DVDizzy Forum

Forgive me for this, but why does it matter that The Lion King DVD doesn't contain the original theatrical version? I mean, doesn't the IMAX version look better? Help me understand so I can join the protest too.

By that standard, all movies can look better today. Why not re-animate Fantasia to make some of the things look better. Surely, the dinosaur sequences can look better - check out "Dinosaur" - and they can enhance the special effects.

No, wait, that'd be sacrilege, right? Fantasia is a classic and loved by many people and it's over 60 years old.

So why is The Lion King a different story? Since I got my DVD player nearly 5 years ago, it has been at the top of my "Most Wanted DVDs" List...and after all this time, the only way to get the theatrical cut on DVD would be to support the Asian bootleggers. That's just pathetic.

Sure, the changes are minor, but they're noticeable and they're throughout. I can understand making the film look sharper for IMAX, but the film that I know and fell in love with nearly a decade ago isn't going to be the film presented on DVD. How stupid is it that with all the money they're spending on the DVD, they couldn't really provide both cuts.

And furthermore, it's an insult to all of us that they're advertising the "Original Theatrical Cut", when it's not, and when their promotional article in USA Today claims that enthusiasts need not worry. That's just blatant lying, and that's never good. As ridiculous as it sounds, I'd rather just get the original theatrical cut, the Robert Gulliaume-hosted TV special, all the original and re-release trailers & TV ads, and the laserdisc commentary than the 2-disc set they're putting out. Sure, some of it sounds good. But they could have done better with even just one disc. After all this time. Sigh. At least audio/video is supposedly up to snuff.

I won't go into the whole restoration/enhancement debate. Needless to say since Steamboat Willie was released, Disney has had the technology to make their animated movies look better. A quick scene reanimated here, a new background image there. But it never happened. And as a result we can now enjoy the Black and White Mickey Mouse and Silly Symphony cartoons on the Treasures sets.

How would you feel if you found out the "1928" Steamboat Willie on the Black and White set was really a "1934" enchanced version, with smoother animation and more detail on the backgrounds? I'd bet you'd feel cheated.

Disney has been releasing colourised versions of some of their Black and White Cartoons (If I remember correctly there is one on the Robin Hood DVD) - but I'm sure 99.9% of the people on this board would prefer to have the original black and white version instead.

Not having seen the IMAX version, I cannot comment on how much the changes affect the overall presentation, but I will admit I'm worried about the 'enhanced, brighter' colours the most.

But what I find most troubling is how Disney twice have not advertised the changes. How hard is it to say "The Original Cut as seen on IMAX screens" or something? Even a little asterisk and footnote or something?

It's more worrying this time as in a number of interviews people at Disney have basically assured people worried after the Beauty and the Beast release, that the "Original Cut" would be included - again how hard is it to mention IMAX? The fact that they just don't care is so frustrating.

Even more annoying is that Don Hahn said the original version "with no changes" would be available on the DVD, which is a total lie, from the looks of it.

Here is the USA Today excerpt which, assuming DVD File's review is correct, is a complete lie:

quote:
It all sounds like an adventure — but it raises a prickly question: How far back into its library will Disney go to make "improvements"? Would the studio do this to The Jungle Book? Snow White? When should a movie be left alone?

Disney's answer: Not to worry. It's all about options. The original version of The Lion King, with no remixing, no tinkering and no new song, will also be included in the DVD.

"The purists out there can see the movie exactly as it was in 1994," Hahn says. "Those who enjoy seeing new innovations can sing a new song."

Luke wrote:Here is the USA Today excerpt which, assuming DVD File's review is correct, is a complete lie:

quote:
It all sounds like an adventure — but it raises a ly question: How far back into its library will Disney go to make "improvements"? Would the studio do this to The Jungle Book? Snow White? When should a movie be left alone?

Disney's answer: Not to worry. It's all about options. The original version of The Lion King, with no remixing, no tinkering and no new song, will also be included in the DVD.

"The purists out there can see the movie exactly as it was in 1994," Hahn says. "Those who enjoy seeing new innovations can sing a new song."

That's the quote I remembered. Next time I see Hahn on the street, I'm going to force him into an alley and kick his ass.

