Reboots have been the rage in Hollywood since the beginning of Hollywood. Over the last few years, Disney has capitalized on this reboot fever by releasing live action remakes of their classic animated films. With the success of The Jungle Book in 2016 and Beauty and the Beast in 2017, some might say that they are using nostalgia as a way to fill up movie theaters.
This week, the complete trailer for the live action reboot of Aladdin was released.
I have to admit that I am impressed with the trailer. It looks like a fun movie, even though a part of me will always love the 1992 animated film. I appreciate that the cast is ethnically accurate to the world that Aladdin is set in. Stepping into the animated shoes created in 1992 by Scott Weinger and Linda Larkin are Mena Massoud and Naomi Scott. I am also impressed by Will Smith as Genie. Though he will never be able to replace Robin Williams’s version of the character, I have a feeling that Smith will bring his own unique sensibilities and flair to Genie.
Will I be seeing the movie when it hits theaters in the spring? The answer is likely yes.
Earlier today, I wrote a Flashback Friday post about previous film adaptations of The Jungle Book.
This post is about the new adaptation, which premiered in theaters two weeks ago.
Mowgli (Neel Sethi) is a man-cub living in the jungle. Raised by the wolf pack, led by Akela (Giancarlo Esposito), the boy is simply part of the of the wolf pack, especially to Raksha (Lupita Nyong’o), the female wolf who took him as her own.
Together with Bagheera (Sir Ben Kingsley), the wolves and Bagheera are doing the best they can for Mowgli. But he is still a man-cub. When Shere Khan (Idris Elba) wants Mowgli dead, the wolves and Bagheera decide that it is time for the man cub to be around his own kind. What starts out as a simple journey becomes fraught with complications. Baloo (Bill Murray) wants what is best for Mowgli, but Kaa (Scarlett Johansson) and King Louie (Christopher Walken) have ulterior motives.
Fans of the 1967 animated film will be thrilled that the filmmakers kept the narrative and many of the elements that made that film a success. While it is less of a comedy and more of an action film, it still well done and entertaining.
I recommend it.
The Jungle Book is presently playing in theaters.
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.