Club PA 2.0 has arrived! If you'd like to access some extra PA content and help support the forums, check it out at patreon.com/ClubPA
The image size limit has been raised to 1mb! Anything larger than that should be linked to. This is a HARD limit, please do not abuse it.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

What do they got in here, King Kong? [Jurassic World]

2456712

Posts

  • Dark Raven XDark Raven X Laugh hard, run fast, be kindRegistered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    Yeeeeah, Wu pretty much says that the Jurassic Park dinos are nowhere near accurate. They acknowledge it. He said if he had 100% accurate DNA, then none of their assets would look as they do. But he has to patch a bunch of shit in there to make em work, and that makes em look like lizards.

    If you're asking why they haven't corrected it from a film making point of view... why would they ever? Jurassic Park dinos are lizards, not birds. It'd be fucking weird to have them suddenly corrected now.

    Oh brilliant
    AbsoluteZeroTransporterSo It GoesFoolOnTheHillSyphonBlue
  • VeeveeVeevee regular WisconsinRegistered User regular
    edited June 2015
    They acknowledged it at least. Can't really ask for more from a summer blockbuster.

    About to watch this at a drive in theater. So excited.

    Veevee on
    Dark Raven XKing RiptorShadowhopeArmorocSo It Goes
  • BloodySlothBloodySloth regular Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    Yeeeeah, Wu pretty much says that the Jurassic Park dinos are nowhere near accurate. They acknowledge it. He said if he had 100% accurate DNA, then none of their assets would look as they do. But he has to patch a bunch of shit in there to make em work, and that makes em look like lizards.

    If you're asking why they haven't corrected it from a film making point of view... why would they ever? Jurassic Park dinos are lizards, not birds. It'd be fucking weird to have them suddenly corrected now.

    How would it be weird? It's been over ten years since the last movie. And the even gave some of the dinosaurs quills in that one! The first movie's creatures were built off of the basic premise that they were making animals, and not simply monsters. Before Jurassic Park, the public's perception of theropods were of upright-standing, tail dragging frog monsters, essentially.

    Jurassic Park obviously fucked up in a lot of spots, too, but the point is that the first movie was forward-thinking, where each sequel has been progressively backwards. It's not doing the animals or even the movie franchise justice.

    It's not even that the science is bad, though. Most movies have shitty science, and I like them fine. It's that you could have striking, colorful, and visually creative creature designs by catching up with the times, but they're instead sticking with the route of making dinos that look like someone sculpted them out of old armchairs. I'm not surprised, and I'll still watch the movie some time, but it's a bit sad to see everything designed to be boring, naked, and gray.

  • Atlas in ChainsAtlas in Chains regular Registered User regular
    The characters in this sucked nuts for the entire first act. Nobody seemed like a real person, they were all archetypes. Once the action started and they all realized they had real shit to worry about, most of them settled into some form of interesting person. Except the villains, they were consistently terrible and one note. Hammond's replacement was just weird as shit.
    I told you to make the dinosaurs bigger, faster, stronger, with more teeth, and just generally scarier than ever before! I didn't tell you to make a monster!

    What the fuck? That entire conversation with BD Wong can go fuck itself, it made no goddamn sense.

    The rest of the movie ranged from fine to good. Funny and tense, but never as tense as the original. Way better than 2, 3 was a steaming pile, but still not on par with the first.

    Sequel hooks
    Everyone has mentioned Wong jumping out of the movie being really weird, like a hook was being planted but they gave up. Fuck that. I hope the next movie opens with Pratt's friend crawling out of that log and realizing he's alone, because I don't believe he was ever seen again once the raptor stopped trying to eat him. I probably missed him somewhere, but I hope not. I really want him to still be in that log, waiting for a rescue.

    Shadowhope
  • AistanAistan Tiny Bat Registered User regular
    edited June 2015
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    Yeeeeah, Wu pretty much says that the Jurassic Park dinos are nowhere near accurate. They acknowledge it. He said if he had 100% accurate DNA, then none of their assets would look as they do. But he has to patch a bunch of shit in there to make em work, and that makes em look like lizards.

    If you're asking why they haven't corrected it from a film making point of view... why would they ever? Jurassic Park dinos are lizards, not birds. It'd be fucking weird to have them suddenly corrected now.

    How would it be weird? It's been over ten years since the last movie. And the even gave some of the dinosaurs quills in that one! The first movie's creatures were built off of the basic premise that they were making animals, and not simply monsters. Before Jurassic Park, the public's perception of theropods were of upright-standing, tail dragging frog monsters, essentially.

