Join us as we follow the tales of a monkey who leaves his jungle for another one – New York. It’s the story of one lonely museum guide’s struggle for companionship and one monkey’s quest to satisfy his curiosity. “Curious George” offers the untold background of how the Man in the Yellow Hat came to acquire and grow to love Curious George.

Jill Blackledge: My overall impression is that it’s a cute movie. It’s got the nostalgia factor for people our age who grew up reading the books, but it lacks the smartness of something such as “Finding Nemo” that takes it beyond being just a kids’ movie.

Andrew Schmeisser: I thought at first it would have been a good nostalgic movie for the college-aged person, but it seemed like more of a kids movie. And you’re right, it does lack the ability to appeal to many levels, unlike movies such as “Shrek” or “The Incredibles.”

JB: The presentation was really colorful, although it looks more like the old-school hand-drawn animation. It gives it sort of a primitive look next to the computer-animated movies, but then again, I thought it made it look a little more true to the books.

AS: I liked the way it was presented because, as you said, it does make use of the more classic cell animation and combines it with computer-generated imagery in a pretty interesting way. It was very colorful, as well, but I thought it was a little too bright in certain spots, especially for the color white.

JB: I didn’t really notice that, but I don’t think the color will influence the target audience’s opinion of this movie because they probably haven’t read many of the books.

I did like the way, however, that the books were adapted into this movie. The back story is nice, but the characters are very different from what I envisioned them to be when I read the series.

AS: I’ll agree with you on the adaptation of George’s adventures, specifically, but I wasn’t fond of the idea that the movie gave the Man in the Yellow Hat a name (Ted), a job (museum guide) or a romantic interest (Maggie the kindergarten teacher). I was also disappointed in the fact that the movie primarily followed Ted rather than George.

JB: I see what you’re saying, but I think the reason they had to do that was to give some sort of direction to the whole film. I mean, George has a different adventure in every one of the books, but how would those connect smoothly in a film? It’d be more like a series of vignettes, or a TV show, which might’ve been the more appropriate venue for a “Curious George” adaptation. As for the character changes, I think part of those were made to mold the characters more to the actors who voiced them, besides the fact that there is literally nothing known about the people in the books.

AS: I think you’re right about the need for the characters, but I think that some of them certainly were pulled from other sources. Ted, in particular, reminded me of Ross from TV’s “Friends.” It was fun, however, to try and guess and picture the actual voices of the characters. With such talent as Will Ferrell, Drew Barrymore, Dick Van Dyke and Eugene Levy, it had to be interesting, to say the least.

JB: Yeah, I think the characters in the film looked just like they should based on their voices. They were good matches for the characterization. Sound in general was something this movie did really well. I thought Jack Johnson’s music blended perfectly with the laid-back, “whole wide world” sort of adventure theme.

AS: That’s one thing I really did like: the soundtrack. The soundtrack for “Curious George” was made up of feel-good music and I felt it accented the movie perfectly. It was just fun and campy. You couldn’t help but feel just a little better listening to it.

JB: I think the music is probably the one thing that can span the generation gap in the film. It’s got a sound that appeals to our age group, but it’s also the kind of music you can imagine would be good for kids at play. I like the message that the film is trying to convey, the fact that there’s a world to explore, but it isn’t presented in a mature way so that it offers something for the older set.

AS: You’re right about how it was presented. I, too, feel that it would have been better had it been designed for a larger age bracket. If anything, I think that it could have appealed to our generation’s nostalgia a little bit more. But overall, not a bad film.

JB: Yeah, it’s definitely a children’s film, which makes it a little hard for me to remove myself enough to rate it, but I think people who harbor a strong affection for these books and those with children to take to it will find it an enjoyable film.

AS: So, after seeing this movie, I would have to give it three bananas, because it is a children’s movie and it appeals most to children.

JB: Yes, it is meant to be a children’s movie, and that’s what it accomplishes, and fairly well, too.