Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Jurassic World

1568101124

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,701 ✭✭✭Bacchus


    Doesn't look great. The hybrid dino angle doesn't really grab me. It's only the first trailer though so I still have an open mind.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,968 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    Brutal CGI, lame set up with Star Lord, "Durrr new dinosaur? That doesn't sound like a good idea...", not exactly worthy of Jeff Goldblum there. And it gets out by just climbing a wall? Not looking good...


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,160 ✭✭✭tok9


    The plot actually sounds fine to me. Not really sure why people have an issue with a hybrid Dinosaur after you know... they brought back actual dinosaurs.

    But I completely agree on some of the CGI in that trailer, in particular the water park. Bloody hell, does the film have any animatronics?

    I'm still hopeful but that trailer hasn't helped.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 53 ✭✭Sonic Death Monkey


    Thargor wrote: »
    Brutal CGI, lame set up with Star Lord, "Durrr new dinosaur? That doesn't sound like a good idea...", not exactly worthy of Jeff Goldblum there. And it gets out by just climbing a wall? Not looking good...

    Obviously we don't know much about his character, but still, it doesn't appear as though he's an ounce of the charisma Goldblum had. Not that their characters are comparable, maybe they are, but the line quoted above suggests he's of the same moral code.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,835 ✭✭✭Falthyron


    tok9 wrote: »
    The plot actually sounds fine to me. Not really sure why people have an issue with a hybrid Dinosaur after you know... they brought back actual dinosaurs.

    For me, it is not about the feasibility of a 'super-saur'/hybrid-thing, but it has to do with a lack of imagination about the main threat in the movie. Why does it have to keep getting 'bigger'? Aren't dinosaurs dangerous enough? Have we really exhausted all possible story-lines with a species so varied and interesting already?

    As for the velociraptors running alongside Chris Pratt, he doesn't look too concerned so I don't think they are running from the hybrid-dinosaur. If they can 'tame' or alter the DNA of velociraptors to make them docile or friendly to humans surely that should be the first procedure on the development of any other dinosaurs they bring back from the dead.

    I dunno, maybe I am nitpicking, but this trailer was very disappointing. Generic/standard Hollywood routine springs to mind and I wanted something different.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11 AngCork


    Saw the trailer all over Facebook today.

    Great cast, hope it is good! Glad to see Pratt getting noticed, he was brilliant in Parks & Rec and of course Guardians.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,427 ✭✭✭Morag


    A hybrid? oh dear, I was willing to give it a chance up until that point.

    also who let Raptors, out? lol


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    I'd say there's no reason to be too concerned about the CGI at this stage.

    There's over 6 months to go until release so it's entirely possible there's more polishing to be done.

    But if the acting is that hammy and the dialogue is that terrible fancy CGI won't save it. Nor will it save it from such a retarded plot as hybrid super-dinosaurs.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,607 ✭✭✭pah


    THEY WERE ALL HYBRID DINO'S in JP 1 ffs. the missing bits are from frogs


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,137 ✭✭✭✭TheDoc


    Have to say I enjoyed it and am REALLY excited to see what it looks like.

    Don't get what the whole grief is about the hybrid. I could well imagine the park has been open for some time, and they have tried to create a new attraction to keep it fresh, that goes wildly out of control.

    As someone who actually liked the third one though, probably will let fanboydom take over on this and keep my spirits high.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,595 ✭✭✭Mal-Adjusted


    I'm actually really excited. One thing from the original that i wanted to know was what the park actually looked like. Hammond says that it's all built and ready to go with roller-coasters and such, but we never see it (we only see hints of it, like the Mosasaur pit, in the 2012 PC game). I always wanted to know what a fully finished and running JP would be like.

    I really don't mind the hybrid dinosaur. sure they're all hybrid Ostriches anyway :) Besides, InGen are a eugenics company that brought dinosaurs back twenty years earlier, they'd hardly stop there.
    For the creature itself, if it's a genetically engineered, super agressive monster, it can make the film sort of like "Alien" with dinosaurs. It may also give the film more focus with only one animal threatening people (initially at least). A problem I had with earlier films was that the animals didn't really act like animals, (JPIII was the Spinosarous constantly chasing Grant and co. when a real animal wouldn't). Having some sort of hybrid means they can do as they like with it. Even in the book, the new type of lab-grown raptors are the real threat, the ones that bred in the wild were a lot closer to lions or cheetas.

