You know with all these disney live action remakes ...

[Carl]

A LA TLK would be stupid and pointless... I can see how it would work with human/dog/cat focused movies, but lions aren't going to cooperate and doing a CGI version would be totally pointless. Seeing as how TLG is being drawn in the style of the original film, I think Disney understands how important the animation is to this film. It's not a movie that can be recreated.

[Elton John]

What i meant was live action backgrounds with mostly cgi characters like how they are doing the jungle book (the boy who plays mowgli is the only human character and as far as i know the only non cgi character) not either or.

[DGFone]

The problem with that approach is that The Lion King has 0 human characters. So it will be... entirely CGI.

Frankly, I really don't see how they will be able to top off the 2D animation with CGI. When they made the movie, they knew exactly what kind of tools they had and they knew exactly how to use them. Just look at the differences between the movie and the musical (speaking of live action): a lot of the differences come from the fact that the 2D animated movie was able to do a whole lot more that you simply couldn't do on a stage. A clear example is needing to replace those couple of seconds where Simba steps into Mufasa's paw print on the ground, which was turned into an entire song to get a similar effect.

If Disney wants to make another TLK movie, let them make a good sequel/prequel, not a live action remake.

[Elton John]

I don't see how having real backgrounds would make it all cgi, just having cgi characters with real backgrounds would make it kind of a hybrid.

[DGFone]

What will be the point of having a real background just to superimpose all CGI characters onto it? Seems like a lot of unnecessary work to me.

The point is, I don't think a LA TLK would be a good idea.

[Elton John]

Because how else will Disney make it? I'm not saying I want it but...

The Disney live action remake train is currently accelerating, and I don't see them not going after one of their hottest properties. It might not be a completely logical choice but this is the same company that gave a lone ranger reboot over 200 million dollar budget, even disney can make completely illogical choices.

[SimbasGuard]

The Disney film Dinosaur used live Backgrounds with all CGI characters. Dinosaur is considered an animated movie. Well it is at least considered one of Disney's animated classics in The U.S. I think using this technique to make a so called Live Action Lion King would totally defeat the the purpose as despite being a Live Action/CGI Hybrid is would still be considered an animated film. The question then is would fans be accepting of Disney doing a CGI remake of it's classic 2D animated films? Personally I don't think that would work, especially with The Lion King. I know Disney is capable of making bad business decisions, but Bob Iger really seems to know what he is doing, so I can't see Disney attempting a Live Action Lion King. Regardless of the current trend.

[ScarsLove]

I think Disney should just forget all these live action remakes of classic movies and try being original once again. A live action remake for the TLK would definitely draw a crowd and create lots of hyped up expectations that we all know they wouldn't be able to recreate.

[Carl]

[quote="ScarsLove"]and try being original once again. [/quote]
Are there any Disney movies that are original? All of the ones I know of were inspired by books/fairy tales/stories/history/etc. that already existed.

[quote="Elton John"]Because how else will Disney make it? I'm not saying I want it but...

The Disney live action remake train is currently accelerating, and I don't see them not going after one of their hottest properties. It might not be a completely logical choice but this is the same company that gave a lone ranger reboot over 200 million dollar budget, even disney can make completely illogical choices.[/quote]
Our point is, if the characters are all CGI, then what in the bloody hell is the point? Also that if Disney has ANY amount of intelligence about them, they WON'T make an "LA" TLK. They know that TLK is big but they also know that it's partly because of it's animation style. Otherwise, they would have changed the animation style for TLG and turned them into weird chibis or CGI characters. TLK would not be right in a different style, it would not be right with different voice actors, it would not be right at all to remake it. And as there are no human characters, it would be literally impossible for them to do a live action remake. Sure the characters in the Jungle Book will be CGI, but there is still a human to be played by a real actor, and so because of that one human it can be called live action. Without human characters, it can't be LA, and so it would be stupid to add TLK to the "live action remake train." It's not like Beauty and the Beast or any of the fairy tales that have been told many times where different versions can still be told. The Lion King is a different version of Hamlet. They can't tell a different version of TLK. They can do another version of Hamlet, but not of TLK. It just won't work. They can try it, but all they'll do is piss off people.

[Elton John]

I've tried explaining my point over and over in a mostly polite manner, making this topic was a bad idea.