The Jungle Book

7

SSH83Apr 19, 2016

CG is amazing. 7 star purely for the CG. If the CG wasn't so good, the acting, story and Music would take this to 2 star.

I liked the original "I want to be like you," this version is very... offensive to the ears. Like someone triedCG is amazing. 7 star purely for the CG. If the CG wasn't so good, the acting, story and Music would take this to 2 star.

I liked the original "I want to be like you," this version is very... offensive to the ears. Like someone tried too hard to mimic the old one but overacted. For story, they followed the skeleton of the original, but lost a lot of the charm and spirit of the original. The acting... well... just think anakin skywalker from phantom menance, but 100 times WORSE.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

7

csw12Aug 22, 2016

Beautiful animation and solid directing brings back great memories of the classic...........................................................................

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

7

SpangleApr 24, 2016

The Jungle Book is everything it ever should have been. A truly magical experience, The Jungle Book features stunning visuals, a great score, and fantastic special effects. This classic tale of a boy living in the jungle has been told beforeThe Jungle Book is everything it ever should have been. A truly magical experience, The Jungle Book features stunning visuals, a great score, and fantastic special effects. This classic tale of a boy living in the jungle has been told before obviously and its certainly not the most original plot nowadays to boot, but this does not prevent the film from still sweeping you up in its truly heartwarming tale. The Jungle Book bears its soul for all to see and the result is a truly touching and thoroughly emotional film. I honestly had to fight back tears repeatedly while watching, a feat that does not happen much. Yet, when director Jon Favreau is in control, this seems to be a regular occurrence. He honestly may be a master at emotional manipulation and touching your heart through his films, as evidenced here, as well as in Elf and Chef. Though this one is a big budget film, it feels wholly intimate. Ben Kingsley, Bill Murray, and Idris Elba, are all phenomenal here as voice actors. Neel Sethi is about as good as you can expect of a child actor. He never soars above expectations, but never disappoints either. Overall, The Jungle Book is about as good as a film of this type can be. It can be a little cardboard cutout at times, but it really touches your heart and entertains throughout thanks to great writing, direction, and voice acting.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

7

Jack97May 5, 2016

I never saw the original Jungle Book nor did I read the book so I was more or less unfamiliar with the story. But this Jungle Book movie is quite darn impressive I must say. The visual effects are the best I've seen so far this year. II never saw the original Jungle Book nor did I read the book so I was more or less unfamiliar with the story. But this Jungle Book movie is quite darn impressive I must say. The visual effects are the best I've seen so far this year. I believe this film has set a new standard for CGI at the movies. The story, although simple, is well executed. The voice acting is top notch (Bill Murray and Idris Elba especially), and the film has the good old Disney adventure vibe to add the needed entertainment and excitement. Overall a solid outing from Disney.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

7

Compi24Apr 20, 2016

Featuring quite possibly the most groundbreaking use of CGI to date, "The Jungle Book" is as much a testament to Jon Favreau's superior directorial prowess as it is a suitable interpretation of the Rudyard Kipling tale we've all come to knowFeaturing quite possibly the most groundbreaking use of CGI to date, "The Jungle Book" is as much a testament to Jon Favreau's superior directorial prowess as it is a suitable interpretation of the Rudyard Kipling tale we've all come to know and love. Thanks in no small part to the brilliant imagery, invigorating set pieces, and devoted voice acting work from every cast member, the resulting product is easily Disney's finest live action remake to date.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

7

kreegan64Sep 25, 2016

6.5/10 but rounded it up since Metacritic doesn't allow half points.

This movie surprised me, I'll admit it. I was definitely ready to hate this movie as it's trailer made it seem like it was just another heartless Disney cash in on6.5/10 but rounded it up since Metacritic doesn't allow half points.

This movie surprised me, I'll admit it. I was definitely ready to hate this movie as it's trailer made it seem like it was just another heartless Disney cash in on another timeless animated classic like some OTHER remakes they made. I was excited to see how they used Scarlett Jo as Kaa and how the movie would potentially mess up my childhood. I got the invert of what I was expecting. The movie lends itself to a rather enjoyable flick that I would watch again, but it's not exactly what I would define as good per se.

STORY:The story for the most part holds itself faithful to the original animated classic, but in some areas a little TOO faithful, certain parts of the movie feel very forced and jammed in there, and take away from the overall experience a little. In the other parts where it isn't exactly faithful it expounds upon, giving just a wee bit more depth to the original. Then there are some rather disappointing parts (MINOR SPOILER) such as the complete under utilization of Kaa, not to mention the unoriginal use of Kaa against what Kaa actually was yet again as opposed to the book that the movie was based off of(END SPOILER) Other than that and some boring and illogical parts and a somewhat anticlimactic ending, it holds its own.

VISUALS: Eh, I'm still waiting for the movie that manages to have CGI that doesn't look like it came from 2002 You'd think CGI would have improved more than this. Lackluster animals look, well, lackluster, but such is the world of CGI at least in this one they manage to be expressive, which is more than I can say for the lone human character, Mowgli, but I'll give him a break seeing he's a kid. The rest of the visuals manage to be decent, with a nice jungle aesthetic that looks okay, but nothing mind blowing.

Music: The music does its job, but the only part of it that really sticks for me is the Scarlett Johansson rendition of Kaa's "trust in me" song that only appears at the credits (if I remember correctly) the other renditions of the originals songs are either forced or just adequate.

