Jurassic Park Series

[evolution_rex]

That's something my idea addresses, though - it'd have them making money off them as a theme park, and also doing animal testing and other things of questionable ethics on the side, all in the name of profits.

A nature preserve is different from a zoo or a theme park because the public doesn't get to visit the nature preserve and see the dinosaurs up-close, especially if the nature preserve is meant "for scientists only".

One of the reasons the first movie was so successful was because the general public did want a dinosaur theme park, and the marketing reflected that. The movie was marketed as if Jurassic Park was a real place you could visit, with lunch boxes and T-shirts and stuffed animals and postcards and stuff. All the merchandise you see scattered throughout the movie is real stuff you could actually buy at the time the movie came out. It was really quite clever. The Jurassic Park ride at Universal Studios is the same way - it's done as if you're visiting the "real" Jurassic Park, and it's one of the most popular attractions Universal Studios has ever had. Every time real-life scientists mention potentially cloning extinct animals or dinosaurs, the media inevitably says "so how long until we get a real Jurassic Park?".

To say people wouldn't want a dinosaur theme park and wouldn't pay money to visit it is objectively false. It's true in real life and it's one of the reasons the first movie captured the imaginations of so many people and made it such a success. Having it be "true" from a storytelling perspective is extra-easy if your real-life audience already wants it to be true anyway.
Not to mention my story idea would have it actually work (for a while at least), so "could it work?" would be a moot point since from a story perspective it does work.

You're forgetting about inside the Jurassic Park universe. People died in the San Diego incident. People died in the Jurassic Park incident. People learned about all this secrecy and conspiracy. The wonder of a dinosaur them park is taken away from the terribleness of it all. People in that universe are now use to dinosaurs on Isla Sorna far away, and the idea just doesn't seem as amazing.

And it doesn't exactly work from a story telling perspective. It's re-hashing the first film but with different circumstances. So, it doesn't really work. At least for not a fan. For some one who doesn't really give a shit about the franchise and just want to watch it becuase it has cool dinosaurs, it works becuase they don't care about the overall story of the franchise. Creating ANOTHER park and have it coincidentally break down again is just finding a lousy excuse for a sequel, and just adds a level of stupidity. The franchise has already gains a few levels of stupidity becuase of Jurassic Park 3, and it needs a something a little more intelligent than copying the first film. If you wanted it to work in a story telling perspective, it would go into a different direction, yet not too far off from the original road, and give us something new but good. I fail how giving us one of the most unoriginal JP 4 concepts will do that. It just doesn't for me.

But like I said, it's just my opinion. You like your idea, and that's good for you.

[Xenomrph]

The wonder of a dinosaur them park is taken away from the terribleness of it all. People in that universe are now use to dinosaurs on Isla Sorna far away, and the idea just doesn't seem as amazing.

Are you kidding? If I knew there was a dinosaur theme park I could visit instead of just watching documentaries on Animal Planet or whatever, I'd be the first one in line to go visit it, and I know I'm not alone. It's why zoos and museums and whatnot are still popular, because there's a significant difference between seeing the stuff "up close" and watching it on TV.

People got killed? Well that sucks, but people get killed in zoo accidents and whatnot when they underestimate/misunderstand the animals or people make stupid mistakes, and yet zoos still function and people still visit them. All you need to do is assure people of their safety (and even if you don't, you'll get the adrenaline-junkie crowd) and people will pay money and come back.

Like I said, selling the "in universe" part is easy when your audience already wants it to be true.

At least for not a fan. For some one who doesn't really give a shit about the franchise and just want to watch it becuase it has cool dinosaurs, it works becuase they don't care about the overall story of the franchise. Creating ANOTHER park and have it coincidentally break down again is just finding a lousy excuse for a sequel, and just adds a level of stupidity. The franchise has already gains a few levels of stupidity becuase of Jurassic Park 3, and it needs a something a little more intelligent than copying the first film. If you wanted it to work in a story telling perspective, it would go into a different direction, yet not too far off from the original road, and give us something new but good. I fail how giving us one of the most unoriginal JP 4 concepts will do that.

Did... did you really just play the "true fan" card? Seriously?

I'm a huge JP fan, I have been since the first movie came out. There's plenty of significant differences between my idea and the original - new dinosaurs, new attractions, new characters, actually seeing a fully-functional park (one of the major appeals of the original movie, which the movie didn't actually do). I'm sorry you don't like the idea I guess, but I also know you're in the minority based on the responses I've seen in this thread, on JP forums, and on other movie forums where I've tossed it around.

[Kol]

That's something my idea addresses, though - it'd have them making money off them as a theme park, and also doing animal testing and other things of questionable ethics on the side, all in the name of profits.

