The Jungle Book

Animation is basic 3d but very stylised and a bit jarring. Storylines are very basic and not at all challenging. Characters are based on the Kipling book as is the produnciation of the lead character's name. Certain other reviewers might wish to check the trivia/goof items for The Jungle Book (1967). My 2-year old enjoys it but not as much as the 60s film

I happened to watch this show with my little sister (who's about 4). At first I didn't care for it too much but after a few episodes it kind of grew on me. I'd say it is aimed as a younger audience in that it's in general a very light-hearted and inoffensive show so it doesn't surprise me too much that a lot of adults wouldn't care for it so much. I actually like it, though, as sometimes it's nice to just watch a harmless show with cute little gags.

A lot of people seem to mistakenly think it's based on the Disney movie (especially in the US since it airs on a Disney channel), but it's not. It is based on the original book and actually follows the book MUCH more closely than the Disney adaptation (although it's not quite as dark). Baloo is the stuffy teacher, Bagheera is more lenient and friendly toward Mowgli, Kaa is a good guy, the wolf pack is actually important, etc. It also includes a lot of characters left out of the Disney adaptation like Tabaqui and Chil, which is nice. Someone who dislikes the Disney adaptation for deviating too much from the book may like this version for staying more loyal.

The art style, while a tad cheap looking at first (pretty common with 3D animated shows) actually isn't that bad. The later episodes do a better job of keeping the characters from moving too stiffly. I certainly don't think lazy is the proper word for the animation, it's clear to me that they're actually trying. Sometimes characters will bump into one another or fumble something they're holding and it's not entirely in service to the plot but rather something to liven up the animation. A 2D animated or more stylized 3D show could probably pull it off better but they do a pretty good job of it in my opinion.

This show IS designed to be more accessible to younger kids so it may not have enough bite for older kids or adults but I actually quite enjoy it and find myself watching it even if my little sister isn't around. I liked the original book and it's nice to see stories sticking more to the source material (although kid-friendly) even though I do enjoy the Disney version too. In my opinion, this show is really good introduction for young kids to the original Jungle Book universe and characters.

I've never watched the original jungle book, so I'll pretend as if it doesn't exist.

The show is about this kid named Mowgli who lives in the jungle with a puma and a bear named Bagheera and Baloo respectively. I don't know why but they're very protective of Mowgli, who is always being hunted down by a tiger named Shere Khan.

The plot for most episodes isn't actually bad, but they're not engrossing either, I don't really have a problem with that, but everything else I do have a problem with. The Animation is bad, it's ugly and lazy, Phineas and Ferb is just in 2D but it looks way more appealing and lively compared to this. Characters aren't memorable, sympathetic, or entertaining, they're quite flat and boring, but at least they're not annoying like Fanboy and ChumChum. Dialogue is awful, it sounds like the first draft of the episode, voice-acting is equally bad. Lastly humor of the show is pitiful, one episode they actually went with the old banana peel gag, where one of the characters simply slips, the way they did it wasn't even funny, it was too anti-climatic.

Overall the show just felt lazy and half-done, maybe I need to watch the movie so I can appreciate the show, nevertheless I didn't enjoy the show not because it isn't "my cup of tea" but because it's really bad-quality.

The source material from Rudyard Kipling is justifiably deemed classic literature and the 1967 Disney film was a childhood favourite that still holds dear to me now. Also love a couple of other versions, especially the 1942 film with Sabu, the recent live action version and even more so Soyuzmultfilm's animation.

So there were some moderate expectations for this show, regardless of the animation quality, which didn't appeal to me, and that it didn't look like adults would enjoy it that much. Contrary to what is said here, 'The Jungle Book' (2010) is actually not really based on the Disney film, which despite my love for it doesn't have much Kipling in it other than the characters, title and setting. That there is more elements of Kipling will be appreciated somewhat. What 'The Jungle Book' (2010) lacks is the fun, energy and charm that Disney's version had and Soyuzmultfilm's animation is a much better representation of a "more faithful" adaptation.

Not an awful show by all means, there are far worse shows with cheaper quality and ones that are far more annoying. It just doesn't do much for me, and while kids may lap it up and find some enjoyment adults won't find much to enjoy, even appreciate, or find it easy to watch. For a family-oriented show, NOT kids only, that's not good.

Beginning with the good points, the music is quite good, with a catchy main theme and very energetic and beautifully orchestrated incidental music that doesn't overbear the atmosphere and the tense parts are scored appropriately. A better job generally could have been done with the characters, but Shere Khan comes off very well, he is an effectively sinister villain.

Credit should be given too for the film showing some good values, not done in too preachy a way, and how to get out of tight situations in a way that don't seem too questionable. A couple of the voice actors come off well too, especially David Holt, who is suitably menacing as Shere Khan, and Jimmy Hibbert as a kindly and fun Baloo.

Emma Tate however voices enthusiastically, but in the more tense moments it comes over as too over-eager and cocky, which comes off annoying and in need of more subtlety. The rest of the voice cast suffer from having characters that are obnoxious and sometimes useless, like the monkeys, or blandly written, as nice as it was to see the wolves more prominent little is done with making them interesting or distinct from one another. Kaa is underused generally, and Bagheera- a lenient but flatly written character- is voiced too softly and it's sometimes hard to tell whether Bagheera's meant to be male or female.

Where 'The Jungle Book' is primarily let down is in the animation. The quality would have been forgivable if this was computer animation in its early days but seeing as computer animation has come on a good deal, there was no excuse for the animation to look this cheap. Backgrounds are blocky and lack richness in detail, the colours are very flat but it's the very stiff and quite ugly character designs that come off the worst.

The story lines are far too episodic and formulaic, with too much predictability to a large degree, lack of surprises or real peril and not enough energy. They also devoid of charm, humour feels simplistically juvenile and the more tense parts are hampered by lack of suspense. Dialogue is flat, first-draft-like and constantly sounds like it's trying too hard to appeal to kids, with some groan-inducing juvenile and dull gags to boot, that adults will find little of value.

All in all, not a complete waste of time but didn't do much for me even when taking it for what it was and trying to be. Before anybody gets condescending and attacks me for seemingly judging it through adult eyes, am actually a young adult and a child at heart with an undying lifelong love for animation. 4/10 Bethany Cox

Just stopped by here to say, that the first 20s of the Music Intro, ar out of tune and just sung wrong. That someone who calls himself a composer or soundengineer, delivers such work, lacking the fundamentals, is really shoocking me.

Rest also bad. Animation bad, Braindead plots, even for a Childsshow. Suprising that they mostly needed two writed for each episode speaks volumes.