George of the Jungle 2 (2003)

You won't be disappointed!

Sadly Over-hyped

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

I enjoyed watching this film and would recommend other to give it a try , (as I am) but this movie, although enjoyable to watch due to the better than average acting fails to add anything new to its storyline that is all too familiar to these types of movies.

Someone please explain why the hell we have been delivered George of the Jungle 2. The silliness of the first one, coupled with Brendan Fraser's enjoyable slapstick, John Cleese's voice-over and Thomas Haden Church's funny portrayal of the villain is what made the film so fun, yet all of threat was taken away. No more Brendan Fraser. No more funny silliness. No more laughable antics from Haden Church, and Cleese is put to no good use as Ape the Ape. And to make matters worse, GotJ2 insists on assuring the viewers that the film is a sequel, a Disney sequel, and a Disney sequel without Brendan Fraser, this time with the less-famous Christopher Showerman, who isn't even closer to Brendan; which is extremely unprofessional and even more tiring and boring to watch and listen to. The narration is terrible and the subplot of teaching Geroge's young son, portrayed by Angus T. Jones (Jake from "Two and a Half Men") how to rope swing falls flat, just an excuse to advertise toy products for the boy, which was probably the film's main source of funding, because I don't know who the hell would want this film on their credits list. A shame, a mess and not worth the time or effort it takes to watch it. This film is terrible, don't see it and if you have... may God have mercy on you.P.S.: To the positive reviewers of this film, I'm sure that you're appealed to one of the Lyle's henchwoman, especially the blonde, who looks like Melissa Joan Hart, because the actress was born in 1978 (MJH was born in 1976). If you want actresses born in 1978 go to watch a Japanese TV show called "Jiban" (a Robocop-inspired series), because a child actress who portrays a character named Mayumi was born on '78.

This is disgrace in almost every way. I have nothing against movies that are meant to be in more than one part, not even those meant to be single movies but then inspired sequels, but when they knock something together just to try and get few dollars more of the old glory... yuck.New cast is not bad itself, some of them are maybe even better than original cast, but they miss the charm that we fell to in first movie. It simply isn't it. Music is copied from first movie. Story is unoriginal and dumb. Humor is rerun or exaggerated or simply pointless. CGI is story for itself. In original movie you could not tell that elephant is not the real one, while here all animals look like they skipped from cartoon. Not only unconvincing, but also very irritating. Screenplay was obviously forced without ideas or inspiration and then put into movie that I barely forced my self to watch till the end. In one word - sad.

I watched about 10 minutes of it because it was on TV. I did not see the beginning, but I watched the middle part. I immediately disliked it when I saw that Brendan Fraser was not in the movie. George of the Jungle was my favorite movie when I was a little girl, and now it just sucks. The first one was FANTASTIC I'd give that one 40/10 stars if I could. But the sequel deserves about a 1/10. It wasn't funny, it didn't make me laugh like the first one did.Ursula was my favorite character when I was little, and they replaced her too! I'm just curious on why they replaced them. They were made for the part in the movie, so I don't know why they would replace them. I know I only watched 10 minutes of the movie in the middle, but those are 10 minutes I won't get back.

Disney continues to milk success out of their theatrical successes with direct-to-video sequels, a generally annoying practice of theirs, like calling all their cartoons masterpieces and labeling their discs Disney DVD (as if they invented the format!). This live-action cartoon is as good, if not better, than the Brendan Fraser original, mainly because it keeps the satirical humor of the Jay-Ward-cartoon original intact and maintains the production qualities and effects work of the first picture. Unknown Chris Showerman replaces Brendan Fraser and he's up to the task, in spite of the fact that he's at an immediate disadvantage substituting for a recognizable star. It's as lively and humorous as it needs to be and should definitely entertain family elements of all ages as necessary. One more Disney quibble before I close: and that's the pandering, condescending attitude they seem to have for the audience, by labeling their widescreen presentation of the film on DVD as "family friendly", as if filmgoers are nothing but uneducated consumers who might find the black bars on their square TVs offensive and forego the purchase (rental or whatever). Disney just continues to typecast themselves and their audience with their obvious, overt approach to their product!