Jurassic World - Part 10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Frankly, focusing on one characters pretty much ignores the main issue with this film, that the entire cast of characters are terrible. They are all badly written and badly developed.

The one character I did like was Simon Masrani, so of course he was the first to die.
 
The characters in the first film contribute a lot more to their film than any of the others do to theirs. In JW, apart from the military guy who was a walking turd of a character, the others aren't terrible to me, just super-light. The post-JP films are more reliant on the dinosaurs to save the day and this is the one that pulls it off best for me. Just reminds me why the first film is one of my all time favourite films.

The characters in the first film weren't especially deep or anything, but they felt like real people, were quite distinctive, and the actors performed admirably. Even the supporting characters like Muldoon, Nedry, Arnold, and Gennaro are more interesting than the new characters in all three sequels (the one exception being Roland from TLW).
 
Why doesn't the park have a better escape plan? Like shouldn't there be a shelter everyone can hide in if the dinosaurs escape? Shouldn't there be boats ready to evacuate the island at all times?
 
new video showing the creation of the Apatosaurus. :)

[YT]jfcqQf61S-k[/YT]

Man I love seeing the animatronics work behind the scenes, such a wonderful art and hopefully something that is kept alive and well in movies. The Apatosaurus scene is a fantastic sister scene to the Triceratops scene in JP.
 
Just got out of the theater. Even better the second tme and the 3D was very enjoyable and unobtrusive. Im gonna bunp the film up to an 8/10.

About Claire, so what yall are telling me is Claire is a sexist archetype because the Type B personality enployees dont "get" her and think shes is cold and weird and the film wants us to agree with the Type B personalities in the film?

Screw the sexism. Thats kind of a dick thing towards anyone who identifies as a Type A personality regardless of gender. Would yall be as mad if Claire had been a Type A career driven male character named Carl that none of the Type B employees understood or liked? Or are yall just made cause she is a female, cause frankly I think its cheap characterization and a lazy arc for the character regardless of which gender they made the character.

Like I said tho I enjoyed it more this time. This Claire business really is a mountain out of a molehill imo. Women and we Type A's will survive and women arent going to lose theier right to vote or be career driven just because the writers of this film were ***** about Type A personalities and women. As a person who can relate to Claire in more than one way I feel zero pressure to change who I am based on anything in this film.

Yeah, 3D was really well done in this movie, most enjoyable 3D movie experience this year.

The thing is, Claire was not portrayed as stereotypical woman in this movie, but the awful dialogue made a different impression to some, I don't care either way.
 
Last edited:
I think Judy Greer really nailed her five minutes of screen time. I like her.
 
On the actors and characters:

I feel that we can mostly agree the cast was above the skill set required for their characters. Howard, the child actors, the divorcing parents, and Kingpin 2.0 (sorry, don't want to misspell his name) all had predictable character types and jobs in the story. And all of them took advantage of the few opportunities to display more range. Kingpin 2.0 went hammy, but not horrifically hammy; there's really no way to make that character work seriously without being unintentionally cheesy, so a little bit of intentional cheese goes a long way. Howard demonstrated great skill with comic timing, and as the only character to have an arc (whether it was sexist or not) executed it very well. The kids and parents, meanwhile, seemed to be intent on competently tackling their by-the-book segments and then exploited the little divergences from those archetypes: in particular, big brother seemed like an acceptable parody of modern teenagers, but showed genuine care and compassion to little brother when the script gave him the time to.
 
What I liked about JW was how the i-Rex escape was going on, and they kept cutting away to the fully functioning park with people oblivious to what was coming their way. Sort of like passengers on the Titanic playing with ice on the decks while the ship is slowly sinking.
 
Aw, that's probably not very good advice in the long run, but I appreciate it any way. :D :highfive:

Just want to chime in and let you know that you are one of my favorite posters! You always have great insight, but even more importantly I love how classy you are. :yay:
 
What I liked about JW was how the i-Rex escape was going on, and they kept cutting away to the fully functioning park with people oblivious to what was coming their way. Sort of like passengers on the Titanic playing with ice on the decks while the ship is slowly sinking.

