The Jungle Book(s)

Le Saboteur

Active member
WilliamBoyd8 said:
What is an American grizzly bear doing in a film about India?

:)

Surely you meant to ask why a Himalayan brown bear is hanging about the Seoni Forest of Central India?
 

TheFedora

Active member
Le Saboteur said:
Surely you meant to ask why a Himalayan brown bear is hanging about the Seoni Forest of Central India?

Makes as much sense as Giganthopithecus being around although it went extinct 100,000 years ago...

(well if you believe the Bigfooters, Giganthopithecus -is- Yeti which lives in the Himalayas)

Well, they are taking certain liberties with the fauna of Central India thats for sure.
 

Stoo

Well-known member
TheFedora said:
Okay I kind of had that coming....:(

But yeah, my point was that this new addition does give a new element of mysteriousness and adds to the uncharted feel of the Jungle book.
Regarding your comment, "adds to the uncharted feel of the Jungle book": It's doubtful that you're familiar with the source material.

What it adds is a convoluted explanation for something that was a Disney mistake in the 1st place. King Louie is not one of Kipling's creations. He's a Disney thing. Even though he's a fun character, if they wanted to take a more 'realistic' approach, then Disney should've gotten rid of him completely instead of a wild explanation that will probably never be explained in the movie.

Mowgli: What are you?
Louie: I'm a Gigantopithecus from long ago. My family has survived over eons.
Mowgli: O.K., Thanks for clarifying because my tiny, man-brain was confused.
TheFedora said:
Makes as much sense as Giganthopithecus being around although it went extinct 100,000 years ago...
Really?:confused: A wandering/lost animal makes much more sense than an extinct one.:rolleyes:
 

Le Saboteur

Active member
TheFedora said:
Makes as much sense as Giganthopithecus being around although it went extinct 100,000 years ago...

Kipling originally described Baloo (Hindi: Bhalu) as a "sleepy brown bear,*" but it's understood that, with the exception of color, Baloo is supposed to be a sloth bear; later descriptions bear this out. Which do occur in the Seoni region where the stories are set. Though, how an actual bear some six-hundred miles off his home range is comparable to a giant ape that got sent down 100,000 years ago is beyond me.

* -- His father, Lockwood Kipling, illustrated the first edition of the book, and drew him as a brown bear as well.

So why not make Baloo a sloth bear? Good question. Being a medium-sized bear (males top out at ~300lbs) they visually don't look as impressive when paired off with the Royal Bengal Tiger (which top out at ~500lbs**).

**- The tigers of Northern India are often nearly as large as their Amur/Siberian cousins, and those often tip the scales at 700 lbs. A couple of the largest specimens hit 800-plus pounds.

TheFedora said:
Well, they are taking certain liberties with the fauna of Central India that's for sure.

Not really. Aside from Baloo (& King Louie) every animal appears in the Seoni region. In fact, they ranged across the entirety of the sub-continent before the human population exploded. Would it blow your mind to know that India had cheetahs as recently as 1948? Or that they still have lions?

TheFedora said:
(well if you believe the Bigfooters, Giganthopithecus -is- Yeti which lives in the Himalayas)

It's not implausible that a yeti-like creature has escaped human documentation over the decades.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/j0LWi06Ylzc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The daily biology lesson is concluded.

Stoo said:
What it adds is a convoluted explanation for something that was a Disney mistake in the 1st place. King Louie is not one of Kipling's creations. He's a Disney thing. Even though he's a fun character, if they wanted to take a more 'realistic' approach, then Disney should've gotten rid of him completely instead of a wild explanation that will probably never be explained in the movie.

I wouldn't say King Louie is a mistake; he's an intentional addition. It's well known that the original adaptations adhered much closer to Kipling's work, but had a level of emotional complexity (aka dark and brooding) that Uncle Walt didn't want in his family film. Walt sacked writer Bill Peet (101 Dalmations) and composer Terry Gilkyson, and the rest is history as they say.

Gilkyson demos:

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yMSQfxDLc4k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TXzAfaXZW-I" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Bill Peet created King Louie for his original script, but it wasn't a comical role. His Louie wanted to enslave Mowgli in order to learn the secret of Man's red flower.

the-jungle-book-image.jpg


I'm wondering if they resurrected any part of Peet's original script or notes, because the tone from what they've shown thus far is definitely different from the '67 version. It also has way too many story beats taken from later chapters to not hew closer to Kipling's work as well. For anybody whose read the books they should be easily spotted. One's really, really obvious.

For fun, this is from the inside cover of my first edition of Kim.

<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/42281656@N05/24947625486/in/dateposted-public/" title="20160206_155810"><img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1599/24947625486_0fef84c130_c.jpg" width="800" height="450" alt="20160206_155810"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Subsequent required reading: Kipling and the Swastika
 

Le Saboteur

Active member
Starting today (that's the 18th of March if you're keeping score), visitors to the North American parks can get a special sneak peak at the upcoming flick while taking a break from the Temple of the Four Hour Line.

