Instead, I'm gonna talk about The Lion King, because that's more my wheelhouse.
First--let me just say that even though we open with Chiwetel Eijofor intoning one of Scar's more iconic lines -- "Life's not fair" -- we're apparently not getting "Be Prepared*"?! Which I am not okay with Disney. Not okay with.
*"Be Prepared" is one of my favorite Disney songs, full stop. (It's also one of the best Disney villain songs -- absolutely tied with "Poor Unfortunate Souls." Ooh, and "The Mob Song" from Beauty and the Beast. Damn, the villains get good songs.) Even though it's iconic and Elton John was involved, the music from The Lion King has never been my favorite. Probably because The Lion King was never my favorite, which I know is blasphemous to some. I liked it, sure, but it didn't resonate with me as much as other films did.
But regardless. I have some thoughts.
- Baby Simba (and Baby Nala) are absolutely adorable and I love them already. I know they're not real and they're CGI, but still. I have a vague memory of my brother and I being allowed to pick out one stuffed animal each on a Disney trip (before a Disney trip?) and I'm 99% sure that my brother had a stuffed baby Simba and I had a baby Nala. But I could be making that up.
- I got a minor case of goosebumps seeing what is, presumably, part of the "Hakuna Matata" montage when Simba grows up and he and Timon and Pumba are walking on the log.
- One of the things that jumped out to me was Mufasa's quote. I'm not 100% sure, but I'm pretty certain that Mufasa has a new speech. I feel like I'm second-guessing myself, but I think that this quote, from the trailer, is a new revision to the Circle of Life Speech:
"Everything you see exists together in a delicate balance. While others search for what they can take, a true king searches for what he can give."
Okay. It's a new film -- adding new lines and revising speeches is to be expected (and a relief, given that one of the big concerns was that the live-action film would be a shot-for-shot remake of the animated film). But the problem for me was that the line "while others search for what they can take" is played over an image of the hyenas and "a true king" is, of course, paired with Simba. It's the former that concerns me, because Little Me grew up thinking that hyenas were evil, villainous animals. Which...is not true. There are several articles online (like this Disneyfied, or Disney Tried Blog or this Michigan State University Blog or this Odyssey article, among many others) which point out that hyenas aren't scavengers. In fact, they kill somewhere between 60-95% of their own food, and lions are much more likely to steal from hyenas than hyenas are from lions. So, contrary to Mufasa's grandiose speech, hyenas are very much a part of the Circle of Life, and do not ostracize themselves in a graveyard full of old elephant bones.
I was hoping that this would be fixed in the new film but...seems unlikely.
It could be misdirection though, and taken out of context, the speech does have particularly poignant political implications, given it's commentary on what makes a good king (re: leader). Which leads me to my next point... - The other thing that stood out to me was the difference in Scar's appearance. Here's Scar in the 2019 film:
 |
Which isn't all that big of a deal unless you consider the animated version:
I mean, I know it's an animated movie for a target audience of 4-6 year olds, but the differences here are pretty obvious. (And, yes, I realize that may be Simba but Adult Simba is pretty much a carbon copy of Mufasa, so...) The coloring is completely different -- Scar's darker with a black mane, and Simba is lighter -- and Scar has some stereotypical Disney Villain Features like the lime green and yellow eyes, the facial hair (if his little goatee beard thing can be facial hair on a lion), and the harsher features (compared to Simba's softer, rounder features). If you had never seen this film, you could, pretty instantly, identify who was The Good Guy and who was The Bad Guy.
Now, I'm not the only one who noticed as the articles on Huffpost and Buzzfeed show. But their reactions are decidedly different than mine. Take this one:
He's not wrong...I basically said the same thing. But the connotation is different. The Interwebz is not a fan of Scar (which, to be fair, The Interwebz may have conflicting opinions, and people may be on board with this new Scar, but that wouldn't be very click-baity would it?) Take Buzzfeed Ben Henry's comments:
Now, I'm not the only one who noticed as the articles on Huffpost and Buzzfeed show. But their reactions are decidedly different than mine. Take this one:
Just compare the designs here.— Robert "Fat Leprechaun" Bahn (@SenorWoberto) April 10, 2019
OG Scar: evil and pompous as hell
remake Scar: a ratty looking lion I guess pic.twitter.com/5J6ygMQGGV
He's not wrong...I basically said the same thing. But the connotation is different. The Interwebz is not a fan of Scar (which, to be fair, The Interwebz may have conflicting opinions, and people may be on board with this new Scar, but that wouldn't be very click-baity would it?) Take Buzzfeed Ben Henry's comments:
"Just to refresh your memory, in the animated version of The Lion King, Scar is flamboyant, he's sassy, he's a flawless icon. To put it simply, Scar is That Bitch. In the trailer for the live-action version, Scar looks like he's been THROUGH it. He looks like he's sick of everybody's shit. In fact, he looks a little sick, period."
This quote, I think, hits the nail on the head: Henry's word choice -- that Scar is "flamboyant," that he "sassy," that he's "flawless" -- these are all words we use to describe divas and fabulously fierce gay men. Especially the "flamboyant," effeminate gay man. Which is fine -- while I know I could do more, I'm a proud ally of LBTQ+ rights -- except when animators code "transgressive" behaviors solely on the villains. Many male villains in Disney movies -- Scar included, but also, for instance, Ratcliffe, Jafar, and Dr. Facilier -- are coded either "feminine" or "homosexual," ostensibly to mark their difference. (It's not just male villains -- female villains like Ursula and Lady Tremaine are coded masculine too. And villains like Gaston and Clayton are hyper-masculine in a way that marks them as different too.)
All of this is to say -- this wouldn't be a problem if villains weren't the only ones being coded this way; if we had a positive male character be coded as homosexual, or, better yet, be homosexual, but we're not there yet. It's not just an academic opinion -- in a 2017 article, The Telegraph includes Scar in their list of "not so secret gay Disney characters," and points out that while it's unclear if Scar is definitely gay, "given the character's undisputed villainy, it all feels somewhat problematic."
All of this is to say -- this wouldn't be a problem if villains weren't the only ones being coded this way; if we had a positive male character be coded as homosexual, or, better yet, be homosexual, but we're not there yet. It's not just an academic opinion -- in a 2017 article, The Telegraph includes Scar in their list of "not so secret gay Disney characters," and points out that while it's unclear if Scar is definitely gay, "given the character's undisputed villainy, it all feels somewhat problematic."
So Scar's "new look" in the remake, while perhaps less "evil and pompous as hell" or "disappointing" or "the wonderful villain from the superior 1994 film," I don't think that's a bad thing at all. I think it's Disney -- very subtly and not at overtly -- acknowledging that the whole "Good and Evil look different" trope is problematic, as well as the ways in which they portray that difference. Because guess what? You can't assess someone's moral status based on their physical appearance. (Anna learns this lesson the hard way in Frozen -- which is just another reason I love that movie.) This article from Out magazine acknowledges this and points out that Scar's new look might be a good thing. Mathew Rodriguez quotes Myles Johnson, who points out,
“I’m relieved that “The Lion King” put down the trope of using performed femininity and darkness as a way to visually communicate evil...It’s small, but the representations we consume can communicate a lot and Disney has been a notorious culprit of this.”
YAAAAS.
So, the trailer left me with mixed feelings. On the villain side, Disney does seem to be improving...but the political message still seems a little suspect to me. I guess we'll have to wait until July to find out!
So, the trailer left me with mixed feelings. On the villain side, Disney does seem to be improving...but the political message still seems a little suspect to me. I guess we'll have to wait until July to find out!
