While I was very happy that my T-Rex did not get murdered by the new dinosaur, I was disappointed with its reveal. It would have been better too have another callback to the first film such as:
I-Rex is trying to get at the humans hiding in the concession stands. There are water puddles everywhere. Suddenly, there is a soft, distinctive "whump". Followed by another. The I-Rex immediately stops trying to dig out the humans, and looks around. We hear a few more whumps, evenly spaced out and louder, and see the I-Rex lean it's head down to stare at one of the puddles as it ripples with every whump. Then there is silence. Camera moves in front of the I-Rex as it is still eyeing the puddle, and well out of focus, in the background, a familiar shape comes into frame, right before the silence is torn asunder by the deafening bellow of the T-Rex, making the I-Rex jump.
So are the Cubans going to carpet bomb the island again or what
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Pratt was a behavior specialist. Just because he's ex navy doesn't mean he can't also do that. It's not like he's portrayed as some wide eyed newbie, he had obviously been on the island doing this work for a while.
And yeah, I'd say if you've got someone who works day in and day out with the most dangerous creatures on the face of the planet (very, very intelligent and quick thinking creatures) he would in fact be qualified to point out otherwise missed flaws that a bunch of engineers who don't work with dangerous animals might have missed.
The real question is, why the fuck isn't the raptor guy the FIRST person you ask about enclosure security for a brand new carnivore.
In addition to the human characters being superhumanly dumb in Jurassic Word, the Indominus just seems way too intelligent considering that's basically been raised in a cage it's entire life with no real contact with any living being.
By contrast, let's look at "Tremors 2."
Part of the plot of Tremors 2 is that the Shriekers always seem to be one step ahead of the heroes.
They try to escape by truck. Shriekers destroy the engine.
They try to use a radio tower for help. Shriekers sabotage it.
How are the Shriekers so damned smart?
And finally they realize that the Shriekers see in infrared. They're not smart at all, they're just going after heat sources. And that makes a lot more sense than the Shriekers having a firm understanding of human technology.
By contrast, the Indominus somehow remembers a tracker being inserted into her even though she was presumably unconscious at the time, and she knew it would be a tracker. And she somehow knew that she was supposed to remove it.
She also fakes her own escape in order to lure the guards outside so she can kill them and escape. Chris Pratt wants the audience to believe that she planned this on purpose, which means that the director wants us to believe this as well.
I really don't like "by-the-numbers" as a complaint, because dumb cliche movies can be fun, and considering the way this movie was advertised, I don't know why anybody who hated dumb cliche movies went to it. They never pretended it was going to be smart, or anything beyond "Jurassic Park with Chris Pratt." The fact there was some limited (but funny) self awareness and a lot of callbacks to the original is icing on the cake.
I ate an engineer
+1
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
this was one of the worst, most cynical paint-by-numbers empty blockbuster pieces of cinema garbage i've ever seen
i'm not even sure if the bits about audiences just wanting bigger, flashier shit were conscious irony or the kind of automatic hackneyed plotting/writing that characterized the entire film
it was just hollow cardboard archetypes mashed together with strings of contrivance and exposition to get us to the shockingly small proportion of dinosaur carnage
how long was that fucking scene with the raptors sprinting and pratt riding his ridiculous road bike through the woods? a full six minutes? it felt like it. at the end of the film my friend threw his hands into the air and yelled PORNOGRAPHY and walked away, which is only inaccurate in that pornography, at least, just hastens us to the trashy crude thing we want
even the big showdown at the end was kind of bland and unsatisfying
but the final shot
the very final shot
in which we are treated to a sumptuous panning shot of a sunlit platform and swelling triumphant orchestral music as the bizarre incongruous soundtrack to the final shot of the escaped T-Rex roaring on high, in some misguided, desperate orgasm of nostalgia, or some flailing off-kilter thematic thrust about the triumph of authentic nature or i don't even know
it was so absolutely, perfectly off the mark, so tonally un-self-aware, so bizarre and inappropriate and unthinking, that i (and everyone in my row in the theatre) collapsed into mad, shocked laughter
uncontrollable laughter
i literally had to go to the washroom because i laughed so hard it made me need to take a shit
best part of the movie, worth the ticket price
I couldn't agree more.
