Jump to content

Neo

Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle | Nov 29 2018 (LA, NY), Dec 7 (Netflix) | Bale, Blanchett, Cumberbatch & Naomie Harris confirmed

By Neo, in Box Office Discussion

Recommended Posts









ZattMurdock Global Phenomenon

ZattMurdock

Posted
Posted
28 minutes ago, filmlover said:

This is so lucky it bypassed a theatrical release. The floppage would’ve been ugly.

 

21 minutes ago, Jonwo said:

Warner Bros really saved themselves a huge write down but I suspect they've likely lost money selling it to Netflix. 

 

 

I don't know, reading IGN's review I'm more pissed than anything else because it seems that what didn't work in the film WASN'T the performances, but the effects. So yeah I'm sort of pissed at both WB and Netflix for not pouring the money Serkis needed to make this a great film. It seems that it's a daring take on the material - not kid friendly - that was abandoned by the studio, but still having redeeming qualities. 

 

Quote

In a film utterly dependent on buying into the illusion of talking animals, Mowgli’s heightened reality is often tripped up by dodgy visual effects. Not all the facial capture used on the actors voicing the animals works well, with many of the creatures, particularly Shere Khan and all of the wolves, seeming like cartoons inserted into the “real world”. It’s a shame since the animal characters are crucial to the story and its emotional impact. Visual effects of this quality may have passed in 2002 but not in 2018, and their inconsistency often distracts right during an important emotional moment.

10+ IMAGES
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Quote

Thankfully, the film’s central performance isn’t a digital character. Rohan Chand’s Mowgli almost single-handedly keeps the story emotionally authentic and engaging when the visual effects falter. This intense young actor finds the anger and sadness in a character who endures abandonment and loss. His Mowgli already seems mature despite his tender age and small stature; he’s literally battle-scarred from his experiences, making him less a character who loses his innocence and more one steeled by conflict and hardship.

 

Quote

With Mowgli then Serkis seems to have made a film that speaks directly to his own specific interests, which is an artist’s right to do, but which also makes Mowgli a more narrowly appealing watch than other adaptations of Kipling’s classic. Serkis should be applauded for doing it his way, and it’s a shame the visual effects weren’t on par with his vision, but it also shouldn’t be surprising if Mowgli leaves some more casual viewers feeling lost in the jungle. Score: 6.7

 

Source: https://www.ign.com/articles/2018/11/29/mowgli-legend-of-the-jungle-review

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


WittyUsername Summer Tentpole

WittyUsername

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

more like Meh-gli?

Oh well. It was pretty obvious from the start that this wouldn’t receive the praise that the 2016 movie received. I personally wasn’t crazy about the Disney version, but it’s probably the least offensive of their live action remakes, and if people like it, more power to them. 

Edited by WittyUsername
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TalismanRing Global Phenomenon

TalismanRing

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, ZattMurdock said:

I don't know, reading IGN's review I'm more pissed than anything else because it seems that what didn't work in the film WASN'T the performances, but the effects. So yeah I'm sort of pissed at both WB and Netflix for not pouring the money Serkis needed to make this a great film. It seems that it's a daring take on the material - not kid friendly - that was abandoned by the studio, but still having redeeming qualities. 

 

Source: https://www.ign.com/articles/2018/11/29/mowgli-legend-of-the-jungle-review

The cartoonish look of the animals using facial capture of the actors was Serkis's vision and Serkis and WB's purported reason for not releasing this in 2016 was that they were spending more time and money on the VFX.  This started filming the same time the Disney version did and that was released 2 and a half years ago.  

 

WB sunk a lot of $ and time in this film and probably took a loss selling it to Netflix but would have lost far more releasing it.  As it is it was an expensive buy by Netflix and throwing more money at the VFX wouldn't make much fiscal sense for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


ZattMurdock Global Phenomenon

ZattMurdock

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, TalismanRing said:

The cartoonish look of the animals using facial capture of the actors was Serkis's vision and Serkis and WB's purported reason for not releasing this in 2016 was that they were spending more time and money on the VFX.  This started filming the same time the Disney version did and that was released 2 and a half years ago.  

