so like.. jurassic park is the #1 movie in the theatres, terminator sequel is out next month, Final Fantasy 7 is the most hyped game of e3... much anticipated Tomb Raider sequel is being worked on, People are looking forward to DOOM....
I just saw it and I thought it was pretty good in a very "fan servicy" way, but it definitely didn't stand up to the original for one big reason: Chris Pratt. Not him or his acting at all he's usually pretty decent, but his character.
The original had the same character - a Dino/animal aware guy with tons of experience and common sense and a generally good bent about him, but Jurassic park does the right thing by then killing this guy so that the less experienced characters can take over the narrative, so you essentially have a couple scientists and kids saving themselves.
Jurassic world didn't really have the guts to do it even though it was needed. So instead of the scientists and kids being the focus, now the action hero has to race around on a motor bike saving everyone and connecting the story dots, which is just honestly super boring.
Anyways, for the flaws it had they did get one major component right which was delivering big time on hammonds vision for what the park could eventually be. The exhibits and attractions and rides were fantastic and creative, and that was a lot of fun to see.
Jurassic world didn't really have the guts to do it even though it was needed. So instead of the scientists and kids being the focus, now the action hero has to race around on a motor bike saving everyone and connecting the story dots, which is just honestly super boring.
I don't agree with this. Chris Pratt's character was only marginally successful in the story when it came to saving anyone. In the middle of the movie, the two children actually manage to save themselves, without the help of Chris Pratt. When Chris Pratt goes into the super-predator's paddock, the two people he's with both die, he fails to save them. When the flying dinosaurs attack, Chris Pratt has to be saved himself by the female lead. And when the raptor "hunt" happens, everything goes to pot, and Chris Pratt is forced to retreat.
Chris Pratt's character isn't the adventurous cure-all that goes around saving the day. He spends most of the film struggling, just like everyone else. His value is not as an adventurous deus-ex-machina. He is the film's audience surrogate.
He is the character who goes through the film saying and doing everything that the audience is most likely yelling at the screen. He is the voice of reason. That is exactly why his character has no arc through the film. He starts off as the sensible, level-headed character who is already grounded and knows what needs to be done. There's no reason for him to change.
The female lead in the film is the one with the arc. She's the character who changes over the course of the film and learns the importance of connecting with other people.
I enjoyed it for what it was, a fun movie. If you start to think about it too much, there's a lot of moments that make you go wat.
i.e. the woman sprinting the entire movie through mud in heels; why they thought going after a genetically engineered camouflaged killing machine with 10 guys armed with handheld tasers was a good idea; etc.
so like.. jurassic park is the #1 movie in the theatres, terminator sequel is out next month, Final Fantasy 7 is the most hyped game of e3... much anticipated Tomb Raider sequel is being worked on, People are looking forward to DOOM....
WHAT YEAR IS THIS??
i'm waiting for rebook pumps to come back in style
"That is exactly why his character has no arc through the film. He starts off as the sensible, level-headed character who is already grounded and knows what needs to be done. There's no reason for him to change."
Exactly man, very well put and the exact point im trying to make. There is no place for a character like this in a film if they're not going to develop.
In the original they killed him so that all the characters would have to develop.
If you're talking about Muldoon, he died in like the final quarter of the film... That hardly counts as "having to kill him so other characters could develop".
Muldoon was killed because Spielberg was anti-hunting and wanted to make an example. He survives in the book.
He's not really the same character in the book though, if I remember correctly he's much older and an alcoholic, so not exactly the action hero type he was in the movie. And you're right about when he dies but it still does a good job of helping push the final act - plus he hadn't been directly involved in most of the story lines like Pratt in Jurassic world, the only arguable story line Pratt is missing from survival wise is the boys when they're escaping the hamster ball, which I feel like supports my point quite a but because it was one of the best parts of the film as those two bond over survival and get themselves out of a jam by being smart (with the car). After they hook up with Pratt they basically sit around doing nothing being comic foils or mindless Dino bait for Pratt to rescue. They are essentially limited screen time so we can watch a literal "alpha male contest ", and they cease any and all character development.
i.e. the woman sprinting the entire movie through mud in heels;
I wanna tell that this...
is...
FREAKING IMPOSSIBLE
You can't even spend the entire day in heels sit in an office without taking them off at least once. I spend an evening at a lol event in new heel that were supposed to be ok ( took them to the shoes guys so he stretch them) After an 1hour I was crying, after 4hours, my feet were in blood. I had 9blisters, didn't even know it was possible to have this much.