    To me, Chris Pratts character reminds me more of Robert Muldoon than Ian Malcolm. A fairly no-nonsense character.

    What doesn't fill me with confidence about the trailer was the CGI, specifically the Mosasaur pit scene. but like someone else said, it's got eight months to finish rendering. I am surprised by the sheer abundance of CGI in the trailer, compared to all the talk they had about physical props.

    sorry for the long(ish) post :o


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,792 ✭✭✭Gandalph


    Trailer was only meh, and I'm a big JP fan. Don't care though because I know I will probably like the movie none the less.

    Devastated they didn't follow the space theme like in Dino Crisis 3...would of been Oscar worthy!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 216 ✭✭AnLonDubh


    Falthyron wrote: »
    Aren't dinosaurs dangerous enough? Have we really exhausted all possible story-lines with a species so varied and interesting already?
    Dinosauria is a clade.:pac:


  • Registered Users Posts: 128 ✭✭Liam92


    As a huge JP fan, I'm very excited for this film, and I trust Colin Trevorrow directing because it seems he has a clear vision on what it should be. (Watch Safety Not Guaranteed, Trevorrow's only other film, which is actually very impressive)

    On the CGI issue, it does look a bit tacky but there is still over 6 months to go until its release date. The lack of animatronics/puppets in the trailer is just whetting the cinemagoer's appetite to see these dinos properly.
    Especially the hybrid, apparently called a D-Rex, which is meant to be a t-rex, velociraptor, cuttlefish, and a snake combined.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,899 ✭✭✭Paddy@CIRL


    Having had the chance to watch the trailer again, with a little less excitement, I can't say I'm full of confidence. Pratt's lines are a bit hammy and the CGI is a bit weak. Still, there's a good while to go yet...


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    What doesn't help the trailer is that almost no context or backdrop is given. Anyone keeping up with production, be it here or elsewhere, would have known the basic gist of the plot, that it involved the themepark making some rash decisions to boost flagging numbers, and in that sense the super-dino kinda makes some sense, but the trailer fails to inform us of any of that: it's just a procession of shiny FX shots followed by some stiff-faced portents about a genetically altered dinosaur. Watching it again, it's a terrible trailer. We give off about promos that give too much of the film away, this somewhat feels like the opposite - not enough information is given.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,775 ✭✭✭✭Gbear


    pah wrote: »
    THEY WERE ALL HYBRID DINO'S in JP 1 ffs. the missing bits are from frogs

    It isn't the silliness of the technology that's the problem; it's the silliness of using it as a plot device when the park is already up to its tits in enormous death lizards.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,547 ✭✭✭Agricola


    That trailer did nothing for me. I was a huge dinosaur nerd at the age of 12 when JP came out, it will always have a place in my heart, but I think this is a case of lightning not going to strike twice. Once you've done JP, where do you go. Another film about the park opening, then the shít hits the fan when the pens are unlocked. This time with Hyrid dinosaurs though, that will make it work..... Nope.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 477 ✭✭McSasquatch II


    Big fan of Pratt, but he looks miscast here playing the modern version of JP1's Muldoon from what I can see. There's scope for lots of carnage given that the park is fully operational, with throngs of people, but meh. Overall it was fairly insipid. Oh and the effects do indeed look terrible. Jaws is forty years older than this movie, and it had a better looking white shark.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,508 ✭✭✭Oafley Jones


    Falthyron wrote: »
    For me, it is not about the feasibility of a 'super-saur'/hybrid-thing, but it has to do with a lack of imagination about the main threat in the movie. Why does it have to keep getting 'bigger'? Aren't dinosaurs dangerous enough? Have we really exhausted all possible story-lines with a species so varied and interesting already?

    I'd imagine that toys were the big motivator here. Any toy company can knock out a T-Rex, whereas modified Dinos are going to be the sole intellectual property of universal.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,032 ✭✭✭SmokeyEyes


    Nothing can touch JP but I'm still excited that at 31 I'm still going to be able to go watch a film franchise I was absolutely nuts over as a 10 year old!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,799 ✭✭✭FortuneChip


    Falthyron wrote: »
    I think it seems very generic and the CGI looks poor. A DNA modified dinosaur? Really? Aren't dinosaurs supposed to be terrifying enough. Why do we need to make a 'super-saur'? The shot of Star-Lord on a bike being flanked by Velociraptors was the final nail in the coffin for me. Next to the T-Rex, the Velociraptor is supposed to be a real threat, a cunning killer and extremely ruthless. Now they work for the humans?