You wont be wasting your money if you go see it, but if there is a better movie available, you might want to consider if you should watch that one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

SEROJAug 13, 2016

Probably one of the best CGI i've ever seen! The visuals are stunning! The story is a classic and the acting (obviously by the only actor) is acceptable but not so great! Overall i highly recommend this movie for all ages! I adored theProbably one of the best CGI i've ever seen! The visuals are stunning! The story is a classic and the acting (obviously by the only actor) is acceptable but not so great! Overall i highly recommend this movie for all ages! I adored the russian classic from 1967 "Mowgli" and this movie was for me - very special, even though i believe it could've been better! This is probably the highest 7/10 i ever gave :)… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

7

marc5477Sep 20, 2016

After watching three terrible movies (X-Men Apocalypse, Independence Day Resurgence, Where to Invade Next) , I was relieved that the Jungle Book was decent. I actually liked it more than the original which I only enjoyed for the music. AlmostAfter watching three terrible movies (X-Men Apocalypse, Independence Day Resurgence, Where to Invade Next) , I was relieved that the Jungle Book was decent. I actually liked it more than the original which I only enjoyed for the music. Almost all the characters are portrayed better in this live action movie than in the cartoon including Mowgli, Baloo, Loui and Khan. Baghera was basically the same which is fine, and really the only disappointment was Kaa who is now some sort of magical female enchantress type character rather than being comically weak and clumsy. I prefer the original Kaa character over the new one but its a minor issue. This movie improved on the story by making it more cohesive (by adding more backstory) and I thought that it worked. I thought the final confrontation was complete asinine and I really missed the acapella style vultures from the original. I would love to have heard more music in this movie as well since that is what made the original memorable and because the story is overly simple. There was some music in the movie but it was more of an afterthought. I would have rather the music be more prominent like a traditional musical. Still a good movie and fun for the entire family.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

7

ToFewViewsApr 24, 2016

The Jungle Book is a odd movie, It's trying to bring back a animated movie from most people's childhood but this time it's much more violent and has a lot less singing. With the amount of violent/action scenes in this movie it doesn't feelThe Jungle Book is a odd movie, It's trying to bring back a animated movie from most people's childhood but this time it's much more violent and has a lot less singing. With the amount of violent/action scenes in this movie it doesn't feel much like the original other then a few odd parts in the movie. One thing that was done right was CGI, They did a great job at keeping it seem realistic when working with humans and CGI. They also kept some human charm to the main characters to even that they are animals. The voice acting is also done well, Bill Murray, Christopher Walken and Ben Kingsley are just a few of the people who worked on this film. All together I'm confused by what Jungle Book wants to be. Dose it want to bring are childhood movies into a realm of violent action films? or still try to bring back what made it so special when we were younger.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

7

RalfbergsSep 5, 2016

A nice movie and the visuals are great for sure, but I was expecting something more from the story. I did know the story before, but I hoped for some extra twists or something like that. Yes, there were some additions which were quite funnyA nice movie and the visuals are great for sure, but I was expecting something more from the story. I did know the story before, but I hoped for some extra twists or something like that. Yes, there were some additions which were quite funny but I wanted more. Also I this still is meant mainly for kids, so not really for me anymore.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

PipeCApr 15, 2016

Favreau is the director of the umpteenth installment of the classic, this time with CGI special effects and an unusual vocal group.

Once more, the adventures of Mowgli in Indian jungles written by the young Rudyard Kipling are adapted byFavreau is the director of the umpteenth installment of the classic, this time with CGI special effects and an unusual vocal group.

Once more, the adventures of Mowgli in Indian jungles written by the young Rudyard Kipling are adapted by Disney under leadership of Favreau with a significantly attractive result. Together with visual quality, the vocal team is exceptional, these qualities can overshadow the theme background and development of the plot without purpose that accompanies the film during its progress. Summarizing the results of previous deliveries of the "The Jungle Book" around the world, it can be affirmed the support of audience with animals of the jungle, and it seems that this will not be the exception, because its previous evidence.

It's important to remember that this will not be a of the last times we listen to Kipling animals in the cinematography, since the production company Warner Bros will finance "Jungle Book: Origins" under the direction of Serkis and will be full of stars like Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett, Benedict Cumberbatch and Serkis himself as Baloo the bear ( itself delayed lately by the producer until 2018, apparently due to lack of time for proper development by the "ambition" of the project).

From the unforgettable opening scene of the old style of the castle of Disney where then the camera opens road between branches of fruitful trees of the jungle, start something that seems to be a chase human against animal, from that moment ,the realism (excellently illustrated 3D) pervades to perfection in an image that appears in pure manner. It is characteristic of Disney products resume in the form of remake or remastering classics already enshrined in the minds of adults. This strategy, beyond of reborn a memorable story, its second intention is to generate more money, due to which stimulate both the minds of adults and infants who are anxious to be dazzled with the film itself.

I think if the film was dumb would be spectacular, but the eccentric accompanied by Ben Kingsley or Scarlett Johansson is converted in which could be a more masterpiece for its financier. Mowgli (Neel Sethi) is an Indian boy who grew up in the jungle pleasures along with a pack of wolves. After an unexpected enemy re-appeared in animal life, the boy must embark on a sea of adventures and dangers, where he will find a spiteful tiger (I.Elba), a betray snake (Scarlett Johansson) or an unconditional "lazy" bear (Bill Murray) to discover his true family (he ultimately finds it).

Justin Marks' script tends to stumble and ago decline the continuous progress that the film presents. The dialogues are well executed, what it feels like to loose and inconsistent is the intent of the story, (spoiler) the guy is fired from the herd to go to where he truly belongs, but suddenly he's fighting with a tiger face to face for save the animals of the jungle, summarize the aspects of the plot are feel superfluous.

Disney never ceases to die one of its characteristic hallmarks, humor. Each film should have its load identifiable humor. After a slightly dark and dramatic tone in the opening, at the time that Baloo (Bill Murray) appears everything changes. Remarkable is the effort of each line written to the bear, where half of that dialogue has a load of humor. And speaking of Baloo, the homage made by Murray to recreate the 1967 song is really emotional.

