I know what a mandrill is, when reading it an image immediately popped up in my head, colours and all. But no idea about the name though.
I think MOST people here know what a mandrill is, it is one of the most distinct looking primates. with the blue ridges along his red nose. Baboons though perhaps recognisable as a word is quite plain itself. And doesnt really have anything going for him to remember him by, besides its bare ass. Which the mandrill has aswell and really is the only thing they have in common.
Have you seen the size of the canines on mandrills! quite intimidating ( baboon have rather big canines aswell, but still only half the size. Mandrill canines can get above 6 cm and baboons 3cm)
"Wise" really should be enough to get you the answer. I didn't know what a mandrill is, but I got it based on "wise," and now I do know what a mandrill is, so...double bonus.
I'd have to back up that Pumbaa's line is: Timon: "You're the king, and you never told us?" Pumbaa:"Your Majesty! I gravel at your feet" and Timon says "It's not gravel, its grovel! And don't! He's not the king! Are ya Simba?" "No, I'm not the king!" Nala: "Simba!" Simba:" Maybe I was gonna be but... that was a long time ago!" just to give you some context.
Also I noticed someone already pointed this out, but I noticed it too while taking the quiz, the Circle of Life is ALSO the last song played. Literally, going out, it says "Cir-cle- of! Ahhhhh" *abrupt cut off*, fade into Elton John's Can You Feel The Love Tonight for the credits. Similarly, the last song played in the credits, after Elton John, is also the circle of life. They've gone full circle. Hope that cleared things up.
Judges (at least in the US) don't actually use gavels. I'm sure they must have at some point because the notion is so pervasive, but they definitely don't use them now.
Judges (at least in Canada) not only don't use gavels, but don't even usually have gavels! Wild, I know. Wild... wait, these comments were Lion King related at some point weren't they?
I really do intend to watch this movie sometime. It came out between the time my own kids were young and before the grandkids came along, so it was pretty much a Disney drought period in my life although I heard the songs and saw the trailers which were everywhere.
You missed out on arguably the best period in Disney animation history since the 1940s. 1989-1997 or so. The Little Mermaid, Beauty & The Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, Mulan, The Hunchback of Notre Dame... all excellent. The Lion King is perhaps the best of the bunch.
Agreed, between 1989 and 2002 actually has a name--the Disney Renaissance (started with The Little Mermaid and ended with Lilo and Stitch). Show your grandkids every single one of the Disney movies that came out during that time, and they won't be disappointed. Beautiful animation, great original songs and scores, just amazing really. After the Renaissance ended, so did 2-D animation for the most part, so it's almost required viewing just for the historical context of it.
I don't remember Tarzan being very good. But I also didn't think Pocahontas was worthy of the ones that came before. Where did you get your info on the Disney Renaissance?
Those were my growing up years and basisly the only years I have seen disney movies ( in a theathre). And yea, could be that I started to look at things differently by then, but lilo and stitch seemed to have a totalllly different vibe, not the classic feel like the others, more like a cartoon actually (and no I am not referring to the cartoons of it that actually excisted).
I think the first movie ever I saw in a theathre was aladdin, and looking at their list, pocahontos might be the last, meaning the last disney movie I saw there.
I absolutely LOVE The Lion King! I'd say it was one of the defining movies of my childhood, and it's still probably one of my favorite movies today. Everything about it is absolutely wonderful, from the animation to the plot itself (which is actually pretty serious for a kid's movie) to the songs (favorite hands down is "Be Prepared") to the humor. Most people my age feel the same way I do.
And yeah, the 90s had a lot of really good Disney movies. I'd say that the 2000s was a bit of a slump for Disney, but they've released some pretty good movies in the last decade. Moana and Big Hero 6 are also really great, and if we're counting Pixar, I'll throw in Coco and Up as well. On the flip side though, the remakes have been mostly disappointing and don't really live up to the originals.
I can never make up my mind about remakes and reboots. Nobody minds the 30th James Bond movie because we have always understood that the series would go on forever, even though most of those movies are more or less just remakes of Dr. No. Most action movies are effectively remakes of Die Hard, and most romcoms are effectively remakes of Pretty Woman, with some circumstances changed. There aren't a whole lot of worthy new ideas out there, but if you tell the story well and elicit strong reactions in your audience, a remake is as good as anything. From what I understand, Bradley Cooper was really passionate about remaking A Star Is Born, threw everything he had into making it the best it could be, and ended up with a highly-regarded movie. Disney does not appear to be putting any creative effort into these remakes, which is why they are getting slammed. I think if they really did their best to make good movies instead of cynical cash grabs, the remakes would be welcome.
I should add that I wasn't trying to counter your point. I was just using it as a launchpad to think out loud on the subject. I agree that Disney needs to stop. I was speaking to the more general groaning about all the remakes in recent years.
I just feel like they’ve gotten lazier. Their earlier remakes like Alice in Wonderland, Cinderella, The Jungle Book, Maleficent (if you count that as a remake), and even the 101 Dalmatians movies with Glenn Close. Quality of those movies aside, I think they’ve each done a fair job of not doing shot-for-shot recreations of their animated classics.
However, ever since Beauty and the Beast they decided to play it safe and just stick to the same story while only adding tiny little differences that don’t really affect the plot at all. If your goal is not to anger fans of the original by not changing anything major, then what’s the point of remaking it when you can just watch the original whenever you want?
I think the point is winning over the young crowd and introducing them to disney. People might be less interesting in stuff sitting on a shelf from before they were born. But when something new is in the cinema ( and all your friends go) you would go see it.
And when/where have they stated that their goal is not to anger fans of the original?
I think things like this happen all the time,, old fans get upset and new fans get attracted. (and in terms of movies, loyalty or memories of old fans is gonna bring in any money and new fans, kids will buy tons of stuff (well, their parents mostly after giving in to the whining)
I don't know. I think most people wouldn't mind watching something older than them. I sure as heck didn't when I was a kid. And when it comes to Disney, there's decades of quality stuff in their archives that can easily be accessed these days, either online or on DVD/VHS for those that still use them. When I said "goal," I think what I meant by that is, while they may not have directly said that's what they're doing, it seems like they are. But it seems to be working. And I think something they did say is that they'll stop making them when they stop making money, which, considering how well Aladdin and The Lion King did at the box office, is not gonna be anytime soon.
The "Jungle Book" remake wasn't bad. Otherwise, I've been pretty much avoiding all the remakes. I've saw the "Lion King" because my cousin wanted to watch it, and while it wasn't unwatchable it didn't nearly live up to the original. To a certain extent, the whole premise of remaking a cartoon into a live-action film is dumb--cartoons have a lot of creative and artistic freedoms that just don't work live-actions, and trying to change that just constrains the movie.
Never watched the full movie so I did OK .9 correct but I could not get circle of poo sung by Mr hankey in South Park out of my head .This slowed me down just laughing at the memory of this.
The wildebeests, also called gnus, are a genus of antelopes, scientific name Connochaetes.
I think MOST people here know what a mandrill is, it is one of the most distinct looking primates. with the blue ridges along his red nose. Baboons though perhaps recognisable as a word is quite plain itself. And doesnt really have anything going for him to remember him by, besides its bare ass. Which the mandrill has aswell and really is the only thing they have in common.
Have you seen the size of the canines on mandrills! quite intimidating ( baboon have rather big canines aswell, but still only half the size. Mandrill canines can get above 6 cm and baboons 3cm)
Also I noticed someone already pointed this out, but I noticed it too while taking the quiz, the Circle of Life is ALSO the last song played. Literally, going out, it says "Cir-cle- of! Ahhhhh" *abrupt cut off*, fade into Elton John's Can You Feel The Love Tonight for the credits. Similarly, the last song played in the credits, after Elton John, is also the circle of life. They've gone full circle. Hope that cleared things up.
I think the first movie ever I saw in a theathre was aladdin, and looking at their list, pocahontos might be the last, meaning the last disney movie I saw there.
And yeah, the 90s had a lot of really good Disney movies. I'd say that the 2000s was a bit of a slump for Disney, but they've released some pretty good movies in the last decade. Moana and Big Hero 6 are also really great, and if we're counting Pixar, I'll throw in Coco and Up as well. On the flip side though, the remakes have been mostly disappointing and don't really live up to the originals.
(See-tee-hoummmm gwen-ya-maaaaaaa)
En-yaah-ho, bwen-ya-maaaaaaaaa.
However, ever since Beauty and the Beast they decided to play it safe and just stick to the same story while only adding tiny little differences that don’t really affect the plot at all. If your goal is not to anger fans of the original by not changing anything major, then what’s the point of remaking it when you can just watch the original whenever you want?
And when/where have they stated that their goal is not to anger fans of the original?
I think things like this happen all the time,, old fans get upset and new fans get attracted. (and in terms of movies, loyalty or memories of old fans is gonna bring in any money and new fans, kids will buy tons of stuff (well, their parents mostly after giving in to the whining)
Literally the entire joke at that point hinges on it being the wrong word!