    Disappointing to be honest.

    Exactly! Why do they have to go for something "unprecedented".
    Honestly, it looks like Deep Blue Sea with a new skin.

    From the few pieces of dialog we get, everything seems very serious. I was hoping for a bit more levity. Early days though.


  • Registered Users Posts: 56 ✭✭davidrowe


    That scene with the shark really stopped me in my tracks! The genetic engineering plot sounds promising to me, but this franchise has taught me to keep my expectations low enough. It should make for a great couple of hours in the cinema anyway. I love seeing dinosaurs on the big screen!


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,443 ✭✭✭Bipolar Joe


    Haven't seen the trailer, but being upset about a genetic engineering plot because it sounds dumb? You all have seen the first one, right?


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,597 ✭✭✭dan1895


    One of the things about the original was that the dinosaurs weren't monsters just animals. Dangerous animals but just animals none the less. This movie seems to be going out of its way to turn them into monsters.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,810 ✭✭✭Mackman


    For me, the whole brand new man made dinosaur thing just feels like something the studio exec's put in there, "we already had dinosaurs, we need something new!"

    Very disappointing trailer. It just looks like another generic blockbuster, some kids that go missing, big new dinosaur escapes, a Muldoon character telling the park operators they are fools and has to rescue the kids, meanwhile bad CGI **** happens with big set pieces that are supposed to wow us, but really, it's all been done.

    It all looks fake, everything, even the monorail going into the park, It all looks too clean. Maybe they will add realism with more CGI (ironic)


  • Registered Users Posts: 555 ✭✭✭tim3000


    Not overly optimistic about this. I don't like the idea of genetically modified Dinos, the real things are interesting/scary enough as is. I will still go and see it but I am not happy about the plot.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,563 ✭✭✭Adamantium


    To all the people who talk about the original, that was a very rare film in terms of CGI and just about every facet of production working together. In one of the making of documentaries, they has the CG animators and animal trainers PLUS animatronics guys running obstacle courses out in the carpark during every lunch break, so they could intuitvely understand what it would like to move and think like a animal. The cg team became actors, would this ever happen today? It looks hilarious and it's a universe away from guys sitting on their asses working at CG server farms sweating never seeing the light of day doing 1000's of shots. Jurrassic Park had about 50, what they would do to perfect those 50 would be considered insanity overkill and a waste of resources. All of the stop motion animators were horrified when the first CG test came in and they watched, they all assumed that Speilberg had killed a entire industry and all you would have to type D for Dinousaur, many of the guys retrained in hybrid arts, some becoming amateur biologists/animal science, because Steven wanted them there for their expertise on movement, it was a weird situation and confluence of events and is likely to never be repeated. Pure passion.

    It's not the CG that has made it last 21 years later, it's the fact they made the move like animals despite the CG being poorer than it is today (Lettuce be serious)

    This films's CGI looks great and will look even better, don't kid yourself if this trailer had been shown in 1993, you'd have had a heart attack.
    Ask yourself, If after watching the original, would have finding out some of the dinos were hybrids all along ruined your enjoyment of the movie?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,522 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    Adamantium wrote: »
    Ask yourself, If after watching the original, would have finding out some of the dinos were hybrids all along ruined your enjoyment of the movie?

    probably not but that doesn't stop it from being stupid anyway. There are thousand of dinos they could use, why not allosaurus, Epanterias, megaraptor and so on.

    With what we know now of raptors too the ones in the first film are totally ridiculous, pity to keep the trend going rather than correcting the look and size - if only somewhat...

    at least in JP3 they sorta tried
    For Jurassic Park III the male Velociraptor was given quill-like structures along the back of the head and neck. While this was the extent to which CGI effects were able to render feathers at the time, the structures do not resemble the down-like feathers real-life dromaeosaurids bore or the fully developed arm feathers, akin to the wing feathers of modern birds, born by Velociraptor


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,595 ✭✭✭Mal-Adjusted


    Did they ever explain why the Velociraptors looked completely different in each film?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,597 ✭✭✭dan1895


    Did they ever explain why the Velociraptors looked completely different in each film?