Even more admirable is the delicate and precise design of the grotesquely beautiful animals, it is a disproportionate beauty, it's a beauty that stands out, it's a natural beauty, this is truly an animal beauty.

A tiger majestically managed and drawn that looks real. An extremely large snake, where each flake has a pinch real. A giant orangutan in a forgotten temple , accompanied by several monkeys shows the fear and respect for the King of the jungle. A Black Panther give fear or a bear that has no words of description. All this is highlighted and praised as with a magnifying glass with IMAX 3D.

All this cinematic perfection is weakened once more by an end of fairy tales. I think that for be a product of Disney must not have a happy ending or at least repetitive end of death of the villain in all of its films. But well, we all knew it was going to be, after all this is an adaptation

As well as his script and plot are increasingly more monotonous, the audio-visual quality of the project is very promising and exceeds limits of what has been done so far in this type of real action products.

Favreau and Pope produce a sumptuous and delicate visual experience that brings the best of CGI technology in a movie where the animals are the main feature. Interesting and realistic, Jon's work exceeds the requirements of the tape, but the tape itself is carried to the monotonous and incomprehensible. Again, Disney takes advantage of this move, while Warner Bros. and Andy Serkis are adjusting pants to try to overcome its main competitor. Warner'll let us dumbfounded. I'm sure.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

7

YellowKirbyMay 14, 2016

While not as good as the 1967 original, Jon Favreau's 'The Jungle Book' manages to flesh out the characters more so than the original did, and improves vastly on both the story and the action sequences. The only thing bringing it down is theWhile not as good as the 1967 original, Jon Favreau's 'The Jungle Book' manages to flesh out the characters more so than the original did, and improves vastly on both the story and the action sequences. The only thing bringing it down is the comparison between the voice acting from both versions, and of course, the singing too. But apart from that, this is a well acted, beautifully animated film.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

7

RobBob99Apr 19, 2016

The Jungle Book is the most visually engrossing movie I've seen since Gravity. The voice cast including Bill Murray, Idris Elba, Ben Kingsley and Christopher Walken and many others are all outstanding additions to the film. That being said IThe Jungle Book is the most visually engrossing movie I've seen since Gravity. The voice cast including Bill Murray, Idris Elba, Ben Kingsley and Christopher Walken and many others are all outstanding additions to the film. That being said I do feel as if The Jungle Book is overrated. Neel Sethi is fine as Mowgli but there are a few awkward moments. The story to me wasn't that investing even though it stays true to the source material (which I appreciate), just to me, I wasn't completely into the whole story.It's without a doubt a good movie but not the great one everyone has been making it to be.… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

7

BananaGamer12Apr 25, 2016

O filme é lindo e tem uma diversão garantida para quem assistiu as versões anteriores,porém falha em muitos aspectos como dublagem,elenco e direção,mas no resto é um bom filme

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

7

JonZsuJun 19, 2016

A boy in the jungle grows up to be a hero, who embraces the nature and also, his own nature. The Jungle Book told us this amazing story with over-the-top visual effects on every single detail, it is both fearless and astonishing. However, theA boy in the jungle grows up to be a hero, who embraces the nature and also, his own nature. The Jungle Book told us this amazing story with over-the-top visual effects on every single detail, it is both fearless and astonishing. However, the music numbers are a tiny bit too abrupt.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

7

JeneferAug 6, 2016

The Jungle Book is successful in its animation techniques and the excellent choice of voice-match to character. However, the choice of the main character,the little boy Mowgli was not quiet right. In his role, he acted as a learned actor notThe Jungle Book is successful in its animation techniques and the excellent choice of voice-match to character. However, the choice of the main character,the little boy Mowgli was not quiet right. In his role, he acted as a learned actor not a spontaneous performer, his fears, his wonders, his daring fall short of moving us-the viewers-to feel it sincere and touching, in other words we have felt he was acting his role not being.it.

Few scenes needed more attention in its details like the scene when Mowgli found the small elephant in the pit. There should have been more attention to the way Mowgli ties up the robes,skillfully makes the knots,roll them around the elephant climbs up and connect the robes to the other elephants outside gesturing to them to move back...this important scene has been minimized and presented small?
Why is Mowgli's teeth so white? he is living in the jungle and eating like the way animals eat?
The bees scars which spotted his body have disappeared in the evening,nothing was in his body??
These small details matter if the movie is meant to mount high.in its rank.
Briefly and generally, he animation is beautiful,the facial expressions of the animals are marvelous and excellent is the voice choice.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

7

JyroJyroAug 15, 2017

Great family-friendly movie that is gratifyingly different to the original. Even with the plot becoming increasingly conventional over it's run-time, it is hard not to be wowed by the incredible visuals that are on offer here. Voice acting isGreat family-friendly movie that is gratifyingly different to the original. Even with the plot becoming increasingly conventional over it's run-time, it is hard not to be wowed by the incredible visuals that are on offer here. Voice acting is also excellent (especially from goofy Baloo/Bill Murray). The ending was a little predictable.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

CarFan1999Aug 12, 2016

Before I start the review, there are two things that i'd recommend you do before seeing this film. Number 1- watch the original 1967 animated film as there are many references from that film in this new one. Number 2- see this in 3D, as itBefore I start the review, there are two things that i'd recommend you do before seeing this film. Number 1- watch the original 1967 animated film as there are many references from that film in this new one. Number 2- see this in 3D, as it improves the visuals and heightens the action.

I was skeptical about this movie originally as previous live action Disney movies (based off their cartoons) were not highly rated and Disney itself is hellbent on making money with remakes, sequels, and spin-offs. This seemed like another cash grab movie. However, I'm happy to report that this new Jungle Book is a properly done remake. It honors the original source material (the actual book & 67' movie) and improves upon it at the same time.

