Not the worst thing ever, but far inferior to the 1994 version

Rating: 5/10 (22 July 2019)

This recent spade in "live action" remakes of classic Disney films from the 60's all the way to the 90's has got to stop, as it is perfectly clear that their sole purpose is to cash in on the nostalgia and fond memories many of us now adults had as children watching the original animated versions. In regards to their inherent quality they vary from really bad to just okay for the most part, so I dislike more than others, but the Lion King is one of the worst. I don't even know where to start.
I guess the biggest disappointment here would have to be the photo-realistic 3-D animation of the characters which does indeed make them look a lot more like the lions, hyenas, zebras, etc. that they were in the original animated film from the 90's but on the flip side they managed to suck just about all of the life and warmth from them in the process. They honestly would have just been better off filming actual lions and then providing voice overs for them like they did in Disney live actions films in the 90s, notably an earlier "remake" of The Jungle Book. All of the life, expressiveness, emotion, and beauty which went into the design of the original characters is almost completely gone here, with the possible exception of Timon and Pumbaa and even they can't live up to the original.
I understand that given their more realistic appearances they can't really go as far as they could with the original then they could here, and as a result it seems that director Jon Favreau, who also directed the recent live action Jungle Book remake from 2017, told them not to be as emotive in their voice work as it would create too much of a clash between the fairly static expressionless faces on the more realistic characters. Which I suppose makes sense from a technical stand point so either way it was as if this film was doomed to failure from the character animation alone.
But then this brings us to the dialogue and humor of this film, which though not the worst ever it's mostly because the vast majority of the dialogue is simply cut and pasted from the original along with the music and songs and they couldn't even do that right. Most of the humor comes from, as might be expected, the characters of Timon and Pumbaa and the time Simba spends with them growing up after leaving Pride Rock, along side several of their friends and fellow prey animals who are extremely wary of being in the presence, and rightfully so, of an apex predator such as a Lion, even if he's technically on "their side" due to their influence on him.
I did genuinely laugh in a few scenes, but aside from that I rarely got anything emotionally speaking from watching this film, not even the scene where Mufasa, again portrayed by James Earl Jones, although noticeably not as strong, perhaps due to his age, but I suspect more so because of the limits imposed by the "realistic" character designs. Chiwetel Ejiofor as Scar is a far cry from the greatness Jeremy Irons embodied in his role as the original, having little to no menace and personality to him, he doesn't even have his signature black mane and aside from his scarred face it barely even looks like him aside from the fact they are both played by British actors. His version of Be Prepared as also shorter in length and not remotely as memorable as Jeremy Irons version, there almost like two completely different songs. Both Beyonce as adult Nala and Donald Glover (Childish Gambino) as Simba also seem to have very little chemistry or depth regarding their characters and seem almost bored when delivering lines which held far more of an impact in the original.
The story line overall is with a few exceptions the same one as the original with Simba, supposed to be dead, runs away from his place as king of Pride Rock leaving Scar to turn it into a dry deserted hellscape which could also be a pretty good analogy for this film, as just about every character, even Zazu and Rafiki are not even close to as memorable as they were in the original. Zazu barely even looks the same, I think he's an entirely different species of bird, although personally I could care less even if he did look the same.
One thing I guess that I did in fact think was an improvement over the original was the portrayal by newcomer JD McCrary of Simba as a cub, in that he was far more endearing and innocent and therefore likable then the 1994 version played by Jonathan Taylor Thomas, who came off a lot more bratty and even annoying before going through his character growth following Mufasa's death. Here he's just so adorable as a cub you can't help but feel bad for him and hope to see him grow up and take his place as ruler of the Pride Lands, even if he's a little childish and disobedient you're much more likely to forgive him because of his inherent sweetness.
Aside from that there really isn't much to commend, although I suppose the more realistic backgrounds and landscapes are pretty and well detailed, their overall isn't much more to see here worth the price of a movie ticket. A real shame that something so magical was completely sucked dry just for the sake a nostalgic cash grab.