Released in 2019, the remake of ‘The Lion King’ arrived to present a more realistic version of the characters that help tell the story of the little lion, Simba, who after losing his father, Mufasa, the great king of the forest, in an ambush , must figure out how to become the royal heir in the African savannah plains, as the throne is now occupied by his evil and selfish uncle Oscar.
Although the film that receives the Disney seal was released about four years ago, there is a doubt, which originates from the release of the first trailer for the realistic production commanded by the filmmaker. Jon Favreauwhich can permeate to this day: after all, can the adaptation of ‘The Lion King’ be considered live-action?
diverse opinions
Before the release of the production, opinions on how to classify the new ‘The Lion King’ were diverse, as shown in an article produced by the newspaper O Globo in 2018, where three professionals in the cinematographic field drew different conclusions on the subject.
Starting with the filmmaker Edward Calvetthe text explains that upon seeing the first images of the feature, the director of “Luz, anima, ação”, understood, with reservations, that the plot was a live-action, because in his conception, there was the presence of scenarios that would have been enhanced with the use of computer graphics, just as actors had been used to bring the animals’ expressions to life through motion capture technology (a technique seen in Gollum from “The Lord of the Rings” and in the “Avatar” franchise). ”).
This controversy is interesting because we are in a very hybrid moment. We have mixed techniques, separate sets that today are getting closer. It is indeed a live action, but it is important to say that at no time is there an actor acting without the work of the animator behind it. The actors are never free from the strings manipulated by the animator”, explained Calvet.
On the other hand, the creator of the Anima Mundi festival, Marco Magalhãesobserved the scenes differently, believing that there were no flesh and blood actors in the film, thus defending that the production is not a live-action.
To call it that, there would have to be an image, a photograph taking place directly in front of the camera. In live-action, images of reality are borrowed, a reality is recreated”, detailed Magalhães.
agreeing with Magalhãescartoonist and filmmaker Otto Guerrapoints out that the work of favreau is a “hyperrealistic animation”.
Studios have been making these productions that simulate reality for a while now. In the trailer, it is clear that the interpretations are manipulated, they are not real”.
Who is definitely correct?
At the time when Calvet, Magalhães It is War gave their opinions, disney had not yet revealed what techniques he had used to create the film, but the answer came a few months later, in an article in Entertainment Weekly magazine (via Uol Entretenimento) published in 2019, where the backstage of the plot was revealed, and also, which definition best fits to explain the feature film.
This is because, the text explains that the film was produced on a set entirely generated by virtual reality, different from what he believed Calvet at the time of the article in O Globo.
We chose this technique to make an animated movie look like live-action. Instead of someone sitting at the computer programming, we have a real crew that ‘comes on set’ and interacts with the scene, making camera decisions that we would have to make on a normal film set”, explains Favreau.
In addition, in the live-action “Mogli: O Menino Lobo”, a film also directed by favreau, neel sethi he was the actor who gave life to the main character while everything around him was created digitally, unlike “The Lion King”, where there are no real elements or actors.
After removing Mowgli’s only physical element, we are no longer tied to a green screen, or operating real cameras. Everything has gone virtual. We basically created a virtual reality game exclusively for the production of this film.”
With this, it is possible to state that the feature is not a live-action, since this definition only applies to films in which the characters are lived by real actors, as well as the description “hyperrealistic animation”, may not be the most accurate. proper.
Thinking about that, the team of “The Lion King” revealed that they prefer the term “virtual production” be used to define the plot, as the EW article reveals.
Source: Recreio
