Author Topic: Jurassic World  (Read 8830 times)

eward and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Kal

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3286
  • Success is not a goal, it's a byproduct.
  • Respect: +190
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #45 on: November 25, 2014, 07:24:14 PM »
+2
Same thing I thought and it was the same stupid idea with Godzilla. (which if you haven't seen, new Godzilla SPOILER ahead) - Godzilla had like 6 minutes of screen time and no threat to the world and the other shitty monsters took the whole movie. Why? You already have Godzilla!

There are so many cool dinosaurs already so why bother making one up and making the movie about a rogue super advanced dino?

03

  • SBD
  • ***
  • Posts: 1701
  • positive energy;
  • Respect: +455
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #46 on: November 26, 2014, 11:51:23 AM »
+3
as lame as the new dinosaurs are, it could have been infinitely worse.
apparently the original idea was to have them be human/dinosaur hybrids and these are the original sketches that were eventually trashed:

horrible

horrible

ugh (wtf is even going on here)

thats barely any dinosaur percentage right there

BUT i think triceratops man does need his own movie.


jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2350
  • Respect: +1426
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #47 on: November 26, 2014, 12:27:03 PM »
+1
^interesting

i guess this title was already copyrighted: Jurassic IDGAF

pete's dragon gets my reptilian hype, duh

to like say more or whatever -- jurassic park was made 21 years ago and still today someone couldn't make that movie as good as it was made. i think they're fucking around with some established shit that isn't at a point where it needs to be fucked around with, hollywood sometimes makes it seem like ideas confuse them, like they have vision troubles with ideas, what's that called, when a person can't tell the difference between two ideas (a new one and an old one, e.g.), hollywood has that problem.

next year may the dragons kill the dinosaurs. lol dinos, you 'bout to get fucked and you have it coming
Every perspective is an act of creation.

polkablues

  • Child of Myth
  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 7083
  • Respect: +1834
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #48 on: November 26, 2014, 04:08:48 PM »
0
I think it looks fun. I don't think it looks good, but I think it looks fun, and that's all I really want from it. Good would just be extra frosting.
Now you're in the *spoiler* place.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2350
  • Respect: +1426
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #49 on: November 26, 2014, 05:02:08 PM »
0
yeah i mean, if they want to make dino movies let them make dino movies. that's my favorite defense for jurassic movies. supporting the rights of dinos and whatnot

but it's just a way to make money today and be forgotten tomorrow. there's so much big money shit from the past that no one cares about now -- so many sci-fi and disaster movies and etc. like has anyone seen meteor, with sean connery? maybe on mst3k or whatevs, at best. they spend money to make money and i think it's nbd but it's silly
Every perspective is an act of creation.

03

  • SBD
  • ***
  • Posts: 1701
  • positive energy;
  • Respect: +455
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #50 on: November 26, 2014, 05:29:10 PM »
+1
i think the best example of stuff like this versus the original is kubrick was fascinated by the original. what do you think his reaction would be to this?

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2350
  • Respect: +1426
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #51 on: November 26, 2014, 06:55:51 PM »
+1
i'm not sure what his emotional reaction would be, but there are parallels to jurassic park/crichton/spielberg and 2001/clarke/kubrick, in that both projects were being simultaneously developed as both a novel and a movie, although kubrick was more involved in 2001's novel writing process, but anyway his physical reaction is clear: kubrick didn't direct 2010, and oh idk i bet they woulda let 'im if he wanted to

i think pta could've directed this with some spare pvc pipes and $1.50 spent on makeup for joaquin phoenix. or maybe they would've spent some money on the dinos to make them look more like phoenix, who knows
Every perspective is an act of creation.

modage

  • Admin
  • *****
  • Posts: 10780
  • Respect: +719
    • Floating Heads
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #52 on: November 27, 2014, 11:22:31 AM »
+1
I think it looks fun. I don't think it looks good, but I think it looks fun, and that's all I really want from it. Good would just be extra frosting.

This is true but it's also sad. Think of how much we've been forced to drop our expectations over the last 20 years since the original came out. We used to get great, surprising, original blockbusters. Now the best we can hope for is the 3rd sequel/quasi-reboot is fun and (maybe) good.

“It's like we've forgotten who we are — explorers, pioneers, not caretakers."
Christopher Nolan's directive was clear to everyone in the cast and crew: Use CGI only as a last resort.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2350
  • Respect: +1426
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #53 on: May 24, 2015, 02:57:25 PM »
+1
This topic makes me miss MacGuffin, who was last active on Xmas day, and perhaps his gift to himself was to never come back here. Butso, the topic is Chriss Pratt wrote a letter, well played, well played:

Every perspective is an act of creation.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2350
  • Respect: +1426
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #54 on: June 12, 2015, 07:13:35 PM »
0
See but, wellllll. Wasn't taking this one seriously, but now here it's gone and landed on my radar.

