THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Fun Stuff => ENJOY => Topic started by: Edguy on 23 Nov 2014, 08:40

Title: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 23 Nov 2014, 08:40
So, though I'd make a thread about my childhood's favorite movie franchise, since they just released a teaser for a trailer. Oh well, still DINOSAUR HYPE!!

Who else is looking forward to the Jurassic Park rejig (http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/movies/news/a483981/jurassic-park-4-will-be-a-total-rejig-says-actor-sam-neill.html)? Why (not)?

Teaser trailer #1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvu-zlR5A8Q)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BeoPuppy on 23 Nov 2014, 08:58
If this is a reboot I'll invite whole Hollywood to go and fuck itself.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: SubaruStephen on 23 Nov 2014, 09:56
:laugh: It's a sequel. :lol:
Apparently the plot is that another company buys the original island and manages to to get it working as an amusement park.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 23 Nov 2014, 10:46
It's a soft reboot I guess. Sort of like The Incredible Hulk was from the 2003 movie; it follows the previous movie, but it's essentially a reboot.

Also, I don't really get the big hate for reboots. Of all the evils of Hollywood, I think they are far from the biggest problem. Especially in a movie like Jurassic Park, where the biggest selling point is the concept or the setting, rather than characters or a particular plot arc.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BenRG on 23 Nov 2014, 12:32
I'll tolerate a reboot if it's a good reboot. However, if it's just a reset button or a redo with renamed characters, I'll be very, very annoyed.

Either way, they are going to have to jump through some pretty major hoops because it was established in The Lost World that the two dino-seeded islands had been made off-limits by the UN. There would have to be an excellent reason given why that had been rescinded or waived and I'm not going to accept a hand-waving away of that.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BeoPuppy on 23 Nov 2014, 22:48
Reboots are lazy. We'll take what works and ... Do it again! So, so boring. Especiially if the rebooted stuff is not thirty years old.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 24 Nov 2014, 03:24
Quote from: BeoPuppy on 23 Nov 2014, 22:48
Reboots are lazy. We'll take what works and ... Do it again! So, so boring. Especiially if the rebooted stuff is not thirty years old.

Except that's wrong. The idea of a reboot is that you that what doesn't work (or is outdated) and update it. Try a different course. Don't let bad examples like The Amazing Spider-Man taint your view on all reboots. Some franchises really need one.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BenRG on 24 Nov 2014, 03:35
Quote from: Edguy on 24 Nov 2014, 03:24
Some franchises really need one.

I'm not convinced that the Jurassic Park franchise needed one.

I'm still holding out hope that this is JP4, not a reboot. There are lots of ways to do that and, if you advanced the time-line enough, there is no need to re-gather the original cast (unless you want to bring back the kids from JP/TLW as adults).
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BeoPuppy on 24 Nov 2014, 04:05
Well, I think the whole kit and kaboodle is going to hell in a handbasket ever since I saw people getting ready for that much needed reboot of 1984.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 24 Nov 2014, 10:43
Quote from: BenRG on 24 Nov 2014, 03:35
There are lots of ways to do that and, if you advanced the time-line enough, there is no need to re-gather the original cast.

That right there is essentially a soft reboot. The line between a distant sequel (Star Wars VII) and a soft reboot (The Incredible Hulk) is a blurred one.


As to whether JP needed a reboot (regardless of if JW is a reboot or not), I'm fairly indifferent. Like I said, the appeal, at least to me, of the franchise is not a particular plot arc or character(s), but rather the concept and the setting. What matters is the dinosaurs. If they do the dinosaurs well, then I couldn't care less about Dr Grant, Dr Malcom, Dr Sattler, InGen or the Hammonds.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Jimmy the Squid on 25 Nov 2014, 04:58
From what I understand Jurassic World is set 22 years after Jurassic Park where, as mentioned upthread, Isla Nublar has been functioning as a dinosaur amusement park for a few years and then something obviously goes wrong. Wheeeeeeeee!
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BenRG on 25 Nov 2014, 07:06
Quote from: Jimmy the Squid on 25 Nov 2014, 04:58
From what I understand Jurassic World is set 22 years after Jurassic Park where, as mentioned upthread, Isla Nublar has been functioning as a dinosaur amusement park for a few years and then something obviously goes wrong. Wheeeeeeeee!

