• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

‘The Lion King’ Casts Billy Eichner and Seth Rogen as Timon and Pumbaa

Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Acorn

Member
CloudWolf said:
That's the question everybody is asking. Even kids today don't need a new Lion King, the original still holds up very well. It's not like it's an animation from the 30's like with Jungle Book nor does remaking it with "realistic" CGI add anything that the original couldn't deliver.

Disney could release a slightly retouched version of the original in cinema's today and it would still make a shitload of money. There's no need for a modern remake.
Click to expand...
Disney is making money hand over fist and they clearly decided they could make more by investing more in a total new movie. They may be wrong but I'm inclined to agree with them as things stand.

Plus artistically (yes I'm aware this whole process is ultimately cynical) a completely new movie can be more justified than slightly altered re-releases forever.

I also think people forget that with the dvd and rental market disappearing Disney has lost an income stream that existed for years sometimes decades after release hence faster remakes.
 
F

Fancyarcher

Member
Eicher as Timon is an inspired casting, Rogen is good, but I hope Disney didn't cast him just because they wanted to make a fart / weed joke or something. Ha, ha!
 
B

Boke1879

Member
Betty said:
You mean superior to the original and considered the main one?

I don't see that happening, The live action Jungle Book and Beauty and the Beast haven't come close to their animated counterparts at all.
Click to expand...

I mean they are making money and audiences seem to love them. It really doesn't matter if it matches the quality of their original releases.

There are a new generation of kids that will see these movies first and may possibly favor these movies over the animated ones.
 
L

lightskintwin

Banned
Boke1879 said:
I mean they are making money and audiences seem to love them. It really doesn't matter if it matches the quality of their original releases.

There are a new generation of kids that will see these movies first and may possibly favor these movies over the animated ones.
Click to expand...

This.
 
B

bananafactory

Banned
Betty said:
You mean superior to the original and considered the main one?

I don't see that happening, The live action Jungle Book and Beauty and the Beast haven't come close to their animated counterparts at all.
Click to expand...

I think the live action Jungle Book is superior to the animated one

Come at me
 
C

CloudWolf

Member
Boke1879 said:
I mean they are making money and audiences seem to love them. It really doesn't matter if it matches the quality of their original releases.

There are a new generation of kids that will see these movies first and may possibly favor these movies over the animated ones.
Click to expand...
Technically this version would still be animated, just computer animation vs hand drawn animation.
 
D

Diprosalic

Banned
I like the disney remakes and even if they are bad it doesn't take anything away from the original.


We survived Lion King 2 and Lion King 1½
 
R

Ryaaan14

Banned
Will we finally get to see Pumbaa spark up a fatty

Always wanted that since I was a kid

Also Billy on the Street is garbage, perfect casting
 
R

riotous

Banned
I don't get the point of wanting the original voice actors; makes it even more pointless. James Earl Jones works Ok since he's not exactly in the movie that long but even that would have been interesting to re-cast.
 
S

Sho_Nuff82

Member
Rentahamster said:
Is there a point to an adaptation of an animated movie when there are no human characters in the movie anyway?

This would basically be the same movie, except in cgi instead of 2D animation, yes? Not that I think that's necessarily a bad thing. Jungle Book was cool, but it had live humans in it.
Click to expand...

The point is 1.5 billion dollars.

Beauty and the Beast is practically the same film as the original.
 
L

lightskintwin

Banned
riotous said:
I don't get the point of wanting the original voice actors; makes it even more pointless. James Earl Jones works Ok since he's not exactly in the movie that long but even that would have been interesting to re-cast.
Click to expand...

I would've taken Dennis Haysbert or Keith David as Mufasa. Although I could see Keith David being ruled out due to his voice being attached to Dr. Facilier from The Princess and The Frog.
 
J

jj984jj

He's a pretty swell guy in my books anyway.
brian577 said:
Disney, you fucked up. There is no excuse for not getting the original VAs. If Timon and Pumba are that important then why wouldn't you go with the obvious choices.
Click to expand...

