Jurassic World [SPOILERS]

[bacardimayne]

Has it killed the franchise yet?

[AxlisOld]

Has it killed the franchise yet?

I fucking hope so. Quit while you're ahead and end it on a good note.

[sweetness]

Has it killed the franchise yet?

nope

[Apollo]

Has it killed the franchise yet?

nope

Sweet, can't wait.

[Bono]

Jurassic world was meh. 5/10. Terrible acting by most(Chris Pratt excluded) and one of the dumbest fucking storylines ever but it was a dinosaur movie so what did I expect.

[downzy]

Finally got around to seeing it tonight. Not terrible, but not all that great either. 5/10 for me.

[Dan H.]

Finally got around to seeing it tonight. Not terrible, but not all that great either. 5/10 for me.

That bad? I thought it was a solid summer blockbuster. It brought out some decent to great visual effects, had a lot of charm, and tapped into the nostalgia with just the right amount of clever references.

I wouldn't give it a number rating, just because I feel like they're almost completely unjustifiable for this kind of movie. It was a ridiculous amount of fun, and it was refreshing to see a bright action packed well known blockbuster franchise that didn't have superheroes(or Emilia Clarke).

How would you rate it against the other three films of the franchise? Keep in mind, if you say "3" was better I'll see it that you're suffocated in your sleep by Sam Neil himself as retribution for that giant dino turd.

[downzy]

For me, the first is the far superior film. I hated the second and if I'm being completely honest can't even remember the third (though I know I watched it). So I'd rate Jurassic World as the second best film. But again, that's not saying much.

The argument that it should be judged as a summer blockbuster doesn't hold much weight to me. Other "summer blockbusters" do a much better job at providing the viewer a better film experience. Compare Jurassic World to the Avengers or The Dark Knight and then tell me it's still a good movie. I thought the dialogue was terrible, the plot riddled with holes and highly predictable, and sorry to hark on this point, but the story arc for the female leaned heavily on patriarchal tropes.

For me the bar was set fairly high with Mad Max: Fury Road this year. It's a "summer blockbuster" that offers and says something different than what came before it. Summer blockbuster doesn't have to mean shallow entertainment, and for me, that's what Jurassic World was. Really only one scene that I enjoyed (where the birds prey on people on the village, with the British girl getting thrown in the tank). The rest I just found derivative. But again, that's just my opinion. If it worked for you, great. You are, after all, talking to a guy who loved the movie Cabin Boy

[Dan H.]

For me, the first is the far superior film. I hated the second and if I'm being completely honest can't even remember the third (though I know I watched it). So I'd rate Jurassic World as the second best film. But again, that's not saying much.

The argument that it should be judged as a summer blockbuster doesn't hold much weight to me. Other "summer blockbusters" do a much better job at providing the viewer a better film experience. Compare Jurassic World to the Avengers or The Dark Knight and then tell me it's still a good movie. I thought the dialogue was terrible, the plot riddled with holes and highly predictable, and sorry to hark on this point, but the story arc for the female leaned heavily on patriarchal tropes.

For me the bar was set fairly high with Mad Max: Fury Road this year. It's a "summer blockbuster" that offers and says something different than what came before it. Summer blockbuster doesn't have to mean shallow entertainment, and for me, that's what Jurassic World was. Really only one scene that I enjoyed (where the birds prey on people on the village, with the British girl getting thrown in the tank). The rest I just found derivative. But again, that's just my opinion. If it worked for you, great. You are, after all, talking to a guy who loved the movie Cabin Boy

Mad Max slayed. What a fucking refreshing movie. We don't get a whole lot of action/adventure movies with that kind of heart or dedication anymore. You could tell how much the director and producers cared about the source material, and what the fans wanted. I don't know if we'll ever see a movie so saturated with well made practical effects quite like Fury Road ever again. Although, I would have never expected a movie like Fury Road to ever pass the board room brain storm.

I guess if you stack it against The Dark Knight it's an obviously inferior film. Chris Nolan has style in his cinematography, thematic content, acting direction, sound, lighting, Jesus just about everything. The Dark Knight was a significant cinematic production in so many ways where it doesn't really deserve to be shoe horned into the "popcorn summer blockbuster" movie genre.

Put it toe to toe with the Avengers though? I think it holds up. The Avengers is convoluted, it has some witty banter, good effects, simple but effective plot, decent performances, and edge-of-your-seat action.

I think Jurassic World has those qualities with just as much strength as Avengers. They both dissolve into fan boy jerk off schlock at the end, and neither of them feel really satisfying when you leave the theatre, but they're both good fun, well shot, decent acting(Avengers noticeably bests JW here) and are entirely unoffensive to the audiences intelligence. In fact Jurassic World delves (maybe accidently) into some meta themes about corporate cinema.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Dan H.

[Powerage5]

Jurassic world was meh. 5/10. Terrible acting by most(Chris Pratt excluded) and one of the dumbest fucking storylines ever but it was a dinosaur movie so what did I expect.

