How Disney's New 'Jungle Book' Can Overcome Book's Racist Baggage
Yahoo Movies - Friday, April 25, 2014

Of all the films Disney has dug out of its classics collection closet for the live-action reboot treatment, "The Jungle Book" is by far the most likely to cause the studio worries and strife — as Baloo the Bear might chime.

Both Rudyard Kipling's original book, which was written from a British colonialist perspective, and Disney's own animated adaptation have long been slammed for having racist overtones. If the studio hopes to overcome these perceptions and offer up a 21st century-friendly rendition this go-round, it'll take a whole lot more work than just punching up the old material with snazzy costumes and new-age visual effects.

"One of the main reasons that 'The Jungle Book' needs to be rebooted is to fix the things that became controversial not long after it was released in 1967," Robert Thompson, pop culture expert and media professor at Syracuse University, tells Yahoo Movies.

By giving the green light to the new incarnation, hiring Jon Favreau to direct, and tapping a diverse group of A-listers to star – recent Oscar winner Lupita Nyong'o ("12 Years a Slave") and Scarlett Johansson ("Avengers: Age of Ultron") are in talks to join Idris Elba ("Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom") on the developing cast list – Thompson suspects Disney is up to the task and must believe the material "is salvageable."

So, what are some of the "Bare Necessities" of a "Jungle Book" overhaul?

"The first Disney 'Jungle Book' was based on Kipling; the next one will be based on the movie, so it'll be another generation removed from Kipling, which will help," Thompson says.

Stepping away from Kipling's imperialist vision is, however, just the beginning, especially since it was one of the House of Mouse's own story concoctions which caused the most discontent over their first adaptation.

The cartoon's King Louie (which did not stem from the pages of Kipling's original) was a jazzy ape whose language skills were considered much less refined than those of the film's other animals and who sang "I Wanna Be Like You" to the orphaned human boy Mowgli. The character is widely panned as exemplifying "negative racial stereotyping" and connoting inequality between African-Americans and Caucasians.

While filmmakers initially tried to sidestep perceptions of racism with King Louie by casting an Italian-American singer (Louis Prima) in the role rather than Louis Armstrong, whom the part was originally written for, the character still strongly violated the ethos of social progress.

"King Louie was going to be a problem either way," opines Thompson. "The original choice would have been offensive – Louis Armstrong animated as an ape. The choice they went with had a minstrel show feel to it, also offensive."

[Related: 7 Things You Might Not Know About 'The Jungle Book']

Simply whitewash-casting the unfortunately caricaturish character wasn't nearly enough to mask the inherent problems with King Louie the first time around, and it certainly will not work for Disney's renewal. Instead, there'll need to be some fundamental adjustments made – though experts caution against a complete disavowal of the banana-loving primate.

"The King Louie character can have his speaking mannerisms updated in a way that suggests he speaks in a manner similar to the other characters," Jeffrey M. McCall, Professor of Communication at DePauw University, tells Yahoo Movies. "I don't think the upcoming film needs a total scrubbing, or at some point it would no longer be loyal to the original story. But it can be updated with a keener eye to avoiding stereotypical language or behaviors that could be translatable to ethnic definition."

While Disney might not need to scrap King Louie altogether to progress, his performance of the hot-button scat tune "I Wanna Be Like You" might be ripe for total lyrical retooling, if not removal altogether. One can only imagine the outrage that would invariably follow if lines like "I wanna be like you/I wanna walk like you/Talk like you, too/You'll see it's true/An ape like me/Can learn to be human too" remained intact in the new take. That'd prick a few raw paws for sure.

Meanwhile, another big point of action might be to redress the controversial "Jungle Book" plot point of young Mowgli being told he could not live with Baloo the Bear because different species should keep to themselves. Given the historical framework of the film's mid-'60s release, smack dab in the middle of the U.S. Civil Rights Movement, this was perceived as heavily suggestive of pro-segregation principles. Perhaps Favreau and screenwriter Justin Marks could just conjure up another narrative direction altogether for plucking Mowgli away from the wild to avoid this particularly messy aspect.

