Jurassic Park Series

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

Author
Jurassic Park Series (Read 1,366,752 times)

DoomRulz

DoomRulz

#12060
Quote from: Omegazilla on Jun 16, 2015, 11:46:50 AM
Does not make him a villain.

In a way it does. All of the park-related deaths are on his head.

Corporal Hicks

Corporal Hicks

#12061
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2015, 11:35:11 AM
Ned wouldn't have had anything to f**k up at all had Hammond not created the park in the first place. He was foolish to think he could control nature. Nature always wins in the end.

Bit of a blanket statement. Zoo's control nature every day.

blood.

blood.

#12062
It was the costa rican government's fault for leasing the islands to  John Hammond. ::)

OmegaZilla

OmegaZilla

#12063
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2015, 11:59:17 AM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Jun 16, 2015, 11:46:50 AM
Does not make him a villain.

In a way it does. All of the park-related deaths are on his head.
Oh please. If a mad engineer blows up a house or makes it collapse you don't blame the proprietor for it. You blame the engineer.

szkoki

szkoki

#12064
no you blame who made that house, made it available to blown up

DoomRulz

DoomRulz

#12065
Quote from: Corporal Hicks on Jun 16, 2015, 12:28:03 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2015, 11:35:11 AM
Ned wouldn't have had anything to f**k up at all had Hammond not created the park in the first place. He was foolish to think he could control nature. Nature always wins in the end.

Bit of a blanket statement. Zoo's control nature every day.

False equivalency. Zoos are able to control what already exists. They can fully understand it. They aren't attempting to control an ecosystem that vanished millions of years ago. They can't even begin to fully grasp that.

Quote from: Omegazilla on Jun 16, 2015, 12:33:06 PM
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2015, 11:59:17 AM
Quote from: Omegazilla on Jun 16, 2015, 11:46:50 AM
Does not make him a villain.

In a way it does. All of the park-related deaths are on his head.
Oh please. If a mad engineer blows up a house or makes it collapse you don't blame the proprietor for it. You blame the engineer.

Everyone needs a house to live in. And yes, I can fault the proprietor because he's the one who hired the engineer. He should've known what kind of service he was paying for.

Hubbs

Hubbs

#12066
What I'm saying is, for a movie that has made so much money, been such a smash, most of the reviews are pretty poor. If a movie does this well then generally the reviews are very good from everyone (Avengers).

I get that its fun but the negative points seem to far outweigh that...from what I'm gathering.

DoomRulz

DoomRulz

#12067
JUST GO SEE IT AND MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND

HuDaFuK

HuDaFuK

#12068
Lol.

Also, it's really nothing new for films with mediocre or even terrible reviews to make a sh*t-ton of money. Someone already mentioned the Transformers movies.

szkoki

szkoki

#12069
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2015, 01:08:26 PM
JUST GO SEE IT AND MAKE UP YOUR OWN MIND


probably this will be the biggest arguement and question of the year. the demand has dropped over the years plus is Jurassic Park. probably thats why it made 500million and thats why the majority likes it


its just sadly strengthen the Hollywood machine to make shit blocbusters. cant imagine what will be next Star Wars or Alien now because at least with these kinda frenchise they should deliver something

Alien³

Alien³

#12070
Quote from: Hubbs on Jun 16, 2015, 01:00:35 PM
What I'm saying is, for a movie that has made so much money, been such a smash, most of the reviews are pretty poor. If a movie does this well then generally the reviews are very good from everyone (Avengers).

I get that its fun but the negative points seem to far outweigh that...from what I'm gathering.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/jurassic_world/

Good god Hubbs. ::)

The Son of Paragus

The Son of Paragus

#12071
Quote from: Hubbs on Jun 16, 2015, 01:00:35 PM
What I'm saying is, for a movie that has made so much money, been such a smash, most of the reviews are pretty poor. If a movie does this well then generally the reviews are very good from everyone (Avengers).

I get that its fun but the negative points seem to far outweigh that...from what I'm gathering.

I don't know how many and which reviews you have been reading but most are varying from average to really positive rather then negative to average at best.

I think that, even if you'd watch the movie at this point, you kinda spoiled it for yourself by being so negative towards it, it will most likely cloud your whole experience of it while watching.


I personally thought the movie was great, especially as a hardcore JP fan, I remember seeing it in theaters in '93 as a 5 year old and to see a great sequel with so many homages to JP and being set on the 1st Island just got me psyched throughout, I thought it was great, the thing I think really set's its apart from JP is that there was little room for good character development due to there being (maybe) too much action sequences going on. JP had it perfectly balanced back then, there was a good build up to action sequences but between those there was allot of character development, which this sequel seemed to be missing, aside of a few moments, I really liked Claire and Owen, the children didn't bother me at all btw (which I expected they would, so) and Masrani was also a great newcomer, the return of Wu was great, I didn't expect him to have a little "dark streak'

Personally I could have also done without allot of the comic relief (which seems to be a thing in allot of movies/reboots/sequels these days ....) JP and TLW also managed perfectly well without it and I personally feel that comic relief mostly takes away allot of the flair a movie has rather then adding something to it.

Aside of that, this was my movie of the year and I have been looking forward to this ever since JP3 and I had been looking forward ever since JP 1 what happened to lots of stuff on the first Isla Nublar, I think it's great that they gave us a view of what happened, especially the visitor's centre and the T-rex.
Spoiler
the T-rex vs the I-rex might be over the top but I was having a raging blast at that point in cinema and came totally unexpected to me, I was fearing that, besides the little appearance in the beginning, we wouldn't see the rex anymore, and BOOM there she was, I was pumped with adrenaline the moment I heard her famous roar. I could almost cry when she came on. The T rex looked a little different, yes, but since she's 20 years older it's not so far fetched, she had the scars and colors but as far as the CGI making it look different, I thought it were the eyes that they made too yellow and too big compaired to the first movie. Anyways, I couldn't have wished for more considering the Rex saved the day. And the roar at the final scene was quite grand to me, but that's the fanboy speaking. I would have preferred if the Rex killed the Irex rather then the Mosasaur though, but had a blast nontheless :)
[close]

My personal rating)

Jurassic Park 10/10 (what's there not to like?)
The Lost world: 8/10
Jurassic Park 3 6/10
Jurassic World 8/10

I feel JW and TWL are on par, I always really enjoyed TWL, I never understood the hate for it.

szkoki

szkoki

#12072
every review says "its a big, dumb, summer blockbuster but   hey its fun so  its a good movie"



:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Corporal Hicks

Corporal Hicks

#12073
Quote from: DoomRulz on Jun 16, 2015, 12:42:15 PM
False equivalency. Zoos are able to control what already exists. They can fully understand it. They aren't attempting to control an ecosystem that vanished millions of years ago. They can't even begin to fully grasp that.

It's not the extinct ecosystem that they lost control of though. It's purposeful sabotage of the infrastructure that keeps the animals contained. It's nothing the animals did that caused the downfall of the park. If the security hadn't failed it wouldn't have happened. Granted some unforeseen adaptation of their modified genetics would have caused some issues later on down the line but probably nothing to that scale.

It doesn't make Hammond the villain.

Hubbs

Hubbs

#12074
Quote from: HuDaFuK on Jun 16, 2015, 01:14:23 PM
Lol.

Also, it's really nothing new for films with mediocre or even terrible reviews to make a sh*t-ton of money. Someone already mentioned the Transformers movies.

They got bad reviews ;)

Plus after the garbage that was 'Kingsman'  ::) I won't hold my breath.

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