Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Dream, Jun 12, 2015.
The animal doctor in the first film said he has a "gas powered jeep."
Explorers, right. I just assumed both vehicles were Jeeps but suspected I was wrong on the tour cars. But, yeah, they were electrical and were guided by the rail in the middle of the road. There were gas-powered actual Jeeps used to do park operations which is what were used in this move for the boys to return to the park. Which, sorry, I'm not buying it. I'll give shows like Walking Dead a hand-waving to say gas is still viable after around 2 years, though that's pushing it, but I'm not hand-waving 20 years.
Hell, I would have bought it more if they found one of the electric Explorers and managed to get it started and it worked. That I would've been able to hand-wave as, "meh, high-tech electric vehicle." But the gas-jeep working? No. Not buying it not for a second. I'd almost consider dropping it a grade-level because of that because it was utterly dumb and made made me slightly angry.
I'm dropping you a grade level because that actually makes you angry. Just call it stupid, which it is, but to actually feel anger over it and say it "aggravates you to no end" (which I know it does, because I remember the ten-page Walking Dead argument about it)? It's a silly quirk of silly movies and TV to expedite the drama and get to the more important stuff, like dinosaurs or zombies eating people. It shouldn't affect your feelings on the whole movie enough to lower it a grade level on its own.
Maybe he was traumatized at some point in his life by a vehicle not starting?
We just returned from seeing it in Glorious IMAX 3D.
Very fun, exactly what I was expecting. Don't think too hard about it, and just go along for the ride (although NOT in a hamster ball) .
And I've always had a thing for Bryce Dallas Howard.
I give it a Solid "B". A good time at the movies.
A: Fantastically entertaining movie! What's amazing is that if you break it down and analyze any subpart of it (plot, logic, characters, science, CGI) there are many shortcomings, flaws, and outright failures, but as a whole it transcends them.
The park itself is a wonderful creation onscreen, and I think they were right to spend so much of the beginning of the movie going through it, because it's the main thing that distinguishes it from Jurassic Park. Ironically thanks to the 3 previous movies dinosaurs are almost routine; the new park is a special effect as good as any dinosaur. So unlike the first movie where we were anxious to get to the dinosaurs and dino v. people action, I was ok in letting things play out.
Chris Pratt as Owen riding with the raptors looked incredibly hokey in the trailers and would have sunk the movie if they botched it, but his relationship and (tenuous) control over the raptors was well developed. I for one loved the OTT Hoskins as the shady military guy trying to get Pratt to go along with weaponizing the raptors. Afterwards when you think about it it's complete nonsense, but when he talks of the advantages of raptors over drones, with those raptors onscreen, you almost buy it!
Loved BD Wong as Dr. Wu - a massive upgrade on his glorified cameo in Jurassic Park in substance if not screentime. His smooth, arrogant scientist role really emphasized the dark side of creating dinosaurs. And most important for us science/movie geeks, he completely resolves the "No feathers on Dinosaurs!" complaint that's been echoed so often. In the novel, Wu tells Hammond that he wants to unroll a new version of dinosaurs more like what people imagine (slow lizards), and disputing Hammond's objections that it would make the dinos less 'real'. "There isn't any reality here", Wu says, and in his thoughts he details all the genetic addons needed to make dinos. In the movie, when Khan's Masrani objects to how he created the Indominus Rex, Wu basically gives the explanation Wu did in the book, with the critical add-on that Wu says had they displayed dinosaurs as close to what the DNA they had would have indicated, "they would have looked a lot different." In other words: feathers!
Feathered dinosaurs weren't discovered till 1996 or so in China. Now we have an explanation: back in the late 1980s when the dinos were being made (referring to The Lost World novel), Dr. Wu and his staff must have encountered a rude surprise: WTF our raptors look like overgrown turkeys! Back to the drawing boards! In any sequels from now on the film producers have my permission to display non-feathered dinos (not that I would oppose them being shown).
Bryce Dallas Howard gave a great overall performance as Claire; I did feel a lot of character miscues, as if her words and actions were not consistent with what her character was portrayed as being, which I also attribute to the script - like after she shoots the pterodactyls and the kids aren't appreciative of her vs Pratt. They kinda sabotaged her that way. That being said, she was the heart of the movie - had she been mainly either a screaming damsel in distress or an iron emotionless warrior the movie would have failed, so bravo!
The villainous Indominus Rex was not particularly special effectwise after the T Rex and Spinosaurus, but damn was it vicious. Loved its Nolanesque Joker-escape plan! (of course it's completely ridiculous if you think about it: couldn't they use the tracking implant? Hear it? Smell it?) Utterly ruthless against man and dino alike (poor ankylosaur and brontosaurs ), yet Pratt gave such sensible-sounding explanations for its behavior that you almost felt sorry for it, like Frankenstein's monster.
The raptors were ok, although their design may actually have been better in Lost World and JP3). The film does its homework in laying down the (crazy) conceit that Pratt can train these animals, and it's a genuine thrill when they're unleashed. But worthy of a WWE show, I loved the sudden heel turn by the raptors when they meet the I. Rex!
I do wish the I Rex fought the Spinosaurus while the kids were in the Restricted Zone. Jurassic World took a dump on JP3 with the T Rex made its entrance and smashed the Spino skeleton, but the Spinosaurus was by far the best thing about JP3. Having the I Rex dispatch a Spino as fast or faster than the Spino dispatched T Rex would have made it even more badass. Also plot-related, it was never clear the relationships between Masrani and Hoskins were; it sounded like the uberbillionaire Masrani had bought out the remnants of InGen to create Jurassic World, but then Hoskins is representing InGen? Never got that cleared out.
