Let me begin by admitting that The Lion King has never been on my favourite of Disney animated favourites. As someone who has had extensive studies with the source material (Shakespeare’s Hamlet), I always found the Disney version to be rather dull by comparison. Some catchy songs in the original film and the near-perfect wise father figure of Mufasa were the two elements that kept me from placing The Lion King at the very bottom of the aforementioned list. However, over the years I have come to at least respect the fact that the original Lion King does serve as a nice introduction for children to (arguably) Shakespeare’s magnum opus. That being said, was there any need to visit the backstory of Mufasa? If there was, it definitely deserved better than this.
Let me start by saying that the film is visually stunning. If nothing else, at least it looked amazing. I don’t recall any moment where the CGI became a distraction. The details on the animal characters and environments were extremely impressive. So, there was always something stimulating to look at. Another enjoyable aspect of this presentation was learning more about Rafiki, the sage “medicine monkey.” His origin story is tied almost exclusively to Mufasa’s and feels far more genuine than that of the titular character for some interesting reasons that mostly have to do with the narrative structure of the film.
How this script is written left me very confused when the credits began rolling. The film serves as a sequel to the live-action Lion King film. Timon and Pumbaa are charged with looking after Simba’s daughter Kiara while her parents take a trip without her. It is during this time that Rafiki steps in to offer his wisdom to her in dealing with her separation anxiety. The conversation turns towards ancestry and Rafiki decides to tell the group the story of Kiara’s grandfather, Mufasa. This narrative decision to include the titular character’s origin as a story within the story is perplexing. On one hand, I liked it because of the way it connected the franchise together as a sequel. This helped keep a feeling of moving forward instead of going backwards. It is difficult to maintain this feeling of continuity within a franchise if you are bouncing around in the timeline of the characters’ experiences. However, as the film progressed and the narrative kept coming back to Kiara, Timon, Pumbaa, and Rafiki, I began to realize that I just couldn’t feel as invested as I wanted to be with Mufasa’s story. Rafiki being the “troubadour” instantly becomes unreliable for anything that he wasn’t there to witness himself. His account of the story before his own involvement is a second-hand account; a collage of details gathered from various other sources over the years. And, everyone knows that almost every story becomes more fantastical than it actually was the longer time has passed since it occurred. So, strangely, this “story within a story” narrative approach affected my experience both positively and negatively at the same time. The script structure makes the film quite a dichotomous experience, but does its content help elevate it past the hurdles it creates?
Sadly, it does not. There was very little dialogue that felt as polished or inspirational or meaningful as the original animated film. It was mostly all surface exposition type of dialogue with barely anything substantial underneath it. And don’t even get me started on Timon and Pumbaa breaking the fourth wall on a couple of occasions. It’s as if the success of Deadpool made Disney think that technique could somehow be sprinkled into this film and spread by proxy. Did it make me laugh when they did it? Admittedly, I did giggle, but for so many counterproductive reasons. Overall, the script just seemed to lack those inspirational moments that make a viewer consciously or subconsciously reconsider their own perspective on life or the hierarchy of nature that featured so prominently in the original animated film. And, given how the script was rather dull, there wasn’t much there for the actors to work with. They definitely do a good enough job with the dialogue to keep the story from faltering, but they just never really manage to get it to shine. Even the musical numbers feel empty as not a single song/refrain/chorus from the film has even produced an unexpected hum from me since seeing it. They can be fun in the moment but are mostly forgettable once the lights come up.
Mufasa: The Lion King is a very perplexing film experience. I found it to be an odd mix-match of good and bad that seemed to constantly get in its own way. On one hand, it was like being a mosquito who wandered into someone’s backyard at night and became mesmerized by the bright blue glow of a bug zapper. The beautiful visual spectacle keeps you zoned in on the big screen, but the end of the journey doesn’t feel like it was worth the trip to get there. If you decide to see Mufasa: The Lion King, at least go to see an IMAX presentation and make what little good there is as best as it can be seen.
P.S. For what it’s worth, my 6-year-old son really enjoyed it. So, if you have kids, at least the trip has a good chance of being enjoyable for someone.