All I can say about the original is that it's a cute movie with nice songs and fluid animation. But it lacks a core plot, lacks drama, and is filled with filler scenes. The new one takes the basic plot line of the original and adds all the elements that were missing from it to make a deeper, darker, and more complex story. The action scenes are tense and violent, emotion is clearly displayed, and the story itself takes a balanced amount of material from the original movie and the books by Rudyard Kipling. Our main character, Mowgli, has adventures with the various animals while dealing with the threat of tiger Shere Khan. As this film is all animated, except Mowgli, the voice acting is done quite well from all the A- list actors involved and the one real actor does a superb job as well. The songs are very catchy and the lighter scenes are pleasant as well.

However, the majority of the credit for this should go to the animators. The animation here is so realistic and detailed that it seems completely real and believable. Since this was filmed and created for 3D specifically, it's best to see this that way. So is this a perfect movie? No. The biggest problem with this movie is the way the story is told. While a lot better over the original, the story is a little episodic and feels disjointed. The 2/3 act is overly long and a little boring. In addition, since the voice actors are so well known that when their characters spoke, at times I could only envision the actor speaking in the recording booth. Overall, this new 2016 Jungle Book is a technical masterpiece with wonderful animation, memorable characters, and a story that; while disjointed and overly long; is an improvement over the original.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

7

JP32Mar 24, 2020

Watching the film, I had no idea where the real world ended and the effects began. This is the best compliment I can give to a special effects film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

WhereismymindAug 19, 2016

The animated Disney version was my favourite movie as a child. This new take didn't surpass it, but it did it justice. The characters of Shere Khan and the Wolves were more interesting, but the overall darker tone made it loose a bit of theThe animated Disney version was my favourite movie as a child. This new take didn't surpass it, but it did it justice. The characters of Shere Khan and the Wolves were more interesting, but the overall darker tone made it loose a bit of the original's charm. It's still a movie worth watching.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

DominArsenDec 8, 2018

Le Livre de la jungle

-Un beau film qui prend pour représentation le livre de la jungle, mais qui se propose comme un film seul, comme si rien n’avait été fait avant lui. J'ai cherché les clins d’œil à l'oeuvre originale de 1967 et je n'estLe Livre de la jungle

-Un beau film qui prend pour représentation le livre de la jungle, mais qui se propose comme un film seul, comme si rien n’avait été fait avant lui. J'ai cherché les clins d’œil à l'oeuvre originale de 1967 et je n'est pas trouvé même la voit du serpent à changer de sexe et c'est transformé en femme psychopathe (peux être une vision de la femme manipulatrice qui est peux être la femme du réalisateur ou autre, si telle est le clin d’œil il n'est pas bien venu... enfin je divague un peut). Surtout à destination des enfants cette scène reste quand mémé sans humour. Les blagues ne sont pas très nombreuses, j'ai moins ri que dans les souvenirs que j'ai du moment ou j'ai vu Mowgli à la Télévision cathodique sur cassette. Heureusement que Balou est présent . Peux être que ce n'est seulement qu'un film plus mature après tout, mais alors quelle est le public.... Enfant, adulte ... ? Ou peux être moi qui n'ai pas compris.
-Les acteurs et doubleurs sont convaincants même le petit. Encore petit pour être parfait. Par contre la voix d'Eddy Mitchell est sublime et fait passé les autres doubleurs pour des feuilles si fines qu'on ne souhaite plus les entendre.
Pour les musiques mises à part les 3 principales qui ne sont pas si folles... le reste n'est que peux convaincant; basé sur du déjà entendu. Il est sûr que j'oublierai cette BO comparée à celle de 1967.
-Les paysage sont beaux les animaux très bien réalisé ;)
-Je tiens quand même à signaler que la 3D n'est pas inutile, mais que le Dolby Atmos on aurait pu s'en passer vu le temps qu'il est utilisé et mis en avant ;)
-Si vous aimé foret et animaux alors oui le cinéma est la bonne destination!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

7

tamcwlmmJan 23, 2018

The Jungle Book has to me this positive vibe that keeps up the whole movie. With the singing and the friendships. The CGI is great and Shere Khan (Idris Elba) sure gives me the goosebumps. I liked Baloo (Bill Murray) a lot, he was this happyThe Jungle Book has to me this positive vibe that keeps up the whole movie. With the singing and the friendships. The CGI is great and Shere Khan (Idris Elba) sure gives me the goosebumps. I liked Baloo (Bill Murray) a lot, he was this happy singing bear that immediatly befriends Mowgli. It's a beautiful family film with sometimes some jumpscares and action scenes that puts you on the edge of your seat.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

IxamApr 17, 2016

A decent movie for kids, but adults may be disappointed. Not a bad film, but I won't be recommending it to my friends or family.

Pros: Beautiful CGI Likable characters Some good action scenes Good Villains Cons: Stale, cheesey dialogue, tooA decent movie for kids, but adults may be disappointed. Not a bad film, but I won't be recommending it to my friends or family.

