Movie Review: The Jungle Book (1967)

Stars: 4 out of 5
Pros: Funny and entertaining for kids

Cons: Art work and some voices could be better

The Bottom Line:

Disney's last movie

Not the best animation

But still worth viewing

A Jungle Full of Laughs and Fun

I have always been a kid at heart. As such, it often makes it hard for me to look critically at things I loved as a child. But sometimes, watching something anew will surprise you and you will see your flaws. Such is the case with The Jungle Book.

Frankly, I want to love it. Released late in 1967, this was the last animated film to be supervised by Walt Disney himself. That alone makes it a special movie. But it falls a little short of some of the true classics.

When Bagheera the panther (voiced by Sebastian Cabot) finds a man cub alone in the jungle, his first instinct is to leave it. But he can't stand to do that, so he makes sure the boy is adopted by a family of wolves. For ten years, Mowgli (Bruce Reitherman) grows in the jungle and feels completely comfortable there. He loves his home.

Unfortunately, trouble is brewing. The tiger Shere Khan (George Sanders) has returned to the area and wants to kill Mowgli. For his own good, the wolf pack decides to have Mowgli return to the man village.

Mowgli doesn't want to go, however, and makes life very difficult on Bagheera, who has agreed to take him. In his efforts to stay in the jungle, he crosses paths with Baloo, a jungle bum of a bear (Phil Harris), King Louie the monkey (Louis Prima), a military pack of elephants, a boa constrictor with sinus problems (Sterling Holloway), and four vultures with perfect harmony. But will he leave the jungle? Is Shere Khan on his trail?

While the film has its flaws, it is still basically good, and the part of me that is still a kid still loves it. It's got some great laughs, although most of it is slapstick type humor. Still, the destruction of the monkey palace scene makes me laugh every time I see it. And, while the story is basically a series of misadventures loosely held together with a larger plot, it works.

The songs are fun, too. When thinking about this movie, everyone immediately thinks of Oscar winning "The Bare Necessities." But there are several more great songs written by the versatile Sherman brothers. (And isn't it ironic that the one song everyone remembers wasn't written by them.) The jazzy "I Wan'na be like You" is lots of fun. There's the highly ironic "Trust in Me." I love good harmonies, so I have lots of fun with "That's what Friends are for." And "My Own Home" has a very beautiful, haunting melody.

The main characters are a little underdeveloped, but they are still fun and lovable. Every one of these characters can bring a smile to your face. The main voice talent all does a great job of bringing the characters to life.

However, watching this as an adult, I do notice some flaws. The animation is simpler then it needs to be. Having said that, I still love some of their water shots, like the waterfall we see twice and the moonlight reflecting on the water. But the rest of it could be better. It's not quite as simple as the line heavy work I associate with the 70's and early 80's, but it is obviously going in that direction. The backgrounds are often flat and lack the depth and detail of some of Disney's earlier efforts. Additionally, several shots are obviously used more then once, something I spotted even as a child. This contributes to the cheep feel.

My other complaint centers around the supporting character voice talent. Frankly, it falls flat. The actors sound like they are reading the script and not really trying.

Yes, these are the complaints of an adult looking at the film now. As a kid, however, I loved it. And I'm sure today's kids will love The Jungle Book just as much as I did.