Onkelpsycho
Sr Member
Who cares for the idea of the movie, let's check the trailer for props... :lol
Jurassic World
- Thread starter Lutso
- Start date
-
- Tags
- jurassic park
joshvanrad
Master Member
I'm not entirely sure how I feel about this after seeing the trailer. Will I see it? Yes, definitely. But am I a little skeptical? A little.
The park looked cool, and using familiar "monsters" from current times, like the Great White, as perspective to how large jurassic creatures were is pretty cool. I just don't know if I'm huge on the futuristic scifi type of devices they use (ie. Hamster Ride). In the first Jurassic Park, other than the science they use, everything else is stuff you could find at any amusement park, and that definitely added to the immersion.
The park looked cool, and using familiar "monsters" from current times, like the Great White, as perspective to how large jurassic creatures were is pretty cool. I just don't know if I'm huge on the futuristic scifi type of devices they use (ie. Hamster Ride). In the first Jurassic Park, other than the science they use, everything else is stuff you could find at any amusement park, and that definitely added to the immersion.
firesprite
Master Member
Also, when those kids get back (they're not going to kill kids, you and I both know that), they need to be taken away from their parents. Seriously, who would let their kids go someplace like that unaccompanied. That mom even jokes about 'if something chases you, run'? Ugh. At least in the first movie, Tim and Lex's parents had every expectation things would be safe because of grandpa's assurances.
However, despite the fact that this trailer makes it look like Steven Spielberg was kidnapped and brainwashed by Michael Bay, I'll probably shell out the money to see it in the theater. Let's be honest... they're dinosaurs and I've loved dinos since I was a little kid. I may not be happy right now, but I'll suck it up, pay my money and take my chances that this will stir some of the warm fuzzy feelings of joy and wonder that the first one and, to a diminishing degree, the follow ups did.
However, despite the fact that this trailer makes it look like Steven Spielberg was kidnapped and brainwashed by Michael Bay, I'll probably shell out the money to see it in the theater. Let's be honest... they're dinosaurs and I've loved dinos since I was a little kid. I may not be happy right now, but I'll suck it up, pay my money and take my chances that this will stir some of the warm fuzzy feelings of joy and wonder that the first one and, to a diminishing degree, the follow ups did.
Last edited:
I thought the first Jurassic Park was brilliant, it was one of those mile stone step forwards in EFX film work that just made your jaw drop in disbelief. In each of the following sequels the stories were weaker and had less interesting things to say (lets be honest everyone, its all about dinos killing people!!! ) but the actual quality of the dinosaurs CGI and physical models improved, if not by the massive strides of the first , then at least in detail. I thought the spinosaurus in the third was superb, and the raptors even closer to the actual fossils than in the first, even if the script was weakest of the lot.
I’m therefore somewhat surprised that the effects shots seem a little behind in this trailer, but if its going to be a truely fully 3D movie then that’s very probably the reason. The only dinosaur that looks particularly good is the mosasaurus flipping its fins and leaping out of the sea (don’t think its a liopleurodon ) and that looks like a definite 3D’er right down to the audience getting splashed and that’s a brand new beast to the series. But the trailer does seem to suggest alot of shots geared towards the 3D effect,ie the "HamsterBall", the Raptors running eitherside of the Bike, the gate openning into the park etc and these always look "poor" without the depth of perception behind them. Given all the CGI renderings from the series are still all at ILM I cannot see the effects work being the weakest part of the movie at all, not by a very long shot.
I like the “Godzilla” suggestion in the music with the new hidden dino, although the tooth structure suggest a Spinosaurus/Tyranno cross ,but it could be any combination. What annoys me is despite having all these hugely dangerous animals around, nobody appears to have considered just having a couple of pieces of artillery hanging about ,just in case. No matter what the size even old WWII surplus would just knock any beast on its arse. But hey its a just a monster movie!!!
What I really don't like again is the prevalence of familes/teenagers /kids that just weakens the whole set up for me. If you are going to have flesh eatting dinos no H&S on Earth is going to let you run around in a hamster ball anywhere near them. Aren't there other islands where you can do your dangerous dino experiments ??? For once I’d like a "Jurassic Park " that would really frighten the grown ups, I mean what’s the point in having huge toothy predatory creatures if you don’t see them ripping people to shreds before eatting them !!! It worked for Alien!!!
Unfortunately the story just looks like a retelling of the original but bigger ,BIGGER, BIIIIGGGGER!!!!! And that isn’t necessarily better. But here’s hoping though.
I’m therefore somewhat surprised that the effects shots seem a little behind in this trailer, but if its going to be a truely fully 3D movie then that’s very probably the reason. The only dinosaur that looks particularly good is the mosasaurus flipping its fins and leaping out of the sea (don’t think its a liopleurodon ) and that looks like a definite 3D’er right down to the audience getting splashed and that’s a brand new beast to the series. But the trailer does seem to suggest alot of shots geared towards the 3D effect,ie the "HamsterBall", the Raptors running eitherside of the Bike, the gate openning into the park etc and these always look "poor" without the depth of perception behind them. Given all the CGI renderings from the series are still all at ILM I cannot see the effects work being the weakest part of the movie at all, not by a very long shot.
I like the “Godzilla” suggestion in the music with the new hidden dino, although the tooth structure suggest a Spinosaurus/Tyranno cross ,but it could be any combination. What annoys me is despite having all these hugely dangerous animals around, nobody appears to have considered just having a couple of pieces of artillery hanging about ,just in case. No matter what the size even old WWII surplus would just knock any beast on its arse. But hey its a just a monster movie!!!
