Jurassic World

sonic85

seen the trailer tonight for the first time before san andreas and was disappointed. the crappy cgi will be the ruination of this IMO.

will go see this because I love Jurassic park and chris pratt but expectations will be rock bottom and id say ill just end up coming home and throwing on my dvd of the first movie.

just cant beat practical effects

Sleepy

Won tickets to the premiere but can't go as I'm away for work.

Going to send the step-son and his dad instead.

Joeface

Sleepy wrote: »

Won tickets to the premiere but can't go as I'm away for work.

Going to send the step-son and his dad instead.

Very saintly of you .............I have Guest passes for Odeon for this , I will not be giving them away

DoYouEvenLift

Wow, this was filmed in 35mm with 65mm IMAX shots, they even used one of Kubrick's 65mm cameras from 2001: A Space Odyssey, but they decided to ruin a possibly great 70mm IMAX movie release by post converting it to 3D. Add to that them using more CGI instead of practical effects and they made some seriously disappointing choices for this movie. And then they say that they want the franchise to be as big as star wars and the MCU lol.


Hope this is a gigantic piece of sh!t for them being kunts!

jacksie66

This post has been deleted.

e_e

http://letterboxd.com/film/jurassic-world/

Abysmal ratings so far and they're usually a lot kinder pre-release.

e_e

e_e wrote: »

http://letterboxd.com/film/jurassic-world/

Abysmal ratings so far and they're usually a lot kinder pre-release.

Jurassic fail?

fluke

M!Ck^ wrote: »

Jurassic fail?

Jurassic Krap

Dair76

Maybe

That is one big pile of shit.

Loughc

Some of the early reaction here seems quite positive;

http://www.slashfilm.com/jurassic-world-early-buzz/

pixelburp

At the risk of sounding like a grumpy old fogey, I'd sooner believe one of aintitcool's breathless reviews than I would a random, unsubstantiated collection of Twitter posts. Generally, if I read the words '... reaction on Twitter' on news websites, I stop reading the article.

Not mad on the mention of product placement as it's something that kills immersion dead for me (somewhat ironically, given it's often an attempt to further place a film within 'our' world). I have had very low expectations for Jurassic World anyway, so if it's even passably entertaining, I guess that's a win

LuckyLloyd

Who gives a **** about the early reviews? You're still going to see it either way.

e_e

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

You're still going to see it either way.

Nope, thought the trailer was bad and was banking on there being a positive response overall. The director's previous movie didn't give me much hope either.

pixelburp

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Who gives a **** about the early reviews? You're still going to see it either way.

Well I don't own a Cineworld card or equivalent, so no; if the consensus suggests Jurassic World ain't much cop, then I won't be going. Life's too short, and my wallet too shallow to waste on films that I probably won't enjoy.

But yeah, still conjecture I guess so we'll see how the chips fall after the twitter noise machine has quietened down.

Frank O. Pinion

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

they decided to ruin a possibly great 70mm IMAX movie release by post converting it to 3D.

We've actually had this conversation before in the Guardians of the Galaxy thread, but avoiding a live-action 3D film because it's post-converted 3D is silly. Post-converted 3D is getting better and better. The list of live-action films actually filmed in 3D each year is pretty short anyways, it's mostly animated films that are "real 3D".

http://www.techradar.com/news/home-cinema/post-converted-3d-can-be-better-than-true-3d-reckons-marvel-director-1252572

Sleepy

I think his point was that seeing it in 70mm IMAX would be a vastly superior experience to seeing it in 3D.

DoYouEvenLift

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

We've actually had this conversation before in the Guardians of the Galaxy thread, but avoiding a live-action 3D film because it's post-converted 3D is silly. Post-converted 3D is getting better and better. The list of live-action films actually filmed in 3D each year is pretty short anyways, it's mostly animated films that are "real 3D".

http://www.techradar.com/news/home-cinema/post-converted-3d-can-be-better-than-true-3d-reckons-marvel-director-1252572

Doesn't justify it. And what the post below yours said.

Also, of course marvel directors are going to claim post converts are as good as true 3D since they do all their movies post convert, it's a cash grab for them and saying different could potentially damage that cash grab.

Thargor

Last night Cinemasins released Everything Wrong with Jurassic Park III:

I was struck by how bad the CGI is compared to the effects in the first and how everything Ive seen of the next film makes it look like they've gone even further backwards, those raptors look like they're floating a few cm above the ground and the Seaworld exhibition looks like a cartoon.

