Mowgli - Il figlio della giungla

Andy Serkis can do it all without drawing much attention or praise to himself. He can act, great voice actor and he's proven that he can direct. Even though they did the remake of The Jungle Book two years ago and I almost always hate remakes so close together. I would gladly say that I am wrong about this one. It was done perfectly and was a completely different spin on it. I would be glad if Andy got another chance at directing another Disney movie, Great job with this one!!!

"Mowgli" is an 1894 character that became famous through Disney Studios that used the public domain to promote the character. However this film is darker and different from the Disney´s version. The voices of Christian Bale, Cate Blanchett and Benedict Cumberbatch are impressive and give life to Bagheera, Kaa and Shere Khan. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Mogli: Entre Dois Mundos" ("Mowgli: Between Two Worlds")

After watching this, I felt really surprised on how good it was. Don't expect it to be too similar to The Jungle Book. Mowgli is a more adult oriented film with some dark tones which I appreciate. I was very more focused on the actors. Everyone stands out. Even some actors that have small, but important roles. The CGI was the only thing that got under my skin. Some scenes had excellent visual effects, then exceptional, and then just plain horrible CGI. It feels like an unfinished film and took me away from the movie for a while. Maybe Warner Bros cut the films cost when they decided to go to Netflix. I feel really sorry for Andy Serkis. If Warner Bros would have let Serkis finish Mowgli. It would have been better than Disney's version and Andy Serkis would get more praise when he clearly earns it.

In performance-capture maestro Andy Serkis' hands, Legends of the Jungle is a darker, more surprising version of The Jungle Book. Get ready to leave behind the jungle of your childhood imagination. You know, the one where you slumber peacefully in a tree bough, waterfalls ain't nothing but slides and you can float downstream resting on the upturned belly of an amiable bear.

It's impossible not to keep comparing Serkis' version of this classic story to Disney's 2016 live-action remake of its own 1967 animated family favorite. In Disney's remake, the animals are remarkably photo-realistic. But Serkis is purposefully trying to achieve something entirely different. The motion capture is used to make the animal characters deeper, richer and almost more recognizably human.

This no doubt presents more of a challenge for the actors than straightforward voice work, and as a result the animals are expressive and affecting. They're more well-rounded and relatable than their Disney counterparts, even if they're not as instantly charming. Christian Bale's nuanced performance as Bagheera the panther and Benedict Cumberbatch's ferocity as tiger Shere Khan are standouts that translate particularly powerfully through the performance capture.

But as you'll have guessed from the film's title, it's not all about the animals. In Disney's version, Mowgli felt more like a narrative device drawing the animals of the jungle together so we could hear their stories. In Serkis' hands, Mowgli is less of an ensemble player. His character development is central to the plot, especially in the second half. The movie feels like a coming-of-age tale as the man-cub seeks to establish his identity as not quite human, not quite wolf -- simultaneously both and neither.

It did come as a surprise when, bang in the middle of the film, the plot veered wildly off course from the familiar narrative the Disney films established atop Kipling's work. Some may hate this startling divergence, but I enjoyed the sudden realization that I didn't know exactly what was going to happen next, especially after being lulled into a false sense of security by familiar opening scenes.

Serkis has made a visually arresting film that Netflix is lucky to have gotten its hands on. It has more than the bear necessities required to put it on your watch list, even if it is lacking the music.

As usual the critics have no taste, and their opinions don't match up with the general populace (aside from a few weird individuals who gave this movie a "1"...Yes, very much worth taking seriously...lol). This movie is better than the Disney version, not the other way around. Credit where credit is due, the Disney version has more realistic CGI (though the characters look more menacing in this version than in the Disney one, so that's a plus), possibly as a result of a better budget, though maybe not. Everything else though, is better in this version. It's much more faithful to the books. It is much darker and more mature than Disney's version, which to some I suppose might be a minus, while for the rest of us it's a huge plus. Depends on what you're looking for in the movie. Most importantly, the voice acting in this version is waaaayyyy better than in Disney's version (I'm really shocked and in disbelief to see that one reviewer thinks the voice acting in Disney's version was better, like, what?). Benedict Cumberbatch is absolutely perfect as Shere Khan, and blows Idris Elba's performance, which was already very good, out of the water. Cate Blanchett as Kaa (who thankfully has much more screentime and relevance to the story in this version) is soooo much better than Scarlett Johansson that it's not even funny. She has a much more powerful presence.

Don't get me wrong, I like Disney's live action remake of their movie. It was good, and I enjoyed it. But this one is definitely the superior of the two. If you want to watch a darker and more mature version of the story without all the jolly Disney songs, give this one a watch. Personally I absolutely loved it.