You know your trailer hasn't been well received when it gets ratiod into oblivion and you have to disable comments on it entirely. Such is the case with Disney's Mufasa - the movie nobody asked for.
Let me guess. In this movie, Mustafa dabbles in polyamory and relationships with other species. Scar is actually gay and a spurned lover. Mustafa was actually mean, abusive and patriarchal and all the female lionesses hated him.
Someone said that the movie will reveal that actually Scar was the royal lion and Mufasa the orfan Scar's family adopt and the one that stole the reign from him, but I couldnt tell if this is true or not. Wouldnt be surprise if it is tho
@@Ou_phrontis It’s because Disney has no faith with that show. Lion King made billions for them and they don’t want to risk their current cashcow fumbled from general audiences seeing this trailer. Word of mouth plays a part
OH WOW NO ONE ASKED FOR IT, and no one wanted it; which are the ONLY two criteria DISNEY needs to make anything nowadays. "is there a market? NO? PERFECT. Are we going to destroy a small animation studio and ruin a thousand or more people's jobs and futures? YES? Even more incentive."
Wrong. The only criteria Disney needs to make a movie is that it belongs to a franchise that has made money. They will keep doing that until the franchise is no longer profitable.
There are blood ties between most executives, financiers, world leaders, and top-eschelon government leadership. Have been for centuries, at the least. "It's not elites ruining it for all of you. It's fellow serfs!"
Around the point when people realized that these "re-imaginings" and "spiritual successors" were specifically meant to *tear down* the things they feel nostalgia for? People stopped wanting them.
oh ya good point. I didn't even connect the dot on that originally. I was more focused on the design style and just how absurd they are for doubling down on that when no one liked it. But thats a key plot point also. They went from Mufasa being a noble king that supposedly came from a line of respectable leaders. To rando nobody that became a king? Seems like a weird alteration.
@@robosoldier11 Yeah, if he had some significant ascension story like that, it would have been mentioned in the Lion King, no? I mean, that would be important stuff to tell your son, the future king about.
Of course they will. But the issue actually started way back when the original drawn version was released; Scar is the one with a black mane, which usually symbolises the dominant male of the hierarchy and is more attractive to the females than any other mane color. So it will be easy picking for them to skew this new movie in a way were Scar would have been the ruler by true right but Mufasa stole it from him.
I’m pretty sure they already gave Scar a sympathetic backstory before all this cash grabbing live action crap. I also think Mufasa was literally the only one who treated Scar with respect, but they’re still gonna make him the asshole anyways.
@@cosmicspacething3474 it is a terrible idea that reality isn't black and white, that people aren't good or evil... how could anyone think of such an evil idea???
6:01, the CGI remake got criticized because the characters showed LESS expression than an actual cat. Lions in wildlife documentaries are more expressive than that.
I wondered what was so triggering about it. I haven't seen any of the live action remakes because I agree with Drinker on this: they aren't different stories, they just have a different look. But when I saw the trailer, I thought, Seth Rogan's name really cannot be the big problem here. Showing less expression than an actual cat is a problem though. If kids would just rather watch an Animal Kingdom documentary rather than a Disney production, Disney is probably on the wrong track. On the other hand, it would be nice if this is the only problem with this movie. Bad graphics is, sadly, the least of Disney's problems.
The thing is that cats can be expressive with their faces and entire body language... but their muzzles and muscles around the eyes aren't made to express complex human emotion, nor their mouth to move to speak human language (I know it sounds crazy, right?). But I'm very much looking forward to Disney's CG remake of Bambi, since deer and rabbits instead are notorious for how expressively human they look.
Mufasa in The Lion King speaking to Simba about ruling everything the light touches; like your father, and father's father, and his father before him The narrator in the Mufasa trailer: *HE HAD NO ROYAL BLOODLINE AND CAME FROM NOTHING LIKE A TRUE REVOLUTIONARY
He's retired, thank God. (Of course, he let Disney sample his voice for an AI model, so he can still technically play Mufasa and Darth Vader in perpetuity.)
