Jurassic World

syklops · 22-06-2013 11:52pm

syklops wrote: »

Jaws meets Jurassic Park and Spielberg is not involved.

Hmmm,

Actually Jaws 3(-D) had a lagoon and was set in a Sea World-esque place with a new hidden monster, and was shot in 3D.

Is this basically Jaws 3, with Dinosaurs?

Instead of JP4 could we not get a brand new Dino Riders instead? Please?

edit: Jaws 3 sucked btw.

Goldstein · 23-06-2013 3:10am

Take out all references to "tamed dinosaurs" and the rest seems ok and I love the lagoon idea to bring in some new characters although I'm not sure what the upper size of a Isla Nublar lagoon could be, seems it could be a bit small. Megalodon FTW!

Or maybe a Mosasaurus, Tylosaurus, super-sized Liopleurodon or the like. Those would be spectacular and exciting additions.

On the t-rex taming thing though - imagine trying to tame a great white. Pretty stupid right? Now imagine taming a predator four times its size. They'll render the t-rexs and raptors totally impotent if they try to turn them into glorified pets. Idiotic route to go down. I just thought of that gorilla in Congo that was with the humans. *shudder*

For once I hope they don't pay too close attention to the latest Paleontological theories on some of the dinos. No feathers please

krudler · 23-06-2013 4:18am

for the love of god can Hollywood just make MEG, it's screaming for a decent adaptation, the book is pulp fiction nonsense but its supremely entertaining, in only the way a novel about a 70ft shark could be.

SimonTemplar · 23-06-2013 3:01pm

Tamed dinosaurs is the worst idea in the long sad history of bad ideas.

Galvasean · 23-06-2013 9:13pm

krudler wrote: »

for the love of god can Hollywood just make MEG, it's screaming for a decent adaptation, the book is pulp fiction nonsense but its supremely entertaining, in only the way a novel about a 70ft shark could be.

They already did:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nzd0R_OeOc

pixelburp · 23-06-2013 9:15pm

^ You know what, I don't mind admitting that I own that on DVD

</secret-shame>

Galvasean · 23-06-2013 10:10pm

It's a freakin' comedy masterpiece!

brianregan09 · 24-06-2013 2:03pm

Tamed Velociraptors.........................WOW just wow

missingtime · 24-06-2013 2:52pm

If they add some Cadillacs it could work.

Mickeroo · 24-06-2013 2:55pm

brianregan09 wrote: »

Tamed Velociraptors.........................WOW just wow

Really don't understand why this is such a sticking point, people have tamed predatory animals before. Go on youtube and you'll find videos of people rolling around on the ground with a pride of lions like they were pets. We have no idea how susceptible a dinosaur would be to be being tamed but it's definitely not outside the realms of possibility and it's certainly not the most unbelievable aspect of a film where velociraptors are taller than a man and we manage to ressurect them.....

krudler · 24-06-2013 3:09pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Really don't understand why this is such a sticking point, people have tamed predatory animals before. Go on youtube and you'll find videos of people rolling around on the ground with a pride of lions like they were pets. We have no idea how susceptible a dinosaur would be to be being tamed but it's definitely not outside the realms of possibility and it's certainly not the most unbelievable aspect of a film where velociraptors are taller than a man and we manage to ressurect them.....

I vote this the best sentence ever typed on boards.ie

Mickeroo · 24-06-2013 3:14pm

krudler wrote: »

I vote this the best sentence ever typed on boards.ie

And of course I have a typo right in the middle of it too :pac:

Marty McFly · 24-06-2013 3:39pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Really don't understand why this is such a sticking point, people have tamed predatory animals before. Go on youtube and you'll find videos of people rolling around on the ground with a pride of lions like they were pets. We have no idea how susceptible a dinosaur would be to be being tamed but it's definitely not outside the realms of possibility and it's certainly not the most unbelievable aspect of a film where velociraptors are taller than a man and we manage to ressurect them.....

