The Jumanji Remake Just Looks All Kinds Of Awful

The Jumanji Remake Just Looks All Kinds Of Awful

Part of the fun of Jumanji was, apart from the fact that Robin Williams was in the film, was its seeming plausibility. Opening a board game and finding the horrors inside made sense.

The Jumanji remake, titled Welcome to the Jungle, starts with a bunch of kids finding something that looks like a ColecoVision. It doesn’t get better from there.

The whole concept is that the four kids find an old video game, rather than a board game, and they end up playing as their selected avatars. That’s the explanation for how Dwayne Johnson, Jack Black and Kevin Hart suddenly appear in the film, anyway.

In the original Jumanji, the board game seemed a lot more threatening because the kids were just launched into the board game as themselves, not given any special powers, extra physicality or any ability to handle the threats that were coming their way. Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle just looks like a shitty action movie, but hopefully come Boxing Day it has a little bit more to that.

But so far, I really doubt it.


  • Dwayne Johnson seems like a nice guy in real life. He’s charming, intelligent, can moderately act and has great physicality. But seriously, his committee approach to picking film projects absolutely stinks. He literally, honestly, has not made one good movie. He’s made some okay ones, but based on all the attributes I listed above he should at least have ONE action classic under his belt. But nope, he carries on with garbage like this, San Andreas, Central Intelligence, the upcoming Rampage film etc etc.

    Put it this way, Nicholas Cage has three stone cold classic action flicks: The Rock, Con Air, and Face/Off.

    Johnson has none.

    Now go and look at a picture of them one after the other.

    Surely something is wrong here no? I mean if there is one person who can herald in a return to 80’s/mid 90’s style action it’s Dwayne! But nope, he’s letting the team down badly.

    Dwayne Johnson sucks. End of rant.

    P.S. He oversold every one of Stone Colds Stunners.

        • I don’t know what’s bolder; changing the name to that, or casting Sean William Scott as the “brainy” one.

          Legit though I love that film for what it is. And when he punches through that brick pillar with his bare hands! So strong!

      • I saw it in the cinema opening day. It was acceptable.

        I rewatched it recently. It’s barely tolerable.

        Your criteria for action films clearly is deficient.

    • I tend to agree with this sentiment. The guy really seems quite genuine and approachable, a real fan-deserving star, but his management seems to be failing him hard. He would definitely Rock in the hardcore action genre—he’s totally buff, fit af, a hard worker, and hugely social online—that’s a winning combination to begin with. He just needs to let go his family-friendly vibe a little and get into some real action.

      • Moana was terrible, the story was all over the place and Moui was a bad person who never got his comeuppance. Just teaching kids there are no consequences to your misdeeds as long as you’re charismatic (remember when rock Johnson made an anti Hillary propaganda song?). Also the songs in Moana were anything but memorable, I can’t understand anyone who thought Miranda did a good job with songs that were so illfitting.

      • Pain and Gain is a classic action movie? Not sure if srs. It was an excuse for Mark Wahlberg and Johnson to blatantly cycle and that’s about it.

  • And i watched the trailer and saw a potentially good movie after thinking it was going to be horrible.
    I wouldnt want them to remake Jumanji, and they arent, they are doing something else, which is good.

    • This.

      If it was a remake of the original then it would be the worst thing ever.

      But there is no reason that the franchise can’t be extended to add new things.

      Who knows how many other Jumanji things are out there, is it always a game of some kind(probably)?

      I was expecting the trailer to enforce my opinion that it was going to be terrible, it kinda did the opposite

    • I think this would get better press if it had a different name and never referenced Jumanji. I can imagine articles pointing out that this movie is “what if Jumanji was a video game?” but the nostalgia attached to the name is already tarnishing this movie

  • I’m gonna respectfully disagree. They took a well known movie from the 90’s, changed it from a board game coming into the real world to people going into a video game world. How many of us wished that we could be sucked into a video game world? I know I have. This movie looks over the top because video games are so implausible. Also I don’t think the point of the original movie was to make people scared and threatened by jungle animals roaming the streets, it was just some kids trying to play a game and needing to finish it to get everything back to normal.

    This looks like a fun movie. Jack Black playing a teenage girl trapped in a middle aged mans body? Hilarious. Another movie with Kevin Hart and The Rock (gotta be honest Kevin’s movies are a guilty pleasure of mine) just tells me that these guys definitely had fun making this. I’ll happily buy a ticket for this movie

    • I’m with you. The original was a Robin Williams family movie. It’s not meant to be highbrow in any way, and sure as hell neither was the genre sequel Zathura.

      This looks like fun. Exactly what I’m expecting – every character is a terrible stereotype (the only thing more stereotyped could have been if Kevin Hart was an Asian comedian like Anh Do), and so are the situations. The fun will be the banter, and they’ve got a good bunch for that (on paper, here’s hoping it works). It’ll be fun going with my kids, and that’s the point.

