Stream in HD    Download in HD


The Jungle Book

The Jungle Book

A man-cub named Mowgli fostered by wolves. After a threat from the tiger Shere Khan, Mowgli is forced to flee the jungle, by which he embarks on a journey of self discovery with the help of the panther, Bagheera and the free-spirited bear, Baloo.

The man-cub Mowgli flees the jungle after a threat from the tiger Shere Khan. Guided by Bagheera the panther and the bear Baloo, Mowgli embarks on a journey of self-discovery, though he also meets creatures who don't have his best interests at heart. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers
Continue to Download HDThe Jungle Book HDHD67895672

The Jungle Book torrent reviews

Megan T (it) wrote: More eye-opening about today's Afghanistan than you'll get from any news story. Afghanistan does American Idol and reminds me of the great tendency throughout history of humans to make the all same mistakes. 100% on RT, 3.5/5 for me.

Dot L (ca) wrote: Set on a rural Australian farm, a family needs to deal with the tragedies of the past.

David U (jp) wrote: At first it seems as if it'll at least be worth watching for a few scares, but the stupidity builds and builds until it's completely intolerable. Then it becomes so stupid that it couldn't possibly get any worse. Then it gets stupider.

Gloria B (fr) wrote: omg! those were some sick people. but loved it!!

Hugo G (ca) wrote: This is the sequel to a not very good action movie. But this time, they made it better. It had many more fights, which was a good thing. But in some way, some of them felt unnecessary. Still, the way they were made, adding martial arts was great. Because it wasn't only boxing, but were more elaborated fighting sequences. Also, this one had more story, even though at the beginning it was not very effective, it got better halfway through. Moreover, none of the previous cast came back for this one, but somehow it didn't affect the movie. Because it didn't felt like a sequel, but also because the new actor portraying the previous protagonist was actually good. As well as the new villain, interpreted by Scott Adkins, and I have to say that he was just excellent fighting. They were very innovative and looked incredible. Overall, it was a good sequel but a better stand by movie. Even though it had a weak plot at the beginning, the ending was worth it and made me kind of forget it. And a surprise for being a Direct-to-DVD movie, too. Even though it felt sometimes like a TV movie.

Kristen A (de) wrote: seem like the movie needed more but it was good.

Lee B (mx) wrote: IF this was Singleton's attempt to try and go the Spike Lee-Malcolm X route and get deep historical to prove worthiness as a director, he got it all wrong. Spike did so much for keeping the possibly meandering story of Malcolm X together with cinematic visual magic, tight editing and wonderful cinematography - not to mention focusing on the transitions in his life. It was brilliant filmmaking. This movie is a fairly specific and set story piece where it doesn't seem to hit all the tones it is supposed to. It is dark and foreboding from the start and doesn't get you into the lives of the characters you are supposed to feel for beside Esther Rolle, Don Cheadle and Jon Voight. That's a problem when the main arc revolved around Rhames and Neal. This movie is good at the set pieces. You never really doubt that you are there. It could have been more involving, but I am not sure if the 1 dimensional acting of most of the white characters was intentional or not. It comes across very uneven, and slightly unbelievable. And that means it didn't ring true for me. I know it really happened, but a good doc with emotional VOs might have been better.

Michael G (ca) wrote: Well, this was quite an interesting movie. Not what I expected but was certainly not disappointing.

Adam C (nl) wrote: It's no Psycho II but as a sequel to a classic it is not bad at all.

Andrew P (nl) wrote: I don't get the adoration for this film. Guess I'm not artsy fartsy enough.

Luis C (de) wrote: Audrey Hepburn is magnificent...

Nathan W (jp) wrote: At one point this was probably a great film, but unfortunately what we ended up with was a poorly executed waste of time. The director made a few baffling decisions, for example, making the kids out as complete morons. I think he was trying to show their innocence, but failed miserably. Kevin Bacon's character comes across as hammy and pathetic at times. I didn't feel any true menace from him, or like he posed a real threat at any point in the film. It's really a shame and a wasted opportunity, because I think there was a lot of potential there at one point.