But in a way it make me laugh because he even talked about those heel being shitty to walk in the park, so she's probably just a pretty bad ass women with feet of steel. you know the power of love for kids you didnt see in the last 7 years is stronger than your feet killing you.
also the mom is pretty much a psycho " If something chase you.. RUN *huge sadist smile*"
Watched it. It's not the complete distaster it could have been, but it's also not a great film. It was watchable, but they tried to do too much with too little time, and as a result most of it felt a bit tepid as nothing ever really developed in the entire film.
The ending pissed me off a lot, since after 'the big final showdown' a lot is left unresolved, the screen fades to black, then magically everyone is perfectly fine.
Never mind that the original T-Rex and a Raptor are still on the loose in the main park area, not far from the evacuees.
If you're talking about Muldoon, he died in like the final quarter of the film... That hardly counts as "having to kill him so other characters could develop".
Muldoon was killed because Spielberg was anti-hunting and wanted to make an example. He survives in the book.
He survives in the original film canon too (somehow) - in the Lost World it's made clear that three people died in the incident. The three people that die are Gennaro (T-Rex), John Arnold (Raptors) and the security guard at the beginning of the film. Denis Nedry probably also dies, but it's unlikely anyone except the audience actually knows what happened to him, so he isn't counted in the canon 'three deaths'.
In the comic series he survived the same attack with the raptors, though it is never mentioned how.
He survives in the original film canon too (somehow) - in the Lost World it's made clear that three people died in the incident. The three people that die are Gennaro (T-Rex), John Arnold (Raptors) and the security guard at the beginning of the film. Denis Nedry probably also dies, but it's unlikely anyone except the audience actually knows what happened to him, so he isn't counted in the canon 'three deaths'.
In the comic series he survived the same attack with the raptors, though it is never mentioned how.
I think him surviving is just a huge retcon, because he definitely dies in the first movie. There was a lot of retcon after the first movie made such an impact, and Crichton changed the sequel books to help setup future movies. Ian Malcom dies in the book and shows up in the sequel, and I believe there are a couple other big changes to the books to make them more movie friendly. That said, if Muldoon did survive the movie it wouldn't have anything to do with Crichton I guess, so who knows what was going on.
I don't recall anyone evacuating via boat, just people waiting for them
.
No idea either. There's a deleted scene that names him as one of the casulaties in the Lost World, but since that was never released, it can't be considered canon. It also directly contradicts the 'three deaths', unless John Arnold was the mystery survivor (seems unlikely given Ellie finds his dismembered arm...)
I don't recall anyone evacuating via boat, just people waiting for them
.
No idea either. There's a deleted scene that names him as one of the casulaties in the Lost World, but since that was never released, it can't be considered canon. It also directly contradicts the 'three deaths', unless John Arnold was the mystery survivor (seems unlikely given Ellie finds his dismembered arm...)
when its daylight out it shows all the injured people waiting around inside and there is an annoucement the cruise ship would be there in 45 mins, then later on with the raptors being set loose its night, so its implied everyone has evacuated, and claire says to call for a chopper
.
also in the original book Henry Wu is killed by raptors so he is one of the deaths, the worker at the beginning of the book is not counted in that number.
I think him surviving is just a huge retcon, because he definitely dies in the first movie.
Actually, Henry Wu leaves the island with the rest of the staff in the first Jurassic Park movie. So that isn't a retcon at all. He isn't even on the island when the "incident" takes place.
Actually, Henry Wu leaves the island with the rest of the staff in the first Jurassic Park movie. So that isn't a retcon at all. He isn't even on the island when the "incident" takes place.
from the novel:
When Wu and the rest of those in the control room realized that the park had been running on backup power, Wu's job was to stay in the control room until Arnold could reboot the system. Then, Wu was supposed to start up the computer and restore power to the fences. Unfortunately, he was forced to rejoin the others in the Safari Lodge after two failed attempts to reboot the system from the maintenance shed. On his way to the lodge, Wu picked up an injured Robert Muldoon and brought him back with him in the gas Jeep. Later on, over the radio, Wu talked Grant through rebooting the park's systems. Soon afterwards, Wu, while telling Ellie Sattler to come back to the lodge, is ambushed from above by Velociraptors and devoured alive after being sliced down the stomach while lying on his back.
