Jungle Book (1942)

I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Memorable, crazy movie

Best movie of this year hands down!

This is a Movie adaption of a Tale written by the famous Rudyard Kipling a fellow of English Blood who was born and Raised in the foothills of the Himalayas in India. CINEMATOGRAPHY GREAT. The BEGINNING of the MOvie is a wonderful scene of Wildlife. This is a colored film but has the resolution of black and white, so I am guessing was quite a cinematographers delight in the day. IF you can get a good quality version and watch it on a really good flat TV or better yet an HD CRT, you will get the richness of the movie. SO much of it is dark spaces. MUSIC was very nice. NOt quite Indian, somewhat orchestral, and interesting mix of what seems like very original music, carries the film wonderfully. Folksy and majestic at the same time, fitting to the story!!ACTING very good. Solid acting , nothing stupendous, some nice subtle performances within. Most of this movie is carried by the story and the action. SCENES are generally small, and very cozy, almost like a stage play ,from a modern perspective. I get hungry for sandwiches when i watch this movie. for you in Cold Weather climates, watch this movie in the WINTER!!!This is an ACTION ADVENTURE movie with Political and Dramatic Strings, an Deservingly classic tale, and this movie is quite well made. CULTURALLY & ETHNICALLY sensitive people who object to a lot of stuff may have some internal issues to defeat to enjoy this movie, but other than that, it is an Epic Story made into a great adventure movie.T H A N K S F O R R E A D I N G ! ! ! !

Colorful live-action version of the Rudyard Kipling classic. The story is about a boy raised by wolves who tries to adapt to life with humans. I grew up with the Disney animated film so I suppose that will always be "my" Jungle Book but I still enjoyed this film very much. Great-looking sets, beautiful technicolor, well-directed action scenes, fine Miklos Rosza score, and a solid cast make this a highly enjoyable movie. Sabu is perfectly cast as Mowgli. Great character actors Joseph Calleia, John Qualen, and Frank Puglia all play parts unlike anything else I've ever seen them in and they do quite well. It's a really fun adventure film with lots of heart.

When I was a kid (back in the Fifties), I loved anything to do with wild animals, especially my favorites, the big jungle cats. So a picture like this was right up my alley. Oddly, today was the first time I've ever watched "Jungle Book" uninterrupted from start to finish. What I recall of the picture was from my Saturday mornings watching 'Andy's Gang' where it was serialized, and even today the version I watched had those identifiable breaks in the story where a new chapter would take place.Even so, I recall so many years later the names of the more prominent animal characters - Shere Khan the Tiger, Kaa the Python and Bagheera the Panther. I'm surprised the film credits don't list Mowgli's adoptive parents, the wolves Akela and Raksha, even though the wolves have more screen time than some of the others like Hathi the Elephant and the almost invisible Baloo the Bear. The Disney version would have to rectify that.Others reviewing the film on this board appear to rave about the picture's early use of the color format but watching today I can't really concur. It's not anywhere near as vibrant as the same era's "The Adventures of Robin Hood' (1938) or the following year's "The Wizard of Oz". Granted, not the same budget obviously so I guess you can give it some slack. The technical effects for the time were fairly well done I thought, what with those talking snakes and all.For his part, Sabu was quite the accomplished non-actor after having been discovered by the Korda's in the late 1930's. He quite obviously looks the part of the young but principled savage who grows up simultaneously in dual worlds of Man and the Jungle. His disillusionment with the 'civilized' world along with the trio of greedy Indian merchants was strongly reminiscent of the central characters in 1948's "The Treasure of the Sierra Madre", and if you watch closely, his vine swing with Mahala (Patricia O'Rourke) looked like it was carbon-copied by those two young actors in the very first "Star Wars" film - you know who I mean.

I had seen this movie in late 80's when i was a kid. I loved it. When i first saw this movie, i knew it was old maybe released in late 60'- early 70's. Few days back i saw it again after many many years on TV. And I was shocked to find this movie was released in 1942. Which is years before the independence of India and this makes the movie older than most of the so called Great Hollywood Classics. During the time it was released it might not have been heard by many.Mostly forgotten over number of years. But i have no doubt its one of the first Hollywood movies to star an Asian actor in the lead.And probably the first Indian actor. Also the first color movie which involves lots of Animals.I'm not surprised that few 100 people have voted for this movie. Maybe because it was released during the world war days.I was really surprised this movie was given a rating of just over 6. And why is that? The Movies good. it involves animals..Its made for Kids. Then i felt maybe because some don't want to see an Asian actor Leading in a Hollywood Classic. When you see movies like the much hyped king kong (1933)which was released just 9 years before this movie and was a B&W Classic and involved a stuffed monkey dancing on a sky scraper to get a vote of 8 and voted by almost 18,000 people i think this justifies my Answer.