Watch
The Lion King
Remove ads
Your probable score
?

The Lion King

2019
Drama
Family/Kids
1h 58m
Your probable score
Avg Percentile 34.66% from 1218 total ratings

Ratings & Reviews

(1218)
Compact view
Compact view
Rated 15 Jul 2019
75
30th
Like all the other recent Disney remakes, this one improves on the original in no way whatsoever (it's actually the most scene-for-scene identical of them yet, a la Psycho 1998) and is only palatable if you've never seen the other one. And if you've never seen the other one, well, do *that*. Why are we wasting our time here?
Rated 24 Jul 2019
80
33rd
The original is one of my favorite Disney movies, so I have to nitpick a little. I didn't appreciate some of the songs being cut short. The lack of visual emotion from the lions is pretty noticeable too, especially when the voice acting is so good. That's not to say it's bad though. The music is still great and the CGI is absolutely astonishing. I didn't even feel the length. It looks and feels like The Lion King, it just lacks the overall spirit of the original. I still liked it though.
Rated 25 Nov 2019
40
28th
Some years ago, fellow criticker and all-around gentleman Dean Franz amazed us all with the now legendary description of certain movies as being like a 'limp dick in the face'. Well, this one is photo realistic.
Rated 22 Jul 2019
44
31st
While the visuals are breathtaking and awe-inspiring, Disney's photorealistic remake of The Lion King doesn't feel nearly as lively or epic as the original, instead feeling stale and uninspired. There was not a single moment where I thought that what I was watching in this film was better than its predecessor.
Rated 17 Jul 2019
75
65th
There's as usual not a single thing that matters this does better than the original. It's extremely impressive visually, but pretty much everything else is at least just slightly less good. But let's be fair here - the original is a nearly insurmountably great animated classic, and this is not really that much worse. So it's a fine film. But you're still way better off with the 1994 Lion King, which you're reminded of constantly while watching this.
Rated 18 Jul 2019
60
50th
The effects are incredible and, for me, enough to recommend the film. However, not only is it ridiculously close to the original (we're in 'Psycho' remake territory here!), every single scene was much less engaging for me. There's just something flat and lifeless about this version. Rogen is brilliant casting for Pumbaa, though, and I enjoyed the film a whole lot more once he and Billy Eichner's Timon showed up and brought some new energy to the hitherto almost completely pointless proceedings.
Rated 18 Jul 2019
75
73rd
Unlike other reviewers I found it highly original. However, I probably ought to point out that this is the first movie I've ever seen. I'm 12 days old, and I already love going to the cinema, at least according to my dad. When I grow old enough to be able to actually see the screen and stay awake for more than 1% of the film, I'll probably be even more flabbergasted and impressed.
Rated 19 Jul 2019
10
2nd
Imagine all the colour, emotion, life, magic, joy, and personality sucked out all in an instant from one of your all-time favourite movies. That's this 2019 Lion King remake in a nutshell. As the end credits were rolling, I felt nothing. I didn't care about anything. I never felt sad, happy, overjoyed, or any emotion the entire time. I was soulless, just like this entire movie was. It was Disney at their absolute worst. What happened to artistic integrity, originality, or effort? Garbage movie.
Rated 01 Feb 2020
65
42nd
You know how much money you can save by not animating the dicks on your realistic animals? Live action Disney remake villains have all been awful.
Rated 20 Aug 2019
4
44th
This is remarkable on a technical achievement level - the fact that animators can sit in front of computers and make animals and locations that look like this in 2019 is truly astonishing. Creatively it’s a very soulless and through-the-motions remake of the 1994 original, without a single scene that betters or even matches the impact of its original 2D animated version. I can’t imagine that Jon Favreau is really the true top voice behind this movie rather than whoever the head animator was.
Rated 18 Jul 2019
50
36th
Visually it's impressive and the voice acting is great but the CGI doesn't benefit the film in any way. The lacking facial expressions of the animals make it feel like you're watching a nature documentary.