    Jurassic Park obviously fucked up in a lot of spots, too, but the point is that the first movie was forward-thinking, where each sequel has been progressively backwards. It's not doing the animals or even the movie franchise justice.

    It's not even that the science is bad, though. Most movies have shitty science, and I like them fine. It's that you could have striking, colorful, and visually creative creature designs by catching up with the times, but they're instead sticking with the route of making dinos that look like someone sculpted them out of old armchairs. I'm not surprised, and I'll still watch the movie some time, but it's a bit sad to see everything designed to be boring, naked, and gray.

    In the context of the movie, though, they just used Hammond's research and built an actual working park from it. There hasn't been a 10 year gap where nothing has happened, it's been a continual process of people going to this dinosaur theme park and them continuing to add new attractions to it. Sure maybe they could engineer dinosaurs that were more accurate to what we know now, but then they'd get questions like "how come this one of this species has feathers but this other one of the same species that has been here since the start doesn't?" Which they would have to answer with "well because we engineered them that way, they aren't actually exact resurrected copies of the creatures that lived millions of years ago" because all the media and public would hear is "these are fake dinosaurs" and I get the impression they want to avoid that conversation as much as possible.

    A reboot of the series (god forbid) should have dinosaurs with feathers, yeah. But this is a continuation of everything involved within the previous movies. When Hammond made his genetically engineered animals Dinosaurs didn't have feathers so that's how he made them. It would actually be kind of interesting to see the state of paleontology within that world. Does InGen just buy up all dinosaur research as it happens to make sure nothing contrary to their attractions gets published? Maybe the existence of the dinosaur park has stunted that field of study.

    Also re: "boring, naked, and gray", the raptors in raptor squad have colorful markings.

    Aistan on
    steam_sig.png
    Dark Raven X
  • President RexPresident Rex regular Registered User regular
    In the book Hammond expressly states he wanted the most realistic dinosaurs possible (excepting the "lysine contingency" (the dino's inability to make an amino acid so they shouldn't be able to survive off the island) and specific genes so the dinosaurs could be patented and trademarked. There's a significant part in the book where Wu tries to talk him into 'upgrading' the dinosaurs to be 'better' for the park (slower, more docile, easier for the public to view).

    Hammond shoots him down because he wanted them as realistic as possible (while also not realizing the dinosaurs he got are basically genetically created monsters because you can't repeat and control the past, yadda, yadda yadda).


    In short: it sounds like the new movie's setup makes no sense.

    The only reason they were like that in the movie was because that was the scientific consensus at the time (and why they started adding protofeathers in Jurassic Park 3). It's also why the 'velociraptors' are six feet tall. Crichton was working from research where the taxonomy had other dinosaurs being classified under velociraptors; the 'raptors' in the books (and ostensibly the movies) are actually akin to deinonychus or utahraptor, whereas Velociraptor mongoliensis is more like the size of a dog.

  • jothkijothki regular Registered User regular
    The weird thing about the whole series (or at least the first three movies) is that the whole chaos theory thing doesn't just pan out. The dinosaurs all tend to act in predictable manners, and the available tools are perfectly capable of handling them. Everything bad that happens is due to the humans sabotaging each other or themselves. The problem isn't our arrogance in thinking we can control nature, but our arrogance in thinking that we don't need to control ourselves.

  • Dark Raven XDark Raven X Laugh hard, run fast, be kindRegistered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    The weird thing about the whole series (or at least the first three movies) is that the whole chaos theory thing doesn't just pan out. The dinosaurs all tend to act in predictable manners, and the available tools are perfectly capable of handling them. Everything bad that happens is due to the humans sabotaging each other or themselves. The problem isn't our arrogance in thinking we can control nature, but our arrogance in thinking that we don't need to control ourselves.

    This is not the case with World! ;P
    The I.Rex escapes because it's patchwork nature means it has camouflage and temperature regulation abilities - things the containment people never anticipated. Their shiny new containment unit is suddenly useless because oh shit, it can turn invisible to sensors.

    Oh brilliant
    TransporterSo It Goes
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA regular Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    As a person who loved dinos as a kid, my interest decreased as they became more like giant birds and less like dragons and Godzilla.

    Also, I like the idea of the dinosaurs being specifically designed to appeal to park visitors.

    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
  • chiasaur11chiasaur11 Never doubt a raccoon. Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    The weird thing about the whole series (or at least the first three movies) is that the whole chaos theory thing doesn't just pan out. The dinosaurs all tend to act in predictable manners, and the available tools are perfectly capable of handling them. Everything bad that happens is due to the humans sabotaging each other or themselves. The problem isn't our arrogance in thinking we can control nature, but our arrogance in thinking that we don't need to control ourselves.