As the most popular writer of his era, I’m really surprised that Shakespeare turned down the opportunity for the prequel to Hamlet. Thank goodness Disney is here to come in and pick up the slack.
Always amused me that Shakespeare was writing the "popular" entertainment of his time. The Globe Theater wasn't for the aristocracy, but for the masses - Which means that, if Shakespeare were alive today, he'd be writing episodes of _Everybody Loves Raymond..._
Well, a couple of centuries later the much-needed spin-off on Rosencrantz and Guildenstern was written. 😆 The main difference is that today it would have been taken at face value and stretched over 4 seasons.
To give you some perspective, the comments section for the Acolyte is still up. Either Disney is desperate to save Mufasa, or they’ve given up completely on Star Wars, or a little of both.
But no one asked for the Lion King remake either, but that made like $1.5B... Are the people complaining they don't like the 'photo-realistic' CGI the same ones that made The Lion King a huge hit?
Scar : Mufasa- I am your father, Mufasa: No! No! It can't be, that's impossible! Scar: Seek your feelings. You know it to be the truth. My Father was gone and I was only one of age and mother was in heat. Mufasa: NO!
@StreetPreacherr making money is incidental, clearly. Nothing that has happened in the past decade or so makes sense in light of the greed hypothesis. Only the evil hypothesis - they do it to destroy good things, spread lies, and suppress human spirit - fits all the phenomena.
Why does every remake seem to be about angst? They just aren't the happy films of before. Disney lost something. #1 is respect for the customers. We don't want remakes. Nor endless sequels.
Personally, I don't mind well-made remakes, if they're a 'side-dish' between new, original stuff. But not only do the 80s and 90s era movies not need a remake (they're animation, ffs, and good animation at that, apart from making them HD or whatever so they are up to date technologically, leave them alone), everything the Disney remake machine touches goes to absolute shit.
There's also the tagline that says "orphan" which, you know if you watched the oringal, he wasn't. And he tells Simba about his father so... Are we retconning the originals???
Couldn't agree more. People are outraged at Disney and then say "well Deadpool looks ok, I'll see it". Fork Awf!! HOW can people spend money on anything from Disney? Do people serious have no shame? F Disney, I'll never give them any money after they destroyed Star Wars.
How else will you get Disney to change if you don’t support the few good things they do make so that they make more of that. Guessing you still watched Shogun or The Bear tho
I might be the only human on the planet who's for most of his life actually wanted a lion king prequel ive always wanted to know what mufasa and scars childhood was like and what lead to all the hatred and betrayal and they couldnt even set THAT up right, like im the 1% who should be excited for this and I have ZERO interest in this good job disney
You're not the only one. The idea of Mufasa and Scar's origin stories would have been brilliant to see... If only it were 2D animated and were written and told by the same folks who created the original masterpiece.
That's perfectly natural when you grew up at a time when Dis hired people who knew how to tell stories. The expectation that it would be of a certain standard was a reasonable one. Nobody could have foreseen this.
@@liamphibia i dont mind the cgi, im a big visuals person and the lion king remake looked extraordinary. the problem was the horrible casting and watering down of the story, on top of the fact it was just an unnecessary retelling of the same story. a new story with cgi would be dope to me. that being said like others are saying i dont trust disney to do it well and itll likely be dogshit.
Remember in the 90s, Disney put out a bunch of straight to vhs movies like Little mermaid 2 and Lady and the tramp 2? This is the same thing, except now Disney is stupid enough to put it in theaters first.
I watched the Mufasa trailer yesterday and at the end my only thought was, "okay... they didn't show me any reason why I should want to see this. Just, it's about Mufasa. That's enough."
Mads Mikkelsen needs to fire his agent. He boomed thanks to Hannibal and it seems nearly every thing he's been in since, at least in America, has been awful.
If Kathleen Kennedy interviewed you for a job at Disney and you just sat down and told her to ‘feck off’ to which she replies ‘I’ll destroy your career!!!’…does that mean you’ve got the job?🤔🤷🏼♂️
Hey kids do you remember that one character, from that one movie that was actually cool..well we’re making an entire movie about them. Why? Well, it’s because we have no originality or talent..we’re Disney.
