What the 1994 cartoon treated as cute satire — in the song “Hakuna Matata” sung by warthog Pumbaa and meerkat...

>What the 1994 cartoon treated as cute satire — in the song “Hakuna Matata” sung by warthog Pumbaa and meerkat Timon — rings hollow in this new version where those creatures possess ugliness rather than charm and promote special-group interest. None of this can be defended as a trendy political allegory as some reviewers contend. Besides, the underlying praise of monarchy is always a problem for fashionable, egalitarian, supposedly woke Afrocentricity.
>Seth Rogen (Pumbaa): Channels his dirtbag shtick into the warthog who sings the “no worries” theme song “Hakuna Matata,” a nihilist philosophy.
>Billy Eichner (Timon): TV’s harassment comic, cast as the meerkat, harmonizing on “Hakuna Matata” about life as “a meaningless line of indifference” without irony.

Here lies Yea Forums's champion, defeated by a children's film. Was it his dishonesty as the "critic who cried degeneracy" that brought him down or did his film education fail him and he was unable to see that Timon and Pumbaa's care-free attitude was an obvious farce, an obstacle for Simba to overcome on his path to adulthood in a classic, coming-of-age story?

Attached: blog4457widea.jpg (200x187, 8K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wALGw4DQCUM
youtube.com/watch?v=VBxruT4LEaA
youtube.com/watch?v=-knafjmXjCQ
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Armond is right

He's just a gay guy with a fetish for jerking off in public.

I think he's saying the performance lacks self awareness and the movie essentially criticizes the actors' lives. Like Seth Rogan and Eichner are the real live versions of the hakuna matata nihilism that's being condemned but don't realize it.

I might just be high, though.

>hakuna matata
>nihilist
Jesus christ can we some education up in this motherfucker

Can you read?
His entire point is that the song functions as farce in the original, but just comes across as nihilistic in the remake.

It serves the same function in the remake as well, both Timon and Pumbaa follow Simba in rejecting this philosophy in the third act.

>the script didn't change, so it means the same thing
No

except now those charming cute animals selling snake oil have been remade into ugly CGI where stoner comics are, like, telling kids to smoke bongs yo

The fact that you try to play this game of reading between the lines is fitting considering Mr White is a master of the non-existent subtext. You can perform all the mental gymnastics you want, it won't change the fact that the arc for these characters is quite simple as one would expect from a Disney animation tarted at children. The movie is either a shot for shot remake of the original or a visual, cynical, leftist critique at war with the text of the piece. You can't have it both ways.

>treats Jack and Jill as a comedy masterpiece
What a bizarre hill to die on.

nihilism doesn't mean you have to whine about the pointlessness

Now that the snyder-apologist has been uncovered as a politicizing hack, who will become Yea Forums's new favorite critic?

Attached: kermode-main.jpg (825x464, 168K)

Get out summerfag

Fuck off, Armond is king of Yea Forums

There's been a number of movies that are shot-for-shot remakes/adaptations but somehow completely different. Watchmen, alita, etc. Its really hard to tell exactly why watchmen misses all the overtones and every bit of subtext in scenes its directly duplicating, but it does.

nice nitpicking faggot

Mark Kermode slams Armond White youtube.com/watch?v=wALGw4DQCUM

>Film gets positive, universal praise
>White will say it is shit

>Film gets negative, universal criticism
>White will say it is the best film of the year

>Film gets mixed, universal indifference
>White breaks and goes off on rants (like he often does) about shit unrelated to the film

White is just a contrarian who soapboxes and Yea Forums only likes him because of this, but ignores his political agenda because it sides on the 'right'. White won't ever actually talk about a film as a film, he'll talk about the politics or whatever. It's fun to read, but he isn't a good film critic.

Every film critic is biased, you only care here because Armond disagrees with you. And even worse, you can't just say he's racist or homophobic to shut down his criticisms.

He agrees with the general consensus about 50% of the time, dude kek You're off base

>Its really hard to tell exactly why watchmen misses all the overtones
No it isn't and it's actually the perfect example outside maybe Transformers of visuals being at conflict with the text. Snyder fetishizes Rorschach's vigilantism and violent tactics with slow-motion action shots put to the greatest hits of that era.
The Lion King doesn't just borrow the most famous images from the original the way Watchmen does, it lifts the entire visual language of the 94' animated classic.

I never said film critics aren't biased, my issue is that White is a contrarian and when he talks about films he doesn't talk about the film, he talks about the message. I remember his review, I think it was about some black film or something, he went on a long rant about how black music was stolen by something and the film was some political thing. He never mentioned the performances, the shots, the music, or designs or anything. I didn't even say White disagreed with me, I'm doing my best to review him as a critic based on his performance as a critic. I said Yea Forums likes him because of his political rants because they side with the majority of people's views here.

If you say so, I'm not going to argue, but he regularly does the opposite of what the vast majority says and used to be the one guy who did it until that Irish and Australian paper got out contrarian reviews before him because White has to look up words in his thesaurus.

That sounds like if Yea Forums was incarnated as a movie critic. Have you considered that you're just a sorry summerfag, and should leave?

Attached: pepe.jpg (500x483, 33K)

youtube.com/watch?v=VBxruT4LEaA

Attached: nihilism.jpg (640x640, 104K)

Not reading the whole essay
You whined about him talking about politics but every critic does that, you didn't need to say you hate biased critics outright for me to make that obvious connection.

He sounds meeker than I imagined him to be. Something about the tone of his reviews produced the expectation of a commanding and attention-demanding demeanor.

Just because he hate some popular movies doesn't mean he's a contrarian. Take a look at his favorite films each year even b4 that Irish and Australian paper got out. He always had Spielberg, Kubrick, Lynch, the Coen brothers, Some Pixar stuff like the first two Toy Story films, The Iron Giant, some Disney flicks, the classic Adam Sandler comedies etc. Yes, someone ran the numbers and he agrees with the consensus 50% (I think 53 to be exact) of the time

I think he was trying to not sound like a dick since he was being accused of being a dick at the event. He's more confident in this video. Pretty cool listening to him talk about the current state of cinema youtube.com/watch?v=-knafjmXjCQ

>confident over phone, changes to a pussy when confronted face to face
Yea Forums incarnate

The problennis that the faggots in OP are like the guy un the left

He was trying to remain calm, retard. It's about how you carry yourself in that kind of situation. If he started cussing and going nuts like Alex Jones, then it would make him look bad. Of course, you being autistic, I have to explain this to you

He's a gay film critic, what did you really expect

It's amazing how much he fits the archetype of a pseudo-intellectual. He assigns unthinkable depth and meaning to shallow pieces like BvS at the same time dishonestly deconstructing the newest critical darling in an attempt to win the race for the hottest, most controversial take on art and culture.

Listen to some of his videos on YouTube. He's more upbeat and confident. In one video he basically calls the interviewee and idiot and manchild and calls Nolan a hack

Hi, reddit

Yes he would fit there perfectly.

You have to go back

>This is not conventional comic-book allegory; rather, Snyder uses the figures of Batman (Ben Affleck) and Superman (Henry Cavill) walloping each other to give visible substance to social and moral issues, much as Greek tragedy does.
>dude the characters are speaking in monologues at each other therefore it is high art lmao

newfag

Man Kermode is such a cornball

You don't understand this guy's motives. He's a gay black conservative, he's extremely tired of pandering lefty messaging and therefore tosses anything like that out. That's also why he likes Snyder films (Snyder loves Ayn Rand)