What I really don't like again is the prevalence of familes/teenagers /kids that just weakens the whole set up for me. If you are going to have flesh eatting dinos no H&S on Earth is going to let you run around in a hamster ball anywhere near them. Aren't there other islands where you can do your dangerous dino experiments ??? For once I’d like a "Jurassic Park " that would really frighten the grown ups, I mean what’s the point in having huge toothy predatory creatures if you don’t see them ripping people to shreds before eatting them !!! It worked for Alien!!!
Unfortunately the story just looks like a retelling of the original but bigger ,BIGGER, BIIIIGGGGER!!!!! And that isn’t necessarily better. But here’s hoping though.
Last edited:
joshvanrad
Master Member
Wait... this is going to be in 3D?
Films like this, which are supposed to be grounded in the real world, work best when there's only one "supernatural" element for lack of a better word. Think of it like Back to the Future. You have a time machine, that's far fetched, but the film sells it because everything else in the movie is grounded pretty well. Now, if you start ADDING to that far fetched element things can get out of control pretty easily.
The original Jurassic Park has one far fetched premise which is that we can clone dinosaurs. Everything else was grounded well. Real vehicles, real environment, plausible enclosures, etc. Start adding more far fetched elements to that and things get weird and less believable. Hamster ball vehicles that don't exist and are completely impractical, raptors trained like guard dogs (not convinced that this is the case yet), and on. The more you add the sillier it gets.
So it's not that one is more far fetched than the other, it's that the combination of them has an accumulative affect.
Stoney
Well-Known Member
The giant tooth, the amber chunk and hopefully a cool prop like in the first movie the hammond cane or cryoncan.
Hmm what I like in the trailer is the original slow melody of the original melody, the canoe rides in the river and the Liopleurodon show with a shark as lure, and the park seems to look good.
I do not like is the character Bryce Dallas how she looks with the white dress and this haircut, she looks like an intellectual person, or a omniscient person.
The scene with the trained raptors is cool but strange(bad), because I can not imagine that somebody train raptors because there are absolute killers uncontrollable like Alien xenomorph.
But in all the Trailer looks good. I hope the movie will be good, and I think it will sure like the first movie only this time the park is officially opened with visitors.
firesprite
Master Member
Anyone else wonder how they got the DNA for a marine dino? I mean, the conceit of the first movies and the novels they were based on was that the dinos were cloned from DNA retrieved from mosquitoes which had fed on said dinos.
luke1923
New Member
I'm sure they'll touch on it in the film, my guess is that one very unlucky marine dinosaur washed up on shore and the mosquitos got the blood from there. Is this scientifically plausible? Maybe not, but it's just what I think may be a way for them to explain it in the film.
Riceball
Master Member
Maybe they perfected the techniques of DNA extraction to the point where they no longer need blood from amber encased mosquitoes and can extract directly from the fossilized bone themselves. They did say that they've learned a lot in the past decade and there seems to be some evidence supporting the idea that fossilized bones aren't quite as inert and missing organics components as once believed.
Beached.
Most definitely!!!!! The introduction and success of 3D films was one of the major reasons that the franchise got a "reboot" after all this time . The camera tech used to shoot it was 3D, same as Prometheus I'm told,with some 70mm used as well. They are going for the size and 3D spectacle with this one to get the proper "scale" of the dinosaurs onto IMAX screensl. Its the main marketing angle apparently. The "mystery monster" is unsurprisingly the definite focus of alot of the key 3D effects sequences. So don't be to worried by what you see in the trailer. Its just a glimpse we've got of where its going to go. If I'm not impressed by the story I'll probably be by the visual side of it.
And, as Jeyl so wisely points out (my god I can agree with him no this!!!!), if you can train lions and tigers, raptors raised from the egg ,where its easier to "impress" on them at an early age are no stretch of the imagination at all. You can do it with ostritches and nearly all other birds, including true raptors (birds of prey) quite readily today. Personally I've always wanted a pet pterosaur!!!
joshvanrad
Master Member
3D... You can go ahead and count me out then.
Riceball
Master Member
Not to mention that these are genetically engineered raptors, as has been suggested they probably tweaked their appearance as new research suggested that they may have been feathered (which is an explanation for why they look different between films) so it's possible that they further modified them so that they became trainable if not quite tame. Just because they're (apparently) trained doesn't necessarily mean that they're tame or domesticated, hell, we don't even know if they're really trained or just being "remote controlled" via some sort of implant, or maybe they somehow manage to trick them into believing that the park rangers are their Alpha or something.
Soon as I saw the motorcycle I had to smile, alot of the magnificent flying bird shots you see in wildlife spectacles on TV today are almost all "imprinted" birds flying alongside microgliders or cars driven by their "parents". Infact rare birds bred in captivity have got to be hand reared in facial isolation of their keepers because they will unfortunately imprint on human beings far more readily than their own kind, and will often totally fail to reproduce with their own as a result. Which kinds of mucks up the whole point of the breeding programs. I might have an awful lot of problems with the science behind "Jurassic Park", it was just a very good story based on some VERY flawed research ( though there has been some fantastic fossils found to have preserved detail at a structurally cellular level recently) but surprisingly training raptors is not one of them.
Last edited:
