DVDizzy Forum

An extended sneak peek has been released. You can also watch the D23 Expo presentation for the show where the executive producer gives some background info on the concept of the Lion Guard and its relationship with Scar.

Man, they are really putting in some effort into this series. I am happy that Kiara will be in this which will satisfy everyone who have childhood memories of her. The fact that they did explain how Scar didn't have the Roar Of the Elders does add more depth to the character.

I'm loving this new series more and more every time I watch it.

I would be a much happier man today if Disney were more willing to do stuff like this.

Kion actually resemble young Simba a bit.

It looks like The Lion Guard is set in-between The Lion King II when Kiara was still young. This makes no sense. Why does Disney want to mess up the continuity for no good reason? If Kion was born during the events of The Lion King II, where was he? Why was there no mention of him or acknowledgment of his existence? All of these continuity errors could have been avoided if Kiara was depicted as an adult lioness.

OMG. *Shaking my head in disgrace*.

How are even sure though that's Kiara?

Mickeyfan1990 wrote:How are even sure though that's Kiara?

Because she is going to be the Queen!

1 or 2 possibilities:

-Either that's Kion's sister or Kiara's daughter.
-Kion probably dies around the time Kiara was still young.

Mickeyfan1990 wrote: -Kion probably dies around the time Kiara was still young.

Yeah, it's a dark and bleak possibility, but if you want to fit this show into the larger Lion King continuity, there's really no other alternative. It can also be used to explain Simba being overprotective of Kiara in TLK 2 and the feud with Zira's group of lions which were nowhere to be seen in the original.

However, it is still stupid, they should have just made Kiara the same age as she was by the end of TLK 2.

Mooky wrote:Yeah, it's a dark and bleak possibility, but if you want to fit this show into the larger Lion King continuity, there's really no other alternative. It can also be used to explain Simba being overprotective of Kiara in TLK 2 and the feud with Zira's group of lions which were nowhere to be seen in the original.

That's a big stretch. So, he died somehow and no one ever mentioned him or his tragic passing? They all just pretended he never existed? Who does that?

Also, since The Lion Guard is set at the beginning of The Lion King II, shouldn't Kovu as a cub make an appearance? Shouldn't there be at least a mention or acknowledgement of Zira and the divided pride? It's extremely unlikely that will happen in the show.

Mooky wrote:However, it is still stupid, they should have just made Kiara the same age as she was by the end of TLK 2.

Exactly. Would that had been so difficult? Honestly, the way Disney somehow manages to screw up even with the simplest of things is mind-boggling.

Sotiris wrote:

Mooky wrote:Yeah, it's a dark and bleak possibility, but if you want to fit this show into the larger Lion King continuity, there's really no other alternative. It can also be used to explain Simba being overprotective of Kiara in TLK 2 and the feud with Zira's group of lions which were nowhere to be seen in the original.

That's a big stretch. So, he died somehow and no one ever mentioned him or his tragic passing? They all just pretended he never existed? Who does that?

Disney does Remember, before Kiara, there was Kopa:

http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Kopa

http://lionking.wikia.com/wiki/Kopa

One could argue that he doesn't matter because he was featured in a different medium, though.

Sotiris wrote:Also, since The Lion Guard is set at the beginning of The Lion King II, shouldn't Kovu as a cub make an appearance? Shouldn't there be at least a mention or acknowledgement of Zira and the divided pride?

Well, there was no mention of Zira and her pride in the original film, and we were left with filling out continuity blanks on our own, so basically any and all continuity errors in this franchise started way back with TLK 2 (which also ignored The Lion King: Six New Adventures).

Sotiris wrote:Honestly, the way Disney somehow manages to screw things up even with the simplest of things is mind-boggling.

They are notorious for continuity errors, but it's not something exclusive to them (see Fox and X-Men films). Other stuff they messed up:
- The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning doesn't really line up with The Little Mermaid: The Series or with the original film for that matter
- Anastasia's actions in Cinderella III don't match her character arc in Cinderella II. However, it's possible C-III is set before C-II.
- Beauty and the Beast and The Enchanted Christmas and Prince's inconsistent age/Enchantress's appearance. Heck, basically the whole of TEC (and Belle's Magical World too) is inconsistent with BatB -- Forte and Fife were never seen in the original.
- Hercules: The Series doesn't match wiith Hercules and Hades' first meeting as featured in Hercules
- Brother Bear 2's Nita is nowhere to be seen in the original Brother Bear

There's probably much, much more.

