anything is a no for me. She ruins everything she's in, music, movies, politics... She's horrible.

well, Netflix-Mowgly has animals with human faces expression and...it was not very good.

They thought it was a good idea to turn these memorably designed, expressively animated cartoon animals into real animals. And, I mean, they did a good job, I just don't see the point.

thos eyebrows 4th simba :o :o murrrrr

They're fleshy bumps that evolved to A) serve as sexual display devices, B) help protect the face from the tusks of other warthogs.

racist

normies already love the lion king

It was great, get fucked

Turns out realistically rendered CG animals aren't nearly as expressive as hand drawn cartoon ones. Who could have guessed?

Its a visual reminder that all animals worship Satan.

why the fuck are people going "WOW REALISM!!" now when it was already a shit concept back then?

Attached: 51YZ7H5F12L._SY445_.jpg (315x445, 30K)

He's 88 years old.

will this Scar teach Simba how to suck cock like the old did?

>Do you think Beyonce isn't popular over seas?
The beyoncé cult isn't as strong outside of america, yes.

Going half-way between realistic and cartoony isn't a happy medium, it just looks worse than both.

They look like actual lions, how shocking.

How did people react when this first came out ?

They're fucking lions, man.

Mufasa and Young Simba look alright. Everything else is shit.

Racist.

Yikes.

Like it wasn't already?

Attached: bnTjGcU.gif (720x404, 1.06M)

Even video games are suffering from this realism cancers. Why make a fun and timeless experience with the very versatile medium of animation when you can just pour your whole budget into "realistic" graphics that will have aged like fucking milk in a couple of years?

yknow, when the lion king came out, my 10 year old brain thought of it as "Realistic" style
I thought the same about BTAS. i didn't require much realism at the time to consider something 'not cartoony'

Oh yeah I'm so sure there was enough pressure to fucking make ones who had more face lumps reproduce more until the entire species uniformly had them. that's how genetics works.
God put em there you dunce.

spengberb looks infinitely worse than SU, what's wrong with you

But this looked great.
looked good, characters were neat, but had no substance, and they used literally the least interesting dinosaur species as the main stars, just because they were the first named dinosaur

>If you're game
Nice.

It wont matter what we say ITT
Its going to make millions, even if people hate it and forget about it like they did with the Dumbo remake because DIsney bumps the sales numbers and buys all empty theaters.
It wont matter and Disney wont learn

Attached: gfdg.gif (394x405, 325K)

So the merch of the movie will be any fucking lion plush

Attached: SS-030028-2.jpg (600x600, 151K)

Dude, they totally look better than the original cartoon. The Detective Pikachu guy told me so.

Attached: Screenshot_20190410-135542_Samsung Internet~2.jpg (1080x742, 122K)

They should have taken some creative license with scar.

to be fair, Nala is the only one whose color scheme is still the same from her cartoon design so I will give them that.

You take away the escapism of 2d and replace it with the realism of 3d/cgi.

wow, rude

I unironically like this, the only problem I have is the tone won't match the new aesthetic, at all. They will try to recapture the silliness of the cartoon movie, including songs, and it will look and feel jarring with these visuals. It doesn't mesh well at all, like those few cringy moments in The Jungle Book when they suddenly broke out into song.

If they wanted to try and do a more realistic take on the story and try and darker tone, these new visuals would be perfect. Disney won't do that though, so this will be a disaster.

Attached: 407d6d8c267.png (719x699, 519K)

It's speciesist, you stupid motherfuckers!

True.
For me, the CGI looks fine, it's just that the original had such a unique look to it. I wish they'd bend the rules just a little and give Simba/Mufasa a brighter red mane. And scar a darker one one. Basically stick with the color pallet.

Jews took over disney.

>he's assuming that poster isn't a lion

Racist.

Dark manes are real. Why doesn't Scar have a dark mane?

Attached: lion.jpg (333x500, 98K)

they're not even the same kind of cartoon lmao

Let's be real. The best way to make a Lion King remake would have been a reinterpretation with black actors dressed as animals sorta like the musical.
But that wouldn't be as profitable with the mainstream audience I guess.

Attached: musical.jpg (2740x1536, 1.35M)

Spongebob is the only current cartoon that is well animated and drawn but ok, dude

It made money, but Walking with Dinosaurs came out around the same time and stole all of its thunder.

Why did they even cast her when adult Nala has only got less than half a song in the original movie? Unless they intend to use Shadowland too.

