Jurassic Park IV - Part 1

[Ultimatehero]

Well, he kind of is. Hammond always has had a mad scientist vibe about him. He desperately wants dinosaurs to coexist with man that any past indiscretions he would willfully ignore.

Basically the guy who brings the dinosaurs to the city reminds me of who Hammond probably would have been like in his early years. And that was probably the point with his character.

As said in the sequel, all of this has happened and he still kept the island open where tourists could unknowingly land on it?! That's not the mind of a sane man lol.

As to who could play that kind of a mad scientist and still make him enjoyable, no idea. But with a Robert Downey Jr or Hugh Laurie type who play lovable mad geniuses - we would view him as the same old John Hammond just younger.

He could be called a villain, I think it's just willful ignorance because of his life's passion. Many scientists in real life have this blind ignorance thing going on due to their passion. I mean, building the atomic bomb and then being devastated by its effects - I highly doubt he didn't know what he was building, but he remained blissfully ignorant of the effects it would have on people while at the same time thinking about those effects as an advancement.

If your mind is too into it, all you can think about is keeping it alive. Somethings went wrong, but THEN he brought in a whole security team and high tech gates. And for a while that worked - Hammond would think it is safe to bring others in. It flows with his insanity in JP2.

 

[Gianakin_]

It can be made to make sense in-universe and what you've said works. I just think it's too much for John Hammond. In Jp1 and 2 it's indeed willful ignorance (and a touch of madness), but with your JP0 it would be too much for him, I think.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Say something goes horribly wrong with very little infrastructure. Very little security. Then he finds a way to make it work. He finds electronic gates. He finds a security staff. He implements all of these high tech procedures that- for YEARS worked. If in a matter of years nothing goes wrong - a good substantial time - he'd probably think that that's the past and that will never happen again. I think that would make him even more of a tragic figure in JP1 because he's, for the first time, seeing this flaw that he has and how it cost those closest to him. Then in JP2 he's like an alcoholic trying to recover yet still has that one bottle of beer tucked away in the refrigerator. To me that just seems like a tragic figure rather than a villain.

 

[Gianakin_]

How long ago would you set it? The 70s?

 

[Ultimatehero]

That's one way. Another way and best way is setting it in modern day. With what scientists are working on today, Jurassic Park is no longer science fiction - it's becoming science FACT. Adding an additional layer to it. Perhaps some dinosaurs we can't bring back. But with scientists working on already resurrecting a wooly mammoth then being so stupid in trying to resurrect a sabretooth tiger (who has got to be a thousand times more dangerous than any wild cat that we've got now) - this thing can really thrive and seem possible.These John Hammond scientists exist.

As per connection to the other films - think of them either as some other time line or just taking place years later. Mass audiences are already well familiar with this direction.

The classic Hollywood origin/reboot to take full advantage of the scientific atmosphere we're actually living in today. To me it can potentially be a very relevant film. Science and discovery was at the forefront of the first film, what the subsequent films lacked - this would be bringing everything back but in a very original way and a way that commentates on the scientific world we're living in now.

The real Jurassic Park:
[YT]68QhIQLeVUA[/YT]
I really see this as bringing a lot more to the film, it's no longer science fiction - it's chillingly science fact.

 

[TheDreamMaster]

It can be made to make sense in-universe and what you've said works. I just think it's too much for John Hammond. In Jp1 and 2 it's indeed willful ignorance (and a touch of madness), but with your JP0 it would be too much for him, I think.

See, this is one of the only reasons I'd push for a reboot, because Hammond actually was quite the villian in the original. Richard Attenbourough brought a lot of that nice guy with a touch of madness to Speilberg's version, but Crichton's was quite power hungry, and indeed was the polar opposite of the film version. In fact, in the movie we were sort of made to dislike the lawyer because he liked money, when in fact ennero was a really good character in the book and Hammond was indeed quite geared to getting the money.

 

[Destructus86]

Do we even know anything about the official storyline yet?

I would actually prefer it take place in the future. Not the distant future...maybe something like 2030 or close to it.

 

[Edguy]

That's one way. Another way and best way is setting it in modern day. With what scientists are working on today, Jurassic Park is no longer science fiction - it's becoming science FACT. Adding an additional layer to it. Perhaps some dinosaurs we can't bring back. But with scientists working on already resurrecting a wooly mammoth then being so stupid in trying to resurrect a sabretooth tiger (who has got to be a thousand times more dangerous than any wild cat that we've got now) - this thing can really thrive and seem possible.These John Hammond scientists exist.

The classic Hollywood origin/reboot to take full advantage of the scientific atmosphere we're actually living in today. To me it can potentially be a very relevant film. Science and discovery was at the forefront of the first film, what the subsequent films lacked - this would be bringing everything back but in a very original way and a way that commentates on the scientific world we're living in now.

The real Jurassic Park:
[YT]68QhIQLeVUA[/YT]
I really see this as bringing a lot more to the film, it's no longer science fiction - it's chillingly science fact.

It's funny how everyone think of all extinct predators as some kind of exotic killer monsters--they're just animals, just like the ones that live today. That goes for the dinosaurs as well.

As to bringing more science to the film; big yes, as long as it's good science. Films trying to explain stuff and be all "sciency", but without actual scientific credibility.. That's just painful..

I also vote for a reboot. Jurassic Park's value isn't in it's story or characters, but in the concept; people love dinosaurs. A reboot with modified scientific content, to fit with recent advances in the fields, and a brand new setting and cast, would, imo, be the best way to go!

