Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

Ortiz Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

limelemonrocks George of the Jungle is a cool movie about an ape man living in the jungle. This movie is kind of a copy of Tarzan, but it isn't awful. This movie was funny, and it was also a little boring. This movie to me wasn't making since at times. A guy falling of a bridge 30 stories high, then he survives, and there's another scene where a bad guy shoots George in the head, and then George lives! Brendon Fraser's performance as George was wonderful, and this movie also has John Cleeese, and Thomas Haden Church. The song at the begging of the movie was cool because it starts out as a cartoon, and then after the song, the live action starts. I would only revisit the funny parts of the movie, I would rather not watch the whole thing.

roddekker For starters - When it came to that whole business of George repeatedly crashing into trees while swinging from a vine (which was supposed to be one of this picture's comical high points) - Believe me, it all became really tiresome and totally stale, real fast.Instead of this stunt producing big laughs, it only succeeded in making me cringe and roll my eyes to the ceiling out of bored exasperation. It actually got to the point where I found myself hoping that George would, indeed, seriously injure himself the next time he came face-to-face with another tree trunk. But, my wish was never granted.Not only that, but, I found that the annoying & unfunny voice-over narration that cropped-up throughout the story didn't help matters much, either. And as far as the George character went, I thought that Brendan Fraser was clearly miscast for his part and his performance unbelievably irritating, to boot.When George arrived in the "civilized" world, that certainly made his character look even more stupid than ever.If you ask me - This $55 million, live-action cartoon tried way-way too hard to be funny, but regardless of all of its zany, slapstick comedy, it only succeeded in falling flat on its face for the most part.Based on the characters from a very mediocre TV cartoon series from 1967, George Of The Jungle was strictly geared for an audience that has very low expectations about what encourages them to laugh.

breakdownthatfilm-blogspot-com Cartoons are difficult to convert to movies. With a short running time of only 20-25 minutes of plot, it can be fatal to drag it out for more than an hour. This is not the first of its kind but it possibly one of the better live-action adaptations that have been presented to broader audiences of recent memory. There are a number reasons to why this stands true compared to other cartoons but it also contains flaws that many others have too. Therefore, it only constitutes as slightly above average.Audiences are introduced to George (Brendan Fraser), a simple-minded man brought up by the local Apes of Africa. One day he stumbles upon a beautiful tourist named Ursula (Leslie Mann) and they immediately began to fall for each other. To George's dismay, Ursula isn't single, for her fiancé Lyle (Thomas Hayden Church) is also in love with her - thus beginning the plot. There are a number of pluses that come with the bad here. Thankfully, there's a tad more good than bad. First are the characters. Brendan Fraser as George of the Jungle was perfect. Fraser not only can do action but also handles comedy with ease. His persona resembles that of a human cartoon; like Jim Carrey but not as extreme. Leslie Mann as the damsel is OK. She is definitely cute enough for the role but doesn't make her character stand out. For a female character that stands up to some high-end people, she's still ditsy. However, the other cast members help overshadow her performance. Thomas Hayden Church is funny because of how naive he is and his perception of the lower class locals when in fact; he is the lowest of the low. Heading the locals is Kwame (Richard Roundtree from the original Shaft (1971)) and he too has funny moments. Along with that is John Cleese's voice work as George's friend Ape. The intellectual dialog that he is given sounds preposterous but in a silly fun kind of way. Topping it off is Keith Scott's narration; he is possibly one of the more comical of characters even though he is never seen. What helps these characters actually make the film worth a watch is partly due to the writing, which involves breaking the fourth wall. This is not done once or twice, the count exceeds far more than many comedies actually do nowadays. But this particular element is what help makes it work and be funny. Unfortunately, the other part of the writing that doesn't work is what every other live-action cartoon movie includes; throwing the main characters into the current day. Relying on a character from decades before to make scenes comical by putting them in real world situations don't work very often. It's clichéd and it doesn't give a unique universe for the main characters. Originally it started out fun and different because it took place in a jungle where things would happen that many audiences don't see, but in the city? If it's called George of the JUNGLE, why is it taking place in the CITY?There's also some noticeable loopholes in the story that don't give any explanation to how certain characters knew or remembered various information. However, in some cases some of the situations that take place should not be considered because the movie does play out like a cartoon, which is important if it's based off of one. That also doesn't mean the special effects should remind audiences of that. Since this movie was released at a time where CGI was really starting to boom, it can be seen clear as daylight what is fake and what is real. Unfortunately, that badly dates it. It could be worse though because Marc Shaiman's score kept fidelity to the original theme but made it fun to listen to for the whole ride of the movie. It's better than most.The majority of characters and parts of the comedy are funny at times along with appropriate music. Yet, the story is cliché and the special effects are dated.

bigverybadtom The only truly memorable scene in this movie was the stunt at the Golden Gate Bridge-it was actually rather impressive. The rest, however, was trite, dull, and repetitive. George, an inept Tarzan-like man, is found by Ursula in the jungle, and she takes him to the city, and of course there are problems with that.The original "George Of The Jungle" episodes were short cartoons, not necessarily suited for conversion to a feature-length film, as other such efforts such as "Dudley Do-Right" have proved. Though the movie does make a real effort to keep as close to the original cartoon as possible, the sad truth is that the whole thing just didn't work. Fortunately, the fad for such efforts has long died off, so we don't have to worry about seeing Hong Kong Phooey or Tennessee Tuxedo getting such treatment.