It's not live action, it's disney undercutting VFX artist & animators.

What did they do to my nigga scar?

They turned him into live action Shere Khan because Favreau hates smug cats.

I really liked nu Shere Khan though

god could they seriously not give scar a fucking black mane?

I know that it's a soulless cashgrab that won't have any of the great visuals that made the original unique but at least I hope they fix some of the storytelling issues like Scar causing a drought that Simba magically fixes, how useless the hyenas really were or Scar getting an epic final fight where he actually gets the upperhand physically which goes completely against his character.

Maybe they felt it was racist to have the only lion with dark pigmentation be evil?

That real lion looks more emotive in that photograph then the cartoon lions in the new movie. I don't think it's just hyper-realism at fault here. It's also bad character animation.

So when Scar takes over the pride after killing Mufasa he effectively is the alpha. Does that mean he fucked Simba's mom and Nala? I mean all the females in the pride belong to the alpha. He definitely fucked them right?

They got rid of the best one

youtube.com/watch?v=zl8gDjaHWWA
check this shit out

That's just a dumb baseless rumor

The sad part as much as Broderick is a meh actor his voice lent a certain gentleness to Simba that made him likeable. Gambinos voice is gonna make the ending sound like a regular thug battle in Compton screaming how Mufasas death was wypipos fault.

It would make perfect sense, though.
He was oppressed by the light colored lions and thus rose up to defeat them and take over, ushering in a new era for his dark-maned kin.

That is dark shit Disney

He would be too attractive to the lionesses. They prefer males with large dark manes. Those usually come from being well fed.

What's even the point of this movie?

money

Oh fucking hell. Why? This is so stupid. What is the criteria for doing this? Do normies really think this is better?

Attached: tenor (1).gif (368x498, 3.59M)

pic related + careless whisper

Attached: maxresdefault (1).jpg (1280x720, 89K)

Why isn't Scar's mane black?

I hope they make Kovu to be Scar´s son in the sequel.

>Walking with Dinosaurs came out around the same time and stole all of its thunder.
How did we go from this
youtu.be/P7lBKBxIwGM
To this?
youtu.be/jv7hRBL9ygY

>Do normies really think this is better?
It's possible. At the very least, they don't have any alternatives other than buying the original film on BD/DVD when it's released.

Because then he'd stand out from the other characters.

Scar looks about 2 hours away from starving. Always have seen him as a slender, more agile-looking, well fed lion.

I don't know but it's just one complaint of many when it comes to these boring-ass designs. This movie looks so mother fucking bland.

Attached: 1552223437418.jpg (701x701, 59K)

Yes, and Scar killed Mufasa because he was tired on Man Love Thursdays.
youtu.be/yn42A-EhDow

COMPARE THE SOULNESS DOT COM

ARR ROOK SAME

SO, dark full manes in lions is a sign of an attractive,strong, virile male. Female lions LOVE them some bushy black maned lions..

But the animators of The Lion King infamously forgoed alot of IRL biology. So the 'good' lions had red manes/light manes and Scar had the sexy black one - also they completely fucked up how hyenas are IRL amongst other things.. but..

Since this is more 'realistic' and 2019, instead of giving Scar his iconic big bushy black mane, it looks like they gave him less of a mane and slightly thinner looking to make him look like an inferior cuck male lion in comparison to the super healthy testosterone-filled non-onions-boy Mufasa.

Honestly they did so little to differentiate the character's its gonna be a pain to watch.

darker furred male lions also are sterile more often than not due to the dark colored fur drawing more heat in

>tone death

This lion has far more SOUL than any of the CGI lions in the Lion King reboot. Look at his expressive noble eyes. The 2D cartoon lions in original Lion King look more like this beautiful animal than the renders made by the pack of nerds that Disney hired for the new movie.

This film was childhood kino. An example of CGI done right, with great expression and emotion along with technical marvels.

I can see that.

Like a Hyena would ever 'work' with a lone male lion - when a pack is more likely to kill him. Also, Hyenas are strict matriarchal - so again them following a male lion is super weird.. they also tend to be less of scavengers then lions typically and are hella smart.

Then the case with Timon not even being with a colony of meerkats when they are highly sociable but timid creatures.. or how Simba never once thought of eating Timon or Pumba despite being an obligatory carnivore.

There is a lot of biological loopholes and liberties taken for the sake of fiction, but that's what you get when you try to adapt Hamlet from human nobility to rando African animals.

