I don’t know what I was expecting from Jungle Cruise but I will say that when your lead actress’s main talking point in her press appearances is that she did everything within her power to not be in the movie, that doesn’t exactly give you confidence in the flick.
Then again, the history of this project dictates that whoever ended up in it will have probably done so kicking and screaming. Jungle Cruise has been one of those cursed projects in Hollywood, the very definition of “development hell.” The project was first conceived after Disney converted Pirates of the Caribbean into a successful film and was to star Tom Hanks and Tim Allen. Since then, it’s been one problem after another.
But after a Rock attachment and more rewrites than the Bible, the movie found a green light when Disney convinced Emily Blunt to come onboard. Producer Hiram Garcia claimed that the script was cracked when they realized that Emily’s scientist character should be the lead, not The Rock. Without the burden of having to ground the protag, The Rock could develop his own version of Jack Sparrow, and just… to put it simply… screw around.
Jungle Cruise draws most heavily on two films – Raiders of the Lost Ark and the aforementioned Pirates. It takes place in 1916. Lily, a privileged scientist who wears pants instead of dresses, has heard of a sacred flower deep in the Amazon Jungle that can cure any disease. So she and her brother, MacGregor, head to the heart of Brazil with a mechanical arrowhead thingey which holds the key to finding the flower.
Once in the Amazon, they run into Frank, a bargain basement cruise skipper who hasn’t uttered a single truth in 40 years. When Frank can’t make the rent on his boat, he’s forced to accept the Lily job, and off they go. Almost immediately, they encounter a Nazi (you may ask how there are Nazis in 1916 but just trust me, he’s a Nazi) with his own sub (I told you about those Raiders references) who will stop at nothing to get that arrowhead. Gotta have your McGuffins if you’re writing a big Disney movie!
After Frank tries several times to con Lily (at one point orchestrating an operation of fake cannibal tribes to pretend to kidnap them), they run into an actual threat in Aguirre and his band of Spanish jungle spirits. Aguirre, who’s made out of snakes (I told you about those Pirates references), is also looking for the super flower, presumably to turn him back into a non-snake person. Even though they don’t trust each other, Frank and Lily will have to work together to defeat both the Nazis and the snake people so they can find the sacred flower and erase all disease and suffering on planet earth.
So, in the newsletter – which I know you all read – I talked about a famous screenwriter (Terry Rossio) who claimed that the reason he was filthy rich while so many other screenwriters couldn’t afford to refill their Lime Scooter credit, was because he focused on making fun happy entertaining movies while all the other screenwriters were trying to make edgy “dark” R-rated material. “Jungle Cruise,” this screenwriter would argue, is the sort of script you SHOULD be writing if you want to become successful beyond your wildest dreams in Hollywood.
Do I agree with him?
Can I say, ‘sort of?’
Family films for young kids (Pixar and Disney Animation), Family films for medium-aged kids (Jungle Cruise and Pirates of the Caribbean), and Family films for teenaged kids (Star Wars and Marvel movies) make the most money in Hollywood. Period. And these films are all uplifting positive experiences that make you feel good after seeing them. So, yes, if you’re writing any of these movies, it means you are getting a huge paycheck.
But I think the conversation surrounding why writers do or do not want to write these movies is more complicated that Terry Rossio laid out. If you write Jungle Cruise, nobody will ever EVER know your name as a screenwriter. Ditto The Jungle Book. Ditto Malificent. Ditto The Lion King. Ditto Black Widow. Ditto Captain Marvel. So, yes, you do get paid the big bucks. But you feel unappreciated. You feel like anyone could’ve done the job.
Remember, the only reason people know Terry Rossio’s name is because he started a popular website in the 90s where he and his writing partner were the only professional screenwriters out there giving advice. Had he not started that site, nobody would know his name.
So I think that’s the real dilemma here. When you write one of these movies, it’s purely for the paycheck. You will never get recognition for them EVEN WITHIN the industry itself. Because when these movies do well, it’s the director who gets the accolades, the actors, the visual effects team, and even the studio itself is going to get credit before the screenwriter does.
But some people don’t care about that. Some people want to make money. Hell, I want to make money producing movies. So I’m not standing up here on my high horse saying I’m better than this. But it is a question screenwriters have to ask themselves. Do they want to become a working screenwriter who nobody will ever know?
If you do, then by all means, write high concept PG spec screenplays and think of them as calling cards for getting one of those Disney jobs. Then, once you’re called into the room, you MUST be good at coming up with an angle.
The angle that got Jungle Cruise made was changing the main character from the captain to the passenger. Switching the protagonist is one of the best ways to find a fresh angle in any script. A lot of writers get lost in the bells and whistles of a property (“What if we set the cruise… IN SPACE?”). Yes, you can find fresh angles that way. But it takes so much less energy to switch the POV of the film, which often yields more interesting results.
By switching the main character from Frank to Lily in Jungle Cruise, it allowed them to make Frank more mysterious and more fun. I don’t want to spoil anything but there’s a major reveal with Frank later in the movie and I don’t see how they could’ve done that if he were the protagonist.
We were just talking about this in my Ernest review, which is a short story being adapted into a movie. The short story had the father as the protagonist. But the father was angry and inactive. The son, who was a secondary character in the narrative, was the most active character. So I’m willing to bet that the screenwriter will make him the lead.
I actually think every writer owes it to himself, before they start writing, to imagine the movie through every other characters’ eyes to see if they’re missing out on a better movie. Let’s take Raiders as an example. What does that movie look like with Marion as the lead? Pretty good actually. She’s a fun character who seems to get in a lot of mischief. But she’s not as good of a character as Indiana Jones.
Or, if we’re looking at recent box office, what about Stillwater? Does that movie get better if the daughter is the protagonist rather then her father? I think it does. She’s the one in trouble. Not him. Her story seems more interesting. Also, focusing on her would probably necessitate you back up and see the immediate aftermath of the murder, which would’ve been way more dramatic than anything else that occurs in that sloppy screenplay.
Getting back to Jungle Cruise, writing a movie like this isn’t dissimilar to watching a movie like this. You kind of feel good about it while it’s happening. But then, when you’re finished, the experience quickly slips from your mind, leaving you wondering if the whole thing ever happened in the first place.
