Jurassic World

Gbear · 02-02-2015 1:52pm

Interesting to see the progress in the CGI:

It's probably going to be polished right up until before release.

jones · 02-02-2015 2:54pm

The SB trailer is a lot better than the teaser and kept the eery JP piano theme which I loved. Chris Pratt can do no wrong in my eyes are the moment so really looking forward to this

pixelburp · 02-02-2015 3:10pm

Gbear wrote: »

Interesting to see the progress in the CGI:

It's probably going to be polished right up until before release.

Was there ever even a set? It really highlights though just how little of that scene is 'real', bar the half dozen or so people in the foreground. it's fascinating to compare the two versions, but equally it's a little depressing too; feels so ... cut & paste. All things being equal, it'll probably sit as an establishing scene to demonstrate the park's status, but it just makes things feel that bit more vacant and unconvincing...

Bacchus · 02-02-2015 3:11pm

That new trailer certainly improved on the first. You can make a bit more sense of what's going on and even the trained raptops and the hybrid-dino ideas don't seem so gimmicky. I'm still not 100% sold on it but that trailer restored a little bit of the awe that the original had.

02-02-2015 3:28pm

I suppose that, regarding the makey uppey dino, is highlighting just how commercialised it is. Just like Hollywood

Falthyron · 02-02-2015 3:48pm

The unarmed human told the four raptors to obey: this won't end well. It reinforces the original idea of them rallying next to Chris Pratt when he is on the bike. Seems to me that he goes on a hunt for the new dinosaur with his raptor-buddies.

"Collect Chris and his pet raptors now! Available at your local McDonalds".

Adamantium · 02-02-2015 4:10pm

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

I fear this film will have a fatal spectacle problem. Rewatching the original film recently, what's so effective about it is how 'intimate' everything is bar one or two scenes. Scenes are always focused on a handful of characters, which keeps everything in sharp focus and means Spielberg really earns the 'money shots' when they actually arrive. Hell, several of the most iconic scenes in the film - such as the water shaking - are all about build up rather than reveal. It's not exactly Hitchcock, but it's still an exercise in restraint and modesty in many respects. Spielberg even cheekily plays with that, what what with the characters' crushing disappointment when they first visit the enclosures and don't actually see anything. Their frustration and impatience is obvious - maybe mirroring the audience?

The trailers for Jurassic World alone contain several more sweeping spectacle shots than the entirety of the original film. Certainly this can be partially forgiven since the entire idea behind the film is that the park is open and busy (an inconvenience the films so far have neatly sidestepped). And the latest trailer at least indicates there will be some scenes focused on one or two characters facing off against one or two dinosaurs. But the film has an uphill battle making something as memorable as the first when all signs point to the fact that it's philosophy and concept seem a world away from Spielberg's masterpiece (and I'm actually not at all reluctant to use that word). Even the iconic gate is bigger and more grandiose here - let's hope Trevorrow knows when to dial back too (which you'd hope he would given that's exactly what worked in Safety Not Guaranteed)

I agree, but I'd rather them try to so something new than have the series double down on itself by going over old territory aka Terminator Genysis.

Unfortunately I don't think you can meld a classic even with all the preparation in the world, I hope it'll surprise and wow in a different way to the original. I'm hoping something similar for The Force Awakens, which will be probably be the best acted and wrote film in the SW Franchise to date

irishgeo · 02-02-2015 4:43pm

its pretty obvious as well someone is going to end up in the water and be eaten/attacked by the new water dino.

going to have to rewatch the new SB trailer as i was halfasleep watching it last night.

irishgeo · 02-02-2015 4:53pm

Gbear wrote: »

Interesting to see the progress in the CGI:

It's probably going to be polished right up until before release.

odd the train tracks are missing from the 2nd trailer.

Virtanen · 02-02-2015 5:47pm

folan wrote: »

i would fully expect a heel turn by the raptors by the end of the film, once their biggest rival is defeated.

R(aptor)KO from outta nowhere?

Goldstein · 02-02-2015 7:37pm

irishgeo wrote: »

odd the train tracks are missing from the 2nd trailer.

It may have been suggested to them that having the monorail run past the massive fućk-off Mosasaur breaching lagoon posed a slight health and safety issue.

razorblunt · 02-02-2015 7:55pm

I'll admit it .. I got excited, looks like it's not going to hold back either on the gore.

irishgeo · 02-02-2015 8:57pm

razorblunt wrote: »

I'll admit it .. I got excited, looks like it's not going to hold back either on the gore.

Depends what rating they aiming for.

homerun_homer · 02-02-2015 10:14pm

I was very much looking forward to this and the idea that the franchise would get a spark of new life. I'm still not sure and if anything, a bit disappointed by how things are looking with these trailers, too much CGI, no sign of good practical effects, trained raptors... while being a new twist on things, it is a bit cheesy. They seemed to make the raptors look less scary looking too.

If it's not all I hoped for then I hope it's at least a fun film.

Dair76 · 03-02-2015 12:26am

Still some polish needed on the effects, but fair play to their attention to detail - they changed the image on the dude's phone in the bottom-right hand corner to match the make-believe background each time.

Roar · 03-02-2015 8:01am

Source

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/new-jurassic-world-trailer-hides-improved-cgi-plain-sight/

irishgeo · 06-02-2015 1:19am

Roar wrote: »

Source

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/new-jurassic-world-trailer-hides-improved-cgi-plain-sight/

Having looked again the mono rail is still there just a lot lower to the ground. You can see it just above the water. Its small compared to the water tower

Dair76 · 06-02-2015 2:33am

I think that's just the electric fence continuing on around the lagoon.

Mr Freeze · 06-02-2015 9:57am

irishgeo wrote: »

Having looked again the mono rail is still there just a lot lower to the ground. You can see it just above the water. Its small compared to the water tower

Even the first monorail was too low if that thing is swimming around underneath. If its way lower now they are just asking for park goers to get chomped.

syklops · 06-02-2015 11:20am

Watched the trailer this morning. Im very excited, and conversely have massive problems with what I understand so far.

So, they have engineered a custom dinosaur. Why? No, really, I'm asking. Theres hundreds to choose from.

I was thinking in the shower earlier, if there was a real life Jurassic Park, I'd want to see Triceratops, Stegosaurus and Brachiasaurus. If the park just had those three I'd be content. Why do they need predators at all, considering the significant extra cost, risk etc. OK, a lot of peoples favourite is the T-Rex. A T-rex would be manageable. Why in the world would you create raptors? Its a very bad idea.

So, they have engineered a new dinosaur. A cute cuddly one? No. From what I can gather it has the body of a T-Rex or other large dinosaur but the mind of a velociraptor or other highly intelligent predator. Its like giving Hannibal Lector Jaws' teeth.

Still, I felt very nostalgic watching those gates open.

folan · 06-02-2015 11:29am

syklops wrote: »

So, they have engineered a custom dinosaur. Why?

My understanding is they want to create something that will really scare people again, or be a massive new attraction, so that they come to see it.

Lets assume that the park has been open a while, and people have gotten used to seeing all forms of dinos in captivity, so they dont get scared any more. The novelty wears off. Profits go down.

Mitch Connor · 06-02-2015 11:46am

folan wrote: »

My understanding is they want to create something that will really scare people again, or be a massive new attraction, so that they come to see it.

Lets assume that the park has been open a while, and people have gotten used to seeing all forms of dinos in captivity, so they dont get scared any more. The novelty wears off. Profits go down.

Thats exactly it from what they have said.

One of the first things the director said about the movie publicly was how they had this idea about a kid standing infront of a giant Dinosaur enclosure, with the Dino right there - but the kid had his back to it looking at his phone. THe idea that people were essentially bored of the experience.

So, as you said, a new attraction is needed. In parks around the world they add attractions to keep interest up. Same is happening here, just the new attraction is a Dino, not a rollercoaster.

The new dino doesn't bother me. Though my knowledge of dinosaurs is very limited. I knew most of the main ones in the first couple of movies. Raptors were new to me at the time (and inaccurate in the movie but that doesn't seem to get as much hate as this new fella!) as well as the dilophosaurus. I had never heard of the big one in the third movie so for all it mattered to me it could have been completely made up too!

Also - why create predators or have them at all due to risk etc? I would say the fact Lions and Tigers are arguably the most popular attactions and zoos and safari's would be an answer to that itself.

Mr Freeze · 06-02-2015 11:54am

The new Dino means they can do what they want with it, having it to anything without peoples inner paleontologists coming out and commenting & nitpicking.

EG.
There are no velociraptors in those movies, as a velociraptor was only the size of a chicken, those are Deinonychus in the movies.

They can have the new creature behave in any way possible to fit the script and without any restrictions that a real dino might have had. Like it climbs out of an enclosure based on one trailer, T-Rex couldn't do that, but a fictional creature can.

syklops · 06-02-2015 12:41pm

Mitch Connor wrote: »

Thats exactly it from what they have said.

One of the first things the director said about the movie publicly was how they had this idea about a kid standing infront of a giant Dinosaur enclosure, with the Dino right there - but the kid had his back to it looking at his phone. The idea that people were essentially bored of the experience.

It feels bizarre that you phrased your comment that way because I saw this photo only minutes ago:

From here

OK, I get the need for the new dino in the context of the story. Just hopefully it wont have feathers.

Mal-Adjusted · 06-02-2015 12:42pm

The few issues i have is with visitor numbers going gown. Think about how many zoo's there are. Jurassic World would be the most unique zoo in the world with animals only it has. in order for visitor numbers to go down due t lack of interest, it would literally have to be the last surviving zoo on earth as people would lose interest in the animals we've seen all our lives loooooong before dinosaurs!

As for them engineering their own species, i kind of like it (they're all just mutated Ostriches and Emu's anyway). In the original book [SPOILERS for 26 year old novel], the scientists are constantly tweeking and updating the genetics of the animals. This results in two types of Raptors, normal ones which breed in the wild and are closer to cheetahs in behavior (dangerous, but approachable if you take care) and a small number of new Raptors that are essentially distilled evil and will kill anything on sight (including the normal Raptors). Guess which ones made it into the film.

also, a makey-uppey species means you won't have nerds blowing a gasket & screaming betrayal if it ends up killing the T-Rex!

06-02-2015 12:43pm

syklops wrote: »

Just hopefully it wont have feathers.

why the hell not?

folan · 06-02-2015 12:43pm

Mal-Adjusted wrote: »

Guess which ones made it into the film.

the scientists. always stealing the spotlight, they are.

Mitch Connor · 06-02-2015 1:01pm

folan wrote: »

the scientists. always stealing the spotlight, they are.

A scientist is actually my favourite part of the first movie at this point.

The guy in the lab near the beginning using, for no real reason, vr gloves to manipulate the DNA strand on the computer while wearing a protective perspex helmet/mask to protect him from, I can only assume, the danger of the computer screen blowing up from all the complex awesome DNA stuff he is doing.

This guy - what a hero.

Vid here - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XyYmMFAMHRo 1:51.

syklops · 06-02-2015 2:04pm

Deleted User wrote: »

why the hell not?

"That doesn't look very scary. More like a six-foot turkey. "

Now with feathers.

Although speaking as someone with Ornithophobia, the end result might be that the movie actually terrifies me.

06-02-2015 2:08pm

syklops wrote: »

"That doesn't look very scary. More like a six-foot turkey. "

Now with feathers.

Although speaking as someone with Ornithophobia, the end result might be that the movie actually terrifies me.

You saying that a 6 foot tall eagle would not be frightening?

Jurassic World

Comments