Similar to that last shot with the T-Rex, the first big orchestral swell in the beginning with the kids on the monorail felt so preposterously wonky, because the scene wasn't showing anything. It's this gigantic crescendo of the iconic Jurassic Park theme . . . . for literally no reason.
I really hope Trevorrow never works again. I didn't like Safety Not Guaranteed, and I hated this.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I really don't like "by-the-numbers" as a complaint, because dumb cliche movies can be fun, and considering the way this movie was advertised, I don't know why anybody who hated dumb cliche movies went to it. They never pretended it was going to be smart, or anything beyond "Jurassic Park with Chris Pratt." The fact there was some limited (but funny) self awareness and a lot of callbacks to the original is icing on the cake.
I really don't like "by-the-numbers" as a complaint, because dumb cliche movies can be fun, and considering the way this movie was advertised, I don't know why anybody who hated dumb cliche movies went to it. They never pretended it was going to be smart, or anything beyond "Jurassic Park with Chris Pratt." The fact there was some limited (but funny) self awareness and a lot of callbacks to the original is icing on the cake.
This?
This shit right here?
Not helpful. Stop.
Sorry my thoughts are offensive to you.
I like smart media, but that doesn't mean that I have to think all generic media is bad. Sometimes I enjoy generic; I like intentionally stupid action movies (see Pacific Rim), I like generic top 40 pop, etc. I know it's an unforgivable sin on the internet.
But because of that, I see "cliche" as a sign the movie is middle of the road, not unforgivably bad. Especially with a movie that clearly advertised itself as being a stupid throwback. Yes, the plot was ridiculously dumb. Yes, the characters were inconsistent. I expected that going in, and still found the movie enjoyable if not thought provoking.
milski on
I ate an engineer
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
I really don't like "by-the-numbers" as a complaint, because dumb cliche movies can be fun, and considering the way this movie was advertised, I don't know why anybody who hated dumb cliche movies went to it. They never pretended it was going to be smart, or anything beyond "Jurassic Park with Chris Pratt." The fact there was some limited (but funny) self awareness and a lot of callbacks to the original is icing on the cake.
This?
This shit right here?
Not helpful. Stop.
Sorry my thoughts are offensive to you.
I like smart media, but that doesn't mean that I have to think all generic media is bad. Sometimes I enjoy generic; I like intentionally stupid action movies (see Pacific Rim), I like generic top 40 pop, etc. I know it's an unforgivable sin on the internet.
But because of that, I see "cliche" as a sign the movie is middle of the road, not unforgivably bad. Especially with a movie that clearly advertised itself as being a stupid throwback. Yes, the plot was ridiculously dumb. Yes, the characters were inconsistent. I expected that going in, and still found the movie enjoyable if not thought provoking.
Whether you are intending to are not, you're stifling discussion and criticizing people for using critical thought. This is antithetical to any kind of purposeful discussion.
Your "thoughts" aren't offensive. The fact that you feel you need to tell people to stop being analytical is offensive.
If you have nothing of substance to say and only seek to attack those who do, you've offered nothing of positive value. So please don't do that.
There is a critical difference between "I really don't like 'by-the-numbers' as a complaint" and "I really don't mind it when stories are 'by-the-numbers.'"
One is telling people that they're wrong in providing their opinions, the other is saying that you have a contrary opinion. Contrary opinions are great! Being exposed to contrary opinions is a really important thing for any viewer or critic. Telling people that they're wrong in providing their opinions is not great. That stifles discussion and turns a fun, civil conversation where people discuss contrary opinions into a debate with a much nastier tone.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
I don't get why people are confused by the chain of command. Claire manages the park day to day. Masrani owns the company, but leaves details to other people and doesn't really know what is being done. Owens works for Hoskins who works for InGen's security division and their raptor project is not park of the park. Wu runs the genetics division which also doesn't answer to Claire. It might answer to Masrani but the board of directors clearly sees him more as a figure head and someone to work around rather than for.
Once Masrani dies Hoskins calls up the board and gets them to put him in charge. Or he just makes that up and uses the fact that Claire isn't there and that he has a bunch of mercs with guns to take over.
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
+2
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
The confusion is Masrani Global vs InGen.
