Beloved movie re-made, suddenly gets savage reviews by "woke" critics

Remember Disney's "The Lion King"?  It was released 25 years ago.  Was it popular?  Did everyone love it--including the critics?

Why yes, it was wildly popular.  Critics--always anxious to praise the Disney empire--absolutely gushed over its magnificence.  Examples:

A certain blockbuster and a future classic, The Lion King is a scrumptiously delightful moviegoing experience.

Graced with heart, humor and boundless energy, this Walt Disney presentation should cut a huge swathe through all age groups.  Young tots and adults alike will warm to its nourishingly wise storyline.

The Lion King isn't just the best film of the Disney renaissance but the best animated film of all time! 

The number of equally gushing reviews for the original is virtually endless.

So in view of the wild popularity of the original, Disney has re-made it by using real animal images in place of the original animation.  But the plot is exactly the same as the original version.

So you might think the new version would garner the same effusive, unstinting praise as the original, eh?  And indeed, most of the initial reviews were total gushing.

But suddenly, mysteriously, a few "woke" critics--including the woke morons at the Washington Post--have decided that what was once described as "the best animated film of all time" is actually raaaacist and pro-colonialist.

Think I'm kidding?  Here's the sub-head of an op-ed in the Post.  (And you need to know that the Post never prints op-eds for views it doesn't endorse.)

No matter how you look at it, this is a film that introduces us to a society where the weak have learned to worship at the feet of the strong

"As we watch the herbivores congregate to bow down before their newborn ruler, “The Lion King” presents a seductive worldview in which absolute power goes unquestioned and the weak and the vulnerable are fundamentally inferior. In other words: “The Lion King” offers us fascist ideology writ large, and there is no obvious way out for the remake.

"As a fable “The Lion King” isn’t really about lions — or any other animal species. Instead, a variety of cute and cuddly creatures stand in for a deeply human way of organizing society. But mapping our own social hierarchies onto the pristine and “neutral” animal kingdom makes these power dynamics seem natural, common-sense and even desirable. And by using predator-prey relationships to allegorize human power structures, the film almost inevitably incorporates a worldview in which the rulers’ power derives from their biological superiority.

Skeptical?  Check the leftist cesspool "Vox":

"The animals fit into types, and the film on the whole vibes with a pro-monarchial view of leadership..."

"A community in Africa discovers its resources and home are decimated after a power-humgry would-be leader stages a coup, then collaborates with rapacious enemies from a foreign land who over-hunt and suck their land dry."

How did the fun, innocent, innocuous plot of the 1994 version suddenly outrage "woke" movie reviewers?  Seems they're outraged because they depict a monarchy (lion king) as a good protagonist.  Oh, and the woke reviewers were outraged that in the 1994 version, whites were hired to do the character voices!  This is outrageous because, reasons.

If you don't condemn the new re-make as raaacist and pro-monarchy you're just hopelessly...racist and pro-monarchy.