I honestly expected Chris Pratt to be one of the worst things about the film. In reality, he was one of the best things about it. Very pleasantly surprised there.

Finally got around to seeing it tonight. Not terrible, but not all that great either. 5/10 for me.

This post makes, like, a lot more sense here than in the SPECTRE thread

[downzy]

For me, the first is the far superior film. I hated the second and if I'm being completely honest can't even remember the third (though I know I watched it). So I'd rate Jurassic World as the second best film. But again, that's not saying much.

The argument that it should be judged as a summer blockbuster doesn't hold much weight to me. Other "summer blockbusters" do a much better job at providing the viewer a better film experience. Compare Jurassic World to the Avengers or The Dark Knight and then tell me it's still a good movie. I thought the dialogue was terrible, the plot riddled with holes and highly predictable, and sorry to hark on this point, but the story arc for the female leaned heavily on patriarchal tropes.

For me the bar was set fairly high with Mad Max: Fury Road this year. It's a "summer blockbuster" that offers and says something different than what came before it. Summer blockbuster doesn't have to mean shallow entertainment, and for me, that's what Jurassic World was. Really only one scene that I enjoyed (where the birds prey on people on the village, with the British girl getting thrown in the tank). The rest I just found derivative. But again, that's just my opinion. If it worked for you, great. You are, after all, talking to a guy who loved the movie Cabin Boy

Mad Max slayed. What a fucking refreshing movie.

I guess if you stack it against The Dark Knight it's an obviously inferior film. Chris Nolan has style in his cinematography, thematic content, acting direction, sound, lighting, Jesus just about everything. The Dark Knight was a significant cinematic production in so many ways where it doesn't really deserve to be shoe horned into the "popcorn summer blockbuster" movie genre.

Put it toe to toe with the Avengers though? I think it holds up. The Avengers is convoluted, it has some witty banter, good effects, simple but effective plot, decent performances, and edge-of-your-seat action.

I think Jurassic World has those qualities with just as much strength as Avengers. They both dissolve into fan boy jerk off schlock at the end, and neither of them feel really satisfying when you leave the theatre, but they're both good fun, well shot, decent acting(Avengers noticeably bests JW here) and are entirely unoffensive to the audiences intelligence. In fact Jurassic World delves (maybe accidently) into some meta themes about corporate cinema.

Really? I don't remember anything in The Avengers (I'm talking about the first one) that had me scratching my head like the ridiculous ending of JW. The Avengers at least had characters I liked who made me laugh. The kids in this movie made me cringe (is it just me or does the younger kid look weird when he runs). The female lead was just terrible as a character. The "bad guy" felt like a very bad cliche. Pratt was alright, but there wasn't much story or dialogue for him to chew on (he was way better in Guardians of the Galaxy). Only character I kind of like was the nerd dude at the control centre with his plastic dinosaurs. Enjoyed watching him go for the hero kiss and get rejected. So I guess there's that.

And I personally liked the ending of the Avengers. Not sure how you could say that JW's ending is comparable (as f'n if the raptors are going to switch sides again for a second time).

Ultimately, there's no point in JW other than to watch dinosaurs eat people. At least with Avengers we had never seen some of the biggest comic book superheros interact with each other in one movie. That hadn't really been done before and it was fun to watch. JW just felt like a cash grab with little thought and cliched characters wedged in for little reason (the military tangent felt tacked on and cooked up in a Hollywood board meeting). Again, just my opinion. Wasn't actually planning on seeing it when it came out but changed my mind after reading several reviews in this thread. Guess my expectations were too high going in.

[Iron MikeyJ]

Honestly the dark knight is the most over rated super hero film ever made. Obviously thats my opinion, but as a true Batman film, nolans films are slightly above average. But they are no where near these Perfectly executed films that many like to make them out to be. If you put Avengers head to head vs The Dark Knight, I would say The Avengers OWNS The Dark Knight in just about every level.

Don't get me wrong, I do "like" the Nolan films, I think they were a well exectuted triolgy. But as far as Batman films go, they got a lot wrong. If you want a film that captures the truest spirit of what the Batman universe is, Batman 1989 comes far closer than any other film made. Series vs series, Nolans series is better yes, but film vs film, Burton's Batman OWNS anything Nolan ever did. Don't get me wrong, Burton's Batman isn't perfect either, but it is much closer to Batman's real universe, tone, realism, and anything else you can ask for than anything Nolan did.

I'm a HUGE super hero fan, and as such, I dislike how "fans" put The Dark Knight on this pedastool as some sort of brilliant super hero film. It is a good film, I don't disagree there, but people like to praise it and bash other super hero films, like it is some sort of master piece. Which I'm sorry, but I can rip the Nolan series a new asshole, as a real Batman fan. It fails on multiple levels. Perhaps TDK is a better film than the Avengers, if you want to talk cinematography and all that crap. But The Avengers captured the real spirit of every character in that film, while all of Nolans films failed on that account. Like I said earlier, the best non animated Batman film is still Batman 1989, and if you don't agree than you really don't know your Batman very well, sorry...

Edited August 11, 2015 by Iron MikeyJ

[arnold layne]

I enjoyed it.

[Iron MikeyJ]

I enjoyed it.

Are you talking about TDK? If so, I agree, it is enjoyable. It is a good movie, I'm not saying that it's not. Im just pointing out that it does have flaws, especially as a Batman film. Their just seems to be a certain group of people that put it on the all time great movie type of level, which I have a problem with that. In order for me to say it's an all time great movie, they would have to nail the Batman and Gotham city universe and tone, and that is where Nolan failed miserably.

To be fair, it's hard to really perfect any film that has prexisting cannon, like super hero films. As far as films go, I would say Star Wars, Empire Strikes Back, Terminator 1, Terminator 2, Alien, Aliens, Jurassic Park, and many other films I would say are easily superior to Th Dark Knight. But those films set the standard for their franchises, they didn't have any other form of media to live up to (except jurassic park was a novel, but to most people the film is the standard, not the book), where TDK had previous films, comics, cartoons, tv shows, etc. Just so much media that already helped establish what Batman is/was. Its the same problem that all remakes run into, they immediately draw comparisons to an already existing film. Where the other films I mentioned set the standards or exceeded an already high standard. As good as TDK is, it just doesn't live up to entirety of what Batman is for me to put it on the same level as T2 or Empire Strikes Back. Even though I probably wouldn't put The Avengers on that level either, I do feel it comes closer to that level than TDK does, because of what it got right. It got the characters, tone, and banter of the actual comics better than TDK did.

Edited August 11, 2015 by Iron MikeyJ

[arnold layne]

No I was talking about JW.

The only superhero I like is Captain America.

[sweetness]

If you put Avengers head to head vs The Dark Knight, I would say The Avengers OWNS The Dark Knight in just about every level.

lol

On Topic:

http://screencrush.com/jurassic-world-2-details/

"Jurassic War"

ohhh bwoy

[Powerage5]

I hope Jurassic War doesn't end up being the title, it's awful.

[sweetness]

I hope they scrap the entire premise. Thought the whole brilliant "weaponized dinosaurs" idea got squashed in JW.

[Black Sabbath]

If they do something where they're trying to use dinosaurs as weapons and they turn on them and run rampant, I can probably get down with that. But I'll miss the "park" aspect.

But Wu got away and was still on board with the dinosaur soldier stuff.

Honestly, it's hard to say what other way they could go. They can't do a park again and just being trapped on an island won't do it anymore. It has to be something different. But the dinosaur soldier idea was mainly thought about with raptors, wasn't it? They can't have JUST raptors... Hard to say what they'll do though. I'm hesitantly optimistic about this idea, but I'm not judging anything yet.

[bacardimayne]

There should have been an after credits scene where a scarred Indominus rose out of the Mosa pool, carrying its severed head in its mouth as an armless Vincent D'onofrio watched in approval from the control room.

[Amir]

Wish we got more park visitors being attacked like the pterosaur bit that was in the trailer. As it was it ended up being mostly a rehash of the small group being attacked schtick we saw in the earlier films.

I say they go for Jurassic War. We're getting War of the Planet of the Apes. Then hopefully we get Jurassic Ape War.

[Powerage5]

Wish we got more park visitors being attacked like the pterosaur bit that was in the trailer. As it was it ended up being mostly a rehash of the small group being attacked schtick we saw in the earlier films.

I say they go for Jurassic War. We're getting War of the Planet of the Apes. Then hopefully we get Jurassic Ape War.

All of the yes.

[DieselDaisy]

It is as if they have abandoned all pretenses of 'bringing dinosaurs alive' and much of the science of the novel and (in watered down form) the first film and are now content to make films featuring CGI 'monsters' fighting each other. It is rather like they are saying ''yes, we are dumb''.

[Estranged Reality]

Wish we got more park visitors being attacked like the pterosaur bit that was in the trailer. As it was it ended up being mostly a rehash of the small group being attacked schtick we saw in the earlier films.

I say they go for Jurassic War. We're getting War of the Planet of the Apes. Then hopefully we get Jurassic Ape War.

All of the yes.

That was the weird thing about Jurassic World. The whole park aspect really wasn't utilized the way I had hoped. I wanted more tourists trapped on rides with dangerous dinos after them. Maybe a sequence where a kid is inside a museum exhibit where dangerous dinos are usually encased behind glass, but one of the glass containers was broken and it's loose somewhere in the exhibit. See, I should be writing the sequel.

[Black Sabbath]

Yeah, I loved Jurassic World, but I was disappointed they didn't utilize the park aspect as much as they could have either.

Oh well, can't wait for the Blu-ray!