If you're on the Left Coast, then the sneak peak can be visited at the Bug's Life Theatre at Disney's California Adventure. That other also ran park will hold its preview as part of the Walt Disney: One Man's Dream attraction at the Hollywood Studios. Both previews are expected to have an introduction from director Jon Favreau.

Full blurb: Preview Scenes from Disney's 'The Jungle Book'

For everybody else, do check out these rather awesome teevee spots that have been trickling out. If nothing else, it's going to be a visual tour de force.

Idris Elba makes a better Cape Buffalo, but we get a couple more lines of dialogue in this extended teevee spot that sound pretty good. Even ScarJo's Kaa sounds better, more natural!

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0DnQJg7VCKk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4QqLf0BBtLQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0jI6PDnyl0o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

If you have the time, do take a tour around the 'net and read a few of the interviews Favreau has done and how he describes the process on this flick being almost identical to an animated feature.
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
Le Saboteur said:
If you have the time, do take a tour around the 'net and read a few of the interviews Favreau has done and how he describes the process on this flick being almost identical to an animated feature.

With all that CGI, why wouldn't it be?
 

DARTH ZOIDBERG

Well-known member
Le Saboteur said:
Mine should be. It was going to be until they changed the release date to next year when I'll actually be in Kipling country. Now I'm not sure if it will even be in theatres when I get back.



And it did. On the teevee. Jon Favreau stopped by the Access Hollywood studio to debut the trailer for the general public. The high-quality version wasn't released until earlier today.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HcgJRQWxKnw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Quick thoughts: This doesn't appear to be a straight adaptation/remake/whatever of the '67 version. There are too many shots of other chapters in the Mowgli stories for it to be a genuine remake.

The animals look great. It's especially nice to have Kaa back to [sic] his true form. Still not keen on ScarJo's voicework though.

Poor Lungri.

Is Hathi going to let in the jungle?!

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_kl0-C_AE_8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
I think It looks fantastic I can't wait!!!!

I love the fact that It looks like a big homage to the original Disney cartoon. something that might be throwing some people off about the voice acting with the lip-sync looking weird, the Animals look so real VS the Disney cartoon that was well a traditional animation cartoon.
 
Last edited:

Le Saboteur

Active member
Pale Horse said:
With all that CGI, why wouldn't it be?

It's more about approach and process; the animators were there from beginning to end rather than sloughing it off to the VFX team after principle photography was completed.

The second Hindi-language trailer was released yesterday. While it recycles a lot of footage from the US trailers, there's quite a bit of new footage too. Of note: our first good look at Akela and Raksha. Dig Irrfan Khan's take on Shere Khan too!

Please note: A massive, massive spoiler is seemingly confirmed if you're even remotely familiar with the book. Stop about halfway through. Or just don't watch it at all if you want to go in blind.

You have been warned.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JCgPGFunkig" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's <s>Amrish</s> Om Puri doing work as Baloo; Quantico star Priyanka Chopra voicing Kaa and the aforementioned Irrfan Khan as Shere Khan;

DARTH ZOIDBERG said:
I love the fact that It looks like a big homage to the original Disney cartoon.

While there are definite homages or nods to Disney's animated classic in this version -- Kaa attempting to eat Mowgli, the Bare Necessities, etc. -- I'm not sure that's the right term. This flick appears to be hewing quite close to the book in terms of tone and structure, and as such has quickly become it's own thing. It's as different from the '67 version as the '94 version is different from both of these 'animated' offerings.

Also released yesterday were a handful of promotional photos featuring the principle cast members posing along side their animated counterparts. They're all class, but these are my favorites.

the-jungle-book-special-shoot_shere-khan.jpg


<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/42281656@N05/25679029190/in/dateposted-public/" title="THE JUNGLE BOOK"><img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1497/25679029190_d5f0ccd806_c.jpg" width="534" height="800" alt="THE JUNGLE BOOK"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Full gallery here.
 

DARTH ZOIDBERG

Well-known member
Le Saboteur said:
It's more about approach and process; the animators were there from beginning to end rather than sloughing it off to the VFX team after principle photography was completed.

The second Hindi-language trailer was released yesterday. While it recycles a lot of footage from the US trailers, there's quite a bit of new footage too. Of note: our first good look at Akela and Raksha. Dig Irrfan Khan's take on Shere Khan too!

Please note: A massive, massive spoiler is seemingly confirmed if you're even remotely familiar with the book. Stop about halfway through. Or just don't watch it at all if you want to go in blind.

You have been warned.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JCgPGFunkig" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's <s>Amrish</s> Om Puri doing work as Baloo; Quantico star Priyanka Chopra voicing Kaa and the aforementioned Irrfan Khan as Shere Khan;



While there are definite homages or nods to Disney's animated classic in this version -- Kaa attempting to eat Mowgli, the Bare Necessities, etc. -- I'm not sure that's the right term. This flick appears to be hewing quite close to the book in terms of tone and structure, and as such has quickly become it's own thing. It's as different from the '67 version as the '94 version is different from both of these 'animated' offerings.

