Jurassic World - Part 9

[Legendver2]

Wasn't the I-Rex made to be bigger and badder than a T-Rex hence

Spoiler

Rexy had trouble defeating it by herself. If I'm not mistaken, the Indominus includes Rex and Raptor genes right, so I find it fitting to have both animals team up to take it down. Dat raptor riding rex action though!

Seeing Rexy return in this one makes me wonder if Blue will return with a new pack in the future.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Ugh, guys. That movie was bad. The script was an absolute trainwreck with some of the worst characterization (save for Pratt) and dialogue I've seen in awhile. Over CG'd and barely interesting. That big ol' climax should have been thrilling, not numbing. Also, the Mosasaurus kept changing proportions. That bugged me.

 

[Waldini]

Ugh, guys. That movie was bad. The script was an absolute trainwreck with some of the worst characterization (save for Pratt) and dialogue I've seen in awhile. Over CG'd and barely interesting. That big ol' climax should have been thrilling, not numbing. Also, the Mosasaurus kept changing proportions. That bugged me.

Did it bother you in Jurassic Park that nearly every dinosaur changed proportions?

I guess when you started hating the movie since the first trailer ... that hate is hard to let go. Everyone is entitled to their own opinnion though. But it feels like people have forgotten how to enjoy movies nowadays.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Did it bother you in Jurassic Park that nearly every dinosaur changed proportions?

I guess when you started hating the movie since the first trailer ... that hate is hard to let go. Everyone is entitled to their own opinnion though. But it feels like people have forgotten how to enjoy movies nowadays.

Yep, my inability to enjoy movies is why Jurassic World is a bad one. This movie had no weight. None of the characters had real reasons for being, nor were they well established. If I can't get attached to the living characters, I damn sure better be attached to the dino's, but seeings as they were weightless CG constructs I can't connect that either. I was very optimistic for this film, I love Jurassic Park with every part of me. I even got a soft spot for JP3, but Jurassic World was very dull.

 

[ThePhantasm]

The CG I don't care as much about, but the criticisms about the characterization are concerning. Hopefully I'll see this over the weekend to find out for myself.

 

[divan]

The characters did perfectly fine to care about them. Specially the Owen, Claire but also Raptors and the I-Rex which are the stars of the movie and not the other way around. This isn't Philosoraptor - The Movie and shouldn't be.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

Characterisation is a big problem with JW. Take this scene for instance

Spoiler

Bryces character, after being a total self involved, corporate stooge for 50% of the film all of a sudden sees a dying dino and cries over it. Umm no, that's not how it works.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

Also am i the only one who

Spoiler

Got sad when the kids visited the old visitors Centre from the first film?. Seeing the old night vision goggles, the cars etc. All that scene did for me was make me miss all the old characters from the first film more. Made me wish I was watching them all come back one last time to the old stomping ground.

 

[divan]

Characterisation is a big problem with JW. Take this scene for instance

Spoiler

Bryces character, after being a total self involved, corporate stooge for 50% of the film all of a sudden sees a dying dino and cries over it. Umm no, that's not how it works.

Why not? She isn't a sociopath and it's her fault. You talk as if she were the Joker before that scene. Saying that something just "doesn't work like that" is the equivalent of saying "I didn't like it, therefore it can't be good this way".

And no, characterization wasn't a problem in JW. You may have disliked that there wasn't more characterization, but again, this isn't a character-based piece. There was enough to make you care about the characters in the situation they were.

 

[Marvolo]

Well the characters can't be any worse than than the ****heads that were in JP3. Manic screaming mom, dorky dad, grumpy Alan, the Boy Wonder, and Alan's partner. Oh and who can forget the cannon fodder gang of bargain-bin mercs. Absolutely riveting characters those were.

 

[divan]

Well the characters can't be any worse than than the ****heads that were in JP3. Manic screaming mom, dorky dad, grumpy Alan, the Boy Wonder, and Alan's partner. Absolutely riveting characters those were.

Don't forget the main characters in The Lost World - Julianne Sue, Homicidal Ecologist, Jeff Goldblum and Batgirl. Thank god that one had Pete at least.