Mooky wrote:One could argue that he doesn't matter because he was featured in a different medium, though.

I think you already explained why that isn't an issue. Disney comics and storybooks make up new characters all the time but none of them are canon. There's a bigger need for new material in that medium and it's unreasonable to expect the creators of a sequel or a TV show to be aware of and constrained by all of the new characters and stories made up by Disney Publishing all over the world.

Mooky wrote:Well, there was no mention of Zira and her pride in the original film, and we were left with filling out continuity blanks on our own, so basically any and all continuity errors in this franchise started way back with TLK 2

But it's much easier to fill in the blanks and retain continuity in this case. In the original film, after the climactic battle we went straight to the birth of Simba's daughter. We can easily assume the divide of the pride took place during that period that wasn't shown. As for Zira, you could argue that she wasn't shown in the original because she was irrelevant to the story. That she was still there somewhere, just not shown on-screen. There were no direct contradictions like with what's happening with The Lion Guard.

Mooky wrote:The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning doesn't really line up with The Little Mermaid: The Series.

Yes, but you can ignore and exclude the TV series from the canon. In The Lion Guard you can't ignore The Lion King 2 because Kiara is included.

Mooky wrote:Anastasia's actions in Cinderella III don't match her character arc in Cinderella II. However, it's possible C-III is set before C-II.

I thought it was established that Cinderella III is set in-between Cinderella II (after the first two segments but before the last one). Anastasia's character development in Cinderella III sets the foundation for her redemption arc in the segment "An Uncommon Romance" with the baker in Cinderella II. There was even a painting in the end credits of Cinderella III that alludes to that.

Mooky wrote:Beauty and the Beast and The Enchanted Christmas and Prince's inconsistent age/Enchantress's appearance. Heck, basically the whole of TEC (and Belle's Magical World too) is inconsistent with BatB -- Forte and Fife were never seen in the original.

There's no inconsistency with the Enchantress' appearance. The stained glass window in the original is supposed to be an artistic representation; it's not supposed to realistically capture the likeness of the characters. They can totally get away with that. As for the age discrepancy, that's an issue that is already present in the original so...

I don't find that The Enchanted Christmas or Belle's Magical World are inconsistent just because they introduced new characters that weren't seen in the original. It's implied that there are many more servants/enchanted objects in the original than the few ones we've seen so we can easily assume they were off-screen because they were irrelevant to the story at that point.

Mooky wrote:Hercules: The Series doesn't match wiith Hercules and Hades' first meeting as featured in Hercules.

Yes, but again you can ignore the TV show since it's a series and not a feature.

Mooky wrote:Brother Bear 2's Nita is nowhere to be seen in the original Brother Bear

That's actually explained in the sequel. Nita was friends with Kenai as children but then got separated and since in the original film we are introduced to Kenai as a teenager, her absence is understandable.

Bottom line, I think the inconsistency in The Lion Guard is much more bothersome and unexplainable than anything else Disney's done before. It would be fine if Disney were to completely ignore the sequel and pretend Kion was Simba's only child, but what they've done is actually much worse.

Well, this explains Kovu's absence. Yeah, this is confusing. Maybe in LK II, Nala was pregnant with him when Kiara was a cub and maybe he moved out when he was grown?

As a personal rule, I always consider any sequel, tv series or other medium made outside of Walt Disney Animation Studios to be non-canon. The television series have always been terrible with continuity (the 101 Dalmatians show was a particular headache since it included elements from both the animated film and live-action film).

b/c Disney isnt treated like the MCU, where everything has to line up perfectly.


in BB2 I assumed that Nita was from another tribe which is why we didnt see her in the first film, and why we dont see Denali in the 2nd. But I only saw the sequel once a looong time ago so I dont remember the details too well...

speaking of the LK spin-off books, I found out that one of the books had a non-antagonistic hyena character named Asante. I hope they do a similar character for the series!

Sotiris wrote:

Mooky wrote:One could argue that he doesn't matter because he was featured in a different medium, though.