Rated 20 Jul 2019
40
38th
It's truly a technical marvel. Not only every animal, but every blade of grass, grain of sand, rock, tree, sunset, moon were all animated. But there's a reason animators of old didn't draw animals with realistic faces. These realistic lions, etc lack the emotion that the 1994 version have. It wasn't really until Timon & Pumba arrived that the film had some life to it.
Rated 21 Jul 2019
14
1st
I feel nothing. So, I guess I'm emotionally on par with the reimagined characters in this baffling remake. We have crossed into a darker timeline. This film will eat the box office alive while everyone stares at the screen, as dead-eyed as the animals, and come out content because it looked real nice. It does look real nice. Too bad this animation robs the original story of every single asset it holds. This was the worst thing I've seen in years. Please don't spend money on this.
Rated 24 Jul 2019
64
48th
I think I'm positively biased here due to sheer nostalgia and Eichner stealing every scene, but I did quite enjoy this overall. Technically it's great with the level of CGI but it does feel quite hollow and just feels like a sort of ‘clinical' remake for me. Decent but see the original and see the show in the theatre.
Rated 21 Jul 2019
48
21st
It was good until the animals started talking and did not show a single emotion from start to finish
Rated 09 Aug 2019
50
33rd
As fantastic as the VFXs are (and they legitimately are breathtaking) this movie is an utterly pointless "Remastered" version of the one of classical animation's undisputed highlights. And as admirable as the filmmakers' dedication to lifelike representation of the animals behaviour is, the lack of any discernible emotion creates the movie's biggest problem - a lack of engagement with the characters and drama.
Rated 23 Aug 2019
55
50th
What was the point of Rafiki?
Rated 26 Jul 2019
50
29th
This version of The Lion King just did absolutely nothing for me. It wasn't a bad film, and so I don't feel like I can rate it poorly, but the truth is that it really did the bare minimum for me. The casting, while seemingly perfect, was unimpressive. Glover and Beyonce specifically were uncharacteristically dull. And while some shots looked beautiful, the animal CGI feels like it regressed even from Favreau's last attempt in Jungle Book. Just sorely disappointing.
Rated 11 Jul 2019
35
27th
I can see where this is going. I'm afraid to say it, but I think as long as James Earl Jones is alive, they'll go ahead and even remake New Hope, all in its spectacular CGI-action glory.
Rated 18 Jul 2019
38
2nd
Some voice-work and singing from Glover and Beyonce is the only improvement this has over the already dismal original. It makes no attempts for improvement, but conversely makes this cartoonish story completely at odds with the mundane photorealistic aesthetics. Emblematic of both our culture's nostalgia and amnesia, this new barrage of Disney remakes is further uncontested evidence of the studio's artistic bankruptcy.
Rated 28 Jul 2019
65
26th
Wow this did not work. Most of what makes this movie 'good' either comes from walking in the shadow of the animated feature, or the occasional moment when Disney ditches the expected script to poke fun at itself. But most of the movie tries too hard to copy the original, and what changes it does make to 'plot' or personality are extraneous or go nowhere. Watch the original. Forget this. Voice acting was lacking. Emotional expression wasn't there. It's a pale copy.
Rated 31 Jul 2019
35
6th
The Circle of Life(less Disney remakes). So much effort has gone into these minuscule tweaks and adjustments designed to deviate from the original, but for what purpose? It’s still the same film, just longer and worse. Even the “groundbreaking” visuals will age quickly (the weightlessness of some of the crowd shots in particular already looks flimsy). This isn’t quite as aggressively dreadful as 2017’s appalling Beauty and the Beast, but The Lion King is somehow even more pointless.
Rated 02 Aug 2019
71
53rd
This is tricky to rate. I heard one person explain it very well "It's like you're enjoying the movie, but also bored at the same time". I give it points for the visual technology, for the score, for the cinematography, and some of the acting, but overall there's just a feeling that it's lacking the soul it needs, because they decided to make the animation just a little too realistic, where the animals simply are expressionless, and it hurts the movie.