In the movie it's left ambiguous at the end of the first movie, and the second movie doesn't even mention him (they only mention 3 CONFIRMED deaths). So yes, i'd say him being in JW is a bit of a retcon.
As a side note, according to the novels, Wu isn't even that great a scientist. Grant asks him which species of frog was used in the DNA splicing and it takes Wu a good long while to "click" that it's causing the dino's to change sexes. He's also considered (by Hammond) to be one of the biggest reasons that the park failed.
For any who haven't yet, i highly recommend reading the original novel. Almost the entire plot of all 3 of the first films comes directly from that book, Crichton wrote The Lost World as a response to the movie, and tried to retcon as little as possible, obviously when the producers said "Malcolm is the main character" he had to make sure he lived. The original book is actually pretty incredible.
I'd have loved to have seen the Rex swimming in the movie =[
Movie was bad and visually looked bad. So many bad CG shots. So many eye rolling moments. Human Element was terrible. I liked Chris Pratt. hated the Kids. hated the romance.
also
The killing of the secretary left a bad taste in my mouth. They made it seem almost comedic. I thought her death was so unnecessary, and if it was they way they showed it was super classless. The way she suffered, I dunno man. Made me angry
Henry Wu survives the first movie and appears in the game (which is canon with the films). He leaves the island before the storm with the rest of the non-essential staff.
The killing of the secretary left a bad taste in my mouth. They made it seem almost comedic. I thought her death was so unnecessary, and if it was they way they showed it was super classless. The way she suffered, I dunno man. Made me angry
I'm trying to understand what happened.
That terribly hot british assistant is taken by the pterosaurs, flown to the water and the mosasaur eats her and the pterosaur holding her?
Gosh, ILM, what happened ?
CG look like 10 years old. I wasn't expecting much of the story line, but atleast good visuals.
Best scene is geek guy trying to kiss the girl. Only interesting part is bryce dallas howard in shirt (horrible haircut and makeup tho).
Actually, Henry Wu leaves the island with the rest of the staff in the first Jurassic Park movie. So that isn't a retcon at all. He isn't even on the island when the "incident" takes place.
My comment was about Muldoon surviving a triple raptor attack not Henry.
In order the Jurassic Park Films from best to least. And the squeals should end at Jurassic World, but it probably won't.
1. Jurassic Park - It is the best, and will keep that position.
2. Jurassic World - Good Job at the 4th squeal, quite pleased.
3. Jurassic Park III
4. The Lost World - Jurassic Park
The squeal to Jurassic Park was a flop. Jurassic World came close to matching that of the original, and as mentioned, should be the end of the Jurassic Movie squeals, why ruin it, but Hollywood does. Look at the Terminator series, it is dead, Terminator Genisys is a let down, the only reason to see it, is Arnold probably last appearance in a Terminator movie, besides that it's a flop. Both JP and Terminator should be ended, no more.
Jurassic Park III sorta leads into Jurassic World, everyone had to wait 14 yrs to see what was to unfold and that is Jurassic World.
I have yet to see Terminator Genisys but I've seen all the Terminator movies, and we all know how great T2 was, Terminator and T2 will always be the top best Terminator movies, period.
Sequels are made based on how much MONEY they will make, not based on how much you, or anyone else liked it.
Jurassic World completely stomped on pretty much every box office record in a short period of time. I would give it at least 3 sequels before they even consider pulling the plug.
I was hoping at the end of the movie they would hit the island with a nuclear bomb. Then roll the credits over a mushroom cloud. There, put a final end to these movies. But no....
While true, $ determines a sequel, I think there is a giant flaw in that logic (for studios), when using it to trigger a sequel. There are plenty of great movies, that are not box office smashes, because it didn't grab consumer focus. Sometimes, it's just released at a bad time, like when another blockbuster is released, or a holiday where people don't go to movies.
The thing is, they gain popularity, when they hit the video market, but that doesn't generate enough funds to trigger interest in a sequel (by the studios). The fans will screen for a sequel, but it never arrives, because the studio doesn't think it's justified. The reality is, there's now a huge fan base, who would be there day one, if a sequel is released.
