My Own Personal Nerdy Disney and Animation Scrutinizing Analyses: "The Lion King II: Simba's Pride" - The Rare Disney Cheapquel to Be A Proud King of Disney Cheapquels

Hi folks! Welcome to My Own Personal Nerdy Disney Scrutinizing and Animation Analyses blog. A blog where I'm analyzing several Disney films, Disney or Animation in general! These entries are meant to be my analyses only. Not reviews or statements. Just fun analyses! Though I'll make some personal remarks now and then, the content of these entries is meant to be depicted objectively. They're made for entertainment purpose only and the pictures/clips are copyright Disney or other companies.

Make sure to leave a comment if you like this site! And if there's something you think could be improved, please let me know. But in a constructive way, please. And just a note; I'm not a Native English writer, so my incorrect grammar may be notable.

And finally; If you haven't seen the films, beware of spoilers! And the funny lines aren't meant to be nothing than funny. So I hope you won't find them offensive. If so, I apologize.

This entry happened to be a first of it`s kind. Mostly because it was my first assessment of a direct to video sequel. So forgive me, purists and haters ;)

It would've been an understatement to state how "beloved" the Disney direct to-video/DVD-sequels were (yes, note the sarcasm, folks). And it's easy to see why. Those products were inferior to their theatrical counterparts in many ways and truly hampered people's memories about their predecessors. Two major reasons for why the hate of these cheapquels, which they've been referred to, have been so overwhelming (and sure this applies to direct of video-productions in general, not only the Disney cheapquels).

On a personal level, I kinda liked the idea at first (though of course I've would've personally preferred actual theatrically sequels). Yet when the craze eventually took over, it certainly became clear that these cheapquels were declining in quality and becoming worse and worse (in my opinion).

Disney`s Previous Policy of Sequels

Strike this pose. And yes, it hurts ;)

However, while the craze fortunately stopped in late 2008 and the Revival era actually launched theatrical sequels (going against the studio's original policy about sequels. Which never happened in Walt's time, because of how the sequels of Three Little Pigs flopped).
While of course there are many subjective opinions about these cheapquels, there has been at least one which has happened to become cherished and perceived as superior to it`s counterparts. And that is the sequel to The Lion King. The Lion King II: Simba's Pride.

Yes, I have a bigger mouth than you. So what? :)

Trivia

Having finally turned 20 years old (released October 27th 1998), Simba`s Pride was a huge success. With $ 454.5 million copies sold overall and being the most successful direct-to-video release to date (and with 3.5 copies sold the three first days). And anticipating it's success, there were shipped 13 million copies to stores. Pride also won an Annie Award for Best Animated Home Entertainment Production. While it was initially planned as a 1996-release, when director Darrell Rooney and Jeannine Roussel came onboard. Yet Variety rumored it to be released in the spring of 1997. Simba's Pride was one of the earliest films to be released in the cheapquel phase.

This ambitious sequel was made by Disney's Australian studio (though the pre-production process started in the US) in a 20 months process. Though the overall execution took overall four years (while there was a slight hiatus due to rewriting). The cheapquel-phase had started four years prior to Pride with Return of Jafar. Which it's success made Disney confident enough to churn these cheapquels to a living profit.

So Simba's Pride was the sixth cheapquel in the lineup (1998 also saw the release of Pocahontas II: Journey To A New World, a rare Disney sequel that at least logically was needed. Which was loathed by Pocahontas fans for actually ending the relationship between the lovebirds). Being the official follow-up to the most successful animated film at the time, Simba's Pride had no small expectations on it's shoulders (though the discussions of a sequel originated before the first movie was released).

It would be easy to claim that The Lion King should've received an theatrical sequel in the same vein as The Rescuers Down Under, for obvious reasons (though an excuse for it at the time was that Feature Animation was too occupied with their own properties and that home video was an effective way to launch a sequel). But we all know that unfortunately didn't happen (at least domestically, since Simba's Pride was in some European and Latin American countries released theatrically. Which was a deliberate choice).

Yes, it's a preview screening for those
with Potter's invisibility cape :)

It would be easy to ponder about why exactly it took so long to make a sequel to Lion King, since there were a less gap between Aladdin and The Return of Jafar. Fans of Lion King could wonder if Simba's Pride would've benefited to ride on the heels of it's success of it's predecessor. But at least we got the Timon & Pumbaa-series in between and visitors of Disneyworld had the Circle of Life An Environmental Fable attraction. Which featured original, polished animation of Simba and his jungle pals. And let's not forget the Stand By Me short, which also had some quite polished animation! Simba's Pride got more merchandise than the other cheapquels, but the reason is of course obvious (and the merchandise was also a big gain, gaining $ 300 millions).