The special effects (I include the park) were great, although the big herbo dinos did look kind of weightless, and the shadows cast looked off (a common problem with CGI objects in movies). The final battle was spectacular, and I admit I never saw the mososaur finishing move coming!
There are shortcomings of course, unfortunately mainly surrounding the actors - or more properly what the actors had to act out. The kids' presence in JW are appropriate on a plot level, unlike Lost World & JP3, as they are the park's intended audience, but they were especially grating before the action started, and just ok after. There's a lot of online controversy about the way Zara died (absolutely horrifying). Plotwise I was ok with it because it was so shocking; it was a way to make clear the seriousness of events without going into R territory. Let's face it seeing faceless soldiers and workers getting dino'd can only have mild shock effect 4 movies in.
One more criticism: the dinos became way, way too anthropomorphized in Jurassic World, I mean it was almost Disney's Dinosaur-level bad. I swear, the raptor was literally winking at and telling Pratt to run!
Can't wait to see it again, even though I'm betting the flaws are really going to stick out!
I went to see it today and it was sold out but finally saw it at an alternate theater. I rated it a "C" as I thought it was predicable and basically the same story that we've seen before. It is a movie that I have no desire to see again. Too many cheesy moments which just drive me crazy because with just a few little script changes; it could have been much better. I can't believe this movie is so popular.
Holy shit! This was awesome!
I was very entertained while watching this. When the main JP theme started up I teared up, that John Williams music is still amazing. This was first and foremost a disaster film, while the humans characters were secondary, but they were likable enough.
The highlight of this franchise has always been the dinosaurs. There was so much nice build up to when we saw the first full shot of the live dinosaurs in the park.
The most interesting relationship in the movie was between Owen and the raptors. I loved how it was handled. They considered Owen part of the pack, but they would turn on him if whatever he did went against what was group's best interests. I think they switched sides to the I-Rex because they mistakenly believed the humans were shooting at them, and switched back when the I-Rex hurt one of their own. In comparison, the "romance" between Owen and Claire felt too by the numbers for a blockbuster.
I really missed the T-Rex though. It had a huge impact in the first movie, but it had pretty much a cameo in this. The mega fight at the end between the three predators was pretty cool.
Jurassic World is the only worthy sequel to the first movie.
This movie gets an A-!
Yup. I didn't see the first film back then, but I had dug up a MIDI file with the music after I got my sound blaster clone. That, and the pictures of the trucks, etched the impression of what Jurassic Park was supposed to be, so I got goosebumps when they played the original theme.
And when the trucks came, I was like five-year old Tom Paris seeing any 20th century one – of course it's going to work, duh! Nope, I wasn't older than the characters in this one.
Last night I watched the original JP which I hadn't seen in twenty years.
What a difference two decades makes. The original now seems less intense and somewhat slower paced. I don't think it comes across as any smarter than JW though. I rate them pretty much even.
The origonal dinosaurs still look pretty good. Many of the scenes with them were in conditions of low light and with action which could help obscure any flaws.
In a way I think JW is to JP similar to what Aliens is to Alien: same basic idea, but ramped up some in energy.
But, Alien is a horror movie and Aliens is an action movie. They just happen to share the same setting.
Alien movies: monster(s) comes out and kills everyone. Elements of horror and action in both, but in varying degrees for overall execution.
Jurassic movies: dinosaurs get loose and attack anyone in sight. JW is just ramped up with more potential casualties.
I thought it was a fun action movie and gave it a B+. There's a lot of suspension of disbelief needed with some dinosaurs being essentially smarter than humans (and a lot of military/security humans being some of the dumbest around), with dinosaurs communicating with each other and with humans so obviously and a lot of questionable business practices exercised by the park. I thought the most ridiculous was the rides. In our litigious society do you really think a park is going to let you control your own vehicle around animals that way several dozen tons? Or go paddling around them down the river? And NO one has gotten hurt? They let teenagers do this stuff and aren't worried about lawsuits when one of them gets killed? I try to imagine a zoo letting people close to just the gentle herbivores and seeing how long that idea would last.
If you get too wrapped around the details I'm sure you can come up with a lot more plot holes. But the plot was simply a textbook action movie with little depth to the characters and a tried and true basic story line. I think if they had tried to get as preachy as JP or focus more on the morality play of the park with the current set of actors it could have been disastrous. I think they did a good job of giving us a movie that appeals to the masses yet has just enough to keep the fringe elements from complaining too much.
You're missing the distinction in story type between Alien and Aliens.
From a story point of view Alien has more in common with Halloween than it does Aliens.
Aliens on the other hand uses "the gauntlet" story line similar to what is seen in the movie The Warriors.
To call one a "ramped up" version of the other is overly simplistic.
I will agree that JW is a "ramped up" JP though.
Aliens is a ramped up version of Alien. The distinction is more emphasis on action even while the horror elements are still there. That they are both well done is a bonus. The xenomorphs were no longer a surprise (for the audience) so it made sense to inject more action. We can be grateful it was done with a deft hand.
No surprise in JW in terms of dinosaurs getting loose so the only real recourse (to the producers) was to intensify the action.
You're not listening.
There's no such thing as a story type.
There is absolutely such a thing as story type (or, if you prefer, genre) and Alien/Aliens exist in two different genres.
Separate names with a comma.