Jurassic Park Series

[HuDaFuK]

Plus the Rex was probably nearby the door because of the noise the raptors and Indominus were making. Not to mention the slow moving door opening annnnd its not a massive paddock.

But it was just standing there. It wasn't just arriving, it wasn't agitated by the commotion outside, nothing. It just stood there politely waiting for the money shot. Stuff like that spoiled it for me.

[DoomRulz]

The new movie captured nothing of the original movie magic that was spielberg's craft.

"...but let's be honest. No one's impressed by a dinosaur anymore."

Thank you for proving the film correct.

[Alien³]

But it was just standing there. It wasn't just arriving,

Did we see the same film? It clearly walks towards the door from the dark depths of its paddock.

I dont need an explanation to make them feel less like CGI movie monsters, Because that's all they were.
The first movies portrayed animals.

But what was unanimal like about them?

For me the JW dinosaurs acted just as their previous incarnations did.
Not just from JP but TLW and JP3.

[Gate]

I think part of the problem you guy are trying to address comes from public perception of dinosaurs. Real dinosaurs acted like birds-- feathers, lots of energy, intelligent, unpredictable.

In the first film, I'd say they were all a little clumsy and slow compared to JW.

[bobby brown]

But what was unanimal like about them?

For me the JW dinosaurs acted just as their previous incarnations did.
Not just from JP but TLW and JP3.

Its not about the feather issue, at all. I accept JP´s dinos as actual dinos in this fictitious world.
Its more about how its done. Well, its not easy to put finger on it exactly, but I'll try.

The first films put a lot of effort into making the animals move with weight, and make them behave a tad bit "imperfect" like actual animals do. JW´s monsters where just to glorified, and fast. Moving with impossible speed and flexibility. Even if we know today JP´s dinos where scientifically inaccurate, the movie makers at least tried to present it with as much realism as possible.

You think flying pterosaurs carrying humans around and a dinosaur teamup brawl is a natural progression of that mentality?

Not to mention the baby dino petting zoo, Those dinosaurs probably cost millions to produce, and you let kids play around with them and ride them!? those animals are fu**ing fragile. Also I didn't like that hologram in the visitor centre. just to futuristic.

[DoomRulz]

The first films put a lot of effort into making the animals move with weight, and make them behave a tad bit "imperfect" like actual animals do. JW´s monsters where just to glorified, and fast. Moving with impossible speed and flexibility. Even if we know today JP´s dinos where scientifically inaccurate, the movie makers at least tried to present it with as much realism as possible.

Agreed 100%. That's why the CG doesn't work in this film. You can tell they're CG creations and don't feel real like they did in the first two.

You think flying pterosaurs carrying humans around and a dinosaur teamup brawl is a natural progression of that mentality?

No. It was totally unrealistic. No pterosaur in the fossil record would possess enough strength to lift up a large fish, much less a human being. But pterosaurs attacking humans is common in dino movies (see One Million Years B.C. and The Valley of Gwangi) so I accept it as part of the fun.

[HuDaFuK]

Not to mention the baby dino petting zoo, Those dinosaurs probably cost millions to produce, and you let kids play around with them and ride them!? those animals are fu**ing fragile.

There's also the fact a baby Triceratops could do some serious damage to a child if it felt even slightly inclined. The whole concept is daft.

It's like how the original film has that bit where they try to feed the T-rex with the tethered goat, and Grant points out how silly it is. That voice of reason seemed to be missing in the new film

[DoomRulz]

Not to mention the baby dino petting zoo, Those dinosaurs probably cost millions to produce, and you let kids play around with them and ride them!? those animals are fu**ing fragile.

There's also the fact a baby Triceratops could do some serious damage to a child if it felt even slightly inclined. The whole concept is daft.

The same could be said of any petting zoo in the modern world. Hell, even horseback riding carries risks. That's no reason to not let kids play with young herbivorous dinosaurs in a petting zoo.

It's like how the original film has that bit where they try to feed the T-rex with the tethered goat, and Grant points out how silly it is. That voice of reason seemed to be missing in the new film

Not exactly. He points out that T.rex doesn't want to be fed, but wants to hunt. Jurassic World shows us that it ends up working in the end because they had conditioned her to react.

[stephen]

Why? We already know the raptors are intelligent. Why is it so hard to fathom that she understands that Rexy isn't her enemy in that moment?

It was just the way it played out. It felt like cheesy, childish monster movie moment.

This - just cheesy.

Don't get me wrong - I enjoyed the movie quite a lot actually.

I saw this cheesy moment a mile away though and I was saying to myself - "don't do it don't do it" and then, they did it.

It was already pushing the limit of cheesiness with the three way battle but I was kind of just buying that and then it pushed the cheese level through the roof.

[HuDaFuK]

The same could be said of any petting zoo in the modern world. Hell, even horseback riding carries risks. That's no reason to not let kids play with young herbivorous dinosaurs in a petting zoo.

