A fish out of water is a common tale. Among the many fish out of water tales is The Jungle Book by Rudyard Kipling. Published in the 1890’s, it told the tale of a young boy named Mowgli who raised among the animals in the Indian Jungle.
In 1967, the Disney film company decided to take the book and turn the story into an animated film. Mowgli (voiced by Bruce Reitherman) is man cub living in the jungle. Baloo the bear (Phil Harris) and Bagheera the panther (Sebastian Cabot) differ on what to do with the man cub. Baloo would be happy to keep Mowgli with him, but Bagheera knows that the boy is in danger should he stay in the jungle.
In 1994, a live adaptation was released into theaters, also by Disney. Mowgli (Jason Scott Lee) was raised by animals in the jungle after his father was killed by a tiger. Years later, Mowgli returns to the “civilization” of Colonial India. Reuniting with his childhood sweetheart, Kitty (Lena Headey), Mowgli must find out not only where he belongs, but what he considers to be civilization.
Do I recommend them?
Let me put it this way. The 1967 adaptation is very era centric. The 1994 movie is more of a what if sequel with a bit of Tarzan in the civilized world in it to move the narrative beyond the original tale.
To answer your question, both are a maybe for me.