The main thing they need to focus on is the wonder and how spectacular it is that there's GOD DAMN DINOSAURS. The scene in JP1 where they first see the Brachiosaurus encompasses what Jurassic Park is all about.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Exactly. Capturing the magic of "firsts."

Off-track, I might be wrong but wouldn't a sabretooth be more dangerous than a lion, jaguar, and tiger?

 

[A Necessary Evil]

No bad guy Hammond. In the book, yeah he was an evil Walt Disney, but in the movies he's a kindly old man, but the books and JP movie-verse are completely different beasts. Also, I doubt he'll even be in this one, since JP3 he was in there by name only, and in TLW seemed to be in failing health.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Unless they go back to the beginning in a 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' type way (with a different tone) to take full advantage of the technological and scientific world we are living in today which would then turn science fiction into science fact. The fact that Jurassic Park is no longer just a thing for the movies, but in some cases the science from that is coming into fruition. I would be very surprised if the writers passed this opportunity up.

Also, I'm uncertain why people think that means "evil" John Hammond. Do we call Oppenheimer evil or a villain? No. His creation led to bad things, things he without a doubt knew was coming but still couldn't fathom. To me it just means he's a tragic figure with a dream and an inability to think much beyond said dream, a flaw he showed us in JPII. A flaw many scientists have without being portrayed as evil.

 

[BlueLightning]

Also, I'm uncertain why people think that means "evil" John Hammond. Do we call Oppenheimer evil or a villain? No. His creation led to bad things, things he without a doubt knew was coming but still couldn't fathom. To me it just means he's a tragic figure with a dream and an inability to think much beyond said dream, a flaw he showed us in JPII. A flaw many scientists have without being portrayed as evil.

In the movies he is a good fellow, but in the books he could be labeled as evil.

 

[Hunter Rider]

I'm surprised at this development and even more so that it will be out next year, there just doesn't seem to be time for what should be a large scale project.

Spielberg, along with nearly every other great director from that period, is getting a bit soft in his old age and doesn't have that edge any more in my opinion. Would love for him to prove me wrong and make a Jurassic Park with the impact of the 1st for future generations to experience. JP1 was one of my best ever theatre experiences.

Mine too, the cinema felt like it was shaking during the T-Rex attack on the tour car with the kids in.

 

[Gianakin_]

See, this is one of the only reasons I'd push for a reboot, because Hammond actually was quite the villian in the original. Richard Attenbourough brought a lot of that nice guy with a touch of madness to Speilberg's version, but Crichton's was quite power hungry, and indeed was the polar opposite of the film version. In fact, in the movie we were sort of made to dislike the lawyer because he liked money, when in fact ennero was a really good character in the book and Hammond was indeed quite geared to getting the money.

Now that's true. Hammond was a total *****e in the book.

 

[Gianakin_]

That's one way. Another way and best way is setting it in modern day. With what scientists are working on today, Jurassic Park is no longer science fiction - it's becoming science FACT. Adding an additional layer to it. Perhaps some dinosaurs we can't bring back. But with scientists working on already resurrecting a wooly mammoth then being so stupid in trying to resurrect a sabretooth tiger (who has got to be a thousand times more dangerous than any wild cat that we've got now) - this thing can really thrive and seem possible.These John Hammond scientists exist.

As per connection to the other films - think of them either as some other time line or just taking place years later. Mass audiences are already well familiar with this direction.

The classic Hollywood origin/reboot to take full advantage of the scientific atmosphere we're actually living in today. To me it can potentially be a very relevant film. Science and discovery was at the forefront of the first film, what the subsequent films lacked - this would be bringing everything back but in a very original way and a way that commentates on the scientific world we're living in now.

The real Jurassic Park:
[YT]68QhIQLeVUA[/YT]
I really see this as bringing a lot more to the film, it's no longer science fiction - it's chillingly science fact.

So you're basically talking a reboot, not a prequel. If so, I'd totally be down with that.

 

[Ultimatehero]

Well technically it would be both, as said like 'Rise of the Planet of the Apes' we all know where it's going due to the original films making it a prequel BUT one not restricted to the timeline of the films that came after it. Another example is Oz: The Great and Powerful. X-Men: First Class, not so much- still timeline confused there...

 

[the last son]

Does anyone want Sam Neill back?

 

[Destructus86]

Does anyone want Sam Neill back?

No. I want Guy Pearce in the lead role. (i'm serious)

 

[Doctor Jones]

The only way Grant or Neil could return is not for them to go to the island. It has to be something that is effecting people on a grand scale. Otherwise, why the hell would they go there again?

 

[Edguy]

I'm sure we'll get an all new cast, maybe some cameos. Hopefully, they'll reboot it. I think there's a good chance that it will, at least, be a half-way reboot. That is, new cast, new setting, but parallels for those that want to see them.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

i actually kind if like the idea of a grown up Tim heading back to the island

 

[Donut]

i actually kind if like the idea of a grown up Tim heading back to the island

Tim & Lex ending up back on the Island (for whatever reason). Followed by Grant & Malcolm going on a rescue mission. Surely those two people they care about. Would be enough reason for those two to go back & everyone else refusing to help etc. Something like an enemy of Hammond's kidnaps Tim & Lex & leaves them stranded on the original Island & Hammond calls in for help ?

 

[Airwings]

i actually kind if like the idea of a grown up Tim heading back to the island

That's the best premise for a JP4.
And I want him to be bad-ass.

 

[georgec]

Zombie dinosaurs?

 

[Victarion]

Dinosaurs carrying a virus that mutated and grew from lack of a controlled diet. But no zombies. Something like the bubonic plague, but in dinosaurs.