Pros:
Beautiful CGI
Likable characters
Some good action scenes
Good Villains

Cons:
Stale, cheesey dialogue, too much chanting about the pack
Forced nostalgia. The movie would have been better served by omitting some of the nostalgia and keeping the themes/feel of the movie more consistent.
Disappointing final fight scene. Can't explain more without including spoilers.
Illogical resolution. The ending seemed forced, and the characters did not seem consistent at the end of the film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

chad326Apr 24, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As someone who loved the original jungle book as a kid, this was definitely a dissapointment for me, and not just because they took a very different tone than the original. While they made a valiant attempt, and there was clearly a good chunk of effort put into the movie, it definitely fell flat for me.
First off the format that they chose is extremely hard, because literally the whole movie is 1 kid on a green screen for the whole movie. think about that for a moment, the entire movie rests on the shoulders of Neel Sethi's acting, who while i think he did a very good job, he's still just a kid and that really really limits the quality of the movie, because no matter how good of an actor, no matter how much practice Neel has had, he's still just a 12 year old kid, he's not a professional actor. Now this worked just fine in the original jungle book because it was a kids movie, and everyone knew it was a kids movie. The new jungle book really tried to be a serious movie that adults would enjoy as well, and that's where i think its biggest flaw is.
This brings me to my next point which is the "realism" that they chose to implore. Now having life like animals that talk has always been a very rocky slope, there a lots of examples where it can go horribly wrong and not very many where it goes right. From the very opening scene that shows mowglie running through the forest, until the end of the movie you could pretty easily tell that even a lot of his movements
were cgi, which also took away from the experience for me, but my biggest qualm with the realism is that they tried so hard to make the movie realistic and then continued to allow very large plot holes. Mowglie is a human whos lived with animals all his life, and so because he's a human with no education of any kind he's a boy genius? without even pausing to think, he comes up with very intricate ways to engineer situations to his advantage, within the movie they just call it "his tricks" but i mean seriously, he suspends himself from a cliff with a vine as a rope, anchored by animals with a system of how the animals should move in order to put him in the right position to use a saw that he made to cut down chunks of honey, all without getting stung, but when he does he just completely brushes it off like it never happened, all of which he thought about for literally 30 seconds, less even, it took him 30 seconds to engineer and begin making this very intricate plan to get honey for baloo, and this is just the tip of the ice berg. throughout the movie the fact that he was such a boy genius and able to completely ignore pain (he was stung by at least 20 bees but still managed to get the honey, and then miraculously healed in 1 minute, and towards the end he gets a huge gash across his chest from shere khan (the antagonist/ tiger) says ow and then continues on as if nothing happened.
this was probably the biggest turn off for me, they seemed to try so hard to make the movie believable, but its a story about talking animals and a boy who's apparently the next genius of an era, and has the pain tolerance of 2 grown men combined. the original movie was just a fun kids movie that didn't try to be real, and i think thats the biggest distinction between the two.
I did think that the casting was exceptional, but i am a little biased against christopher walken, i think that the character of king louie could have been portrayed differently, and played a little better.… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

6

sanyrubOct 10, 2016

Decent live action film with amazing visuals that cannot get past of a generic plot with not much thought. A good version? Yes. Oscars and awards talk? How? When? Hmm no. It isn´t anywhere as good as to deserve such thing. Watch for theDecent live action film with amazing visuals that cannot get past of a generic plot with not much thought. A good version? Yes. Oscars and awards talk? How? When? Hmm no. It isn´t anywhere as good as to deserve such thing. Watch for the visuals and the kids will love it. But there´s no more to it. Nothing deeper or with special artistic value.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

dpaudiophileApr 15, 2016

amazed at how overrated this movie is... I mean its okay, but to give it 10/10 or 4 stars or anything close to that type of praise is insane.

This is a decent family movie, that should hold kids attentions and leave parents and youngeramazed at how overrated this movie is... I mean its okay, but to give it 10/10 or 4 stars or anything close to that type of praise is insane.

This is a decent family movie, that should hold kids attentions and leave parents and younger adults saying, "meh, that wasn't the worst thing in the world..."

For anyone who wants a good jungle book experience, go read the original book from the late 19th century. The 60s animated film is better than this 2016 version, and yet I would still say that the 60s film (barring the music) wasn't a masterpiece.… Expand

6 of 11 users found this helpful65

All this user's reviews

6

Voodoo123Mar 11, 2020

The incredible visuals are so arresting here it is an amazing reminder of how far CGI has progressed in feature films.... Sadly this wasnt enough to move me as the screenplay editing and pacing felt decidedly average and the weaker rehashesThe incredible visuals are so arresting here it is an amazing reminder of how far CGI has progressed in feature films.... Sadly this wasnt enough to move me as the screenplay editing and pacing felt decidedly average and the weaker rehashes of the classic original songs bare necessities and jungle vip stood out from the rest of the picture. So ultimately I just didnt feel anything for mowgli or his animal friends. Scenes just played out in sequence with little for me to care for. It felt like this was a missed opportunity as the cast are superb and under utilised (with the exception of Elba!).… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

AxeTJun 3, 2016

The animals are magnificent. The kid… not so much. While talking animals including a ferocious tiger, pack of wolves, black panther, big grizzly bear, huge gorilla, giant snake and more are all stunning in detail; the kid's mouth shouldThe animals are magnificent. The kid… not so much. While talking animals including a ferocious tiger, pack of wolves, black panther, big grizzly bear, huge gorilla, giant snake and more are all stunning in detail; the kid's mouth should have been closed a lot more in this. Actually, what would have made this very interesting and a daring more artful movie would have been no dialogue at all as in a silent animated extravaganza (well not silent but full of great sound design and music score). That of course would be too risky for a major Disney family release, but certainly more original than this highly formulaic remake that's moderately amusing some of the time. The story makes sense, but sure isn't fresh.
A note on stars doing voices in animated movies: it's better not to know who they are, at least until after it's over. Otherwise it blows the suspension of disbelief. I don't think anyone ever goes to one of these movies to hear any star's voice, ever! They are going for the story and animation and music solely. So why advertise it only to break the illusion once in?… Expand

5 of 6 users found this helpful51

All this user's reviews

6

EpicLadySpongeApr 15, 2016

Did you guys hear the news? Disney's remaking their very own Jungle Book and changing things just for the best of their own decisions. Changing Kaa's gender surprises me because that's normally one of the things that's going to cause my scoreDid you guys hear the news? Disney's remaking their very own Jungle Book and changing things just for the best of their own decisions. Changing Kaa's gender surprises me because that's normally one of the things that's going to cause my score to go down. What's normally great about this is that it's better than the Rudyard Kipling version which, also, is a critical success. Not enjoyable for me but for you moviegoers and Jungle Book fans will enjoy this without any doubt. A friendly adventure seems stale enough and that's not even possible with Disney's family-friendly adventures.… Expand

5 of 11 users found this helpful56

All this user's reviews

6

InglouriousAndyMay 17, 2016

"The Jungle Book" is painfully boring. Even with the stunning visual effects, this movie has nos soul or heart. It's an empty shell, but a good-looking one. And my goodness, Neel Sethi cannot act one bit. Worse than Jake Lloyd, no kidding.