But there not really tamed there just animal behaviourists who know how to act around them any of them will openly admit at any stage the lions could turn on them and tear them to shreds, nor will you ever see them being so tamed us humans can send them out to attack oh say a wild rhino on a rampage to help protects us like is being implied will happen in the new Jurassic Park

.

Mickeroo · 24-06-2013 4:05pm

Marty McFly wrote: »

But there not really tamed there just animal behaviourists who know how to act around them any of them will openly admit at any stage the lions could turn on them and tear them to shreds, nor will you ever see them being so tamed us humans can send them out to attack oh say a wild rhino on a rampage to help protects us like is being implied will happen in the new Jurassic Park .

Yeah you're right of course but i don't think it's as big a leap as people are making it out to be. I think it's just a case of them being seen as movie monsters that just want to eat people rather than actual animals that make it harder for folks to accept.

If the 'raptors are as intelligent as they're made put to be in the other films I don't see why they couldn't be trained to some extent, provided they're kept muzzled when the handlers are around of course :pac:

At the end of the day though, this will probaly just be another big dumb summer blockbuster not hard sci-fi so it's always going to fall apart if people start applying too much real world logic to it.

Kess73 · 24-06-2013 4:57pm

missingtime wrote: »

If they add some Cadillacs it could work.

Don't forget adding Hannah Dundee

Sleepy · 24-06-2013 5:00pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah you're right of course but i don't think it's as big a leap as people are making it out to be. I think it's just a case of them being seen as movie monsters that just want to eat people rather than actual animals that make it harder for folks to accept.

If the 'raptors are as intelligent as they're made put to be in the other films I don't see why they couldn't be trained to some extent, provided they're kept muzzled when the handlers are around of course :pac:

At the end of the day though, this will probaly just be another big dumb summer blockbuster not hard sci-fi so it's always going to fall apart if people start applying too much real world logic to it.

muzzled? I'd imagine fetters would be more useful tbh...

McSasquatch · 24-06-2013 5:23pm

I don't have a problem with someone saying dinosaurs could be tamed.

I have a problem with the majority of dinosaurs in a Jurassic Park movie being tame. Where's the fun in that?

Galvasean · 24-06-2013 8:25pm

pixelburp · 11-09-2013 8:02am

Well this production has a new name, "Jurassic World", as well as a release date - June 12 2015. The linked article comes with a new logo, but I'm not sure if it's official or not:

http://www.thewrap.com/steven-spielbergs-jurassic-world-to-hit-theaters-in-june-2015/

rockbeast · 11-09-2013 9:45am

pixelburp wrote: »

Well this production has a new name, "Jurassic World", as well as a release date - June 12 2015. The linked article comes with a new logo, but I'm not sure if it's official or not:

http://www.thewrap.com/steven-spielbergs-jurassic-world-to-hit-theaters-in-june-2015/

I was hoping for Jurassic Fork:pac:

Hmmm...looks fake. Surely they'd superimpose Mr T-Rex on a globe?

What I want to know is, will there be feathers on the dinosaurs?

Kess73 · 11-09-2013 12:07pm

Galvasean wrote: »

I give you Pocho and Chito.

Pocho remained aggressive towards people generally, but would swim with Chito and allow him to pet him. Chito found Pocho when he was injured and nursed him back to health. Croc and man have had over 20 years as companions (and Chito eventually made money out of swimming with Pocho in front of tourists) before Pocho died last year.

http://www.globalwhisperer.com/2010/09/costa-rican-man-friends-crocodile/

A-Man-Friendly-With-Massive-Crocodile-Amazing-Story.-4.jpg

Now I just need to find me a T Rex with a splinter in his foot. Take out the splinter, and get the Rex to follow me to Jack Horner's gaff.:D

rockbeast · 11-09-2013 12:10pm

Kess73 wrote: »

I give you Pocho and Chito.

