lion king

Stefanie 2022-03-22 09:01:33

2.0 / The first and second acts dragged on like "Animal World", and the third act was like "Animal Attack". There are only "animal" things, no "people" things. When watching it, there is always the illusion of a group of animals with personal speech in their mouths, a kind of horror comedy cult feeling after the end of mankind. #manual funny#

Ana 2022-03-23 09:01:38

Is "reality" itself a spectacle? When the off-site information is emphasized, when the preview is observed as a prelude that does not seek immersion, "reality" is of course a spectacle, because it represents the myth of capital and technology; but once the audience is invited to enter, everything in the film is "real" It will become a kind of "Animal World"-style for granted, and "real" is of course not a spectacle. Where is the real spectacle? Human dubbing performance has lost the coordination of "anthropomorphic performance" of traditional animation, and the falseness of hearing is more false because the vision is more realistic; a more realistic presentation method is bundled, and the animation version's most proud singing and dancing is impossible. Recreated without restraint, the true spectacles of The Lion King—the inner spectacle from anthropomorphic emotion, the outer spectacle from expressionism—are all undone by technology. And the adjustment of the plot is hindered by the feelings of the bottom, which is extremely tasteless. Whether it is the cutting-edge exploration of the medium made by "Billy Lynn" or the further mainstream attempt made by "The Lion King" based on capital brute force, it shows that the relationship between film and reality has entered a more interesting stage.