    I don't think so nor did they ever say why they called them velociraptors when they were deinonychus or dromeosaurus. Velociraptors were only about knee height.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,426 ✭✭✭Roar


    Genetically engineered creature goes on the rampage killing everyone?

    Congratulations. You've just rebooted Deep Blue Sea

    Got a bad feeling about this. Some of the CGI looked poor - fair enough it's only the trailer, but that shot of Burt Macklin on a motorbike while velociraptors rush by him looked terrible.

    The whole thing just doesn't look... Right.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    I feel a bit let down by that trailer. Perhaps it's nostalgia, but the dinosaurs look awful in this.
    I'm not completely against the idea of the hybrid running amok but when you have endless dinosaurs to use you don't really need anything else IMHO.

    That Monorail a) looked awful and b) was completely unnecessary, what I liked about the first one was that it was a believable park, it's now like some sort of Gatwick Terminal Link / Disneyland moshup.

    I'll still go see this and perhaps the graphics will be rendered a bit more but it's all a bit meh.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators Posts: 24,126 Mod ✭✭✭✭Angron


    dan1895 wrote: »
    I don't think so nor did they ever say why they called them velociraptors when they were deinonychus or dromeosaurus. Velociraptors were only about knee height.
    Apparently that happened because someone misunderstood naming for dinosaurs, and thought the genus was velociraptor.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,343 ✭✭✭Sean Quagmire


    The trailer looks awful. I know the CGI isn't finished but it looks completely over done. did they really need to CG the bloody gate?

    the dialogue makes the scientist sound dumb and sinister. And Chris Pratt's 'cool and down with the hip' character appears predictable and lacks depth of a leading character. This film will be weak.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,308 ✭✭✭✭.ak


    I'll go see it. But my expectations of it will be the same as I had for the sequels - just rebranding a classic. Cheap rollercoaster thrills... but sometimes that's not a bad thing. I'll go to it, I'll enjoy it, but I'll probably forget it a week after. Don't see any point in getting offended by it though.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,943 ✭✭✭smcgiff


    dan1895 wrote: »
    One of the things about the original was that the dinosaurs weren't monsters just animals. Dangerous animals but just animals none the less. This movie seems to be going out of its way to turn them into monsters.

    Agreed. Have only seen the trailer and have not read the 300 odd posts here.

    This reminded me of "Alien" on an earth setting. Not impressed, will be watching on DVD or online.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,563 ✭✭✭✭peteeeed


    they fed one of them JAWS , i'm in


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,009 ✭✭✭conorhal


    Oh dear... I thought that this trailer would shout 'take my money!' instead it shouts, 'the studio would like Chris Pratt to have a talking wisecracking velocaraptor sidekick just like that Rat in that Galaxy Guardians movie, can we do that?'
    peteeeed wrote: »
    they fed one of them JAWS , i'm in

    On the other hand, there is that...


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,308 ✭✭✭✭.ak


    One thing that annoyed me though isn't the fact they had to write in a GM dino, but the fact that they seem to need to make a bigger/badder/fictional dino when they have the iconic t-rex at hand. In the 3rd one I really disliked the whole having a bigger dino than the t-rex thing, just seemed cheap to me.

    I think with these sort of movies toning things down works better than going over the top. Chris Nolan's revamp of the Batman series is a great example, or JJ's Star Trek. Strip things back a bit and let the iconic elements speak for themselves.

    EDIT: Reminds me of the Ian Malcolm quote - Dr. Ian Malcolm: Yeah, yeah, but your scientists writers were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,988 ✭✭✭constitutionus


    i thought the trailer was fine TBH.

    Dont get the prob with the hybrid dinosaur, shure didnt grant say in the first one that the dinos we see arent the real deal having been fused with frog DNA anyway.

    hammonds been making what people wanted to see from the begining.

    have to say im delighted to see that whenever this is set theyve got the park fully up and running as i was sick to death of ruined ones. has a nice seaworld/disnyworld vibe off it and look forward to seeing it before it gets trashed by dinos.

    im not a huge fan of these films but theyve entertained me so ill give this one a chance.

    :D


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,160 ✭✭✭tok9


    I thought the shot with the Velociraptors was fine actually. Looked good to me especially in comparison to the other CGI.

    It's just a concern from a story point of view :(


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,308 ✭✭✭✭.ak


    tok9 wrote: »
    I thought the shot with the Velociraptors was fine actually. Looked good to me especially in comparison to the other CGI.