For example, the A-Team. I got really concerned about the movie, when it hit the theaters. I think many shared my concern, because it did not do well in the box office. When it hit video, I checked it out, and loved it. Sure, it isn't the greatest movie ever, but I do think it was worth making a sequel. I saw many people, online, who were begging for a sequel; enough so that they've ask Bradley Cooper, in interviews (and he'd be on board). But the box office numbers will prevent it from ever happening.
I've seen this twice, once with my girlfriend and all 3 of the more grown up kids, and then again in IMAX with the two eldest kids.
While the movie itself wasn't terrible, i think the enjoyment i got from it was more that my kids really enjoyed it. They'd grown up with the original Jurassic Park films being watered down and content cut and aired on TV, so they never got the big-screen spectacle. They were thoroughly thrilled (and one was terrified, which was also awesome hehe).
Replies
dude....kids in general are completely stupid haha. anyone who thinks they were personally smart as a child...is living in a dream world :P
and I agree with the raptor "taming" stuff, I mean just look at this...
[ame]
WHAT YEAR IS THIS??
The original had the same character - a Dino/animal aware guy with tons of experience and common sense and a generally good bent about him, but Jurassic park does the right thing by then killing this guy so that the less experienced characters can take over the narrative, so you essentially have a couple scientists and kids saving themselves.
Jurassic world didn't really have the guts to do it even though it was needed. So instead of the scientists and kids being the focus, now the action hero has to race around on a motor bike saving everyone and connecting the story dots, which is just honestly super boring.
Anyways, for the flaws it had they did get one major component right which was delivering big time on hammonds vision for what the park could eventually be. The exhibits and attractions and rides were fantastic and creative, and that was a lot of fun to see.
I don't agree with this. Chris Pratt's character was only marginally successful in the story when it came to saving anyone. In the middle of the movie, the two children actually manage to save themselves, without the help of Chris Pratt. When Chris Pratt goes into the super-predator's paddock, the two people he's with both die, he fails to save them. When the flying dinosaurs attack, Chris Pratt has to be saved himself by the female lead. And when the raptor "hunt" happens, everything goes to pot, and Chris Pratt is forced to retreat.
Chris Pratt's character isn't the adventurous cure-all that goes around saving the day. He spends most of the film struggling, just like everyone else. His value is not as an adventurous deus-ex-machina. He is the film's audience surrogate.
He is the character who goes through the film saying and doing everything that the audience is most likely yelling at the screen. He is the voice of reason. That is exactly why his character has no arc through the film. He starts off as the sensible, level-headed character who is already grounded and knows what needs to be done. There's no reason for him to change.
The female lead in the film is the one with the arc. She's the character who changes over the course of the film and learns the importance of connecting with other people.
i.e. the woman sprinting the entire movie through mud in heels; why they thought going after a genetically engineered camouflaged killing machine with 10 guys armed with handheld tasers was a good idea; etc.
i'm waiting for rebook pumps to come back in style
Exactly man, very well put and the exact point im trying to make. There is no place for a character like this in a film if they're not going to develop.
In the original they killed him so that all the characters would have to develop.
Muldoon was killed because Spielberg was anti-hunting and wanted to make an example. He survives in the book.
I wanna tell that this...
is...
FREAKING IMPOSSIBLE
You can't even spend the entire day in heels sit in an office without taking them off at least once. I spend an evening at a lol event in new heel that were supposed to be ok ( took them to the shoes guys so he stretch them) After an 1hour I was crying, after 4hours, my feet were in blood. I had 9blisters, didn't even know it was possible to have this much.
But in a way it make me laugh because he even talked about those heel being shitty to walk in the park, so she's probably just a pretty bad ass women with feet of steel. you know the power of love for kids you didnt see in the last 7 years is stronger than your feet killing you.
also the mom is pretty much a psycho " If something chase you.. RUN *huge sadist smile*"
The ending pissed me off a lot, since after 'the big final showdown' a lot is left unresolved, the screen fades to black, then magically everyone is perfectly fine.
He survives in the original film canon too (somehow) - in the Lost World it's made clear that three people died in the incident. The three people that die are Gennaro (T-Rex), John Arnold (Raptors) and the security guard at the beginning of the film. Denis Nedry probably also dies, but it's unlikely anyone except the audience actually knows what happened to him, so he isn't counted in the canon 'three deaths'.
In the comic series he survived the same attack with the raptors, though it is never mentioned how.
