Jurassic Park Series

Started by War Wager, Mar 25, 2007, 10:10:16 PM

Author
Jurassic Park Series (Read 1,367,552 times)

King Rathalos

King Rathalos

#2685
Quote from: Walk Evil Talk on May 18, 2011, 05:06:58 PM

Oh my god, I never realised how detailed the raptors were, I mean Jesus Christ I feel like I'm looking at a real animal...

RazorSlash

RazorSlash

#2686
This is like Gremlins 3. No matter how much you want it, the chances are slim to none

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#2687
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on May 18, 2011, 07:19:57 PM
It could still happen for ya Zilla ... just minus 1 Sam Neil, 1 Stan Winston, and 1 Micheal Crichton.
I know, that's why I said "I do not think it is anymore possible". Jurassic Park 3 would've been tons better with Crichton's collaboration, something 4 will never have the chance to have if it gets made; it wouldn't have his touch unfortunately. I think though that, while without Stan Winston's direction it wouldn't be the same, I think the new Legacy Fx Studios would still do a pretty damn good job with the practical effects, and The Lost World flowed just fine without Neill, though you just could inflate his paycheck.

Alien³

Alien³

#2688
If they were ever to make a fourth I can't see Spielberg returning as director. I wouldn't mind Johnson returning if he tones down the humor, removes dream sequences and makes the on screen jungle look darker, I mean in JP/// it is a bright green whereas the first two JP films the jungles were dark and scary.

Hmm I wonder what J.J Abrams would do with a fourth Jurassic Park film? I mean if Super 8 is as Spielberg-esque as it looks then maybe he could be the man. 

Requiem28

Requiem28

#2689
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 18, 2011, 05:20:22 PM
Quote from: Walk Evil Talk on May 18, 2011, 05:06:58 PM
Jurassic Park cgi love, direct from ILM's website:








Still stunning after all these years. Love those great, great shots.

It's sad how, even now, movies simply cannot beat the CGI quality presented in JP  ::)

Le Celticant

Le Celticant

#2690
That's because it is not CGI...  ::)

Requiem28

Requiem28

#2691
Quote from: Le Celticant on May 18, 2011, 08:03:51 PM
That's because it is not CGI...  ::)

I actually used to think that they tamed real dinosaurs for the film when I was a kid  :laugh:

Just like how they train bears and tigers.

Space Sweeper

Space Sweeper

#2692
Quote from: Bat Chain Puller on May 18, 2011, 06:51:26 PM
In my 'fan film' inspired more by the book, I have a pretty high body count, plenty of gore and viscera, action, chases, etc. And the balls to have a child eaten by a Dinosaur (Thank you Jaws era Spielberg!) But the main characters (for the most part) seem to avoid death because the force is simply 'with them.'
Can it be found anywhere on the internet? I seriously want to see this.

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#2693
Quote from: Requiem28 on May 18, 2011, 08:01:36 PM
It's sad how, even now, movies simply cannot beat the CGI quality presented in JP  ::)
For real. 90s were the years of CGI. Jurassic Park, The Lost World, Godzilla, Titanic and Men in Black all are f**king great examples of good computer graphics; newer films tend to make cgi with super-quick shots, and it doesn't help but look fake. The prime objective of those great 90s cgi was to make it look real. Dunno if it is used anymore, save some exceptions (D9, Avatar or Outlander).

DoomRulz

DoomRulz

#2694
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 18, 2011, 07:11:18 PM
Weird thing is that Universal could make a fourth Jurassic Park film anytime and make a shitload of money... they've delayed it for so long. They've, fundamentally, ignored a gold mine. Jurassic Park is a f**king enormous franchise. It has a gargantuan number of fans worldwide.
I'd love to see it made personally, but realistically, I do not think it is anymore possible.

I think JP 3 killed whatever interest there was. Dinosaurs will always be popular, but JP failed to live up to expectations.

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#2695
Quote from: DoomRulz on May 18, 2011, 08:26:07 PM
I think JP 3 killed whatever interest there was.
Why? It was pretty successful at the box office, and it spawned a lot of merchandise.

Sharp Sticks

Sharp Sticks

#2696
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 18, 2011, 08:27:30 PM
Why? It was pretty successful at the box office, and it spawned a lot of merchandise.

Still royally sucked, and people noticed.

Space Sweeper

Space Sweeper

#2697
Quote from: Sharp Sticks on May 18, 2011, 08:42:59 PM
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 18, 2011, 08:27:30 PM
Why? It was pretty successful at the box office, and it spawned a lot of merchandise.

Still royally sucked, and people noticed.
Yeah, like an eight year old me.


OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#2698
It was still pretty successful, it sucking royally [as subjective as something can get] or not. 3 didn't kill interest, it increased interest - and as I said, spawned an enormous merchandise. Later Jurassic Park media all feature stuff from the third film, beginning with the Spinosaurus. If it was not successful, and if it universally sucked, why would merchandise force it so much? Wouldn't that decrease sellings and thus make for a very, very unintelligent move?

Requiem28

Requiem28

#2699
Quote from: OmegaZilla on May 18, 2011, 08:23:36 PM
Quote from: Requiem28 on May 18, 2011, 08:01:36 PM
It's sad how, even now, movies simply cannot beat the CGI quality presented in JP  ::)
For real. 90s were the years of CGI. Jurassic Park, The Lost World, Godzilla, Titanic and Men in Black all are f**king great examples of good computer graphics; newer films tend to make cgi with super-quick shots, and it doesn't help but look fake. The prime objective of those great 90s cgi was to make it look real. Dunno if it is used anymore, save some exceptions (D9, Avatar or Outlander).

True Dat.

I just hope the CGI for the Hulk in The Avengers will be outstanding.

AvPGalaxy: About | Contact | Cookie Policy | Manage Cookie Settings | Privacy Policy | Legal Info
Facebook Twitter Instagram YouTube Patreon RSS Feed
Contact: General Queries | Submit News