I liked that as well. The I-Rex to me was ****ing awesome. It was new and fresh, scary and intimidating. I think it did for JW what the Spino couldn't do for JP3.
 
I liked that as well. The I-Rex to me was ****ing awesome. It was new and fresh, scary and intimidating. I think it did for JW what the Spino couldn't do for JP3.
I agree. It also helped that the i-Rex was built up as this scary creature as well before we even saw it in action.
 
I agree. It also helped that the i-Rex was built up as this scary creature as well before we even saw it in action.

The I-Rex definitely had more build up than the Spino did.
 
I disagree. You can see it with how she interacts with Owen and her relationship with her nephews. It is tied to her gender, the same way Owen's Alpha status is.

Not at all, friend. You're looking way too deeply into this...everybody complaining her character is sexist is looking too deep to find something that simply isn't there. Her interaction with the kids was awkward because she didn't spend time with her family, she didn't have a real connection with them at first. That's not something exclusive to women so how that qualifies as a reason is behind me. And Owen's Alpha status is because he has to maintain enough control to not get eaten so maybe those who found the movie to be sexist just didn't see the same movie as the rest of us.

I mean, for Christ's sake, the antagonists of the movie are primarily female. :o

And I remember people complaining about Bryce running around the jungle in heels (as if she had a place to change shoes) and then we find out it was her damn idea the whole time.

See, it's stupid nitpicks like this that leave me scratching my head. If you want sexism, go watch a horror movie. They've been making sexist characters for years & we're all fine with it.

Also, I think to say any actor could've portrayed Owen is a bit laughable. I'm not saying his character is something complex that couldn't be done by anyone else, but people like the character because of Pratt.

I love Josh Brolin but he's made some major duds & his biggest work will no doubt be as Thanos, from which he'll likely be seen in much better productions. But if he were in JW, I guarantee it wouldn't be as big. Brolin, as awesome a guy as he is, doesn't have the same likability that Pratt has right now.

Anybody who doesn't recognize Pratt's importance here is seriously overlooking how popular he's become across the board.
 
The one character I did like was Simon Masrani, so of course he was the first to die.

Masrani didn't die until close to the third act...plenty of people bit the dust before him so he definitely wasn't first to die.

But yeah, I do agree that his character was great. Honestly, I liked him more than Hammond. Yeah, they made similar mistakes but Masrani seemed to realize the depth of his mistake more than Hammond...who just kept moving along as if everything was A-okay.
 
Just want to chime in and let you know that you are one of my favorite posters! You always have great insight, but even more importantly I love how classy you are. :yay:
Aw, thank you sir. You're not so bad yourself. :)
 
The characters in the first film weren't especially deep or anything, but they felt like real people, were quite distinctive, and the actors performed admirably. Even the supporting characters like Muldoon, Nedry, Arnold, and Gennaro are more interesting than the new characters in all three sequels (the one exception being Roland from TLW).

Yeah, we're not talking Oscar-bait or anything but very real like you say. I don't have much against the JW characters, there's just not much to them and I wouldn't care if I never saw them again while many of the JP characters are an attraction in themselves as well as the dinosaurs. Same goes for the supporting JP characters as you mention but of course Roland is the exception, what a guy! Postlethwaite can't play bland/uninteresting even when he tries.
 
The I-Rex definitely had more build up than the Spino did.

And yet I still think Spinosaurus had the better suspense and 'gotcha!' moments. The clever(even though not very logical sometimes) ways it'd periodically show up got me more than I-Rex did.
 
It's not the Spino's fault it was stuck in a duff film with joke human characters and instructed to take out the fan favourite T Rex. We need more Spino love.
 
I liked the phone gag even though logically you'd not be able to hear it from Spino's stomach.
 
And yet I still think Spinosaurus had the better suspense and 'gotcha!' moments. The clever(even though not very logical sometimes) ways it'd periodically show up got me more than I-Rex did.

Yea, the one thing I will give credit to Joe Johnston is that some scenes have suspense build-up and "gotcha" moments in JP 3, which was sorely lacking in JW.
 
Last edited:
You can tell Joe Johnston used horror influences. The phone thing was unrealistic, but effective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"