Perfect cast and a good story

One of my all time favorites.

hyped garbage

Excellent, smart action film.

"The Jungle Book" is one of the earliest animal movies made. The Tarzan movies that began in the 1930s had some animals, but this film was the first that showed the public video scenes of numerous jungle creatures. And, it was done in full color in 1942. Unless one lived in a big city that had a zoo in the early to mid-20th century, you weren't able to see live jungle animals. For most children growing up in those years, the only pictures of tigers, elephants, monkeys and crocodiles one saw were those in books or National Geographic magazine. So, this film was the first moving picture of live animals that many people saw. Later, of course, TV would add to the exposure, and animal theme parks would start to proliferate – after Disneyland opened in 1957.In the first six decades of the 20th century, Rudyard Kipling ruled large for his stories with many animals that inhabited the jungles of India. I remember reading "Rikki-Tikki-Tavi" and some other Kipling stories as a child. Kipling was a master story teller, and he wrote in numerous forms – novels, short stories, poems. His best works were adventure novels and children's books. Kipling's works were natural sources for screenplays with which to make movies. Indeed, some of these titles will loom large to movie buffs. Besides "The Jungle Book" in 1942, Kipling's "Captains Courageous" was made into a film in 1937. The MGM film starred Spencer Tracy and Freddie Bartholomew. It earned Tracy his first Oscar and received three more Academy Award nominations. Hallmark produced a TV movie based on the story in 1996, starring Robert Urich and Kenny Vadas. In 1939, RKO made "Gunga Din," from Kipling's poem of the same title. It starred Cary Grant, Joan Fontaine, Victor McLaglen, and Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. That received an Oscar nomination for best black and white cinematography. In 1950, Errol Flynn, Dean Stockwell and Paul Lukas starred in another Kipling story, "Kim," which was made by MGM. A TV version of that story was made by London Films in 1984, and aired on CBS in the U.S. It starred Peter O'Toole. In 1975, Sean Connery and Michael Caine starred in "The Man Who Would be King," an adventure story set in a fictitious middle Asian country. Kipling knew a number of other prominent writers of his time – T.S. Eliot, George Orwell, Mark Twain, and some who became friends – Henry James and Arthur Conan Doyle. Many in the field of literature considered Kipling the best British writer and story teller of his time, an accolade shared by much of the public as well. In 1907 he became the first writer of English to win the Nobel Prize for Literature, and he remains the youngest person (at age 41) ever to receive that award. Born in India, Kipling traveled a great deal and lived in many different places, including more than four years in the Untied States. It was during that time, living in Vermont, that he wrote the Jungle books, his novel, "Captains Courageous," and another volume of poetry. He met many heads of state, and befriended President Theodore Roosevelt.

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 first encountered Sabu in his other famous flick, "Thief of Baghdad", where he impressed with both acting talent and physical prowess. The movie, though full of Arab clichés and with actors and extras of every race but Arab, was forgivable because its premise was so fantasy-oriented. "Jungle Book" however, supposedly in a much more realistic mode, presents an India that is a mishmash of cultures, sometimes pseudoCambodian, sometimes pseudoTurkish, sometimes pseudoRoosevelt; with a lot of white actors who look like a bunch of poorly-painted Al Jolsons trying to be Indians while talking like New York cabbies. An overly-clichéd India would have been an improvement, but it seems nobody had any idea what India and its people should look like. The two significant female characters, while both actually of European stock, were the only characters (besides Sabu) who were close to convincing as Indians (although their costumes were not). And oddly, altho the movie poster claims that Mowgli risked his life in the jungle for the "girl he loved", their is no hint that their relation with each other was anything more than a vague mutual curiosity. The plot line was going everywhere and nowhere, and the abundant animal scenes were well shot but redundant (some reviewers comment on the obvious flakiness of the animals, but they must have better eyes than I do). For me, at least, the film's only saving grace was Sabu himself, who obviously was the inspiration for the project. He lit up every scene he appeared in with the believability of his character and his lithe and athletic physique which showcased much more agility than even in "Thief". But if you want sexy, you would do much better to see Jason Scott Lee's 90s version, albeit Mr Lee is hard to believe as an Indian. However, back to the 1942 version, the subplot dealing with Mowgli's nemesis - the evil tiger Shere Khan - was half-baked and he did SK in half-way through the movie with no apparent fanfare. It didn't mesh in well with the story of the greedy Hindu 3 stooges raiding the treasure and consequently the whole bit with the jungle fire and all. The real failure, of course, is the end where the British lass asks the storyteller "what happened to the boy and the girl??", to which the storyteller replies,"THAT... is another stor-r-ry!"Wha'...??!

Reared in the Indian Jungle, a young man must learn to live amongst the most rapacious of Nature's creatures, Man.Sir Alexander Korda's splendid film uses Kipling's book as a launching pad to tell Mowgli's story after he left his animal friends. It is told with great verve and excitement and its evocative views of the great jungle and the Lost City, as locations for Mowgli's further adventures, revealed in vibrant Technicolor, are an indication of the excellent production values lavished to make the story come alive.As teen-aged Mowgli, Indian actor Sabu couldn't be more perfect. Whether as the Wild Boy who first enters the village, or, later, as the completely competent young man who ferrets out the secret of the Lost City's treasure, fights the tiger Shere Khan and communes with deadly snakes, elephants & wolves, he is completely believable. Kipling would have been proud.Rosemary DeCamp is a quiet delight as Mowgli's gentle mother, her scenes with Sabu are most effective and tender. John Qualen, Frank Puglia, and especially Joseph Calleia, all score as the members of the man-village who want to see Mowgli destroyed. Playing his character as an old man, Calleia also bookends the film as its storyteller, using his somber demeanor to add to the mystery of the plot. That's Silent star Noble Johnson as the Sikh whose female companion encourages the telling of the tale.Born Sabu Dastagir in 1924, Sabu was employed in the Maharaja of Mysore's stables when he was discovered by Korda's company and set before the cameras. His first four films (ELEPHANT BOY-1937, THE DRUM-1938, THE THIEF OF BAGDAD-1940, JUNGLE BOOK-1942) were his best and he found himself working out of Hollywood when they were completed. After distinguished military service in World War II he resumed his film career, but he became endlessly confined for years playing ethnic roles in undistinguished minor films, BLACK NARCISSUS (1947) being the one great exception. His final movie, Walt Disney's A TIGER WALKS (1964) was an improvement, but it was too late. Sabu had died of a heart attack in late 1963, only 39 years of age.