Rated 03 Aug 2019
65
31st
As Disney continues its weird and wild world tour of reselling 30-somethings' childhoods back to them at $12 a ticket, I'm left asking the question, "What's the point of this movie?" What does this movie give you that the 1994 offering doesn't? Beyonce as Nala. That's about it. Distracting voice acting and unflattering CGI (if you're going for, y'know, emotion) underscore the absolute lack of need for this remake. I didn't hate it. But it doesn't need to exist. Just watch the 1994 one, 'kay?
Rated 31 Aug 2019
40
20th
Straight-out boring.
Rated 05 Sep 2019
41
39th
watchable
Rated 12 Oct 2019
60
21st
I did not enjoy this remake of The Lion King, and that's okay. Technically the animation looks great, but it strips away the emotion present in the anthropomorphised 2D version. The lighting makes the film less vibrant, making it hard to distinguish between Simba & Scar. The voice acting ranges from decent to obnoxious (Beyoncé), and the songs are somehow less memorable. Comparison to the original is inevitable as it's a shot-for-shot remake, with half an hour added to tell you nihilism is bad.
Rated 27 Oct 2019
50
45th
Another solid remake from Disney but the "live action" just doesn't fit the storytelling as well as the animated version. Breathtaking CGI. When they're that real, though, it's hard to see beyond the nature show aspect and see them as characters rather than animals. Scar & stampede not as scary. Seth Rogen's Pumbaa MVP. I had a hard time telling the female lions or the cubs apart. Not sure the extra runtime was worth it. Fav scene: contrived sequence with the fur getting back to Rafiki.
Rated 04 Feb 2020
72
42nd
Taken for granted as a cynical, appalling idea to begin with, the end result is about as good as you could hope for, evoking memories of Van Sant's PSYCHO in that all the best moments are the eerily accurate recreations of moments from the original film. However, this version is dragged by unnecessary bloat and sorely misses Jeremy Irons (though Ejiofor's Scar is still an enjoyable creation). Score rearrangements are fine, and it is lovely to have Jones back in his second most iconic role!
Rated 01 Dec 2021
54
10th
The worst offender of the lot. "The Lion King" is the most revered and ubiquitous movie of the Disney renaissance. It's too much a part of millions of people's childhoods to have been remade without skepticism. Contrary to the trend of the other remakes, it's not the music that is folly in this installment, it's the lack of traditional animation. By making the cartoons into realistic CG animals, every ounce of magic was lost.
Rated 11 Nov 2019
65
53rd
The movie was ok. This movie may have looked more real but it didn't feel as great as the original
Rated 22 Sep 2019
65
61st
One tough film to rate. Evokes some of the same feelings as the original (mainly because of the nostalgia), but seeing a film that mimics its original in such a way is at the same time superfluous. I liked som of the plot explanations that updated the story to 2019.
Rated 25 Nov 2019
64
45th
Everything was pretty good. It follows the original practically frame for frame many times, so there's little that feels new other than maybe Timon and Pumba
Rated 09 Jan 2020
10
4th
Did you see the original Lion King? Then you do not need to see this.
Rated 19 Jul 2019
80
59th
The Lion King is a half hour longer than the film it is adapting. This was a fact I was dreading. However, the added length only serves to highlight what was already moving and beautiful in the original film, letting shots linger and fostering character depth that I found lacking in the first. I still find the Circle of Life troubling as a concept, adult Simba's story remains uncompelling to me, and stiff facial movements let the otherwise flawless animation down, but I really loved this.
Rated 22 Jul 2019
65
58th
It's worth your time if you love the original, but if you haven't seen the 1994 version, go and watch that one. The archetypical story and characters are working here as well, Mufasa might even be better than in the animated movie. However the animals show almost no facial expression at all which added very much to the drama in the original. Also the songs are just terrible - aside from the opening - they put so little effort into them, it would have been better if they left them out altogether.
Rated 23 Jul 2019
77
41st
Pretty good cover of a movie
Rated 24 Jul 2019
50
15th
The photoreal environments were stunning, but no amount of detail or colour could save each one from becoming Uncanny Valley, Africa as soon as an animal opened its mouth to speak—though, admittedly, Timon and Pumba were a riot. To boot, the story is terribly weak, the photorealism acting as a catalyst to realize a bevy of unfortunate elements (the lack of agency for the lionesses, the terribly shallow romance, the harem, the super twisted politics of the savanna).
