Pegasus Actual
Gold Member
This looks like some lame bullshit. My recommendation, skip giving Disney more money, save yourself some time, and just take in 4 minutes of Weird Al:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Disney’s “Jungle Cruise” - The Rock, Emily Blunt
- Thread starter JareBear: Remastered
- Start date
- |OT|
He is a big physical guy with a stellar work ethic and great charisma. His career is basically just like Schwarzeneggars but with modern pg13 crap instead of awesome hard R stuff.
Dural
Member
Right, something like that would be great. With modern technology they could really do some cool things to it, but the removal of Trader Sam and the other woke changes are BS.
SidViscous
Member
Trader Sam is in the film, or at least was originally cast. The film was delayed almost two years because the brother character was being played as "gay" by a straight actor, so they did a bunch of reshoots to just make him wimpy.
ManaByte
Member
In an alternate universe we got this:
That's Jungle Cruise going through Indiana Jones Adventure, which was actually TWO rides: Both the Anahiem version and the Disneyland Paris rollercoaster.
Dural
Member
In an alternate universe we got this:
That's Jungle Cruise going through Indiana Jones Adventure, which was actually TWO rides: Both the Anahiem version and the Disneyland Paris rollercoaster.
That would have been so cool! Disney has been putting a lot of rides in lately, but they've also cut back on what a lot of the rides originally pitched as by the imagineers. If they let the imagineers do what they wanted Disneyland and Disney World would be closer to what they have in Japan with Disney Sea. The Oriental Land Company pretty much let the imagineers do what they wanted and they ended up with the best Disney park with some brilliant rides.
ManaByte
Member
Even with OLC money they probably couldn't have done that version of Indy. That alone was probably about $1 billion in 1995 dollars.
Unknown Soldier
Member
I can't wait for the movie based on 'It's A Small World' TBH, I wonder what that one is going to be about.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Jungle Cruise is one of the original rides at Disneyland. I mean it is literally one of the rides available since the park opened in 1955. To call it iconic isn't even doing it justice. It's older than Pirates of the Caribbean, It's A Small World, Space Mountain, Splash Mountain, etc. Fucking with Jungle Cruise the ride to make it match the movie would be a travesty. Disney wasn't stupid with Pirates of the Caribbean, they know that one is iconic too so they timidly put a few Jack Sparrows in it but otherwise left it alone and it's still very close to the 1967 original.
What will really trigger the Disneyland OG's is when they finally implement the long-planned retheme of Splash Mountain to The Princess and the Frog, replacing the original Song of the South theme. Considering that Song of the South has never officially been released in North America, it was always kind of an interesting situation with Splash Mountain where literally everyone knows the ride and the songs but hardly anyone knows what it's actually based on. If you want to ride the original Splash Mountain, you better go to Disneyland this year because rumors are the retheme will happen soon.
ManaByte
Member
The Jungle Cruise changes are basically the same as the "PC" changes they made to Pirates in the late 90s. People hate them for the same reasons.
The Splash Mountain changes are just dumb. Disney publicly will never release Song of the South again, but that didn't stop them from allowing the archives from doing a full 4K restoration of the movie that even digitally removed the camera judder just so they could have a pristine copy in their archives forever.
Dural
Member
So it did $34 million domestically with an additional $30 million from streaming, not too bad but likely not enough for it to turn into a new franchise. I feel like word of mouth will be good so the second week drop won't be as bad.
‘Jungle Cruise’ Sets Sail With A $34.2 Million Domestic Opening; Adds $30 Million More On Disney Plus - Box Office Mojo
‘Jungle Cruise’ Sets Sail With A $34.2 Million Domestic Opening; Adds $30 Million More On Disney Plus - Box Office Mojo
Kilau
Gold Member
Yes the mummy is a good comparison, fun but turn your brain off kinda fun. Jesse Plemons had my favorite character but I didn’t feel anyone performed badly.
Read there was a small reference to pirates of the Caribbean and I wonder if they are supposed to be in the same “universe” but it really doesn’t matter.