I think him surviving is just a huge retcon, because he definitely dies in the first movie. There was a lot of retcon after the first movie made such an impact, and Crichton changed the sequel books to help setup future movies. Ian Malcom dies in the book and shows up in the sequel, and I believe there are a couple other big changes to the books to make them more movie friendly. That said, if Muldoon did survive the movie it wouldn't have anything to do with Crichton I guess, so who knows what was going on.
They evacuated by boat, so that hanger is somewhere well away from the island separated from the Trex by a lot of water.
No idea either. There's a deleted scene that names him as one of the casulaties in the Lost World, but since that was never released, it can't be considered canon. It also directly contradicts the 'three deaths', unless John Arnold was the mystery survivor (seems unlikely given Ellie finds his dismembered arm...)
also in the original book Henry Wu is killed by raptors so he is one of the deaths, the worker at the beginning of the book is not counted in that number.
Actually, Henry Wu leaves the island with the rest of the staff in the first Jurassic Park movie. So that isn't a retcon at all. He isn't even on the island when the "incident" takes place.
from the novel:
In the movie it's left ambiguous at the end of the first movie, and the second movie doesn't even mention him (they only mention 3 CONFIRMED deaths). So yes, i'd say him being in JW is a bit of a retcon.
As a side note, according to the novels, Wu isn't even that great a scientist. Grant asks him which species of frog was used in the DNA splicing and it takes Wu a good long while to "click" that it's causing the dino's to change sexes. He's also considered (by Hammond) to be one of the biggest reasons that the park failed.
I'd have loved to have seen the Rex swimming in the movie =[
also
I've found this making of for the apatosaurus, really cool stuff.
Spoilers by the way
CG look like 10 years old. I wasn't expecting much of the story line, but atleast good visuals.
Best scene is geek guy trying to kiss the girl. Only interesting part is bryce dallas howard in shirt (horrible haircut and makeup tho).
edit: raptors looked better in Jurassic Park
Good to know I am not the only one who thought that
My comment was about Muldoon surviving a triple raptor attack not Henry.
1. Jurassic Park - It is the best, and will keep that position.
2. Jurassic World - Good Job at the 4th squeal, quite pleased.
3. Jurassic Park III
4. The Lost World - Jurassic Park
The squeal to Jurassic Park was a flop. Jurassic World came close to matching that of the original, and as mentioned, should be the end of the Jurassic Movie squeals, why ruin it, but Hollywood does. Look at the Terminator series, it is dead, Terminator Genisys is a let down, the only reason to see it, is Arnold probably last appearance in a Terminator movie, besides that it's a flop. Both JP and Terminator should be ended, no more.
Jurassic Park III sorta leads into Jurassic World, everyone had to wait 14 yrs to see what was to unfold and that is Jurassic World.
I have yet to see Terminator Genisys but I've seen all the Terminator movies, and we all know how great T2 was, Terminator and T2 will always be the top best Terminator movies, period.
Jurassic World completely stomped on pretty much every box office record in a short period of time. I would give it at least 3 sequels before they even consider pulling the plug.
And unfortunately for you, Terminator Genysis is currently sitting at $72.5 million Domestic, and has only been in the theatres for 2 weeks:
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=terminator2015.htm
SO yes, there will be plenty more Terminator Sequels.
Only hope we might have for it, is if they 'Max Max' it, and give it back to the original Director, to somehow give a new spin on the series.
The thing is, they gain popularity, when they hit the video market, but that doesn't generate enough funds to trigger interest in a sequel (by the studios). The fans will screen for a sequel, but it never arrives, because the studio doesn't think it's justified. The reality is, there's now a huge fan base, who would be there day one, if a sequel is released.
For example, the A-Team. I got really concerned about the movie, when it hit the theaters. I think many shared my concern, because it did not do well in the box office. When it hit video, I checked it out, and loved it. Sure, it isn't the greatest movie ever, but I do think it was worth making a sequel. I saw many people, online, who were begging for a sequel; enough so that they've ask Bradley Cooper, in interviews (and he'd be on board). But the box office numbers will prevent it from ever happening.
While the movie itself wasn't terrible, i think the enjoyment i got from it was more that my kids really enjoyed it. They'd grown up with the original Jurassic Park films being watered down and content cut and aired on TV, so they never got the big-screen spectacle. They were thoroughly thrilled (and one was terrified, which was also awesome hehe).
+1
I can look over all the plot holes and the super cheesy ending, but that scene was unnecessary.