Deep Dive Disney: Wes Looks at The Jungle Book

Welcome back to this massive project I have undertaken which I affectionately refer to as Deep Dive Disney. As you may have already noticed, this time around we’re going to be doing things a little bit differently. Instead of just discussing and analyzing one movie, today, as we look at The Jungle Book, we’ll be comparing the 1967 animated film to the 2016 live action remake. Why? Well, here’s the thing. Disney live action remakes have developed something of a bad reputation. Often times it’s a reputation well deserved, but because of that, often times the ones that are actually decent films get unfairly dismissed. I bring this up as the 2016 remake of The Jungle Book often falls into this category, something I feel is extremely unfair because, frankly after the horribly paced snooze fest I just watched, I am more convinced than ever that the Jungle Book remake may very well be the only film of its kind to be superior to the original version. Is it a perfect film? I wouldn’t say that, but in my opinion, it takes the elements of the original and uses them to tell a better, or at least more coherent story. So, what is The Jungle Book? Loosely based on a 1894 collection of short stories by Rudyard Kipling, The Jungle Book tells the story of Mowgli, a human child or “Man Cub” as is the term used by the animals of the jungle, who is found abandoned in the Jungle by the Panther, Bagheera, and raised by a pack of wolves. However, when Mowgli becomes the target of the dreaded Tiger, Shere Khan, the Jungle is no longer a safe place for the child and Bagheera tries to take him back to the man village so he can be safe among his own kind. However, Mowgli doesn’t want to leave the only home he’s ever known and tries get away from Bagheera, which leads him to Baloo, the lazy but lovable bear who takes Mowgli under his wing and grows to love him like his own son. Differing wildly from the book (Probably a good thing as I hear that the book makes Peter Pan look like a liberal left-wing manifesto), the story is still remembered as a Disney Classic. So, is the remake better than the original. Well, that’s entirely up to the opinion of the individual, but this is my blog so I’m going to say yes. In any case, let’s compare and contrast two different versions of The Jungle Book.

Main Character:

We’ll start off with the 1967 Mowgli. I’ll be honest, I found this kid to be kind of a little shit. You get a sense that he doesn’t take the threat of Shere Khan seriously at all. He thinks his family is abandoning him and is too young to grasp the idea that they’re only trying to keep him safe. I understand that this can be a difficult thing for a child to grasp, but it really irked me. Constantly, almost repetitively, Mowgli ignores the impending threat of Shere Khan, even when the Tiger is two feet in front of him. He’s nowhere near as obnoxious as Peter Pan, but he got under my skin quite a bit with his constant whining and zero sense of self-preservation, something you’d think one would pick up having spent their entire life in the jungle.

2016 Mowgli inherited a few of the traits of his 1967 counterpart but is still a vast improvement. Not only has this Mowgli adapted to survive in the jungle, even using human ingenuity in order to overcome the disadvantages he has when compared to his wolf brothers. 1967 Mowgli didn't even know how to climb a tree! When Shere Khan shows up, Mowgli absolutely takes the threat of him seriously, voluntarily leaving the pack so Shere Khan will no longer be a threat to his surrogate family. He still doesn’t want to go to the man village, but at least he understands the seriousness of the situation. Hell, despite his apprehension, he still willingly goes with Bagheera to the man village and unlike in the 1967 film where he just complains until Bagheera gets fed up and leaves him to his own devices, here, they just get separated when Shere Khan attacks and that’s what leads Mowgli to Baloo. While we’re on the subject, I really have to give massive props to Neel Sethi who plays Mowgli in the 2016 film. Child actors tend to be a bit of a crap shoot, and while he may not be perfect, he does an admirable job as the only human actor in the film acting in front of a green screen. The way he interacts with the CGI animals is very impressive and never once are you taken out of the film as a result. Good job kid.