Well, since we're stuffed, we can at least look at each other :)

Is It`s Fanbase Deserved?

But as already said, Simba's Pride has a reputation of being superior to the other cheapquels (and I'm sorry purists, there are even people who consider it to be superior to it's highly regarded predecessor). But does it deserve it? Well, let's analyze this subject, shall we?

Enjoy holding her while you can.
Soon she'll be to heavy for ya :)

The Strengths of Simba`s Pride

Of course this assessment will be my own subjective analysis on the take, so take it with a grain of salt. But even for an analytical brain as mine (no meaning to brag), it's easy to spot the weaknesses and strengths of any movie (or a product for that matter) and see why people are compelled or repulsed by those qualities. In retrospect, it's easy to see why some people actually embraced Pride better than the other cheapquels.

Pride has a lot of it going for it! It's irresistibly cute and endearing! The animation is frankly superior to it's counterparts and actually looking less Saturday Morning cartoon-esque. The music is mostly good, both it's score and the songs (which Ladysmith Black Mambazo contributed to). The characterizations are engaging enough and the premise yields promise.

Even a lion can have a Colgate smile :)

A Different Storyline From It`s Predecessor

One thing the early Disney cheapquels shall have credit for, is for being actual continuations of the stories and never relying on skimpy plotlines as the later on cheapquels did (the only exception were the Beauty and the Beast midquels, which were non-canon). At least Pride shall have credit for being an actual continuation of the story and not just being just a rehash of it's predecessor (though some naysayers have whined that most of the plotlines are basically a reversion of their predecessors, but sorry to cite this guys, at least some of the plotlines makes sense).

Pride had a different conflict, yet it's needless to cite that it's basically another Shakespeare-plot line, this time with Romeo and Juliet (and also a little bit of Manchurian Candidate), just with an happy ending (and yes, since it's Disney, it's easy to compare it to Pocahontas, which this film pays nods to with swirling leaves. Some have compared it to The Fox and the Hound as well).

The New Characters: The Outlanders

We've watched The Fox and The Hound too many times ;)

However, the new storyline leads us to one of the Pride`s head-scratching issues: The Outlanders! Of course they`ve been something to ponder widely about. Due to

their logical aspects of their non-existense in the original (and also how the Hyenas are completely absent in this film. Though they get a brief mention by Nuka in the Elephant Graveyard. Since the Outlanders are apparently given their own place, the Outlands. Though it was originally meant to be a Crystal Cave).
Of course they make little sense. Yet for a wild imagination, one could assume that they could`ve been existent in The Lion King all along. Just not being mentioned.

In a way, the choice of giving Scar afollowing cult is dramatically intriguing. Since he wasthe antagonist of it's predecessor (and yes, it obviously introduces a religion named Scar, since Zira worships him as a God. Yet Zira was originally going to ally the Hyenas). Yet despite this, Kovu is never actually Scar's son (Michael Eisner suggested to back off that from that subject. Despite that Kovu was originally going to be both Zira and Scar's son. But hey, at least conscious step, due to how it's been widely debated that Simba and Nala could've been half-siblings as well). Yet Kovu and his siblings never given a father figure, nor is he mentioned whatsoever (on The Lion King source site, this issue is left with an question mark). The Outlanders are the only new characters in the movie (though Zazu were originally going to have a love interest in Binti, who was cut).

Yes, you should be scared of me. I gave you jaundice :)

Kovu and Zira

And I have a long way to go.
That's why I'm shaking.

I can be anthropomorphic by
doing this pose. Sort of :)

At least Kovu's (voiced by Max`s voice actor, Jason Mardsen) set-up makes an intriguing conflict. And it makes the stakes even higher, regarding Kiara's position as a queen. It also gives Kovu (which means scar in Swahili) some character arc and depth. Yet for all this, Kovu's arc and growth is too conventional and straight-forward to be interesting!

The antagonist is Kovu`s mother also raises the stakes higher. And while Zira (meaning hate in Swahili, though she was originally named Bianca) actually shows traits of dimensionality, she never evolves enough as a character and becomes a standard villain at the end (to make the villain a female this time was a conscious choice, to deflect it's predecessor).

Of course in real life this would've created both trauma and disturbance to anyone who's raised under such conditions. So despite how Pride being made at a low-budget and aimed at children, it includes a fairly dark subject (but of course that was the original The Lion King).

Of course Kovu's dilemma is easily resolved at the end. By having his mother falling to her death and having Kovu`s grief be compensated by having his happy ending. Still, director Darrell Rooney have stated that Kovu could've possibly not been Zira's biological son. Mardsen looked at Jeremy Irons' Scar for inspiration for Kovu. While to his dismay. he couldn't use a voice that was too reminiscent of Scar, yet he didn't transfer himself too much to Kovu. Kovu`s original name was Nunka, which made him and Nuka in fact the same character once.

