The live action version of The Jungle Book was on telly this afternoon. I’ve actually owned the film for a while, but have never got round to watching it.
Anyway, the purpose of this blog is to ask the question – was the ending fair?
I don’t think I am giving too many spoilers away when I say that the villain of the movie – a tiger named Shere Khan – dies at the end. He is killed by Mowgli.
Mowgli is a child who lives in the jungle. Do people usually live in the jungle? Not normally. Mowgli should be in a house somewhere, playing his PlayStation, like your typical 10-year-old kid.
Shere Khan is a tiger who lives in the jungle. Do tigers usually live in the jungle? Yes they do. Tigers hunt prey. If that prey happens to be a little boy, so what. Mowgli is in tiger territory. If you ask me, Mowgli had it coming.
The other reason Shere Khan’s murder (yes, I am calling it that) is wrong, is because tigers are an endangered species. There are only 3890 of them left in the wild. Thanks to Mowgli, there are now just 3889.
There are 7.7 billion people on the planet. Had Shere Khan eaten Mowgli, the human race isn’t going to cease to exist. He probably wouldn’t even be missed.
So, next time you watch The Jungle Book, think about the impact it has on the tiger species. If you see the film’s creators, throw a bucket of animal blood over them in protest. Actually, please do NOT do that. It is definitely illegal and probably assault. Plus, I don’t want to get into trouble, like Jo Brand, for encouraging a crime to be committed.
No trackbacks yet.
Posts with similar tags
No post with similar tags yet.
Leave a Reply