    This is not the case with World! ;P
    The I.Rex escapes because it's patchwork nature means it has camouflage and temperature regulation abilities - things the containment people never anticipated. Their shiny new containment unit is suddenly useless because oh shit, it can turn invisible to sensors.
    Also, they walk right in despite the tracking device still being in the room. If they just hadn't set up the security screening, none of this would have happened!

    Or they could have just not spliced in wizard DNA. Classic rookie mistake.

    Dark Raven XPhoenix-DSo It GoesDracomicron
  • jothkijothki regular Registered User regular
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    As a person who loved dinos as a kid, my interest decreased as they became more like giant birds and less like dragons and Godzilla.

    Also, I like the idea of the dinosaurs being specifically designed to appeal to park visitors.

    That's exactly why the movies need to be based on current science. They need to take people's assumptions about what dinosaurs are, and show them that real dinosaurs are far more awesome than they had imagined, changing their views forever. They need to sell feathered dinosaurs so well that in twenty years, people will complain that furry dinosaurs are lame.

    The high point of the original Jurassic Park isn't the T-Rex, or the Velociraptors. It isn't even the first glimpse of the Brachiosaurus. It's when the Brachiosaurus rears up, a thing that you had never even bothered to think about before, but now completely believe in. The movie has taken something that you thought you understood, and showed you the limitations of your own imagination.

    Of course it turns out they probably couldn't really do that. And T-Rexes and raptors have feathers. Some inaccuracy is acceptable, regardless of whether it's due to overreaching assumptions, science moving on, or just putting more value on things looking good. The key is to understand what audiences expect to see from dinosaurs, and show them something that they would never expect.

    BloodySlothTyphoid MannyHarry DresdenTL DR
  • tbloxhamtbloxham regular Registered User regular
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    I'm sorry anthropologists, but I refuse to let my son grow up in a world where dinosaurs have feathers. This is just a truth too far. You don't see us physicists ruining everyone's fun by saying that swings don't work any more.

    "That is cool" - Abraham Lincoln
  • jothkijothki regular Registered User regular
    tbloxham wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    I'm sorry anthropologists, but I refuse to let my son grow up in a world where dinosaurs have feathers. This is just a truth too far. You don't see us physicists ruining everyone's fun by saying that swings don't work any more.

    Complaining that dinosaurs shouldn't have feathers is like complaining that rope swings shouldn't have tires.

    tyrannus
  • Rhan9Rhan9 regular Registered User regular
    edited June 2015
    jothki wrote: »
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    jothki wrote: »
    Well if you are reading early rumors you might think it's about dino-human hybrid soldiers. It isn't that. Thank raptor-jesus.

    I'm more concerned in terms of not showing people what we currently think dinosaurs were actually like, in favor of just having them be the generic scaly monsters everyone expects.

    And then they go ahead and make a fake dinosaur, because the series apparently didn't have enough of them already.

    As a person who loved dinos as a kid, my interest decreased as they became more like giant birds and less like dragons and Godzilla.

    Also, I like the idea of the dinosaurs being specifically designed to appeal to park visitors.

    That's exactly why the movies need to be based on current science. They need to take people's assumptions about what dinosaurs are, and show them that real dinosaurs are far more awesome than they had imagined, changing their views forever. They need to sell feathered dinosaurs so well that in twenty years, people will complain that furry dinosaurs are lame.

    The high point of the original Jurassic Park isn't the T-Rex, or the Velociraptors. It isn't even the first glimpse of the Brachiosaurus. It's when the Brachiosaurus rears up, a thing that you had never even bothered to think about before, but now completely believe in. The movie has taken something that you thought you understood, and showed you the limitations of your own imagination.

    Of course it turns out they probably couldn't really do that. And T-Rexes and raptors have feathers. Some inaccuracy is acceptable, regardless of whether it's due to overreaching assumptions, science moving on, or just putting more value on things looking good. The key is to understand what audiences expect to see from dinosaurs, and show them something that they would never expect.

    But real feathered dinosaurs aren't nearly as awesome as the dragon-like dinosaurs previously imagined. They kinda end up looking like half-assed giant birds, most of the time.
    No amount of selling the image of dinosaurs according to current scientific understanding is going to make them awesome, since dragons are already the epitome of awesome and can't be topped.

