The Jungle Book (1967)

 The Jungle Book (1967)


Disney’s The Jungle Book is a lovable, high-spirited adventure that all ages will enjoy. Like many Disney films from before 1970, this is considered a classic in the eyes of many. Personally, it does not reach the heights of top-tier Disney animation classics such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, but it remains a movie everyone should see. Rudyard Kipling’s story is a bit on the dark side, so Walt Disney took the basics and gave the film a light-hearted energy suitable for children. When the fantastic song “Bare Necessities” appeared, it is an example of light-heartedness that Disney was striving for. Still, there are some darker moments when it comes to the snake, Kaa and of course, Shere Khan the tiger. The hand-drawn animation is excellent, and it is obvious that care was taken into creating the animated characters. The voicecast is well represented with the characters. Disney chose some marketable names which was extremely rare in 1967. He felt that George Sanders was the right voice for Shere Khan. He even went as far to have the tiger designed based on Sanders’s appearance. There are reasons why the film struggles to make Disney’s best animated films. Most of the reasons relate to character deficiencies and a very basic story that could have used some fat. If you notice the movements of the orangutans, you will know what I mean by character deficiencies. On a lighter note, the vultures were originally planned to appear as The Beatles. That would have been really cool!

After The Sword in the Stone was released, story artist Bill Peet told Disney that its time for the studio to create more interesting animal characters and suggested Kipling’s The Jungle Book as the next project. He agreed and took a hands-on approach because of the prior’s film mixed reaction. Peet wanted to follow the more sinister tone of the book, but Disney disagreed and removed Peet from the project. We do have Peet to thank for creating Louie, the king of the monkeys. In the end, Disney wanted a lighter, character-driven story with more gags, an emotional core, and just a fun atmosphere. This would also be the last project that Disney would ever work on before his death. The film was released shortly after his death. I think, for the most part, they succeeded in following Disney’s vision for the project. Every scene with Baloo the bear is enough to warm your heart. Same with Louie the Monkey King and those awesome, marching elephants.

Mowgli (Bruce Reitherman) was abandoned in the jungle as a baby and was raised by a pack of wolves. As Mowgli grows older, the wise panther named Bagheera (Sebastian Cabot) believes that Mowgli needs to be returned to the humans. Baloo the bear (Phil Harris) opposes the idea and takes Mowgli under his wings teaching him there is no better life than living in the jungle. Bagheera is under the realization that Mowgli does have enemies such as Kaa the snake (Sterling Holloway) and more importantly, Shere Khan (George Sanders) who despises all humans. Over the course of time, Mowgli may have encounters with his enemies as he really does not want to leave the jungle. What could persuade him? Perhaps a human girl from the nearby village.

Disney wanted a more recognizable cast. The name that stands out is George Sanders. His voice makes for a frightening encounter. The rest of the cast would mostly be familiar to people from the 1960’s. Phil Harris was a wisecracking comedian and actually shocked the crew when announced he was hired. He improvised his lines because the scripted lines were not natural to him. Louis Prima played foil very well to Mowgli. Speaking of which, the director’s son, Bruce Reitherman was casted as the voice of Mowgli as he had some experience with voice roles in previous Disney features. It was very rare to use names that people recognized in the 60’s, but it worked well here. I am not sure anyone could replace George Sanders as the voice of Shere Khan.

Overall, I really liked The Jungle Book. It is a simple story with a basic plot, but the movie is all about its three-dimensional characters. Some of them are inspired characters with lighter touches than in Kipling’s book. Baloo is such a lovable bear and his rendition of “Bare Necessities” is probably my favorite scene. I can never stop singing that song. I had issues with several of the characters such as the orangutans. At times, the plot can be overly simple but that is what Disney wanted. The animation is colorful and well-designed, and I liked the look of the jungle. Disney eliminated the darker elements of Kipling’s book and created something more family friendly. Not my favorite Disney movie, but still worth a watch.

My Grade: B+

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986)

Image
Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986) “Life moves pretty fast. If you don’t stop and look around once in awhile, you could miss it.” Ah, wise words from our new young friend, Ferris Bueller. In John Hughes’s 1986 film, Ferris Bueller’s Day Off , all Ferris wants to do is take a day and have fun. That is the most simplistic theme the movie has. You can go deeper, but the main takeaway is that it is okay to have fun. That is a motto I have taken to heart. I really loved the film. People consider The Breakfast Club to be Hughes’s best and most important movie. That’s a fine statement to make, but I would personally rank the film number two behind this particular one. The teen characters are instantly relatable, it has a memorable antagonist for the children, and this is basically a thirty-year-old travel guide for Chicago. Just how Woody Allen creates his movies as love letters for New York, this is applicable for John Hughes. A Chicago love letter!   Like all of his films, Hughes wrote...
Read more

The Spy Who Loved Me (1977)

Image
The Spy Who Loved Me (1977) The James Bond franchise is one of those franchises that will never die. It has been going strong since the first movie rolled out in the early 1960’s, and new James Bond movies are still produced today. What makes this series unique is they use multiple actors to play the titular character over the years. They all bring their own gravitas to the role, and each Bond is a different man when compared to each other (although the martini, shaken not stirred and the beautiful women among other things remain a constant.) So my first James Bond review for this blog is 1977’s The Spy Who Loved Me. This wasn’t my first look at the series, but it was my first look at the older movies. I really liked what I saw. This is an old-fashioned story that combines a spy drama and an action-packed war movie into one package. Like many of the older Bond movies, the story can get borderline preposterous. The cheesiness of the plot did come to grow on me after awhile, even...
Read more

Table for Five (1983)

Image
Table for Five (1983) I can guarantee that ninety percent of my readers here have not seen this tear-jerking melodrama 1983’s Table for Five , yet alone heard of it. Hopefully after reading my kind words, you will be somewhat intrigued by this movie. When doing my research for the film, I was shocked to see how vastly underrated the movie is. There are only a few reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, hardly any information on Wikipedia or Google-hardly anything out there in this vast Internet landscape. Then, why on earth is this movie so good? Sure, maybe some folks will say the movie is just a predictable Lifetime TV movie, but honestly it is much more than that. There are some elements that makes this film seem destined for the television at times, but to me it is much more than that. I consider the movie to be an honest, emotional portrayal about fatherhood and family. Directed by Robert Lieberman, this film is about a man named J.P Tannen (Jon Voight) who fails at being fathe...
Read more