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

notTheRadBradMay 22, 2016

an average to good movie for kids , the animation is the best, but the acting is not too good just normal , but still likeable for kids. The jungle book was a phenomenal cartoon series which quenched my adventure thirst in my childhood,an average to good movie for kids , the animation is the best, but the acting is not too good just normal , but still likeable for kids. The jungle book was a phenomenal cartoon series which quenched my adventure thirst in my childhood, can't say the same about this movie though.
But
Everyone has their own opinions , some might like it some might not and I stated mine and i think the plot isn't the best of all but still it's a solid plot that the cartoon series was based on (somewhat).Anyways , i wouldn't recommend this movie to adults who care about acting in a movie and suspense and stuff . This is just a kids movie. :)… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

5

StevieGJDMay 23, 2016

This is a good movie for kids, but I was underwhelmed. The digital rendering of the animals is excellent, really great. This is a visually stunning film. Some of the references to the 1967 animated movie are cute and endearing. But theThis is a good movie for kids, but I was underwhelmed. The digital rendering of the animals is excellent, really great. This is a visually stunning film. Some of the references to the 1967 animated movie are cute and endearing. But the script is the problem here. The story is corny and feels phony. Some of the short appearances of characters just seem pointless. While I absolutely love Scarlett Johnansson, her character's brief appearance in the film adds absolutely nothing. Much of the movie felt like this pointless scene. So, while they clearly have the technology to put Kipling's book on the screen, they needed to focus more on the plot and writing. I expected it to be great. Unless you are a child, it is not.… Expand

5 of 6 users found this helpful51

All this user's reviews

5

fungusgnatMay 26, 2016

This sumptuous 3D production is beautiful at every turn, and, even these days, when every year seems to bring some new mind-blowing advancement of the state of the special-effects art, "The Jungle Book" is startling (and funny and affecting)This sumptuous 3D production is beautiful at every turn, and, even these days, when every year seems to bring some new mind-blowing advancement of the state of the special-effects art, "The Jungle Book" is startling (and funny and affecting) in its own way. Moreover, if there is a rule to obey for success in the May-to-September box office season, it’s “Begin well,” and "The Jungle Book" begins well, with a mad race through the trees. Given all that, it’s too bad that Hollywood’s resourcefulness is so limited that it must accompany visual feast with narrative famine. This film’s story is likely to seem hackneyed and uninteresting to anyone older than 10. For adults, this is an eyes-only film.… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

5

TyranianOct 1, 2019

Almost completely lifeless and lacking the charm of the animated original. Visuals are strong but negate character.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

beezballApr 24, 2016

It took itself too seriously in the beginning and end, the middle was wonderful. Also, the changed ending, I very much disliked it. I thought it was unnecessary and probably politically motivated, as were the humans suck (typical) themes.

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

5

ElectroNickApr 26, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After hearing all of the critical praise of the remake to Disney's animated Classic I decided to check it out for myself. My personal conclusion is that it is a mixed bag. This film will keep your children entertained and it will keep you interested in a visual sense. However if you are looking for a film that has a solid script and a film with a clear focus on what it wants to be you will be disappointed. As I said before the visuals are really stunning with an excellent use of CGI for the animals. The film looks gorgeous as the jungle really feels alive and the animals look as realistic as they have ever been. The wolves and Bagheera in particular look realistic and it feels that you can reach out and touch him. The color palate also pops up with bright and beautiful colors. The score is also grand with reworking of classic songs. The part of the soundtrack which really stood out was the instrumental rendition of "Trust In Me" when Mogli was discovering his past through Kaa's hypnosis. The actors give a valiant attempt to bring life to the characters with great performances from Christopher Walken, Ben Kinglsey, Bill Murray, and Idris Elba. The film is unfortunate held back by a script which lacks any focus. It is unsure if it wants to be an adaption of the original book or a remake of the animated film. It tries to combine elements from both works but it creates a jumbled script. For example when Mogli meets Kaa she helps Mogli get her memories back and gives him sage advise like her book counter book. However in the next scene though she tries to eat him like in the animated film. Another example was that Shere Khan kills the eldest wolf and holds them hostage like a thug but than tries to act suave like in the original cartoon making it seem like they are two completely different characters enrolled into one. Another main problem is the lack of connection to the characters because the script moves from set piece to set piece without any time to let the characters develop their relationships. As a final note this film will keep children entertained and will fulfill your needs if your looking to purely be immersed in the jungle and will keep your kids entertained but it is unfocused. The original animated film may not have been a faithful adaptation but it had a clear focus on what it wanted to be. Aside from its score and impressive visuals it is really nothing more than an average family movie. It is fine from any other company but from Disney I expected better.… Expand