    • I don’t think the issue is that this is a bad movie, I just think that it’s likely to be a bad Jumanji movie. The fact that so many people already have reservations about it should say something.

      The original Jumanji worked because we all could believe that an ancient board game of unknown origin could potentially have some kind of occultic power. Whether we truly believe or not, we’ve so often heard of stories involving tarot cards, ouija boards, and other occultic objects that the leap to a board game being possessed seems almost logical, if not simply believable.

      In turn, a supernatural video game cabinet—let alone the hardware and software running inside it—is pretty ridiculous. Video games simply haven’t been around long enough to build any kind of potential dark mystique. Never mind the fact that no one has yet been able to code for the supernatural.
      Perhaps a magical macguffin inside the cabinet could add a layer of abstraction to explain it and achieve some measure of believability or logic, but without something tying it all back to the original I fear it will be just another mediocre reboot at best.

      Of course, that’s not to say it may not be funny, but just that I doubt it will live up to equal the original. I just can’t see myself watching this at the cinema.

      • Having reservations about a movie is so common now that I’m pretty sure people in Hollywood don’t listen to fans that have them. Ben Affleck being cast as Batman is a good example of people hating that choice. Whenever they announce a new movie remake there’s always reservations for them, when Disney bought Star Wars people literally flipped tables thinking it was the end of the franchise.

        People hold any form of media so close to their hearts. I look at this and take it for what it is, a movie. Does it seem plausible? No. Am I going to question it? not really, and nor should I. It’s purpose is to entertain, look at the Fast and Furious movies for example. They have so many ridiculous driving stunts and sequences that wouldn’t be possible but the movies do what their supposed to do which is entertain, and people who walk out complaining that they’re not realistic pretty much get told that that’s the point.

        • You make a good point about people’s reservations, but how many times have these been proven correct when it comes to sequels, reboots and remakes of now classic films (which is all the horrible rage these days)?
          More movie franchises have been all but ruined by money-hungry Hollywood execs and writers trying to recapture their success than I care to recall or count. It’s obviously not a stretch of the imagination to say the number of failed sequels/reboots/remakes far outweigh the number of successful ones.

          And the problem with accepting “stupid fun” films as entertainment, is that Hollywood then thinks it’s ok to continue making mindlessly mediocre films to make money instead of creating something more worthwhile. This is the reason we have the Fast and Furious, Transformers, and the Resident Evil franchises, to name just a few. These have not, by any stretch of the imagination, spawned truly *great* films; their continued success lies purely on the fact that people are so willing to accept the ridiculousness of the stunts, the explosions, and destruction porn, over and to the detriment of truly engaging and thoughtfully constructed stories. These are not mutually exclusive concepts; we can have both, it just takes a little more effort.

          I’m not wanting this movie to fail, and I do hope it’s a good film—at least the comedy—I just don’t think it feels worthy of the name Jumanji. Call it nostalgia, or call it expecting too much… I think there are better stories out there.
          I will however be happy to eat my words if it turns out to be great.

          • I agree with you. Basically, people lap up this tripe and therefore the big studios keep churning them out. You couldn’t pay me to sit through transformers or anything the rock is involved with. Or even marvel films. They are empty shells of something masquerading as films. Pitiful shite.

          • The purpose of media is to be entertained and if most people are entertained then it’s succeeded. Not every movie has to be a classic. The genuinely terrible films tank.

          • Well, see, I specifically didn’t include Marvel because for the most part they’ve put out some great stories. Sure they’ve had a few less than stellar offerings, but I feel like they’re the exception and they’re still very watchable.
            Marvel’s stories have a very human touch—they’re not really about the technology, the special effects, or the superheroes themselves, but about how humans and those striving for humanity react to things bigger than themselves, whether it’s a demigod being, the responsibility of power, or the struggle against impending annihilation. In turn, Michael Bay films are really very poor excuses to peddle his unique brand of metal mayhem, destruction porn, explosions, and sexy girls. And although they’re not without technical skill, they’re largely devoid of any real substance.

            Perhaps if you’re not into comic books or superhero films than I can see why you might dislike Marvel but I personally wouldn’t put Marvel in the same pile with Michael Bay’s stuff.

  • It looks like stupid fun to me.

    When I heard they were remaking Jumanji I thought that was a stupid idea and just expected a boring remake, but this looks like a new concept based on the spirit of the original which seems like a great idea to me.

  • I actually think this looks quite fun. Plus I quite like Johnson, Black & Gillan so having all 3 in the one movie makes it pretty much a must-watch for me 🙂

  • Made me wanna see it with the family. I can’t say the apparent diversion from the spirit of the original movie has me bothered in any way.

  • Yeah I think this looks fun. I think people are getting to caught up on nostalgia and are wanting a Jumanji movie to suite them. This is a fun family movie with the Jumanji name thrown in to get some free publicity.

