# Lion King 3D one of the biggest surprises of the year



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

There are 4 old threads that show up here in a "Lion King" search, the newest of which is 2004.

Last night when an ad for the new 3D version appeared, I muttered something about negative about Disney and re-releases. Apparently, I don't understand. Yesterday from The Hollywood Reporter:


> Families are turning out in force to see the 3D conversion of the 1994 animated classic (theaters also are playing the toon on 2D screens), which was largely intended to promote the Oct. 4 release of the Diamond Blu-Ray edition of the film. But the theatrical run is turning out to be a phenomenon in and of itself.
> 
> Heading into the weekend, _Lion King_ was expected to gross $12 million to $13 million; by midday Friday, those figures had been revised upwards to $15 million or better. For Disney, the news kept getting better and better as the evening wore on (some box office pundits, however, thought it would gross $18 million to $20 million all along).
> 
> _Lion King_ remains the top grossing hand-drawn animation film of all time, and ushered in what's known as the "Disney Renaissance." All told, it's grossed north of $328.5 million domestically, and $788.2 million worldwide, includng more than $10 million already earned in Latin America by the 3D re-release.


The followup article today notes:


> Defying all projections, Disney's re-release of _The Lion King_ roared its way to a first-day gross of $8.8 million at the domestic box office and is now on course to gross as much as $25 million for the weekend.
> 
> _Lion King_ easily claimed the top spot over three new films - Ryan Gosling starrer _Drive_, Sarah Jessica Parker comedy _I Don't Know How She Does It_ and Rod Lurie's _Straw Dogs_ remake.


So is it really that good in 3D or is it just because it's new to a whole new generation of kids?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

New generation.


----------



## elaclair (Jun 18, 2004)

phrelin said:


> So is it really that good in 3D or is it just because it's new to a whole new generation of kids?


Probably a little of both. I love the movie and will probably go see it in the theatre while it's available. I may also do the 3D thang just because I'm curious how well/badly the 3D conversion was done....


----------



## phrelin (Jan 18, 2007)

Well, whatever the reason is, today's update is:


> Freshly updated to a new 3D version, the classic animated movie took in an estimated $29.3 million in North America, an astounding number.


I'm leaning on the side of a new generation of kids is making this happen. As one critic noted:


> "Once upon a time, pre-video, Disney reissued its classics to theaters for short runs so that a new generation could experience them the way they were meant to be seen. That makes this Lion King revival part of a grand tradition, 3-D or not," he writes. "Some who were just children 17 years ago have the chance to make this the first Disney film their kids see in a theater. Lucky them."


But those revenue numbers are stunning for a rerelease.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I miss the old days when this was routine... studios re-releasing a good movie for another run and for another generation.

I suspect most of this is a new generation of new kids who haven't seen it at all and parents who want to take their kids to see a family-themed movie that they probably have already seen themselves and remember it as a good family outing.


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

My kids have already seen most of these movies, as I own them on a media of sometype...

So I can't drop $50 to take the family to go see a movie, I already have ona $10 DVD..
And will re-purchase in about 2 weeks (Lion King) on Blu-Ray or newer media, for about $15...

Just can't do it...

56" Screen, Stereo System that rocks the walls... 
No need to go to a theater on THEIR schedule, just to see it on just a little bit bigger screen... with no ability to puase if there is a need for a food or potty run.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

Earl Bonovich said:


> 56" Screen,
> 
> No need to go to a theater on THEIR schedule, just to see it on *just a little bit bigger screen*...


Yeah, we're not talking about Cinerama sized screens any more, are we?


----------



## Earl Bonovich (Nov 15, 2005)

SayWhat? said:


> Yeah, we're not talking about Cinerama sized screens any more, are we?




Okay ... so it is a bit more then a "little bit"


----------



## naijai (Aug 19, 2006)

I will be getting it on Blu-Ray once released on the 4th so that i can watch with my toddler who cannot sit still through a movie (watched last 1/2 of Cars 2 standing by the stairs with her in my hands), as Earl said, i miss that pause button with her in the theater


----------