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Hoskins has guns. And supposedly the support of the board of directors.
While racing light mechs, your Urbanmech comes in second place, but only because it ran out of ammo.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Hoskins has guns. And supposedly the support of the board of directors.
"Ok, duders, I gotta plan to fix this whole 'murdersaurus loose in a theme park' kerfuffle: we set trained raptors loose in a park full of tourists to hunt it down."
"How trained are these raptors?"
"Not very. They attack every human they see."
"Okay, do it."
+4
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Right. When Steve Jobs died Tim Cook didn't become the boss after Carl Icahn ordered him to storm the place.
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Hoskins has guns. And supposedly the support of the board of directors.
"Ok, duders, I gotta plan to fix this whole 'murdersaurus loose in a theme park' kerfuffle: we set trained raptors loose in a park full of tourists to hunt it down."
"How trained are these raptors?"
"Not very. They attack every human they see."
"Okay, do it."
Everything to do with the raptor's is basically the only story line I think they put any thought in.
There's a reason why he recommended to use the Raptors. If a field test actually worked, documented and recorded, Ingen would be guaranteed military money going forward. If not, oh well, try again later after cleaning up the mess.
He knew if he backed Pratt's character into a corner that he would lead the assault, since they ALL knew if Pratt didn't the Raptor's would just eat everyone(which ended up happening anyway!)
I think that overall, I found the movie enjoyable, but not good. Walking out of the theatre, the best comparison I could think of was the first Michael Bay Transformers movie. There were a lot of dumb in the film, but it also had dinosaurs. I suspect that like the Michael Bay Transformers films, it's going to be part of a very financially successful franchise that everyone says that they dislike, but that many go to see anyways.
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Hoskins has guns. And supposedly the support of the board of directors.
"Ok, duders, I gotta plan to fix this whole 'murdersaurus loose in a theme park' kerfuffle: we set trained raptors loose in a park full of tourists to hunt it down."
"How trained are these raptors?"
"Not very. They attack every human they see."
"Okay, do it."
Everything to do with the raptor's is basically the only story line I think they put any thought in.
There's a reason why he recommended to use the Raptors. If a field test actually worked, documented and recorded, Ingen would be guaranteed military money going forward. If not, oh well, try again later after cleaning up the mess.
He knew if he backed Pratt's character into a corner that he would lead the assault, since they ALL knew if Pratt didn't the Raptor's would just eat everyone(which ended up happening anyway!)
It seems like the raptor plot was taken and tweaked from the old crazy-pants scripts with the hybrid dino-soldiers, but yes, it's the only plot in the whole film with any weight to it.
But still, "trained combat raptors" is an impossibly stupid idea, even if it worked. They're not bulletproof, can't stand extreme heat or cold, and need to be fed lots and lots of food.
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Hoskins has guns. And supposedly the support of the board of directors.
"Ok, duders, I gotta plan to fix this whole 'murdersaurus loose in a theme park' kerfuffle: we set trained raptors loose in a park full of tourists to hunt it down."
"How trained are these raptors?"
"Not very. They attack every human they see."
"Okay, do it."
Everything to do with the raptor's is basically the only story line I think they put any thought in.
There's a reason why he recommended to use the Raptors. If a field test actually worked, documented and recorded, Ingen would be guaranteed military money going forward. If not, oh well, try again later after cleaning up the mess.
He knew if he backed Pratt's character into a corner that he would lead the assault, since they ALL knew if Pratt didn't the Raptor's would just eat everyone(which ended up happening anyway!)
It seems like the raptor plot was taken and tweaked from the old crazy-pants scripts with the hybrid dino-soldiers, but yes, it's the only plot in the whole film with any weight to it.
But still, "trained combat raptors" is an impossibly stupid idea, even if it worked. They're not bulletproof, can't stand extreme heat or cold, and need to be fed lots and lots of food.
Yeah, from Jurassic Park alone we know that they can strip an entire island of livestock and smaller dinosaurs in less than a day and still have room left for humans.
Has any nation ever deliberately tried to ruin the ecosystem of another one? Would that count as a biological weapon
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheaper sure, but nowhere near as cool.
+1
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheaper sure, but nowhere near as cool.
D'Onofrio must have worked for InGen's "XTREEM radical tactical bros" division
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheaper sure, but nowhere near as cool.