>comparing a movie with soul to Lion King 1.1: Realism Boogaloo

On the contrary, black-maned lions are able to survive injuries better due to being high-T. The guy's name is "Scar" for a reason.

I can't believe that the people behind this movie thought that this was a good idea even half of the way through it.
I can only imagine they got to a point where they said "well, we've gotten this far. Might as well finish this sad turd of a film".

Attached: 1541295795414.jpg (500x369, 22K)

The other animals look better to me. Feels like they just fucked up the lions somehow. A shame they're the focus of the story.

This niBBa gets it.

how come people say they can't tell the apart? They look different to me

Did you know lion sex lasts just mere seconds and then it's over

Lions are physocally incapable of facially expressing emotions.

This is such a fucking bad idea

no, odds are good that they simply are ashamed over liking something that's done in a Cartoon-style, and this would make it feel more "serious" to them.
I'm serious, I've heard this argument from 4 different people!

Yeah. And lions can mate up to 50 times a day.
Pigs, OTOH, have orgasms that last half an hour.
I would rather be a pig.

Oh my god its the 101 dalmatians live action all over again.

Look at this hyper-realistic animal that is still able to express facial emotions.

Mufasa is still James Earl Jones, so it can't be all bad.

I loved 101 Dalmations live action though. I watched it literally hundreds of times as a kid.

Copyrights for these films are getting close to expiring user, why do you think they have so many remakes coming out all at once?

I'm questioning more and more why this needed to be made.

>soul
Go back to Yea Forums

Hard to imagine these two dudes singing Hakuna Matata

It's almost like 2D animation was always the superior option.

At this point the /pol/ bait that they made Scar a white lion would've looked better, at least he would've looked dignified, not mangy

Attached: untitled.jpg (612x612, 52K)

My cousin who is a fucking normie showed my the 2nd trailer to this and he was all hyped for it......So to answer your question, most likely.

Is there something wrong with Disney's CGI department? Everything looks like ass now, either design-wise or execution. A decade ago they made Davy Jones and he still holds up. Whether 2D or 3D they used to be at the top of their game.

Attached: untitled.jpg (750x563, 55K)

Everything about this movie looks useless.

Literally the same movie without the color palettes and facial expressions.

I think nobody really cares about the original Dumbo, but the kids who watched the 1994 lion king have families of their own now. It's prime nostalgia bait.

That one wasn’t too bad though. It at least threw in a few new things here and there.

>ERGHEMEGED DIS LOOKSH SO REEEEYYYULLL!!!!

Attached: abc.png (226x223, 7K)

What kind of pheromone would I need to mask myself with in order to get raped by a lioness? How much would I have to spend?

It was mostly worth it to watch Glenn Close having a five course meal of the scenery.

I genuinely feel that most companies just got the memo that nobody actually cares.
Before hand cgi was working hard to pioneer the industry and prove their worth by impressing people, then the movie makers realized that they kind of have a captive audience at this point, there's no point in trying hard and given the nature of the artform, cgi is rarely impressive as it ages.

I like how malnourished Scar looks. That's the only positive I have to say

Walt Disney died

Are people so fucking boring and unimaginative that they need this realistic crap to be impressed? Seems like the exact opposite of what Disney used to be about.

dunno I love Genie Will

at this point in movies I almost never hate CGI because I just think about them in terms of animation instead of realism

I've never seen a better example of SOULESS vs SOUL
The worst part is; it's going to sell well, because the average joe is going to look at this and go "Wow! so realistic!".

Zootopia looks absolutely phenomenal, I have serious doubts it's going to age.

did they whitewash scar? what the fuck disney?!

Alright, so, as a kid who actually grew up with this in its 2D form, I think you're basically all just being closed minded (hilariously like the closed minded cucks before us, by our standards). In this day and age, 2D, beautifully drawn animation just isn't the thing anymore. You are letting yourselves fall into our granpappy's trenchs. Granted, I am also irate to see such a classic reborn, but from what I saw from the trailer it's basically just being reconstructed for the new generation to be able to accept it, like we did.

We staunch hard line cunts need to just accept the changing of the times.

This is like the Killing Joke recoloring.

Attached: ugh.jpg (750x582, 211K)

But this isn't about hand-drawn vs. CGI? I loved Zootopia. This is just shit.

Is it, though? All of the core pieces and principles are there.

