1. Find your way through the deepest dungeon in the 18th Mini Mapping Contest Poll.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. A brave new world lies beyond the seven seas. Join the 34th Modeling Contest today!
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Check out the Staff job openings thread.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Hive 3 Remoosed BETA - NOW LIVE. Go check it out at BETA Hive Workshop! Post your feedback in this new forum BETA Feedback.
Dismiss Notice
60,000 passwords have been reset on July 8, 2019. If you cannot login, read this.

[SPOILERS] Jurassic World

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Razosh, Jul 8, 2015.

  1. Razosh

    Razosh

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,860
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    So I just came home from watching Jurassic World and I wanted to know what all of you thought?

    For my part this was one of the films that I grew up on and it sparked my childhood love for dinosaurs. In the first film it always felt that the main characters were the dinosaurs and the humans where just side characters and that was my hope for Jurassic World. I will say that it did manage to live up to my expectations in the later half of the film. For the first half I was just so tired of the human plot and the divorce story and what not that I just didn't care about. But for the later half I felt it turn around when the velociraptors were called to hunt down the indomisaurus and I was just thinking to myself this is a truly amazing film.

    Overall I would say that the film is pretty good if all of it had held up to the quality of the later half of the film it would have been one of the best movie experiences of my life. You just ended up loving and cheering for Blue, Echo, Delta and Charlie and every time one of them died a voice inside me cried out in frustration. And in the ending fight scene were (whom I presume was the alpha female Blue) returned from the dead to fight alongside the tyrannosaurus against the indomisaurus my heart was beating faster than I've ever remembered it do. The ending was in my opinion next to flawless and ended in the exact same way as Jurassic Park did, it was great.

    What in my opinion made the film good though was that the producers unlike me didn't see the dinosaurs as the protagonists which made them willing to kill of the dinosaurs you cared about which made me have a genuine fear for the lives of the protagonists which is VERY rare nowadays not even GoT. In the end had all the humans died I would not have cared because they were not the stars of the film. But as it is the whole film I have to judge it as a whole and I have to say that it's good but only slightly above average because the first half was just so boring as it focused way to much on the humans and not nearly enough on the dinosaurs and that's why I was there to see dinosaurs do cool shit.
     
    Last edited: Jul 14, 2015
  2. OutsiderXE

    OutsiderXE

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,118
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    3
    Resources:
    3
    The only moment I was bored was when the kids were talking about fear. Other than that it was really fun. Much better than I had expected.
     
  3. Razosh

    Razosh

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,860
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    I also really hated the moment when the brontosaurus died and the kids aunt shed a tear. That tear felt so forced into the story to make the character progress it was so immensely bad it was unbelievable.

    I will say this though, the tyrannosaurus rex vs indominus rex battle made the Gandalf vs Balrog fighting scene look like two toddlers fighting. It is without a doubt the best fighting scene I've ever seen on film.
     
  4. Orcnet

    Orcnet

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2010
    Messages:
    3,855
    Resources:
    4
    Maps:
    3
    Tutorials:
    1
    Resources:
    4
    And about the final fight scene, all the dinosaurs during that fight were females. I just noticed it.
     
  5. Razosh

    Razosh

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,860
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    Yep they sure were, mammals are one of the few groups where male specimens are predominantly bigger. Blue is a female, the Tyrannosaurus Rex was a female and the Indominus Rex was a female. (Not sure of the water creature though.) Jurassic World would most likely do what all other parks do and pick the bigger specimens for display therefor when it comes to mammals males are often picked and when displaying something like a Bald Eagle or a Saltwater Crocodile females are picked since they by far out scale their male counterparts. If you want even more ridiculous size differences though look at insect queens or Clown fishes for example.
     
  6. Edge45

    Edge45

    Joined:
    May 15, 2013
    Messages:
    2,568
    Resources:
    27
    Models:
    8
    Icons:
    17
    Template:
    2
    Resources:
    27
    That creature is a Mososaurus

    Anyway, it was really amazing, though the half part was neutral for me since some movies need some explanation, the battle was the best part for me, and I also like the names of those raptors, man, wish I had pets like those
     
  7. OutsiderXE

    OutsiderXE

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2004
    Messages:
    1,118
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    3
    Resources:
    3
    Arent all dinosaurs in that park female? They said in Jurassic Park 1 they dont breed male so the dinosaurs cant reproduce by themselves.
     
  8. Razosh

    Razosh

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,860
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    What's canon in Jurassic Park isn't always canon in Jurassic World and in Jurassic Park there were males as they had taken DNA from frogs who could switch gender. ;D
     
  9. Gilles

    Gilles

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    8,464
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    It was Michael Bay with dinos instead of explosions. I enjoyed laughing at it with my friends.
     
  10. PurgeandFire

    PurgeandFire

    Code Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,430
    Resources:
    18
    Icons:
    1
    Spells:
    4
    Tutorials:
    9
    JASS:
    4
    Resources:
    18
    It was definitely fun to watch. Great scenery, very nice CGI, cool dinosaurs.

    As others have mentioned, the plot wasn't all too interesting (at least the human-related parts). I didn't care about the divorce that much, and the army guy was just far too obnoxious for there to be any dynamic to his character. Indian guy was hilarious. Loved him. Chris Pratt.. hard to take him seriously due to his other roles. He did a good job, but it is just one of those things you can't shake off. Kinda like when I was watching Elijah Wood in Wilfred--I just kept picturing Frodo.

    One complaint I have relates to the "amusement park" theme. (that they sort of mentioned in that monologue with the moustache guy talking about Jurassic Park) The mystery was gone for the most part. Compare how you felt in this island vs. the original Jurassic Park or better yet--King Kong. It definitely was missing that "discovery" feeling.

    Also--many people died, but it was hard to really feel sympathy or frightened since most of the people were just random bystanders, and their mass hysteria with the pterodactyls wasn't all too exciting considering the other big hybrid dinosaur was still on the loose. Although, I was surprised the secretary died.

    The part I found most interesting was when the boys went off on their own in the gyrosphere. I really wish that had lasted longer, because that felt like the most intense/adventurous moment of the film.

    The concept of the raptors was pretty cool, and the fights were great. I kinda expected it to be a dinosaur showdown, but not much wrong with that. The mosasaurus was amazing. I wish they had done a bit more with the underwater creatures since I've always found the prehistoric underwater animals to be so fascinating and unexplored, but I understand that wasn't their focus.

    In summary:
     
  11. Tauer

    Tauer

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2004
    Messages:
    1,333
    Resources:
    29
    Models:
    25
    Skins:
    4
    Resources:
    29
    I really liked it. It's the best Jurassic Park sequel. It doesn't beat the original but is still better than The Lost World and definately a lot better than JP3.

    The characters were alright, nothing amazing, but if you think about it neither were the characters in the original. Probably the only interesting characters in the original were Malcom and Hammond. I think Pratt's character was great. He felt like a mix between Grant and Malcom. Claire was a cool character as well, who probably had the most development over the film. The kids were, as you might expect, quite annoying. But so were the kids from the original, so nothing new there.

    CGI was amazing, anyone saying otherwise are just haters. Big improvement over the originals which is to be expected of course. Many of the scenes haters refer to when they say the "animatronics" were more memorably, were in fact CGI to begin with. There were animatronics used yes, but only for close ups.

    Death of the secretary was brutal.

    I wasn't a fan of the idea of the I-Rex originally. I thought it seemed out of place with all the "natural" dinosaurs and it seemed too much like a monster from a monster-movie. But then Dr. Wu summed it up perfectly:

    This is how it's been since the beginning. If Jurassic Park were to be realistic or natural, the dinos from the first film would've had feathers. And the raptors would've been the size of turkeys. So I think this moment with Dr. Wu was sorta of an eye opener, not just for Jurassic World but for the whole franchise.

    Only thing I didn't like was during the last dinosaur showdown. It was amazing, don't get me wrong, but I didn't really like the mosasaurus sweeping in killing the I-Rex in the end. It just seemed way too convenient and cheesy, even for a JP movie.

    All in all, I really enjoyed it. Looking forward to a sequel.
     
  12. Razosh

    Razosh

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,860
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    I agree the only aquatic dinosaur that has been touched before is the Spinosaurus in Jurassic Park III but its depiction was even more off than their depiction of the Velociraptor. :D At least in Jurassic World they explained that by saying they had genetically modified all their dinosaurs. There were even some nice details that they did not mention, for instance the Triceratops youngsters had antlers that bent in the opposite direction that the adults did which also was the case in reality.

    That is a bit of an underestimation an average Velociraptor would probably weigh about 15 kg while the biggest of the turkeys would weigh about a third of that. But you're right that archaeologists believe them to have looked something like this.

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Dr Super Good

    Dr Super Good

    Spell Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    26,199
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    1
    Spells:
    2
    Resources:
    3
    The entire concept of the film makes no sense. In a world where cloning technology is that advanced how can any dinosaur pose a threat?

    You have a giant mutated tyrannous on the lose? Track it with a drone and blow it up. Shoot it if you have to, even in WW2 guns existed that could penetrate over a feet of steel plating and could be mount onto a tank, more than enough to take down something unarmoured.

    Why on earth did it even need tracking? Did their remote tracking technology fail or something?! Surely something that big could be spotted anywhere from an aircraft? What was the anti-terrorism squad doing about this, or is that limited to hijacked passenger aircraft?

    The first film at least made some sense. It was a disaster that happened due to bad decisions (no fail-safes, bad gene splices, hiring the wrong staff, cutting corners etc). One could accept what happened due to plain old bad decisions and the park was closed as a result. Especially at the time the failure of computer systems was quite a topic as back then computers were quite special and not all risks associated with them were fully understood.

    However in 2015 there is no excuse any more for such mistakes. Not only did they have the failures of the first film to learn upon (bring heavy weaponry, keep track of animals better, more fail safes) but they also have all the latest technology at their disposal. A place that has genetically modified dinosaurs and lethal electric fences would have armed drones, sentry guns and all forms of modern day weapons for security purposes. Let us not forget the chance of "kill switches" placed into every dinosaur, especially experimental ones for remote termination.

    From the sounds of it they just wanted over sized dinosaurs fighting and killing each other. To allow this they threw out all sense and threw in stupidity. How I miss films with non-killing orientated plots.
     
  14. Zwiebelchen

    Zwiebelchen

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    7,014
    Resources:
    12
    Models:
    5
    Maps:
    1
    Spells:
    1
    Tutorials:
    1
    JASS:
    4
    Resources:
    12
    I haven't seen the movie yet.
    Did they adress the problem of dinosaurs actually having feathers? I know, it's hard selling dinosaur toys to children if they look like giant chicken, but we just have to fight that "dinosaurs are reptiles" fallacy eventually...

    To be honest, that concept worked well for Pacific Rim...
    It's not like people don't enjoy pointless action. But please leave my dear classics like Indiana Jones, Star Wars und Jurassic Park out of this...

    Back to the Future is like the last bastion of classic movies that wasn't butchered yet.
     
  15. Dr Super Good

    Dr Super Good

    Spell Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    26,199
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    1
    Spells:
    2
    Resources:
    3
    The originals of these were both very good storyline wise. They had a good balance between action and plotline which made sense. Films recently focus too much on gory action rather than on the plot why it is all happening. To the point you are sure 80% of the named characters dying is for the violence more than as part of the story.
     
  16. Gilles

    Gilles

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    8,464
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    See, my complaint is that they let story get in the way of dinosaurs. I don't give a flying fuck about some stupid kids divorcing parents. I came to see dinosaurs tear shit up.

    In fact, that movie would have been a million times better, and that's no hyperbole, if the kids were removed from the movie, and more dinosaurs were added. Oh god I hated those kids.
     
  17. Dr Super Good

    Dr Super Good

    Spell Reviewer

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2005
    Messages:
    26,199
    Resources:
    3
    Maps:
    1
    Spells:
    2
    Resources:
    3
    Except why should Dinosaurs be tearing up "shit". They are not demons or inherently malevolent. How could they even tear up anything in a world where humans possess enough firepower to destroy everything.

    Even a "T-Rex" would not be able to do much to concrete and steel structures. That is unless idiots designed the place and made everything out of metal covered paper and paper mache. Or maybe the things they call Dinosaurs are not Dinosaurs but rather sophisticated war machines made of carbon fibre and titanium which raises the question why they would allow any civilian anywhere near one.
     
  18. Razosh

    Razosh

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    3,860
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    No they are by no means evil I agree with you they are animals just like you or me. But if the setting of the past three movies have taught us it's that things goes goes south real swift and dinosaurs starts eating people and wrecking shit up. It is simply to a Tyrannosaurus Rex human appears to be below them on the food chain so obviously they would see us as prey. In Sweden for instance a human hasn't been attacked by a wolf for centuries and that's because their parents teaches them to avoid humans. That's why in Sweden you're taught that the louder you're the safer you're because all large carnivores in Sweden are scared of humans. When you're in a zoo however you build up trust and you remove the fear factor and that's when animals are actually dangerous.
     
  19. PurgeandFire

    PurgeandFire

    Code Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2006
    Messages:
    7,430
    Resources:
    18
    Icons:
    1
    Spells:
    4
    Tutorials:
    9
    JASS:
    4
    Resources:
    18
    The reasoning in the movie was that (1) dinosaurs were kept in captivity and the humans were generally annoying (e.g. velociraptors & the army guy) (2) with the indominus rex, she killed for sport with the existential question: who am I? Where am I on the food chain?

    that's why ppl got shrekt. you'd prolly do it too since there isn't much to lose in the first place
     
  20. Gilles

    Gilles

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    8,464
    Resources:
    0
    Resources:
    0
    I'm just waiting for the sequel, when they splice raptors with humans!