 

[Legendver2]

Why not? She isn't a sociopath and it's her fault. You talk as if she were the Joker before that scene. Saying that something just "doesn't work like that" is the equivalent of saying "I didn't like it, therefore it can't be good this way".

And no, characterization wasn't a problem in JW. You may have disliked that there wasn't more characterization, but again, this isn't a character-based piece. There was enough to make you care about the characters in the situation they were.

I'd rep this if I could. It's one of those classic tropes

Spoiler

of experiencing things from an outside financial point of view, not caring about the well being of the assets, and then actually being up close and personal to an actual living thing and seeing the asset as a living breathing creature. That can change anyone's perspective.

Surprisingly, the kids were actually not annoying in this one. I liked the theme of brotherly bond between them, but they could've done without the [BLACKOUT]divorce[/BLACKOUT] plotline, since that was never addressed again and there was no closure to it. They could've just stuck with the issue of [BLACKOUT]big bro going off to college as the primary factor of them separating.[/BLACKOUT] Would've had the same effect, and more streamlined.

 

[titansupes]

Characterisation is a big problem with JW. Take this scene for instance

Spoiler

Bryces character, after being a total self involved, corporate stooge for 50% of the film all of a sudden sees a dying dino and cries over it. Umm no, that's not how it works.

Spoiler

It harkens back to earlier in the movie, when she's talking to her boss about not being able to measure the animals feelings on what's happening around them and he says something like "Of course you can, you can see it in their eyes, can't you?" And she, not understanding and just trying to get through it, says "Of course". She's told things like this a few times through out the movie, by Owen ("These are living, breathing animals not numbers on a spreadsheet") and I think by the control room guy. When she finally got up close to one, it was suffering and dying along with its herd... I don't see why she couldn't get emotional over that. Hell, I have a friend who was a huge meat-eater, loved his steaks and whatnot... saw a minute long video of animals being mistreated at a slaughterhouse, became a vegetarian a few weeks later. But the movie doesn't have (or need) a few weeks to show "Claire DOES have a heart". It streamlined, as movies do.

 

[MAN O STEEL]

You say why not?. I say because people don't change who they are at the flip of a switch. You change through many years of getting older, learning from mistakes. She changed in a split second. Look at the grant character from the first movie. He hated kids, didn't want any of his own, thought they were just annoying. By the end of the movie he had become very nurturing. He still was a bit reserved but he made some progress. And even then he still had no kids of his own. That's the point. He grew a little as a person but he didn't change completely. That's actual human progression. That's why we cared about these people. In JW everyone was a cliche. Starlord was the charming mans man. The denofrio character might as well have been twirling his evil moustache. Bryce character changed at the drop of a hat and the kid had mummy daddy issues and the teen just wanted to get laid. Even if that meant flirting with every chick he saw, despite having a GF back home. Im not rooting for people written so thin and non interesting

 

[divan]

You say why not?. I say because people don't change who they are at the flip of a switch. You change through many years of getting older, learning from mistakes. She changed in a split second. Look at the grant character from the first movie. He hated kids, didn't want any of his own, thought they were just annoying. By the end of the movie he had become very nurturing. He still was a bit reserved but he made some progress. And even then he still had no kids of his own. That's the point. He grew a little as a person but he didn't change completely.

Read titansupes' post.

Just curious, what did you people think about Godzilla (2014) in comparision to this movie?

 

[titansupes]

You say why not?. I say because people don't change who they are at the flip of a switch. You change through many years of getting older, learning from mistakes. She changed in a split second. Look at the grant character from the first movie. He hated kids, didn't want any of his own, thought they were just annoying. By the end of the movie he had become very nurturing. He still was a bit reserved but he made some progress. And even then he still had no kids of his own. That's the point. He grew a little as a person but he didn't change completely. That's actual human progression. That's why we cared about these people. In JW everyone was a cliche. Starlord was the charming mans man. The denofrio character might as well have been twirling his evil moustache. Bryce character changed at the drop of a hat and the kid had mummy daddy issues and the teen just wanted to get laid. Even if that meant flirting with every chick he saw, despite having a GF back home. Im not rooting for people written so thin and non interesting

This is how the vast, vast majority of movie character arcs work. People go from hateful to loving in two hours, from lacking a purpose to being a supehero, from being an anti-social OCD driven man their whole lives to someone in love and care free, from a career-focused, pathological liar to a caring family man. They change over the course of the movie. Sometimes, within the timeline of the movie, it takes them years, or it takes them two hours. That's how movies work.