I'd call that a Darwin Award moment.

Lives were lost during the original development program. Lives were lost due to people entering the livestock storage area. Lives were lost when people visited the park island again. Simply put, every time people came close to these things, lives were lost. Whoever thought that they'd get it right this time obviously is immune to education.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Pilchard123 on 25 Nov 2014, 10:31
Jurassic Park
What could possibly go wrong?
There's monsters ev'rywhere
And tou-rists are dumb
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: J on 25 Nov 2014, 10:47

so, yeah.


ok, three things:

1: cliche monster-movie premise is cliche. buuut, 'amusement park attractions run amok due to poor safety measures' wasn't exactly the most original thing either

B)  i predict one of two things is going to happen at some point during the plot, either:
  a) the Frankensaurus will kill a motherfucking T-rex to show how badass it is, or
  b) the Frankensaurus will kill a spinosaurus as apology for that scene that gareth loves so much from JP3. in which case, the main characters will probably at some point be rescued by the intervention of a motherfucking T-rex (deus rex machina).

and thirdly; i kinda like the Jaws gag, but i really wish they'd given Ariana Richards a cameo as the kid's mom
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: kryptoknight on 25 Nov 2014, 13:11
The park looks absolutely amazing.  I kinda wish it were real.  However I think that if the people running it are stupid enough to breed carnivores then they deserve what's coming (Especially after the events of the first three films.)  Seriously.  It's a creature the size of a city bus that thinks you look like a tasty little snack.  WHY WOULD YOU MAKE THAT?!
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Pilchard123 on 25 Nov 2014, 13:31
2:13 sounds like a belch, played really slowly.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BenRG on 25 Nov 2014, 14:41
Watched trailer.

Darwin Award nomination confirmed.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Kugai on 25 Nov 2014, 14:46
Oh grud, what the hell has she cooked up.


Tyranosaurus Raptor??
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BenRG on 25 Nov 2014, 14:52
Quote from: Kugai on 25 Nov 2014, 14:46
Oh grud, what the hell has she cooked up.

Tyranosaurus Raptor??

The vocalisation was definitely the Utahraptor-esque 'JP Raptor'. It looks smaller than a Rex though, I'm wondering if it's been hybridised with human DNA to make it even smarter and able to use tools.

For science.

Because, hey! What could possibly go wrong?

Obviously these guys were recruited directly from The Umbrella Corporation's genetics division:
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Kugai on 25 Nov 2014, 14:56
And off went the hero on his motorcycle with his Velocirapor Hunting Pack


Wait ...... WHAT??!!!
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: J on 25 Nov 2014, 15:17
also, first genetically modified hybrid dinosaur? wut?

THEY WERE ALL GENETICALLY MODIFIED HYBRID DINOSAURS! THE ENTIRE STORY OF THE FIRST MOVIE HINGED ON THAT POINT!

ALSO I'M PRETTY SURE THAT NON-GENETICALLY MODIFIED DINOSAURS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BREATHE, DUE TO CHANGES IN THE OXYGEN CONTENT OF THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE OVER THE PAST 65MILLION YEARS!
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Thrillho on 25 Nov 2014, 15:26
That trailer already had too much dinosaurs in it. I would've been happy with just the plesiosaur or whatever that thing is launching out of the water.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 25 Nov 2014, 16:00
Quote from: Kugai on 25 Nov 2014, 14:56
And off went the hero on his motorcycle with his Velocirapor Hunting Pack


Wait ...... WHAT??!!!

Starlord has a bloodhound pack of (huge featherless) Velocirapors. (http://imgur.com/56aOJFJ) Think about that for a second.

Quote from: J on 25 Nov 2014, 15:17
ALSO I'M PRETTY SURE THAT NON-GENETICALLY MODIFIED DINOSAURS WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO BREATHE, DUE TO CHANGES IN THE OXYGEN CONTENT OF THE EARTH'S ATMOSPHERE OVER THE PAST 65MILLION YEARS!

