ANYBODY SEE THE REMAKE OF JUNGLEBOOK YET?

It is on my to see list.

I'm waiting for it to come out on download. But it sounds like they did a good job with it. I'll be curious to see if my 6yr old daughter likes it.

we went to the theater to see it in its best environment. (Sound and pic were very true , not over accentuated). No heavy base drums with exception of one scene which surprises everyone.
Its a bit dark so some kids may be a bit frightened.

If youre a Kipling fan, the Jungle book is just about a few chapters devoted to the whole Mowgli story but, for every" JB" movie Ive seen thus far (starting with the original Sabu version and the first Disney, and now this-I missed the oriental effort), the Kipling story is always deviated from differently in each movie.

Just as Phil Hrris was a great Balu in the foirst Disney feature, Bill Murray does a "hopped up, yet administratively oriented" Balu an Im glad that he didnt phone it in like hes done in his recent movies where he always looks like hes on drugs and really couldnt give a ****.
Christophr Walken voices a charatcter that Kipling never had in mind except for an entire "species of felons".

The cgi blended with actual scenery was flawless as an art form. (The credits reflected that, there were hundreds of cgi and special effects and photography techs amd artists)

HOWEVER, NYT panned the **** out of it, but I nver let that bother me until after a show to see whether I agree or not.

BTW, the KIng Louie character, although never included in Kipling stories, was an Orang in the first Disney movie. NO Orngutans in Inja.
So they worked it out with a fossil species. Thatwas cool.

Movies are never the same as the books. They just don't have the time in a movie to go into the details a book does. So I try to think of them as completely different stories even though they are based on the same content.

yeh, the movie versions actually blended parts of Kiplings Jungle Book I and II , with some characters that Kipling never had.
I saw a review that was kida dismissive in which the reviewer said that the Disney moves were "inspired by" not "based on" Kiplings stories.

You know that Kipling was living in Vermont (next door) when he wrote many of these tales in JB I and JBII.

I didn't know that. I always figured he lived in India or something.

I didn't even like the first Disney film of Jungle Book. Never watched it all. But all I had to do was see the trailer for this version and I want to see it.

The first Disney version looked "Flat". This one, because its cgi blended with real scenery and the kid is alive, its believable.

Im curious how many here would receive it. Its not that I am against all cgi, its just that most cgi movies just do it because they dont have a story to tell. Mowgli can be enjoyed on many levels .

I will take a Mowgli over a Tarzan any day.

I hated the original's art work. But I could have suffered that if the script had been good enough.

I've not seen it but my kids loved it.

did they comment on the inserted "darkness" in the movie? The new themes were more akin to the original live movie with Sabu (a movie that I think was made in the 40's)

Not that I'm aware of. My youngest is autistic and doesn't really have the language skills to comment, but I'll ask the kid.

I didn't think it seemed that dark, it had exactly the same amount of violence as many kids' films and the lessons seemed to be the same.

I thought it was incredible, the only issue I had with it was they were inserting songs when it wasn't a musical which just felt incredibly inappropriate.

agreed. They had to insert the songs from the first Disney version and I too, do not know why they did that. Sorta pointless. BUT, having someone like Christopher Walken sing that particular song, was a hoot.

How about this?

My wife and I and kids and grandkids all enjoyed.
Glad you asked.

When I was tiny I adored the Jungle Books. Wisely, I never went near the Disney monstrosity.

I'm not sure about this one. I'll have to go by myself if I go....nobody I know ever read the books