Jurassic World

Bacchus

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Ha - yeah - a poor understanding by me, with 3 family members on the spectrum.

Social skills, repition and announcing of knowledge, repition of issues and facts (number of teeth, repeated a few times), taking orders literally (hold hands), accounting of time (X time to airport, X time plus Y with traffic). Comment from the older brother about him supposed to be a genius ( a fairly common trait - poor social skills but high intelligence). There are many queues to the kid being on the spectrum, very obvious ones to my mind - which I see in family members.

Perhaps that's just the conclusion you jumped to because you have 3 family members diagnosed to be on it and you saw some common traits. As I'm sure you are aware though, autism is much more complex and broader than just a high functioning person who can repeat facts (something like Asperger’s Syndrome).

Anyway, this is going waaaay off track. You have a case to make that he could be on the spectrum, I'll concede that (particularly if what MrWalsh says is true). I just don't see the relevance and it came across to me when you said it first that it was an excuse for a poor character. What I saw was a normal, nerdy kid that was botched by the script to be Timmy 2.0 and they missed the mark.

syklops

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Ha - yeah - a poor understanding by me, with 3 family members on the spectrum.

Social skills, repition and announcing of knowledge, repition of issues and facts (number of teeth, repeated a few times), taking orders literally (hold hands), accounting of time (X time to airport, X time plus Y with traffic). Comment from the older brother about him supposed to be a genius ( a fairly common trait - poor social skills but high intelligence). There are many queues to the kid being on the spectrum, very obvious ones to my mind - which I see in family members.

Thats hollywoods way of going "Hey audience! This kid here is smart!". In many ways Hollywood hasn't got past the days when the next scene in a silent movie was described by a title, so poor writers have to exaggerate what they are saying.



Poor social skills, dropping facts, high intelligence etc etc. You are describing me and a number of my friends. Genius, I am not. Im just smart and 'different'.

J Mysterio

I didnt care for any of the characters, none of them had any depth or nuance.

The story was all over the place and overall I found the film to be a massive dissapointment, riddled witch cliches, unoriginal thought and shocking product placement.

Bacchus

The original and best on ITV2 right now

WHIP IT!

Are people actually up in arms here about how unrealistic the DINOSAUR movie was?? :D

I enjoyed it, it was fun. I've never seen a dinosaur so I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt on a few aspects of the movie that some headbangers here are losing their sh*t over...

brianregan09

Clearly alot of people are way overthinking this movie....autism ffs

KingBrian2

Just been myself and yes I found it a good movie, reinvigorated my love for Dinosaurs. Chris Pratt did a top class performance. Bryce Dallas Howard who I am not familiar with also did very a great job. The CGI in this movie did not disappoint and I am left very pleased with what I saw. Is likely to gain some detractors as it is not as good as the Original also the whole hybrid concept is not really up my alley.

What is anyone else's opinion if you have seen it?

youreadthat

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Are people actually up in arms here about how unrealistic the DINOSAUR movie was?? :D

I enjoyed it, it was fun. I've never seen a dinosaur so I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt on a few aspects of the movie that some headbangers here are losing their sh*t over...

So because it has dinosaurs in and they are extinct, we have to accept that any film with an element of fantasy in it has to also be stupid? The film has holes and poor characters because it was written badly over too long a period of time with too many people, not because any film with a dinosaur needs to be dumb as f**k.

biggebruv

wow this movie is still killing it at the box office
Never thought it would be this big a hit

im glad because I love the JP franchise

Mitch Connor

biggebruv wrote: »

wow this movie is still killing it at the box office
Never thought it would be this big a hit

im glad because I love the JP franchise

While I loved this movie - i'd still have big worries about the franchise going forward - I simply don't see where they can go from here. Part of the issue with the original sequels was coming up with a reason as to why people would go back to the island or park. They are right back to square one again - why would people go back to the park now? How could the park even be opened again?

They could go this wierd Dino-Soldier route that was rumoured for this movie, and was a plot point within this movie - and they look to have set it up that way for the sequels but I really don't like the idea of it.

StaticAge11

I just hope for the sequel, Isla Sorna is included. Maybe an idea for the sequel could be to mix the sci-fi/adventure theme with some other theme, similar to how Captain America: The Winter Soldier mixed the action with the political side. Not saying Jurassic World should be political, just it could be time to shake up the formula where the biggest enemy is a bigger/badder dino

biggebruv

Mitch Connor wrote: »

While I loved this movie - i'd still have big worries about the franchise going forward - I simply don't see where they can go from here. Part of the issue with the original sequels was coming up with a reason as to why people would go back to the island or park. They are right back to square one again - why would people go back to the park now? How could the park even be opened again?