D'Onofrio must have worked for InGen's "XTREEM radical tactical bros" division
All I'm saying is that you could fly a truckload of pissed off hungry wolves into somebody's backyard, or you could launch a billion dollar genetic research project/theme park that might someday manage to create magical pseudo-dinosaurs that can evade thermal sensors because magic frog DNA, then drop those in somebodies back yard.
Which one says "Fuck you!" better? Personally, I'm going with the magical clone-asaurs.
And obviously they had to partner with the XTREEM RadTactiBros division, where else are you going to find dinosaur mounts for your go-pro cameras?
see317 on
+1
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheaper sure, but nowhere near as cool.
D'Onofrio must have worked for InGen's "XTREEM radical tactical bros" division
All I'm saying is that you could fly a truckload of pissed off hungry wolves into somebody's backyard, or you could launch a billion dollar genetic research project/theme park that to create magical pseudo-dinosaurs that can evade thermal sensors because magic frog DNA, then drop those in somebodies back yard.
Which one says "Fuck you!" better? Personally, I'm going with the magical clone-asaurs.
And obviously they had to partner with the XTREEM RadTactiBros division, where else are you going to find dinosaur mounts for your go-pro cameras?
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheaper sure, but nowhere near as cool.
D'Onofrio must have worked for InGen's "XTREEM radical tactical bros" division
All I'm saying is that you could fly a truckload of pissed off hungry wolves into somebody's backyard, or you could launch a billion dollar genetic research project/theme park that to create magical pseudo-dinosaurs that can evade thermal sensors because magic frog DNA, then drop those in somebodies back yard.
Which one says "Fuck you!" better? Personally, I'm going with the magical clone-asaurs.
And obviously they had to partner with the XTREEM RadTactiBros division, where else are you going to find dinosaur mounts for your go-pro cameras?
This is the plot for JP5, obviously
That was my absolute favorite thing in the world when I was five. I remember putting together a puzzle with that image so many times the puzzle pieces wore out and fell apart. I had a couple of the action figure/dinosaurs too. Other kids were into Ghostbusters and Ninja Turtles and Transformers, but I thought that Dinoriders were the absolute best thing ever. Also, Frank Welker and Peter Cullen both did voice work for the series.
I don't think that I could ever go back and watch that show. I suspect that the reason such an awesome premise didn't spawn multiple seasons, reboots, and big budget movies is because the show sucked, and my current self would be able to pick up on that. That would break the heart of my inner five year old.
Shadowhope on
Civics is not a consumer product that you can ignore because you don’t like the options presented.
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheaper sure, but nowhere near as cool.
D'Onofrio must have worked for InGen's "XTREEM radical tactical bros" division
All I'm saying is that you could fly a truckload of pissed off hungry wolves into somebody's backyard, or you could launch a billion dollar genetic research project/theme park that to create magical pseudo-dinosaurs that can evade thermal sensors because magic frog DNA, then drop those in somebodies back yard.
Which one says "Fuck you!" better? Personally, I'm going with the magical clone-asaurs.
And obviously they had to partner with the XTREEM RadTactiBros division, where else are you going to find dinosaur mounts for your go-pro cameras?
did I miss setting with the "more teeth" line? It felt really out of nowhere, for being the catalyst for freeing the T-Rex
I think the Masrani and Wu said it multiple times about making a scarier dinosaur, but I don't think the kid ever heard it. It's definitely a callback but it doesn't make any sense for the kid to say.
did I miss setting with the "more teeth" line? It felt really out of nowhere, for being the catalyst for freeing the T-Rex
I think the Masrani and Wu said it multiple times about making a scarier dinosaur, but I don't think the kid ever heard it. It's definitely a callback but it doesn't make any sense for the kid to say.
Ok, I knew it was said by other characters and in a different context, it just felt weird for the kid to randomly blurt it out. Especially since that could just be like, a bunch of compys!
did I miss setting with the "more teeth" line? It felt really out of nowhere, for being the catalyst for freeing the T-Rex
I think the Masrani and Wu said it multiple times about making a scarier dinosaur, but I don't think the kid ever heard it. It's definitely a callback but it doesn't make any sense for the kid to say.
