Talk:Mufasa: The Lion King

Note

The entirety of the Production section was copy pasted from the The Lion King (2019 film)#Follow-up film. Noting this as per WP:COPYPASTE. Rusted AutoParts 15:40, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Zimmer not doing the score?

According to this link, he's not doing this film. giftheck (talk) 09:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 17 May 2024

Sddrawings1229 (talk) 21:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC) I would like to edit the paragraph about the negate reactions[reply]

 Not done Twice you have removed that section without explanation and twice have been reverted. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Aoidh (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prequel AND Sequel??

Kind of a strange way to describe this. While, maybe technically accurate, this film appears to be pretty much a prequel that starts out in a sequel timeline because it is being told by someone in past tense. Unless there's a considerable amount of storyline that takes place in the time after Lion King, perhaps this should be changed to simply call it a Prequel?

Mind you, I have not seen the film yet, since it won't be released until December 2024, nor have I read a draft of the script. Robertjm (talk) 14:06, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think of it as a prequel within a sequel, but I doubt that such wording is allowed in Wikipedia articles. Cbsteffen (talk) 03:25, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By definition any prequel is also a sequel, prequels are a subtype of sequels, where the story happens to be set chronologically earlier than the previous film. I do not think it is necessary to call it both a sequel and a prequel merely because it is bookended and uses a flashback as a framing device. I do not believe it is helpful to normal readers to be told it is both a sequel and prequel, that begs an explanation that the lead section does not have space to give.
In some rare cases such as The Godfather Part 2 the story is not merely a flashback but two significant stories told at different times and in such as case as that it might be appropriate to claim a film is both a sequel and a prequel. That does not appear to be the case here and simply calling it a prequel would probably be simpler and clearer for most ordinary readers. -- 109.79.69.146 (talk) 19:47, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Budget

Okay. I want to clear some things up: Although the budget on this article is stated as $200 million, Variety states that it's north of that, meaning it exceeds that number. See https://variety.com/2024/film/box-office/sonic-the-hedgehog-3-mufasa-lion-king-box-office-opening-weekend-projections-1236251797/ Ele3ctricBloom$ (talk) 16:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's so bad, it's clearly a ballpark estimate, and a surprisingly low estimate since its predecessor The Lion King cost $250–260 million. Disney doesn't seem able to make a movie for less than $200 million. I see that the Infobox has been changed to "$200+ million" and while that extra "+" symbol was clearly done in good faith is misses the bigger problem that the WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE is " to summarize, but not supplant, the key facts that appear in an article" and instead of making minor modifications to the Infobox (which other editors may reject or overwrite) this needs to be properly explained as prose somewhere in the article body. The Production or Development section of the article is often a good placed to explain the budget, especially if it is known what amount the film was greenlit at when it went into development. (The budget is sometimes included in the Box office section to compare and contrast with the box office gross and potential profits or losses the film may have made.) Boxofficemojo[1] does not list a budget for this film. TheNumbers.com lists the budget as $200 million.[2]
Brent Lang at Variety (Dec 27) said the film "cost $200 million to produce"[3] in contrast to the previous (Dec 17) cautious estimate from Rebecca Rubin[4] presenting the same number as if it has been confirmed as a known production budget figure. This is a bad habit I've seen before from Variety of asserting their own previous reporting as fact without any caution, or explanation, or correction of the earlier figures. Editors of this encyclopedia must remain skeptical and not exclude or cherry pick budget figures. -- 109.79.69.146 (talk) 19:39, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was checking on this page and read the conversation, and I realized the plus wasnt there, so I put it back Theeverywhereperson 06:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see you added it back[5] but editors soon removed the "+" notation[6]. Unfortunately editors are still ignoring WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE which is to " to summarize, but not supplant, the key facts that appear in an article". Editors should first add the budget to the article body with proper context and explanation, instead of quibbling over minor formatting in the Infobox. -- 109.76.130.114 (talk) 18:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly! Theeverywhereperson 18:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong box office

I may be completely wrong, but according to https://www.the-numbers.com/daily-box-office-chart, the box office numbers are $88.3 million instead of $209.8 million. Hellothere34343434 (talk) 16:36, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both are correct the 88 million is domestic (US and Canada) whereas the 209 million is worldwide.--67.70.103.133 (talk) 04:32, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading claim

Disney has made a misleading claim on X(Twitter) saying that Mufasa: The Lion King is #1 in America, despite Sonic The Hedgehog 3 grossing better than Mufasa in America. [7]https://news.meaww.com/disney-called-out-for-falsely-touting-mufasa-the-lion-king-as-1-movie-in-america-over-sonic-3 GuyUser81 (talk) 01:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Surprised no one has added in yet. Ryanisgreat4444 (talk) 03:46, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Same here. Disney is trying to bully the film into being #1 even though Sonic 3 has already out performed it both globally and in America. --Tailikku (talk) 05:20, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beyoncé Knowles-Carter or Beyoncé?

