HOME | DD
i-stamp — Kimba and Simba
Published: 2011-04-24 05:32:16 +0000 UTC; Views: 7041; Favourites: 265; Downloads: 407
Redirect to original
Description
Made with a combination of Photoshop and Flash cs3.The Lion King copied a great deal off Kimba: The White Lion. And even if you like The Lion King better, even if they were originally going to make a 'tribute,' they never asked for permission and never credited Tezuka Inc. for the theft they never apologized for.
You can be a fan of TLK and not have the guilty conscious trying to justify a wrong Disney did. But don't try and deny it. That's what lets these things happen over and over again. Instead, be happy that Kimba was around to "inspire" Disney.
For more about the Kimba v. Simba debate, there's a really outdated website over here .
P.S. I will never disable comments just because people disagree with me. Feel free to voice your opinions.
P.P.S. Thanks to for the motivation to do this stamp.
Related content
Comments: 279
Also, people who say "well you wouldn't have heard of Kimba if it weren't for Lion King" - considering that Disney tried to sue Tezuka Inc. for attempting to air Kimba I dare say I would have.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I believe it was this stamp where I had first heard of the whole Kimba vs. Simba thing (years ago). Annoys me to think Disney got away with something like this - especially given how anal they are about their copyright.
Heard Pixar did something similar with Finding Nemo which if it's true then I hate - as I still want to enjoy Finding Nemo/Dory but knowing that it's potentially a rip off taints the enjoyment.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Just like if there weren't Nintendo, there wouldn't be a Sony Playstation or a Microsoft XBox!
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I thought the Lion King was based off of Halmet for the most part.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Some story elements were, but a lot of the character choices (baboon wiseman, hyena minions, dark lion with an eye scar) and specific imagery (pride rock, the thorn thicket, elephant graveyard, dead parent in the clouds) were not.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
You cannot copyright a representation of a character in the clouds or an angle. Everything else you said there makes sense, however.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
If there was no Bambi, there would be no Kimba. So, Tezuka Inc. should be happy Disney was around to 'inspire' Kimba.
Also, the stories are entirely different from each other. TLK is Hamlet, Kimba is Bambi. This is why Disney never apologized, they stayed as far away from Kimba as they could. It sounds lame and biased, but i do think a lot of 'evidence' people keep shoving down other's throats are actually coincidental.
As for the characters being similar, Kimba had a character for nearly every African animal in existence. If wouldn't have mattered what animal Disney used as a character, someone would always be able to trace it back to a Kimba character, that almost doesn't seem fair.
If you REALLY look at it, you'll notice TLK took more from The Land Before Time than Kimba. Think about it:
- A naive, adventurous youngster is born with great significance to a loving family
- he has a light colored female friend
- the 'circle of life' concept is mentioned in both films
- the protagonist and his friend both get themselves into terrible danger only to be saved by protagonist's parent
- his brave parent gets brutally murdered
- he cries over dead parent's body in a very emotional scene
- he then must wander a deserted wasteland alone
- until he meets some friends: a fat one that eats a lot (Pumbaa vs. Spike), and a small talkative one that rides on fat one's back (Timon vs. Ducky). Also both TLBT and TLK have a nervous 'flyer' character too (Zazu vs. Petree)
- After some soul searching; the dead parent appears to him in the clouds and ultimately guides him home
- after overcoming some obstacles in his way; and with the help of his friends, he finally makes it home and lives happily ever after. Sound familiar?
It's not like Disney never ripped off Don Bluth again ever, just look at Dinosaur compared to The Land Before Time. The similarities are a lot more clear here than between TLK and Kimba.
The only REAL reason people go ape shit on this; is because they both take place in Africa and are about lions. But that's like saying every movie about dogs ripped off of Lassie.
Please do some ACTUAL research before condemming TLK completely, rather than blindly agreeing to whatever 'master internet' says
👍: 1 ⏩: 1
First, Kimba had very little to do with Bambi except for stylistic influence to character design. Second, Bambi doesn't belong to Disney, it was an adaptation of a book (very little of Disney is origional works, Disney is mostly good at taking other people's tragic stories and dumbing it down for the kiddies).