Let alone exist.

Quote from: Gareth on 25 Nov 2014, 15:26
..the plesiosaur or whatever that thing is launching out of the water.
I'm pretty sure that was a pliosaur (which is a plesiosaur), or possibly a mosasaur (not a plesiosaur) :)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 25 Nov 2014, 16:38
uhm, double post, sorry :]
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: BenRG on 25 Nov 2014, 23:28
Quote from: J on 25 Nov 2014, 15:17
also, first genetically modified hybrid dinosaur? wut?

THEY WERE ALL GENETICALLY MODIFIED HYBRID DINOSAURS! THE ENTIRE STORY OF THE FIRST MOVIE HINGED ON THAT POINT!

They were just using frog DNA to patch the holes in the dino genetic code. The import of frog characteristics (spontaneous gender-swap) was unintended. This is the first time they have deliberately and by design imported features from another species into a dinosaur.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Pilchard123 on 26 Nov 2014, 00:42
(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/jurassic_world.png)

ALT: Hey guys! What's eating you? Ha ha ha, it's me! Oh, what fun we have.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Jimmy the Squid on 26 Nov 2014, 01:00
It was a Kronosaurus.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: J on 26 Nov 2014, 02:50
Quote
Jurassic World could have been worse. The original idea was to have human-dinosaur hybrids. Here are some concept images leaked a few years ago (http://imgur.com/a/ou5o6)
(http://i.imgur.com/ql5BzHZ.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/Ml13KhS.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/6jYt3yE.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/VsNac0S.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/MqeiiPE.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/Wbktf7m.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/6Cx6kXK.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/XVmLazJ.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/PB303VH.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/kpnz3b5.png)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Thrillho on 26 Nov 2014, 02:52
Some of those are kinda cool, I think. But it's not the right franchise for it.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: ChaoSera on 26 Nov 2014, 06:22
Quote from: Gareth on 26 Nov 2014, 02:52
Some of those are kinda cool, I think. But it's not the right franchise for it.
I agree. If they make a movie that doesn't belong to the Jurassic Park franchise but with human-dinosaur hybrids, I would watch it. Hard.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 26 Nov 2014, 06:29
I just hope the plot device dinosaur doesn't turn out to be as stupid as I fear. If it's a T-Rex/Velociraptor hybrid, I'm going to facepalm so hard. But that is what it'll turn out to be, isn't it?
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: ChaoSera on 26 Nov 2014, 12:51
Probably, yeah.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: LeeC on 26 Nov 2014, 12:56
That was my guess, yeah.  Or some sort of T-rex human hybrid is my second guess.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 26 Nov 2014, 14:01
Quote from: LeeC on 26 Nov 2014, 12:56
Or some sort of T-rex human hybrid is my second guess.

I think (hope?) they learned their lesson from the leak of those concept drawings.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: mustang6172 on 26 Nov 2014, 18:57
Quote from: J on 25 Nov 2014, 10:47
  b) the Frankensaurus will kill a spinosaurus as apology for that scene that gareth loves so much from JP3. in which case, the main characters will probably at some point be rescued by the intervention of a motherfucking T-rex (deus rex machina).

I've noticed the JP movies tend to retcon whenever new discoveries about dinosaurs are made.  Recent discoveries have lead to the conclusion that spinosaurus was a marine reptile. (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/d-brief/2014/09/11/spinosaurus-is-first-known-semi-aquatic-dinosaur/#.VHaSqme9bxc)