Created in response to the discussion at Talk:Wicked (2024 film) § RfC on whether credited name or common name should be used. How should Beyoncé be referred to within articles related to The Lion King (2019 film)? Beyoncé Knowles-Carter or just Beyoncé (but with a footnote added that she is credited as Beyoncé Knowles-Carter)? Let me know what you think. Thank you. ScarletViolet tc 13:14, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How credited mostly as it reflects her own wishes - she is the one who makes that choice - and is the preferred choice in WP:FILMCAST. Common name supported by references, as permitted in FILMCAST, is a fallback for those cases where there is no official credit such as for uncredited performers or cameos. Geraldo Perez (talk) 16:30, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 28 January 2025

In the lead section replace X "$627 million" Y "$627.5 million".

It should be immediately obvious why this correction is needed but no one did it already so maybe it needs to be explained that the WP:LEAD section is supposed to summarize what is in the article body, and the article body says "$627.5 million" also when rounding numbers in the normal way MOS:LARGENUM $627.5 million should round up to $628 million, and to truncate it down to $627 million is inaccurate. (I have repeatedly asked User:Evope to try to be more careful and remember to properly update the lead section when updating the box office gross but he seems to have some kind of blind spot when it comes to this recurring error.) This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, basic mathematics should not be wrong simply because this is a film article. -- 109.78.196.175 (talk) 21:17, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The box office figures were updated and the issue fixed,[8] at least temporarily.
I noticed an edit from January 27 in which the edit summary stated "We don't round up"(diff) The MOS:FILMLEAD documentation gives no suggestion that this is the case. The claim that the normal rules of rounding numbers (MOS:LARGENUM) somehow does not apply to the lead section of film articles is bizarre, and it is especially strange to suggest that this would somehow only apply to the lead section but not also the Infobox or article body. The basic rules of mathematics and simple rounding of numbers in the normal way should apply to film articles the same as any other Wikipedia article. -- 109.79.167.239 (talk) 14:19, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


In the lead section please replace

  • X "$721 million" with
  • Y "$721.1 million".


This keeps happening! Editors keep failing to round number in the normal expected way, MOS:LARGENUM it is not that complicated. The WP:LEAD is supposed to summarize what is in the article body. There is no good reason to not use the same figures in the Infobox and lead section. $719.6 million normally rounds to $720 million, it is inaccurate misleading and unnecessary to truncate it down to $719 million in the lead section. Please fix this again. -- 109.76.132.35 (talk) 23:26, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update figures. There is no good reason not to use the same figures in the Infobox and Lead section. -- 109.76.129.86 (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Article still fails basic math, and needlessly and inaccurately truncates the gross in the lead section.
In the lead section please replace

  • X "$721 million" with
  • Y "$721.9 million".


(or round both figures up to $722 million, because it seems strange to pretend to care about precision while being so imprecise about it). -- 109.76.131.32 (talk) 02:08, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An editor denied this request without commenting, their edit summary claimed (diff) "It requires reliable sources". This is not new information. The reliable source is Box Office Mojo, the same reliable source already clearly reference in the Infobox and article body. It is unclear why editors are unwilling or unable to get simple basic numbers right and consistent. If more explaining is needed then please comment on this talk page, not just in an edit summary. -- 109.76.131.32 (talk) 22:16, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Vestrian24Bio then deleted the above comment without any explanation.(diff) It is highly irregular to delete WP:OTHERSCOMMENTS. It remains unclear to me why editors are choosing to deliberately ignore MOS:LARGENUM and not follow the simple normal expected rules of rounding numbers, or even the simple consistency of using the same matching numbers in the Infobox and lead section. -- 109.78.196.5 (talk) 15:10, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Box office gross figures have been updated to match consistently in all three places.(diff) -- 109.78.197.79 (talk) 15:53, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
... soon made inconsistent again by editor only updating the Infobox(diff) and failing to update the lead section. -- 109.77.199.220 (talk) 16:38, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Infobox says $722.6 million and the lead section says $722 million. They should both contain the same figures, either $722.6 million or $723 million. It should be an embarrassment to editors that they leave this encyclopedia with big obvious fails of basic mathematical rounding. Please see MOS:LARGENUM. It would be better to not edit at all than to leave an encyclopedia with such basic and glaring errors an inconsistencies.

In the Infobox and lead section replace

  • X "$722.6 million" with
  • Y "$723 million"

I shouldn't have to keep repeating a request that editors observe basic mathematics in an encyclopedia. -- 109.76.135.1 (talk) 23:04, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Day Creature (talk) 20:39, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I hope it lasts for a few days at least. -- 109.76.135.231 (talk) 21:36, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Last Disney DVD release

Mufasa 2024 movie become a Last Disney DVD release, Future Disney titles releasing on Blu-ray and Digital only without DVD. 77.79.182.116 (talk) 15:22, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{Citation needed}} -- 109.76.129.86 (talk) 13:19, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 March 2025

Switch the voice actors of Azibo and Inaki, as they are wrong

Correction below:

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Vestrian24Bio 04:11, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mufasa:_The_Lion_King