Third, my list is not vague stretches of narrative overviews but exact scenes and characters. Not just a mandrill but a wise old mandril shaman who beats some sense into the protagonist. Not just an evil lion but a foppish dark colored scar eyed lion. Not just a vision of dead father but a cloud that shapes into the father to deliver hope and assurance. Etc etc.
Not coincidence. Not ambiguous. Just straight up idea poaching. Done way more research on this than you apparently have.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
'Kimba had very little to do with Bambi except for stylistic influence and character design." Same argument can be used for this controversy between TLK and Kimba! You just basically admitted that Bambi inspired Kimba. So, Disney still influenced Kimba first. So again, they're about even of this mess. I know Bambi was based off a book, and Kimba was based off that adaption. Deal with it.
Also, I never denied that Disney took some elements from Kimba, of course they would have. It's what they do (as you said).
But Kimba had a whole TV series to utilize the landscape and create every possible event possible in the setting, it wouldn't have mattered what TLK used for a scene, again it could be traced to some point in the Kimba series.
I just think people are looking in the wrong place, i still maintain Disney took MORE from The Land Before Time than Kimba, but for some reason no one gives a shit about that, because Littlefoot isn't a lion. So people keep going ape shit about Kimba, when very little was actually taken from it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Same argument can be used for this controversy between TLK and Kimba!"
No it can't, I just explained why. Instead of vague allusions to a hero's journey or some stylistic choices, whole scenes and characters were taken from Kimba for TLK. And this isn't just a matter of Kimba having a long running TV series. It was deliberate, not accidental. And nobody who saw TLk's plans to make a Kimba movie in storyboards then sudden change into an 'original' movie is fooled. The bulk of Simba's story was taken from Kimba, not other sources.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
The bulk of Simba's STORY was taken from Hamlet and The Land Before Time, almost from plot point to plot point. If some scenes from Kimba resemble the same as TLK; then Kimba must have taken 'inspiration' from Hamlet too.
All they really took from Kimba was some imagery and character designs/traits.
And Kimba is Bambi, even the physical traits are similar, small black noses, big bug eyes, black ear tips, spiked cheek fur. Their stories are similar too: both are born with only one parent to look after them, humans have a strong presense in this universe, a parent is shot by hunters, they meet various animal friends including a young female of the same species, and they have to follow their father's footsteps to bring harmony and become royalty of their setting. For Kimba it's 'King of the Jungle', for Bambi it's 'Prince of the Forest'.
So AGAIN, Kimba isn't original either. Stop attacking something for doing the same thing that the 'source material' did.
Bitching about it isn't going to do anything anyway. It won't erase TLK from existence, and it won't deduct any financial gain that the franchise brought in for Disney. Kimba is still loved in Pop Culture as it ever was, and so is The Lion King. Get over it.
You also clearly ignored my comparison between TLK and TLBT because if it doesn't tell you what you want to hear.
I'm done with this, we're just going in circles anyway.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
No, it wasn't. Kimba had very little to do with Hamlet, which was filled in the gaps of TLK where original characterization is supposed to go. But Hamlet did not have a stampede, a circling shot over the rocky outcropping and roar with birds flying about, or a feathery majordomo to the kind wise king, a wise mandrill shaman, a scar eyes dark foppish lion, seeing your dead parents in the clouds or sun, choosing to not eat meat so you won't threaten your meerkat and warthog companions, a fight scene in which the protagonist hangs off a cliff while the antagonist jeers above him, running away from evil but comedic hyenas and ending up comically thwarted by a briar patch, and so on and so on.
Your comparisons are weak and anemic compared to the sheer volume of shot for shot, clearly stolen characters and concepts TLK did. I'm not looking to bring down TLK's financial gain or remove it. I'm educating about this, one of several instances where a fandom got built up on Disney's deceit. And I've had plenty of comments here thanking me for not just putting up and shutting up as you would clearly have me do.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Take it from someone who has actually seen TLK recently, a lot of the storyline doesn't revolve around Kimba at all. I'm guessing by your hostile attitude towards this film; you haven't actually seen TLK all the way through for quite a while.
