• 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.

Scar and Mufasa weren't actually related?!

http://lionking.wikia.com/wiki/Original_Concepts_and_Documentations#Scar

”Because originally, Scar was a rogue lion. He didn't have anything to do with the pride, and then we thought, 'Well...it'd be more interesting if the threat came from within.'"
—Roger Allers[19]

It was mentioned by Roger Allers, the co-director of The Lion King, in one of the documentation videos that Scar originally had no relation to the royal family but still desired the throne. After Jeremy Irons' features were worked into Scar, he was changed to be Mufasa's brother because the thought of an "inside threat" was a lot more interesting than a random rogue. This is why Scar and Mufasa differ so much in appearance, despite being full brothers.
 

Ratrat

Member
It's not a ripoff of Hamlet. It's an adaptation, a reworking, a reimagining of Hamlet. "Hamlet but with Lions" is the literal pitch of the movie.

The Kimba thing is BS, there's a few similar pieces of iconography. That's about it.
Yeah, and so they should be brothers instead insisting on realism to change the dynamic.
Pretty huge coincidence on the other point. They were cleary inspired.
 

caliph95

Member
To be fair, they look nothing alike. Like about as dissimilar as you can be while still being male lions. The story works either way, Scar is your classic usurper
Yeah I don't see the problem here it changes nothing and they can still be brothers if they grew up together.

This is a non story
 
Going by Allers' quote it suggests to me that Hahn means in reality, sure, they wouldn't actually have been related. But it's a Disney movie and it's dramaturgically stronger for them to be brothers, so they're related.
 
I don't understand how the scientific dynamics change the unlikelihood of a brother lion taking over a pride. Brother lions have been known to cooperate to take over prides. And they then form a hierarchy amongst them.

This is just dumb.
 

ghst

thanks for the laugh
doesn't simba call him his uncle at one point? wasn't he "next in line before the little hairball was born"?
 
How a mandrill would actually introduce a newborn lion in the wild:
YNOZ0pg.gif
 

kirblar

Member
In that case Scar shouldn't be the villain because killing the cubs of rival males is just what lions do.
Males raised together don't do it, they'll form up as a pack after getting exiled.

(but they'll totally kill any outsider babies, just not that of their bros.)
 
For people who supposedly know lions, they don't know much about lions... There are prides that are co-run by brothers in the wild. Usually it's young males who form a pride around a single or pair of sister pride-less lions.

Makes it less creepy that Kiara (Simba's kid) and Kovu (Scar's kid) got together, but overall I don't care.

Kovu is not Scar's kid is he? Pretty sure they specifically say Kovu was "chosen" by Scar to be his successor. Scar was totally gay.
 

Big-E

Member
Scar references being Mufasa's brother multiple times and vice versa. Scar even discusses how he got the short stick in the gene pool in regards to Mufasa. Fucking dumb.
 

zeemumu

Member
Kovu is not Scar's kid is he? Pretty sure they specifically say Kovu was "chosen" by Scar to be his successor. Scar was totally gay.

Well the outcasts are made of former Pride Rock lions and since Kovu must've been around while Scar was living and he was the only male at Pride Rock at the time...


Besides, Scar was tryin' to get with SAAAAARRAAAAAAAABIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Edit: Oh yeah, and the Nala thing too
 

Crazyorloco

Member
Nope. In the original Lion King;

Simba refers to scar as his uncle
Mufasa calls out "Brother!" during one of the most important scenes in the movie.

I wonder if they're going to change the whole story up for the remake.
 
I figured they are brothers but Scar was so weak that Mufasa didn't see him as a threat and let him stay because he wasn't able to feed himself.
 

Goodstyle

Member
It's cute that they're trying to inject realism no, but it doesn't fly with what we know of the story.

1. Scar and Mufasa call each other "brother". Simba called Scar his uncle.
2. Scar was next in line to the throne after Mufasa before Simba was born, that's what kicks off the whole plot.
3. The only reason Kovu was "chosen" as Scar's heir rather than actually being born to him was because Disney didn't want to have an incest relationship in their film. He was originally supposed to be Scar's son.

They can say whatever they want, but the movies very clearly showed Scar was Mufasa's brother. Word of God does not contradict shit we saw first hand. This is like George Lucas going, "No actually, Vader wasn't really Luke's father." Yes he fucking was.
 
Meh i'll choose to ignore this crap. They're brothers.

didn't know it was re releasing on bluray. any difference from the old one.
 

Redd

Member
I remember Simba calling Scar his Uncle. Mufasa and Scar were brothers. Simba and Nala were siblings from different mothers. Scars son and Simbas daughter hooked up. No one really cared then. They're cartoon lions.
 

kirblar

Member
Again, they're misunderstanding this. Male lion packs w/ multiple adult males raised together are a common thing. While Lions do kill the offspring of rivals they encounter, they don't kill the offspring of their brothers. The story as shown on screen is perfect - Lions practice infanticide, but Scar doing it to Simba is indeed a betrayal.
 
Top Bottom