Frank O. Pinion

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Also, of course marvel directors are going to claim post converts are as good as true 3D since they do all their movies post convert, it's a cash grab for them and saying different could potentially damage that cash grab.

But I have watched Marvel's post-converted films in 3D, and the 3D looks great, and I'm talking about at home on 3D Blu-ray, not even at the cinema.

Post-converts are getting better and better, and I'll always check out a new film in 3D if I'm interested in it, whether it's a post-convert or filmed in 3D. All of the live-action 3D films I watched from 2014 looked fine.

DoYouEvenLift

Frank O. Pinion wrote: »

But I have watched Marvel's post-converted films in 3D, and the 3D looks great, and I'm talking about at home on 3D Blu-ray, not even at the cinema.

Post-converts are getting better and better, and I'll always check out a new film in 3D if I'm interested in it, whether it's a post-convert or filmed in 3D. All of the live-action 3D films I watched from 2014 looked fine.

That's lovely, and good for you, but they'd look even better filmed in 3D.

Falthyron

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

That's lovely, and good for you, but they'd look even better filmed in 3D.

I agree. The Hobbit movies in 3D are of a very different quality to 3D movies that have been given segments of 3D or given the post-film effect. I was lucky (or unlucky, depending on point of view) to have seen Star Wars Episode 1 in cinema with the 3D effect tacked on and would consider that to be one of the worst examples of 3D. When you compare that 3D effect to The Hobbit, the gap in quality is huge.

Having said that, I am sure the technology is improving for adding in a post-film 3D effect. For the time being, however, filming in true 3D still has a formidable lead over adding in 3D post-film.

DoYouEvenLift

Falthyron wrote: »

I agree. The Hobbit movies in 3D are of a very different quality to 3D movies that have been given segments of 3D or given the post-film effect. I was lucky (or unlucky, depending on point of view) to have seen Star Wars Episode 1 in cinema with the 3D effect tacked on and would consider that to be one of the worst examples of 3D. When you compare that 3D effect to The Hobbit, the gap in quality is huge.

Having said that, I am sure the technology is improving for adding in a post-film 3D effect. For the time being, however, filming in true 3D still has a formidable lead over adding in 3D post-film.

The effect for the CGI scenes, which these movies are very heavily reliant on, are definitely great 3D scenes because that technology is of course brilliant. But normal scenes not reliant on CGI and filmed in 2D just are nowhere near as good as they would be if they had just filmed them in 3D because that would give the 'field of depth' effect that you see in movies like The Hobbit and Avatar which are perfect examples of 3D done right. I just don't understand why anyone would defend lazy cash grabbing done by the studios like this other poster is doing lol, as consumers we should only push for the best options to be used so we get the best experiences possible for our money. 3D wouldn't be considered such a gimmick by as many people if film makers would just take the extra bit of effort to film in 3D and deliver the same way James Cameron and Peter Jackson did and still do. There's no excuse besides laziness because 3D cameras have become as compact as a lot of 2D cameras.

Frank O. Pinion

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

That's lovely, and good for you, but they'd look even better filmed in 3D.

Yes, of course they would. I never said they didn't or wouldn't. Would it be worth it financially, though, for each studio to do that? That is the question you have to ask yourself, DoYouEvenLift. These movie producers aren't giving up their third yacht, you know.

I was saying your attitude of holding grudges against movies and/or producers for trying to make more money by doing post-conversion 3D is bizarre. All movies are trying to make money. If they make money by doing post-conversions, they will. I don't this have weird idea that a live-action film is "ruined" because of post-conversion 3D.

Falthyron wrote:

I am sure the technology is improving for adding in a post-film 3D effect.

It really is. Edge of Tomorrow is another film that was great in "post-converted" 3D. Do I wish all live-action 3D films were filmed in 3D, sure, but am I going to avoid all post-converted 3D films because producers are trying to make a few more bucks? No way.

Zubeneschamali

Falthyron wrote: »

For the time being, however, filming in true 3D still has a formidable lead over adding in 3D post-film.

True, but filming in 2D and then NOT converting to 3D is still miles better.

.ak

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Who gives a **** about the early reviews? You're still going to see it either way.

Honestly, I'm probably only going to see this if no other movie interests me in that period during my 'movie breaks'. It really looks like a waste of time, it's like they took all that is going bad with the movie industry and all the bad parts of the JP sequels and just amplified them and hope for the best. Bizarre logic.