    Rhan9 on
    Hexmage-PAtbloxhamJayricho
  • Dark Raven XDark Raven X Laugh hard, run fast, be kindRegistered User regular
    But they've never been accurate. The Jurassic Park velociraptors are way, way bigger than the real deal. Would you also want them reduced to an accurate scale? Because then they'd lose all threat. The reality is this movie takes place in the same continuity as the earlier ones, and there is no reasonable way to correct them now. Out of universe, people don't want to see giant murder chickens, and in universe they can't create them due to limits in the cloning process.

    If your complaint is one of false advertising, I think anyone with more than a passing interest in dinosaurs is well aware of the inaccuracies, so what is there to worry about? :P

    Oh brilliant
    815165
  • Rhan9Rhan9 regular Registered User regular
    But they've never been accurate. The Jurassic Park velociraptors are way, way bigger than the real deal. Would you also want them reduced to an accurate scale? Because then they'd lose all threat. The reality is this movie takes place in the same continuity as the earlier ones, and there is no reasonable way to correct them now. Out of universe, people don't want to see giant murder chickens, and in universe they can't create them due to limits in the cloning process.

    If your complaint is one of false advertising, I think anyone with more than a passing interest in dinosaurs is well aware of the inaccuracies, so what is there to worry about? :P

    Yeah, a velociraptor is something like the size of a goose. A deinonychus (and all the cool kids knew it) is basically what you see in the movies as a "raptor".
    But the feathered dinosaurs is kinda like the deal with Pluto. Yeah, okay, it's more accurate now that Pluto's been demoted from being a planet, and dinosaurs have feathers. It's better science, but you can't help but feel like the world is a little bit worse for it.

    XaquinExileForarvalhalla130
  • SurfpossumSurfpossum A nonentity trying to preserve the anonymity he so richly deserves.Registered User regular
    edited June 2015
    So I caught this last night, and I have to say that with Mad Max being the last movie I watched, my eyes were rolling out of my head at the amount of telling instead of/in addition to showing this movie did.
    Oh those ominous cracks in the glass are where she tried to break through, because they might be something else.

    Maybe progress should lose for once.

    You'll want kids someday.

    Remember everyone, Mosasaurs here eats everything that gets near the water!

    Let me, Chris Pratt, use my words to tell you all about this dinosaur because how can you know a thing's personality without words.

    Mom and dad are getting divorced, I googled it. (That one actually isn't bad.)

    These are animals that are alive and have feelings!

    Use non lethal force! Because it was expensive. This many expensive, specifically.

    She ripped the tracking device out, by remembering.

    I can't tell you what DNA we put in there. Okay fine I'll tell you some.

    She didn't eat them. She's killing for sport.

    The aviary's been breached! In case you were wondering what the big hole was.

    Should we totally enter into a mutually agreeable and contractually obligatory relationship? Please tell me, with words.

    And by far the worst:

    Something is wrong. (no, really?)
    They're communicating. (No, really?!)
    There's a new alpha now. (NO, REALLY?!?)

    It felt about as subtle as a bag of bricks, especially when it seemed like oh it is time to explicitly talk about a thematic message! But there were some better bits, too:
    This glass can stop a fifty cal bullet. *claw stab*

    The little kid smacking the hologram button.

    Chris Pratt dousing himself in gasoline.

    Explaining why the dinosaurs were never completely accurate.

    Overall, it was still a fun movie, and of course the final fight was awesome; I just kept getting pulled out by criticisms popping into my head.

    Surfpossum on
    icon.png facebookIcon.png tumblrIcon.png
    is this how nations are born
    BionicPenguinNSDFRandSmaug6
  • MalReynoldsMalReynolds The Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicines Registered User regular
    Yes

    We should not confuse our children

    teaching them that fictional things can be fantastical is problematic

    instead, we should do away with any fiction that strays too far from realism

    Jurassic Park should be burned

    #feathereddinos4life

    "A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
    "Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
    My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
    Dark Raven X
  • AistanAistan Tiny Bat Registered User regular
    edited June 2015
    The real missed opportunity of the series is that the park is on an island, so there can't be a constant angry mob picketing just outside the gates. Signs like "Not MY dinosaurs!" and "Teach The TRUTH, Not Fantasy" and "Feathers Are Awesome".

    They'd probably get eaten though, and the message would be lost.

    Aistan on
    steam_sig.png
    Hexmage-PAHarry Dresden
  • jothkijothki regular Registered User regular
    Rhan9 wrote: »
    But they've never been accurate. The Jurassic Park velociraptors are way, way bigger than the real deal. Would you also want them reduced to an accurate scale? Because then they'd lose all threat. The reality is this movie takes place in the same continuity as the earlier ones, and there is no reasonable way to correct them now. Out of universe, people don't want to see giant murder chickens, and in universe they can't create them due to limits in the cloning process.