Pocho remained aggressive towards people generally, but would swim with Chito and allow him to pet him. Chito found Pocho when he was injured and nursed him back to health. Croc and man have had over 20 years as companions.

http://www.globalwhisperer.com/2010/09/costa-rican-man-friends-crocodile/

Now I just need to find me a T Rex with a splinter in his foot. Take out the splinter, and get the Rex to follow me to Jack Horner's gaff.:D

That's not a dinosaur; this is a dinosaur:D

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2416554/Another-gator-record-broken-Mississippi--time-741-pounds-states-heaviest-longest.html?ico=home%5Emostread

Kess73 · 11-09-2013 12:13pm

rockbeast wrote: »

That's not a dinosaur; this is a dinosaur:D

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2416554/Another-gator-record-broken-Mississippi--time-741-pounds-states-heaviest-longest.html?ico=home%5Emostread

That gator is smaller than Pocho was. Pocho weighed over 1000 lbs when he died and was over 15 feet in length

Both would pale in size next to some of the Salties in Oz though.

rockbeast · 11-09-2013 12:20pm

Kess73 wrote: »

That gator is smaller than Pocho was. Pocho weighed over 1000 lbs when he died and was over 15 feet in length

Both would pale in size next to some of the Salties in Oz though.

Ya, Pocho-Smocho!:D

Apparently red-necks in any land can outwit lizards anyway!

Now duck-billed platypus's - there's a real enemy of mankind:eek:

Antar Bolaeisk · 11-09-2013 3:18pm

I feel that they've made a mistake jumping all the way to Jurassic World with this film, they probably should have gone with Jurassic County first, moved on to Jurassic Country and then maybe Jurassic World. Now they're going to have to go with Jurassic Galaxy for the next film which is just crazy, dinosaurs in space crazy.

Mitch Connor · 11-09-2013 3:22pm

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

I feel that they've made a mistake jumping all the way to Jurassic World with this film, they probably should have gone with Jurassic County first, moved on to Jurassic Country and then maybe Jurassic World. Now they're going to have to go with Jurassic Galaxy for the next film which is just crazy, dinosaurs in space crazy.

You're no Dino nut!

Dinosaurs in space!

syklops · 11-09-2013 3:48pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Really don't understand why this is such a sticking point, people have tamed predatory animals before. Go on youtube and you'll find videos of people rolling around on the ground with a pride of lions like they were pets. We have no idea how susceptible a dinosaur would be to be being tamed but it's definitely not outside the realms of possibility and it's certainly not the most unbelievable aspect of a film where velociraptors are taller than a man and we manage to ressurect them.....

Funnily enough in 3001, the final sequel to 2001 a space odyssey, set a millennium in the future. Dinosaurs had been cloned and engineered Velociraptors had been taught to do menial tasks like gardening. From what I remember, it had been found velociraptors were highly intelligent and highly organised creatures.

prospect · 11-09-2013 4:08pm

Tangent:

I remember seeing the original Jurrasic Park in the cinema when it was first released way back when.

I distinctly remember a scene with Dr. Sattler (Dern) in the bunker and Arnolds (Jackson) hand is placed on her shoulder, when she turns around it turns out to be the severed limb.

I recently watched the movie on Telly and this scene was cut. Was this just done for TV or was it cut after the release? Was there anything else cut?

rockbeast · 11-09-2013 4:10pm

prospect wrote: »

Tangent:

I remember seeing the original Jurrasic Park in the cinema when it was first released way back when.

I distinctly remember a scene with Dr. Sattler (Dern) in the bunker and Arnolds (Jackson) hand is placed on her shoulder, when she turns around it turns out to be the severed limb.

I recently watched the movie on Telly and this scene was cut. Was this just done for TV or was it cut after the release? Was there anything else cut?

What channel? I know ITV cut but that would be ridonkulous!

It did happen as you said. BR, DVD, RTE, SKY movies it's always there and one of the best bits

ronano · 11-09-2013 4:19pm

it was also in the recent imax re-release

krudler · 11-09-2013 4:47pm

prospect wrote: »

Tangent:

I remember seeing the original Jurrasic Park in the cinema when it was first released way back when.