[Related: 'The Jungle Book' Story Man Floyd Norman Reflects on Mr. Disney's Last Film]

It's worth noting that the new "Jungle Book" flick won't just have to overcome the issues of racism plaguing the 1967 animated version. The movie was also quite problematic for those who decried the lack of central female characters (there were just three, and one didn't even speak). With its recent casting decisions, though, it looks like Disney just may have a remedy for that issue by way of some simple swapping.

While Nyong'o's role as the mother wolf Rachka was one of the three femmes included in the original, Johansson's part as the hypnotic python Kaa was originally voiced by a man. (On a similar note of diversification, Idris Elba's role as the villainous tiger Shere Khan belonged to a white actor in the prior version.)

To supplement, if needed, the film could also take a leaf from the playbook of theatrical director Mary Zimmerman, who recently revived "The Jungle Book" for the stage and added in a few new animal characters in order to narrow the gender gap.

Disney's live-action and CGI hybrid re-imagining of "The Jungle Book," one of two modern-day re-tellings of the Rudyard Kipling adventure tale current underway, will hit theaters on Oct. 29, 2015. The other, housed by Warner Bros., will be helmed by Andy Serkis and has no firm release date at this time.


1128 comments

Sounds like they're going to gut every single thing I loved about "The Jungle Book." All this time, my favorite Disney movie was nothing but a vehicle for racism! ...or is it more likely these people are morons who are going to destroy the best parts of a beloved, classic movie in the name of new dollars? Some of you may worship at the alter of Disney, but I know all they care about is money. So I'll say it again: they are going to destroy a true CLASSIC of film and animation... for nothing more than a few more dollars.
A Yahoo! User, 16 mins ago
A kid who should not live with animals for his own safety becomes an allegory for segregation? You gotta to be kidding me! An ape who wants to be human is an allegory that blacks are subhuman? No %&%ing way! I am not being sarcastic by the way. When people try to look to hard between the lines they really just miss the point. You want to change the whole premise of the story based upon some screwed up logic? If you've ever seen the live footage of the band swing dancing to there own music it makes perfect sense. Of course there will always people who want to see what they want to see. They are definitely looking in the wrong place. This is only referring to the DIsney version of the story. Books themselves almost always have double meanings. However a movie based upon the story doesn't necessarily promote or agree with that meaning.
A Yahoo! User, 22 mins ago
This is a joke - it has to be. They want it both ways - as usual. King Louie is an ape who wants to be like a human. That isn't racist. That is a cartoon fantasy about an ape who wants to be a human. Disney is a hot bed of racism and sexism - but this isn't one of the places to go looking for it. This is just pre-production marketing designed to get people excited about the reboot..
A Yahoo! User, 5 mins ago
Why??! Why must you need to remake it? The Jungle book was a total classic. I still love that movie to this day. You're telling me the movie I grew up with wasn't good enough? As a young child singing about the bear necessities, never once did I think to myself- "Wow, this is racist. I sure wish Disney would re-release this in a few years." I'll never understand why movie these days can't think up original ideas. I thought re-releasing the Spiderman movies (not ten years after the last couple) was stupid enough. But this takes my lack of respect to a whole new level. I can't wait to see what classics they'll screw up next.
A Yahoo! User, 34 mins ago
This is stupid! If you go around looking for racism, you will find it ANYWHERE! This was a great show as a kid, and I never saw anything racist. Yes King Louie was less developed than a Man, but that is typical of man versus Ape. Bagheera was a refined creature, while Baloo was just a crazy loafer. Each had their own language. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT PEOPLE TODAY ALL SPEAK THE SAME??? REALLY??? From the inner cities of Detroit or New York, to N'Awlins (New Orleans to the uninitiated) to the posh folks of Beverly Hills or the Hamptons-- People speak differently! Some is region, some is education, some is --believe it or not -- socio-economic classes (GASP!! Does that REALLY EXIST?? Quick! Close your eyes, plug your ears and go "I'm not listening, I'm not listening!") . . . good grief
SoNowWhat?, 37 mins ago