Rated 24 Jul 2019
39
36th
Baby Pumbaa is literally one of the greatest things I've ever seen; the movie itself, though, not so much.
Rated 24 Jul 2019
35
14th
Bad. Because of a lack of emotion in the characters, there is no attachment to the audience. It's a shame they only mumble about since the voice cast did well. Furthermore the realism route they took with this remake takes away from the atmosphere of certain places. While they did the jungle reasonably well, The elephants graveyard just isn't spooky and Scars' character doesn't look menacing. I think they should have embraced more of the character movement and lighting of the original.
Rated 25 Jul 2019
74
45th
Lion King remastered. Which would be better if the original Lion King wasn't a perfect masterpiece.
Rated 30 Jul 2019
40
23rd
Queen Bee - don't mess with the King
Rated 05 Aug 2019
45
7th
I'll just go ahead and be the one who says it's one of those remakes that didn't need to be done, takes away from the magic I recall in the cartoon. And I love gambino, but his voice is too distracting as Simba. But still, the advancement of CGI makes it inevitable to remake anything production can get their hands on.
Rated 06 Aug 2019
70
62nd
Yes, this does follow the original step by step - but there's enough good stuff in this film to see it twice in 20 years. What did not work were the voices, which suffer from being put in the mouth of hyperrealistic animals. Only Seth Rogen as Pumbaa got close to Bill-Murray-as-Baloo-territory. Zimmer's music also dithers between cliché and outright imitation, and yet all of that is easily forgotten when you see the incredible animation - for me this film is the start of a new era for CGI.
Rated 08 Aug 2019
79
37th
It doesn't have the same heart as the original. but I still enjoyed myself. This is definitely better than the Aladdin remake. It felt really nostalgic singing along to the iconic songs. If you're a Disney fan, I would definitely recommend this.
Rated 29 Aug 2019
53
20th
eh could have been worse
Rated 02 Sep 2019
80
51st
It could never quite capture the magic of the original perhaps that is because everything was the same plot wise. Perhaps it is because the generation that saw the original is now all grown up. Perhaps it's the visuals that are hyper realistic that don't make it as easy to buy into. It's all those factors rolled in to one plus the idea that it does not feel necessary nor does it really add anything to the playing field that hasn't been done before.
Rated 16 Sep 2019
75
32nd
I liked it, but didn't love it. The look of the film was inconsistent: half the time it felt like a nature documentary and half the time it felt like a cartoon. There was room to improve the story from the original and that wasn't done. However, the true crime was the neutering of "Be Prepared." The coolest-sounding song from the original was turned into a brief spoken poem. On the bright side: Glover is a big improvement over Broderick and Eichner & Rogen had a top-notch turn as Timon & Pumbaa.
Rated 18 Jan 2020
51
25th
Looks great and well done, but was this really necessary?
Rated 20 Aug 2022
76
57th
Well. I was told that it was a reimagining. I've seen the original, the musical, and this version. And it's good, but not great. Not the movie I fell in love with. Disney clearly decided to play it safe and take out a lot of the edginess that gave it attitude. The result? I didn't feel the love tonight. I didn't feel much at all. Some aspects have probably added some authenticity to the movie. But this movie was never really about that. This movie is about standing up. I think that was lost
Rated 18 Oct 2019
88
36th
It's the same movie, just not as good. I think the realism of the animals will make it tougher for kids. Also, the music wasn't perfect like the original. Just because you can remake the Disney films to more live action, doesn't mean you need to. I'll stick with the 1994 animated version.
Rated 19 Oct 2019
93
92nd
While the critics are right when saying there's a massive lack in the personified expressions seen in the classic film, that affected my overal score negatively by 2%, since it slightly affected the acting and chemistry sub-scores. It doesn't affect characters, casting, or individual importance. Looking past that, BEAUTIFUL visuals, impressive casting, great music, great story, and I felt it. If we weren't spoiled by the 90s film...people may have loved this movie.
Rated 19 Oct 2019
50
15th
Should be viewed as a ridiculous, redundant folly but instead made 1.7 bn dollars. Depressing.
Rated 30 Oct 2019
50
14th
I had enjoyed the previous Disney live action remakes, but I was right to be sceptical of this one. I applaud that Disney chose a diverse cast. However, having James Earl Jones back as Mufasa just makes all the other voices sound wrong. Also, it felt many of the best/funniest parts were changed for no good reason or give some of the big names in the film more screen time without substance.
Rated 24 Nov 2019
30
12th
The Lion King lives in a place you wouldn't want to visit, the off-putting, stomach-churning Uncanny Valley. The (attempted) photorealism doesn't mix well with the fantastical storytelling, and the voice acting sucks.
Rated 03 Mar 2024
30
4th
The good old formal error that has already been debunked by Rembrandt: more natural and accurate isn't the same as more lively and empathetic. It can even get cold and horryfying, as is the case here.
Rated 26 Jan 2020
50
44th
Visually stunning, completely unnecessary and oddly dull.
Rated 04 Feb 2020
100
94th
Probably one the most twisted plots I know of for a children's story Guilt tripping a kid into believing he's responsible for his father's death Story stays true to the original cartoon version If for nothing else Watch for the special effects it is absolutely visually stunning
Rated 07 Feb 2020
24
19th
From, Disney Corporation, the studio that brought you [Aladdin], comes a ["live-action" remake] of a classic adventure: [The Lion King]! Starring a diverse cast including: [Donald Glover], [Seth Rogen], and [racial minority #5]! With daring themes of [classism] and [individualism]! The CGI [animals] will leave you breathless! See it today! (I should have never paid for Disney+, this is seriously depressing)
Rated 15 Mar 2020
55
20th
How ultra-realism killed this film. As a massive fan of the original (and the stage musicals), I was looking forward to this one. The cast was terrific and I quite enjoyed what they did with some of the plot points and songs. And not for nothing, the photo-realistic visuals are stunning, but that also proved to be its downfall. The key to the film was always the emotion, and unfortunately, as cute as they may be, animals can't emote and that takes away so much of what made the original so good.
Rated 20 Mar 2020
1
16th
No fun, just horrible.
Rated 18 Apr 2020
75
33rd
If you are a CGI enthusiast, it's a marvel to watch. That said, it's almost identical to the original. Sadly, however, the parts and songs that they removed generally made the movie worse and the things they added were almost entirely of no real consequence. It's the same old story, and outside of any desire to stare at the impressively life-like CGI animals, there's not a ton of other reasons to rewatch this version when the original Lion King is just so much better.
Rated 11 May 2020
60
52nd
Apart from few updated lines that actually worked better than the original ones, after the initial amazement of the animation quality wears off - this is just a shot by shot remake that offers zero original input. Somehow, even while enjoying the benefit of a longer runtime, this felt rushed. I LOVED how they tried to build up Nala's character, but the whole romance subplot made even less sense with the character she was established to be. It's also creepy as heck when characters can't emote.
Rated 17 Jun 2020
71
39th
Most of my enjoyment came from anticipating moments from the original. Then this one would slightly, moderately, or completely under-deliver on the emotion of that scene. Great CGI but none of the voice actors were as good. The Disney remakes that try to do something new are taking more of a risk, but the ones that stick to the script are screwed because they will never be as good.
Rated 24 Mar 2020
20
8th
This sucked. An absolute bore to watch and one of the worst travesties I have ever seen put to film. All of the other Disney remakes had SOMETHING to them. I didn't have fun in this movie at all.
Rated 30 May 2020
48
29th
This isn't a terrible movie on its own but it doesn't hold a candle to the original version. The "photo" realistic designed actually hurt the film in two ways, first it limits the amount of emoting that the characters can do and worse yet the closer something look to real the hard for my brain to accept how artificial everything feels. And while the acting was fairly dull and emotionless it was the new renditions and additions to the songs that I liked the least.
Rated 18 Feb 2020
8
62nd
I had low expectations, but I was surprised. The translation from traditional animation to CGI fascinated me, despite concerns that realistic animals speaking would be odd-looking and difficult to suspend my disbelief for. I WAS distracted once I recognized Beyonce and upon hearing the voice of Timon (not well-cast imo), but this movie put more emotion in me than the original film; it has gorgeous scenes and songs (Not you, Be Prepared..) and the stampede is TERRIFYING. Overall, I recommend it.
