Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom

1235»

Comments

  • #202
    homerun_homer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,026 ✭✭✭homerun_homer


    I went to see this in 4DX last week. 4DX was done to get it out of the way first and foremost, and I chose this film since I've far less interest in the franchise since the first Jurassic World. I'm not going to waste a viewing on something like Infinity Wars where I've a more vested interest.

    Anyway, the movie was more enjoyable than Jurassic World because that film has committed all the sins and this film was following up on it, but with far less cringe. It's not a good movie, nor would I recommend it to anyone but it was passable entertainment. J.A. Bayona was my biggest draw to it initially. I hoped he would do something great with it but he's tied to the studios and has to follow their lead.

    I liked the imagery of the Brontosaurus walking up to the pier, and getting engulfed in smoke and lava. It was the best throwback to the original thus far in any sequel, and nearly brought a lump to my throat. Maybe more so because it's a visual represents killing off the old franchise completely.

    The sub plot with the girl and what it amounts to is stupid and felt like it had no place in the film except to shoe horn in a kid in perilous situations. She was fine in the role, and I didn't not like her.

    The made up dinosaur, much like the last film, was just not the direction I like to see the films going. The original film had great tense moments with these dinosaurs and had more ground to cover and with many other dinos with potential for adventure set pieces. It's like they are just pushed aside for something more rad :cool: to please kids. The weaponisation of, and greedy interest of rich business men with the dinosaurs are the routes I hate these films taking.

    Does anyone else think it weird that most of the dinosaurs can now roam America but there is no mate for them, therefore they can either be killed by military, or just die in the wild. It doesn't scream to me that by the time a sequel comes around that there will be an abundance of more dinos stalking the USA.

    Oh.. and not to get bogged down in trailer discussion, but bar the initial trailer (in which Bayona said purposefully doens't spoil the rest of the film), the trailers pretty much played out all the action set pieces and left very little new. I wish the marketing people in Hollywood learned to hold some stuff back. The one credit I will give Rian Johnson is that he purposefully had much of TLJ kept from trailers.

    4DX wise, it was ok for a little while since it was a new experience. It would be cool if the tech was on par with the virtual rides of the like of Universal studios for the feeling of dead drops and motion experience. By the time they got off the island I was done with being in the 4DX chair. The most annoying part was the blowing at my neck. When raptors attach I would not expect a simple whisp of air blowing at my neck to be the immersive feeling. I thought it also stupid when an establishing aerial shot is used and you get a floating motion. This is all well and good if a character is in a helicopter or something but leave it out for establishing exterior aerial shots. I won't be going again unless it's for a 90 minute action/adventure that I'm told is worth it.


  • #203
    McLoughlin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭McLoughlin


    homerun_homer wrote: »
    Does anyone else think it weird that most of the dinosaurs can now roam America but there is no mate for them, therefore they can either be killed by military, or just die in the wild. It doesn't scream to me that by the time a sequel comes around that there will be an abundance of more dinos stalking the USA.

    That has been answered way back in Jurassic Park


  • #204
    Jude13
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,827 ✭✭✭Jude13


    I was really looking forward to this movie after enjoying the first of the reboot. I thought it was woeful. Really disappointed that it was just a filler between the last and the next movie.


  • #205
    Dravokivich
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Music Moderators, Politics Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 22,360 CMod ✭✭✭✭Dravokivich


    I don't usually like to criticise movies and try to accept them as entertainment. But I'm finding this franchise to be very confusing now. It's meant to be full of shock thrills and suspense. But this movie was more of a parody of Jurassic park 1&2 with the cast of Jurassic world.

    The auction scene was very reminiscent of classic king Kong movies and the final scene had me thinking more so of planet of the apes with a resident evil feel to it.

    It didn't have any identity of its own.


  • #206
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Wailin wrote: »
    What the actual ****?! Ever heard of ****ing spoilers??

    Dunno if you're being sarcastic, but OU812 was. Without spoiling anything that doesn't happen in the film, in fact TBH Goldblum's inclusion was purely as fan-service and something to include in the trailer.

    _________

    I actually enjoyed this more than I did the first Jurassic World; it felt looser, grubbier with an almost low-rent flourish than the Colin Trevorrow vehicle. It's still a franchise that's a touch too derivative, with many moments clearly cribbed from both previous Jurassic Parks or other genre films such as King Kong; but while the last film ultimately came off rote, vapid and brazenly cynical, with Fallen Kingdom there was a trashy B-movie heart beating at the centre, the more thrilling moments even leaning into PG-horror not really seen since the 1993 original. JA Bayona added a touch of the wilderness & viciousness the franchise was sorely lacking - the 'Indoraptor' used far more effectively than its progenitor, often framed like the monstrous creature from a horror film than a 'fun' blockbuster dinosaur.

    That said, while the mechanics of the action were great, its human participants remained as tedious as before. Both returning leads added nothing but some continuity, the script also persisting with a romance nobody cared about - including said leads, going by their lack of chemistry.

    Fallen Kingdom will also be the point where I'm officially done with Chris Pratt and his single character template; the smug, sometimes hyper-capable smartass he keeps playing had already been wearing thin, but here it became so utterly insufferable it broke the camels back. To be fair, it worked in Guardians of the Galaxy, as the scripts often called his character out on said smugness, but the writing here was never sophisticated enough to look past the cockiness. As for the secondary characters, well I suppose they were just ... there. Generic and redundant, the vet & IT nerd contributed nothing except a limp attempt to introduce more heroes to the party.

    Also, the less said about the gratuitous Jeff Goldblum cameo the better, and probably the easiest paycheque he ever earned.

    Still! Ultimately the limp characterisation & Pratt's smarminess didn't derail the film enough to ruin the solid thrills.


  • #207
    dulux99
    Registered Users Posts: 2,795 ✭✭✭dulux99


    My only gripe with the film was the price of the dinosaurs at the auction. 43m for the prototype of a new breed of dinosaur? Everton paid 50m for Gylfi Sigurdson!


  • #208
    razorblunt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    dulux99 wrote: »
    My only gripe with the film was the price of the dinosaurs at the auction. 43m for the prototype of a new breed of dinosaur? Everton paid 50m for Gylfi Sigurdson!

    Don't forget to add on wages too, look how much they were paying the way dinosaur they had, Rooney, per week.


  • #209
    paulbok
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,989 ✭✭✭paulbok


    homerun_homer wrote: »

    Does anyone else think it weird that most of the dinosaurs can now roam America but there is no mate for them, therefore they can either be killed by military, or just die in the wild. It doesn't scream to me that by the time a sequel comes around that there will be an abundance of more dinos stalking the USA.

    They will be glad of the 2nd ammendment now


  • #210
    Sad Professor
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 22,680 CMod ✭✭✭✭Sad Professor


    Despite a rotten RT score from critics and audiences, this is cleaning up at the box office. Should hit a billion worldwide in the next week.


  • Advertisement
  • #211
    brevity
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,587 ✭✭✭brevity


    I think they could make a good Aliensesque movie out of this franchise.

    A bunch of Ingen mercenaries are dropped into Isla something-or-other to try and secure the island/get some maguffin.


  • #212
    TerrorFirmer
    Closed Accounts Posts: 29,930 ✭✭✭✭TerrorFirmer


    An OK movie overall that improves as it progresses, but never comes even close to truly hitting the mark and most of the characters are just terrible charicatures of other characters that've already featured in the franchise previously - to much better effect. The 'villians' are about as Sunday-morning-cartoon as you could get, which cheapens the whole thing.

    It's just tired now and limps along from one huge CGI set piece to another without much care for character development or real exploration of interesting themes the film itself sets up. But, on the flip side, it is entertaining and I enjoyed it - though I thought it was a big disimprovement on Jurrassic World (itself not spectacular either). It is to that movie, what Lost World was to the original film.

    There was one scene they absolutely knocked out of the park though - the haunting scene of the dinosaur standing on the pier as they're leaving the island. God, I almost had a lump in my throat watching that! The way it was shot, and the accompanying audio, too....really stunning stuff. Pity that tone/potential was not used or realised anywhere else in the film, which is disappointing.

    The last third of the movie was both absurdly stupid and hugely thrilling in equal measure. The whole auction bit really threw me off though - affordable dinosaurs? Even to the slowest mind, surely those figures were just utterly ridiculous...brings us back to the Sunday-morning-cartoon angle. Having said that, a fairly gratifying if entirely dumb scene.

    Anyway, decent watch overall, just a very average and forgettable film.


  • #213
    Pugzilla
    Site Banned Posts: 1,765 ✭✭✭Pugzilla


    I enjoyed it overall, but the unrealistically low auction prices for the dinosaurs annoyed me a lot.


  • #214
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    It's another one of those franchises whose B-movie potential is being stymied by the fact the franchise is ringfenced as a PG13, studio smoothed, China-friendly blockbuster. The storytelling potential is throughly squeezed out: the best thing it could do would be to let it be the trashy, horror tinged movie Fallen Kingdom clearly yearned to be.


  • #215
    razorblunt
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,300 ✭✭✭✭razorblunt


    Got round to this one late, as a JP fan there's alot wrong with it and little right but its decent in parts.

    The dockyard scene was very well done and there's some great shots throughout (rocking horse being overshadowed by the dinosaur head etc) but jesus the two main villains were pantomine stuff. Even the Great White Hunter was an idiot, Pete Postheltwaite he ain't.

    Toby Jones thought he was in a panto I'd say.

    As for the ending, the still have the trackers, they'd round up the girls quite quickly.


  • #216
    .......
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,057 ✭✭✭.......


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • #217
    yourdeadwright
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,814 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    i thought it was quite decent, but id love to see an R rated Jurassic Park movie,


  • #218
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Bumping the thread, as quite bizarrely, next week FX are airing an 8 minute short film that'll bridge the gap between Fallen Kingdom & Jurassic World 3; Colin Trevorrow will be directing it, which was the one bum note in the news as it reminded me that that hack was returning after JA Bayona's good work

    It'll be titled "Battle at Big Rock" and was actually filmed in Ireland; no idea if it'll air this side of the pond, but fair to say it'll pop up at all the 'usual' online outlets

    http://collider.com/jurassic-world-short-film-colin-trevorrow-interview/
    COLIN TREVORROW: Battle At Big Rock is a short film that takes place one year after the events of Fallen Kingdom. It’s about a family on a camping trip to Big Rock National Park, about 20 miles from where the last film ended. There have been a few sightings, but this is the first major confrontation between dinosaurs and humans.

    A lot of people are going to wonder how did you make a Jurassic World short film without anyone getting wind of it?

    TREVORROW: We shot it in Ireland last winter. They have a grove of redwood trees outside Dublin that look exactly like the national parks in Northern California. I honestly never thought we’d make it this far without getting found out. The Irish can keep a secret.


  • #219
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    That is bizarre news. Where's he talking about? Birr Castle? Don't know of anywhere else we have redwoods in Ireland.

    Also, I don't understand how a stampeding herd of dinos has only had "a few sightings" in over a year.
    pixelburp wrote: »
    Colin Trevorrow will be directing it, which was the one bum note in the news as it reminded me that that hack was returning after JA Bayona's good work
    Why is Trevorrow a hack? I thought the first JW was fantastic. I liked Fallen Kingdom but for me it is firmly in the shadow of the first.


  • #220
    El Duda
    Registered Users Posts: 890 ✭✭✭El Duda


    What 'good work' did JA Bayona do? Fallen Kingdom was an absolute abomination of a film. Unspeakably awful but still stupidly entertaining at times.


  • #221
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Dades wrote: »
    That is bizarre news. Where's he talking about? Birr Castle? Don't know of anywhere else we have redwoods in Ireland.

    That's my presumption: I had a quick look and all roads led to Birr. It's only 1.5 hours out from Dublin so that'd track.
    Dades wrote: »
    Also, I don't understand how a stampeding herd of dinos has only had "a few sightings" in over a year.

    Why is Trevorrow a hack? I thought the first JW was fantastic. I liked Fallen Kingdom but for me it is firmly in the shadow of the first.

    He's a hack in the sense that his work is almost devoid of creativity, originality or anything resembling a directorial voice. He's in the same pot of directors that you'd find Brett Ratner, John Moore; yes men who just point & shoot, bring no spark or flair.

    Agree to disagree about JW 'cos it just was lifeless mediocrity. Like I say below, Bayona took a 0/10 script and dragged it into a mediocre film; Trevorrow took a 10/10 script and dragged it down to a mediocre film.
    El Duda wrote: »
    What 'good work' did JA Bayona do? Fallen Kingdom was an absolute abomination of a film. Unspeakably awful but still stupidly entertaining at times.

    Yup, the film was awful and not saying it wasn't, but it was the script that was the dead weight IMO: that the movie was entertaining at all, was down to Bayona adding some pace and flourish here & there. The super-raptor & that auction was inane, but then the scenes of it stalking our heroes was tense, often infused with a distinct horror flavour. The mechanics and visuals worked, even as the script let the film down each time.

    In fact my own review on this thread probably sums it up better :Dhttps://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=107312765&postcount=206 lol


  • Advertisement
  • #222
    El Duda
    Registered Users Posts: 890 ✭✭✭El Duda


    Good point, well made. I agree that the script is shocking.


  • #223
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    I'd agree the script of FK is the source of the problem. Setting half the movie in an old mansion didn't leave a lot of scope for spectacle.

    Won't agree on JW though! Saw it twice in the cinema and more at home as my kids love it. As is the trend these days, it was somewhat of a reboot of Jurassic Park. I'm cool with that. I've made my peace with this studio approach since this, and The Force Awakens. I'm old - I get it!


  • #224
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Dades wrote: »
    I'd agree the script of FK is the source of the problem. Setting half the movie in an old mansion didn't leave a lot of scope for spectacle.

    Won't agree on JW though! Saw it twice in the cinema and more at home as my kids love it. As is the trend these days, it was somewhat of a reboot of Jurassic Park. I'm cool with that. I've made my peace with this studio approach since this, and The Force Awakens. I'm old - I get it!

    Right but in of itself I didn't mind that JW was essentially a retread; was always going to be inevitable if the script went with a plot of "What if Jurassic Park eventually opened anyway?"; the prospect of carnage in a fully functioning park was too tempting not to take on. It's just that the studio gave the job to a director who did absolutely nothing interesting with the concept or execution.

    Agree to disagree n' all that, just thought Fallen Kingdom did more with less, while JW1 did less with more, the latter leaving me more annoyed, even if both films weren't great in the end :D


  • #225
    El Duda
    Registered Users Posts: 890 ✭✭✭El Duda


    Yeah, the direction in JW was very flat but the script was ok.


  • #226
    Mr Crispy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,001 ✭✭✭Mr Crispy


    Available on the official JW channel on YouTube;

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7kbVvpOGdQ


  • #227
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Wasn't bad for a short; not quite sure what the point of it was, given the third movie's still a good bit into the future. I suppose it's clear what the plot is likely to be, with dinosaurs now definitively back in the ecosystem.

    And to think, they're only back in the wild 'cos a kid got sad they were clones like her, with Chris Pratty / Dallas Howard deciding that yes, releasing them into wild was a great idea .


  • #228
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,072 ✭✭✭OU812


    pixelburp wrote: »
    not quite sure what the point of it was.

    I’m gonna predict one of these a year until the next movie comes out to keep up the hype.

    You’ve new characters & new direction.

    Plus, universal spent over €100m on updating the ride so gotta keep the crowds coming


  • #229
    dan1895
    Registered Users Posts: 4,597 ✭✭✭dan1895


    That Allosaurus is definitely juicing.


  • #230
    flangemeistro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,695 ✭✭✭flangemeistro


    Actually enjoyed that 7 minutes


  • #231
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    Not sure again, what the point was, but it was a good bit of dino-action.

    A classic case of Chekhov's Gun with that crossbow. Worked for me.


  • Advertisement
  • #232
    conorhal
    Registered Users Posts: 7,004 ✭✭✭conorhal


    Dades wrote: »
    Not sure again, what the point was, but it was a good bit of dino-action.

    A classic case of Chekhov's Gun with that crossbow. Worked for me.


    I presume the short is designed to establish with the audience that the next film will not be a 'park based scenerio' but a continuation of the ludicrous events from the last film.

    The whole '8yr old Rambo with a crossbow shtick' made me roll my eyes pretty hard. It was almost as bad as Ian Malcom's daughter using her gymnastics routine to kick a raptor out a window.
    Perhaps it's just me though, and I concede that I might be the only person disappointed that Tim and Lex didn't end up Dino chum in the kitchen in the first film. I just find kids written as if they were obnoxiously know it all adults that behave in unrealistic and improbable ways really irritating.

    The whole franchise has run out of steam and ideas, give up the pretense Universal and just make a Dino-riders movie already.


  • #233
    Sleepy
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,268 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    Our entire family enjoyed the that. Simple enough premise and establishes a few things for the next film: the dinosaurs are breeding in the wild and they haven't been rounded up for some reason.


  • #234
    gmisk
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,309 ✭✭✭✭gmisk


    I rather enjoyed the short, the little clips over the titles as well


  • #235
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    conorhal wrote: »
    Perhaps it's just me though, and I concede that I might be the only person disappointed that Tim and Lex didn't end up Dino chum in the kitchen in the first film. I just find kids written as if they were obnoxiously know it all adults that behave in unrealistic and improbable ways really irritating.
    I'd have thought the kids in the first JP were fairly realistic. Scared and (very) screamy. Doing stupid things (stop waving the f*ckin torch!) Almost totally reliant on adults.


  • #236
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    The JP kids were a mixed bag. Part of the problem with writing children in general IMO, is that it's easy to end up with two variants: the precocious snots whose chirpiness is obnoxiously fake, or Little Adults who basically function as a Greek Chorus or Council for the main adult characters. Spielberg seems to have struggled with good child characters - at least I can't immediately think of any, with the only exception I can think of being Christian Bale's young lead in Empire of the Sun.

    The director has a schmaltzy blindspot, that when aimed at children, veers into this idealised concept of what a child is, that ultimately never rings true. So with JP, you got Tim (although it can be argued that he was MEANT to be a shiny-eyed pain in the a$$, to act as an initial confirmation to Alan Grant that children are The Worst. Only then for his paternal instincts to kick in later)

    For me, part of the original appeal of Stranger Things was that the Duffers somehow channeled more authentic personalities and tropes of children into their writing, making them likeable, but kind idiots at the same time. That unique perspective of life that only pre-teen kids posses. Of course, what it ultimately comes down to is the abilities of the actor: children are emotional works in progress in the first place, so asking them to act out emotional ranges they may neither understand or posses is a bit of a directing Hail Mary. Again, this is kinda why Stranger Things did so well, lucking out with their cast.


  • #237
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,072 ✭✭✭OU812


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Spielberg seems to have struggled with good child characters - at least I can't immediately think of any, with the only exception I can think of being Christian Bale's young lead in Empire of the Sun.


    Drew Barrymore in ET???


  • #238
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    OU812 wrote: »
    Drew Barrymore in ET???

    Wasn't she quite young in that? Been years since I've seen ET but I remember her as one of those doe-eyed "cute" toddlers. Kinda thinking more of child characters who have actual, distinct personalities.


  • #239
    homerun_homer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,026 ✭✭✭homerun_homer


    So this is set 1 year after Fallen Kingdom, I'd understand the smaller dinos that there were multiple of getting out of hand in the real world, breeding and becoming a pest, but the bigger ones surely would be handled easier by an army. Wasn't there only one T-Rex released at the end of FK? I can imagine the sequel trying to pass it off as there being more, and new baby Rex's.

    I thought the short film was as cheesey and hammy as the newer films and I really wish that a good filmaker and writing team were behind them. Trevorrow is a hack.


  • #240
    Dades
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    pixelburp wrote: »
    The director has a schmaltzy blindspot, that when aimed at children, veers into this idealised concept of what a child is, that ultimately never rings true. So with JP, you got Tim (although it can be argued that he was MEANT to be a shiny-eyed pain in the a$$, to act as an initial confirmation to Alan Grant that children are The Worst. Only then for his paternal instincts to kick in later)
    Not seeing what was wrong with Tim. I assume what you reference was his role - the whole "This is why I hate kids... but then this is what happens when you bond with them..." Totally part of the charm of the movie.

    Compare this to the pair in Jurassic World *shudder*. I love that movie, but it's in spite of those kids.

    Every kid is different in real life, so there's no correct way to depict a child. If filmmakers regularly pick a particular personality type to further a story I'm fine with that if executed well.

    And as you say - a LOT depends on the casting.


  • Advertisement
  • #241
    OU812
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,072 ✭✭✭OU812


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Wasn't she quite young in that? Been years since I've seen ET but I remember her as one of those doe-eyed "cute" toddlers. Kinda thinking more of child characters who have actual, distinct personalities.

    Henry Thomas then. Her older brother.

    I’d have to go back through his catalogue, but I’m pretty sure Spielberg is one of the few directors who gets kids right


  • #242
    brianregan09
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,482 ✭✭✭brianregan09


    Tough crowd here


    I thought it was great , more please


  • #243
    Loughc
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 24,986 Mod ✭✭✭✭Loughc


    brianregan09 wrote: »
    Tough crowd here


    I thought it was great , more please

    I echo that. A very enjoyable short and a completely unexpected surprise when it dropped.


  • #244
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Hey it was enjoyable for what it was don't get me wrong, if a touch too prone to shaky cam; just didn't see the point. And this is Hollywood, there's allllways a point :D

    And if nothing else it reminded me to visit Birr Castle


  • #245
    Slydice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭Slydice


    Gave this a watch. Good fun and the dinosaurs looked solid on screen. Not an expert on their behaviours or anything though! 🙂

    The film gave the franchise some real future potential. I was half imagining Dinoriders by the end of it! 😁

    The kid..

    definitely a clone right? .. I wonder if she's got dino DNA.. maybe could control the dinos like blue?



  • #246
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 11,614 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118419387#Comment_118419387

    Why did Jurassic Park get 3+ unrequested/not needed sequels, and we still did not get a Dinoriders movie?



  • Advertisement
  • #247
    pixelburp
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 36,711 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118419387#Comment_118419387

    Let me pour cold water on your enthusiasm for sequels by pointing out Colin Trevorrow is helming the latest; the same Trevorrow sacked from Star Wars Episode IX 'cos even Disney didn't think him good enough to direct that. and directed Jurassic World, so YMMV on how you saw that film.



  • #248
    Slydice
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,501 ✭✭✭✭Slydice


    huh .. wierd .. for some reason none of that really has me feeling like cold water was poured on what potential is there



  • #249
    ~Rebel~
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 31,988 ✭✭✭✭~Rebel~


    https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118425203#Comment_118425203

    The Book of Henry was bad enough to cost Trevorrow the Star Wars job, but he did fine with Jurassic World - it was never gonna be anything but what it was - and Safety Not Guaranteed is quite decent.



Advertisement