4 of 5 users found this helpful41

All this user's reviews

5

AdamGregory03Apr 4, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm just gonna start by saying I grew up with the original animated feature, which did have it's flaws and definitely wasn't faithful to Rudyard Kipling's original story, but I still liked it a lot. As for this movie though, I'll start with the positives. The film does look amazing and surprisingly realistic! Even though it is obviously CGI and at moments can look kind of fake, but on the whole you could swear the movie was shot in a real jungle. And I also like most of the actors they got to portray the cast, most notably John Goodman as Baloo, Ben Kingsley as Bagheera, and especially Christopher Walken as King Louie. The only one I didn't really feel was Scarlet Johansson as Kaa, but aside from her I feel like they all bring their own unique charm to these classic characters. With that said, the movie as a whole I thought was just okay as there are some problems that hold me back from considering it great. For one, there are just some things that don't make sense, like how come the elephants can't speak when every other animal can? Mowgli brings up briefly how every animal has a "language", but then apparently that means wolves, panthers, AND bears can all speak the same language? And also I thought the ending was kind of a cop-out. The original movie ended with Mowgli and the animals going their separate ways, as that was what was best. Here, Mowgli just ends up staying in the jungle and all the animals are cool with it now. Plus, the scene where Baloo is intentionally mean to Mowgli to convince him to leave felt kind of forced. On the whole though, it's not the worst movie ever or anything like that, and I won't hold it against anyone if they think it's a masterpiece. For me personally, I simply thought it was okay, and I definitely prefer the original movie that was fully animated... But maybe that's just my nostalgia talking.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

TuneisonDec 21, 2017

The Jungle Book is a completely average movie yet, because this is made by the "gods" known as Disney it gets spammed with 10/10 Reviews on this website. As for the film I'd certainly give it a point for some of the creature design. HoweverThe Jungle Book is a completely average movie yet, because this is made by the "gods" known as Disney it gets spammed with 10/10 Reviews on this website. As for the film I'd certainly give it a point for some of the creature design. However whenever Baghreea specifically talks it freaks me out because of how uncanny his movements are. People are also praising Mowgli's actor for some reason even though he sucked. As for the sequence of events it's completely predictable. As soon as they would introduce a scene you could tell how it would end. As for the Music it was okay. The problem was it appeared 2 times in the film. I must admit I liked both songs even without seeing the original. As per usual with these types of movies the cast is a cast of all celebrities and, one new guy isn't that surprising. The problem is they aren't playing human characters and, whenever these animals talk they just sound like the actors. Who wants to talk about the scene with Scarlett Johansen? I know I do! This scene is really creepy because Scarlett often uses certain elements of her body (her **** to enhance her performances. After seeing movies like Under the Skin where this works it really ruins the experience to know this actress normally does "sexy" performances. It seems very creepy that she is doing this to a Young Boy. That's more of a personal preference but, I feel it's still worth mentioning. Anyways, that's about all I have to say about this movie and, how average it is.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

JacobDec 21, 2016

The Jungle Book is as thick and tangled as the jungle itself. While on the outside it looks impressive with lush dense environments and believable animals it is rooted inconsistency. One minute it is happy loving tribute to the 1967 classicThe Jungle Book is as thick and tangled as the jungle itself. While on the outside it looks impressive with lush dense environments and believable animals it is rooted inconsistency. One minute it is happy loving tribute to the 1967 classic and then next it is a dark and realistic story based on Kipling’s film. The two elements never mesh well and cause inconsistencies as characters act one way one minute and another the next without it every feeling seemless. Over the two sides the playful homage is preferred with familiar songs, a familiar soundtrack, and voices that capture the spirit of the original characters. Unfortunately, all that is lost as likeable characters are made unlikeable, the threatening made unthreating, and a cobbled messed. With the new film having little to offer outside of visual spectacle, you are better off just sticking to the 1967 bear neccessities.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

pardogatoDec 21, 2016

There is this poem from León Felipe (circa 1930) that says:

“Take out the rhyme and take out the verse. Forget the sentence and erase the sign. But what is left, that, it’s the poem itself." (My translation, sorry) If for this Jungle BookThere is this poem from León Felipe (circa 1930) that says:

“Take out the rhyme
and take out the verse.
Forget the sentence
and erase the sign.
But what is left,
that,
it’s the poem itself."
(My translation, sorry)

If for this Jungle Book version we do the same, and forget the nostalgic effect and the CGI awe effect, what is left?, nothing, indeed. Sorry, but this film is nothing without those two elements. Child bait material for nostalgic parents.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

VipraApr 18, 2016

If you have read the original book and/or seen any earlier animations, you may safely stay away. You won't miss anything. You're better off doing anything else - may be just sleeping!
Unlike the irrelevant superhero animes, The Jungle BookIf you have read the original book and/or seen any earlier animations, you may safely stay away. You won't miss anything. You're better off doing anything else - may be just sleeping!
Unlike the irrelevant superhero animes, The Jungle Book could have a lot of educational value wrapped in excellent entertainment. But no, the makers of this movie decided to make a run-on-the-mill grand animation movie with some cliched humor and some unnecessary violence sprinkled at random.
The movie fails at many levels - from the glaring ones, like the incoherence of narration; to the counter-educative disproportionate animals, a Grizzly in an Avatar-esque rainforest hit by a drought, and an inexplicable temple structure. The "humane" innovations by Mowgli take the cake here, though!

