Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:Well it all comes down to opinion
The only people who ever say that are people with the wrong opinion, or people who haven't thought about what they're thinking / saying. Otherwise, everyone's just going to agree with you and say, "hey- you're right. So let's not ever have anymore opinions at all because they never do anyone any good." I've heard it all before. And you're only half right.
Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:How are the characters "sad cookie-cutter cut-outs"? They're much more colorful than Finding Nemo.
Finding Nemo wasn't a perfect movie. But it was much more entertaining and visually compelling than any DreamWorks or Disney movies in the new millennium that come directly to mind. And it's really nice to see you playing guessing games. Because if you really think The Lion King is so great, you'd be able to answer that question. If you think Simba is a really original character, you're nuts or you haven't seen enough animated films. Nothing in his character's range or cannon is anything new or different. And you're right in thinking it doesn't particularly have to be, no one expects this to be Shakespeare or, like I mentioned before, Gone With the Wind. But the film forsakes a lot of true entertainment value so that it can say it's all about natural characters and a semi-realistic portrayal of what happens in the animal kingdom - so it had to be better. It sentimentalized and softened up animal instinct but expects to get credit for being tough or survival-of-the-fittest. In short, it was a failure. Character-wise, the film didn't work.
Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:Matthew Broderick does a fine job. James Earl Jones was perfect as Mufasa, and the songs by Elton John are great.
Taken on their own, they might be "okay." But when added to this film, they don't work. They're out of place. And it's important that they do come together, which they don't.
Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:Again, all comes down to opinion, and since you believe yours is so right all the time (:roll:) I won't bother argueing.
Eat my shorts, TP. I'm the only one here who ever actually cares enough about what I think to defend it no matter how unpopular it is. And defend it past the point of agree-to-disagree. If you don't understand that, I don't care. As long as you're speaking to the contrary, I have something to say. Besides, you just don't understand where you're wrong. If what I say isn't helping, you can ignore it or whatever. Who am I to tell you what to do? But stop whining about how sick you are of me continuing to explain my point of view. Poor TP, poor, poor TP. Feel better now?
Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:Now you're just being completely ridiculous. I'm sure if you were to nitpick everything, I'm sure you'd find something racist or politically incorrect in everything.
I don't nitpick what deserves to be left alone, and you just don't like that someone intelligent doesn't think this movie's all that.
Timon/Pumbaa fan wrote:And that's what bothers me the most. So you're calling everyone who even likes this movie dumb?
OK.
Well, if the shoe fits... Anyway, if I was calling you dumb, what would it matter? Does that change the fact that this movie might be dumb? No, not at all. What you or anyone else thinks of me doesn't impact the movie or it's quality. You're hoping that people will agree with you instead of me if you're able to say, "hey look Lazario's saying we're racists and stupid!" If people actually buy what you're saying now, yes, then they are stupid. This film is still overrated as hell. Everytime Disney tries to tell a story about harsh animal reality (Fox and the Hound, Bambi, The Lion King), they make several huge mistakes. This film's no different than those other 2 movies. And there is little to no ground where these films are fairy tales, but rather they only work for viewers who can relate to these characters. What kid can relate to having to fight, kill, and breed to survive?! Any that you know of? Too often these three "animated classics" cross the line into territory that the viewer can barely comprehend - how many of us have ever been animals singing about one day being King of the Jungle? Oy!
Anyway, to take a page out of Joplin's handbook, which I contested mostly because I agreed with the overall idea (just not the way it was used against some), some Disney movies take you to a whole new world full of magic and wonder as well as danger. These 3 animated classics are really just about danger and things that we can't really understand. Basically, putting us in the trenches. It's a formula Disney had not mastered by 1994. Because it had to choose - either focus on the emotional, sappy and spear us the survival-of-the-fittest, or focus on the animal kingdom war and not get so soft. So it ends up with a movie where every scene is made of fluff, not complete, not good enough. Expecting us to root for a one-dimensional character for which nothing he's experienced has been elaborated (or even put on a level we can relate to), in an absurd situation that is unimpressive and incomprehensible in both a kids' film and an adults' film, then realizing it's failed to make the serious aspects work, it pours on the sugar hoping they can make these animals look lovable while they're reduced to killers...
This film is a failure on every level other than the artwork. Sorry you don't agree, but you won't even accept that it's possible that I'm right and you're wrong - so which one of us is being unreasonable again? I forget sometimes. I've proven that person isn't me, because here I am again, elaborating and explaining. You don't much seem to be capable of that. But I don't care - it makes my job easier.