Ok, I knew it was said by other characters and in a different context, it just felt weird for the kid to randomly blurt it out. Especially since that could just be like, a bunch of compys!
My gut says that they either really wanted to call back that line and didn't care that he hadn't heard it, or he heard the line in a cut scene. I'm inclined to believe the latter because the kids never directly acknowledged that the I. Rex isn't a normal dinosaur even though that's exactly how the little kid was characterized, so the scene was probably just cut for not advancing the action and/or showing the Mercedes logo.
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheetahs can't open doors.
edit: Also raptors would be scarier animals to run from then cheetahs.
Are there any international policy people who know how many violations that would break?
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
Cheaper sure, but nowhere near as cool.
D'Onofrio must have worked for InGen's "XTREEM radical tactical bros" division
All I'm saying is that you could fly a truckload of pissed off hungry wolves into somebody's backyard, or you could launch a billion dollar genetic research project/theme park that to create magical pseudo-dinosaurs that can evade thermal sensors because magic frog DNA, then drop those in somebodies back yard.
Which one says "Fuck you!" better? Personally, I'm going with the magical clone-asaurs.
And obviously they had to partner with the XTREEM RadTactiBros division, where else are you going to find dinosaur mounts for your go-pro cameras?
This is the plot for JP5, obviously
That was my absolute favorite thing in the world when I was five. I remember putting together a puzzle with that image so many times the puzzle pieces wore out and fell apart. I had a couple of the action figure/dinosaurs too. Other kids were into Ghostbusters and Ninja Turtles and Transformers, but I thought that Dinoriders were the absolute best thing ever. Also, Frank Welker and Peter Cullen both did voice work for the series.
I don't think that I could ever go back and watch that show. I suspect that the reason such an awesome premise didn't spawn multiple seasons, reboots, and big budget movies is because the show sucked, and my current self would be able to pick up on that. That would break the heart of my inner five year old.
That show needs to be rebooted as a movie series. Just keep Michael Bay away from it. He'll find a way to make it boring and inject a random scene about Romeo and Juliette laws over the hero's hot daughter.
Masrani owns the park and is Claire's boss. InGen is apparently some small shareholder now, having sold the majority of the park to Masrani Global.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
Hoskins has guns. And supposedly the support of the board of directors.
"Ok, duders, I gotta plan to fix this whole 'murdersaurus loose in a theme park' kerfuffle: we set trained raptors loose in a park full of tourists to hunt it down."
"How trained are these raptors?"
"Not very. They attack every human they see."
"Okay, do it."
Everything to do with the raptor's is basically the only story line I think they put any thought in.
There's a reason why he recommended to use the Raptors. If a field test actually worked, documented and recorded, Ingen would be guaranteed military money going forward. If not, oh well, try again later after cleaning up the mess.
He knew if he backed Pratt's character into a corner that he would lead the assault, since they ALL knew if Pratt didn't the Raptor's would just eat everyone(which ended up happening anyway!)
It seems like the raptor plot was taken and tweaked from the old crazy-pants scripts with the hybrid dino-soldiers, but yes, it's the only plot in the whole film with any weight to it.
But still, "trained combat raptors" is an impossibly stupid idea, even if it worked. They're not bulletproof, can't stand extreme heat or cold, and need to be fed lots and lots of food.
I did like how Hoskins ends up spinning the whole field test later on:
That while it ended up being a total failure with the raptors eating the team, suddenly sees it as a successful test of the I-Rex.
Its the sort of spin politicians would would have to look up in awe at.
I know its probably been mentioned however something that bothered me
The gyrosphere ride was missing a remote override that most modern free roam rides have these days? It feels like there should have been a small throwaway line mentioning the override system not working once they see the kids going out of bounds. Or a scene with something unknown going faulty on the sphere in a final destination kinda way. Even without that I feel the setup to visit the original park site was one of my favourite moments of the film, but then just stops and doesn't really go anywhere with it. The whole setup was dying for the main characters discovering some nasty behind the scenes stuff with the new park.
+1
Options
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
They do mention the invisible fences aren't working properly. The Gyrospheres would probably work on that same system.