It’s far worse than that. The leadership at Disney (and most major institutions worldwide, oddly) are actively committing suicide. Theyre not incompetent, they literally are trying to destroy their own legacy in some psychotic longterm social engineering agenda.
can they make it any more obvious that they are completely and utterly sapped for anything resembling a new idea? i mean fuck, talk about beating a dead horse, their now beating that dead horses dead father lmao
Families would rather go see Sonic Movie 3 on that same day instead because Sonic is fun, bright, energetic, expressive, entertaining, fast-paced and highly respectful to it's game roots. Btw Drinker, I'd love to see do a little review on Sonic 3.
It is utilizing the cgi puppets and background scenes already generated to save costs. That was why ghostbusters 2016 had ghosts from Scooby Doo movies with Freddie Prince Jr only slightly altered.
The guy behind the movie was outright that the movie looked soulless as hell, and responded by saying something to the effect of "People care about The Lion King." Not talking about his own fucking movie, but rather the original beloved classic. Needless to say, this man has absolute faith in the upcoming movie.
You mean John Favreau? I remember seeing that clip, he was saying the music would carry the movie pretty much. Which is also very close to what you're saying
People used to care about a lot of things. Hollywood (not just Disney) cannot grasp that your ex, who loved you when you married her, stopped when you cheated and divorced her. You're a bad memory now. A bad memory showing up at her door at 3 am, stinking of beer and piss, waving an old VHS of the Lion King.
Because the protagonist dying is the only possible source of tension? That's a strange argument. People get invested in other characters, too. Do you disagree that the Star Wars prequel made moments like Obi-Wan's clash against Vader in A New Hope better? The issue with prequels is that they're almost always made for the wrong reasons.
In almost all action/adventure movies, you know the hero is going to make it. You just don't know how. James Bond and Indiana Jones are always going to escape danger, thwart the villain and get the girl. But audiences are still willing to go along for the ride and suspend their disbelief if the stakes appear to be high enough in the moment. Prequels suck for the same reason that sequels suck. They are mostly uninspired cash grabs. But I'm convinced that you could make a good prequel, if there is a good enough story to tell and the right person to tell it. It can't just be an origin story. That's boring. It has to stand on its own and be more than just a pale reflection of the original. An example of a great prequel is the book Commanche Moon, by Larry McMurtry (not the miniseries.) I like it even better than Lonesome Dove. It has more colorful characters and tells the story of Woodrow and Gus when they were young and in the prime of life, having adventures in a lawless Texas frontier that had vanished by the time of the first book.
It's the "whodunnit" versus "howcatchem" problem. If you know who did the crime, then the excitement has to come from watching Columbo figure it out and catch him.
I must confess I really enjoy this more one on one kind of conversation. It feels like ideas get to expressed in much more detail and developed alongside each other. I still enjoy the larger group talks, but would love to see this kind of "more intimate" discussions more often. Regardless keep up the great work and am really enjoying what you're doing!
Disney held a meeting; "ok, how can we make a movie and not put a chick in it and make it lame? Anyone? Anyone?" Blank stares, the one furry sheepishly speaks up, "the Lion King again?"
The bit where Mufasa is escaping from the crocodiles is literally a scene taken straight from Lion King 2: Simbas Pride. They’re stealing from their own movies. Smh.
I thought Disney is the one company that doesn't copyright strike their trailers. Anyway, that's what Gary says on FNT. In either case it's stupid for companies to copyright strike people watching their trailers. It's free advertising for them.
That was old Disney. It's like when somebody you grew up with becomes a self-destructive addict. You have to accept that this person with his name and face is not your friend. It's the chemical that is killing them.
the biggest pblem the film has is... there's NOTHING about Mufasa's history i felt needed explanation. He's the king. ok we know that means he's son of the last king. That doesn't need exploration. We know he was a good king by the stories standards. what else... Scar? i mean his brother wanted to be king. That's not anthing about Mufasa worth expanding on. if the Monkey was king, Scar'd be the same character None of it matters
I sold my Disney stock some time ago. It's still on my Watch List, and it's recommended as "Strong Buy" green green green as it continues to swirl the drain.