  • arguing it’s meant to be dumb fun doesn’t cut it with me. Movies like Dwayne Johnson is involved with are unwatchable garbage with terrible ‘zany’ humour and no substance what so ever. Fuck this shit

  • In the original Jumanji, the board game seemed a lot more threatening because the kids were just launched into the board game as themselves, not given any special powers, extra physicality or any ability to handle the threats that were coming their way.

    No it wasn’t? The kids never went into the game, the only one who did, was Robins character, who was released from the game BY the kids. When the animals came out, the kids had to help him restore them. If anything, Jumanji was ‘the hero’s journey’, with Robin taking the role of ‘wisened mentor’, a classic trope in terms of this position. The kids had to cross many thresholds in order to grow and evolve ‘into better children’ throughout the tale, such as rising to challenges to become more mature. Robin was the ‘gatekeeper of knowledge’ and as per the standard trope of the 80s and 90s, the children learnt to become good, better behaved children with good family values by following his lessons throughout the movie, despite everything that happened etc etc. Jumanji was fun, a good movie but let’s not make up fake things that didn’t happen in the movie, they never ‘went into’ the game, things ‘came out’ of the game. You might be thinking of Zathura in that instance where they were sucked into the space dimension?

    Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle just looks like a shitty action movie, but hopefully come Boxing Day it has a little bit more to that.

    Way to judge a book by its cover. I disagree wholeheartedly. With children thrown into a game this time (which didn’t happen in the first), forced to take on the roles of avatars that play against their stereotypes, small boy becomes muscular powerhouse, sexy girl becomes intelligent bookworm, strong guy becomes comedic smartarse, and nerdy girl gets the chance to become resilient warriorwoman, you’ve got a movie that can potentially present a whole new dynamic rather than just recreate the first. Try thinking outside the box a little, rather than just writing up a standard hitpiece decrying it, often negativity is far easier to resort to, but this is not a remake, this is a full blown sequel and according to the director, Robins character will be noted fully, his presence felt and mentioned.

    I for one look forward to this completely in a time where I’m growing sick and tired of comicbook movies to be honest, I want something ‘new’. This looks fun, and that’s what I want. Fun. Not dark and dour, not depressing, but fun. This looks it.

  • Jumanji Welcome to the Jungle is making a comeback without Robin Williams? What the hell is going on here?! I know the first Jumanji film was filmed in 1995 that’s just two years after I was born that involved kids getting sucked into a board game and trying to find a way to escape from the jungle full of dangerous animals but getting sucked into a video game even after you’ve been sent to detention in high school is even worse. I mean really Dwayne The Rock Johnson is going to star in the Jumanji sequel along with Jack Black and Kevin Hart really? Sony you really to need lift your game we can’t have another Jumanji movie starring Dwayne The Rock Johnson no really I’m dead serious we can’t have another Jumanji movie without Robin Williams now that he is dead. Sony making another Jumanji movie is not to going that way but if you are planning to make the Jumanji sequel then I’m not going to see the movie this year and neither are my parents Sony I’m giving you the thumbs down.

      • Do you know why trailers are made? So audiences can judge whether or not they want to see a film. Don’t get catty because people are voicing reasons the marketing is failing to attract them with a tool that highlights a film. Learn to think critically and get yourself an education.

        • First, trailers are made to sell a movie to an audience, they often take money shots, and misrepresented combinations of shots to produce something that often does not represent the final product. This is a common practice to stoke interest in movies, especially those that have troubled production histories.

          I’m not the one getting catty going by your ultra salty post there bub.

          As far as getting an education:

          1. I’ve worked in the movie industry before 😉
          2. I’ve got a Bachelor of Education
          3. There was nothing by hyperbolic speculation in the comment above, nothing to think critically about. Nothing said about the use of diagetic, or non-diagetic audio, about the framing of the shots, the casting itself, the script (which can’t be commented on as we’ve not yet seen it). I say to my students what Samuel Johnson said, “”What we hope ever to do with ease, we must learn first to do with diligence.” If you wish to think critically, that’s absolutely endorsed, however ensure you have the facts first before you embark upon such a journey lest you find yourself merely speculating fruitlessly.

          Back off the keyboard warrior act a little, you’ll sound like less of a dick next time.

    • How cute you think “hater” is an insult. What’s wrong with not liking unfunny comedies? I dislike plenty of bad things so I’m a hater? By contrast that makes you a lover right? So you love when kids get abused by their parents?

  • jesus christ! i can’t believe how many people are here defending this trite. i just watched the trailer and had to collect my brain from the floor aferward as it was trying to escape my body. i can only guess it’s movie execs and hired people coming to try and put a band-aid on this abortion of a film. this looks so generic and awful, you’ve all made me loose faith in humanity.

Show more comments

Log in to comment on this story!