Most of the story centres around Mufasa's murder and Simba getting blamed for it by his own uncle. Kimba doesn't bear the guilt for his father's death, he wasn't even born yet; he never even met him. Claw had nothing to do with Panja's death and isn't related to Kimba in any way, he's just a rogue. Lion King used much of its screen time to develop a bond between Simba and Mufasa, and then Simba's guilt for thinking he caused his death. TLK is about 'coming of age', moving on and facing responsibility. Kimba was more like 'Robin Hood' lion, an active hero vigilante for his jungle animal friends.
Most of the complaints you pointed out are nitpicky and take up little of The Lion King movie. The only real complaint i can see are the character designs for some of them like Rafiki and Scar, the rest i'd say is just the fact that Kimba had an entire TV series to use virtually all possible scenarios using the African landscape and animals.
"I'm educating about this."
To what end? And what purpose? To teach people how to hold a grudge against a 20 year old Disney film that people really love? Teaching that all good things originated somewhere else? Because again, Kimba was inspired by Bambi so...
Or is it to teach that plagiarism is bad? That's not a bad moral mind you, but using TLK is a HORRIBLE example! Not because the evidence isn't there, but because teaching this moral usually implies you to use an example where said plagiarism had consequences. The Lion King is a beloved Disney classic that many people hold very dear, and it raked in a shit load of money for the company! Still does. So how can you teach this moral if Disney didn't suffer for it? It seems that TLK actually encourages plagiarism, just like Frozen encourages recycling old ideas and pretending like they're new. I know there's ethics involved and everything, but face it...nobody really cares except you.
And don't use that 'those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it' argument. Plagiarism will NEVER cease, especially in the media industry. Just look at Dreamworks' films in regards to Pixar movies! Now THAT'S shameful plagiarism! In fact, without it; the industry would crumble. Considering how difficult it really is to come up with something 100% original, especially nowadays. My advice is to get used to it. Otherwise, you'll find yourself not liking many films at all.
Again, i never denied that Disney took some elements of Kimba for TLK. It's what they do. But the originality it DOES have; is strong and definitely worth noting. The art is beautiful, the music score is phenomenal, the songs are memorable, the animation is gorgeous and fluent. It's still a solid, beautiful movie regardless of what sparked its creation. To only focus shit like this...is pretty damn sad. Kimba is beautiful too, but visually at least; i find TLK more striking.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
All you've described is, what TLK didn't lift off Kimba or filled in with Hamlet. Not nitpicky, there's just very little of the movie outside those elements because it's a fairly vapid movie. But the 'influence' it drew from Kimba really cannot be compared to Kimba and Bambi which I've already explained.
Whats sad is the 'Simpsons did it' defense to clearly lifted material as if Kimba had explored every option instead of TLK writers being lazy, which they clearly were.
Just because Disney got away with their shitty behavior doesn't mean they shouldn't be called out on it. And just because you like it doesn't change that no, it's not very original and it's most groundbreaking attributes had nothing to do with the writing or design work. Avatar was groundbreaking in its animation too, doesn't change that it's pretty damn derivative. And if argue less so than TLK. I still like parts of Avatar, but I understand that it's not a good movie. And neither is TLK.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Plagiarism is EVERYWHERE! It's not a good thing morally, yet great things can come from it. Films in particular. So i still suggest getting over it, otherwise you'll have a pretty miserable existence, not being able to enjoy anything as it is; just because it resembles something else.
But fine, be cynical and whiny about something that can never be changed. And just becasue you DON'T like it, it won't change the way TLK has impacted pop culture; or the way it has inspired many people.
And whether or not TLK is a good movie; is more a matter of opinion, not fact. Even you can't be that pretentious.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
'Nothing new under the sun' is not an adequate argument when there are, in fact, still novel concepts and origional ways of handling archetypal concepts out there. It's just not something Disney does well.
There is also a gradient of acceptable inspiration that I'm fine with. Plenty of fantasies owe it's roots to LotR yet still manage to blossom into their own distinct stories. TLK doesn't. Avatar doesn't. They also don't even bother acknowledging their source material. Disney even tried to bar Kimba from a film festival TLK was playing at because the fuckers knew more people would become aware of what they did.
That they've inspired people doesn't change the wrong that's been done and should be acknowledged. Just like it wouldn't if, on the occasions here on DA where people copy art and others like it despite the obvious theft. Liking something doesn't absolve wrong.