Kiara

Note an error. And I'm not
hinting where ;)

Funny enough, Simba's Pride gives a remarkable twist to Simba's newborn cub. To have her being a female (which of course has led to debates about Simba and Nala's cub in the first film, what he was originally called and being contradicting to the canon, since that cub was a male and therefore fulfilling the circle. And that he was named Chaka or Kopa, not Kiara, and having siblings named Shani and Timira)! While there were rumors that Rob Minkoff and Roger Allers thought the original cub complicated the story, they've still declred their ignorance about Kiara's gender at the time!
Of course the theories of Simba's Pride being canon have been brought up, also for starting in the same way as it's predecessor. With He Lives in You (from the Broadway play), since that the predecessor actually ended with the Circle of Life reprise.

Of course Kiara (as an adult voiced by Neve Campbell, though Jennifer Aniston and Sarah Jessica Parker were considered for the part) is just as adventurous and disobedient as her father was in the first film. And also being a departure from him, by not wanting to be royal (an article by New York Daily News labeled the movie as The Lion Queen, which could've been a suitable title). But Kiara's arc regarding her royal position is (in my opinion) vaguely executed and not consistently.
Since it's Disney after all, Kiara (who was originally Shani and afterwards called Aisha, until realizing that a character in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers shared that name) is easily comparable to the spunky and independent likes of Ariel, Jasmine and co. But that's really both her and the movie's Achilles heel and a big flaw! Kiara acts way more recklessly and ruthlessly than Ariel ever did (despite Ariel's receiving more hate). And regardless of her father's behavior, she disobeys him quite recklessly!

Besides, Kiara puts an immense faith in Kovu when they meet again as adults. Despite (apparently) having met each other just once as a cubs (and not to mention how she acted snotty and ungrateful when he saved her life)! Kiara seems oblivious about the potential danger Kovu represents and mostly sides with Kovu when Simba's is attacked by the Outlanders afterwards (originally Simba was intended to be killed by the Outlanders, yes, believe it or not, but it was scrapped). And just to notify, my statement was not meant to be a dismissal about Kiara's love for her father. But a statement about Kiara being too blinded by her love (despite how Kovu eventually grows and matures).

Biggest Flaw of Simba`s Pride: It`s Screenplay

We lions can laugh too,
not only Hyenas :)

Which leads us to the biggest flaw of the film; The screenplay! Evenfor a Disney cheapquel, it contains a huge gap; Kiara and Kovu unfortunately never spends enough time together as cubs (despite how they have more screentime as adults, it's notable that the marketing for the film marketed them mostly as cubs)! Which really doesn't seem to justify why Kiara places such an enormous faith in Kovu when they meet again as adults (Neve Campell and Jason Mardsen recorded several of their scenes together and worked on Saturdays)!

While the absence of time together on one hand makes sense, since both prides mostly prevents them to meet each other. It still would've made logically more compelling if they've spent more time together as cubs, to justify Kiara`s faith. And frankly, both of them were more endearing as cubs (of course it's could be assumed that Kiara and Kovu could've met each other as cubs within the story/outside the movie. But since the movie just shows that single interaction, it's easy to conclude that they didn't met again until their adulthood).

We're the stand-in for the same scene in the first movie :)

Second Flaw: What To Do With The Secondary Characters/Comic Relief

We can't be friends, you're too silly :)

Another flaw Pride possesses is it's comedy and not really
knowing how to use the characters from it's predecessor. At least sort of! Timon and Pumbaa mostly serves as Kiara`s misplaced babysitters. Regardless of all the opinions about the duo, at least they served a purpose in the original film; To take Simba in and learn him about Hakuna Matata (which just gets one mention in this sequel, yet it's rumored that it was going to be more mentioned and Timon citing that Pride is a sequel). In this sequel, however, they're (in my opinion) incredibly grating and just serves as juvenile filler.

Which is pretty much what can be said about the rest of the comedy on this film. Regardless of all the opinions about the original The Lion King, at least it does juggle comedy and drama well (in my opinion and frankly, Timon and Pumbaa were at least more tolerable there). Zira's eldest son Nuka (which means stink and was voiced by Andy Dick, who stucked a tissue both in his shirt and on his head on his recordings), serves as a semi-comic relief. And is quite grating and fails miserably!

