The Jungle Book 2 (2003)

A project designed simply to milk little kids parents of their money. The plot? Nothing happens !!! This is especially bad because of the quality of the first film. Straight to video instead? No, straight in the bin, where people who dream up these sort of vacuous non-entity efforts should also find themselves.

Fmovies: I agree with the reviewer of the DVD to this Disney sequel on the Ultimate Disney site (now more commonly known as DVDizzy): It's not on the same level as the first movie, but simultaneously it isn't that bad either and I still find it enjoyable, despite the flaws there may be. Someone mentioned that this is just a rehash of the original film. I didn't quite get what that other viewer meant or what that other reviewer was talking about at first, but I guess it is somewhat, in a few ways, but not all that much I don't think. Believe it or not, this is actually one of the few Disney sequels I was feeling to a degree. Those who think this is very bad, I can think of other movies that are much worse, such as the straight-to-VHS Bar-B-Q and I rather watch Jungle Book 2 again than that or before ever watching that again, looking back on it. To anyone who may be reading this, y'all might want to rent for yourselves or watch it online first though. I don't think I'll even bother bringing up what has already been elaborated by the other reviewers about this on here nor try to discuss what hasn't already been discussed on this. Anyway, I say it's worth giving a whirl and hopefully at least some will be on the fence with it like I am.

The Jungle Book 2 is by far one of the worst sequels (whether Disney or Non-Disney) I have ever seen. It has a weak storyline, below average songs and terrible animation.

I remember when I heard that there was going to be a sequel to the Jungle Book (one of my favourite Disney films), I was extremely excited: my excitement went to waste. What makes this film even worse is how great the first Jungle Book film was. I think the same can be said for most Disney sequels (e.g. Pocahontas 2, The Hunchback of Notre Dame 2 etc).

Quite frankly, I like to imagine that this sequel does not exist.

The Jungle Book 2 fmovies. I will have to agree with some commentators here that The Jungle Book 2 was a very big disappointment.

Disney Corp. should hire a team of movie experts and analyze the elements of the first movie and then repeat them again, with changes.

The only good part in my opinion was the new vulture played by Phil Collins, he was funny. Otherwise, the music which in version 1 was completely enchanting, and delightful is missing from version 2. Also they left out one of the best characters, King Louie, and above all, there was no plot at all. Alas! William, are there no more writers like thou?

Disney would die again if he saw this movie.

Recipe for Jungle Book 2:

Take one classic animated movie, loved by millions the world over.

Carefully remove the plot.

Add a couple of inconsequential new characters.

Simmer gently without much loving care for very little time in a studio.

et voila!

You have the most pointless sequel I have seen in a long time. This is a shameless and charmless cash-in on the original Jungle Book. All the characters are there (with the exception of King Louie - who is absent for no explained reason) but they are there just because they were in the first film. No other reason at all.

The plot isn't. There is no plot! Some vague hokum about how Mowgli misses the jungle, and that's it. Dull, dull, dull, dull, dull!

You have to admire Disney's inattention to detail, though. For example. Mowgli, having been transplanted to the man village, has to obey all the rules of civilised society. Except, he still gets to wear his loincloth like some Tarzan wannabee. No smart man clothes for you, jungle boy! Just that raggedy old cloth! Haha! You're in the man world now, but we'll cruelly let you wear your rag to constantly remind you of the fact that you were once in a real movie with heart!

And what's with everyone in that village? They are deathly afraid of the "jungle" and its inhabitants. So much so that they've placed convenient stepping stones across the river so that they can get to it anytime they like. Bah!

There's one new song of any note "Jungle Rythym" which is OK, but that's it. Otherwise it's just an endless rehash of "Bare Necessities" several times during the picture. Talk about a one-song movie.

The voices are done reasonably well, though how they roped John-Rhys Davies into this I'll never know. Mowgli (Haley Joel Osment) and Baloo (John Goodman) are particularly good.

But otherwise its just rubbish really. Little kids will enjoy it, but it's a shame Disney didn't add a few more "adult" oriented gags into it. The only one of note was the vultures being portrayed as the Beatles. Even that wasn't funny the second time around. I can imagine parents the world over, having taken their kids to see this, dreading the little 'uns wanting to go again.

Oh, and Disney guys? Just because Lilo and Stitch was a good film, doesn't mean you have to try and sneak the two main characters into every movie from now on. Shanti and the intensely irritating Ranjan are practically clones of Lilo and Stitch, but without the charm of either.

The final insult was, after sitting through the movie and listening to far too many reprisals of "Bare Necessities" and NOT having King Louie in it at all, the end credits played out to "I Wannna be Like You". Yeah, that makes tons of sense Disney. Not have a major character in the movie, then use his theme song at the end.

What a crock! Not so much of a straight-to-video production as it should have been a straight-to-the-cheap-bin-in-the-video-shop effort.

The original is one of my favourites, with the great songs, originality, memorable characters and its good nature. Other than the existence of the characters, this sequel fails everywhere else, so is definitely inferior in comparison. I can't believe some people thought the original was racist, I personally think someone's ethnicity should not be an issue when talking about voice work. Another problem with the sequel was that the characters, who were funny and memorable in the original, were not very likable at all, not even Baloo. Though Phil Collins makes a brief and amusing appearance as a vulture. The biggest flaw, was the plot. It seemed non-existent, and if there was one, it was very uninteresting with no heart, fun or charm at all, all of which were in the original. It also felt too much of a re-hash, a similar problem I had with Little Mermaid 2. The pace was very limp, although the film is quite short.(some sequels like King of Thieves, Enchanted Christmas and Simbas's Pride were surprisingly good despite their short durations) The voice talents try their best, but with a very bad script, and they sounded too similar to the original voices. Haley Joel Osment does his best, but his Mowgli had no personality, likewise with John Goodman as Baloo. Bagheera, Kaa and Ranjan provide some laughs, halfway through, after a very slow beginning. One of the original's highlights was George Sanders' Shere Kahn. Whilst suave and charismatic, Sanders brought a sense of menace to the character. That said, I was deeply disappointed in Tony Jay as Shere Kahn, though it isn't his fault at all; the material they gave him was very bad indeed. He was amazing as the character in Talespin, why did the script writers decide to ruin him, by making him rather empty as a villain? Jay is a truly talented voice actor, like Tim Curry, evident in Beauty and the Beast, Talespin and Hunchback of Notre Dame, but through no fault of his, Shere Kahn was nowhere near as menacing as he was in the original. The songs from the original were legendary, here they were eminently forgettable, and slowed the film down quite considerably. Bare Neccessities even managed to be very badly sung. Though on a positive note, some of the animation was average, and there was at least some attempt at humour. I don't think it is as bad as Cinderella 2, but nevertheless it is very thinly-plotted. 4/10 Bethany Cox.