LADY AND THE TRAMP 2 vs. THE LION KING 2

During the 2000's, Disney was in a predicament as far as their animation studio was concerned. After the Renaissance era, the films started to become less ambitious while other branches of Disney started heavily focusing on other projects involving the films and franchises that put them on the map. These were the Disney sequels, lasting from 1994 to 2008, even though the Disney sequels really came through the woodwork in the 2000's. Noted as one of the darker eras in Disney history, the Disney sequels still get a bad wrap. There are various reasons as to why these movies are heavily disliked, ranging from them being an unnecessary and haphazard extension of their source material, to them being made out of necessity for a younger audience, to the fact that they just don't sit well compared to Walt's original vision. But, of course, everyone has their preferences on which Disney sequels are the absolute best. For me, that honor goes to "Lady And The Tramp 2: Scamp's Adventure", but in terms of the popular opinion, the Disney sequel that gets the most credit is "The Lion King 2: Simba's Pride", which is a sequel I find to be highly overrated and weak compared to the massive 1994 film. But, the popular opinion is of course a reversal of my opinion. "Lady And The Tramp 2" gets criticized for many reasons by Disney fans, but "The Lion King 2" gets endlessly praised. I've pointed this out, but I haven't directly gone into detail as to why I think differently than most people. This journal entry will compare both films in detail in order to describe why I feel "Lady And The Tramp 2" is a better film than "The Lion King 2".

First off, it's important to note the similarities between each film. Both films were released around the same time, "The Lion King 2" was released in 1998 while the release of "Lady And The Tramp 2" came roughly three years later. Both films have the same director, Darrell Rooney, while Jeannine Roussel was involved with both films (she produced "The Lion King 2" and was the co-director and producer of "Lady And The Tramp 2"). In terms of story, both movies center on the offspring of the main characters of the previous films. Both movies have the protagonist enter a relationship with another character and they are united by the end of each movie. Not only that, but going back to the personnel, both films had production work at Disney's Australian animation studio in addition to their television animation studio in America. And going even further into fun fact territory, both films were released on the 27th of the month that they came out in. "The Lion King 2" was released on October 27th to home video, and "Lady And The Tramp 2" was released on February 27th. Now, I'm sure there are at least a few more similarites that tie these two films together in some way, such as the fact that both of them were previewed on the 1998 "Lady And The Tramp" VHS, but this would go on for far too long if I pointed out every minute similarity that is shared with these two films.

There are also differences, and this is where the judgement of quality comes in. First off, it has been stated in a video by a YouTube user named ILoveKimPossibleALot that "The Lion King 2" actually has a point and "Lady And The Tramp 2" doesn't really have one, which I don't have that much of a problem with. "The Lion King 2" acts as an extension of its source material and carries a bit more potential and ambition, which was capitalized by future sequels and spinoffs. "Lady And The Tramp 2" was among the crop of films that did not inherently need a sequel as the original film ended on a happy note. You could argue that "Lady And The Tramp 2" was made due to the production team loving the original film. This is apparent in the behind the scenes featurette, where Darrell Rooney explains that it was a film he loved as a child. But that motivation can be applied to many different things. At the end of the day, there weren't a lot of people clamoring for a sequel to "Lady And The Tramp". "The Lion King", on the other hand, was produced after Walt Disney's lifetime and it felt more appropriate for there to be a sequel. All of the Renaissance films and even the Revival films are not in the same arena as the Golden and Silver eras of Disney animation, where none of the films necessarily set themselves up for sequels. "You can't top Pigs with Pigs", Walt Disney stated at one point. This was a reference to a "Three Little Pigs" sequel short that wasn't as successful as the original, and that's why Walt opposed the practice of sequels. So, of course, modern films in Disney's library are more likely to get sequels than films that came out in the 40's and 50's and even the 60's.

However, that's not the thing I was touching on. What I was going to say was that both films, in terms of story, are different in terms of what their messages and plotlines are, and in terms of quality. "The Lion King 2" is a retelling of "Romeo And Juliet", and that is a clever idea. Can't knock it for that. Certainly there was a level of ambition that inspired the making of that film, as not only is it a sequel to a successful film, but it's an interpretation of a classic Shakespeare play much like the original film was. "Lady And The Tramp 2" is more of a role reversal of the original film, and has a different story than "The Lion King 2". It's about a character who runs away from home as his surroundings restrict him from doing what he enjoys, as he believes that joining a group of characters that has what he is looking for will make him feel more complete. "The Lion King 2" is about uniting different groups together in order to destroy prejudice, while "Lady And The Tramp 2" is a tale about the importance of family, and that the people you idolize can easily turn their backs on you at the drop of a hat. Two separate plotlines, two different themes. Both of which are important for children to learn about and can be done well in a movie. They've been executed well in the past. But here is the difference between these two movies. "Lady And The Tramp 2" has more focus on its plot than "The Lion King 2".

That is the thing that people seem to not point out. Sure, go ahead and argue about how Scamp is voiced by an adult actor which somehow doesn't make him convincing and how the fact that it is a role reversal of the original film somehow makes it an awful movie, but "Lady And The Tramp 2: Scamp's Adventure" is more consistent in its story. Take a look at the comic relief characters of this movie, which are mainly the Junkyard Dog team sans Buster. These characters are not placed in any of the dramatic scenes and if they are, the tone isn't sacrificed. The screenwriters understood that in order to make a great movie, they knew when to utilize every element effectively, including comedy. The funnier scenes in "Lady And The Tramp 2", such as the scene where Scamp's sisters are hoping that Scamp gets in trouble when he returns, or the picnic chase, are light-hearted and provide more of an opportunity for humor to be injected. You don't see Mooch or Francois interrupt any of the dramatic scenes in the movie. Once again, these characters are used in dramatic scenes, such as when it's revealed to the Junkyard Dogs that Angel desires to be a housedog. But they aren't doing anything comedic or stupid. They are just background characters reacting to what they're hearing, and it works well. Jock and Trusty are also examples, as their humorous scenes aren't interjected into serious moments, and if they are, such as the end scene where Trusty finds Scamp and Jock thinks he hasn't found anything, it is effective and it's actually funny and doesn't bring the movie to a halt. The tone isn't botched or ruined because of the humor, and you're still invested in the characters and the story.

Now, "The Lion King 2" on the other hand... ohhhh boy. I've already talked about Timon and Pumbaa's role in the movie too much, but stick around because I'm doing it again. In the list I wrote where I brought up the five reasons why I disliked this movie, this was the main reason why. I still stand by that there was only one scene where they worked, and that's the scene in the middle of the movie with the roaring lesson that Kovu is giving to Kiara. Other than that, there is NO reason for these characters to be in this movie whatsoever. None! They contribute absolutely nothing! They are awful! They are interjected into two emotional moments, crying like a couple of sensitive manchildren who get overly sad at everything. They do nothing in the final battle between the Pridelands and Zira's group of lionesses, other than dance like mating grasshoppers just when you are about to get invested in the conflict between the two different sides. They do NOTHING! They ruin every scene that they're in! Their humor is awful! Timon's voice is obnoxious! They mess everything up because Simba thinks it is a good idea to send them to watch over Kiara instead of sending Zazu. They suck! The only reason that Timon and Pumbaa are in "The Lion King 2" is because they were popular in the first movie. And everyone who loves this film doesn't bring it up. It's such a big elephant in the room where the people in the room are actively ignoring the elephant, even if the elephant makes a lot of noise. Nobody acknowledges that Timon and Pumbaa hurt "The Lion King 2" in terms of tone, but they will go on and say that "Lady And The Tramp 2" is a bad movie for absolutely stupid reasons.