>You people that grew up with this movie need to realize that this live action remake doesn't replace the originals.

>It is for a new generation of kids

Pick one mouse shill

And more importantly what actual fucking kid would prefer the cgi shit fist with a military shooter filter over cartoon animals?

>what actual fucking kid would prefer the cgi shit fist with a military shooter filter over cartoon animals?
a retarded one
reminder that kids today are given tablets with no supervision and watch snuff porn on liveleak at age 7

Study your history.

>BOOKS ARE BAD AND FOR THE DEVIL
>RADIO IS BAD AN FOR THE DEVIL
>TELEVISION IS BAD AND FOR THE DEVIL

From what I have seen from the trailers, it's just a retelling of a tale for the next generation. While I am not personally a huge fan of it, I can understand it.

and by that you mean that it is the same movie back to back hence misses the entire point of a remake

>Oh, bUt iT Is iN a HyPer-REAlistiC AstHeTIc AnD ThE VoICE AcTIng iS GaRBage SO iT Is TOtalLY DiFfeRenT

That, that is not at all what I said. If it was the same movie (back to back) they'd both be in 2D..? What?

abstraction bad
fake reality good
animal yourself, consume and die.
amen.

I hope you're baiting and not actually this retarded. Apart from your "TV IS BAD AND FOR THE DEVIL" argument being stupid as fuck since TV turned out to be fucking cancer, this isn't a matter of bigotry, it's a matter of taste. The shit in the OP is pure fucking trash.

What in the actual fuck are you talking about? It is one thing to make a remake of something that people grew up in but to make changes that are for the worst is a completely fair criticism especially considering that this film is absolutely timeless regardless of what contrarians say.

It doesn't aim to a specific generation so I still don't understand what your actual argument for this is. On one hand we shouldn't be upset because the original would always be there which is admittedly true but on one hand it is for this generation of kids that haven't seen the original, I don't see why parents can't just play the original for them and to make this other than to manipulate dumb people for their money with nostalgia bait.

I wasn't born when looney tunes was brought into this world but I would easily take that over fucking space jam which was specifically for my generation when it came out.

Attached: plz-stop-post.jpg (500x375, 92K)

That was not what I mean and you know it, based on the trailers alone it looks exactly like the same story but in hyper "realistic" cg and shitty voice acting.

I'm neither, though I'm beginning to accept you're as closed minded as the previous generational iterations before us. Basically every generation before the next hated anything they came up with that upset the status quo that said generation was used to. You're more than welcome to research it on your own time instead of simply deflecting it to 'lol your arguement is cancer' because that's what you've done by calling TV cancer. Regardless of your stance on TV as a whole, you can't argue that it didn't cause a hilarious generational shift, for better or worse.

I stand by my statement that this, by what I've seen in the trailer, is just a remake to fit with the new generation which we, more or less by definition, mostly won't agree with or understand.

Think back, would you have, willingly, watched gone with the wind as a child?

But why?

So, you're just bitching about them telling the same story in a different format? I fail to see the problem as long as more people enjoy the story.

Did kids generally do that when it came out? Serious question.

If all you got out what I said was
>I think anything that is good is bad and anything old is good

then you were either just baiting or purposefully being a retard. What actually sucks is there were actual disney classics like snow white cinderella, peter pan and even dumbo that really could benefit for a remake for this generation like you said, when you clash with the direction of the original or at least make changes that effect it in the worst way then what is the fucking point?

creativity bad
muddy realism good
think less, create less.
consume.
amen.

You're actually the one who is close minded, and pointlessly contrarian. I said I loved Zootopia, and it came out in 2016. If I were against "new things" I would have dismissed Zootopia as well. I think CGI is great since it allows animators to do things that would be simply impossible in 2D.
But this is just lazy trash and I'm calling a spade a spade. You wanna know why they made realistic lions? Most likely not because of artistic choices, but because it's EASIER to make an "impressive" realistic lion model and just animate a badly rigged human mouth flapping on top of it with machine aid, than having to actually animate stylized characters that are built to emote. A style like Zootopia requires planning, skill, it creates design issues, but in the end it shows a different result.
This shit isn't even made for kids, it's made for nostalgic imbeciles who grew up with the original and are going to see the realistic remake because as adult people they are meant to appreciate realism.

