But the now-seven-year-old could handle this version.Īnyway, I will argue that the new film’s intensity and potential for discomfort is more about enhanced special effects technology than explicitly onscreen content. And yes, my middle son getting freaked out by Christopher Walken did feel like a significant rite-of-passage moment as a parent.
And sure, King Louie had a song number, but he still scared my then-4.5-year-old son. If anything, the 2016 blockbuster used its familiar songs and somewhat “family-friendly” Ballou characterization (thanks, Bill Murray) to give it latitude to tell an otherwise grim survival adventure. With one major exception, the two adaptations are not that different, as both acknowledge the sometimes harsh realities of the jungle and both dabble in the core concept of a human raised by animals. Amusingly enough, the first act is actually lighter and more kid-friendly (more dialogue, more incident) than the Jon Favreau adaptation, which felt like an arthouse movie/Terrence Malick tone poem for much of its first third. Even while earning its PG-13 rating, it is still mostly kid-appropriate, provided your child is old enough to watch a Star Wars or MCU movie and is aware that this won’t be like the 1967 animated feature. Yes, as promised by the director, this is technically a darker, grimmer and more “grounded” take on the core material, even as that tone harkens back to the original Rudyard Kipling novel.
0 kommentar(er)