But since there are no feathers on those raptors I guess anything goes.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 27 Nov 2014, 04:50
I think Spinosaurus has been speculated to be somewhat marine, or at least fish eating, since it's discovery. Also, scientists knew that raptors, and probably a lot of other dions, most likely had some degree of feathers before the first JP were made :)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Masterpiece on 27 Nov 2014, 05:05
Is it just me or does it feel like Gareth Edwards directed this trailer?
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Jimmy the Squid on 27 Nov 2014, 07:38
It's also worth noting that even when Crichton wrote the first book, he intentionally swapped the names of deinonychus and velociraptor because he thought velociraptor sounded more fearsome. The joke the kid makes at the beginning saying that the velociraptor fossil looks like a turkey is because actual velociraptors were probably about the size of turkeys.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: hedgie on 27 Nov 2014, 08:18
Dude, turkeys are scary.  There are huge groups of 'em near where I live, and their big theropod feet freak me out every time.  Well, that and they destroy everything in their path, but it's illegal to even shoot them with a crossbow where I am.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 27 Nov 2014, 08:56
Quote from: Masterpiece on 27 Nov 2014, 05:05
Is it just me or does it feel like Gareth Edwards directed this trailer?

Well, they're from the same school of small indie directors picked up for big budget hollywood genre movies.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: J on 27 Nov 2014, 10:23
Quote from: hedgie on 27 Nov 2014, 08:18
Dude, turkeys are scary.  There are huge groups of 'em near where I live, and their big theropod feet freak me out every time.  Well, that and they destroy everything in their path, but it's illegal to even shoot them with a crossbow where I am.
you talking domestic turkeys, or wild turkeys? because there's a pretty major difference
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: SubaruStephen on 27 Nov 2014, 11:56
One comes in a bottle, the other is frozen.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: jwhouk on 27 Nov 2014, 13:10
J speaks the truth. If one of those things gets in front of your car as you're driving down the road, it's like hitting a bowling ball.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 28 Nov 2014, 10:51
Jurassic World Director and Official Site Reveal More Details (http://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/387365-jurassic-world-director-and-official-site-reveal-more-details)

Interview with Trevorrow. For example, we get a confirmation that the aquatic dinosaur is indeed a mosasaur.

Also, the "official" site for Jurassic World: http://www.jurassicworld.com/
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: hedgie on 28 Nov 2014, 18:03
Quote from: J on 27 Nov 2014, 10:23
Quote from: hedgie on 27 Nov 2014, 08:18
Dude, turkeys are scary.  There are huge groups of 'em near where I live, and their big theropod feet freak me out every time.  Well, that and they destroy everything in their path, but it's illegal to even shoot them with a crossbow where I am.
you talking domestic turkeys, or wild turkeys? because there's a pretty major difference
Wild ones here.  Harassing people and pets, destroying plants and property.  If I had my way, they would have been culled and cooked up for the homeless some time ago.  A few, we could support, the numbers they have now are far too many for the local environment to support.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: GarandMarine on 29 Nov 2014, 01:58
Too bad California hates hunters. Otherwise there'd be a very simple and tasty solution.


The only good kind of wild turkey is in a bottle at your local booze store.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: hedgie on 29 Nov 2014, 03:18
Meh, my uncle regularly hunts, as do many people I know here.  None of them have ever had a problem with it.  Hell, the wild pig problem in some areas means that land owners often *pay* hunters to take 'em out.  I just happen to live in a rather hippie town, and even then, I'm generally opposed to discharging a weapon in urban areas without there being a threat to life || limb to justify it.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: LeeC on 05 Dec 2014, 14:51
(http://i.imgur.com/I1MQaFv.jpg)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Kugai on 05 Dec 2014, 18:20
"Daddy!!"

:D
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Masterpiece on 05 Dec 2014, 19:23
Man, Chris Pratt really was wrong when he thought he'd never get the star role in a blockbuster. Man's perfect. He just needed the right ramp to get into the spotlight.

I'm also totally fine with that ramp being Andy Dwyer, because shit is hilarious.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: GarandMarine on 05 Dec 2014, 20:38
So cute! I want a pack!
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Aimless on 06 Dec 2014, 06:07
I can't wait to see this and then see it again on an oculus rift :o
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 22 Apr 2015, 10:47

So, what're the odds a T-Rex comes in somewhere in the third act and kills the Indominous as a massive fan service finale?