Rated 19 Jan 2020
72
63rd
The film looks absolutely amazing, voice acting is great and it's more mature than the original lion king. And that's why I like the 90's version way more than this one. However this one is great, I prefer Pumba luring Hyena's with an apple in his mouth and Rafiki kung-fuing and bitchslapping hyena's over this "mature" version every single day.
Rated 12 Jul 2019
8
6th
F
Rated 19 Jul 2019
80
77th
Needtoemoteeyebrows/eyesbetter+scarmostlybetter/subtextfromOG+rafikigood+kidsimbalilworse+kidnalasomebetter+mufasaworse+zasuworse+hyenasworse/laughruined+timonvoiceactorsucked+pumbaabetterjokes+gambino/beyoncemeh-shesangCYFTLTworse
Rated 19 Jul 2019
45
2nd
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Rated 14 Dec 2022
2
4th
The rule is: if you remake the Lion King without *Be Prepared*, you include *The Madness of King Scar*. How do you omit both!? Focusing so much on realism means the characters are unexpressive and everything loses the charm the original had.
Rated 22 Jul 2019
94
96th
This is an excellent film. I honestly have nothing but praise for it 3 days after viewing.
Rated 25 Jul 2019
80
80th
I liked the live action capture CGI animation (or whatever the hell they're gonna call it) better than the original. Artistically, it's stunning.
Rated 25 Jul 2019
60
47th
Walt Disney animasyonları film yapmaya devam. Aslan ailesine yeni doğan Simba Kuruyemiş, kral olmak için yaşayarak öğrenir. Eğlenceli bir film. Fakat filmin 2. yarıda fazla ritüel kaçtı. Aslan olmak zor. Öleceksin. Tanrı olacaksın. Tüm sorumluluk sende. Ölme aslanım ölme.
Rated 27 Jul 2019
30
21st
The original is for me Disney’s greatest animated achievement, not faultless by any means but beautiful, dramatic and funny. This really is none of those things.
Rated 02 Jun 2024
20
2nd
Disappointing. It was nostalgic but my childhood heart will always yearn for a genuine sequel to TLK II, not this.
Rated 07 Nov 2022
67
43rd
Yeah, it looks pretty good, but, like, I've seen this movie. Watching roughly the same thing, but with CGI instead of animation was just redundant. At least when they did The Jungle Book it was new.
Rated 01 Aug 2019
4
72nd
I know it's possible but I was so impressed with the visuals. I don't care what people say - I loved it. This being good doesn't make the original (1992) less good. Did I miss some of the iconic lines? Yes. Did it ruin the experience for me? No. *Good
Rated 02 Aug 2019
60
40th
* I don't remember if Simba was this much a wuss in the original, but man, how easy is it to manipulate him? Even while he is to become king. Beyond stunning vfx, but not much else to offer in this one apart from the side characters maybe.
Rated 19 Mar 2024
20
14th
Big disappointment. The cartoon was fine, but the so-called live action disappointed. The CGI was nicely done, but the expressions/mimics were therefore gone. Therefore, it was difficult to empathize with the individual characters. For me, it became another unnecessary remake of an fine cartoon.
Rated 04 Aug 2019
53
32nd
It's a delightful movie. I don't understand why it's getting such lukewarm reviews. Watch this one to remember what you loved in the original on the first place, and try to see it through the new lens. Try to avoid comparing them.
Rated 07 Aug 2019
50
33rd
Disney'in elindeki orjinal animasyonları yeni nesile pazarlama dalgasının son ayağı Lion King 90 lardaki başarılı animasyonu yeni nesile live action türünde adapte etme amacının bir ürünü olarak ortaya çıkıyor Lion King bu yolda gerçekçilik sosu katmak için kullandığı CGI efektleriyle gerçekçi olmaya çalışırken işi abartıp yapay bir havaya büründürüyor adeta bir belgesel derlemesinden hallice bu yapım orjinalinin kurgusuna hiçbir şey katmayarak eseri daha k
Rated 07 Sep 2019
73
46th
La storia è bella e fa commuovere, anche se non è nulla di nuovo ovviamente. Peccato per il doppiaggio italiano infame, d'altronde Mengoni ed Elisa sono cantanti non doppiatori, ad ognuno il suo mestiere.