Also released yesterday were a handful of promotional photos featuring the principle cast members posing along side their animated counterparts. They're all class, but these are my favorites.

the-jungle-book-special-shoot_shere-khan.jpg


<a data-flickr-embed="true" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/42281656@N05/25679029190/in/dateposted-public/" title="THE JUNGLE BOOK"><img src="https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1497/25679029190_d5f0ccd806_c.jpg" width="534" height="800" alt="THE JUNGLE BOOK"></a><script async src="//embedr.flickr.com/assets/client-code.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Full gallery here.
good points my friend :D
 

Le Saboteur

Active member
The Tiger May Be King When He Fights Alone..

The Disney Machine has begun its marketing campaign -- saw my first bus shelter and billboard today. Character posters are also starting to appear in various places and lobbies.

But first, perhaps sensing some disquiet about Idris Elba's turn as Shere Khan, Disney's marketing team has released an "Intro to Shere Khan". (Which is really just a snippet of his speech upon arriving at the Peace Rock in "How Fear Came.")

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OD3CLzPER34" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Disney and Elba have wisely steered clear of trying to emulate George Sanders' now classic performance. Which would have been a hopeless task. And while I'm not quite sure how I would describe it yet, the more I hear the more I like Elba's take on the character.

Character posters

the-latest-character-posters-for-disney-s-the-jungle-book-are-totally-fierce-disney-903677.jpg



the-latest-character-posters-for-disney-s-the-jungle-book-are-totally-fierce-disney-903673.jpg


The-Jungle-Book-Character-Posters-5.jpg


Full gallery over here.
 
Last edited:

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
I was down on this, I admit. It's been a roller coaster. But I read a Favreau interview and his perspective is encouraging. I suspect it'll be a Tron: Legacy scenario where the initial expectation will let everyone down, but it'll grow on you with repeated viewings.

That said, enjoy some of the OST made available...

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IoRcHC4PrlM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

It's no George Burns, but it's uplifting and magnanimous.
 

Le Saboteur

Active member
Pale Horse said:
I was down on this, I admit. It's been a roller coaster. But I read a Favreau interview and his perspective is encouraging. I suspect it'll be a Tron: Legacy scenario where the initial expectation will let everyone down, but it'll grow on you with repeated viewings.

It's gonna be as big as Avatar!

Well, that's one. Now if only the thread starter would show something resembling enthusiasm.


Dig the fur on Raksha! And the droplets of water as they pill on Bagheera's coat! It's not perfect, but that's great looking.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GgGOcEgRh7k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Baloo's getting ready for hibernation clip.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KpZIeo4oIoA" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I despise Favreau's use of the term "content" when referring to a movie (contents come in a box), but this is the first of a series(?) of featurettes about the movie and its construction. Murray also chimes in with his first public thoughts and mentions a love for Kipling's original work.

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kFshLh8xSz0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

Pale Horse

Moderator
Staff member
I saw it. Thank you Jon for not ruining my childhood. It's a solid film. It's not a blockbuster. I loved the Bruce Dickinson easter egg.

I'll be happy to see this through kiddo's eyes.
 

TheFedora

Active member
Pale Horse said:
I saw it. Thank you Jon for not ruining my childhood. It's a solid film. It's not a blockbuster. I loved the Bruce Dickinson easter egg.

I'll be happy to see this through kiddo's eyes.

Wow, I hope to see it when it comes to a theater near me. I really do. Especially since a sequel was announced right away, gives me confidence that they think it will do well.

Jungle Book will have a sequel!
 

temple_runner

New member
I thought the CGI was great, but the songs were a little off-beat with the rest of the film. I'm not sure if my nostalgia is working on me or not, but I enjoyed the songs better in the original animated film.
 

DARTH ZOIDBERG

Well-known member
I loved the Jungle Book It had great Animation the landscapes were so real looking I thought sometimes I was looking At Real Jungle. you definitely Get lost In the world and Forget It is All CGI, The hair on all the Animals was so life Like! My favorite Characters were Baloo, Begheera, and the wolves! me and my dad don't get the complaints of the bad acting by the kid, we thought he was great! when you take into account he was the only real actor acting with green screen and nothing real I think he did a great job and it was his first part! I loved the Music especially the New Orleans style Music Dr. John and Kermit Ruffins !!!!! Over All It was Not as good as the Original Cartoon but a great time none the less !!!!!!!!
 

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
It was okay. I think it's fueled by nostalgia for the 1967 animated film re-released in 1978, 1984, and 1990. Disney reheated this handful of Sherman brothers songs once before. I prefer there be a MacGuffin as in the 1942 or 1994 versions. Maybe that's not canonical, but remember these tales were plagiarized from the start: "it is extremely possible that I have helped myself promiscuously but at present cannot remember from whose stories I have stolen."

More Kipling here: The Man Who Would Be King.
Le Saboteur said:
This is from the inside cover of my first edition of Kim.
I remember playing Kim's Game in Scouts, a great tradition.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MURigSnzUBk" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
Top