    If your complaint is one of false advertising, I think anyone with more than a passing interest in dinosaurs is well aware of the inaccuracies, so what is there to worry about? :P

    Yeah, a velociraptor is something like the size of a goose. A deinonychus (and all the cool kids knew it) is basically what you see in the movies as a "raptor".
    But the feathered dinosaurs is kinda like the deal with Pluto. Yeah, okay, it's more accurate now that Pluto's been demoted from being a planet, and dinosaurs have feathers. It's better science, but you can't help but feel like the world is a little bit worse for it.

    Isn't it better that there are a whole ton of rocks like Pluto in the solar system, rather than just the one? You're letting your expectations limit your ability to see the full potential of what is really there.

    BloodySloth
  • davidsdurionsdavidsdurions Your Trusty Meatshield Panhandle NebraskaRegistered User regular
  • BloodySlothBloodySloth regular Registered User regular
    edited June 2015
    A lot of this sounds a lot like when Ray Harryhausen complained about the original Jurassic Park not having upright standing, tail dragging lizards for its dinosaurs, because they lacked character. Now we look at those old dinosaurs and laugh because they're so hokey. Vibrant, striking animals are cool. Avatar's creatures were awesome because they were so colorful and exotic.

    There's actually a small movement started on twitter that I'll link called Build a Better Fake Theropod, started by other people who were equally disappointed in how boring Jurassic World's dinosaurs are. A lot of the entries are jokes, obviously, but a lot of the artwork people have been making is super neat and also shows how feathers can make the animals look more wild and dangerous looking.
    CHKq_AKW8AAr9PY.jpg

    CDVndy1VIAAO5cb.jpg


    BloodySloth on
  • Rhan9Rhan9 regular Registered User regular
    That T-Rex looks really shite.

    Linespider5AManFromEarthgjaustinAbsoluteZeroJayricho
  • BloodySlothBloodySloth regular Registered User regular
    Fortunately for you, then, it was way over the image filesize limit and I had to remove it :p

  • notdroidnotdroid regular Registered User regular
    Loved the movie, and all the nods to the original.
    That scene when the raptor looks into the deep green eyes of Chris Pratt and decides to fight the I. Rex made me understand what this movie is really about:

    Jurassic World is a romantic drama about a velociraptor who is caught in a love triangle between Starlord and an abusive genetically modified dinosaur, while simultaneously fighting the peer pressure to conform exerted by the rest of his kind. The park is nothing but a metaphor, meant to show how our consumerist society exploits the personal relationship hardships of others for entertainement to fulfill our voyeurism & greed.

    Dark Raven XgjaustinTransporterPhoenix-DJusticeforPlutoMvrckArmorocSo It GoesAntoshkaDracomicronmcdermottSkeithTicaldfjamvalhalla130Ardol
  • staplerofpaperstaplerofpaper regular Registered User regular
    No spoilers

    Hated the trailers, got interested after reviews weren't terrible. Just got back from seeing it and was very entertained. Yeah there was dumb stuff here and there but I wanted a popcorn movie not Shakespeare.

    I loved the amount of detail that went into the world creation, specifically the main hub area of the park. Like Disney's Animal Kingdom on steroids. (I think that's a good example, never been so I may be off). You know how people suffered from depression after Avatar because it was not a real world? I'm sad that this place doesn't exist. Without all the danger and disasters of course.

    steam_sig.png
    gjaustin
  • chiasaur11chiasaur11 Never doubt a raccoon. Registered User regular
    No spoilers

    Hated the trailers, got interested after reviews weren't terrible. Just got back from seeing it and was very entertained. Yeah there was dumb stuff here and there but I wanted a popcorn movie not Shakespeare.

    The thing is, Shakespeare did the popcorn movies of his day. Total crowdpleaser stuff. It's just it mostly was, you know, well written.

    This movie isn't. At all. It was pretty purestrain fucking stupid. And just after Fury Road, too, a movie that proved you can have something smart, detailed, and good without sacrificing badass explosions and excitement. This movie had some of the worst dialog ever written, incoherent motivation, abysmal treatment of the female cast, and just, generally, kinda sucked.

    815165
  • GaddezGaddez regular Registered User regular
    So I saw this yesterday morning and there were things I liked and things that I really didn't.

    Pro's:
    1. The raptors were fun to watch, much more so then in the previous movies since they were more then just murder machines.
    2. The park staff were neat in that they came across as the most bored out of their minds teenagers I would expect to see working at a place like this.
    3. The animatronics were good.
    4. We get to see what the park would have been if nedry hadn't wrecked everything.
    5. The final fight was fun hollywood bullshit.

