The Jungle Book (2016) ***½/5: A good film but there are some deficiencies with the visual presentation. This remake could have been more extensive or elaborate.

(photo courtesy of hollywoodreporter.com)

The Jungle Book is a good film but there were some notable deficiencies in its presentation. The irony here is that most people have praised the visual elements in this film yet I was not as impressed as I watched it in 3D. The visuals were good particularly the CGI creation of the jungle and animals etc but sometimes I was too conscious that I was looking at a green screen. The visuals did not necessarily make the story more effective in my opinion and this is where the deficiencies set in. There are some interesting moments that could have been much more effective if this remake went against some of the traditional elements associated with the original and the stories told by Kipling.  A genuine remake would have been more effective than just sticking to what’s already known. The movie could have been so much more than its American centric approach. The visuals in Life of Pi were more effective in terms of story.

This film stars Neel Sethi as Mowgli an orphan in the Indian jungle raised by wolves. Following the threat of the tiger Shere Khan (Idris Elba) Mowgli leaves the pack to return to human civilization escorted by the black panther, Bagheera (Ben Kingsley) and the bear Baloo (Bill Murray). Mowgli must learn to accept who he is as a man cub in the jungle especially as the threat of Shere Khan looms.

Positives

The primary positive as everyone knows is the visuals on display. It has been reported that everything was created by computer and this means that the CGI on display must be at a very high level, from the creation of the jungle to the creation of the animals. If it is true that all the visuals, except Mowgli, were created in such a manner then it’s very impressive. It can also seem very artificial.  At times the visuals were so good that I felt that I was looking at a green screen. This is the price we pay for great visuals. Some of the settings in the film were truly creepy or full of suspense such as when Mowgli interacts with the snake, Kaa (Scarlett Johansson) or when Shere Khan is at his menacing best.  There is not much more to be said about the visuals apart from go and see it yourself but to beware of the artificial feel that comes with it.

The story is somewhat interesting particularly when it comes to the interpretation of the world by the animals. I’m a big fan of nature but I would not want to be instructed by a black panther or a bear or a pack of wolves. There is only so much they can know which doesn’t make it interesting. There is an attempt to make some of the instructions that Mowgli receives seem profound but it falls flat and more or less reflects the smallness of the world inhabited by these animals. There is no real attempt to go big here. The narration by Kingsley as Bagheera is pretty good despite the limited scope or lack of profundity. One can see how the plot device about Mowgli having to return to the village sets the stage for his interaction with several characters outside of the wolf pack and Bagheera. He is almost swallowed whole by a python, meets a lazy bear, interacts with and then confronts a giant orangutan called King Louie (Christopher Walken).  He then returns to face Shere Khan. There is also some interaction with the Elephants and one does get some sense of how their size has a impact on the environment. It’s very surprising that the elephants don’t talk. Why do some animals talk and others don’t? There is also the issue of fire or the red flower which is a very important plot point especially since fire is seen as the primary reason for man’s power. Mowgli’s tool making abilities or ‘tricks’ don’t seem as profound to the animals as fire (interesting) until the end. I wonder how they will react when Mowgli is able to create and wield a spear.

The voice acting is pretty good. I liked Idris Alba as Shere Khan. The others were good but Shere Khan really does have a menacing presence in this film and a lot of it is due to Idris Elba’s voice acting. Kingsley as Bagheera is like the typical father figure and Bill Murray as Baloo is there for comic relief. Christopher Walken as King Louie comes across as a typical gangster and Scarlett Johansson as the snake Kaa probably could have gotten more screen time.

There are a lot of lessons about the jungle that Mowgli does learn and are used to good effect when it matters.

Negatives

The primary negative is that some of the visuals don’t support a character like Mowgli and this would have called for a more extensive reimagining of the character and how he actually interacts with the jungle. The director Jon Favreau and his writers take the angle that this is just like a cartoon even though it’s partly live action. In this day and age we’re having live action where a character talks to animals like Dr. Dolittle. Is it that Mowgli has a similar gift? He speaks to them in such a candid manner as if he’s speaking to regular people. If this film was a more extensive reimagining of the subject and not just a mere remake then the creators would have found ways to make Mowgli’s interaction with the jungle much more interesting. What kind of languages do bear, wolves, tigers, monkeys and snakes speak? What is their actual language apart from English? The perspective of another human would have been more interesting especially when he or she sees young mowgli walking side by side with a black panther or a bear. At least we would get to see how they are really interacting. Most animals are limited in terms of communication and this is why they are not on our level. Mowgli shouldn’t even be able to speak English extensively based on his own story so it would be interesting to get the perspective of another human character. In the eyes of another human character mowgli would be doing a lot of grunts and gesticulations like a animal. Why does mowgli walk so casually upright? One would expect him to attempt to emulate the quadrupeds (four legged animals) some more. There is nothing wrong with him walking upright but not enough of him truly moving like he was raised in the jungle.

I was not impressed with how Neel Sethi moved as Mowgli and one could tell that he was uncomfortable in some areas. In a animated film it wouldn’t be an issue and the movements of Mowgli would have been more effective. In live action Mowgli’s movement through jungle barefooted and with only a loin cloth does not capture the hazards of the area sufficiently. He runs as if he’s afraid to buck or bump his toe or worried that his feet would be pricked.

This is the advantage of having everything shot in front of a green screen.  Filmmakers no longer have to go on location and so it’s a reversion to the old days where films were made entirely in the studio to cut costs. Oh how little we have advanced. I didn’t even get a sense of India. I am assuming that the story takes place in India so why not some more representation of India. Give us a shot of the Himalayas for Christ sake and invent some story about its legend. A story about the Himalayas being the home of the gods etc.   I never knew there was such a large population of rhinos in India. The elephants look more like African elephants than Indian ones. Baloo does not seem like a typical Indian bear. Looks more like the kind of bear you find in America. And since when do wolves co exist with a tiger. Neel as Mowgli might have the Indian look but he doesn’t act Indian at all and so we’re still  imbibing American values. He speaks American to appeal to American audiences but he has the look of an Indian. Is this still 1967? In this day and age a more extensive reimagining of the story would have required some more of the Indian perspective; more of the Indian mythology etc and how these animals fit in.

These deficiencies in presentation means that the creators had the opportunity to truly remake Rudyard Kipling’s basic jungle stories but instead decided to play it safe. This is a Disney film after all and the major market for movies is still America. Life of Pi, however, did it right. In Life of Pi I got a true sense of India but that was a more mature film so The Jungle Book is exactly what the children deserve. A good film for children but very limited and it won’t have lasting appeal because they did not reinvent the wheel in any considerable way.