The people who've been digging this in my life are people who don't take movies seriously. Non-movie people, who've gone/will go mostly for the dinosaurs, and to go to the movies (to these people going to the movies is a little treat they find in the world to give themselves now and then), the described people I know irl have been crushing on this movie, they all sound like middle-schoolers, and I love it.

Everything I've heard sounds like the ingredients for the classic Hollywood movie that I love along with everyone else. So, I ain't seen the sucker, but it sounds to me like people are in the movie in order for dinosaur adventures to happen, it's not all very gripping, but it's there and it's not there "for some random reason," no, it's there to give the drama to make the excuse for outrageous dinosaur things to happen in this made-up environment that isn't at all believable, which I adore because that means the non-believable is making believable emotions in the people watching the movie.

I'm happy Jurassic World has arrived and I've upgraded my interests from Redbox to the question of whether I should choose 3d.
Every perspective is an act of creation.

Alexandro

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 1742
  • Respect: +470
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #55 on: June 13, 2015, 09:15:45 AM »
+1
I saw it on IMAX 3D and to be honest, the 3D part didn't offer much. It's not a film that takes advantage of it. However, the IMAX part does.

The film is ultra dumb, and it has enough absurdities and illogical fallacies for ten movies. Yet it's a blast. It's a movie having fun with it's own madness and enjoying it's cruelty towards humans. Dinosaurs look amazing and it has a bunch of great sequences, particularly an epic one with pterodactyls which I personally wished it was even longer. Bryce Dallas Howard and Chris Pratt are fun, in the spirit of the old school Spielberg heroes. There is no way to reprise the kind of wonder and amaezement that the the first one had, but it's probably the one closer to it in terms of excitement.

Kal

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3286
  • Success is not a goal, it's a byproduct.
  • Respect: +190
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #56 on: June 13, 2015, 11:26:08 AM »
0
Spoilers or whatever...

Chris Pratt in an Indiana Jones looking costume riding a motorcycle with velociraptors as his crew is probably one of the most fun images in film history and it almost makes the whole film worth it.

I don't know why they make stories so complex for no reason, with the added element of the military contract and all that bullshit, but the whole thing is very entertaining and the vfx are incredible.

Lottery

  • The Return Threshold
  • ****
  • Posts: 965
  • You're Dead!
  • Respect: +453
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #57 on: June 13, 2015, 06:29:58 PM »
0
...the vfx are incredible.

My friends said the same thing but I found it inconsistent visually. I mean it looked pretty bland to me overall but the actual special effects varied from stunning to poor.

Pratt and Raptor bros were better than expected. Pratt was convincing in the serious moments and the raptor stuff didn't come off as a joke (my predictions on the previous page were somewhat accurate).

Final act was exciting (it had a hell of a body count by the end) but it didn't really feel like a JP film. The third film despite how shit it was felt more like a JP film. JW is probably ranked third in the franchise.

Wasn't a particularly good film overall, they definitely had the wrong dude directing- and the writing was weak. Despite its faliures, it works pretty well on the terror and action front.

jenkins

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 2350
  • Respect: +1426
    • Neon Burrito
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #58 on: June 13, 2015, 06:38:52 PM »
+1
Not quite as quick with its narrative as Bird of Paradise, which was my personal hope, and one does feel newcomer Trevorrow over feeling Spielberg, butalso I like how in the end dinosaurs settle the fight, and there's some dabbling into the "sense of awe" category of Spielberg pictures. Agree with Kal about the raptors and Alexandro about the pterodactyls. I was more jealous of the pterodactyls than the water dinosaur. All I know about the water dinosaur is it has hunger, but zero personality imo.

The gender politics are within the range of Labor Day. Except she's alone because she's business, she can't see dinosaurs as living beings, she's by the numbers but he's all rugged individualism and sensitivity to the needs of others (e.g. raptors) so, by the end, through all his badassery (which is remarked upon and complimented by the young boys) and after he shows her how large and wonderful we and the world can be, she falls in love with him. But I'll give JW forgiveness for an objective of romance, since I like romance and there're dinosaurs. Then I'll say, I don't think the romance was spunky enough. It wasn't as spunk as the dynamics in Spy, which is the movie I saw after this one and enjoyed a bit more, except JW has a better ending. Gimme the first hour of Spy and the second hour of JW, that's a great two hours. So, to rephrase the end of paragraph one, I think there's some good talent here in this movie, but as George C. Scott tells Paul Newman in The Hustler, everyone's got talent and a person needs character.
Every perspective is an act of creation.

Kal

  • The Master of Two Worlds
  • *****
  • Posts: 3286
  • Success is not a goal, it's a byproduct.
  • Respect: +190
Re: Jurassic World
« Reply #59 on: June 14, 2015, 11:01:40 AM »
+1
$204M domestic opening weekend and $511M globally, which makes it the biggest global opening in history. People seem to be into it and giving great WoM.

I'm sure sequel is already getting a release date.

 

DMCA & Copyright | Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy