The Lion King 3D Blu-ray (2019) [Region Free]

[ShinyDiscs]

I saw this on IMAX 3D and was very disappointed in the 3D. It seemed to be all over the place. Especially at the beginning it just seemed really fake.

[xbs2034]

Originally Posted by ShinyDiscs

I saw this on IMAX 3D and was very disappointed in the 3D. It seemed to be all over the place. Especially at the beginning it just seemed really fake.

Like Jungle Book, I think they were going for a somewhat conservative approach to the 3D, but I felt it was pushed a bit stronger than Jungle Book and was mostly a pleasant medium 3D. And there were a few weaker moments, but the expanded 1.43 IMAX sequences sometimes had strong 3D to more than make up for those, unfortunately it’s just select laser sites (I think 12 in the US and a similar amount overseas) which have the expanded sequences and can’t really recreate that at home either.

[Jonnyxll]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Thanks for your thoughts on the 3D. So would you say the 3D being medium to high strength 3D, are directly comparable to the medium to strong 3D of Avengers End Game or Infinity War if you compare them side by side?

You´re welcome

For me has Avengers Endgame+Infinity War strong 3D.
If you compare them with The Lion King, Avengers wins.
The depth is a little bit stronger and the difference is not too big.

But you must know, that i saw Avengers 3+4 in IMAX Laser 3D and The Lion King in "normal" 3D Cinema without Laser.
So i´m very excited about the 3D at Home.

[Tonppa]

I saw the movie in IMAX 3D.

The 3D was mostly OK. There was some very flat scenes which could have had decent depth but they didn't. Some action and music sequences were fine with good depth and medium layering.

Overall for the 3D: 2.5 / 5.

[imsounoriginal]

The 3D on this was incredible, especially in Laser IMAX. But I dunno if I'd ever watch the movie again. Might buy if it shows up in an Amazon UK or Zavvi 2-for-18 deal, but otherwise I'll pass.

[that1guystudios]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Thanks for the 3D details. How do you feel the 3D in the film compares to the 3D of the trailers? Are the trailers accurate? If so, they look like mild 3D mostly, except for that medium 3D layered cliff sequence overlooking the stampede below.

I saw the film in 3D IMAX and had seen the 3D IMAX Trailer multiple times in the same exact theater previously. I felt the trailer was extremely mild 3D at best. The film itself seemed to have stronger depth (I would describe it as mostly medium.) If you go into this expecting similar results to The Jungle Book you won't be disappointed - but if you are expecting the depth of Endgame, Ragnarok, Black Panther or Captain Marvel it is definitely not that strong.

[Unknown450]

Saw it in IMAX 3D today as well, and it seemed like maybe 90% of the seats were full. For a monday at 4pm of a 3D showing I think is pretty great.

For the movie itself I loved it for the most part, there were some things i could have done without. Was one beyonce song that just felt so out of place, and a couple of the scenes felt rushed and less impactful. But visually... WOW this looked incredible, absolutely stunning.

I thought the 3D was good, nice depth for most part. i personally think Jungle Book has better 3D but this was no slouch.

[newtbludger]

Saw IMAX 3D showing. 3D was decent with some pretty good depth but very little pop-out. It was about on par with Aladdin. I thought the movie was terrible. Yet another pointless remake that pales in comparison to the original. I mean when you have a remake where everything about it is worse than the original then what is the point.

[levcore]

Money is the point, that's all that's ever been the point for Disney.

[Freakyguy666]

Thats why it’s called show “business” and not show charity.

[keefelc]

Originally Posted by that1guystudios

Saw this in IMAX 3D last night.

I felt the film translated to the new medium fairly well. I watched the original a few days prior so that it was fresh in my mind.

I don't have any major problems with this remake. It had some really neat visuals and the animation itself was fantastic.

I had hoped for a more visually-stylized version of "Just Can't Wait to Be King" - instead it just matched the photo-realism of the rest of the film.

I felt there were issues with pacing (skipping over or rushing through important beats co yet adding some unnecessary background elements that didn't really add up to much - what was up with the unnecessarily long "hair traveling via dung" scene?) I also missed the more dusky/night look of "Can you feel the Love Tonight" in the original.

Though I casually enjoyed the Beyonce track "Spirit" on the soundtrack it felt shoehorned into the film rather haphazardly and made me long for Zimmer and Lebo M's score/vocal work. I did get a kick out of the scene that replaced the Luau/Hula scene - won't spoil it here.

I felt that John Oliver, Seth Rogen and Billy Eichner added a lot of humor and brought something new and enjoyable to their characters. I also felt the vocal work of JC McCrary as Young Simba deserves to be mentioned - his emotion and inflection was perfect in the post-stampede scene.

I've heard some state that Beyonce and Glover sound bored, but to me it felt like they were simply imitating the cadence of Broderick and Kelly from the original film at times.

The 3D Presentation:
The 3D felt very realistic but was reserved. Very similar to the 3D in The Jungle Book remake. This is medium level 3D throughout, not a lot of mild or strong shots - but it consistently helps draw you into the environment.
I'd prefer it to have been pushed a bit stronger the way that Marvel presents their more recent films, but after seeing it in 3D I doubt I'd be able to watch it in any other format.

I'll be happy to own both films and watch either one again, but if someone asks me which one I'd rather rewatch, it will always be the original. Those with an aversion to hand-drawn animation (I have a few folks in my family who feel this way) will likely prefer this new version.

Saw the movie in 3D laser Imax tonight and I pretty much agree with that1guystudio's review. I really felt the 3D was used to effectively draw you into environment. For example, little things like the weeds, pollen and sparks of fire floating around. Maybe those effects were a little too realistic because there was one point where a bunch in the audience started coughing!

The movie is a definite treat for the eyes. If Disney is going to continue to remake their animation classics, I hope they will continue to push and advance the technology with beauties such as this version of The Lion King!

Our theater also showed us a terrific 3D trailer for the upcoming Mulan live action. The 3D was pretty immersive in this clip so I have high hopes for the 3D in the entire movie!

[Zivouhr]

Originally Posted by levcore

Money is the point, that's all that's ever been the point for Disney.

Having a job is mostly for money, but if you can find a job you love, then it's about more than money as you know.

Money is the goal of any business if they're to survive, but so is their goal to entertain and tell a good story most times. Filmmakers often make movies that inspire them to create, not just for profit. Walt Disney started animating not just for money, but because he wanted to bring his imagination to life.

But relating to Lion King's remake, while money was a goal, so was Disney testing their artists to create one of the most realistic films about CGI animals ever made. They succeeded in my opinion. A new achievement in motion pictures and visually very impressive.

The film itself I enjoyed as a fan of animals and Nature documentaries, though it does have its flaws. I'd give the movie an 8/10, but the original Lion King animated, a 10/10.

[imsounoriginal]

Yeah, the movie was really an investment in the technology. The VR tech that they used to make this can be used to make pretty much any other movie Disney could ever want. Beyond the obvious choices like remakes of Bambi or Robin Hood or even Fantasia, I'm sure James Cameron would love to talk to Favreau about how that tech could work for Avatars 4 and 5 (if they make them).

[GreatGreg]

Disney released this to refresh the license on the characters.

There's a reason why they have chosen the movies they have to remake as live action films. They have millions, if not billions, invested in the Parks and merchandise. They are all based on their most popular franchises such as the Princesses, Lion King, Star Wars, and Avatar.

The more movies they can release using these licenses, the more people will come to their parks to see Pumbaa or ride the Millennium Falcon or line up for Toy Story merchandise.

It's the modern-day version of 'direct to video' in the 80s and 90s and the theatrical re-releases of the 60s and 70s.

[Variety Films 3D]

I saw it in IMAX 3D and can echo that the 3D is medium and subdued, like many Disney or Pixar films are. No pop-outs. That being said of course the 3D wasn't bad and it always makes it better, and I honestly don't see how the 3D itself would change any whether you're watching it on standard 2K projector, laser, 3DTV etc. It's gonna have the same level of depth any which way, just different brightness and perceived clarity.

[Freakyguy666]

Originally Posted by Zivouhr

Having a job is mostly for money, but if you can find a job you love, then it's about more than money as you know.

Money is the goal of any business if they're to survive, but so is their goal to entertain and tell a good story most times. Filmmakers often make movies that inspire them to create, not just for profit. Walt Disney started animating not just for money, but because he wanted to bring his imagination to life.

But relating to Lion King's remake, while money was a goal, so was Disney testing their artists to create one of the most realistic films about CGI animals ever made. They succeeded in my opinion. A new achievement in motion pictures and visually very impressive.

The film itself I enjoyed as a fan of animals and Nature documentaries, though it does have its flaws. I'd give the movie an 8/10, but the original Lion King animated, a 10/10.

So in short, you clearly disagree with the notion that money has always been the point for Disney.

[Damon1281]

Originally Posted by Variety Films 3D

I saw it in IMAX 3D and can echo that the 3D is medium and subdued, like many Disney or Pixar films are. No pop-outs. That being said of course the 3D wasn't bad and it always makes it better, and I honestly don't see how the 3D itself would change any whether you're watching it on standard 2K projector, laser, 3DTV etc. It's gonna have the same level of depth any which way, just different brightness and perceived clarity.

I guess you must mean that nothing made you duck because there was quite a bit of negative parallax in the movie.

[RayzaNC]

I saw this at Imax Laser (first time I've been there) and it was some of the most impressive 3D I've ever seen
Unbelievable depth and lots of close up shots where it seems its coming out of the screen.

[levcore]

Some say it's weak, some say it's strong. Very divisive it seems.

[Paul H]

Originally Posted by levcore

Some say it's weak, some say it's strong. Very divisive it seems.

Not surprising, since visual 3D media is all digital, and the individual cpu components can be calibrated to process visual-depth at variable percentages at setup.
Never had that kind of variability with analog 3D film.

The cpu default digital stereoscopic 3D depth processing level was established early-on at a 15% level. CPU calibration can variably increase z-plane processing up to 100%.
That is why there will always be different theatrical and consumer digital 3D experiences.