Having just watched the Jungle Jim adventure "The Lost Tribe" with it's wild gorilla finale, I was a whole lot better prepared for this one with the word 'Gorilla' actually in the title. Unexpectedly though, the apes were revealed to be men in gorilla suits, in a scheme to loot the lost gold treasure of Shalakari. That didn't fool Jim for very long, as the story mentioned more than once that this particular area of the Nagandi District wasn't gorilla territory.
As listed in Johnny Weismuller's film credits, this was his third outing as the jungle hero, and the formula pretty much stays on course here. There's plenty of wild animal stock footage, probably the most and the best of the first three pictures. I was particularly impressed with the tease of a panther/crocodile tussle, even though extremely brief, and of course the lion versus tiger battle could never take place in nature. Which got me further thinking about where Jungle Jim's adventures actually take place. The original "Jungle Jim" and "The Lost Tribe" are definitely set in Africa; this one looked like it could have been set in India by the look of the safari hands. In the comic book stories, I have a sense that Jim wound up in India from time to time. To settle the score though, one need only refer to the location of the game preserve mentioned at the start of the story, the Nagandi District. In the first movie, that was in Africa.
Other similarities in style to the first two movies include the use of considerable filler, in this one Jungle Jim spends some time spear fishing as a chimp steals his catch, while in a humorous moment, Jim's dog Skipper bites the tail of an intruding lion. His crow Caw-Caw is also on hand, and it's a hoot to hear him called by name by a macaw later in the story. And of course, what would a Jungle Jim film be if he didn't engage in an obligatory underwater battle, this time a giant eel, or go hand to paw with a jungle cat or two. Funny how he never gets clawed or bitten enough to draw blood.
One thing struck me as odd though, and it was quite pronounced in this story. Unlike those other comic strip turned cinema heroes of the 1950's like The Lone Ranger and Superman who never intentionally harmed his enemy, Jungle Jim actually tells villain Brandt (Onslow Stevens) that he's going to kill him. Granted, he wound up dispatching villains in his other films, but it was never positioned in such a way as to seem premeditated. Sort of takes some of the glow off the whole jungle hero persona, even if the bad guy had it coming.
As listed in Johnny Weismuller's film credits, this was his third outing as the jungle hero, and the formula pretty much stays on course here. There's plenty of wild animal stock footage, probably the most and the best of the first three pictures. I was particularly impressed with the tease of a panther/crocodile tussle, even though extremely brief, and of course the lion versus tiger battle could never take place in nature. Which got me further thinking about where Jungle Jim's adventures actually take place. The original "Jungle Jim" and "The Lost Tribe" are definitely set in Africa; this one looked like it could have been set in India by the look of the safari hands. In the comic book stories, I have a sense that Jim wound up in India from time to time. To settle the score though, one need only refer to the location of the game preserve mentioned at the start of the story, the Nagandi District. In the first movie, that was in Africa.
Other similarities in style to the first two movies include the use of considerable filler, in this one Jungle Jim spends some time spear fishing as a chimp steals his catch, while in a humorous moment, Jim's dog Skipper bites the tail of an intruding lion. His crow Caw-Caw is also on hand, and it's a hoot to hear him called by name by a macaw later in the story. And of course, what would a Jungle Jim film be if he didn't engage in an obligatory underwater battle, this time a giant eel, or go hand to paw with a jungle cat or two. Funny how he never gets clawed or bitten enough to draw blood.
One thing struck me as odd though, and it was quite pronounced in this story. Unlike those other comic strip turned cinema heroes of the 1950's like The Lone Ranger and Superman who never intentionally harmed his enemy, Jungle Jim actually tells villain Brandt (Onslow Stevens) that he's going to kill him. Granted, he wound up dispatching villains in his other films, but it was never positioned in such a way as to seem premeditated. Sort of takes some of the glow off the whole jungle hero persona, even if the bad guy had it coming.