Posts
While I was very happy that my T-Rex did not get murdered by the new dinosaur, I was disappointed with its reveal. It would have been better too have another callback to the first film such as:
I-Rex is trying to get at the humans hiding in the concession stands. There are water puddles everywhere. Suddenly, there is a soft, distinctive "whump". Followed by another. The I-Rex immediately stops trying to dig out the humans, and looks around. We hear a few more whumps, evenly spaced out and louder, and see the I-Rex lean it's head down to stare at one of the puddles as it ripples with every whump. Then there is silence. Camera moves in front of the I-Rex as it is still eyeing the puddle, and well out of focus, in the background, a familiar shape comes into frame, right before the silence is torn asunder by the deafening bellow of the T-Rex, making the I-Rex jump.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
And yeah, I'd say if you've got someone who works day in and day out with the most dangerous creatures on the face of the planet (very, very intelligent and quick thinking creatures) he would in fact be qualified to point out otherwise missed flaws that a bunch of engineers who don't work with dangerous animals might have missed.
The real question is, why the fuck isn't the raptor guy the FIRST person you ask about enclosure security for a brand new carnivore.
In addition to the human characters being superhumanly dumb in Jurassic Word, the Indominus just seems way too intelligent considering that's basically been raised in a cage it's entire life with no real contact with any living being.
By contrast, let's look at "Tremors 2."
They try to escape by truck. Shriekers destroy the engine.
They try to use a radio tower for help. Shriekers sabotage it.
How are the Shriekers so damned smart?
And finally they realize that the Shriekers see in infrared. They're not smart at all, they're just going after heat sources. And that makes a lot more sense than the Shriekers having a firm understanding of human technology.
By contrast, the Indominus somehow remembers a tracker being inserted into her even though she was presumably unconscious at the time, and she knew it would be a tracker. And she somehow knew that she was supposed to remove it.
She also fakes her own escape in order to lure the guards outside so she can kill them and escape. Chris Pratt wants the audience to believe that she planned this on purpose, which means that the director wants us to believe this as well.
I couldn't agree more.
Similar to that last shot with the T-Rex, the first big orchestral swell in the beginning with the kids on the monorail felt so preposterously wonky, because the scene wasn't showing anything. It's this gigantic crescendo of the iconic Jurassic Park theme . . . . for literally no reason.
I really hope Trevorrow never works again. I didn't like Safety Not Guaranteed, and I hated this.
This?
This stuff right here?
Not helpful. Stop.
Sorry my thoughts are offensive to you.
I like smart media, but that doesn't mean that I have to think all generic media is bad. Sometimes I enjoy generic; I like intentionally stupid action movies (see Pacific Rim), I like generic top 40 pop, etc. I know it's an unforgivable sin on the internet.
But because of that, I see "cliche" as a sign the movie is middle of the road, not unforgivably bad. Especially with a movie that clearly advertised itself as being a stupid throwback. Yes, the plot was ridiculously dumb. Yes, the characters were inconsistent. I expected that going in, and still found the movie enjoyable if not thought provoking.
Whether you are intending to are not, you're stifling discussion and criticizing people for using critical thought. This is antithetical to any kind of purposeful discussion.
Your "thoughts" aren't offensive. The fact that you feel you need to tell people to stop being analytical is offensive.
If you have nothing of substance to say and only seek to attack those who do, you've offered nothing of positive value. So please don't do that.
Insisting that people are at fault for not liking a film because they're being too thoughtful is not constructive.
I'm not telling you not to post. I'm asking you not to be that guy.
There is a critical difference between "I really don't like 'by-the-numbers' as a complaint" and "I really don't mind it when stories are 'by-the-numbers.'"
One is telling people that they're wrong in providing their opinions, the other is saying that you have a contrary opinion. Contrary opinions are great! Being exposed to contrary opinions is a really important thing for any viewer or critic. Telling people that they're wrong in providing their opinions is not great. That stifles discussion and turns a fun, civil conversation where people discuss contrary opinions into a debate with a much nastier tone.
When Masrani dies, for some reason, InGen takes over. They shouldn't be able to do that, as surely Claire would now be in charge and has authority to tell Hoskins to fuck off.
"Ok, duders, I gotta plan to fix this whole 'murdersaurus loose in a theme park' kerfuffle: we set trained raptors loose in a park full of tourists to hunt it down."