Luke wrote:
Sure, the changes are minor, but they're noticeable and they're throughout. I can understand making the film look sharper for IMAX, but the film that I know and fell in love with nearly a decade ago isn't going to be the film presented on DVD. How stupid is it that with all the money they're spending on the DVD, they couldn't really provide both cuts.

And furthermore, it's an insult to all of us that they're advertising the "Original Theatrical Cut", when it's not, and when their promotional article in USA Today claims that enthusiasts need not worry. That's just blatant lying, and that's never good.

That sums it up for me perfectly. Why not provide both versions?
And the blatant misrepresentation in the promotional pieces is another slap in the face.

Okay, I'm starting to see why it's not a good idea to exclude the true original theatrical version. Kudos to the analogy about Steamboat Willie -- that's the one that really strikes me. I'm not overly sure if TLK updates bothers me though. I guess I'll know when I get the PE. I guess I feel like it doesn't bother me now, but in thirty years it might bother me to know (due to the historical aspect -- I don't quite consider it changing history yet). Thanks for the insight.

Now everyone will know how I felt about my favorite movie BEAUTY AND THE BEAST!

I had a feeling Disney was going to do this! Why are they messing up there classics? It's bad enough we have stupid sequels to some of them!

This just gets me ticked! I'm still going to buy the DVD though lol!

Welp, I saw the IMAX version, and there are a few little changes besides just "a cleaned up picture". If it was just a restored picture I'd have no qualms, but in the IMAX version there were odd and noticeable little changes throughout. For example, the crocodiles in the "I Just Can't Wait To Be King" sequence are no longer just soft triangles - they're completely redone and look a teensy bit more realistic. The plovers in their mouths have become more cartoony - they're silly, rolly-polly things with little stick legs. *shrug*
The infamous "SFX" pollen has been recolored to an olive-brownish hue, and the retreating clouds after Mufasa's ghost appears have been removed altogether - now Simba just runs after empty night sky. O_o
And I dunno if they fixed this goof or not - but when Simba's saying "How can I go back? I'm not who I used to be..." his eyes change from white to yellow for a second, then back to white.

Anywho, those are the changes I remember. And if it's true that the IMAX version is what we'll be getting as the "original" cut on the dvd, then I'm highly disappointed. Another demerit for Disney.

Paka wrote:the retreating clouds after Mufasa's ghost appears have been removed altogether - now Simba just runs after empty night sky. O_o

Thats just about the most awkward change I've ever heard of. That doesn't even make any sense. That's going to be very distracting when watching the movie.

Its a shame I'm going to miss that Sex scene (LOL).
But yes I would much rather having the 1994 version on DVD instead on the IMAX version.

I really hope Disney hasnt messed with the print as much as is expected!

I totally agree with Luke. As consumers, we have our rigths, and we should have the chance to get the original cut of the movie, not only the enhanced version. How about removing the word SFX? That's history!!!! I'm absolutely against that kind of pathetic censure.

I really like the restoration and the new colors to Beauty and the Beast!

I agree that the original should be present, but when they changed the Lion King, wasn't it all in the computer, so virtually, the original doesn't exist anymore, am I right, because they changed the original for the I-Max, I don't think they left the original, also by only having the I-max version, they can use the same movie space for both, meaning, running the same movie, but only changing for the Mourning report sequence, I think that's how it's works, so they were able to fit more on the first disc. Not saying this was right just trying to get into disney's head to see what they were thinking...

Prince Phillip wrote:just trying to get into disney's head to see what they were thinking...

Don't do that. Their head is a very scary place.

It'd be inconceivable if the original untouched film isn't backed up in their computer drives somewhere. Not only that, but they always have the original film masters too. That's no valid excuse for not including the original film. And if A Bug's Life can include 3 hours of video content and all those audio tracks and look so darn good, Lion King should be able too, as well. Maybe not the most fair comparison - as 2-D/3-D aren't the same beast...but they're both on the computers. No more to say on this really. We're not getting the original theatrical cut - we pretty much suspected this months ago.

Some graphic proof

Original:


DVD 'Original' and Special Edition

I don't understand why they changed the crocodiles. It just doesn't make any sense to me. The new ones don't look better IMO, just very different. Are they supposed to have a more similar look to the other animals in the same sequence or something?