I mean, I knew the movie would be bad because it's Disney but when I watched the trailer, I was shocked at how it just looked like a complete retread of the first movie. The same shots and iconic moments; it's all there. This is the apex of creative bankruptcy.
A sequel/prequel shouldn’t be made unless the idea for the sequel is as good as or better than the original film. There’s maybe 10 sequels that were as good or improved on the original in cinema history. I don’t mean planned trilogies. I mean an original idea does well, so a studio decide/ a to make another.
@@sba8710 yeah me too. I’d say T2 is the best sequel, aliens is as good as alien, Toy Story 2, godfather 2, dark knight, rocky 2. There’s 6 and I’m struggling . Things like LOTR, back to the future and the OT were always meant to be trilogies so I’d not consider them. I said Dark knight but you could take that out because it’s part of a trilogy. And godfather but I just ignore 3.
@@rl8259 dune part 2 is one film in 2 parts, its like the deathly hallows 1 & 2, it’s one film. The original top gun isn’t great and I haven’t seen X or Pearl. Are you recommending?
Cannot wait to find out Mufasa was Scar's mean older brother who gives him his namesake, and Scar was just misunderstood and acting out the trauma of his childhood.
How can he not have a drop of noble blood? He's a lion ffs! The first movie makes it clear that the lions are the aristocracy and all the other animals are the commoners.
This seems completely unnecessary. I do understand why they would try this stunt since the last remake made 1.667 billion. I get it. Why not try. But as an OG The Lion King fan as an 8 year old in 1994, I just feel this seems to be mainly a cash grab here. On a more positive note : I will say X-MEN 97' is unbelievably good in contrast to this -
You guys are bang on with three points -- paying money to watch is a modern Disney movies, is a default NO -- nobody should attend their theme parks anymore, because if they cannot be trusted in media, they certainly cannot be trusted in person -- grand employee clean out is needed; Disney needs to return to the ideal family at the core of their stories and projects, so any employee no longer willing to promote the traditional ideal family needs to be fired ... whether executives, or stories writing, or administration, or park performers, or most of all at the corporate director level.
Mufasa is a prequel to the cgi lion king which is a remake of the animated lion king which is a retelling of Hamlet, which Shakespeare stole from the Heptameron, I believe.
I wonder how long it will take for the big content creators to setup their own fully controlled like/rate site for new content, with identifiable login credentials etc. When that is up they will easily get youtube to position that prominently on videos etc., so it will get the first thing that most users will see and use. And of course there will be some strickt rules for the user supplied texts and KI - what else - based monitoring. To give that also a positive spin, since all big content companies want to use it for the good of the profit margin.
How is this guy in a conversation with drinker and he hasn’t done his homework on the thing that drinker is 100% going to want to talk about… completely baffling
@@rl8259 yeah.....but they only did this with the international trailer, after they received negative comments. ;) Also RU-vid Kids is more for kids exclusive content.
When I first saw the preview in my feed, I thought it was a joke or parody video. I was looking to see who posted it and realized it was an actual Preview! I didn't even watch it, I already knew what was going to be there.
It's not just Disney movies that are a default no. All movies are a default no now! Until proven by trusted reviewers having their say. And those are not found in mainstream media. Thank God for channels like this.
5:55 Snowbell from "Stuart Little" back in freaking 1990s was a photorealistic cat, and he has perfect facial expressions. The modern incompetent slackers at Disney just didn't care hard enough.
"Lion King made $1.6B" "I don't know why Lion King was made" I think I have a guess why.... It may be garbage, but negative comments or not this thing will pull in a billion dollars.
This isn't about storytelling anymore. It's about tech demos, and investments. The first CGI Lion King movie was a billion dollar showcase, showing new 3D animation tools and how they could be used. They just used an already existing IP to do it.
