Film Overview: Barry Jenkins brings recent vitality, originality to the ‘Lion King’ prequel ‘Mufasa’ | Hollywood

Which will appear to be faint reward or no less than a really, very low bar within the grand scheme of issues. However in a panorama the place Disney continues to remake its animated catalogue in barely totally different, and often much less attention-grabbing, varieties whether or not “stay motion” or “photorealistic” that often solely serves to remind how good the 2D animation was, originality is to not be undervalued.

And this story isn’t merely checking off fan service bins and overexplaining origins that by no means wanted them: It’s really good. A prequel to “The Lion King,” opening in theaters Thursday, it’s a story of discovered household, betrayal and future, one which begins to elucidate the estrangement between brothers Scar and Mufasa that everyone knows will finish in homicide, how Mufasa finally ends up as king of the pleasure lands and, maybe most significantly, why just one has an English accent.

On this telling, Scar was as soon as Taka , destined to be king of his pleasure, and Mufasa was a misplaced cub, separated from his mother and father in a dramatic flood. Taka saves Mufasa and brings him into his household. His mom embraces the newcomer; his father rejects him as nothing however a stray. Not that it issues a lot to the cubs; each are thrilled to have a brother. They play and defend each other and develop up collectively. However fissures begin to seem on this basis as Mufasa emerges because the distinctive one and Taka because the coward. After which a lioness enters the image in Sarabi . We’ve all seen sufficient films to know what occurs with that.

The screenplay comes from veteran screenwriter Jeff Nathanson, whose credit embody the 2019 “Lion King,” this yr’s beautiful “Younger Girl and the Sea” and “Catch Me If You Can.” He clearly took a company mandate and made absolutely the least cynical model of that. There are nonetheless questionable corporate-feeling decisions, like straining to tie it to a present and future “Lion King” by having Rafiki inform the story to Simba and Nala’s daughter Kiara , Pumbaa and Timon . These comedic breaks, and Lin-Manuel Miranda’s songs peppered all through, aren’t additive. They actually solely serve to interrupt up the momentum of the compelling fundamental story.

However the greatest challenge stays the shape itself. The photo-realistic computer-generated animals might have technically improved for the reason that 2019 “Lion King,” however they nonetheless aren’t film stars like their 2D animation counterparts. Spectacular although it might be intellectually, the truth of watching these animals for 2 hours is a considerably numbing and boring expertise regardless of the most effective efforts of director Barry Jenkins. The Oscar-winning filmmaker of “Moonlight” did an admirable job including visible curiosity and shade into the landscapes, bringing it nearer to the vibrancy of animation than ever earlier than, and making it as cinematic as doable. The unique story additionally helps right here in that he was by no means going to must recreate iconic sequences in a much less stimulating type. There are simply inherent limitations that filmmakers haven’t but discovered, together with how odd it appears to be like for these animals’ mouths to be transferring and talking English phrases. It’s strangest once they’re singing, mouths agape to carry the lengthy notes in a method that no lion’s mouth ought to ever seem.

If that is one future for filmmaking there’s nonetheless loads of room for enchancment and experimentation. That doesn’t imply it shouldn’t be embraced whereas the kinks are labored out. Nevertheless it additionally doesn’t imply the moviegoing public has to get enthusiastic about each rehash. “Mufasa: The Lion King” is healthier than those that got here earlier than it, however that doesn’t imply it’s nice.

“Mufasa: The Lion King,” a Walt Disney Studios launch in theaters Thursday, is rated PG by the Movement Image Affiliation for “peril, motion/violence and a few thematic parts.” Working time: 118 minutes. Two and a half stars out of 4.

This text was generated from an automatic information company feed with out modifications to textual content.