George of the Jungle 2
George of the Jungle 2
PG | 21 October 2003 (USA)
George of the Jungle 2 Trailers

George and Ursula now have a son, George Junior, so Ursula's mother arrives to try and take them back to "civilization".

Reviews
Karry

Best movie of this year hands down!

... View More
Freaktana

A Major Disappointment

... View More
FuzzyTagz

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

... View More
Freeman

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

... View More
limelemonrocks

I saw this movie again with my dad, and we thought it turned out to be better than the first live action film. George of the Jungle 2 didn't star Brendan Fraser as George in this one. Chris Showermen does the role this time around as George. Chris Showermen was an amazing George, he even played the part better then Brendan Fraser! This is funnier than the first! Keith Scott returns as being the narrator with some funnier jokes that will make you laugh out loud. Most of the jungle animals talk in this sequel, like the mean lion and some other animals. Thomas Haden Church comes back as Lyle, and John Cleese returns as being an ape named ape. I was surprised how good this turned out to be! Me new George, studio to cheep to pay Brendan Fraser! Do you agree that Showermen made a better George, or not? I agree, do you?

... View More
Nick Kennedy

This movie was on t.v the other day, and I didn't enjoy it at all. The first George of the jungle was a good comedy, but the sequel.... completely awful. The new actor and actress to play the lead roles weren't good at all, they should of had the original actor (Brendon Fraiser) and original actress (i forgot her name) so this movie gets the 0 out of ten rating, not a film that you can sit down and watch and enjoy, this is a film that you turn to another channel or take it back to the shop if hired or bought. It was good to see Ape the ape back, but wasn't as fun as the first, they should of had the new George as Georges son grown up, and still had Bredon and (whats her face) in the film, that would've been a bit better then it was.

... View More
yamipegasus

I must say, this movie was almost great. The jokes were pretty funny, and the acting (except for Beatrice) was pretty good, despite the replacement of most of the cast. Even the music was fun and fitting. Where this movie really fell apart was the storyline. I won't get into details, but let's just say it was lacking, at best. Many things were poorly explained, or unreasonable. Another problem, though minor and only slightly annoying, was the way George's elephant, Shep, was portrayed. In the first movie, he blended well with the rest of the set and characters. In this one, he is obviously done with relatively weak CGI that will damage the mood of the scene.It really is a pity that it had a few major glaring flaws... It could have been really good otherwise.

... View More
soccerbabe707

Okay, the reason I even decided to see this movie in the first place, was: I'm a Buffy/Angel fan. Figure it out, I saw it cause Julie Benz was in it. However... even if I'm a fan of an actress, this movie was really, really, horrible. I'm sure the actors did a great job with their parts, it's just the storyline that suffered. The narrator constantly making comments during the movie really annoyed me. This movie is made by Disney because... 1. It's a squeal and 2. the humor is set to like.... five year olds. It's good for little kids, but overall... very corny movie. Hope Disney would find some better plots; but... who am I kidding?! It's Disney! Can't expect much from them now can you?

... View More