That's not all I got out of your post. I was trying to emphasize the fact that most of the new generation are not interested in 2D animation like the original Lion King. This bleeds onto every other thing you mentioned (though dumbo already has a remake out, or soon to be, I forget). Generational gaps and preferences are a thing. This generation prefers the 3D shenanigans, as opposed to us who appreciated the 2D of basically everything you said.

What went wrong is that in the pursuit of photorealism they have forgotten that one of the primary strengths of animation over live-action is it allows animators to create exaggerated expressions, movements, and character shapes that accentuate certain aspects and further visual storytelling. Without making use of these things, it's essentially presenting painstakingly animated real things, which you could also simply film with trained animals.

If I wanted to watch something with the same visual appeal of a wildlife documentary, that's what I would watch. Spending lots of money to make computer animated characters that look and move like real animald is inpressive, but lacks the charm that animation as a medium is uniquely qualified and capable of exhibiting.

It is the same story with an objectively better presentation and superior voice acting. People can already enjoy it in a far superior format anyway without this film being made, if it is the same exact story you are damn right I am going to be comparing the whole product. And it's not like this is a unique format either like somehow training all of the real life animals to try to reenact each scene which would be difficult as hell but so much more forgivable, if they had gone that route I would've been more impressed, this on the other hand is made on a computer with nothing to offer other than the same story with none of the charm and talent the original had.

not that user you're responding to but i think the problem with all those live-action realistic remakes is that they're damaging the already fragile reputation animation, as a medium has.

It may not seem like that browsing Yea Forums but the majority of people out there still see animation as strictly something for children. the usual exception are the new disney movies that they still go to see in theatres because "nostalgia"

so Disney pushing so hard on this realistic retelings is basically reiterating teh idea that cartoons can only be used for bland, childlish storytelling while realism and live-action are the tools necessary to tell more adult, sophisticated stories.

this medium needs more Iron giants, Song of the Seas and Gravity Falls, not more of this trash.

What exactly is your evidence that kids this generation prefer 2d animated movies over 3d? I wonder if it is likely more people are going for 3d animated because it is less work and costs less money and time than doing something doing hand drawn cartoons again, If that were true adventure time and gravity falls wouldn't have been successes, whatever you think of those shows they were astoundingly successful.

Hell with Cuphead being such a success as a 2d hand drawn animated video game it is objectively bullshit that one style is inherently appealing than the other.

Dumbo did have a remake recently but it flopped and people didn't like it PRECISELY because of the photo-realistic cgi looking out of place.

>Is there something wrong with Disney's CGI department?
Yes, too much work running their worker resource thin. More and more movie require CGI while not enough people can pull it out, hence why some of the 3 effect of Black Panther looked bad.

Infinite corporate expansion and an endless supply of easily controlled walking wallets.

Attached: 1537666872508.jpg (1024x576, 73K)

>There are people on Yea Forums right now who will buy tickets for this movie and ensure a continuation of soulless cash-grab cgi/live action remakes

Attached: 1538077473661.jpg (255x255, 15K)

>Children prefer 2d over 3d
what? no, maybe in 1999 when it was super new and Toy Story gave audiences a great, original story while Disney was losing its steam and every cartoon on TV was putting a long episode on the big screen.

Today it's just that's an easier tool to animate with than 2D, but the blandness of the artstyle studios chose to use is inexcusable.
Once every Disney movie looked different from one another, while now you can't tell if it's Disney, Illumination, Dreamworks or Blue Sky without looking it up.
thankfully Captain underpants, the Peanuts Movie and especially Spider-verse are opening new possibilities.

The original illustrator recolored it himself so you could actually tell what the fuck was going on in the pictures he drew.

The problem is that Killing Joke actually needs the wacky John Higgins colouring to be interesting and not as up its own ass

Arvalis is such a fucking tosser

>Expressive subtlety
>I wish they didn't talk

Attached: 1528827006380.png (720x1000, 1.02M)

>lemurs in a dinosaur movie
I hated this shit

Okay so at least the other remakes make sense in theory, but this is literally a higher-budget animated film with more restrictions. Might as well go the zoo if you want to see a real lion.

The lions are too realistic looking. Could have made the eyes and snouts a bit more anthro so they can show more human-ish emotions.

Scar actually looks more sympathetic appearance-wise in the CGI version than the animated original.

Attached: Airborne trooper of eternal pain and suffering.jpg (1036x1008, 324K)

>looking forward to John Oliver

Attached: disgusted forward observer.jpg (1900x4120, 3.41M)

I was expecting Scar to be less hairy and kinda mangy. I’m still disappointed.