"How trained are these raptors?"
"Not very. They attack every human they see."
"Okay, do it."
Right. When Steve Jobs died Tim Cook didn't become the boss after Carl Icahn ordered him to storm the place.
Everything to do with the raptor's is basically the only story line I think they put any thought in.
There's a reason why he recommended to use the Raptors. If a field test actually worked, documented and recorded, Ingen would be guaranteed military money going forward. If not, oh well, try again later after cleaning up the mess.
He knew if he backed Pratt's character into a corner that he would lead the assault, since they ALL knew if Pratt didn't the Raptor's would just eat everyone(which ended up happening anyway!)
I think that overall, I found the movie enjoyable, but not good. Walking out of the theatre, the best comparison I could think of was the first Michael Bay Transformers movie. There were a lot of dumb in the film, but it also had dinosaurs. I suspect that like the Michael Bay Transformers films, it's going to be part of a very financially successful franchise that everyone says that they dislike, but that many go to see anyways.
It seems like the raptor plot was taken and tweaked from the old crazy-pants scripts with the hybrid dino-soldiers, but yes, it's the only plot in the whole film with any weight to it.
But still, "trained combat raptors" is an impossibly stupid idea, even if it worked. They're not bulletproof, can't stand extreme heat or cold, and need to be fed lots and lots of food.
Yeah, from Jurassic Park alone we know that they can strip an entire island of livestock and smaller dinosaurs in less than a day and still have room left for humans.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Right, sending in animals to ravage the locals is against all of the Geneva Conventions.
And it's not like we couldn't do that already if we wanted to. I'm not sure why raptors would be preferable to, like, cheetahs or wolves or some shit. It'd be a hell of a lot cheaper, for sure.
D'Onofrio must have worked for InGen's "XTREEM radical tactical bros" division
All I'm saying is that you could fly a truckload of pissed off hungry wolves into somebody's backyard, or you could launch a billion dollar genetic research project/theme park that might someday manage to create magical pseudo-dinosaurs that can evade thermal sensors because magic frog DNA, then drop those in somebodies back yard.
Which one says "Fuck you!" better? Personally, I'm going with the magical clone-asaurs.
And obviously they had to partner with the XTREEM RadTactiBros division, where else are you going to find dinosaur mounts for your go-pro cameras?
This is the plot for JP5, obviously
That was my absolute favorite thing in the world when I was five. I remember putting together a puzzle with that image so many times the puzzle pieces wore out and fell apart. I had a couple of the action figure/dinosaurs too. Other kids were into Ghostbusters and Ninja Turtles and Transformers, but I thought that Dinoriders were the absolute best thing ever. Also, Frank Welker and Peter Cullen both did voice work for the series.
I don't think that I could ever go back and watch that show. I suspect that the reason such an awesome premise didn't spawn multiple seasons, reboots, and big budget movies is because the show sucked, and my current self would be able to pick up on that. That would break the heart of my inner five year old.
I think the Masrani and Wu said it multiple times about making a scarier dinosaur, but I don't think the kid ever heard it. It's definitely a callback but it doesn't make any sense for the kid to say.
Ok, I knew it was said by other characters and in a different context, it just felt weird for the kid to randomly blurt it out. Especially since that could just be like, a bunch of compys!
http://fusion.net/story/152063/zookeepers-are-posting-pictures-of-themselves-prattkeeping-inspired-by-jurassic-world/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=fusionnetwork&utm_content=link
My gut says that they either really wanted to call back that line and didn't care that he hadn't heard it, or he heard the line in a cut scene. I'm inclined to believe the latter because the kids never directly acknowledged that the I. Rex isn't a normal dinosaur even though that's exactly how the little kid was characterized, so the scene was probably just cut for not advancing the action and/or showing the Mercedes logo.
Cheetahs can't open doors.
edit: Also raptors would be scarier animals to run from then cheetahs.
That show needs to be rebooted as a movie series. Just keep Michael Bay away from it. He'll find a way to make it boring and inject a random scene about Romeo and Juliette laws over the hero's hot daughter.
I did like how Hoskins ends up spinning the whole field test later on:
Its the sort of spin politicians would would have to look up in awe at.
I know its probably been mentioned however something that bothered me