The Jungle Book

Dir: Jon Favreau

2016

****

Disney can't seem to leave Rudyard Kipling's classic stories alone. It hit the jackpot in 1967 with what is arguably one of the studio's greatest achievements but they let the side down somewhat in 1994 with a live-action version that boasts some impressive visuals but had none of the joy of the animated version. Neither version was particularly faithful to the source material, although I've always thought the 1967 version was a nice amalgamation of the original Mowgli stories. 1967's The Jungle Book is a vibrant musical, full of character and charm, with unforgettable songs. 1994's Rudyard Kipling's The Jungle Book was a rather quiet affair in comparison, the animals couldn't even talk but at least they were real and not CGI. Personally, I would ask whether the risk of attempting an amalgamation of the two is really worth it but after watching the end result, I would answer with a resounding yes. Jon Favreau can direct. All his films are well structured and visually impressive, but more than that, he understands his projects and is a thinking director. That might sound stupid but many directors simply shoot, they have their formulas and most of the time it works but Favreau is an ideas man and I think this is why he got the job and was the best choice. He understood that the Jungle itself is probably the most important part of the story, something the previous adaptions have missed. He insisted that the live-action version had to have the very best special effects and he hired the best people working in photo-realistic rendering, computer-generated imagery and motion capture technologies. The Jungle, quite rightly, engulfs all else in the film. He said of the project that in Kipling's time, nature was something to be overcome. Now, nature is something to be protected, and this is clear within the structure and mood of the story. The character of Shere Khan (voiced by Idris Elba) seems to have more weight to it also, particularly in this day and age of multicultural misunderstandings, intolerance and the propaganda it adopts. More time is spent on the fact that Mowgli was raised by wolves and his relationship with his adopted family and his overall cultural awareness is explored rather effectively. Ultimately, it is a story of someone who proves he belongs somewhere when it doesn't initially seem apparent that he does. The original book is heavy in colonial misgivings, never malicious but very much of its time, but how screen-writer Justin Mark and Jon Favreau update the story is quite wonderful; subtle and respectful and after reading up on Kipling, the sort of thing I believe he would approve were he alive today. Young Neel Sethi is an adorable and convincing Mowgli, the CGI animals are some of the best I've ever seen and Ben Kingsley (as Bagheera), Idris Elba (as Shere Khan) and Lupita Nyong'o (as Raksha) are all brilliantly cast (listen out for director Sam Raimi as 'giant squirrel too). However, having Christopher Walken play King Louie as a sort of Colonel Walter E. Kurtz character (Marlon Brando's role in Apocalypse Now) is a genius move, as was the decision of turning him from an Orangutan to a Gigantopithecus, not only because of the presence felt due to his increased size but because Orangutan's were never native to India in the first place. 1967's classic is loved for its characters, everyone's favourite arguably being Baloo the bear, voiced by Phil Harris and then Ed Gilbert in the strange but loved (especially by me) Talespin. A tough act to follow but Bill Murray was the perfect fit, Baloo once again, being the best thing about the film and rightly so. The inclusion of Scarlett Johansson as the voice of Kaa (originally a male character) works really well too, Favreau stating that the original was 'a little too male-oriented' and it needed a little female attention. They are clearly friends from working together but I think this is a great decision, particularly as Johansson sings 'Trust in me' so perfectly. This brings me to what was probably the films biggest dilemma. It was never considered that the animals wouldn't speak but should they sing, should this remake of sorts be a musical or not? You could try and come up with some great new songs but quite sensibly, they stuck to the old ones. You can't improve on perfection but then at the same time there really wasn't any point in making a direct copy, so although the film features some of the favourite songs of the 1967 animation, they're not the big production they were, they are fleeting and subtle but remarkably well done. In conclusion, Favreau's Jungle Book is the perfect balance of Kipling's work and Disney's classic, utilizing modern technology and classic literature perfectly. They've achieved what I honestly thought was impossible, and I applaud them for it.