I think you already explained why that isn't an issue. Disney comics and storybooks make up new characters all the time but none of them are canon. There's a bigger need for new material in that medium and it's unreasonable to expect the creators of a sequel or a TV show to be aware of and constrained by all of the new characters and stories made up by Disney Publishing all over the world.

I don't know... I tend to stick to my own (head-)canon, regardless of the medium or what Disney says it's canon. It is limited though -- I don't include most comics and storybooks in it, and I also leave several TV shows out of it (i.e. TaleSpin is obviously non-canon to The Jungle Book, but Jungle Cubs is, despite tonal inconsistencies).

Sotiris wrote:

Mooky wrote:Well, there was no mention of Zira and her pride in the original film, and we were left with filling out continuity blanks on our own, so basically any and all continuity errors in this franchise started way back with TLK 2

But it's much easier to fill in the blanks and retain continuity in this case. In the original film, after the climactic battle we went straight to the birth of Simba's daughter. We can easily assume the divide of the pride took place during that period that wasn't shown. As for Zira, you could argue that she wasn't shown in the original because she was irrelevant to the story. That she was still there somewhere, just not shown on-screen. There were no direct contradictions like with what's happening with The Lion Guard.

Zira/Nita/magical objects situation reminds me of all those TV shows when several seasons into a show we are introduced to a character's best friend/sister/son who was never even referenced before and we are expected to accept it is as normal. It serves the current story they want to tell but it doesn't serve logic. So you just have to work with what you have and try your best to come up with a plausible explanation for it in your head... or just accept the fact that some thing will never be explained .

And TLK2 does directly contradict the original, with Kovu's age being the most problematic issue -- if he's the same age as Kiara, how was he hand-picked by Scar as his successor, when Scar died long before Kiara was born? No matter how you try to explain it, Zira and the existence of her pride are still at odds with what was shown to us in TLK. But at the same time, you could apply your Zira explanation to Kion too. Perhaps his supposed death was irrelevant for the story they wanted to tell in TLK2, so they just choose to ignore it, leaving only traces of it in the finished film (Simba being overprotective of Kiara).

Sotiris wrote:

Mooky wrote:The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning doesn't really line up with The Little Mermaid: The Series.

Yes, but you can ignore and exclude the TV series from the canon. In The Lion Guard you can't ignore The Lion King 2 because Kiara is included.

I choose not to, as I find TLM series superior to Ariel's Beginning in many ways

Sotiris wrote:Bottom line, I think the inconsistency in The Lion Guard is much more bothersome and unexplainable than anything else Disney's done so far. It would be fine if Disney were to completely ignore the sequel and pretend Kion was Simba's only child, but what they've done is actually much worse.

Ehhh, as with a lot of media products, there will probably be people who will choose to ignore TLK2 altogether, and pretend The Lion Guard is the "true" sequel, despite Kiara's previous appearance. Or think of it as alternate continuity. Or this whole Kiara thing can be compared to James Bond's M, when all aspects of previous continuity were thrown out of the window for Casino Royale save for one character who continued to be played by the same actress.

Anyway, maybe we're just overreacting and that storybook has no deeper connection to the actual show or is easily explainable. Either way, this is a Disney Junior show and as such it's target audience is much narrower than that of the rest of the franchise, so it's possible it's not meant to be taken that seriously at all. I mean, Jake and the Never Land Pirates is supposed to be a Peter Pan sequel/spin-off, but I don't think anyone here truly considers it as such.

Mooky wrote:Either way, this is a Disney Junior show and as such it's target audience is much narrower than that of the rest of the franchise, so it's possible it's not meant to be taken that seriously at all.

I know. It's really not a big deal. It's just frustrating that they could have retained continuity in such an easy and uncomplicated way. It's like they're doing it on purpose now to piss us off.

Let's just wait and see, shall we?

While I won't try to accuse Disney for being the only company to have continuity problems with their movies and franchises, they certainly do it a lot. They've even done it with their Disney Channel franchises ("Hannah Montana", with both their episodes and the movie), though it may seem irrelevant, haha. But to make Kion and Kiara the same age is just dumb. Why not including Kopa?

And for the prequel aspects of "Mermaid"; I rather prefer the "Mermaid" series, which was quite cute and endearing. Since the third movie was bloody awful. Bland, dull and stale. The story purpose was quite unlogical, actually. If Ariel's mother was killed by humans, it makes no sense to make Ariel fascinated by them.