Aladdin is a Superior Movie over The Lion King

Pro’s case: 1) I readily concede that Aladdin spends a lot more time on comedy- this is an artistic choice, and we must answer the question of whether this decision enhances or diminishes each respective film. I have already made the case that the focus Genie’s humor distracts from the rest of Aladdin. I don’t dispute that Robin Williams had an excellent performance- he deserved those awards. My argument was that the performance overshadowed the rest of the movie- the balcony scene shows how the Genie interjects with tonally incongruous jokes during the middle of important character development scenes. The Lion King contains plenty of humor- Timon and Pumbaa, as well as Zazu and hyenas are well remembered for their comedic support. The humor in the Lion King supports the plot rather than overshadows it- Pumbaa’s joke about stars as balls of gas actually facilitates character development during the star gazing scene Finally, Pro’s argument seems to be “The Lion King is too emotionally powerful.” This is the mark of Lion King’s superiority- the movie strives to resonate emotionally and it excels in this respect. Pro’s characterization is incorrect though- Simba is not depressed throughout the film. Simba exhibits a range of emotions at different stages in his life because he is a complex character. 2) Jafaar is a straightforward villain, while Scar exists within a complex emotional relationship between Simba and Mufasa. It isn’t hard for Jafaar to trick people when he can literally transform himself. Scar must use subtle emotional manipulation to control Simba and the Lion Pride. Scar’s failure as a ruler does not diminish his character, it only develops another theme- the relationship between moral responsibility and governance. These themes flow from the arc of the story and feed into character development. Mufasa and Simba are motivated to rule by a sense of justice and love of the balance of the kingdom. Scar wants only power and operates by cronyism. Bad governance by Scar results in mismanagement of resources and suffering in his kingdom, while good governance by Mufasa and Simba results in prosperity. Governance and power in Aladdin are mere tokens of who is “winning” in the film. The only reason we care that Jafaar becomes Sultan is because he’s the bad guy and we don’t want the bad guy to win. 3) First, Aladdin’s action scenes are not superior. Mufasa’s death is visually compelling- from the antelope stampeding down the cliff to Mufasa’s final fall. This is one of the most iconic scenes in Disney canon and outshines any scene in Aladdin. Second, neither movie is an action movie. Action scenes support the plot and color the film with excitement but do not define the film. This is a low-priority issue when evaluating a Disney movie. The Lion King contained more than enough action to keep the story gripping and exciting. 4) As much as I appreciate the imabench homage, I simply disagree that the love scene is creepy. “Can You Feel the Love Tonight” is a certified U.S. Gold song, so clearly a lot of people enjoyed the scene. The love story is a side plot in the Lion King, even if it stumbles it does not detract from the movie as a whole. Pro is trying to hang his hat on one scene- compare that to the massive structural problems I have pointed out in Aladdin. Con Case: 1. Pro argues the Simba is superficial by citing that Simba does the following: he goes from being arrogant, to being scared and running, to being carefree and dumb, then finally emerges heroic. That’s a huge range of character development, I really don’t see how that proves Simba superficial. In contrast Aladdin is a liar until the very end of the movie when he suddenly decides to be a stand-up guy. Fascinating. In the Lion King we see Simba struggle to make heroic decisions- it take Nala, Rafiki, and his father’s ghost to bring him to his moral awakening. Aladdin undergoes none of this development, deciding to free Genie seemingly on a whim. Even Genie doesn’t understand why Aladdin doesn’t continue being selfish at the end. Pro’s analysis is fluff. Nothing about Aladdin suggests a father/son relationship between the Genie and Aladdin- Aladdin OWNS Genie. 2. Pro’s argument is basically “Jasmine was so grateful for being freed from slavery that she overlooked Aladdin’s chronic lying.” What a great lesson! Girls, all men will be awful to you so just be grateful when one is slightly less terrible than the other. Aladdin has no realization about honesty- what actually happens is all his friends are mad at him for being a liar, so he decides he should tell Jasmine the truth. Note he doesn’t actually do so, nor does he decide to immediately free the Genie as he promised. This scene, supposedly a major moral turning point, is underwhelming and forgettable. 3. Pro doesn’t address my character analysis of Jasmine. He just says she’s impressed by seeing the world. But this doesn’t change the fact that Jasmine was uninterested in Aladdin until he started showing off his sweet ride. Jasmine wants people to respect her and claims not to like show-offs, but is impressed by a show-off liar. In contrast, Nala demonstrates integrity when she is outraged by Simba's disavowal of responsibility. Cross apply my analysis about Aladdin’s moral realization being underwhelming at best. 4. Pro concedes that Genie is at least marginally distracting. Genie barely functions as the voice of reason. He tells Aladdin to be honest but he also tells Aladdin to be happy once Jasmine has believed the lies: “You’ve just won the heart of the princess! What are you gonna do next?” Pro also ignores the troubling implications of Genie’s pop culture references. If the Genie lives outside of space and time, why couldn’t he use his knowledge to better help Aladdin and stop Jafaar from rising to power? Does the Genie not care? Are the actions of mortals like the actions of ants- just events for him to bounce jokes off of? Aladdin’s ending is blasé. The ending of the Lion King shows Rafiki holding up Simba’s son- visual poetry echoing the start of the movie and the concept of the Circle of Life. Aladdin doesn’t compare. 5. Light/dark are common symbols for good/evil. A black mane doesn’t say anything about race. Jafaar is overtly Arabic while Aladdin is almost white. The opening song to Aladdin had to be changed due to accusations of racism- the lyric “Where they cut off your ear if they don't like your face” was changed for implying Arabic societies were barbaric. 6. Timon and Pumbaa aren’t useless. Not only do they save Simba’s life, they serve as a philosophical contrast to Mufasa. Pro doesn’t explain how his arguments relate to the artistic goals of each film. The Lion King isn’t trying to be a love story, the romance is a tertiary plot point meant to show that Simba is growing up. Thus it isn’t a serious flaw if the scene doesn’t quite connect. In contrast, Aladdin is trying to show the importance of honesty, so it is a serious flaw if it fails to do so.