Yes, my nose is strong enough to
cause wind when I'm breathing in :)

At least Rafiki has a slight purpose in the sequel. By serving as a semi-matchmaker for the lovebirds (and obviously gets to interact with Kiara more than he did with Simba as a cub). Yet Zazu only serves as a delivery assistant without getting his personality tratitsshown (perhaps due to that Rowan Atkinson didn't reprise his role). At least Banzai was originally meant to come back, but he was dropped. The same was meant with Sarabi, but it was scrapped when Madge Sinclair passed away (and yeah fanboys, we could always assume that Sarabi passed away, too).

Another Strength of Simba`s Pride: Simba`s Trauma

Regardless of all the opinions there are about Simba's Pride, at least it deserves genuine recognition for one thing; It actually shows that Simba is still haunted by his trauma! Pride deliberately includes this for a plot point. Yet it makes the story more realistic and logical. And therefore more compelling. And while it would be easy to whine that such a subject matter is quite dark for a childrens movie, anyway, the original was just as dark. So at least we have that to blame. But it`s still nice that Pride uses this, regardless of being a plot point, anyways.

Criticism of Simba/Romeo and Juliet Structure/The Lion Guard

Just pretend it looks yummy ;)

Of course one recurring criticism about Pride is about Simba's actions as a king. Several people have labeled him notorious for banishing the Outlanders and Kovu at the end. And being too oppressive to his daughter. To cite my opinion, it's fairly easy to see that side of the case. Yet to see the other point of view, his reasons for doing so are entirely justifiable! Simba had every right to suspect Kovu, due to his purpose (as cited by Zira in their first meeting in the film)!

I'm going to be your king, so I should sneer the most :)

Of course this has also brought up the speculation that Kiara will be a superior ruler as queen. Since how she intergrates the Outlanders at the climax. Whether Kiara will be live up to this, is of course debatable. But we'll leave that discussion for now.
Of course this Romeo and Juliet-story is for once destined to a happy ending. But it's notable that it has it's cake and eats it too; Unlike Pocahontas, this climax actually has a battle between the two prides and the inspirational speech to make the prides set the piece. But hey, at least this movie doesn't end with Kiara and Kovu reproducing, as it could've easily done.

At least we're diverse in color :)

And yeah folks, let's not forget that Disney has messed up with continuity by giving Kiara a same age brother in Kion in The Lion Guard. Of course this issue makes for a groan, but the creators have justified this that Kion appears during the time where was not shown in Simba's Pride. However, Zira and Kovu makes an appearance in The Lion Guard. But hey, what can we do about it?
And yes folks, the original climax ended with something that could've implied that Zira deliberately threw herself at the river, but it's was deleted.

Some Scrutiny of Mine

Of course this assessment was, as aforementioned, my personal opinions about the strengths and weaknesses of The Lion King-sequel. Regardless of all the various opinions about it, I'm sure there are people who've found more faults with it than I did (which I won't even bother to ponder about now). But of course the big question is that if Simba's Pride truly deserves to be perceived as an worthy sequel among the cheapquel catalog? Is it really good enough to be regarded as a worthy follow-up to what was among the time the biggest Disney King? (Yes, this pun was intended)

The Reason For It`s Popularity/Comparsions To The Lion King

It would be easy to assume that Pride's popularity is linked to the popularity of it's predecessor. Well, that's a fair suggestion (yet it's not a foolproof thing that every sequel of a beloved predecessor gains a fanbase because of those reasons alone).
However, in spite of this, Pride never becomes an exact replica of it's predecessor (at least tone-wise). It actually comes across like it's own movie with it's own tone and feel. Of course this doesn't mean that every sequel feels as a replica of it's predecessor. But where the original was sumptuous, epic and frankly quite grave, Simba's Pride is cuter, fluffier and frankly lighter in tone (despite having it's own fair share of darkness and depth).

In spite of this, it's fair to cite the fact that Simba's Pride is (at least by the major public) nowhere perceived as being superior to it's original counterpart. The Lion King is truly a labor of perfection, which is the reason why it's so beloved. However, it's notable that Pride is one of the rare cheapquels to actually have the characters be listed in the end credits. With both their supervising animators and voice actors, as Disney animated classics usually did back in the nineties and early millennium.

At least it's not "me Tarzan, you Jane". We couldn't :)

Epilogue

But to state my overall opinion about Simba`s Pride, I do have a genuine fondness for it. Mostly for it's strengths. I remember being quite mesmerized by it by it's initial viewing and actually loving it. So I do consider the praise to be genuinely deserved, despite it`s flaws.
Regardless of how Pride should've been perceived among the cheapquel phase, it`s a cute movie on it's own right. Unfortunately it's hampered by a stamp of belonging to a cheapquel catalog (and for it's other aforementioned faults). But at least fans of the film can be glad that it is regarded higher than it's cheapquel counterparts. So that makes it one ;)