By the way, is the iRex pretty much that dinosaur from Ice Age 4? (No, after some research, that one looked more like a frill-less Spinosaurus) King King (2005)? Designed by Hollywood's test groups?
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Thrillho on 23 Apr 2015, 04:04
I'd rather have the fanservice, because fuck the Spinosaurus man.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 14 Jun 2015, 11:49
I just saw Jurassic World, it was pretty cool. Kinda stupid at times, but very self-aware. There was even some fan service.
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Masterpiece on 14 Jun 2015, 17:12
Quote from: Edguy on 14 Jun 2015, 11:49
(click to show/hide)

OH MY GOD YES.

And it was an excellent monster movie. The final battle was everything I asked for and so much more.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Stoon on 14 Jun 2015, 17:54
Oh man, I had a bible thumper come to my door one time trying to convert me to Christianity.  He  had no idea that dinosaurs had feathers.  He had no idea that birds were actually dinosaurs.

(http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/birds_and_dinosaurs.png)
http://xkcd.com/1211/ (http://xkcd.com/1211/)

(http://unseenllc.com/strips/20040312.gif)
http://unseenllc.com/index.php5?s=211 (http://unseenllc.com/index.php5?s=211)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: chaospersonified on 18 Jun 2015, 20:30
I enjoyed Jurassic World, to the point I done boutght the entire series on blu-ray with intent on watching it all tonight before I see it a second time (at $7.50 cheaper but with better quality 3-D) tomorrow. Tonight shall be a drunken night, but one to fucking remember. The first holds the fuck up.

I've never seen the sequels, as it happens, though I caught everything in Lost World after the trailer/cliff scene one time in a motel on cable. We shall see if being better informed about what came before heightens my opinion on Jurassic World.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 19 Jun 2015, 07:02
Not much from the sequels has any relevance at all in Jurassic World. It's all about referencing the first one!
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Thrillho on 19 Jun 2015, 08:26
Sounds like two good decisions to me.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Masterpiece on 19 Jun 2015, 12:34
It really is a great monster film.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Blue Kitty on 20 Jun 2015, 14:22
I really enjoyed the movie, but two things bugged me

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: chaospersonified on 20 Jun 2015, 16:33
Quote from: Blue Kitty on 20 Jun 2015, 14:22
I really enjoyed the movie, but two things bugged me

(click to show/hide)

For real.
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 20 Jun 2015, 18:43
Quote from: chaospersonified on 20 Jun 2015, 16:33
Quote from: Blue Kitty on 20 Jun 2015, 14:22
I really enjoyed the movie, but two things bugged me

(click to show/hide)

For real.
(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Blue Kitty on 20 Jun 2015, 19:04
I thought for awhile that the dino was giving off something that messes with radios and cell signals, cause it always seemed to happen when it was around.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 20 Jun 2015, 19:13
Hey, maybe he had some Radio Jammer dna in himself as well, who knows
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: chaospersonified on 20 Jun 2015, 20:04
Quote from: Blue Kitty on 20 Jun 2015, 19:04
I thought for awhile that the dino was giving off something that messes with radios and cell signals, cause it always seemed to happen when it was around.

That was my theory.
I mean, every other convenient plot device was due to totally accidental side effects of the included genomes.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Blue Kitty on 21 Jun 2015, 13:56
(http://33.media.tumblr.com/ff46412176cd05bc8df553107fdb1ab7/tumblr_inline_nq2eq4OMOa1qcu7yf_500.gif)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Method of Madness on 21 Jun 2015, 16:51
Saw it yesterday. BDH is a fucking badass. (So is Chris Pratt, but we knew that already)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Blue Kitty on 23 Jun 2015, 09:50
(http://40.media.tumblr.com/cf171e05012f0caaa43fb612c3642214/tumblr_nqb6q870Wa1t8o0r4o1_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Aimless on 24 Jun 2015, 14:21
So Jurassic World and Lost World are now both officially Jurassic Park 2 in my mind :o JW doesn't really do justice to concept, perhaps because it has to cater to a new audience that doesn't gaf about the first movie, but it mostly avoids doing things that are just plain bad.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: SubaruStephen on 25 Jun 2015, 17:15
Jurassic World: we got the Isla Nublar park up and running.

Jurassic World 2: we got the San Diego park up and running.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: chaospersonified on 25 Jun 2015, 18:37
Quote from: SubaruStephen on 25 Jun 2015, 17:15
Jurassic World: we got the Isla Nublar park up and running.

