Estimated read time: 4-5 minutes
This archived news story is available only for your personal, non-commercial use. Information in the story may be outdated or superseded by additional information. Reading or replaying the story in its archived form does not constitute a republication of the story.
THE JUNGLE — “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” is now in theaters and it is an absolute blast.
The movie is the right mix of hilarity and absurdity and I had a fantastic time. Dave Clyde gave a great review on the film, and now I'm here to let you know what you can expect from a content perspective to help you decide if it’s appropriate for your family movie night.
The first “Jumanji” from 1995 is fairly appropriate for the whole family and this 2017 version seems to be marketed as a fun family trip to the theater. I’d agree this is a great movie for the family, but it might be more for an “older” family with teenagers.
Again, I need to let you know like I do in all of these parent reviews, I cannot and will not tell you what is and is not appropriate for you or your kids — only you can make that decision. I’m just here to tell you what was in the movie and hopefully help you make an educated decision.
Sexiness and crude humor
I’m going to do my best to avoid any spoilers here, but in order to let you know what to expect in this category, there may be a mild spoiler. Be aware, but also know that if you’ve seen any of the trailers for “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle,” I am not revealing anything you don’t already know.
There is a bit of off-color humor in the film that is sexual in nature, but I wouldn’t necessarily call it crude. That likely seems like an oxymoron, but I didn’t think the jokes were offensive, but they were scatological in nature. Jack Black is actually a teenage girl in a grown man’s body so naturally, this opens up for several jokes about certain body parts this character now has that are foreign and scary.
The other thing is one character, Karen Gillan, is dressed in a midriff and short shorts throughout the film. While the outfit is certainly revealing, it’s also explained why Gillan’s character is dressed like this and it’s comical in nature.
Other than that, there is mainly just harmless flirting and teenage romance, but nothing else that I think could really be construed as offensive.
This category was actually more mild than I thought it would be. There is a bit of language scattered throughout the film, but nothing too harsh and no mention of the so-called R-rated word.
By the time the film ends, the language is more along the lines of a PG film than a PG-13 film. For example, I rewatched “Home Alone” the other night and there was definitely more language in that movie than in “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle.”
I would say “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” earns its PG-13 stripes in the violence category. Things don’t get too graphic or bloody, but between jaguar maulings, rhino trampling, hippo devourings and spontaneous body explosions, there is a good amount of violence.
The violence is mainly played to a comedic effect, but know that there are a lot of deaths and several moments that could be construed as scary for some younger audiences. If we compare it to the original film, I’d say this one is more violent, but the violence in “Jumanji: Welcome to Jungle” is more light-hearted than the violence in the Robin Williams' version.
Personally, I don’t think any of the deaths or violence were disturbing or overly scary, but I would assume it may be a little too much for some audiences.
I feel “Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” earns its PG-13 rating, but I wouldn’t say it’s an overly aggressive PG-13 or even borderline to R.
“Jumanji: Welcome to the Jungle” is rated PG-13 for adventure action, suggestive content and some language.