Save this article to read it later.
Find this story in your accountsSaved for Latersection.
I will say this forMufasa: Those lions are cute as buttons.
Disney will surely sell a lot of plushies with this one.
But technologically speaking, the new one leaves the previous iteration in the dust.
The animals look realer than ever, and their mouths more convincingly match the spoken dialogue.
For some viewers, that might be enough.
Yes, it will surely make truckloads of money.
Artistically speaking, it feels like an enormous wasted opportunity, especially given the talent involved.
Mufasa kills Kiross son, a blood vendetta is born, and away we go.
Mufasaattempts an impossible balancing act.
But the movie also calls back (calls forth?)
Easter eggs, I suppose, for a story that technically hasnt happened yet.
Maybe thats why Jenkins anxiously tries to jazz up the action with fast, fancy, swooping camera movements.
Jenkins does give us one wonderful underwater fight which might be the exception that proves the rule.
Sometimes, photorealism is the enemy of the real.
There were surely opportunities there.
InMufasa, its the bad guys who use the everything the light touches construction.
What are we doing here?
Jenkins is a talented artist whos done great work in the past.
Remove that dimension from this directors work, and you lose entire worlds.
It could have been about finding your place in the world; its not.
It could have been about the overwhelming weight of responsibility; its not.
(Id mention the Lin-Manuel Miranda songs…but Ive already forgotten them.)