Jurassic World 2: we got the San Diego park up and running.

Considering the events of Jurassic world, highly unlikely.

Jurassic World 2 will concern that doctor who escaped with the embryos. Unless it's set like, three years from now at least, unlikely plot choice. JW wasn't a direct copy of Jurassic Park; I think it unlikely the sequel will be the sequel to the original.

Don't be silly.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: LTK on 28 Jun 2015, 03:54
I saw this yesterday. Is it just me or do modern movie franchises venture more and more into the territory of big budget enabled fanfiction?
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Neko_Ali on 28 Jun 2015, 08:13
It's the nature of big budget film making these days. Studios are not willing to throw millions of dollars at projects that aren't going to see them a sizable return. So when someone brings them a reimagining of a movie that brought in huge profits, or a script involving a big nostalgia property, they get dollar signs in their eyes. Even if the movies are not well received (see the Transformers franchise), they are still going to make money on the opening weekends for people going to see if it lives up to what they remember. Sometimes it works well, see Mad Max Fury Road. Sometimes it's a terrible and should never have been made. See Battleship.

Studios are only going to make what earns them money or acclaim. That means remakes and imaginings... 'fanfiction'. Adaptions of popular book or television properties. And vehicle movies for popular stars. Plus more 'artistic' films around Oscar season. Any other projects have to squeeze in. Usually either supported by someone who has a lot of clout in the industry, or funded by smaller studios more willing to take risks.

In some ways it makes me glad I didn't follow through with my dream of getting into the special effects industry, so I didn't have to deal with the politicking involved. Mostly though it was the huge amounts of time on location, and the on/off nature of the work. I need more stability in my life than what working in a special effects studio could offer.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Pilchard123 on 18 Jul 2015, 15:54
Iiiiiiit's B-movie time!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMZt0YMw9O0

(Not actually part of the Jurassic Park series)
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: robinz on 21 Jul 2015, 01:55
worse....movie.....ever(http://cdn.meme.li/instances/250x250/53173350.jpg[b][/b])
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Thrillho on 21 Jul 2015, 02:15
It looks fantastically terrible to me. Might watch it.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Kugai on 21 Jul 2015, 16:22
Ahhh, B Movies


The Meat & Potatoes of the Film Industry.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: chaospersonified on 21 Jul 2015, 23:37
Quote from: Kugai on 21 Jul 2015, 16:22

The Meat & Potatoes of the Film Industry.

Meat and potatoes? I've always felt they're more 'deli sandwich and brussel sprouts,' in that most people are gonna turn them right the fuck down, but there's a small percentage where that's their jam.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: robinz on 22 Jul 2015, 08:09
Myself and my wife have always said its the the burger and fries of the industy
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Edguy on 22 Jul 2015, 14:39
Quote from: robinz on 22 Jul 2015, 08:09
Myself and my wife have always said its the the burger and fries of the industy

But everyone one eats burger and fries. And some then feel a little bad about it. Wouldn't that be like the Transformers movies etc?
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Method of Madness on 22 Jul 2015, 14:41
Hahaha, I considered making that exact post earlier.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Kugai on 22 Jul 2015, 16:27
My point in my Post is that for every Blockbuster that comes out, there are undoubtedly a dozen 'B-Movies' in the pipeline or out, which is basically the 'Meat and Potatoes' of the industry
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: chaospersonified on 22 Jul 2015, 21:09
Quote from: Kugai on 22 Jul 2015, 16:27
My point in my Post is that for every Blockbuster that comes out, there are undoubtedly a dozen 'B-Movies' in the pipeline or out, which is basically the 'Meat and Potatoes' of the industry

Exactly, only people eat meat and potatoes more often than they watch B-movies.
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: Kugai on 23 Jul 2015, 14:18
Speak for yourself

I prefer Steak and Fries
Title: Re: Jurassic Park
Post by: ChaoSera on 25 Jul 2015, 14:24
Finally got to see Jurassic World. Loved it. My expectations were not that high, but I was pleasantly surprised.