Also, I think the animation is superior in "Lady And The Tramp 2". I mean, take a look at the third act of the film when Angel and Tramp are running across that bridge and the fireworks are going off. Look at the "World Without Fences" sequence, especially in the scene where Scamp is standing on that cliff and it pulls back to reveal the whole cliff. Look at the character animation and look at how smooth the movement is as well as how articulate the facial expressions on the characters are. "Lady And The Tramp 2" is one of the Disney sequels that looks better than normal DTV animation. It looks as though the animators put a lot of passion into making a beautiful looking film as opposed to rushing it out to please its demographic. "The Lion King 2" was clearly rushed when it comes to its animation. The characters are much more stiff and restricted, and the designs themselves don't jump out at you like they did in the first movie. That is, except for Kiara and Kovu. The music is also superior in my opinion. The songs in "Lady And the Tramp 2" feel big and grandios. Every song has effort put into it, especially "Always There" and "A World Without Fences". Then, you look at "The Lion King 2" and its songs, and it feels like everyone took Benedryl before making these songs. Most of them are lifeless and the vocalists just sound bored and uninterested. Also, the voice acting is better. Like it or not, Scott Wolf is charismatic as an actor, and he made Scamp convincing as a character, even if he was in his 30's at the time that the movie was being made. Alyssa Milano is excellent as Angel. And more importantly, the actors voicing the returning characters actually sounded like they cared. That is not something I can say about "The Lion King 2" and its returning actors and characters, except for maybe a few. All of this is proof that I think "Lady And The Tramp 2" has far more appeal and effort than "The Lion King 2", and it is NOT because I am biased or have nostalgic feelings or whatever.

Yes, nostalgic feelings are stronger than logical feelings at times, but I take a look at both of these films and I don't get why people think that "The Lion King 2" is a better movie than "Lady And The Tramp 2". I'm not saying that the people who enjoy "The Lion King 2" should stop enjoying it. That is NOT what I am saying. It's NOT. I mean, there are times where I feel like the world would be a better place if everyone thought like me and hated "The Lion King 2" and loved "Lady And The Tramp 2", and there have been times in the past where I've thought about immaturely badmouthing people who think "The Lion King 2" is their favorite Disney sequel, but that isn't reality. I don't think like that, because that is wrong. But, I do feel it's important for people to see my perspective of things, and at the end of the day, it's nice to hear a detractor's opinion rather than someone who agrees with you on everything. That is probably the best thing about movies and other media. People have differing opinions at time, and that could go for some interesting discussion on a movie, whatever one it is. So, I welcome anyone to discuss why they might feel differently or if they agree on this. There are fans of "Lady And The Tramp 2", as there are fans of "The Lion King 2". Some people like one better than the other, and they can't help it. It's the same thing with my opinions I've shared here. I can't help that I pick "Lady And The Tramp 2" over "The Lion King 2". And, maybe it is because of nostalgia and bias that I like this movie so much. This movie was a big part of my life when I first became a fan of it in late 2010, and even in 2011 and 2012, watching it every night on my DVD player. And since then, I've loved it to pieces. It inspired me to be the person and the artist that I am today. Scamp is a character that I could relate to immensely back then and to this day I still look up to him. Maybe it was that way for fans of "The Lion King 2". Maybe it was there for those people at a special part of their life, and I do not have a problem with that. Whatever makes you happy and whatever brings you back to a better time when things weren't depressing or monochrome, keep on loving it.

So, yeah, in my opinion, "Lady And The Tramp 2" is far superior to "The Lion King 2" on every level imaginable, and I think I have explained it pretty well. If you're someone who has never seen either movie, I hope my opinions have given you an outline of what to expect in "Lady And The Tramp 2" and "The Lion King 2", and you can take this with you if you plan to take a look at both of them to form your own opinion. If you disagree with me, I hope that you can still understand why I feel this way, and I hope you get where I am coming from. I don't look at things the same way as other people. That's for sure. So, what do you guys think about both of these movies? Do you agree with me or do you disagree with me? Leave it in the comments down below. And please, be respectful. Do not leave any immature comments because that will not be accepted here. But, if you're willing to discuss your opinion in depth, and you are willing to explain why you feel like one is better than the other, you're welcome. This is not meant to weed every fan of a particular fanbase out, as anyone who is willing to discuss things in a level headed and respectful manner is appreciated. So, keep that in mind as you leave your comment. Please feel free to enjoy my content on the Scamp4553 Deviantart account as well, including other lists, reviews, and other series. Also, if you'd like to get a glimpse at the insanity that takes place outside of this website, check me out as Scamp4553 on Instagram and as SimbaKoda444 on YouTube. And of course, more content is coming your way soon. Take care.