You were the one that started saying TLK is a good movie. I think it has two good songs and the rest are obnoxious or forgettable (especially can you feel the love, can't wait to be king and hakuna matata). I think most of the characters were bland and empty feeling tropes(with the exception of Scar). I think the art was just an upgrade of standing designs. A rather good upgrade but not novel (also rather like Avatar). Overall I think the best thing to come out of TLK was the stage play, which actually did do some ground breaking things.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Whatever helps your self righteousness sleep at night bub
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I prefer Kimba to me honest. Lion King has a racist scene in it.. like they literally copy some of the Nazi march in the hyena march scene. X_X I like Lion King a bit still but that scene really bugs me.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Wasn't loin king suppose to be remake of Kimba : The White lion? I remember in production or pre production states that there is concept artwork showing simba as a white lion.
here is the image
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia…
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
What do you think is the better one Kimba or The Lion king, I know wha disney did was wrong, but I have to admit, The Lion King left a huge impact in a lot of lives, also with it's Broadyway musical
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I do like the musical more than the movie. But I credit the overall story and characters to Kimba.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm assuming that Disney took so much from Kimba that the only really difference between The Lion king and Kimba is that Simba is not a white lion, and if he was he would have been Kimba
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Kimba is a really long television series with lots of character development. Meanwhile The Lion King is a feature length movie. Simba does resemble Kimba as most know him, but he resembles the shallow, foolish young Kimba (even as an adult) more than the Kimba established. The striking similarities are more what happens to Simba. Pretty much nothing happens to Simba that doesn't also happen to Kimba. The stampede, the dead father, the father in the clouds scene, being struck by a mandrill Shaman telling him to man up, his lady love, even an elephant graveyard and falling into a thorn bed.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
So it's most likely, than the lion king was really suppose to be a remake or a theatrical release of Kimba, but for some reason they pulled away from the idea, and then claim Lion as there own
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I believe that reason is Disney had a couple greedy assholes in charge and didn't want to ask permission or pay for royalties.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I'm not defending their actions . but isn't it possible while The Lion King was suppose to be a american remake of Kimba, they ran into an issue where they couldn't use Kimba, so they made there own version? I mean it doesn't make sense they would make other movies where based off of the old stories like Alladin ( Arabian night) The little mermaid, and Cinderella, and for some reason claim lion king as completely as there own for the reason of greed. I know most of movies disney makes are in the public domain so they don't need to credit the author, but what made Lion king so special.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I doubt that. Not the part where they wanted to make an adaptation, but the part where the issue was anything but they couldn't be arsed to pay for royalties. This isn't the first time Disney has snubbed a modern author. You should check out the book The Mouse Betrayed sometime.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
That true, thanks I will check that book out. In a way, I'm not really surprised, I mean Disney had a long history of controversy.
But did you say, that there were stories that were adapted into film by disney which were not in the public domain? Did disney credit the authors or the families of the author?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Fuck I had a chance to get the whole series at ComicCon for like 40 bucks. Shouldn't have passed that up.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
There's a lot more to it than that.
Foppish dark colored lion with a wounded eye, keeps hyena minions.
Kimba, who saw his dead father in the clouds, keeps a parrot king's aid, who receives wise instruction from a mandril shaman. There's even a stampede scene and a pride rock circling with the lion roaring scene. A warthog and meerkat friend. He tries to eat grass so he wouldn't have to eat them.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
There's a difference between "referencing" and "blatantly ripping off".
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Simba means 'power' so what does colour have to do with anything?
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hidden by Commenter
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Well that's a plain as fuck name then.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
Hidden by Commenter
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Oh shut up dumbass. I know a lot on names. Grow the fuck up and quit replying to ancient comments like a butthurt child.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Hidden by Commenter
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Frankly I prefer Kimba over his Japanese name Leo, it's so plain for a lion.
Lol, which ones? XD
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Hidden by Commenter
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
? What? Eh? I'm just saying I like the name better than the Japanese one. and I'm a otaku, that's saying something, cause most people think we worship Japan or something. Or are you referring to liking both Simba and Kimba? Cause I do like both, except that one scene in LK that rather bothers me. Feel free to ask which one.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
| Next =>