JCK75
Member
Took the kid to see it yesterday, it was fun and we enjoyed it..
but it felt like walmart brand pirates of the carribean/the mummy..
The Rock and Emily Blunt were awesome but for the most part the bad guys felt like no threat at all and were played too comedically.
it did not need to be as long as it was.
The Gay brother just reminded me of Milo Yinapohicantspellhisname
but it felt like walmart brand pirates of the carribean/the mummy..
The Rock and Emily Blunt were awesome but for the most part the bad guys felt like no threat at all and were played too comedically.
it did not need to be as long as it was.
The Gay brother just reminded me of Milo Yinapohicantspellhisname
Last edited:
Alcibiades
Member
I liked it but have a few annoyances:
-Brother did not need to be in the movie at all. Would have liked to see a more streamlined cast.
-The main Spanish bad guy's two friends also did not need to be there.
-Should have taken place in Africa and had more animals.
-Brother did not need to be in the movie at all. Would have liked to see a more streamlined cast.
-The main Spanish bad guy's two friends also did not need to be there.
-Should have taken place in Africa and had more animals.
EruditeHobo
Member
It's better than the average big budget adventure flick that has come out over the last 20 years or so. Someone brought up The Mummy, which is really not a bad point of comparison, but most things are being done on a higher level here than they were there. And having Emily Blunt helps, because she's just better than anyone in The Mummy.
I did think the gay character was interesting... mostly because they kind of did an okay job; this character (minus the coming out moment) has been in these kinds of movies/stories for generations now, and ordinarily would just be gay-coded and, like this brother, be the comic relief. However them taking the extra step and having the coming out scene I think was handled pretty well, it serves a bit of a story purpose IMO, and honestly is worth it for its own sake as it is a nice nod to the history of the genre,. On top of that it's a real commitment to the reality of that fish out of water comic relief character.
However, then they quite quickly have a classic scene of gay-phobia, where The Rock is making dismissive "jokey" throwaway quips about how he's uncomfortable with the gay guy, who just opened up to him not long ago, helping him or "getting behind him"?? Very odd whiplash on that one, to take the character/trope seriously in a kind of tender moment, but then to really lean into kind of stereotypical "offensive" jokes about that character soon afterward.
Anyway. I just thought that specifically was interesting, probably the most interesting part about the whole movie.
And the movie overall was enjoyable. It's no Pirates 1 with Depp, but it was worth seeing. It was big and broad, but mostly fun. The story is nothing special at all. Characters made it worth it. The massive amounts of CGI & green screen were annoying... but honestly this is just the time and age we're living in. It sucks, I would have liked to see some actors lit by actual sunshine... but that's a bridge too far on these kinds of films, I guess. They just don't make them like they used to.
I did think the gay character was interesting... mostly because they kind of did an okay job; this character (minus the coming out moment) has been in these kinds of movies/stories for generations now, and ordinarily would just be gay-coded and, like this brother, be the comic relief. However them taking the extra step and having the coming out scene I think was handled pretty well, it serves a bit of a story purpose IMO, and honestly is worth it for its own sake as it is a nice nod to the history of the genre,. On top of that it's a real commitment to the reality of that fish out of water comic relief character.
However, then they quite quickly have a classic scene of gay-phobia, where The Rock is making dismissive "jokey" throwaway quips about how he's uncomfortable with the gay guy, who just opened up to him not long ago, helping him or "getting behind him"?? Very odd whiplash on that one, to take the character/trope seriously in a kind of tender moment, but then to really lean into kind of stereotypical "offensive" jokes about that character soon afterward.
Anyway. I just thought that specifically was interesting, probably the most interesting part about the whole movie.
And the movie overall was enjoyable. It's no Pirates 1 with Depp, but it was worth seeing. It was big and broad, but mostly fun. The story is nothing special at all. Characters made it worth it. The massive amounts of CGI & green screen were annoying... but honestly this is just the time and age we're living in. It sucks, I would have liked to see some actors lit by actual sunshine... but that's a bridge too far on these kinds of films, I guess. They just don't make them like they used to.
