Jumanji 2017

I always assumed that if a player died, Jumanji declared victory on that player and tipped over their piece or something.

The game is actively trying to murder you. It'd be silly for the game to be rendered unplayable if it succeeds.

But if you couldn't play any more, then all the stuff that got released from the game would still be around to murder you in your face, along with anyone else nearby.

Winner, Jumanji.

But nothing new could come out and murder your face. When stuff comes out, it starts at you and then leaves. The mosquitos, the monkeys, the stampede, etc. attacked the players because they were in the immediate vicinity, but due to the nature of being wild animals, they moved on once those attacks failed. Van Pelt aside, nothing that comes out of Jumanji is a Super-Persistent Predator.

If nothing new can come out, players are forced to cut their losses and stop summoning new horrors. Then it's just a matter of animal control getting a handle on the situation.

edited 6th Jul '17 6:34:57 PM by TobiasDrake

Hmm...

I see your point, but I still think the game would find a way to put the screws to whoever is playing.

Lets just agree to disagree on this.

Jumanji is ultimately bound by its own rules, it's goal is to play the game, not necessarily defeat the players. If killing a player causes the game to be unwinnable then it is not a victory for the game, the game would either be prevented from going past its last turn or force a reset. If it is forced to do a reset, the rules as stated would undo all the chaos it unleashed and bring the slain player(s) back to life. The same question would be what it would do if all players were killed, with the same possible answers.

There's really no indication that Jumanji can't just make shit up as it goes. The players are bound by its rules, but we literally have zero idea of how Jumanji itself works.

Like, it was able to identify Peter trying to cheat by dropping the dice a specific way, and because he was cheating, it attacked him directly rather than throwing wildlife at the group. But despite lashing out at Peter for cheating, it is entirely willing to selectively interpret any act by a person that causes the dice to roll as deliberately rolling your turn. This comes up several times in the film: "The game thinks you rolled."

Van Pelt outright states that he's only out to kill Alan because he's the one who rolled the dice; however, he's entirely willing to try and kill the others once they get in the way. And it may not be coincidence that Van Pelt was conjured on the turn of the one player he has a grudge against; after all, there doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason to what Jumanji chooses to throw at people and when.

Hell, Judy managed to score a mercy roll on once occasion. When Alan's slipping under the quicksand floor, she rolls up "Go back a turn" which freezes the floor back into wood. It's never explained why Jumanji was feeling merciful in that one instance.

That it waited patiently for 26 years to continue its game with Sarah and Alan is also interesting and raises the question of what Jumanji would do if Judy and Peter rolled their turns without freeing Alan and thus nobody knew to go find Sarah. But again, there's nothing that says Jumanji is itself bound by the rules of the game. The rules themselves are very vague, and the only thing preventing someone from just starting a new game is Jumanji locking the pieces in place.

It's also interesting that Jumanji frequently puts itself in harm's way. Half the challenge of the game is protecting the board from whatever horror it just unleashed against you.

It's possible that Jumanji is like a literal genie, forced to obey the letter of its rules regardless of the spirit. But it's just as possible that Jumanji is more like a malevolent DM, interpreting what few rules there are in the way that best suits its game.

EDIT: Shit, it even volunteers players without waiting for their consent. When Judy picks up the two pieces not in use, Jumanji snatches them from her and sets them in place on the board. The simple act of opening the game and touching the pieces was enough for Jumanji to consider the game to be on. Jumanji is really pushy in a way that suggests at least some manner of intelligence rather than rote mechanism.

edited 6th Jul '17 8:56:24 PM by TobiasDrake

None of that indicates a lack of its internal rules being followed. All the dice rolls come with a riddle and a new obstacle, those are the rules. The game is malevolent and seemingly strongarms its players into playing, that much is clear, but it doesn't spawn anything unless a new turn takes place. Every new obstacle that comes this way is implied to be up to random chance, including Judy's mercy roll, just like a random chance cards in a normal board game. Peter being punished for trying to cheat is a new rule being revealed. And ultimately Jumanji has to agree to the Reset Button when a player accomplishes the win condition.

Just going by what we see in the movie, it needs kids to play the game, or people who were kids when they started playing. It waited because it had no choice, Judy and Peter were the first kids it came across after all that time. So it would seem there are some rules it has to follow, but like you said, it forced the kids to play by yanking the pieces right from Judy's hand. So whatever rules it's bound by or sets for itself are subject to the game's own stretching or creative interpretations.

For all it's apparent awareness, I don't think the game puts much thought beyond the current turn of whoever has the dice. Or maybe I should say the game can't put much thought into anything beyond the current turn of whoever has the dice. Jumanji is openly malicious, but it's only active efforts are getting people to start playing the game, screwing with the world after a roll, and punishing cheaters. It's goal was to get played again after the long time out and Judy and Peter were the first opportunity so it seized them. I don't think it could have done anything if Sarah couldn't be brought back to play.

Our own wiki page jokes that the game's one positive trait is that it floats.

It might not actually need kids, it just never ran into any adults who would have played. It was left on the Parrish's table, and the parents weren't likely to play games like that in their grief. They would have put it in the attic and forgotten all about it. Judging from that attic, nobody else lived in the house until the aunt bought it.

Also, going back to an earlier point, it didn't really skip Sarah's turn. New players joined in. That can happen in real world games, and the turn orders get shift to include them. If they'd been able to keep rolling without her, then it would have been different, but they couldn't.

ETA: I know there were three big rolls before they found Alan. I'm pretty sure that was from one of them rolling doubles and getting a second turn, not from anyone skipping.

edited 7th Jul '17 6:09:05 AM by Journeyman

By "waiting 26 years to continue", I meant that in all that time, it never considered Sarah and Alan's game abandoned. When Judy and Peter sat down to play, it considered them to be the other two players in Alan and Sarah's game rather than to be starting a new one for themselves.