Name one zoo in the entire world that lets kids pet and ride baby rhinos.

Not exactly. He points out that T.rex doesn't want to be fed, but wants to hunt.

And in doing so points out the ignorance of the people who planned the park.

The new film took that ignorance and ran with it. There was no one saying, "Do you realise how silly this all its?"

[Alien³]

Not to mention the baby dino petting zoo, Those dinosaurs probably cost millions to produce, and you let kids play around with them and ride them!? those animals are fu**ing fragile.

There's also the fact a baby Triceratops could do some serious damage to a child if it felt even slightly inclined. The whole concept is daft.

The irony is the riding a trike concept comes from the original film.

It's like how the original film has that bit where they try to feed the T-rex with the tethered goat, and Grant points out how silly it is. That voice of reason seemed to be missing in the new film

Except the scene where Owen talks to Claire about how they're methods of feeding the Indominus is wrong, or when he debunks any ideas Hoskins comes up with. Or the scene where Masrani confronts Wu in hindsight about their creation. The film is littered with voice of reason moments its just this time the film is set in a world where having an open dinosaur park is part of the norm.

Name one zoo in the entire world that lets kids pet and ride baby rhinos.

It's not unfathomable...

Spoiler

[close]

The first films put a lot of effort into making the animals move with weight, and make them behave a tad bit "imperfect" like actual animals do. JW´s monsters where just to glorified, and fast. Moving with impossible speed and flexibility. Even if we know today JP´s dinos where scientifically inaccurate, the movie makers at least tried to present it with as much realism as possible.

You sound like Wu from the novel! This paragraph reminds me of this section of the novel.
I highly recommend listening to it!

[HuDaFuK]

Except the scene where Owen talks to Claire about how they're methods of feeding the Indominus is wrong, or when he debunks any ideas Hoskins comes up with. Or the scene where Masrani confronts Wu in hindsight about their creation.

Sure, but they kinda fall on deaf ears when there was so much else going on that struck me as silly.

Is weaponising raptors daft? Of course. But you're already doing plenty of other dumb stuff, why not go the whole hog? The damage had already been done for me.

It's not unfathomable...

They certainly don't look like zoos though.

A rich white colonist propping his kids on top of his pet rhino for a laugh is a long, long way from a zoo letting children ride the animal exhibits. Especially a freaking dinosaur.

[Alien³]

A rich white colonist propping his kids on top of his pet rhino for a laugh is a long, long way from a zoo letting children ride the animal exhibits. Especially a freaking dinosaur.

That is why I said its not unfathomable.

Is weaponising raptors daft? Of course. But you're already doing plenty of other dumb stuff, why not go the whole hog? The damage had already been done for me.

The whole idea of cloning dinosaurs and putting them in a zoo is daft but its entertainment.

Let's not forget we're dealing with a fictional universe where a man and child are chased down a tree by a car only to have it crash on top of them and the first thing said is the boy saying "Well, we're back in the car again." in reality he'd be crying, or screaming, or dead.

The same boy who survives falling in the car from a vertical drop, being electrocuted by 10,000 watts, escaping from raptors in a kitchen and having a rib cage smashed on top of him.

It's what I like call hyper-reality.

[HuDaFuK]

That is why I said its not unfathomable.

Health and safety would love to hear from you

[/quote]

The whole idea of cloning dinosaurs and putting them in a zoo is daft but its entertainment.

But again, it's simply about the subtleties of how it's done. In the original two films, Spielberg got things across in a way that I bought and accepted as believable. In the films since, they haven't done that, and Jurassic World is the worst of the lot on that front. There were just too many moments that stood out as silly.

You simply asked why I thought the film was cheesy and daft. I'm telling you why. Your arguments haven't changed my opinion, just like I don't expect mine to change yours. I just didn't buy into the film, and while it was entertaining enough, I thought it was silly in a way the first two weren't.

[Alien³]

That is why I said its not unfathomable.

Health and safety would love to hear from you

Well luckily we live in a world where heath and safety is 100% accurate...oh wait.

To boot though...

"I told you how many times ... we needed locking mechanisms on the vehicle doors?"

Heath and safety has always been poorly handled within the JP universe. I don't see how a child riding a baby trike is anything shocking or new. It's ridiculousness is the reason people go and see these films. To watch things go wrong. Saying that, the petting zoo had no visible problems, if they had it was off-screen.

But again, it's simply about the subtleties of how it's done. In the original two films, Spielberg got things across in a way that I bought and accepted as believable. In the films since, they haven't done that, and Jurassic World is the worst of the lot on that front. There were just too many moments that stood out as silly.

Well if they ever do clone dinosaurs and decide to open a park we'll certainly see how silly the movies are but alas.

But wait...

In the original two films, Spielberg got things across in a way that I bought and accepted as believable.

Escapism is a fickle thing.