.... and I have an unlimited card.

razorblunt

.ak wrote: »

Honestly, I'm probably only going to see this if no other movie interests me in that period during my 'movie breaks'. It really looks like a waste of time, it's like they took all that is going bad with the movie industry and all the bad parts of the JP sequels and just amplified them and hope for the best. Bizarre logic.


.... and I have an unlimited card.

I'm excited to see it and I only really have two points of comparison for it to be beat:

1. Nothing anywhere near the gymnastic kid from the second
2. Just be better than the third, which it already does it doesn't seem to have Tea Leoni, William H Macy, damn near 0 deaths, a Bear Grylls esque kid and Dr Grant seeing a talking Raptor in his dreams.

So yeah, actually just one item to beat. Though seeing as kids are involved in the trailer it's going to be close.

Dair76

William H Macy is a negative point? GTFO.

Unearthly

Should be a bit of craic. I'm looking forward to it anyway

razorblunt

Dair76 wrote: »

William H Macy is a negative point? GTFO.

He was awful in that movie, absolutely awful.
I recently watched the Movie Sins video for JP3, I had forgotten just how bad it is. It does make reference to Teoni's character asking Macy's "whats are you doing here?" and they categorise it as "Leoni directly asking Macy that question".

Loughc

Digital Spy have just put up a really positive review and they even admitted how bad the trailers looked and how they were expecting it to be awful.

Loughc

IGN.com has given it a 8.3/10

Kiith

I was not expecting decent reviews. Maybe this won't be the utter mess the trailers make it out to be.

tok9

There is some hope... I will take that!

irishgeo

booking my tickets later for tomorrow night showing

Dair76

But does James Cameron rate it??

ktulu123

Can't wait, Imax on Sunday for it. Burt Macklin & Dinosaurs gonna be class! haha

DrFloppy

RTE, for what it's worth, have given it ****

http://www.rte.ie/ten/news/2015/0610/707195-jurassic-world-review/

Unearthly

It's rotten tomatoes score is in the range of around 69% after 36 reviews.

That's decent enough

JP Liz V1

Chris Pratt can keep his outfit in this for Indiana Jones

mayway

I'm hoping that the dismal dullard played by the equally dull and dismal Chris Pratt in the trailer gets chomped by a dinosaur in the 1st 2 minutes.

JP Liz V1

mayway wrote: »

I'm hoping that the dismal dullard played by the equally dull and dismal Chris Pratt in the trailer gets chomped by a dinosaur in the 1st 2 minutes.

I think his role is just a cameo

Mickeroo

mayway wrote: »

I'm hoping that the dismal dullard played by the equally dull and dismal Chris Pratt in the trailer gets chomped by a dinosaur in the 1st 2 minutes.

That is the coolest sentence I have ever heard somebody talk.

Dades

Booked for Friday. Very nearly went for the 2D but then thought I'd regret it.

Pumped after reading some of the reviews.

ktulu123

mayway wrote: »

I'm hoping that the dismal dullard played by the equally dull and dismal Chris Pratt in the trailer gets chomped by a dinosaur in the 1st 2 minutes.

There is no ****ing way you can call Chris Pratt dull!! What the hell man??

FunLover18

ktulu123 wrote:

There is no ****ing way you can call Chris Pratt dull!! What the hell man??

It's like calling Fr Stone entertaining and exciting

Muirshin Durkin

ktulu123 wrote: »

There is no ****ing way you can call Chris Pratt dull!! What the hell man??

Nothing unique or special about him, hes like a Ryan Renolds copy.

Dair76

Jurassic World (and a lot of the movie roles he'll be getting now) isn't going to play up to Pratt's true strengths, but the man is very talented. See Parks & Rec for proof.

tok9

I'm feeling a lot more positive since seeing the reviews. I expected 1-2s across the board.

e_e

mayway wrote: »

I'm hoping that the dismal dullard played by the equally dull and dismal Chris Pratt in the trailer gets chomped by a dinosaur in the 1st 2 minutes.

Eh I think he's fine but watching the trailers for this I can't help but think "Did they just dress up a teamster and put him in the front of the camera?" He looks really out of place to me. :pac:

irishgeo

looking forward to this now after reading a review. dont want to spoil it by reading too many.

24hrs from now ill be in my seat waiting for the 9.20 showing.