History Headscratchers / TheLionKing2019

** She didn't mean that they couldn't understand the language he was speaking; he was just using words that they didn't know the meaning of, to which Nala responded in a cheeky manner. The animals in ''The Lion King'''s universe all seem to speak the same language and can clearly communicate with each other.

** She didn't mean that they couldn't understand the language he was speaking; he was just using words that they didn't know the meaning of. The animals in ''The Lion King'''s universe all seem to speak the same language and can clearly communicate with each other.

* When Simba and Nala can't understand Zazu she says "Simba, you speak Bird?" Does this mean Zazu is roaring at them and that's why they understand him?

** Scar just has to say that he didn't like Zazu or his advice, for whatever reason. He could say that he was irritating, incompetent, too glued to the way Mufasa ran things... It doesn't really matter what the lionesses think because Scar's the king, and in the animated film it's established that firing Zazu is something the king has the authority to do. Real-life monarchs have had their advisors put to death for even less-substantiated reasons.

* With the announcement that Jon Favreau will be directing a live-action remake of the ''The Lion King'', this seems to be blurring the lines about the nature of digital imagery in film with regards to it being "live-action" vs an "animated feature". Up to this point, the Disney remakes have included live actors interacting with digital creations to create the fantasy elements of the story and Favreau demonstrated in ''The Jungle Book'' that even the "set" does not require a real location anymore. However, with ''The Lion King'', there will be no human actors meaning everything can essentially be a digital creation. So the question is what does it mean for ''The Lion King'' to be considered "live-action"? How does a "live-action" film that's an all digital creation differ significantly from redoing the story as a 3D CGI Animated Feature like ''Moana'' or ''Zootopia''?
** Considering how much some of the other live-action films have deviated from their animated counterparts, I would be none too surprised if Disney did throw humans into the story for some reason, which would "justify" it being called live-action. (Or they'll use real animals in a portion of the movie where they don't need to talk.)
** On the page for that version, it's pointed out that Disney never said the film was going to be "live-action"; they said they were going to be using the same photorealistic technology and such that they used for ''The Jungle Book.'' (Though this has also sparked further debate, it seems - now people are upset that they're taking a 2D animated piece that still holds up fine today, and essentially updating it into a 3D animated piece.)
** It's also claimed on the YMMV page that they included a single live-action shot somewhere in the movie, just to see if audiences could tell it apart from all the computer-generated stuff.

** An even better question is: how the heck does Timon know what a toothbrush is? Let alone how does he know what chicken tastes like?

** I bet [[WesternAnimation/TheLionKingIISimbasPride Zira]] probably would.
** Assuming this film likely won't have any sequels, I suppose we can cautiously take for granted that Zira doesn't exist in this continuity.

* It's already been established that Zazu was banished from Pride Rock after Mufasa died. But what pretext did Scar use to get rid of him? In reality, Scar wanted Zazu out of the picture so that he wouldn't share too many details about what he knew from the stampede with the lionesses. Thus sparking suspicions that Scar had some additional involvement with the incident. But even if the lionesses have no authority to override Scar's status as the new king, wouldn't they still have questioned why Mufasa's right-paw-bird was fired for no apparent reason?

* It's already been established that Zazu was banished from Pride Rock after Mufasa died. But what pretext did Scar use to get rid of him? In reality, Scar wanted Zazu out of the picture so that he wouldn't share too many details about what he knew from the stampede with the lionesses. Thus sparking suspicions that Scar had some involvement with the incident. But even if the lionesses have no authority to override Scar's status as the new king, wouldn't they still have questioned why Mufasa's right-paw-bird was fired for no apparent reason?

** The crew was also looking for a way around Scar hitting Zazu. Since that kind of slapstick joke wouldn't have been as plausible in this more "lifelike" adaptation of the Lion King.

** This was already brought up and explained earlier — Zazu was effectively exiled from Pride Rock once Scar took over and couldn’t go back due to the threat of being killed. It’s definitely not any more illogical than him being knocked out in the animated film and then not suspecting the only person who was around at the time.

*** The fact that Scar "saw the look in Mufasa eyes" implies that Scar must have been close enough to Mufasa that he could have saved him.

** I bet [[Disney/TheLionKingII Zira]] probably would.

* Why did Scar send Zazu back to get help during the stampede? In the original animated version, he did the exact opposite. He knocked Zazu out specifically to ''prevent'' him from getting help, which seems more in character for him to do because if Zazu had succeeded in getting help, it would potentially foil Scar’s plot to murder Mufasa and Simba. It could also more likely expose his crime to the rest of the pride which would then further endanger his chance of being king. I’ve read that apparently this was done because it seemed weird that Zazu wasn’t suspicious of Scar, but in the original film, Zazu didn’t even realize that it was Scar who knocked him out, since Scar hit him from behind. Also, as pointed out elsewhere, this just created another problem since Zazu should have at some point exposed Scar’s lie that he couldn’t get to the gorge in time to save them.