DVDizzy Forum

Okay, what I don't get is why Disney has the name "The Lion King 3 : Hakuna Matata" outside the USA and in the USA "Lion King 1 1/2"? Won't they get in trouble when they want to create a real sequel that is called Lion King 3? I mean, this movie IS a prequel. Timon even says it himself: "What's with the 3?" in the trailer on the official site.

I think that all sequels should drop the numbers, and the order should rely on the order in which they were released:

e.g. The Lion King, The Lion King: Simba's Pride, The Lion King: Hakuna
Matata
Pocahontas, Pocahontas: Journey to a New World
Atlantis, Atlantis: Milo's Return
The Little Mermaid, The Little Mermaid: Return to the Sea

I'm okay with the 1 1/2,but like having numbers on movies,to tell them apart.

But that's not the actual topic here. I'm worried that if they decide to create a TLK 3, it will be possible in the USA because there is no TLK 3 yet but there will be a problem outside the USA. I also missed Timon with taking that 3 away in the trailer here in Belgium

well, I hope this is the last one, I don´t wat to see Simba´s grandchildren in a real third part.

But it takes place in 1, not between 1 and 2 so 1 1/2 is wrong anyway. It should just be 1/2.

I doubt they could even call the next one 3, even if all of the world was getting the 1 1/2 title. It would still confuse people. "How can it be Lion King III when there's already 3 movies out?"

Yeah but it will confuse people even more if there is a Lion King 3 : Hakuna Matata and a normal Lion King 3 Anyway, maybe they will eventually change it, you never know what Disney is gonna do

I think the main reason for the change is, unlike the US, we will be getting LK 2 and 3 released on the same day (and also a Lion King trilogy boxset).

It wouldn't really market well having 1 1/2 and 2 in the same advert, and how would you quickly in a print advert or such explain that 1 1/2 was newer than 2? Also, a trilogy with 3 films but only goes up to 2 doesn't sound like easy marketing to me either.

Prince Adam wrote:I think that all sequels should drop the numbers, and the order should rely on the order in which they were released:

e.g. The Lion King, The Lion King: Simba's Pride, The Lion King: Hakuna
Matata
Pocahontas, Pocahontas: Journey to a New World
Atlantis, Atlantis: Milo's Return
The Little Mermaid, The Little Mermaid: Return to the Sea

It seems weird to quote myself, but I still have the same thing to say.

I don't think there will be a "third" Lion King movie anyway. In fact, I think the only reason that the 1 1/2 movie is being made the way it is (ie, a new perspective on the original story instead of an all-out new sequel) is that there CAN'T be a Lion King III, by Disney's own canon.

Why not?

Well, remember at the very end of The Lion King, the "big boom" from the beginning repeated itself and The Lion King title logo appeared again. Well, in the end of The Lion King II, all of this was the same -- the big boom was back and then cut to a black screen with text. Only, the text didn't say The Lion King II. Nope, this time the text said THE END.

See what I'm getting at? Disney admitted, on film, that the story had come full circle and that there's nothing more to tell. They admitted that that's THE END and since it's THE END there can't be a third movie. I'm pretty sure that the filmmakers and Disney had every intention of "finishing out" the franchise after Simba's Pride and not doing a third. (Thus, the international title "III" is contradictory.)

But something happened then that they did not indend. The runaway success of Simba's Pride, as well as a lot of praise from the TLK fanbase, made them think, "Hey, these people would probably pay up for a third movie. But wait -- we can't do a third movie, we said the last one was THE END. Hmm...what if we did a midquel? Something that takes place before, during or between the two movies we already made? I know -- THE LION KING 1 1/2!" Thus, we ended up with 1 1/2, an "inbetweenquel", nstead of Lion King III, which probably would have been a true sequel and occured after the events of Simba's Pride.

or maybe they can release a "Lion King zero", with mufasa and scar as cubs

they can call it The Lion King : before Simba

yeah, but didn't Aladdin say the End in the first one? I know about the Arabian Nights reprise thing.. but I thought Little Mermaid said The End too.. so if it doesn't say the End there has to be a "quel"?

But all the Disney films from the Walt-era said THE END-and almost all of them have sequels! So THE END means nothing anymore.

To me all the sequals are non existing. So the "The End" is realy "The End".

I know a lot of people love these "movies" and I guess that is the reason why Eisner get that money look whenever he discovers a movie he can exploite.

Prince Adam wrote:But all the Disney films from the Walt-era said THE END-and almost all of them have sequels! So THE END means nothing anymore.

i don't think if walt had his way there would be a cinderella 2, or lady and the tramp 2. all those were done well after walt had died. i've never seen any of the sequels, but i am more ok with sequels to the newer movies than i am to the walt-era films. at the end of cinderella it doesn't say "happily ever after until cinderella 2, coming soon to home video!!"

Well, Cinderella II does show them "living happily ever after". It even shows one of the sisters "living happily ever after". It in no way invalidates the original film.

And as I've pointed out before, Scamp is an existing Disney character from the early 60's (perhaps earlier). Walt was happy to "exploit" this Lady and the Tramp properties in Comics and Story books. So why not in film?

2099net wrote:Well, Cinderella II does show them "living happily ever after". It even shows one of the sisters "living happily ever after". It in no way invalidates the original film.

And as I've pointed out before, Scamp is an existing Disney character from the early 60's (perhaps earlier). Walt was happy to "exploit" this Lady and the Tramp properties in Comics and Story books. So why not in film?

Exactly! So there should also be a movie titled "The AristoKittens".

sometimes the numbers are quite annoying. its good the aladdin sequels are not called Aladdin 2 The Return of Jafar and Aladdin 3 The 40 Thieves

I know-the numbers make the films seem less "sophisticated" in way of speaking.

I really hope the real Tarzan sequel isn't just called "Tarzan 2": Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote like 23 sequels to his masterpiece, and never once had to use numbers-he thought up inventive titles for them all.

Uhm, I think you missed my point everyone You are talking about a totally different subject. I'm not talking about that I like or not like the numbers on the disney movies. I'm just asking WHY disney made the title different outside the USA! I want 1 1/2 here too, not that stupid 3, it's not even a sequal! And I think it has been answered, the title outside the USA is different because disney is going to release a trilogy here and they don't want to confuse the people with 3 movies and it only goes to 2 (Simba's Pride). Well, does disney really think people are that stupid???