They could go this wierd Dino-Soldier route that was rumoured for this movie, and was a plot point within this movie - and they look to have set it up that way for the sequels but I really don't like the idea of it.

maybe a story of the human dino artwork that was going around a few years back.

the chinese guy from the first movie has the dna and brings it back to mainland someone injects it and its like a virus that turns people into human dinos sounds very out there but at least it would be a new idea for the franchise

Mickeroo

Blue Returns, Deep Blue Sea vs Jurassic World: Blue Goes Deep, Blue Goes to Monte Carlo, Blue Saves Christmas, Blue & Rex's Excellent Adventure, Blue Actually.

These are the sequels the world needs.

StaticAge11

biggebruv wrote: »

maybe a story of the human dino artwork that was going around a few years back.

the chinese guy from the first movie has the dna and brings it back to mainland someone injects it and its like a virus that turns people into human dinos sounds very out there but at least it would be a new idea for the franchise

As much as I love the franchise, that is something I never want to see. Leave the focus on the dinosaurs being dinosaurs. Nature being more powerful than man themes. The soldier hybrid is just stupid, sounds like a ridiculous sci-fi movie, ala Iron Sky

We got a touch of that plot in the JW but thats as much as I would like to see of it.

MrWalsh

Alien Vs Predator Vs Blue

StaticAge11

Remake Will Ferralls movie Old School. Replace the old dude with a velociraptor. "You're my boy Blue". The mud-wrestling scene could go quite differently!

biggebruv

StaticAge11 wrote: »

As much as I love the franchise, that is something I never want to see. Leave the focus on the dinosaurs being dinosaurs. Nature being more powerful than man themes. The soldier hybrid is just stupid, sounds like a ridiculous sci-fi movie, ala Iron Sky

We got a touch of that plot in the JW but thats as much as I would like to see of it.

but as has been said what is there left to do the dna being mixed with humans is the next step I reckon.

everybody had mixed thoughts on the raptor ideas in this movie but they made it work for the most part

beg0rrah

Thought this movie was awful tbh

Tipsy McSwagger

Went to see this today basically because i seen the other 3 films at the cinema and didn't want to miss out. It's not great, it's full of product placement, the kids are annoying (whats with the older kid being some kind of stud?), the raptors are supposed to be evil bastards not pets and i really didn't care who lived or died. The only bit I liked was when the 2 kids went into the old visitors centre. Dr Ian Malcolm sums up this move for me, 'that is one big pile of sh*t'.

Agent Coulson

The only thing more unbelievable than them making dinosaurs was Bryce Dallas Howard running all over the jungle and resort in those spiked heels without breaking them or her ankles.


A fun summer popcorn blockbuster.

Regarding the "product placement" (apologies if this has already been posted) the director was being satirical with it! That's according to IMDb anyway....bizarrely though he decided to use actual real existing products to lampoon the whole product placement thing! :-D I'm call bull**** on this.....seems to me like it's a cover for the ridiculous and shameless amount of it in the film.

Oh and Beats by Dre....I'm sick to the back teeth of seeing them. Every big money music video has someone wearing them, taking them off, turning them on etc. Bloody hell I've never seen such a marketing push...

MrWalsh

Deleted User wrote: »

Regarding the "product placement" (apologies if this has already been posted) the director was being satirical with it!

Was it not obvious that it was ironic?

Bacchus

MrWalsh wrote: »

Was it not obvious that it was ironic?

I think Milana Brief Grenade himself was being a bit satirical. It is obvious but he's "calling BS" on the excuse.

