Il libro della giungla 2

Recipe for Jungle Book 2:

Take one classic animated movie, loved by millions the world over.

Carefully remove the plot.

Add a couple of inconsequential new characters.

Simmer gently without much loving care for very little time in a studio.

et voila!

You have the most pointless sequel I have seen in a long time. This is a shameless and charmless cash-in on the original Jungle Book. All the characters are there (with the exception of King Louie - who is absent for no explained reason) but they are there just because they were in the first film. No other reason at all.

The plot isn't. There is no plot! Some vague hokum about how Mowgli misses the jungle, and that's it. Dull, dull, dull, dull, dull!

You have to admire Disney's inattention to detail, though. For example. Mowgli, having been transplanted to the man village, has to obey all the rules of civilised society. Except, he still gets to wear his loincloth like some Tarzan wannabee. No smart man clothes for you, jungle boy! Just that raggedy old cloth! Haha! You're in the man world now, but we'll cruelly let you wear your rag to constantly remind you of the fact that you were once in a real movie with heart!

And what's with everyone in that village? They are deathly afraid of the "jungle" and its inhabitants. So much so that they've placed convenient stepping stones across the river so that they can get to it anytime they like. Bah!

There's one new song of any note "Jungle Rythym" which is OK, but that's it. Otherwise it's just an endless rehash of "Bare Necessities" several times during the picture. Talk about a one-song movie.

The voices are done reasonably well, though how they roped John-Rhys Davies into this I'll never know. Mowgli (Haley Joel Osment) and Baloo (John Goodman) are particularly good.

But otherwise its just rubbish really. Little kids will enjoy it, but it's a shame Disney didn't add a few more "adult" oriented gags into it. The only one of note was the vultures being portrayed as the Beatles. Even that wasn't funny the second time around. I can imagine parents the world over, having taken their kids to see this, dreading the little 'uns wanting to go again.

Oh, and Disney guys? Just because Lilo and Stitch was a good film, doesn't mean you have to try and sneak the two main characters into every movie from now on. Shanti and the intensely irritating Ranjan are practically clones of Lilo and Stitch, but without the charm of either.

The final insult was, after sitting through the movie and listening to far too many reprisals of "Bare Necessities" and NOT having King Louie in it at all, the end credits played out to "I Wannna be Like You". Yeah, that makes tons of sense Disney. Not have a major character in the movie, then use his theme song at the end.

What a crock! Not so much of a straight-to-video production as it should have been a straight-to-the-cheap-bin-in-the-video-shop effort.

We just took our two daughters (ages five and four) to their first cinema experience...The Jungle Book 2. Though it had a few scary parts (Shere Khan close ups), overall it was pleasant and didn't contain the violence that has characterized a number of other childrens videos that we've rented.

The above experience not withstanding, as I watched the film I kept thinking that this movie should not have gone to the theaters, but should have been sent straight to video. When you look at the voice talent (John Goodman, Phil Collins, Haley Joel Osment), you initially expect big gun entertainment. It is later that it dawns on you that you've paid cinema prices for a film that lasts only around 75 minutes and has a plot that is more concerned with having the original cast make almost forced appearance (look! Here is the snake! We've come across the monkeys! Are those elephant noises I hear?), rather than bringing them all back as part of a well devised plot. The film develops well in the village with Mowgli recounting his jungle life. Once the village is left, however, you feel pushed along. The most forced of the whole group are the buzzards, who go from being significant in the first film to basically showing up here and watching Lucky, the new vulture addition, ham it up. I guess Col. Hathi's wife knew better. She doesn't even appear in this one!

The weak plot aside, there was something unusual for me in returning to these characters so many years later and seeing that they have not aged a bit....only in animation! Seeing this film from the 60s brought back with updated music, was enjoyable. Perhaps that is why the buzzards weren't really needed. Audiences of the first film would have been thinking "Ringo" during the buzzard scenes, here the Smash Mouths sing on the soundtrack. Some things just don't cross time well.

So... as a sequel the film is weak. But it is enjoyable to watch...on video. Some sequels are a waste even in the 99 cent bin (Beethoven 3, anyone?), while others are worth the sitting (Homeward Bound 2). Disney has given us a sequel designed for a family with little kids, but its theatrical run shows a greed that does not fit well with the reputation for quality that Walt Disney was given.

ps. We watched the film here in Argentina, so it was in Spanish. Lucky is presented as a doof whose Spanish has the thickest North American accent I've ever heard. Hmmmm.

I will have to agree with some commentators here that The Jungle Book 2 was a very big disappointment.

Disney Corp. should hire a team of movie experts and analyze the elements of the first movie and then repeat them again, with changes.

The only good part in my opinion was the new vulture played by Phil Collins, he was funny. Otherwise, the music which in version 1 was completely enchanting, and delightful is missing from version 2. Also they left out one of the best characters, King Louie, and above all, there was no plot at all. Alas! William, are there no more writers like thou?

Disney would die again if he saw this movie.

I was pretty entertained by this sequel. What I found most impressive was the excellent voice-over work. I have gone back and checked what the deal was and found it very interesting that both the Winnie the Pooh crews (new and old) were very much involved in the Jungle Books.

Kaa the snake was my main interest, being done by the same voice over guy who now does Winnie the Pooh (Jim Cummings). Just as the original Kaa the snake, Sterling Holloway, was also the same guy who did the original Winnie voice .

The other was the Black Panther, Bageera, originally done by Mr. French of Family Affair, the great Sebastian Cabot... now being done so well by Bob Joles who also narrates the Winnie series these days, just as Mr Cabot did in his day. Haley Joel Osment did a fantastic job of being Mowgli as well. John Goodman... good I guess... but the original Phil Harris just had that fluid jazz scat thing DOWN. So Baloo just isnt as cool as he used to be. No offense John, I seriously can't think of anyone who could have done better. But sometimes greatness is just great, and can't be duplicated. Nice try though.

Sure the story wasn't really all that rivoting, the animation wasn't as full or rich in color. And no King Louis, but then again... the elephant marching army and the Beatles Buzzards were so great and are back again.

Jungle Book was a great classic, certainly my favorite of all Disney animations... but Jungle Book 2 is certainly worth seeing for the next bunch of little guys who need that Disney fix.

I have to agree with another critic in here... they should have spent a little more time and added a few more minutes of something. 70 minutes... and 15 of it in shadow puppet credits... stop short changing the Disney legacy with trying to reissue a cheaper version of the actual foundation that Disney was built on. Walt is shedding a few tears where ever he is.(actually I guess he sheds ice cubes, isn't he frozen somewhere?) Eisner, get with the program already.

You can say what you want about sequels, but some movies are suitable for them. That's the case of "Jungle Book", one of my dearest childhood memories. Although the Disney's sequels have earned a bad reputation (which it's understandable, but that's another discussion for now).

SPOILER) It's ironic that they took almost 36 years to make a sequel, but the movie takes place not many days after Mowgli came to the man village (SPOILERS OVER).

The story works actually better in this movie, the script is more tight and that's makes this movie watchable and enjoying. Mowgli's emotional journey is more well portrayed in this feature and almost (mark my word; almost) every character from the first movie appears again, which is nice. The new characters are also acceptable.

But the new songs and the humor are terrible and annoying. The animation is colorful, but I don't quite understand why this movie was released on theaters, when it has almost the same quality than a directly to video/DVD feature. Maybe the directors wanted this film to reach a bigger audience? Well, that's another discussion for now.

For those who like sequels; this is a okay movie and exiting movie.