Movie Review

Mufasa: The Lion King storyline might be wan but it sure is pretty

Sarabi, Mufasa, and Rafiki in Mufasa: The Lion King.

Photo courtesy of Disney

The 2019 “live action” remake of The Lion King had two big things going for it: People’s love for the original 1994 animated film and a filmmaking style that made the completely CGI film appear photorealistic. The new prequel, Mufasa: The Lion King, has the second element to lean on, but it must win moviegoers over with some familiar characters but a whole new story.

The origin story of Mufasa (voiced by Aaron Pierre) is broached by having it be told to Kiara (Blue Ivy Carter), the daughter of Simba (Donald Glover) and Nala (Beyoncé), by Rafiki (John Kani), Timon (Billy Eichner), and Pumbaa (Seth Rogen), the first of a series of unnecessary decisions in the film.

As the film tells it, a young Mufasa is on his way to a new home with his parents when he’s washed away by a flash flood. Lost and alone, he’s discovered by Taka (Kelvin Harrison, Jr.), who convinces his mom, Eshe (Thandie Newton), to take Mufasa into their pride, although Taka’s dad, Obasi (Lennie James), is less welcoming.

Mufasa, who proves himself to be brave and daring, and Taka, who's loyal but somewhat weak-willed, grow from cubs into young lions, and their adventures together eventually grow to include a young Rafiki (Kagiso Ledika), as well as Sarabi (Tiffany Boone) and her hornbill companion, Zazu (Preston Nyman). They’re also menaced by a pride of white lions led by Kiros (Mads Mikkelsen), who waste no opportunity to threaten the other lions’ way of life.

Directed by Barry Jenkins and written by Jeff Nathanson, the film - like its 2019 predecessor - has absolutely gorgeous visuals. Using a mixture of real locations and computer generated imagery, Jenkins and his team created a world that feels fully immersive. Everything from the water to the grass to the animals looks like it actually exists, which is an amazing accomplishment and should be celebrated as such.

But the level of detail on that side of the film only increases the level of disappointment with the story. Given the chance to create something new, the filmmakers instead seem to treat the film as just a way to introduce every significant symbol from the original story. You would have thought having young versions of familiar characters would be enough, but instead they go overboard with references, including the creation of a certain location that is patently ridiculous.

Nathanson also overloads the plot with characters and twists. Mufasa’s rise from a nobody to king is faced with multiple obstacles, way too many for what should have been a much simpler story. And Lin-Manuel Miranda’s streak of great music in Disney films ends here, as none of the four songs he contributed work very well. Some are undone by odd phrasing by the performers, and others look strange coming out of the mouths of the characters, but either way, the songs just don’t connect.

The voice performances neither elevate the film nor take away from it. Pierre (Rebel Ridge) and Harrison (Waves) are rising stars in actual live action films, but their appearances here are negligible to the impact of their characters. Mikkelsen (Rogue One) is known for playing great bad guys, and he’s okay here, but nothing to write home about. The rest of the performers don't offer anything special to their roles, including Beyoncé and her daughter, Blue Ivy.

For those who are only looking for “Oh, that’s where that came from!” moments, Mufasa: The Lion King may fit the bill. But for anyone who may want something more than a version of nostalgia, especially from a visionary director like Jenkins, it serves as nothing more than two hours of pretty vistas.

---

Mufasa: The Lion King opens in theaters on December 20.

movies film

Movie Review

Andrew Garfield leads peasant rebellion in medieval film The Uprising

Photo by Betina La Plante/Focus Features

Andrew Garfield in The Uprising.

Writer/director Paul Greengrass made his name with a cinéma vérité style of filmmaking that brought immediacy and depth to three Jason Bourne films, United 93, Captain Phillips, and more. In The Uprising, he uses those skills to tell the story of the so-called Peasants’ Revolt in 14th century England.

Greengrass wastes no time starting the main plot as Ploughman (Andrew Garfield) and his fellow villagers object to onerous taxes put on them by the country’s nobility, led by the young King Richard II (Woody Norman), to fund an ongoing war. Ploughman initiates a violent response over the tone-deaf — and unseemly — way the king’s guard go about their business, and the rebellion soon starts to spread across the countryside, with the citizens looking for a degree of autonomy.

The ever-expanding group makes their way toward London to try to make their case to the king himself. Meanwhile, the king’s top advisors, including Archbishop Sudbury (Stephen Dillane) and Treasurer Hales (Tom Hollander), try to usurp power from the inexperienced monarch even as the king’s mother (Katherine Waterston) tries to get him to be more assertive.

The history of the English monarchy is long and lurid, as Shakespeare detailed in multiple plays, including Richard II. Though the events in the film took place almost 650 years ago, it’s easy to see parallels between what the peasants were fighting for and modern-day politics. Greengrass’ storytelling intent is solid, and the righteous anger the citizens feel is initially relatable and palpable.

But the populism theme of the story soon gets bogged down in drudgery and minutiae that is difficult to understand, especially when the details are lost in the thick regional English accents. The leaders of the rebels — including John Ball (Jamie Bell), Wat Tyler (Cosmo Jarvis), and Alyce (Thomasin McKenzie) — are shown doing a lot of planning, but the strong feelings they have about their quest don’t come across well, leaving the audience as passive observers.

When there is action, Greengrass and his team employ a frenetic style that is not great for comprehension. While the gist of what is happening and what side is winning is legible, individual moments go by so quickly so as to be nearly meaningless. Save for Ploughman, any connection that has been made with various characters proves futile, as Greengrass doesn’t seem to have any time for emotion. Scenes that should feel thrilling or heartbreaking instead come off as empty.

Garfield is a two-time Oscar nominee who has done great work across multiple genres. He’s fine in this role, but whether it’s the story, the filmmaking, or something else, he’s not as captivating as usual. The same goes for other strong actors like Bell, McKenzie, Dillane, Hollander, and Waterston, who each seem to be giving their all to their performances but are somehow muted in the process.

Done right, The Uprising could have been a rip-roaring account of people standing up against their oppressors. What Greengrass has made, though, is a film that can’t translate its medieval story for a modern audience and concentrates too much on unexciting elements and too little on thrilling ones.

---

The Uprising is now playing in theaters.

movies film reviews