I probably would not be so disappointed had they just created another stereotype animation, instead of creating a garbage out of a good kids' story.… Expand

4 of 6 users found this helpful42

All this user's reviews

4

sebastianaliAug 7, 2019

Un asqueroso remake que no tiene nada que ver con la original. Mejor se hubieran traído a los cuervos que en esta no están.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

Nobilis1984Apr 21, 2016

To understand why I do not like the movie you have to know that I was born in the 80s and thus know the original. It was even more beautiful and lovingly gezeichneteUnterhaltung. It had a special charm and loving characters.
This one looksTo understand why I do not like the movie you have to know that I was born in the 80s and thus know the original. It was even more beautiful and lovingly gezeichneteUnterhaltung. It had a special charm and loving characters.
This one looks really great and is also displayed realistically. But Bagira and Co are a disappointment.
Since the special charm missing I mentioned. Everything what makes the Disney classics so famous is not found. The humanity of animals is no longer there. Bagira one imagines the original as a buddy by your side before. Here he is just only an animal for which one does not feel any great sympathy.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

3

TheKavehJApr 30, 2016

Sure, the CGI is amazing in the rendition of the 1967 classic, but the rest of the movie seems unnecessary. The film tends to bore, and it becomes miserable to watch.

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

3

Lennon-SAug 24, 2016

Yet again we have film to gathered praise strictly on visual delights alone. And this and now Kubo I can't help but be in disbelief and the movie going audience and critics alike who refuse to weigh a film on its story.

4 of 8 users found this helpful44

All this user's reviews

3

night4Apr 28, 2016

I suppose if you like staring at a half-naked child for hours, this would be a good movie.

I was bored to tears, and so were most of the people nearby, I think.

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

3

autcheApr 15, 2016

Total rubbish movie. Just as boring as the original; can't decide if it wants to be suspenseful, scary, comedy or musical. Don't worry, it does all things equally crappy - except for being boring; that it excelled at. Only redeemingTotal rubbish movie. Just as boring as the original; can't decide if it wants to be suspenseful, scary, comedy or musical. Don't worry, it does all things equally crappy - except for being boring; that it excelled at. Only redeeming quality was Bill Murray & Ben Kingsley. I swear, the kid has to be the son of the guy that played Anakin Skywalker in episode 1.. Most kids within a 10 foot radius were sleeping; heard more than a few times kids asking what time is it and is it almost over. Ugh...this was almost completely awful (sans Bill Murray & Ben Kingsley).… Expand

6 of 19 users found this helpful613

All this user's reviews

3

GorbaxDec 2, 2017

This movie has a mostly great cast, that it completely wastes. The film somewhat mercifully, considering the quality of the ones still in there, sheds most musical portions morphing into a poorly done adventure film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

Miles_SDec 3, 2017

This movie has a mostly great cast, that it completely wastes. The film somewhat mercifully, considering the quality of the ones still in there, sheds most musical portions morphing into a poorly done adventure film.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

LivingTribunalJun 18, 2018

AS soon as I found out that the actor for Mowgli is so bad at acting, I couldn't focus on anything, and I don't think there is anything I enjoyed. It is true that those voices were great, but it wasn't the perfect casting. Also the ending wasAS soon as I found out that the actor for Mowgli is so bad at acting, I couldn't focus on anything, and I don't think there is anything I enjoyed. It is true that those voices were great, but it wasn't the perfect casting. Also the ending was completely from The Lion King.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

2

Chempion1Jun 2, 2020

Начну с хорошего. Графика и анимация в фильме на высоте. Сюжет, ну для 12 летнего ребенка, даже ничего.
Теперь о страшном. В фильме, пантера Багира это мужик-трансвестит, который может рожать котят!!! А Каа, это женщина......!!!
Это жеНачну с хорошего. Графика и анимация в фильме на высоте. Сюжет, ну для 12 летнего ребенка, даже ничего.
Теперь о страшном. В фильме, пантера Багира это мужик-трансвестит, который может рожать котят!!! А Каа, это женщина......!!!
Это же САДОМИЯ какая то! Disney вы же для ДЕТЕЙ снимаете!
ОПОМНИТЕСЬ! ЧТО ВЫ ДЕЛАЕТЕ!!!
Вам же теперь свой мультфильм переозвучивать придется! Детей не жалеете, хоть бабло пожалейте!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

1

queglayMay 9, 2016

Great animation, but the story was one dimensional and lacking to me. It's based almost entirely on conflict, and story tellers today have a duty to enlighten us more than this story did. My 8 year old was as disappointed as I was.

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

1

All_ButTrU4Jul 5, 2022

All the proof I needed to just how excruciating live remakes can be. The cgi is good but how it decides to tell it's story isn't.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

buk_lauMay 4, 2016

what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at itwhat a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.what a bad film, disney must be back at it again.… Expand

5 of 10 users found this helpful55

All this user's reviews

0

Joshua023May 18, 2016

They must of had a low budget it just sucked. Music was the hole thing. this was stupid. I'll just have my kid watch the first one. How could you leave out the great monkey song Im lost. sucks...

4 of 11 users found this helpful47

All this user's reviews

0

arash22Aug 14, 2016

I hate it when technology makes everything possible. maybe this movie was just for kids and I hated it because I'm too old for it. but the fact that they can do almost anything with this computers make me sick.
I am not totally againstI hate it when technology makes everything possible. maybe this movie was just for kids and I hated it because I'm too old for it. but the fact that they can do almost anything with this computers make me sick.
I am not totally against special effects but when the movie have nothing to offer except fake world and characters with a **** story there is no way but to flush it down. the only thing is worse than this kind of mechanical movies is my English. sorry.… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

0

Cedric_GAug 25, 2016

And this to my knowlage and from what I remember was the first of several plotless visual over hyped "masterpieces" that I made the mistake of wasting my money on this year! The most recent being Kubo and the two stings. Unless your a hipsterAnd this to my knowlage and from what I remember was the first of several plotless visual over hyped "masterpieces" that I made the mistake of wasting my money on this year! The most recent being Kubo and the two stings. Unless your a hipster art-nut or a teenager think twice before you read reviews that go on and on about a movie looking "amazing" it's very likely you'll be up for major disappointment!… Expand

4 of 7 users found this helpful43

All this user's reviews

The Jungle Book

User Reviews