I distinctly remember a scene with Dr. Sattler (Dern) in the bunker and Arnolds (Jackson) hand is placed on her shoulder, when she turns around it turns out to be the severed limb.

I recently watched the movie on Telly and this scene was cut. Was this just done for TV or was it cut after the release? Was there anything else cut?

ITV cut The Lost World to ribbons when it was on recently, that great shot of the merc turning around screaming into the camera as the raptor leaps out of the grass onto him was cut

wasn't even anything particularly violent.

old hippy · 11-09-2013 4:56pm

These cuts happen all the time. On seeing Indiana Jones & The Temple of Doom some years after the cinema release I was annoyed that the scene where the villain pulls out some poor guy's beating heart was missing. I don't think that scene ever makes it onto telly.

Whilst on a tangent, when ITV showed The Long Good Friday circa '86/'87 - it was cut to ribbons. Director John McKenzie was incensed and when I saw the uncut version a year or two later, I understood why.

rockbeast · 11-09-2013 5:06pm

old hippy wrote: »

These cuts happen all the time. On seeing Indiana Jones & The Temple of Doom some years after the cinema release I was annoyed that the scene where the villain pulls out some poor guy's beating heart was missing. I don't think that scene ever makes it onto telly.

Whilst on a tangent, when ITV showed The Long Good Friday circa '86/'87 - it was cut to ribbons. Director John McKenzie was incensed and when I saw the uncut version a year or two later, I understood why.

No way! You just reminded me that circa 89/90 RTE broadcast a >1hr version of Raiders OTLA! Think Belloq was cut out of it...

Remember someone I used to know writing a letter to RTE (before email) and got a response saying there were time constraints:rolleyes:

old hippy · 11-09-2013 5:09pm

rockbeast wrote: »

No way! You just reminded me that circa 89/90 RTE broadcast a >1hr version of Raiders OTLA! Think Belloq was cut out of it...

Remember someone I used to know writing a letter to RTE (before email) and got a response saying there were time constraints:rolleyes:

A 1 hr tx version? Are you sure it wasn't broken up with the Nuacht in the middle, like ITV did/do?

RTE were notorious in the day for programmes running late, I do remember that. Set the VHS for something and have the last 7 mins lost forever... :mad:

ScumLord · 11-09-2013 5:32pm

Mickeroo wrote: »

Really don't understand why this is such a sticking point, people have tamed predatory animals before.

Pretty much any animal that lives in a group can be tamed-ish because all you have to do is make them think of you as the alpha leader. It also makes you the target for the other males though and if they're not kept extremely happy they can turn on you for apparently no reason.

They're all susceptible to training too, especially if you're taking advantage of their natural instincts. Even so success is unlikely, the cat and dog more than likely choose to domesticate themselves, we didn't tame them as originally thought. It then took probably thousands of years for dogs to end up like the dogs we have today.

rockbeast · 11-09-2013 5:36pm

old hippy wrote: »

A 1 hr tx version? Are you sure it wasn't broken up with the Nuacht in the middle, like ITV did/do?

RTE were notorious in the day for programmes running late, I do remember that. Set the VHS for something and have the last 7 mins lost forever... :mad:

<1 hr, for real. Edited to feck. Must try and do that myself on FC Pro someday soon.

The bit I remember is that they cut from running in front of the boulder straight to running over the hill with natives chasing Indy:eek:

It actually was a good cut but NOT ROTLA the way we like it!

Kidchameleon · 11-09-2013 5:56pm

prospect wrote: »

Tangent:

I remember seeing the original Jurrasic Park in the cinema when it was first released way back when.

I distinctly remember a scene with Dr. Sattler (Dern) in the bunker and Arnolds (Jackson) hand is placed on her shoulder, when she turns around it turns out to be the severed limb.

I recently watched the movie on Telly and this scene was cut. Was this just done for TV or was it cut after the release? Was there anything else cut?

Do you remember Sattler breaking off a leaf and examining it when they first get to the park? It was in the theater version but cut from all subsequent releases.