Nope, Favreau is making the right choices. Hope he thinks of a good way to make Mufasa different as well despite bringing back JEJ. He shouldn't bring back anyone else. Making the exact same movie is the mistake Beauty and the Beast made.

Jungle Book is the best live action CG Disney remake so far and it's because Favreau made it his own.
 
A

AntraxSuicide

Banned
CloudWolf said:
Well yeah, but that kind of shows how pointless this entire film is. Literally everyone I've heard about this film went: "Wait, why are they even making this? Who is this for?"
Click to expand...

People said this about Beauty and the Beast and it's currently destroying the box office so clearly there are people these movies are made for.
 
B

Big Nikus

Member
| Praxis | said:
I have a Seth Rogen aversion.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif
 
UberTag

UberTag

Member
Rentahamster said:
Is there a point to an adaptation of an animated movie when there are no human characters in the movie anyway?

This would basically be the same movie, except in cgi instead of 2D animation, yes? Not that I think that's necessarily a bad thing. Jungle Book was cool, but it had live humans in it.
Click to expand...
I agree with you on this. It seems silly to refer to this as a "live-action" remake when it's going to be entirely done in CGI. This is an animated film. Calling it otherwise seems to be a conscious branding decision to get cartoon-averse filmgoers on board to watch it.

That said, this will make HUGE money. It's wise to remaster The Lion King. Just don't pretend this is live-action. It might look live-action but it sure as hell won't be.
 
T

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Hollywood Duo said:
Huh is that a joke about Mufasa dying in the movie
Click to expand...

I thought it was a joke about it sounding like he was dying when he tried to do the Vader voice in Rogue One.
 
A

Alex_Mexico

Member
Stop calling this movie a "live action" remake. Unless they use real environments and/or animals it's a CG remake only. The Jungle Book at least had one flesh and blood human character in it. The Lion King won't.
 
1

120v

Member
1994 wasn't long ago in the gist of things... find it a little weird they have to clean slate on voice actors, like with this in particular i feel like they just want to say "hey we got seth rogan in here, cool huh" .... but whatever.
 
S

Skellig Gra

Member
120v said:
1994 wasn't long ago in the gist of things... find it a little weird they have to clean slate on voice actors, like with this in particular i feel like they just want to say "hey we got seth rogan in here, cool huh" .... but whatever.
Click to expand...
You are right tweens from 1994 will still pay good money to see Jonathan Taylor Thomas
 
J

jett

D-Member
120v said:
1994 wasn't long ago in the gist of things... find it a little weird they have to clean slate on voice actors, like with this in particular i feel like they just want to say "hey we got seth rogan in here, cool huh" .... but whatever.
Click to expand...

Although I agree there's no reason to clean the slate entirely, that it was 23 years ago. That's a decent span of time.
 
K

KeyBladerXIII

Member
So you think these guys are going to be the only white actors in the movie? I suppose Zazu too, but I'm thinking that might be it.

I'm still hoping this will be an adaption of the Broadway version with the added songs.
 
A

Acorn

Member
Unspeakable Evil said:
What ever happened to him?
Click to expand...
Think he didn't want to be part of Hollywood as an adult/Hollywood didn't want him.

Probably supports Trump now or something because all mia 90s stars seem to pop up in news supporting Trump.

He might still make crazy money from syndication(?).
 
S

Switch Back 9

a lot of my threads involve me fucking up somehow. Perhaps I'm a moron?
What do people have against Seth Rogen?

Man you guys hate everything. I think the casting is great on both ends.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Seth Rogen Donkey Kong Movie Reportedly in the Works
Rumor Business
26
2K
Piggoro replied
Chiwetel Ejiofor in talks to play Scar for "The Lion King."
2 3 4
198
18K
Linkin112 replied
John Oliver to Voice Zazu in Live-Action 'Lion King'
2
98
11K
DrunkShogun replied
Disney’s Live-Action Lion King Finds Its Sarabi in Alfre Woodard
43
5K
hipbabboom replied
Variety - Melissa McCarthy in talks to play Ursula in live action Little Mermaid
4
545
CyberPanda replied
Top Bottom