3-D animated-family adventure that tells the heart-warming, coming-of-age story of a man and his best-friend, a lovable and fearless dog named, Jock.3-D animated-family adventure that tells the heart-warming, coming-of-age story of a man and his best-friend, a lovable and fearless dog named, Jock.3-D animated-family adventure that tells the heart-warming, coming-of-age story of a man and his best-friend, a lovable and fearless dog named, Jock.
Bryan Adams
- Jock
- (voice)
Donald Sutherland
- Narrator
- (voice)
- …
Helen Hunt
- Jess
- (voice)
Ted Danson
- Pezulu
- (voice)
Desmond Tutu
- Baba
- (voice)
- (as Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu)
Mandy Patinkin
- Basil
- (voice)
William Baldwin
- Boatman
- (voice)
Bongani Nxumalo
- Jim Makokel
- (voice)
Theo Landey
- Fitz
- (voice)
Makenzie Hart
- Young Jock
- (voice)
Jason Kennett
- Snarly
- (voice)
Michael De Pinna
- Claude
- (voice)
Anthony Bishop
- George
- (voice)
Robert Hobbs
- Seedling
- (voice)
Dianne Simpson
- Lillian Morris
- (voice)
Sylvaine Strike
- Polly
- (voice)
Michael Richard
- Mr. Morris
- (voice)
Rose Emanuel
- Julian
- (voice)
Featured reviews
This is the retelling of a well known South African story in 3D animated format and a change of focus to younger viewers. If one expects this to be a faithful retelling of the classic story of Jock of the Bushveld, then one is likely to be disappointed. Unlike the original story, which has Percy Fitzpatrick as the narrator, this is a fresh take on the story told from the point of view the young dog Jock.
In essence, this is the story of a young dog coming of age whilst his owner is making his own journey of discovery in the wilderness of early South African. It is a journey of discovery and of overcoming some of the hardships of the environment and the characters that inhabited it.
Given that much of the story unfolds against the backdrop of a gold-rush mad, but essentially unspoilt area of South Africa, it is wonderful to see that the feel of the wild game rich savanna and the vibrancy of the early mining towns of that time are so well captured.
The animation is not world class - but it does not need to be. The story is well told and the acting is first class. It is particularly heartening to hear the voices of Ted Danson, Helen Hunt and Donald Sutherland in this format. Brian Adams also did a sterling performance of giving the lead character a voice. A cameo by Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu is also interesting.
This is a movie made to be enjoyed by kids - it achieves this purpose easily.
In essence, this is the story of a young dog coming of age whilst his owner is making his own journey of discovery in the wilderness of early South African. It is a journey of discovery and of overcoming some of the hardships of the environment and the characters that inhabited it.
Given that much of the story unfolds against the backdrop of a gold-rush mad, but essentially unspoilt area of South Africa, it is wonderful to see that the feel of the wild game rich savanna and the vibrancy of the early mining towns of that time are so well captured.
The animation is not world class - but it does not need to be. The story is well told and the acting is first class. It is particularly heartening to hear the voices of Ted Danson, Helen Hunt and Donald Sutherland in this format. Brian Adams also did a sterling performance of giving the lead character a voice. A cameo by Nobel laureate Archbishop Desmond Tutu is also interesting.
This is a movie made to be enjoyed by kids - it achieves this purpose easily.
As a masters student in animation, it pains me to watch this film. I loved the original storyline and the renditions told to me as a child but this is missing the essence of the story: the companionship between a man and animal, their adventures in the bush and how the underdog triumphs above all. The Jungle Book, done in 1967 achieves this far and beyond this movie. Story is king, the animation is bad but if the story was any good then they could have gotten away from it- an example of this being "Hoodwinkd".
The character design and models are poor and unappealing and there so many supporting, useless characters, such as the rooster. The animation is floaty and cringe-worthy, none of the 10 principles seem to be taken into account which places this movie technically behind Snow White, done in 1937. Fitzgerald is possibly the most unappealing animated character I have ever seen, worse than Gurgi in the Black Cauldron. The pitiful voice acting makes me sad, for something that is so 'proudly South African', they literally chose every other accent to be the voices of the characters (including a put-on French accent??).
The sad thing is that the emphasis of this production is completely wrong: hair, fabric and other simulations should be the last added extras, and redoing the whole film because Stereoscopic films were starting to become trendy is a terrible waste of money and time.
To say "but my kids enjoyed it" is a sad excuse for this film, they probably enjoyed the TV-watching experience more than anything else and with so many fantastic 3D animated features done before this production even began (The Incredibles, Finding Nemo, Ratatouille), there are far better things to take your kids to see where you don't have to suffer through in the process.
The creators say that the success of this movie depended on the distribution and marketing of the film, which was difficult coming from SA and out of their hands but the real reason why this movie failed was due to the lack of skill, reference and focus. For how could they have taken the most loved South African classic and failed so badly?
The character design and models are poor and unappealing and there so many supporting, useless characters, such as the rooster. The animation is floaty and cringe-worthy, none of the 10 principles seem to be taken into account which places this movie technically behind Snow White, done in 1937. Fitzgerald is possibly the most unappealing animated character I have ever seen, worse than Gurgi in the Black Cauldron. The pitiful voice acting makes me sad, for something that is so 'proudly South African', they literally chose every other accent to be the voices of the characters (including a put-on French accent??).
The sad thing is that the emphasis of this production is completely wrong: hair, fabric and other simulations should be the last added extras, and redoing the whole film because Stereoscopic films were starting to become trendy is a terrible waste of money and time.