    It's just a concern from a story point of view :(

    Hopefully Chris Pratts owns a Cadillac and then it'll all make sense.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,308 ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Also why does everyone keep referring to Alien? Couldn't think of anything more different to Ridley Scott's classic?


  • Administrators, Computer Games Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 32,406 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭Mickeroo


    The genetic modification kind of makes sense, they obviously have a handle on controlling Dinosaurs at this point, there had to be some sort of silly plot device to make this one different from the others otherwise it wouldn't be a threat.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,988 ✭✭✭constitutionus


    TheDoc wrote: »
    Have to say I enjoyed it and am REALLY excited to see what it looks like.

    Don't get what the whole grief is about the hybrid. I could well imagine the park has been open for some time, and they have tried to create a new attraction to keep it fresh, that goes wildly out of control.

    As someone who actually liked the third one though, probably will let fanboydom take over on this and keep my spirits high.

    i get that feeling myself.

    one of the themes of the series is respecting the force of nature.

    it looks to me like the parks been open years, sales are down, so the stockholders get em pimp it up with something new to get the crowds back.

    and it bites them in the arse.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,391 ✭✭✭PhiloCypher


    Any thoughts for the conservation of the current species obviously went out the window if they are feeding great whites to pliosaurs like chum. Is there a scene where they feed a tiger to raptors later in the film I wonder.

    Ironically those are the sort of match ups I wouldn't have minded seeing in the film I'd hoped we were getting on when I'd heard it was going to be called Jurassic "world". I thought cool we're finally gonna get a film where the dinosaur get off/smuggled off the island and throw our ecosystem out of whack. Where we see prides of lions competing with raptors for food. Where we see who would win in a footrace between a cheetah and a raptor etc. But nope we get the deep blue sea. Le sigh.


  • Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Music Moderators, Regional Midlands Moderators Posts: 24,126 Mod ✭✭✭✭Angron


    conorhal wrote: »
    Oh dear... I thought that this trailer would shout 'take my money!' instead it shouts, 'the studio would like Chris Pratt to have a talking wisecracking velocaraptor sidekick just like that Rat in that Galaxy Guardians movie, can we do that?'



    On the other hand, there is that...
    Now I'm just thinking of the redone pilot for the TV show Archer that replaced the main guy with a dinosaur.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,835 ✭✭✭Falthyron


    Ok, so I watched the trailer again and had another think about it.

    This is my guess for the story to be plausible:

    The emphasis is on genetics so I reckon they have discovered a way to alter the DNA of the dinosaurs in such a way to make them all docile or harmless to humans. This is the only way they could get approval to re-open the park after the previous disasters. A demonstration would have been made, possibly using velociraptors, to show that the creatures are now under full control of humans or are incapable of attacking humans. My evidence for this lies with the many shots of the dinosaurs being so close to people and children, as well as the complete lack of safe-guards at the water-park where a massive dinosaur could easily leap up into the air and crush all those in the stands.

    However, the problem in the movie lies with the dinosaurs possibly being affected by the DNA altering, maybe it affects their ability to pro-create as well. I don't buy the whole 'we are losing money, dinosaurs are boring now' line, so the scientists create a hybrid that retains some of its aggressive tendencies to show something new to the audiences coming to the park. There has to be some reason why the hybrid isn't 'neutered' where as the rest of the dinosaurs are. My guess lies with the 'taming' effect having side-effects that can't be explained or something.

    Having said all that, the movie also feels like a possible 'soft'-reboot. Similar to Star Trek in 2009, but still feeling like it could be a sequel. Furthermore, if it goes down the typical and predictable route of: Park Opens, fun and wonder, then chaos, madness and lots of death, followed by a standard 'We can't play God' moral message at the end, where to next? They re-open the re-opened park in Jurassic World 2?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,308 ✭✭✭✭.ak


    Mickeroo wrote: »
    The genetic modification kind of makes sense, they obviously have a handle on controlling Dinosaurs at this point, there had to be some sort of silly plot device to make this one different from the others otherwise it wouldn't be a threat.

    They could've just done human error. Worked for the first one. But yeah. I agree, I don't have much of an issue using it as a plot device, like I said above it can be done, but should it? Does it really need it? I suppose we'll have to wait to find out.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement