Loved the action sequences (which is the only real reason to go see movies like these).
The development was rushed, but who cares.
The topic seemed to focus way too much on the locusts/corporate subplot, than what to do about the fact that freakin' dinosaurs are running amok in the world. That was.... odd.
Also found that the movie was incredibly generous in the amount of characters who were allowed to live.
Overall, I got what I came there for. Your thoughts?
Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
The director said he purposely downplayed the loose-dinosaur thing because they would be so few as to be a rarity. So you're supposed to presume that the characters constantly encounter them, because they go looking for them. And of course Blue has an attachment to Owen.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
I’m a big fan of the Jurassic Park franchise, but I might pass on this one. I was reading about the plot and the focus on the locusts doesn’t quite interest me. I don’t think any of the movies have had the same magic as the first one. Absolute classic that was.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
Yes, the first movie was a revelation when it came out, plus with Spielberg and Williams, exceedingly well done. Hard to top that first impression. Similar to the original Star Wars.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
leader1 wrote:I don’t think any of the movies have had the same magic as the first one. Absolute classic that was.
Then you may wish to see it after all... as there's a lot of little easter eggs (or outright recreations) of scenes you'd only recognize if you'd seen the first one.
-
- flybaurlax
- Posts: 709
- Joined:
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
The first one can never be topped because it never really was about the dinosaurs, at least from a screen presence perspective. The dinos only had about 15 minutes of screen time in the original. So the magic was really set by the writing, acting, and the score as mentioned above. However, this one brought back a lot of the feels from the first one - it focused heavily on the characters. I enjoyed it. Although I felt the same way as LAX772LR, I thought more people would die. However, the action was pretty suspenseful and kept me on the edge for most of the movie. Overall I was entertained and I had fun watching it.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
Not a fan of the franchise. Mindless entertainment. Not that that's a bad thing, but, as an adult, not my kind of mindless entertainment. When it comes to giant beats that have attachments to humans, I guess I favor King Kong.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
leader1 wrote:I’m a big fan of the Jurassic Park franchise, but I might pass on this one. I was reading about the plot and the focus on the locusts doesn’t quite interest me. I don’t think any of the movies have had the same magic as the first one. Absolute classic that was.
I though the locusts were cool and definitely surprised me. It turned into a social commentary but I though it fit the movie well, I thought this was another dinosaur.
LAX772LR wrote:Loved the action sequences (which is the only real reason to go see movies like these).
The development was rushed, but who cares.
The topic seemed to focus way too much on the locusts/corporate subplot, than what to do about the fact that freakin' dinosaurs are running amok in the world. That was.... odd.
Also found that the movie was incredibly generous in the amount of characters who were allowed to live.
Overall, I got what I came there for. Your thoughts?
None of these movies with the exception of the first kill any of the central protagonists.
I agree with the locusts and the commentary of it. I was more interested to see dinosaurs do cool shit in cold weather.
I do wonder if they could survive winters like how its portrayed in this film. The climate during that time was far warmer and the atmosphere has much more oxygen so probably not but it would be interesting.
https://maxs-blogo-saurus.com/2020/04/0 ... -climates/
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science- ... 0dinosaurs.
https://screenrant.com/jurassic-world-d ... ther-live/
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
StarAC17 wrote:I do wonder if they could survive winters like how its portrayed in this film. The climate during that time was far warmer and the atmosphere has much more oxygen so probably not but it would be interesting.
True, that there was more Oxygen (approx 30% versus today's 21%) and warmer temps in the Cretaceous, and no arctic/antarctic ice sheets.... the temps at the poles did however drop to near-freezing, and some dinosaurs were adapted to deal with it.
Take Yutyrannus for example, the largest feathered dinosaur yet discovered... it dwelt in arctic areas, and its feathering in some areas was thicker than a woolly mammoth's fur! It was as tall as a house, but its round fur made it look like a giant baby chicken, lol. But with feathering like that, there's little doubt that it could deal with freezing temps just fine.
There was also Nanuqsaurus, that was similarly evolved. Its furry feathering was not quite as thick, but its thickness was even more uniform and dense than many animals that live in the polar regions today. And as you may have guessed, it was an arctic dweller as well.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
I always liked it! It was Part 2 which was a disaster. I really begged my Dad to take us to see "Father's Day" in theaters instead (back in 1997), but he wouldn't budge.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
The giant insects couldn't live with "low" O2 like we have today.
Re: Jurassic World III (Jurassic Park VI)... thoughts?
The first Jurassic Park was a very good movie. I think it will always be regarded as an achievement. Old fashioned moviemaking skills combined with something new.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: DH106 and 40 guests