Attached: 1527469411126.jpg (650x433, 132K)

>BLACKED present even in the animal kingdom
ohnononono

>Realism is better than looking good!
This is peak weeaboo enabling behavior.

Is it going to be in the remake?

Attached: 1550049404209.jpg (480x360, 10K)

Yes and it will be brown and look like shit.

That lioness looks less than impressed.

>January 22, 1879
>Wildebeest Valley, the Pridelands
>139 enlisted men and officers from the 24th Regiment of Foot, led by Lieutenants John Chard and Gonville Bromhead are on patrol in the Gorge
>up ahead they spot a lone lion cub under the shade of a tree, growling at a chameleon
>they note that something's not right, lion cubs are rarely left unattended by their parents
>suddenly, they hear a rumble echo throughout the valley
>the echo turns to feeling of an earthquake
>suddenly, Lt. Bromhead turns his head to see a horde of Wildebeests descend upon them from the cliffs
>there's hundreds, no, thousands of them
>no time to take cover, no time to run
>their only hope for survival to make a stand
>Lt. Chard gives the order, "RANKS OF TWO!"
>with machine-like efficiency, all 139 men form a square with ranks of two, one kneeling the other standing, a maneuver practice hundreds of time
>"LOAD!"
>within seconds, every Martini-Henry rifle is loaded with a single .577/450 caliber round
>"FIX BAYONETS!"
>dozens of bayonets mate with their rifles with a click
>soon, the Wildebeests are upon them, swarming like angry bees
>"Hold fast!"
>at last, the order is given
>"FIRE BY RANK! FRONT RANK... FIRE!"

Who wins Yea Forums?

Attached: rorke's drift.gif (320x180, 1.35M)

REEE CGI BAD
CGI TAKE AWAY CARTOON LION!
REEEEEE

the ride never ends

Attached: Milo and Otis 2020.jpg (1200x410, 81K)

Attached: 1535725896225.png (500x500, 263K)

Honestly I'm not even totally against live action, but there's tons of movies that're begging to be redone with love, with plenty of room for special effects to really shine and provide a lovely story. Atlantis, Treasure Planet, and Black Cauldron could all shine if done right, but instead they're making the wrong things "realistic" for, idunno, the sake of showing off tech? I mean sure the nostalgic cash grabbing but like there's room to appeal to older audiences as well as making something that works in a new form and can be loved by kids these days. Aladdin wouldn't be too bad but people consider Genie irreplaceable and Will Smith is a definitely questionable pick, not to mention he looks like shit in the movie (from what's been seen so far).

Here's your (You)

3DPD

>let's handicap ourselves by making an emotional movie where the characters can't convery any emotion whatsoever

101 dalmatians is the one good live action adaption I can think of and that's because they focused more on the villains.

Because that's a sign of an alpha.

Based ignorant retard. If this is bait, you got me.

Oh hey, I know this guy. I'm in a discord with him. Some guy is trying to call him anti-Semitic because RJ compared someone to Ben Shapiro.

Have you even heard what Donald Glover sounds like? Not the "cool woke black guy" he's trying to come off as either, the real one who used to shitpost on Yea Forums back in the day. The guy who invented the word "nigger-faggot" back when he made YouTube videos with his college buddies under Derrick Comedy. Dude's a massive geek from the Stone Mountain suburbs, who even in his own show Atlanta, depicts himself as a goober.

Attached: Donald Glover - 1.jpg (175x263, 13K)

>all those fucks on /vp/ who defend this guy's garbage

>that wouldn't be as profitable with the mainstream audience I guess
How so?
I mean, I get the same hunch, I feel it in my heart that it'd underperform, but wouldn't the media, hollywood, and all the leftist types /pol/ always whines about love the absolute fuck of the idea of a movie full of niggers?
And fuck, I kinda want the whole african aesthetic costumes and feel it could have. Makes me want to watch Kirikou again

Screw this crap. I'm gonna watch a superior live-action talking lion movie: Pride, featuring Kate Winslet as Macheeba.

>Pride
my nibba. I thought I was the only one who watched that as a kid

people can change

I'm so fucking triggered right now

They have expressive eyes you fuckwit. I bet you're some amerimutt who thinks you need a big goofy grin to show emotion.

You presenting the images on the left as though they are from the same scenes as the ones on the right.

ITT: WHY DO THE ANIMALS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO LOOK LIKE REAL VERSIONS OF THE CARTOON THAT TRIED TO MAKE IT'S MODELS LOOK LIKE REAL ANIMALS LOOK REAL AND NOT MORE LIKE THE CARTOOOOOOON ToT

It's that thing from your childhood that you remember, but okay for adults!

BECAUSE ADULTS CAN'T WATCH CARTOONS!

It doesn't matter if they were "supposed" to look real or not. The result was inexpressive, charmless, and boring. Just because that's what they were going for doesn't make it good.

>I fail to see the problem as long as more people enjoy the story.
the original lion king is gonna be in Disney+, this remake has literally absolutely no purpose whatsoever other than having them hold onto the merchandising rights.

I have yet to see anyone give a solid reason why they want to see this movie. All I get is shit like "muh nostalgia", which wouldn't be an issue if they actually explained what they liked in the original movie that they could actually see in this version. Lion King is just as much about it's visuals and voice cast as it is it's music and story. None of the characters, be that Timon, Pumba, Scar, Simba, Rafiki or the Hayena's would be nearly as iconic and loved if not for there personality and voices, the former of which came through in their designs and animations and the latter which worked in tandem with the animation to bring the characters to life. This applies to the songs as well. Songs like Be Prepared, Just Can't Wait to be King and Hakuna Matata are all iconic, not just due to the music, but the scenes and voices which accompanied them. By removing the most central parts of the film and leaving just the plot and the music, I fail to see what nostalgia itch could be scratched by watching a completely sterilized version of the movie.

MUH REALISM

>Is there something wrong with Disney's CGI department?
No, it's what the people will pay for and market research and sales proves it.

You can't hide what inside, Donald.

No they're not. Lion King is only just barely over 20 years old. Copyright doesn't expire that fast.

They're making so many for a quick buck, banking on nostalgia.

Real animals are capable of showing emotion. There's no emotion on Simba's face despite having just seen his dad get trampled to death and his uncle telling him to run away and never return.

"Realism" isn't the issue. The issue is bad design.

>The original Japanese creation will be lost to time
Yeah, maybe in America, but Kimba is fucking huge in Japan and in other countries that aired it on T.V.

The real kicker of this story is the fact that Tezuka's company didn't pursue any action against Disney for the blatant copyright until Disney tried to sue them for a movie adaption they made in the 90s that had been in production long before The Lion King ever was. I'm pretty sure there's evidence of Roy Disney talking about The Lion King being an adaptation of Kimba from before it's release as well, and some concept art with Kimba's name on it.

>we made this really expensive and good looking animal models, but they will break if the faces moves too much

dong lover

I'm going to assume this is sarcasm.

Yes but the film has no reason to exist in the first place

My grandpa introduced me to Kurosawa movies when I was about eight. I watched Gone with the Wind with my mother. Not because she told me to watch it but because I parked my ass willingly because I enjoyed the story and the visuals. At least as much as I could undersand them as a kid. Among my favourite movies were Clash of the Titans and Jason and the Argonauts. And it was in the '90 I already saw Jurassic Park and its amazing effects.

Don't treat children like morons, don't teach them old = bad. Don't lower their standards with unoriginal garbage bereft of any stylistic flair.

>implying they won't remake Kimba eventually

I've never noticed this before. Will look out for it next time I watch.

It looks like my mans is hittin it from behind, legend

His eyes are yellow in daylight scenes and white in night scenes. That particular screenshot is an animation error where his eye briefly flickers to another color and then back.
I'd assume that the night scenes have got some kind of blueish-tinted color overlay that causes the color variation, but Rafiki's eyes seem to stay yellow in the same scenes where Simba's eyecolor changes to white. So I'm not sure what's up with it.

that is the wrong dog for tramp REEEEEE

Holy shit bruh, it is James Earl Jones. After that post might as well kys

>Calling people retarded
>More better

Haha

have they shown the monkey yet

where did they cram James Corden into this piece of shit, he has some pact with Satan

hell yeah dino tendies

hu, so just like humans then.

bro

Have sex, you disgusting weeb.

they didn't retain the characters' original colors. the original lion king was really vibrant and colorful. I bet they're not even going to have any catchy musical numbers either, or if they do they'll look like complete shit because the colors and the scenery made the movie.

Attached: 1551393092718.png (540x482, 190K)

then that's just hamlet with singing

After this bullshit breaks a billion, do you think we're getting an adaptation of 2?