It's a weird decision to make. Like, if Peter hadn't rolled Alan out of the jungle, nobody could have gone and fetched Sarah. Jumanji would be rendered unplayable.

It didn't skip anybody's turn. Here's the turn order:

• Sarah: Bats.
• Alan: In the jungle.
• Judy: Mosquitos.
• Peter: Monkeys, but rolled doubles so he gets to go again.
• Peter Again: Lion, and also rolled a 5 so Alan gets released from the jungle.

At that point, they had to track down Sarah because it was her turn. No one got skipped; 26 years just passed between Alan and Judy's turns.

I actually took very careful track of whose turn it was the last time I watched it. The filmmakers did a great job on that note; there are no continuity errors in the turn order. The only thing that really stands out is Peter being close enough that he thought he could end the game on his second turn; yes, he rolled doubles on his first, but they were snake eyes and his second roll was a 5. I don't think you could be only twelve spaces away from the game's end on what adds up to an average roll of 7.

As it is, the game has three full revolutions around the table with Alan and Sarah getting four turns.

Its lure, the jungle drum beats, is shown to only be audible to children. Judy and Peter hear Jumanji luring them to the attic while their aunt is completely oblivious.

edited 7th Jul '17 11:52:44 AM by TobiasDrake

In that case, there might be some credence to the idea that this game was made to train young warriors, in both mind (via the riddles) and body (via the dangers).

edited 7th Jul '17 1:30:44 PM by Worlder

It's possible that Alan could have played his turn of Jumanji from inside the jungle. If his turn had come up again, without anyone else rolling 5 or 8 to let him out, there might have been dice somewhere in the jungle he could have rolled.

"Well, this is an unusually square and spotted turtle..." *rolls it*

*nothing happens* "...it made sense at the time."

edited 7th Jul '17 9:39:34 PM by Tuckerscreator

XD

I figured the drumming is heard by those the gen wants/chooses to play it, but I don't remember if any other extraneous characters heard the drumming or not.

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/posts.php?discussion=14608156490A28810900&page=3#73

I like that comparison,my favourite theory is that Jumanji is a demon/supernatural entity bound to the boardgame,that would explain it's malicious nature as some people have noted,as well as the fact that it can think,there's clearly an entity there.

Alan hears the drumming at the construction site, which draws him to come find it. None of the workers nearby seem to be aware of it.

When Alan tries to run away, Sarah's at the door to return his bike. Jumanji starts up its drumming again and they both hear it, which draws them to play it.

26 years later, Jumanji's drumming lures Peter and Judy to the attic. We see them standing in the foyer with Aunt Nora; both kids hear the drumming, but Nora has no idea what they're responding to.

The main connecting thread between each of these instances is that children hear the drums while adults are oblivious to them, but there's nothing that necessarily proves it's not single-targeting people it's pre-selected as players, but "can't be heard by adults" seems simpler.

Jumanji's sort of like an angler fish. The drums are its glowy light.

edited 7th Jul '17 7:45:40 PM by TobiasDrake

Also at the very beginning with the last set of players and very end with the soon to be latest set of players, it's kids who hear the drums.

It could easily be that the game knows children are more likely to bother with playing such a game in the first place. I mean, other than adults who played them as kids, most folk aren't likely to pick up a dice-and-board game without the presence of others who already enjoy them. Like kids. That would bring up the question of why the Demon was stuffed in such a game to begin with, but that could be anything.

If it even is a demon. I don't recall any indication that it was anything but a sentient, malevolent board game.

Having just watched Jumanji again the other day for the first time in years, I realised I'd completely forgotten about the opening scene in 1869. What jumped out at me was the comment after the howl that "It's just a pack of wolves." And I thought "Just a pack of wolves?", but then I realised they had probably seen far, far worse while playing the game than a bunch of wolves.

edited 10th Jul '17 9:29:26 AM by Ulysses21

> That would bring up the question of why the Demon was stuffed in such a game to begin with, but that could be anything.

Could be a disguise,it's a prison but the entity is capable changing it's appearance so it's a boardgame,it wants people to play it's game,hence the drums that only children can hear,adults might be more wary of board's tricks,where as children are easier to fool.

> If it even is a demon. I don't recall any indication that it was anything but a sentient, malevolent board game.

Certainly there's no evidence in film or anywhere else that Jumanji is a demon possessing a board game,but it's fun theory there's something behind the malevolence

edited 10th Jul '17 10:23:35 AM by Ultimatum

I like the part when Van Pelt tries to shoot Alan at the end and the game repossesses the bullet midflight. I like to imagine that it was deliberately shielding him rather than just convenient timing; the game was pulling rank on Van Pelt and going, "He called Jumanji. The game is over. You aren't allowed to shoot him anymore."

It's also funny if you remember that Van Pelt purchased that gun and those bullets out here in the real world. Jumanji, bad. Those do not belong to you. Put them back.

If reality hadn't reshuffled so extremely due to the 26 year length of the game, there would probably be a very confused gun store owner trying to figure out why his gold coins just evaporated into thin air.

edited 10th Jul '17 11:55:33 AM by TobiasDrake

One thing that I find kind of interesting when you compare Jumanji and Zathura is the way the games actually work. Like, Zathura would be incredibly boring to play if it wasn't magic. The game does pretty much everything itself except for reading the cards.

But other thing is how the games interact with the players. Jumanji is capable of spitting things out of the game into the real world, and essentially taking control of the real world to some degree. Zathura (apparently) rips the house out of the real world and stuffs it into the game world. Although Zathura's approach to the "previous player comes back" thing is significantly weirder.