Notes for the non-WB/non-Disney Live Action variants
*In terms of how in name only an onscreen Jungle Book adaptation can go, My Mowgli Boy surely is a huge winner. In a happy twist of irony; despite still being rather heavily vetted in its native PRC (as with everything in the country), it’s also a lot more adult than Prince of The Wolves or even Andy Serkis’ Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle, which is itself a hard achievement to follow in Hollywood. The main reason why is that Mowgli (appearing as Mo Ge Li in this version) occasionally gets drunk and sometimes cat fights his own girlfriend turned future wife.
*The Second Jungle Book: Mowgli And Baloo is perhaps the least faithful Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Stories adaptation distributed by a major Hollywood studio. In hilarious irony, it’s ranked (in terms of being in name only) between Reitherman’s The Jungle Book and DQ’s The Jungle Book.
*Mowgli: The New Adventures of The Jungle Book is a decent prequel to The Jungle Book: Search for The Lost Treasure.
*The Jungle Book: The Search for The Lost Treasure is more faithful to both Jungle Books (or more specifically a few stories in each of them) than its prequel tv series.
*Prince of the Wolves is perhaps the most faithful non-WB/non-Disney live action variant out there, even though it’s largely a comedy romance for the most part. Along with My Mowgli Boy and Stephen Sommers’ The Jungle Book, it is one of the few significant onscreen adaptations of the Jungle Book story that started it all. Not even helping is that, apart from having a huge online audience primarily consisting of Southeast Asians, Taiwanese, Latin Americans and Brazilians, what most people don’t really know that the story that it’s indirectly based upon is In the Rukh, with the heroine and hero’s age gap and all.
Notes for the non-WB/non-Disney Animated Variants
*Even though DQ’s The Jungle Book is considerably lighter than most other adaptations (which are still family friendly to begin with), it’s not as (heavily) in name only as My Mowgli Boy.
*While Wolf Boy Ken is likely inspired more by Wambi the Jungle Boy than by the actual Jungle Books, it is still a modest international success which stars a wild boy and the heroic wolves who raised him.
*Golden Films’ The Jungle Book, although pragmatically based on Mowgli’s Brothers and a few other bits in The Jungle Book, has the palest 20th Century variant of Mowgli out there. Unfortunate implications indeed.
*Despite being from the UK, Bevanfield Films’ The Jungle Book is the worst Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Stories onscreen adaptation by far.
*Saban’s The Jungle Book is perhaps the most faithful Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Stories adaptation distributed by a Hollywood studio other than WB.
*Despite being made in Soviet Union era Russia, The Adventures of Mowgli is the most faithful of the 20th Century Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Stories adaptations onscreen. It is based upon both Jungle Books as well as having a few elements coming from In The Rukh, such as Mowgli being in his twenties for significant amounts of the fifth and final part.
*In terms of being faithful to the original, Jungle King Saro is perhaps an all time winner for a crapload of questionable reasons! Being based on both Jungle Books, it features the most questionable onscreen depictions of the otherwise competent Man Villagers on record, which surely said it all, as the show was indeed filled with critical research failures galore.
Notes for MGM, Netflix and Warner Bros Variants
*Zoltan Korda’s The Jungle Book is the least faithful of the MGM, Netflix and Warner Bros variants. Funnily enough, it is the first onscreen Jungle Book adaptation based primarily (albeit rather loosely) on The Second Jungle Book (mingling awkwardly with a few elements of The Jungle Book) and features the inspiration behind King Louie and King Larry, an orangutan who leads the Bandar Log group of fellow primates.
*Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle is the darkest and edgiest Jungle Book adaptation co-distributed by a pair of major Hollywood studios, although it is based pragmatically on The Jungle Book with a few elements coming from The Second Jungle Book.
*The Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Brothers, although based on a few bits of The Jungle Book (but primarily Mowgli’s Brothers), is perhaps the most faithful Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Stories adaptation distributed by a major Hollywood studio.
Notes for Disney Variants
*Despite its own famously troubled production history, Reitherman’s The Jungle Book is surprisingly less ‘in name only’ than two closely ranked deviants, The Second Jungle Book: Mowgli And Baloo and DQ’s The Jungle Book.
*The Jungle Book 2, although a rather weak and often contentious sequel, is actually a bit more faithful to Kipling’s Jungle Books (but mostly Leaving In The Jungle and a few bits in The Second Jungle Book) than its predecessor. It is the only animated Disney one which doesn’t feature Louie, as the latter is (in the story) implied to be taking a holiday off.
*Sommers’ The Jungle Book is the darkest 20th century Disney variant. Funnily enough, while it does have elements of both Jungle Books mingling with each other, it is the first significant live action Jungle Book adaptation based on In The Rukh, albeit in a rather loose fashion.
*Favreau’s The Jungle Book and its upcoming sequel The Jungle Book 2 are amongst the darkest of the Disney variants, despite being rated PG in the US.
*The Jungle Book: Mowgli’s Story is the most faithful of the Disney variants, being based primarily on Mowgli’s Brothers and other bits in The Jungle Book.
No comments:
Post a Comment