Villain:

Before we get to the big bad tiger, let’s briefly discuss this film’s secondary villain, Kaa the Snake. In both versions Kaa is creepy as hell, what with their penchant for hypnosis to paralyze their pray before consumption. In the 2016 version, they actually made Kaa female and had her voiced by Scarlett Johansen. Which version of Kaa you prefer is up to you, but for me, I thought ScarJo managed to be just a little bit more intimidating.

As you may recall, the ruthless Tiger, Shere Khan, found himself on my Top 20 Disney Villains countdown and in both versions it is not difficult to see why. This fierce feline is a master of intimidation. Everyone in the jungle, from the tiniest rodent to the largest elephant is terrified of this guy and he not only knows it, he loves it. The 1967 Shere Khan is delightfully menacing, but unfortunately, he waits until the film is almost half over to show up. Still, he’s plenty intimidating, knows how to make a great entrance and the scene where he nearly kills Baloo is appropriately brutal. He’s voiced by classic actor George Sanders, who played Mr. Freeze on the Adam West Batman Show. That has nothing to do with anything, I just wanted to make sure you all knew that. Sanders’ voice actually does add plenty of intimidation factor to the character but still, Shere Khan’s general lack of screen time in the 1967 version and the fact that he goes out like a wuss running in terror of his own flaming tail makes him feel like less of a threat in the long run.

While 1967 Shere Khan takes his sweet time, 2016 Shere Khan does not fuck around and wastes no time showing everyone in the jungle who’s boss. Voiced by the always awesome Idris Elba, Shere Khan gets one whiff of Man Cub in the air and gives the entire jungle a simple ultimatum: surrender the Man Cub to me, or a lot of animals are going to die. And when Mowgli agrees to leave the pack so Shere Khan won’t bother them, that’s not enough for the big bad tiger. He doesn’t want Mowgli gone, he wants Mowgli dead! And since the Wolves didn’t surrender him, he straight up rips the throat out of the pack leader, Akeela, and holds the rest of the pack hostage knowing that once word spreads of what happened, Mowgli will come running back, and when he does, Shere Khan will be waiting. There’s this one really intense scene where Shere Khan is telling a story to the wolf pups about how cuckoo birds lay their eggs in other nests, causing the children of the other bird to starve and die, the implication being that this all the fault of Raksha, Mowgli’s adoptive mother. Because she brought a human into her pack, all this blood is on her hands. This Shere Khan also gets a much more impressive final battle. Mowgli inspires the entire Jungle to unite against the Tiger while the Jungle burns. Eventually it comes down to Mowgli and Shere Khan atop a tree, and Mowgli outwits the Tiger causing him to fall into a pit of fire, nice!

There’s one more character worth mentioning here, especially since it will make the already sure to be huge Side Characters section little lighter. In the 2016 film, King Louie is a far more antagonistic character and frankly, blows his 1967 counterpart completely out of the water. King Louie in this version is voiced by Christopher Walken, which already bumps up the awesome factor of the character. This King Louie is larger than life, commands a massive army, including a jungle-wide spy network, and fills his palace with trinkets from the human world, including a cowbell because this movie loves me and appreciates my humor. The point is, this Louie comes across like someone who has earned the title of King, not some 60’s beatnik who hangs around in temple ruins to get high. I always got a sense that Louie in this version was actually a much more formidable threat than Shere Khan and with his raw power and resources could have taken down the Tiger, he just chose not to because they had no beef. It’s a welcome update on a character who felt mostly superfluous to the original. Great stuff.

Side Characters:

Both versions of the film have a ton of side characters, so this is likely to be a long section. I’ll get this out of the way right away. In both versions, the Elephants just feel pointless. They have a little bit more going for them in the 2016 version, even if I never quite understood the reverence the other animals seem to have for them but they do put out the fire in the 2016 version, which puts them ahead of the 1967 elephants who only exist to pad out the run time.

The 2016 version cuts out the flock of vultures, which was a smart decision. While I appreciated that the vultures were meant to be an homage to The Beatles, they really were superfluous, like a lot of scenes in the 1967 version.

I like that in the 2016 version, Mowgli’s wolf family is given a little bit more screen time. In the 1967 version, they quickly establish that the wolves raised Mowgli shows them agreeing to send Mowgli away for his safety, then the film kind of forgets they exist. Here, Mowgli’s Wolf mother, Raksha, voiced by Lupita Nyong’o and the pack leader, Akeela, voiced by Giancarlo Esposito, are given a little more development. I actually really appreciated the emotional goodbye between Mowgli and his mother when Mowgli leaves the pack.

Now lets’ talk about Bagheera the Panther. In both versions, Bagheera can be strict and loses his patience with Mowgli and Baloo’s antics quickly, but he ultimately cares about Mowgli and wants what’s best for him, which is why he suggests sending him away. There’s not that much difference between the two versions but it worth mentioning that 2016 Bagheera is voiced by the great Sir Ben Kingsley, which is always nice.

And now, the main event. Everyone’s favorite character, including mine, Baloo the Bear. It seems before Baloo found a lucrative career as a cargo pilot (seriously, TaleSpin is awesome, but I will never understand how someone watched The Jungle Book and said “This Needs More Airplanes") Baloo led a very bohemian lifestyle, described as a “Lazy Jungle Bum” by Bagheera. Naturally, Mowgli is drawn to Baloo’s more relaxed way of life, especially if it means an alternative to leaving the jungle. While 2016 Baloo is a little more manipulative at first, in both versions the bear forms a strong bond with young Mowgli and even starts to think of him like a son. Their chemistry really is the highlight of the film, making it all the more heartbreaking when they have to part ways. While Baloo may be lazy, he always steps up when he needs to. and in both versions, Baloo fights Shere Khan on Mowgli’s behalf. I’ll give the 1967 version this, the scene where you think Baloo is dead is pretty heart wrenching. They genuinely had five-year-old Wes fooled into thinking that they’d killed off this beloved character, and when he wakes up and tells Bagheera to keep eulogizing him it usually gets a laugh. Both versions of Baloo are brought to life by excellent actors. 1967 Baloo is voiced by a talented actor named Phil Harris whom we’ll likely discuss again once we get to Robin Hood where he essentially plays the same character. The 2016 version is played by Peter Venkman himself, Bill Murray, who rarely turns in a bad performance and was a perfect choice to play Baloo.

Songs:

The 2016 version cuts most of the songs, which is probably for the best. None of them are really missed, although I wouldn’t have minded seeing what this film’s version of Kaa would have done with Trust In Me. The only two songs that remain are, in my opinion, the only two from either version worth talking about. Let’s start with the big one, Bare Necessities. Bare Necessities is an enjoyably catchy and relaxing jazz number that I can’t help but groove to. The song is about Baloo’s relaxed carefree lifestyle and the appeal it holds for Mowgli. One could almost call it the better version of Hakuna Matata. Don’t get me wrong, I love Hakuna Matata, but this one just is a little bit catchier. The other song worth discussing is King Louie’s number, I Wanna Be Like You, a song about King Louie’s desire to be like humans. It’s a really fun swing number. What’s interesting here is how it’s presented in the 2016 version. We’re right in the middle of a really intimidating spiel, and suddenly, IT’S SHOWTIME!! Keep in mind, up to this point this film has not been a musical. Yeah, they sing Bare Necessities, but that’s a less a full blown musical number and more just a fun song taught to Mowgli by Baloo, so it makes sense in context. Here, this song comes straight out of nowhere and it’s kind of hilarious in how out of place it is. Couple that with the fact that it’s Christopher Walken doing the singing, and you have a recipe for a memorably weird song sequence. Hell, they even play it again during the end credits to make sure it sticks with you.

Memorable Scenes:

Most of the memorable scenes in either film we’ve already discussed. However, there is one part of the film that I will one hundred percent give the 1967 version over its 2016 counterpart. There’s a scene where Baloo is informed of Mowgli’s situation with Shere Khan. Despite his own misgivings about sending Mowgli to the man village, even Baloo knows that Shere Khan is not to be messed with and promises Bagheera that he’ll do the right thing. This whole scene really was heartbreaking since you really do feel how much Baloo has come to love Mowgli in their short time together. He doesn’t want to lose this kid who he’s come to care for like his own cub, but he also doesn’t want to see Shere Khan kill him. It’s almost hard to watch when you see him tell Mowgli to go to the man village. You can tell this is destroying him, but he knows its for the best. I actually got a little teary eyed during this scene. The 2016 version has this scene as well, but it doesn’t really carry the same level of emotional weight. I may think the 2016 film is the superior version, but I’ll still give credit to 1967 when I believe it’s deserved

Story:

So, I’ll get this out of the way right up front. I absolutely despise the ending to the 1967 version of the film. I never really liked it as a kid and watching it as an adult it seriously pissed me off. After all the crap Mowgli’s gone through, leaving his home with the wolf pack, tangling with Kaa, forming a bond with Baloo, having that bond broken, confronting Shere Khan and almost losing Baloo in the process, Mowgli just wanders out of the jungle because he sees a pretty girl. That is fucking stupid! This little shit has been whining about wanting to stay in the Jungle despite the fact that there's a man-eating Tiger trying to kill him for the entire movie, and now that Shere Khan is gone and he would be able to stay if he chose, he just fucks off to the man village because of hormones. You mean to tell me that Mowgli’s nine-year-old libido is somehow a more powerful motivator than the threat of a man-eating tiger? Bullshit! Hell, he doesn’t even say goodbye to Baloo and Bagheera, his two best friends in the world. You’d think there would be some kind of emotional farewell but no, all he does is shrug at them with a dopey grin on his face and leave without a word. Worse yet, this is all meant to be part of some stupid and incredibly dated “Stay With Your Own Kind” message the film was going for which is all sorts of problematic. The 2016 film thankfully changes the ending completely. In this version, Mowgli does not go back to the man village. Yeah, in this movie, Mowgli does not leave the only home he’s ever known just because he’s got the hots for some rando. Hell, we only see the man village very briefly and it’s deliberately framed as a terrifying place. We don’t see that much of it, just shadows, but we can clearly see that Mowgli does not belong there. In this version, Mowgli stays with the wolves because they’re his family. Blood or not, Raksha and the others raised him and no other place will ever feel like home. The lesson Mowgli learns here is to embrace what he is rather than where he’s from. He lives among wolves, but he is a man, and there’s no shame in being so. Afterall, it’s Mowgli’s human ingenuity that ultimately defeats Shere Khan. I think that’s a really nice message. I once knew a guy who was of Korean descent but was adopted by white people. They loved him just as much as any natural parents would and when he wanted to explore his cultural background, his parents encouraged it wholeheartedly. I think Mowgli’s going through something similar here and I honestly appreciate it.

The Dark Disney Factor:

Most of the darker scenes from either film have already been covered. Be it Shere Khan ripping Akeela’s throat out or the creepy man village scene among others. However, one aspect of the film that’s equally creepy in both versions is Kaa the Snake. The way he/she hypnotizes his/her victims so their nice in docile before he/she eventually eats them is very disturbing. I hate to use this comparison, but it’s unfortunately very apt to liken Kaa to a date rapist, relying on putting their victim in an altered state of mind before doing something horrible to them. Kaa’s scene in the 2016 version is especially creepy because you don’t actually see her right away. You just here her voice all around and see some of her coils hanging in the nearby tree. It’s actually a very well executed scene.

Final Thoughts: I hope what this article has proved is that it is possible to tell an interesting story using the elements presented in the 1967 film. It’s unfortunate that the 1967 film did not take full advantage of its potential and was bogged down by abysmal pacing and a horrendous ending. The 2016 version is a great film that improves upon its predecessor in many ways and I enjoyed it immensely. It’s the reason that I still feel that there is merit in remaking and updating these old classics even if Disney doesn’t always get it right. I hope you enjoyed a slight diversion from the norm with this article. Next time, we’re back to business as usual when we look at The Aristocats.