Rated 12 Oct 2019
50
77th
I love animals, so up my alley. The songs, and I've heard them places before, does little for me. Not my taste. I get the feeling the realistic look takes the experience down a notch. Looses that old Disney charm, which has made their cartoons timeless classics. The life-circle story is evergreen and enchanting. Still, I'm struggling with the realistic conversion holding back the emotional effect of it. Good family film, but the Disney magic has been whitewashed off the experience.
Rated 16 Oct 2019
54
30th
Gorgeous movie to look at but that's mostly it. Not bad by any means but rarely interesting
Rated 14 Aug 2022
0
16th
I have watched nearly every live action remake as I'm always interested in seeing what new things new people can bring to the table with old stories. But see, they deleted Scar. They deleted Scar, and I didn't find out, and I sat through a very boring word-for-word remake that brought NOTHING but DID delete THE GREATEST VILLAIN SONG EVER CREATED, so now I HAVE to hate them all. You understand, right?
Rated 07 Nov 2019
68
46th
Beautifully photo realistic, had a few giggles, but a a children's story story line with not much depth.
Rated 25 May 2020
55
30th
You know this is going to be mediocre when Be Prepared is cut. Just go watch the original, and don't waste money on Disney+.
Rated 26 Dec 2019
62
41st
It was beautiful and stunning and emotional up until each moment when the animals started talking and the CGI was trying to convey human emotions on animal faces. It just doesn't work like animation does. Not bad, but why re-make something that could not be topped with CGI, anyway? Aw yeah, money.
Rated 23 Feb 2020
75
58th
Nostalgia + great graphics (motion felt a little off, though, which was distracting).
Rated 30 Jan 2020
20
15th
The characters were emotively lifeless and almost all of the voice acting fell flat, big names do not equal good voice actors. The musical parts were unimpressive and Be Prepared was utterly ruined. The lighting is practically never used to help convey anything within the narrative, and many of musical ques from the original film while still there are rendered meaningless. The environments were visually bland unlike the real world inspirations the original animators drew from. It just sucks.
Rated 01 Apr 2023
20
12th
I know it's a kid's movie but I don't understand why the rest of the animals don't revolt and abolish the monarchy that kills and eats them. Simba, Pumbaa and Timon are just slumming it in a republic otherwise they'd replicate it in Simba's homeland. Power ultimately corrupts even them I guess. Such a weirdly classist, royalist story for the US to be into!
Rated 30 Dec 2022
12
27th
why did they make every animal's face blank and boring. should have done this moving in animation
Rated 13 Apr 2020
60
12th
In its attempts at photorealism, Disney has escaped from the horrifying depths of the Jungle Book's uncanny valley. As a result, The Lion King often feels like a bunch of celebrities talking over a nature documentary. Impressive enough as a tech demo, but mostly soulless and unnecessary. The butchering of the iconic songs has luckily been way overstated (although none of the new versions surpass the originals).
Rated 21 Oct 2020
0
3rd
worthless
Rated 07 Aug 2020
62
24th
I'm getting tired of these live-action remakes that while they may not be frame for frame, they are pretty much line for line the exact same as the original. Give us something different, take the core values and reimagine how these stories can be retold so they can be fresh and new again.
Rated 04 Jan 2021
85
29th
Simba is a young lion and son of the lion king Mufasa. He looks up to his father and takes his royal destiny to heart. Mufasa's jealous brother Scar doesn't like that at all and he and a group of hyenas hatch a plan to get rid of both Mufasa and Simba so that he can take power himself.
Rated 10 Apr 2021
90
18th
Good movie.
Rated 29 Jul 2021
12
0th
So boring

Collections

Loading ...

Similar Titles

Loading ...

Statistics

Loading ...

Trailer

Loading ...