ScumLord · 11-09-2013 6:33pm

I wonder will the dinosaurs look as realistic in the new version. I don't think a lot of CGI looks realistic these days, it's too glossy, cartoonish and hyper to pass for realistic. I could see an over dependence on CGI meaning these dinosaurs won't look quite as real as the ones from the original jurassic park.

Nerdkiller1991 · 11-09-2013 6:45pm

ScumLord wrote: »

I wonder will the dinosaurs look as realistic in the new version. I don't think a lot of CGI looks realistic these days, it's too glossy, cartoonish and hyper to pass for realistic. I could see an over dependence on CGI meaning these dinosaurs won't look quite as real as the ones from the original jurassic park.

I don't know. I heard somewhere that they're going for the same CGI/animatronics hybrid that the previous movies had, but I might be wrong.

dreamers75 · 11-09-2013 11:04pm

ScumLord wrote: »

I wonder will the dinosaurs look as realistic in the new version. I don't think a lot of CGI looks realistic these days, it's too glossy, cartoonish and hyper to pass for realistic. I could see an over dependence on CGI meaning these dinosaurs won't look quite as real as the ones from the original jurassic park.

So CGI has regressed in your opinion or the newish movies that use it are crap :pac:

I think people looking for the CGI in movies doesnt help.

Jurassic Park nailed it 20 years ago, noone cared what was CGI and what wasnt. It was dinosaurs!!

Bipolar Joe · 12-09-2013 12:03am

I always thought the whole point of CGI was to enhance what was already there. Tons of stuff people always thought was CGI in Jurassic Park turned out to be a dude in a costume, which obviously looked more real and tangible, and so that became the level people expected, or something.

syklops · 12-09-2013 10:19am

Bipolar Joe wrote: »

I always thought the whole point of CGI was to enhance what was already there. Tons of stuff people always thought was CGI in Jurassic Park turned out to be a dude in a costume, which obviously looked more real and tangible, and so that became the level people expected, or something.

Really good article on the transition to CGI here

According to it, there was more CGI in the Social Network than all of Terminator 2.

Nearly 20 years on T2 is still visually impressive.

Mitch Connor · 12-09-2013 10:40am

syklops wrote: »

Really good article on the transition to CGI here

According to it, there was more CGI in the Social Network than all of Terminator 2.

Nearly 20 years on T2 is still visually impressive.

At the same time, the CGI in The Social Network was superb - wouldn't have thought it was there at all.

BlitzKrieg · 12-09-2013 11:11am

Mitch Connor wrote: »

At the same time, the CGI in The Social Network was superb - wouldn't have thought it was there at all.

thats kind of half the problem.

The other half is the change in attitude CGI has done to audiences.

Prior to the rise of CGI there was always a sense of wonder of *How did they do that?* to a lot of big films and there was quite a market for pieces on how things were made (and still is somewhat) but CGI has created a sort of lazy response mentality with viewers which is when something amazing happens your brain goes *That was done on computers* and because you make that connection instantly you draw your eyes towards the tell tale signs of cgi.

There use to be such a major draw for pieces on how films were made, I mean there still is, but its much more talking heads about visualizing an idea, where right up until the late 90s there were lots of little features on how certain scenes were shot or sfx shot created. These are nowhere near as prevalent as they once were.

I have a vhs at home which was sold as a standalone and it was entirely filled with making of pieces on how they did every major effects shot in the first terminator film. (I still remember fondly the breakdown on how they did a shot of arnie punching the windscreen of a car and James Cameron didnt want to use sugar glass as it lacked impact, so instead they set up a gas powered pile driver under Arnies arm in his coat so when he punched they would use it to smash the glass.)

sadly a making of feature for the terminator today has only this on it at 8 minutes 15 seconds:

while the one on this vhs spent a good 20 or so minutes walking us through the set up and why it was a challenge and how it improved the film etc.

thats sadly the more depressing effect cgi has had on cinema goers, its become a bit of a cheap excuse for them to explain how anything was done and because it was done on computers there is this sometimes annoying assumption that it was the lazy way of doing things

syklops · 12-09-2013 11:20am

Mitch Connor wrote: »

At the same time, the CGI in The Social Network was superb - wouldn't have thought it was there at all.

Very well done CGI is very well done, unfortunately, so many places go for the lazy option so it looks flat and dull or wispy. An example of the wispy look is the ship from V. The corridors look foggy. Compare it to say, the corridors in the ship in Avatar.

ScumLord · 12-09-2013 3:20pm

Nerdkiller1991 wrote: »

I don't know. I heard somewhere that they're going for the same CGI/animatronics hybrid that the previous movies had, but I might be wrong.

I hope so.

dreamers75 wrote: »

So CGI has regressed in your opinion or the newish movies that use it are crap :pac:

Technically it's better, you can achieve much more, much easier but every film over uses it to the point they might as well be using toys it's so obviously CGI. It's all almost too clear, crisp and detailed to be real.

I thought the likes of any of the superhero films like ironman and spiderman have poor CGI. I just didn't like anything about it. It looked very fake even though everything was done technically perfectly.

Galvasean · 12-09-2013 6:16pm

rockbeast wrote: »

That's not a dinosaur; this is a dinosaur:D

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2416554/Another-gator-record-broken-Mississippi--time-741-pounds-states-heaviest-longest.html?ico=home%5Emostread

No it isn't. This is!

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

thats kind of half the problem.

The other half is the change in attitude CGI has done to audiences.

Prior to the rise of CGI there was always a sense of wonder of *How did they do that?* to a lot of big films and there was quite a market for pieces on how things were made...

I agree. I used to adore 'making of' documentaries with all of their animations and make up magic. It's just not as interesting to watch guys mess about in front of an editing suite.

If there's one thing I did like about JP3 it was that they did use a lot of conventional special effects when they could. That Spinosaurus robot was bloody massive! And the raptor trousers were pretty neat too.

With any luck JP4 will follow the JP tradition of mixing inventive conventional effects with CGI.

krudler · 12-09-2013 6:55pm

Galvasean wrote: »

No it isn't. This is!

I agree. I used to adore 'making of' documentaries with all of their animations and make up magic. It's just not as interesting to watch guys mess about in front of an editing suite.

If there's one thing I did like about JP3 it was that they did use a lot of conventional special effects when they could. That Spinosaurus robot was bloody massive! And the raptor trousers were pretty neat too.

With any luck JP4 will follow the JP tradition of mixing inventive conventional effects with CGI.

And with JP they were innovating effects as well so it was trial and error for them, which imo is when the best effects come about. Not replicating stuff that has been done better before. It's why modern CGI for the most part isn't believable, because you know it was knocked up by people at computers not people building maquettes or backdrops or puppets or whatever.

One of my favourite effects ever is the queen from Aliens, she's big, clunky, doesn't exactly move gracefully. But the way Cameron shot her makes it look impressive even today, compare that to the one in AVP, where's its running around the place crashing through walls and looks rubbish.

Galvasean · 18-09-2013 7:25pm

Galvasean wrote: »

If there's one thing I did like about JP3 it was that they did use a lot of conventional special effects when they could. That Spinosaurus robot was bloody massive! And the raptor trousers were pretty neat too.

With any luck JP4 will follow the JP tradition of mixing inventive conventional effects with CGI.

This is what I'm talking about:

ScumLord · 18-09-2013 9:05pm

krudler wrote: »

It's why modern CGI for the most part isn't believable, because you know it was knocked up by people at computers not people building maquettes or backdrops or puppets or whatever.

I don't think CGI is quiet there in being completely convincing, it's not ready to replace actual physical objects in the real world yet but it's great at adding to real objects to make them more convincing. It could add muscle movement, heartbeat pulses and fix the problems that give away animatronics. A lot of that type of work happens in film and TV and for the most part we don't notice at all.

As a package I find it interesting because I follow after effects tutorials from time to time.

Jurassic World

Comments