 

WB sunk a lot of $ and time in this film and probably took a loss selling it to Netflix but would have lost far more releasing it.  As it is it was an expensive buy by Netflix and throwing more money at the VFX wouldn't make much fiscal sense for them.

Idk, I'm watching the trailers and it feels INCREDIBLY unbalanced. I mean, the Panther and several animals look great, but the bear that Serkis is playing looks atrocious, not just cartoonish, but like unfinished FX. I just wish we'd get a fully fleshed out film, and I think Netflix could have an actual great and impressive film if more money was invested on it to polish it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ZattMurdock Global Phenomenon

ZattMurdock

Posted
Posted

More reviews:

 

New York Times, Positive:

 

Quote

The filmmakers are clearly trying to bring an uncommon maturity to the fantasy film, and in many respects they succeed. While not everything here works, what does is impressive.

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/28/movies/mowgli-legend-of-the-jungle-review.html

 

 

San Francisco Chronicle, 3/4: 

 

Quote

Although the quality of visual effects doesn’t come close to Favreau’s soaring and groundbreaking “The Jungle Book,” the Serkis version offers compelling character design and sound design. Shere Khan drags a wounded paw, his sharp claws clicking on the rocks to announce his arrival. An Indian elephant is covered with so much lichens and moss, it’s hard to tell where the jungle ends and the beast begins.

Visually, Serkis frames his shots from low on the ground even more than the air, adding to the sense of vulnerability. In a particularly memorable scene, Mowgli holds his breath underwater, watching as Shere Khan laps his bloody tongue in the surface of the creek above him. In this movie, the circle of life always seems about to end.

But there are moments of grace throughout. And after testing the audience, Serkis allows his heroes some reward for their self-sufficiency. “Mowgli” confirms that hard work and cunning, not good songwriting skills, are the best assets for survival in an increasingly cruel world.

Source: https://datebook.sfchronicle.com/movies-tv/andy-serkis-solid-new-mowgli-takes-the-bleaker-path-through-the-jungle

 

 

IndieWire, Negative:

 

Quote

Mowgli abandons all sense of wonder and opts for a dark weirdness that will likely turn off audience members of all ages, while scarring a few of them along the way.

Source: https://www.indiewire.com/2018/11/mowgli-review-andy-serkis-motion-capture-1202021152/

 

 

Los Angeles Times, Positive:

 

Quote

If “The Jungle Book” is Disney transmuting Rudyard Kipling’s natural world into a fantasia of wonder, personality and song, Andy Serkis’ adaptation “Mowgli: Legend of the Jungle” — named for the wolf-raised man-cub at the heart of these stories — is an animalistic cage match: The law of this movie wilderness is, simply, kill or be killed, and be careful who you trust. Who has time to sing about necessities?

Filmed more than three years ago for Warner Bros. but held back to steer clear of the Jon Favreau-directed 2016 blockbuster, “Mowgli” arrives via Netflix like the edgier, seen-it-all stepsibling of the Disney movies: unafraid of death and blood and ready to grapple with the queasy legacy of Kipling’s colonial allegory while serving up celebrity-voiced animals, immersive scenery and effects wizardry blended with Serkis’ performance-capture acumen as actor and director.

Of course, that makes this version, written by Callie Kloves, closer in tone to the visceral impact of Kipling’s prose. The abiding darkness and occasionally graphic visuals will likely reduce its appeal as talking-critter family fare — think growling nighttime campfire tale instead of sun-dappled spectacle — but it makes for a welcome swerve from the Mouse House’s fun-zone approach to these timeless stories.

Source: https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-mowgli-review-20181128-story.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites






SLAM! Summer Tentpole

SLAM!

Posted
Posted

The reception is good enough to guarantee that I end up watching this on Netflix when I'm bored one day. It also makes me excited for Animal Farm, because I'm sure Andy Serkis will take the criticism and use it to make his passion project much better.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites










Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.

  I accept