To say "but my kids enjoyed it" is a sad excuse for this film, they probably enjoyed the TV-watching experience more than anything else and with so many fantastic 3D animated features done before this production even began (The Incredibles, Finding Nemo, Ratatouille), there are far better things to take your kids to see where you don't have to suffer through in the process.
The creators say that the success of this movie depended on the distribution and marketing of the film, which was difficult coming from SA and out of their hands but the real reason why this movie failed was due to the lack of skill, reference and focus. For how could they have taken the most loved South African classic and failed so badly?
This was the worst movie that I have seen in 2011, how could this movie be named "Jock". Not only is the animation totally crap but the story is completely different from the novel. This novel is based on a true story and even the 1992 movie was closer to the truth than this movie. I was totally disappointed at this movie that starred the voices of people like Donald Sutherland, Helen Hunt and Arch Bishop Desmond Tutu. The best version of this movie is a South African production that was made in the 80's, based most accurately on the true story. Please find the novel and read it to see the real story, this is one of the best South African legends written.
Assuming that this film was aimed at children and seeing the vitriolic bile that others have used to review this film I felt that I should give a brief defence of this film.
Animation was at times basic in parts yes but beautiful in others the human characters were better than the animals for the most part, there the criticism ends while not my cup of tea meaning its south African content of which I am not that knowledgeable I took the film for what it was a children's adventure as for the morals that it teaches that those other critics deem so important I thought there were only two good beats evil and the little guy can sometimes beat the big one.
As for a critique of the film I asked my children 4,6,9 and 12 years old who were all glued to the film throughout. Consensus, they all enjoyed the film with no criticism at all. My two year old son was a little scared of George the Baboon, not Gorilla as he was wrongly called by the first critic.
It was in keeping with a children's film when there were some fighting scenes with some violence I thought it was tastefully done with blood and gore completely avoided so as not to distress a young audience. All in all you have to be young at heart to critique a children's film or flaws become chasms. My wife and children spoke I listened and observed mixed their opinions with mine and rate the movie at 6 out of 10.
My opinion don't expect the earth but don't be afraid to get the sweets and popcorn out and watch it with the children on DVD.
Animation was at times basic in parts yes but beautiful in others the human characters were better than the animals for the most part, there the criticism ends while not my cup of tea meaning its south African content of which I am not that knowledgeable I took the film for what it was a children's adventure as for the morals that it teaches that those other critics deem so important I thought there were only two good beats evil and the little guy can sometimes beat the big one.
As for a critique of the film I asked my children 4,6,9 and 12 years old who were all glued to the film throughout. Consensus, they all enjoyed the film with no criticism at all. My two year old son was a little scared of George the Baboon, not Gorilla as he was wrongly called by the first critic.
It was in keeping with a children's film when there were some fighting scenes with some violence I thought it was tastefully done with blood and gore completely avoided so as not to distress a young audience. All in all you have to be young at heart to critique a children's film or flaws become chasms. My wife and children spoke I listened and observed mixed their opinions with mine and rate the movie at 6 out of 10.
My opinion don't expect the earth but don't be afraid to get the sweets and popcorn out and watch it with the children on DVD.
"Jock" is not all that impressive for an animated movie. You'd think that this was a kids movie, but given the storyline, it sort of intended for a more grown up, if not mature, audience, because the storyline is far from a cheerful and silly one that is usually seen in animated movies.
Personally I didn't really find the movie all that interesting, because the characters in the movie were fairly plain and sort of one-dimensional. It wasn't really characters that you really got to love and have any type of relationship with.
I will say that the CGI animation and the visuals were quite good though, and that is what really works in favor for the movie. If you have smaller kids in the household, you might want to go for a different animated movie, as there is something underlying more sinister to this storyline, which may not be suitable for just anyone.
Also the names billed on the voice cast list does impress as there are some nice names here; Donald Sutherland, Helen Hunt, Ted Danson and William Baldwin. More impressively, then they got Desmond Tutu to add his voice to this as well. As for Bryan Adams, well I will leave that untouched, as I have no personal liking or disliking for him or his work in any way.
In this day and age, "Jock" is nothing impressive and doesn't really move the bar for CGI animated movies in any way.
Personally I didn't really find the movie all that interesting, because the characters in the movie were fairly plain and sort of one-dimensional. It wasn't really characters that you really got to love and have any type of relationship with.
I will say that the CGI animation and the visuals were quite good though, and that is what really works in favor for the movie. If you have smaller kids in the household, you might want to go for a different animated movie, as there is something underlying more sinister to this storyline, which may not be suitable for just anyone.
Also the names billed on the voice cast list does impress as there are some nice names here; Donald Sutherland, Helen Hunt, Ted Danson and William Baldwin. More impressively, then they got Desmond Tutu to add his voice to this as well. As for Bryan Adams, well I will leave that untouched, as I have no personal liking or disliking for him or his work in any way.
In this day and age, "Jock" is nothing impressive and doesn't really move the bar for CGI animated movies in any way.
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThe character of Jock, his antics, and the life lessons of the book are so famous and widely-known in South Africa, that statues are routinely erected in his honor and the first private lodge in Africa's wildlife reserve - Kruger National Park - bears his name.
- ConnectionsVersion of Jock of the Bushveld (1986)
- How long is Jock the Hero Dog?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Gross worldwide
- $2,008,173
- Runtime1 hour 29 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.78 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