There certainly was a level of self-awareness in JW (the exploitation of a wonderful idea - i.e. the original Jurassic Park - for financial gain) which was quite fun but it was too much and the joke wore thin when it was clear the marketing team were driving it all.

e_e

Awful movie. No joy, no sense of awe, terror or excitement and no heart. Big budget "film making" at its most empty and cynical.

youreadthat

I was thinking about another thing that is annoying. The hook of this film is that the park is now open. That should be exciting, thrilling even. Yet as soon as we're there we are greeted with the news that this park is actually boring to the visitors and numbers are decreasing.......underwhelming the premise straight away. Then we only get to see in one building in the theme park area, and only a tiny bit of the safari zone..... In the Jurassic Park it took them ages to reach safety, in this it takes 10 minutes, again underwhelming scale.

e_e

youreadthat wrote: »

I was thinking about another thing that is annoying. The hook of this film is that the park is now open. That should be exciting, thrilling even. Yet as soon as we're there we are greeted with the news that this park is actually boring to the visitors and numbers are decreasing.......underwhelming the premise straight away. Then we only get to see in one building in the theme park area, and only a tiny bit of the safari zone..... In the Jurassic Park it took them ages to reach safety, in this it takes 10 minutes, again underwhelming scale.

The pacing and editing in this film were so terrible. It did seem like they were going for that sense of wonder at the beginning but it was just shot and cut so haphazardly. It's such a mess, at various points I wasn't sure if I was supposed left shocked or amused and just looked at the screen stone-faced.

The death of the assistant

being a key point.

Also I know everyone else has made this point, but it's just such a cynical way of thumbing your nose at the viewer with it doing the exact thing it satirizes by having endless product placement and going for a standard "bigger = better" blockbuster. There's a really annoying smugness and ironic detachment to the whole thing, like Trevorrow was scared of just making a fun bit of escapism with dinosaurs.

biggebruv

youreadthat wrote: »

I was thinking about another thing that is annoying. The hook of this film is that the park is now open. That should be exciting, thrilling even. Yet as soon as we're there we are greeted with the news that this park is actually boring to the visitors and numbers are decreasing.......underwhelming the premise straight away. Then we only get to see in one building in the theme park area, and only a tiny bit of the safari zone..... In the Jurassic Park it took them ages to reach safety, in this it takes 10 minutes, again underwhelming scale.

yeah it toook ages to get there but this is the fourth movie if they done that again here we would have another godzilla moanfest from people

i liked godzilla though

Thargor

The most glaring bit for me in the godawful direction of this film was the way they cut to the JP theme as they were going up the escalator then unlocking the hotel room with a keycard, that is the most famous reveal music in cinema, it should have been a sweeping shot of the Seaworld exhibit or a herd of Brontosaurus or something and they just pissed it up the wall for no reason besides lazy incompetence.

Mickeroo

Thargor wrote: »

The most glaring bit for me in the godawful direction of this film was the way they cut to the JP theme as they were going up the escalator then unlocking the hotel room with a keycard, that is the most famous reveal music in cinema, it should have been a sweeping shot of the Seaworld exhibit or a herd of Brontosaurus or something and they just pissed it up the wall for no reason besides lazy incompetence.

I thought the whole point of using the iconic theme in that fashion was to show that the park and dinosaurs themselves weren't considered all that special by the general public any more and that the sense of wonder was gone for a lot of people. Thought it worked quite well myself.

Bacchus

Mickeroo wrote: »

I thought the whole point of using the iconic theme in that fashion was to show that the park and dinosaurs themselves weren't considered all that special by the general public any more and that the sense of wonder was gone for a lot of people. Thought it worked quite well myself.

It certainly helped suck the sense of wonder I had with the original out of this movie.

Have we got to the point in the debate over JW that everything bad about it was done on purpose as some sort of in-joke, reference to the original, reference to commercialism or breaking the 4th wall by holding a light up to how 'we' the audience demand bigger, cooler spectacles?

Mickeroo

Bacchus wrote: »

It certainly helped suck the sense of wonder I had with the original out of this movie.

Have we got to the point in the debate over JW that everything bad about it was done on purpose as some sort of in-joke, reference to the original, reference to commercialism or breaking the 4th wall by holding a light up to how 'we' the audience demand bigger, cooler spectacles?

Bad is a subjective term. I liked all that stuff. *shrug*

Thargor

Mickeroo wrote: »

I thought the whole point of using the iconic theme in that fashion was to show that the park and dinosaurs themselves weren't considered all that special by the general public any more and that the sense of wonder was gone for a lot of people. Thought it worked quite well myself.

Nah, theres no way in hell they would be that subtle about it, they would have been beating us over the head with it, it was just sloppy.

Foxtrol

Thargor wrote: »

Nah, theres no way in hell they would be that subtle about it, they would have been beating us over the head with it, it was just sloppy.

Totally agree with Mickeroo on this, the theme being used at that point plays into exactly what we’re hearing from several characters – the original wonder is gone.

Just because other parts of the movie aren’t subtle doesn’t mean that other points they can’t be. I'm not sure how they could beat you over the head with a score.

Whether by design or accident it worked well.

Bacchus

All that was missing with how they used the music was a shot of a guy coming out of a toilet cubicle as it played.

It was borderline something a spoof movie would do, playing the rousing, iconic music over monotonous backdrops.

Mickeroo

Rather they did that than rehash the scene from the original, even if they didn't really pull it off at least they tried something different.

e_e

That's just indicative of the overall emptiness and cynicism of the movie to me. "Meh modern audiences, they just want everything stupider and louder!" *proceeds to do exactly that* It's like the film was written and directed from the perspective of the Bryce Dallas Howard character from early on.

Whatever about The Lost World and Jurassic Park 3, at least they were honest in their intentions.

Turtyturd

Went to see it with my son this afternoon, and it was pretty much what I expected, a soulless summer blockbuster. I think the original Jurassic Park was the Star Wars for my generation and the hype, awe, and excitement is just something that the franchise won't capture again. It had a chance to build some tension with the Indominus Rex reveal but it just seemed like they had a checklist of things they had to get through, same goes for the

camouflage and Raptor dna

reveals.

The characters were all fairly shallow and stereotypical (hey Peter Quill's day job is being a dinosaur trainer.) and like some others I thought the kid had some level of autism when the mother told him how long they had to get to the airport and he was able to correct her.

The only time I really felt the product placement stood out was when the kids were on the monorail and there was a blatant shot of the older kid's converse, and the scene where Owen is drinking the bottle of Coca Cola. The resort is a spot on representation of Universal Citywalk even down to high end shops like Pandora which seem completely out of place. And attractions are regularly sponsered by companies, fairly sure the Jurassic Park Discovery Centre in IOA was sponsored by Nokia at one point.

StaticAge11

Best review of the movie I have seen https://youtu.be/l6umfTLuCI8

EoinMcLovin

Slydice

Watched it this evening. Liked it. :-)

FloatingVoter

Survived this rubbish. Spent the movie rooting for the dinosaurs. Boring monsters chasing even more boring humans. The original(s) had a sense of humour, actors ranging from Richard Attenborough through Sam Neill, Jeff Goldblum, William H Macy and Laura Dern.
This has some anonymous plastic action man character, a guy from a Law and Order spin-off and the most hackneyed damsel in distress since silent movies went out of fashion.
I'm sure it will spawn many forgettable sequels.

Sad Professor

I thought this was a lot of fun. Even the CGI dinos didn’t bother me, though I was well prepared for them by the trailers. Sure it’s a pretty safe rehash of the original, but so are the vast majority of sequels. You get what you pay for: More of the same — with bigger teeth. Trevorrow injects enough winking, self-referential comedy (and commentary) into it to stop it from being completely soulless.

Mr Freeze

Well probably going against the grain here, but I enjoyed it and I would watch it again.

I didn't like T-Rex being a 'goodie' that saves the day (again), but we knew it was coming as soon as it was announced that the T-Rex from the original JP would reappear.

I was always left a bit cold after watching the other JP films, I always had high hopes as a kid and couldn't wait to see JP and The Lost World and didn't really enjoy either as much as I wanted to.

JW is no worse than JP and better than The Lost World and JP 3 (JP3 being muck, saw it on TV recently).

I might have enjoyed it a lot more than the other 3 because I had low expectations and was pleasantly surprised.

nc6000

So are the kid's parents actually getting a divorce?

Loughc

nc6000 wrote: »

So are the kid's parents actually getting a divorce?

Find out in Jurassic World 2: The Lost Marriage. :pac:

expectationlost

nc6000 wrote: »

So are the kid's parents actually getting a divorce?

it wouldn't be a spielberg movie if they weren't

Cookie_Monster

You know what. 3 wasn't that bad and I quite like it.

There, I said it.

Liamalone

I saw this recently, saw all the 'holes', still enjoyed it, it's only a film after all.

J Mysterio

Liamalone wrote: »

I saw this recently, saw all the 'holes', still enjoyed it, it's only a film after all.

And Hitler was only a man.

Loughc

J Mysterio wrote: »

And Hitler was only a man.

And there we go folks, possibly the worst comparison to be seen!