    The con's
    1. I feel bad for Pratt. Guy has a lot of talent and he was given a character that should have been much more interesting then he wound up being. Also, why the hell did they get a navy guy to train dinosaurs? Wouldn't you want like a biologist, or a professional animal trainer, or a mountain man or something for that?
    2. The kids were boring and bad and I really didn't care about them or the stupid metaplot involving them.
    3. The Indominus had more layers of plot armor then I can count; How the hell did it know to lower it's body temperature? How did it know to match it's surroundings to lay an ambush? How the hell did it reach a spot on it's back where the tracker was located? Why were they so concerned with preserving a creature they can literally replace like it's nothing? How the hell did it know how to communicate with the raptors (which wouldn't recognize it as anything other then prey).
    4. The whole militarization plot. It's bad, and in a film that had so many flashes of self awareness I'm amazed that no one pointed out that this was the same as the plots for the entire Alien franchise.
    5. The dinosaurs from the aviary making a beeline for the central park. Why did they go there and not spread out across the island, and why were they picking people up and dropping them?

    Overall, I'd give it a 7/10. I don't think it's a bad movie, but I'm not sure it was worth the 12.75 I paid to see it.

    Richy wrote: »
    But I think the resistance I’m getting more has to do with “rawr! Loklar said it! Rage!” than anything else.

    No, it has to do with the fact that you're done nothing but throw lies, blatant flasehoods, and downright dumb statements at us so far.
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA regular Registered User regular
    A lot of this sounds a lot like when Ray Harryhausen complained about the original Jurassic Park not having upright standing, tail dragging lizards for its dinosaurs, because they lacked character. Now we look at those old dinosaurs and laugh because they're so hokey.

    Actually, I still prefer the posture of Harryhausen's dinosaurs over the more accurate leveled posture.

    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
  • see317see317 regular Registered User regular
    I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I just want to say how awesome it was that the movie took time away from the dinosaurs and the half dozen plots to have a dude bitch about corporate sponsorship in a movie where the Mercedes Benz logo had more face time then most of the actual actors.

    That and the geneticist complaining about the audiences guests just wanting bigger louder more amazing special effects experiences without caring about reality, in a summer block buster. Two of my biggest chuckle-worthy moments.
    If you're curious, the third was the pteranodons dive bombing the people outside the IMAX theater showing "The Pteranodon Experience".

    Ringo wrote: »
    Well except what see317 said. That guy's always wrong.
    CptKemzik
  • notdroidnotdroid regular Registered User regular
    edited June 2015
    see317 wrote: »
    I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I just want to say how awesome it was that the movie took time away from the dinosaurs and the half dozen plots to have a dude bitch about corporate sponsorship in a movie where the Mercedes Benz logo had more face time then most of the actual actors.

    That and the geneticist complaining about the audiences guests just wanting bigger louder more amazing special effects experiences without caring about reality, in a summer block buster. Two of my biggest chuckle-worthy moments.
    If you're curious, the third was the pteranodons dive bombing the people outside the IMAX theater showing "The Pteranodon Experience".

    About that third biggest chuckle:
    Anyone else notice that dude desperately trying to salvage his two mojitos before running inside during that scene? "Dinosaurs from the sky are trying to eat me! MY DRINKS!"

    notdroid on
    TransporterDark Raven XHexmage-PAShadowhopeZomrogjaustinExileFaranguForarSo It GoesEmissary42CptKemzikSmaug6
  • NSDFRandNSDFRand regular FloridaRegistered User regular
    notdroid wrote: »
    see317 wrote: »
    I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I just want to say how awesome it was that the movie took time away from the dinosaurs and the half dozen plots to have a dude bitch about corporate sponsorship in a movie where the Mercedes Benz logo had more face time then most of the actual actors.

    That and the geneticist complaining about the audiences guests just wanting bigger louder more amazing special effects experiences without caring about reality, in a summer block buster. Two of my biggest chuckle-worthy moments.
    If you're curious, the third was the pteranodons dive bombing the people outside the IMAX theater showing "The Pteranodon Experience".

    About that third biggest chuckle:
    Anyone else notice that dude desperately trying to salvage his two mojitos before running inside during that scene? "Dinosaurs from the sky are trying to eat me! MY DRINKS!"
    Yeah, my brother noticed that when we saw it last night. It was pretty funny.