As to the Grant example specifically, he was very, VERY against children. By the end of the movie, he was holding them lovingly, approx twenty-four hours after having met them (then gone through hell with them). Claire was apathetic to the animals, viewing them as stats and assets. By the end, she'd realized they were living and breathing things worthy of more respect and care. And it was done as every other movie performs their arcs.

 

[Marvolo]

A horny teenage...whoever has heard of such a thing?

 

[drod1985]

I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine that a character arc or development could take place over a matter of hours in the context of extreme circumstances. And I'd consider being endangered by wild killer dinosaurs an extreme circumstance.

 

[The Shape]

Well they are clearly setting up [blackout]genetically manipulated dinosaurs created by Henry Wu and InGen for paramilitary purposes.[/blackout]

That's not a movie I'd want to see. That was the most silly and shoe-horned aspect of the plot.

 

[titansupes]

^ I agree with that. I'm thankful it was just a small part of it.

 

[divan]

The first book had a plot point of animals escaping Isla Nublar's firebombing and getting into the South American jungle. I could see the dinos getting into the mainland in the form of invasive species. Not humans against dinosaurs but more along the lines of "life found a way and we'll have to find our place in this new status-quo as well".

 

[The Shape]

^ I agree with that. I'm thankful it was just a small part of it.

It wasn't really a small part, though. It was meant to be the main conflict of the movie, outside of the Indominous. Everything about it was stupid, though.

 

[Spitfire]

The CG I don't care as much about, but the criticisms about the characterization are concerning. Hopefully I'll see this over the weekend to find out for myself.

The characterizations aren't that bad, but there are noticable flaws. Dr Wu and Hoskins suffered most, and were a bit two-dimensional. Owen was good and offered a unique insight into how the dinosaurs should be treated, providing an alternative opinion to the business-first approach of Claire. Masrani wasn't bad either and was showed to care about Hammonds legacy before profit. The changes in Claire's character were intended to be her response to the shocking events around her and how they impacted on her family and the dinosaurs (she hadn't had much contact or connection with any of them before).

But the 'characterizations' of the dinosaurs was first class, especially the raptors. Blue was the stand-out character imo and I loved

Spoiler

the look on her face when she was left with just the T-Rex at the end - genuine fear about what would happen next. Plus the scene when she and the pack reconnected with Owen was lovely.

 

[lukebrodyg]

I pretty much agree with everyone here in what worked and what didn't. The mass majority of the film works very well, though.

The CGI does feel a bit weightless compared to the first movie although technically improved as some have said.

The raptor squad worked far better than I anticipated it would. It held some sense of realism within a completely ridiculous idea. Their relationship with Owen, specifically one, I thought was charming but not overdone.

Seeing Rexy again was so great. Her introduction, if you will, was just about everything I wanted. The only gripe I have with her is that we never really heard the quintessential T-Rex roar we've come to know and love. It was there some, but not in full length per the end of Jurassic Park.

The characters didn't bother me at all. Sure, some were a bit two-dimensional but I was never once annoyed by any of them. The brothers had great chemistry, Claire and Owen worked well, Masrani was down right likable for the most part and everyone you were supposed to hate you did (or at least I did).

The I-Rex proved to be very well done. She was threatening, imposing, powerful, creepy, "believable", and it was so much fun to hate her. Something that made the ending so worth it.

And thank goodness Colin gave us the ending shot that he did.

 

[lukebrodyg]

It wasn't really a small part, though. It was meant to be the main conflict of the movie, outside of the Indominous. Everything about it was stupid, though.

You may be right but I didn't spend too much time thinking about it. When you say that every thing about it was stupid, what do you mean? It's plausible within the context of these films.

But I wouldn't want to see a movie about that.