Jurassic Park Series

[Yautja117]

The second was good, but I still like JP the best.

[stephen]

the second was crap

[SpaceMarines]

That makes rexy mad.

[SM]

Heeeeeeyyy!

[SpaceMarines]

 

[Alien³]

That makes rexy mad.

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/5877/trex3.gif

Who put the xenomorph in its mouth 

[Nychus]

Jurassic Park is not unique because of it's effects anymore for the mere reason that you see similar CGI effects elsewhere nowadays(although way more obvious). This is why I prefer the original JP.

I find it strange that a 17 year old movie has better effects than current movies.

It's not that the effects are bad or anything, the problem is that is all people currently give a damn about, the effects as long as they're maximally flashy. We have lost something more important in the process, the storytelling skill. Storytelling is never truly dependent on effects as those only enhance it, playing a small part in the whole essence. If you abuse an effect it takes too important role thus no longer enhances the story but replaces it. And that's usually a death sentence to classic potential(depending on what people consider "classic").

I personally feel that The Lost World led to the existence of Jurassic Park 3 thus is just as bad. The only potential that at least I saw in it was near the beginning. The attack on the girl at the beach could have opened a build-up any type of story in Site B. What we instead got was virtually the same used formula we got in the Conan Doyle namesake and King Kong where a crew of people go to an island to collect specimen/film a documentary and end up bringing back a powerful creature which wreaks havoc in a city before being succumbed either by the animal escaping back to it's homeworld or being shot down. The Lost World: Jurassic Park merely repeats this instead of trying to be it's own thing. Spielberg holds the blame for this for not bothering to try making it be it's own thing and instead turning it into one immense "homage" to other movies. I know, he had some homages in the first movie too but not in this scale. That's the mistake, they just didn't want an original movie when they had the building blocks. The novel had much more material to offer than they ended up using. Filling the holes with material from other films of the genre instead alone is blasphemy. No pun but in my eyes at least the sequels are inferior to their predecessor.

[Alien³]

I personally feel that The Lost World led to the existence of Jurassic Park 3 thus is just as bad.

Alien led to the existence of Alien: Resurrection does that make it bad?

What we instead got was virtually the same used formula we got in the Conan Doyle namesake and King Kong where a crew of people go to an island to collect specimen/film a documentary and end up bringing back a powerful creature which wreaks havoc in a city before being succumbed either by the animal escaping back to it's homeworld or being shot down

But it works so well because if that island really existed people would go there to document them and others would go to hunt them. it's plot maybe be a homage to other classic stories but it works as a chapter in the Jurassic Park series. Come on Stan Winston's t-rex rampaging through San Diego who wouldn't want that?!

[Dark Passenger]

Alien led to the existence of Alien: Resurrection does that make it bad?

no it didnt...alien 3 did.....

[Alien³]

Alien led to the existence of Alien: Resurrection does that make it bad?

no it didnt...alien 3 did.....

But then you could argue Aliens lead to Alien 3, and Alien lead to Aliens so ergo Alien lead to A:R. I'm making the point that if a sequel is bad doesn't always mean the predecessor is bad as well, because of this sentence:

I personally feel that The Lost World led to the existence of Jurassic Park 3 thus is just as bad.

[Dark Passenger]

Alien led to the existence of Alien: Resurrection does that make it bad?

no it didnt...alien 3 did.....

But then you could argue Aliens lead to Alien 3, and Alien lead to Aliens so ergo Alien lead to A:R. I'm making the point that if a sequel is bad doesn't always mean the predecessor is bad as well, because of this sentence:

I personally feel that The Lost World led to the existence of Jurassic Park 3 thus is just as bad.

thats true...but the guy who originally posted it obviously didnt like the lost world so he blames its shittinest for producing another shitty sequel, so to speak...

[Nychus]

Alien led to the existence of Alien: Resurrection does that make it bad?

no it didnt...alien 3 did.....

But then you could argue Aliens lead to Alien 3, and Alien lead to Aliens so ergo Alien lead to A:R. I'm making the point that if a sequel is bad doesn't always mean the predecessor is bad as well, because of this sentence:

I personally feel that The Lost World led to the existence of Jurassic Park 3 thus is just as bad.

But there is a reason for why Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection exist. Their creators had the excuse to make something lackluster. The Lost World is the excuse Jurassic Park 3 needed to exist.

As for the formula, it worked in King Kong and Doyle's Lost World but in "Jurassic Park 2" it's just a repeat of those movies. While it's true many people would go there the public wouldn't necessarily know as very few would return alive and barely anyone would believe them. The only reason the public knows in the movie is because of that city rampage. If they had spared us that predictable note the films still would have more charm. You see, Isla Nublar of the first movie and Isla Sorna of the sequels aren't just "lost continents". There is a clear reason for why those dinosaurs exist the way they do in the story but it never has been given more ground to stand on because of the aim the sequels took. The story was far better before this point in the franchise. There were simply more perplexing and mysterious subplots in how those dinosaurs were made. The sequels waste that charm to beaten dead horses to borrow the popular term. This quickly made the films a beaten horse corpse. I wish that horse corpse was resurrected to it's live counterpart which it won't if all the ideas they come up with are along the lines of "Homocraptors with guns". Just my two cents.

[Alien³]

I agree with you Nychus but I still enjoyed the Lost World very much and JP/// was a good pop corn movie. however they do need to stop doing the whole people trapped on an island full of dinosaurs plot because it's been done to death.

[OmegaZilla]

Solution: Bring all of Sorna's Dinosaurs on America and develop a film a la Reign of Fire! I know!


*hides in bunker*

[SpaceMarines]

That makes rexy mad.

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/5877/trex3.gif

Who put the xenomorph in its mouth 

Yours truly.

Alien led to the existence of Alien: Resurrection does that make it bad?

no it didnt...alien 3 did.....

But then you could argue Aliens lead to Alien 3, and Alien lead to Aliens so ergo Alien lead to A:R. I'm making the point that if a sequel is bad doesn't always mean the predecessor is bad as well, because of this sentence:

I personally feel that The Lost World led to the existence of Jurassic Park 3 thus is just as bad.

But there is a reason for why Alien 3 and Alien: Resurrection exist. Their creators had the excuse to make something lackluster. The Lost World is the excuse Jurassic Park 3 needed to exist.

As for the formula, it worked in King Kong and Doyle's Lost World but in "Jurassic Park 2" it's just a repeat of those movies. While it's true many people would go there the public wouldn't necessarily know as very few would return alive and barely anyone would believe them. The only reason the public knows in the movie is because of that city rampage. If they had spared us that predictable note the films still would have more charm. You see, Isla Nublar of the first movie and Isla Sorna of the sequels aren't just "lost continents". There is a clear reason for why those dinosaurs exist the way they do in the story but it never has been given more ground to stand on because of the aim the sequels took. The story was far better before this point in the franchise. There were simply more perplexing and mysterious subplots in how those dinosaurs were made. The sequels waste that charm to beaten dead horses to borrow the popular term. This quickly made the films a beaten horse corpse. I wish that horse corpse was resurrected to it's live counterpart which it won't if all the ideas they come up with are along the lines of "Homocraptors with guns". Just my two cents.

Ah, great. You just made me come close to hating the Lost World.