    The 2nd Amendment is unarguably one of the most liberal, liberating and radical statements ever made in human history.
    Andy Joe
  • FantastikaFantastika regular Betting That The Levee Will HoldRegistered User regular
    Sequel hooks
    Everyone has mentioned Wong jumping out of the movie being really weird, like a hook was being planted but they gave up. Fuck that. I hope the next movie opens with Pratt's friend crawling out of that log and realizing he's alone, because I don't believe he was ever seen again once the raptor stopped trying to eat him. I probably missed him somewhere, but I hope not. I really want him to still be in that log, waiting for a rescue.
    I thought the same thing but I remember seeing him near the end, I think in the hangar

    ShadowhopeExile
  • milskimilski UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ UNTZ Registered User regular
    notdroid wrote: »
    see317 wrote: »
    I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I just want to say how awesome it was that the movie took time away from the dinosaurs and the half dozen plots to have a dude bitch about corporate sponsorship in a movie where the Mercedes Benz logo had more face time then most of the actual actors.

    That and the geneticist complaining about the audiences guests just wanting bigger louder more amazing special effects experiences without caring about reality, in a summer block buster. Two of my biggest chuckle-worthy moments.
    If you're curious, the third was the pteranodons dive bombing the people outside the IMAX theater showing "The Pteranodon Experience".

    About that third biggest chuckle:
    Anyone else notice that dude desperately trying to salvage his two mojitos before running inside during that scene? "Dinosaurs from the sky are trying to eat me! MY DRINKS!"
    That dude was Jimmy Buffet.

    You can't write me off like that! You're just a voice, pal! You don't know a DAMN THING ABOUT RACING!!
    notdroidSo It GoesEmissary42AbsoluteZeroTicaldfjam
  • GdiguyGdiguy regular San Diego, CARegistered User regular
    edited June 2015
    I thought it was an interesting spectacle movie, but the overall arch of the movie (and the end) really kind of infuriates me the more that I think about it, especially having watched the first one recently (I think FX was playing it repeatedly)
    The Aunt (whose name I can't remember) having a redemption arc and ending the movie walking off into the sunset pisses me off. She should be looking at the death penalty - she literally made decisions that placed financial concerns of the company above the safety of people in the park, and those decisions led to at the minimum dozens of deaths.

    The first movie handled a similar arc orders of magnitude better with Hammond. First, the storm caused the evacuation of the island in the first, which led to basically only 4 deaths that I can remember thinking about it now - two characters who were trying to exploit the animals for money (Nedry and the lawyer), and two who were integral to the park and clearly knew what they had signed up for (Sam Jackson & the hunter). Maybe I'm just blanking now, but did anyone truly innocent actually die in that movie? Additionally, Hammond never made any decision that immediately risked safety - you can certainly argue that he was incredibly naive, but as soon as it was clear that the TRex was out his only priority was safety.

    This one, the aunt explicitly refuses to order the IRex terminated, despite the fact that it's already killed multiple workers, and never really makes any effort to evacuate anyone until the last possible minute. It's as if someone made a movie about the manager that decided it was cheaper to pay settlements than to repair the Ford Pinto, and at the end he finds a crashed car and rescues the driver before the car explodes to fully redeem himself. Yeah, ok, you did good at the end, but you still made decisions that resulted in multiple deaths to save your company $.

    (I know that the truth about the Ford Pinto was more complicated than that, but the common way it's remembered works better as an analogy)

    Gdiguy on
    ShadowhopeCptKemzikAbsoluteZeroSmaug6
  • VeagleVeagle regular Registered User regular
    notdroid wrote: »
    see317 wrote: »
    I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I just want to say how awesome it was that the movie took time away from the dinosaurs and the half dozen plots to have a dude bitch about corporate sponsorship in a movie where the Mercedes Benz logo had more face time then most of the actual actors.

    That and the geneticist complaining about the audiences guests just wanting bigger louder more amazing special effects experiences without caring about reality, in a summer block buster. Two of my biggest chuckle-worthy moments.
    If you're curious, the third was the pteranodons dive bombing the people outside the IMAX theater showing "The Pteranodon Experience".

    About that third biggest chuckle:
    Anyone else notice that dude desperately trying to salvage his two mojitos before running inside during that scene? "Dinosaurs from the sky are trying to eat me! MY DRINKS!"

    I've been on the fence about seeing this movie, but dumb gags like that might just be enough for me to give it a shot.

    steam_sig.png
  • dlinfinitidlinfiniti regular Registered User regular
    notdroid wrote: »
    Loved the movie, and all the nods to the original.
    That scene when the raptor looks into the deep green eyes of Chris Pratt and decides to fight the I. Rex made me understand what this movie is really about:

    Jurassic World is a romantic drama about a velociraptor who is caught in a love triangle between Starlord and an abusive genetically modified dinosaur, while simultaneously fighting the peer pressure to conform exerted by the rest of his kind. The park is nothing but a metaphor, meant to show how our consumerist society exploits the personal relationship hardships of others for entertainement to fulfill our voyeurism & greed.

    I think you may have read the wrong book
    tumblr_njgo07QzvZ1r4dtnao1_540.jpg

    AAAAA!!! PLAAAYGUUU!!!!
    notdroid
  • ShadowhopeShadowhope Baa. Registered User regular
    Gdiguy wrote: »
    I thought it was an interesting spectacle movie, but the overall arch of the movie (and the end) really kind of infuriates me the more that I think about it, especially having watched the first one recently (I think FX was playing it repeatedly)
    The Aunt (whose name I can't remember) having a redemption arc and ending the movie walking off into the sunset pisses me off. She should be looking at the death penalty - she literally made decisions that placed financial concerns of the company above the safety of people in the park, and those decisions led to at the minimum dozens of deaths.

    The first movie handled a similar arc orders of magnitude better with Hammond. First, the storm caused the evacuation of the island in the first, which led to basically only 4 deaths that I can remember thinking about it now - two characters who were trying to exploit the animals for money (Nedry and the lawyer), and two who were integral to the park and clearly knew what they had signed up for (Sam Jackson & the hunter). Maybe I'm just blanking now, but did anyone truly innocent actually die in that movie? Additionally, Hammond never made any decision that immediately risked safety - you can certainly argue that he was incredibly naive, but as soon as it was clear that the TRex was out his only priority was safety.

    This one, the aunt explicitly refuses to order the IRex terminated, despite the fact that it's already killed multiple workers, and never really makes any effort to evacuate anyone until the last possible minute. It's as if someone made a movie about the manager that decided it was cheaper to pay settlements than to repair the Ford Pinto, and at the end he finds a crashed car and rescues the driver before the car explodes to fully redeem himself. Yeah, ok, you did good at the end, but you still made decisions that resulted in multiple deaths to save your company $.

    (I know that the truth about the Ford Pinto was more complicated than that, but the common way it's remembered works better as an analogy)
    It felt like the aunt character was the human villain of the piece as it was originally written, and then someone changed their minds at some point in development, too late to fully fix her arc to be sympathetic rather than villainous.

    The death of the assistant was painful to watch.

    The assistant, the aunt, the tech woman, and the mother were the only female characters of note in the piece (except for the dinosaurs), and they were respectively one-note and eaten, terrible and incompetent, secondary to the male tech guy, and a nagging non-factor in the show.

    In the first movie, there's a part where Ellie is about to head out with Muldoon, and Hammond broefly suggests that he should be the one going out, as he's a guy. Ellie gives him a look of total disgust and says that they'll discuss sexism in survival situations later. Lex turns out to know UNIX, and plays a big part in saving the day. Jurassic World takes a big step backwards in terms of female empowerment compared to a film made in 1993.

    I sometimes post pretty pictures to twitter: https://twitter.com/matthewandworld
    So It GoesCptKemzik
  • see317see317 regular Registered User regular
    NSDFRand wrote: »
    notdroid wrote: »
    see317 wrote: »
    I don't know if it's been mentioned, but I just want to say how awesome it was that the movie took time away from the dinosaurs and the half dozen plots to have a dude bitch about corporate sponsorship in a movie where the Mercedes Benz logo had more face time then most of the actual actors.

    That and the geneticist complaining about the audiences guests just wanting bigger louder more amazing special effects experiences without caring about reality, in a summer block buster. Two of my biggest chuckle-worthy moments.
    If you're curious, the third was the pteranodons dive bombing the people outside the IMAX theater showing "The Pteranodon Experience".

    About that third biggest chuckle:
    Anyone else notice that dude desperately trying to salvage his two mojitos before running inside during that scene? "Dinosaurs from the sky are trying to eat me! MY DRINKS!"
    Yeah, my brother noticed that when we saw it last night. It was pretty funny.
    To be fair, if they're charging 7 bucks for a soda, how much do you think they were charging for bucket sized margaritas?

    Ringo wrote: »
    Well except what see317 said. That guy's always wrong.
    Dark Raven XnotdroidExile
  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA regular Registered User regular
    edited June 2015
    Somewhat related: Love in the Time of Chasmosaurs: Vintage Dinosaur Art

    BTW, if Jurassic World was scientifically up-to-date Chris Pratt would be training this. znmtv83pmaz4.png

    Hexmage-PA on
    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
    AbsoluteZero
Sign In or Register to comment.