A nature preserve is different from a zoo or a theme park because the public doesn't get to visit the nature preserve and see the dinosaurs up-close, especially if the nature preserve is meant "for scientists only".

One of the reasons the first movie was so successful was because the general public did want a dinosaur theme park, and the marketing reflected that. The movie was marketed as if Jurassic Park was a real place you could visit, with lunch boxes and T-shirts and stuffed animals and postcards and stuff. All the merchandise you see scattered throughout the movie is real stuff you could actually buy at the time the movie came out. It was really quite clever. The Jurassic Park ride at Universal Studios is the same way - it's done as if you're visiting the "real" Jurassic Park, and it's one of the most popular attractions Universal Studios has ever had. Every time real-life scientists mention potentially cloning extinct animals or dinosaurs, the media inevitably says "so how long until we get a real Jurassic Park?".

To say people wouldn't want a dinosaur theme park and wouldn't pay money to visit it is objectively false. It's true in real life and it's one of the reasons the first movie captured the imaginations of so many people and made it such a success. Having it be "true" from a storytelling perspective is extra-easy if your real-life audience already wants it to be true anyway.
Not to mention my story idea would have it actually work (for a while at least), so "could it work?" would be a moot point since from a story perspective it does work.

You're forgetting about inside the Jurassic Park universe. People died in the San Diego incident. People died in the Jurassic Park incident. People learned about all this secrecy and conspiracy. The wonder of a dinosaur them park is taken away from the terribleness of it all. People in that universe are now use to dinosaurs on Isla Sorna far away, and the idea just doesn't seem as amazing.

i think your drifting a far bit from reality...
look JP III again during grant's speech, they are a lot of people who want to raise questions about the nublar park & the san diego incident.

and how in the world would a bunch of dead people prevent me for my love for dinosaurs and the possibility to see one?
does the foxconn-self-murder prevent any one to buy any x-boxes and iphones? i don't think so.

[evolution_rex]

The wonder of a dinosaur them park is taken away from the terribleness of it all. People in that universe are now use to dinosaurs on Isla Sorna far away, and the idea just doesn't seem as amazing.

Are you kidding? If I knew there was a dinosaur theme park I could visit instead of just watching documentaries on Animal Planet or whatever, I'd be the first one in line to go visit it, and I know I'm not alone. It's why zoos and museums and whatnot are still popular, because there's a significant difference between seeing the stuff "up close" and watching it on TV.

People got killed? Well that sucks, but people get killed in zoo accidents and whatnot when they underestimate/misunderstand the animals or people make stupid mistakes, and yet zoos still function and people still visit them. All you need to do is assure people of their safety (and even if you don't, you'll get the adrenaline-junkie crowd) and people will pay money and come back.

Like I said, selling the "in universe" part is easy when your audience already wants it to be true.

At least for not a fan. For some one who doesn't really give a shit about the franchise and just want to watch it becuase it has cool dinosaurs, it works becuase they don't care about the overall story of the franchise. Creating ANOTHER park and have it coincidentally break down again is just finding a lousy excuse for a sequel, and just adds a level of stupidity. The franchise has already gains a few levels of stupidity becuase of Jurassic Park 3, and it needs a something a little more intelligent than copying the first film. If you wanted it to work in a story telling perspective, it would go into a different direction, yet not too far off from the original road, and give us something new but good. I fail how giving us one of the most unoriginal JP 4 concepts will do that.

Did... did you really just play the "true fan" card? Seriously?

I'm a huge JP fan, I have been since the first movie came out. There's plenty of significant differences between my idea and the original - new dinosaurs, new attractions, new characters, actually seeing a fully-functional park (one of the major appeals of the original movie, which the movie didn't actually do). I'm sorry you don't like the idea I guess, but I also know you're in the minority based on the responses I've seen in this thread, on JP forums, and on other movie forums where I've tossed it around.

You're failing to see my point. You ignored my arguments about investors and how it's basically a re-hash of the first film. That is becuase you like your idea and want to stick with your idea.

And actually, I'm not much of a minority when  it comes to JP forums, becuase I'm a member at a lot of them and it's come up a lot, and a lot of people agree with me.

I realize your a fan and all, and your concept for a fourth film is something that the creators of the films might actually do, but I can say it will be a terrible movie and will not finalize the franchise but just bring a concept that's been used so many times before. It may be becuase I want the fourth film to have a conclusion not just an excuse to have a fourth film.

I mean, I really don't want to see something bad happen to a park becuase I already know that something will go wrong. Power goes down? OMG! It's too obvious. People are going to steal dinosaurs or embryos? It's been done before.

And, your not putting yourselves in the universe. Like I said, people want to see dinosaurs, but the first thing that pops into your head is theme park? Just becuase it was used in the first film doesn't make it a common practice to make profit. So, along with spending millions of dollars on a theme park, they'd have to spend millions on catching the dinosaurs, and then the investors have to be willing to think it's safe. Yes, people die in zoo accidents often, but with Jurassic Park, we've got animals larger than elephants and they've seemed to have destroyed the opportunities in the past. That doesn't look to good in the eyes of the public and especially in the eye of investors. They're not going to think 'oh, it was the people's fault, not the dinosaurs. Everything will be fine,' they're going to think 'This hasn't worked out well in the past, and we don't want it happening again.' So, unless you've got some ingenious way that the dinosaurs are going to escape and attack everyone, they've better have some low security. But it doesn't really make sense for it to have low security, considering the investor's worry. So, that just doesn't make sense to me.

To avoid further arguments, I'll shut up about it. I realize that a lot of people here agree with you, and I won't make myself look more like an ass. I apologize for the trouble, but I'm just way against the idea.

[Xenomrph]

You're failing to see my point. You ignored my arguments about investors and how it's basically a re-hash of the first film. That is becuase you like your idea and want to stick with your idea.

No, there's a difference between understanding your point and agreeing with it. I'm doing the former.

And actually, I'm not much of a minority when  it comes to JP forums, becuase I'm a member at a lot of them and it's come up a lot, and a lot of people agree with me.

By all means, link me.

I realize your a fan and all, and your concept for a fourth film is something that the creators of the films might actually do, but I can say it will be a terrible movie and will not finalize the franchise but just bring a concept that's been used so many times before. It may be becuase I want the fourth film to have a conclusion not just an excuse to have a fourth film.

I mean, I really don't want to see something bad happen to a park becuase I already know that something will go wrong. Power goes down? OMG! It's too obvious. People are going to steal dinosaurs or embryos? It's been done before.

Frankly it doesn't need a "conclusion". If anything I'd like to see it keep going, because dinosaurs are cool and the idea of humans interacting with dinosaurs and a dinosaur theme-park is cool.

And, your not putting yourselves in the universe. Like I said, people want to see dinosaurs, but the first thing that pops into your head is theme park? Just becuase it was used in the first film doesn't make it a common practice to make profit. So, along with spending millions of dollars on a theme park, they'd have to spend millions on catching the dinosaurs, and then the investors have to be willing to think it's safe.

They wouldn't have to catch anything - they just clone new ones. They'd have Ingen's data and materials.

They're not going to think 'oh, it was the people's fault, not the dinosaurs. Everything will be fine,' they're going to think 'This hasn't worked out well in the past, and we don't want it happening again.'

No I'm pretty sure people would think the way I said they'd think, for the reason I (and others) said.

So, unless you've got some ingenious way that the dinosaurs are going to escape and attack everyone, they've better have some low security. But it doesn't really make sense for it to have low security, considering the investor's worry.

Alternately, they have good security that fails due to something unforseen - chaos theory in action. It was kind of the point of the first book, and it was something that the first movie didn't explore.

[evolution_rex]

By all means, link me.

Becuase of this argument, I posted a thread in JPLegacy (A popular JP website where work as a moderator) to discuss the idea. I haven't got much replies yet, but we'll see how other people think of the idea.
http://www.jplegacy.org/board/showthread.php?p=720752#post720752

[Xenomrph]

Just replied to your topic on JPLegacy.

[Sso02V]

If we still have zoos after people jump into lion enclosures and get eaten, and elephants bust out and go on a rampage, I really don't see why a secure compound on an island thousands of miles away from anything would be any cause for alarm just because these animals escaped 20 years ago due to industrial sabotage.

[Xenomrph]

Bingo, exactly.

[DoomRulz]

what I'm saying is that a dinosaur park has gotten a really bad reputation, and no one would ever want to build the park again.

I get what you're saying, I just don't agree. I think the public would be aware and just wouldn't care - people would want to go see a dinosaur theme park (the third movie is evidence of that, where you've got unsanctioned, wildly unsafe boat tours near Isla Sorna).

You know, I honestly always thought in the third film, the island was picked at random. The way Billy and Ben freak out after the boat is trashed, none of them say "OMFG it must've been a dinosaur!!"

[Xenomrph]

They knew where they were - they were on a parasailing tour called "Dino-SOAR". The whole point was to see dinosaurs.

[DoomRulz]

I was thinking about, but again, why act like the boat trashing was a big WTF?

[evolution_rex]

There is so much wrong with that scene.

[Ghost Rider]

I was thinking about, but again, why act like the boat trashing was a big WTF?

That might not have expected a dinosaur swimming in the ocean.

[Xenomrph]

I was thinking about, but again, why act like the boat trashing was a big WTF?

Probably the same thing the audience was thinking - a dinosaur did it, but how?!?!?!?!?!?!?!