the Jungle Book

DAY 105


As if I even need an explanation why it's for today, we have the Jungle Book. By the by, this drawing looks awfully familiar, doesn't it? (BTW, for any of you who've seen you-know-what already, please no spoilers)
There's certainly a lot to talk about with the developmental stage alone. There was the original treatment by Bill Peet which was closer to the novel. The struggle Walt did when he went back to the company to strive for more character than the story. Sherman Bros songs clashing with Terry Gilkyson songs And, most importantly, Walt himself passed away from lung cancer during production before the film was released. There was a lot of nervous talk about shutting down the animation district because of it. What could they do without Uncle Walt? But when the film was released almost a year after his death, it was a big hit.
Does the story follow the original Rudyard Kipling stories? Hardly at all. The whole story is just trying to get Mowgli to go back to the Man Village and meeting various characters on the way. This is possibly Disney's least faithful animated adaptations ever, because aside from the title and characters' names, they're 2 completely different stories. In fact, Walt said to his crew "Don't read the original book. I want this to be a fun movie with a lot of heart. make up your own story." after Bill Peet left! Does that make this story bad? Not at all; it's its own thing. It's like the Adam West Batman show or Jim Carrey's the Mask. They're more light-hearted than their darker source material, but they're still entertaining and are good on their own. The animation's pretty good. Does it reuse the same bits again a few times? Clearly. Is it pencil-sketchy in more areas than others? Sometimes. But it's still solid Disney 60s animation. That and more than half of it was done by just 2 people: Frank and Ollie. Both worked off each other perfectly and it shows. The backgrounds are also good, with their water-color look and lots of color. The characters are the greatest strength of this film. They have great personalities, wonderful voices, the interactions, they're just wonderful. Are they as complex as Kipling? No. In fact, even if Disney went with Bill Peet's original version of Jungle Book, I don't think the characters would've been strong enough, because from what's been found, it doesn't seem like we'd get to know Peet's characters well enough (a TV series or multi-part film series, probably). Walt wanted this to be more character-driven than story-driven and in return, it gave us some of Disney's most memorable cast of characters yet. The songs are by the Sherman Brothers (with one exception) and this is one of their best soundtracks. They have an even compromising sound of swingin' jazz and ancient Indian. The same can be said about George Burns' score. The only really negative thing about this film is why didn't they dedicate it in Walt's memory? Before "THE END" pops up, there was plenty of open space to out a "DEDICATED TO WALT DISNEY: 1901-1966"! Overall, the Jungle Book is certainly a must-watch Walt era classic. It was the end of the Walt era and began a new era, but this was a sweet place for Walt to leave us. It would've been great to see a more serious adaptation to the original novels, but that's what remakes are for, right? (hint-hint, nudge-nudge)


DAY 107

Comment & enjoy!