Last edited:
PSYGN
Member
I Like the poster....just not the trailer.
Imagine being from the future and handing this to The Rock.
Insane Metal
Member
This was so boring. I'll try to finish watching it another day. :|
The movie is too long. Too boring. Emily Blunt is as lovely as ever but everything else... meh. The CGI is distracting. Is there ANY scene in this movie that isn't filled with bad CGI everywhere? I swear I could notice that 'halo' caused by green screen or whatever it is that they use around the people in a few scenes.
The movie is too long. Too boring. Emily Blunt is as lovely as ever but everything else... meh. The CGI is distracting. Is there ANY scene in this movie that isn't filled with bad CGI everywhere? I swear I could notice that 'halo' caused by green screen or whatever it is that they use around the people in a few scenes.
MastaKiiLA
Member
Enjoyable flick. I wish there was more of Rock's character doing the jokes. I feel like that should've been more of a running gag throughout the movie. As it stood, they kinda bookended the story with them.
I hope there's a sequel. Blunt is good in everything she's in. I'm also a Rock fan. Great combination for me.
Edgar Ramirez was woefully underused, but Plemons was great enough to carry as the main villain.
I hope there's a sequel. Blunt is good in everything she's in. I'm also a Rock fan. Great combination for me.
Edgar Ramirez was woefully underused, but Plemons was great enough to carry as the main villain.
SidViscous
Member
I quite liked the bit at the end where he mentions zombies and magical tree's to no fanfare but then they all scoff when he mentioned the tribe was led by a woman, Made me sensiblechuckle.gif.
The film funnily enough kept two elements they removed from the ride since it was filmed, the cannibal tribe with the darts and trader sam are no longer part of the attraction due to "woke" Disney, not to mention the test screening of the film was offensive to gays until they added some hero moments in for that character in after shots, film is downright right-wing by modern disney standards!
Last edited by a moderator:
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
Yeah I think if they never went on about the pants thing that would have been more funny.
As I said, there nothing wrong with things like tribe being led by a woman and the old men not believing it, even though they never bat an eyelid to the other stuff.
But I think they ruined it by having everyone she met say something about her wearing pants.
I mean there was nothing wrong with the "oh a woman wearing pants" thing, it's that they just beat dead horse with it
SidViscous
Member
I didn't see it as a woke thing, I saw it as a running joke - her character was bossy and always taking charge, and everybody called her pants lady and commented on how she was always wearing pants. I think it worked for her character.
The green-screen stuff was far more jarring for me, they clearly filmed them with too much light and then later on someone said "you realise the cgi background is going to be at night right?" and they had to bodge it in post processing by lowering the contrast and brightness on the actors to try to make it look like night-time, was really obvious in places.
Last edited by a moderator:
It's a basic movie, pretty average, it's like the breakfast oats of movies, it's there I guess, few good parts, I actually like the poster above better than the entire movie. Also what the hell was Jesse Plemons doing? It's like they told him to act like a Nazi but not quite since Nazi's were not around yet at the time of the movie so somehow Kaisers act like Nazi's?
MastaKiiLA
Member
It was setup by her brother cautioning her about wearing trousers when they first landed. It's not woke, it's just the running gag. I think it was playing on the notion that women were expected to dress ladylike for the time period, so trousers were as shocking for a woman to wear as a face tattoo would be today. Blunt's character was denied membership and access to the association's relics just for being a woman, so it made sense to use it as a gag.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
I got the gag but it out stayed it's welcome and was overplayed.
And it wasn't that Taboo
And let's not forget Amelia Earhart
Like I said Evie in The Mummy Returns didn't have people mentioning her paints every 10 minutes.
I can understand in London as it wouldn't be what you expect a Lady to formally wear at certain places, like a man would be expected to wear a suit.
But in the Jungle, it didn't make sense to go on about it as it was very common.
Last edited: