Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted November 27, 2014 Awards Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) The director of Jurassic World has said that the shot of the gates opening onto the vista was created specially for the trailer, so I imagine it may look quite different in the finished film. He's also said that in the film the gates will be practical, for what that's worth. I'm pretty sure that Winston's company are involved making practical effects, too. I'm staying with Team Holding Onto Hope It'll Be Good. I don't know how much you can blame Potter and LOTR for that effect, ultimo. LOTR has a lot of CG, sure, but it always struck me as using CG when needed (Gollum, cave trolls, massive oliphaunt battles) and practical whenever possible, ie forced perspective and other camera tricks for size differences, prosthetics for Uruk-Hai, genuine weapons, sets like Edoras being made from scratch or from miniatures like Minas Tirith. Contrast that with the Hobbit films with their shitty CG orcs, actors having to perform on separate sets alongside balls on sticks because it's the only way the size differences will work in 3D, weapons they only half make so they can finish it off on computers and make it look shinier for HFR, and it's clear there's been a shift, but not necessarily one you could blame LOTR for. As for Potter, which granted, has a lot of necessary CG, one thing that going on the WB studio tour at Leavesden taught me was just how much that you thought was CG was actually done practically. The chamber of secrets door, Dumbledore's moving spiral staircase, the creatures and the Hogwarts model are just a few examples. They did a lot more practically than I'd previously given them credit for. I'd be more tempted to blame the Star Wars prequels (honestly, computer generating the Jedi robes because they didn't flow the 'right' way in real life, I ask you) and Avatar for the over reliance on CG. Well, that and major directors like Spielberg deciding it's the inevitable future and chucking unnecessary CG gophers and monkeys into his films as a result. Finally! Took me half an hour to write that, browser crashed three times in the process and I kept losing the post! Edited November 27, 2014 by HarmonicGenerator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Dead Mike Posted November 27, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted November 27, 2014 I had high hopes for Jurassic World but dodgy CGI aside why do we need a genetically mutated dinosaur? Aren’t T-Rex’s & other assorted dinosaur’s running wild through a park filled with families a scary enough prospect already? Also, Chris Pratt riding a motorbike amongst a pack of Raptor’s could easily be as bad as Shia Labeouf swinging through the trees with monkeys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Chest Rockwell Posted November 27, 2014 Moderators Share Posted November 27, 2014 Well, it would be slightly better because it's Chris Pratt and not Shia LaBoeuf... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted November 27, 2014 Awards Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) I think the idea behind the genetic hybrid dinosaur is that the park has now been open for however-many years, and the dinosaurs no longer have the amazement factor for audiences that they first did. (Everyone watching the mosasaurus eating the shark through their phones being an example). They're not a novelty anymore, Jurassic Park's just another theme destination for people, so they're under pressure to develop the attraction and make something new and exciting that nobody has ever seen before. When your dinosaurs lose their novelty, you can't just chuck a rollercoaster in or something... You make a new dinosaur with super special features that will keep the people coming through the hopefully-not-computer-generated gates. (It's probably reading into it too much to compare that as a symbol for the current state of blockbuster cinema but it's an interesting point. It's not enough to believe a man can fly anymore, he's got to fly and make forty skyscrapers explode in the process these days.) It's a valid idea, I think. I don't know how well it's going to work in execution. I have my doubts about the need to make up a new dinosaur myself - it's not like they have nothing to work with, T.Rex is never going to not be cool - and it's the same concern for me as a superhero film cramming in ten dozen villains to make the film seem more 'epic'. But I can understand the storyline logic for doing it, and I think it could work as long as they don't go over the top with it. Anyone remember reading about the version of the script which had raptors with machine guns attached to them? As I said above, I live in hope. And come on, they're bringing BD Wong back as Dr Wu! That can't be bad! Edited November 27, 2014 by HarmonicGenerator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loki Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 I was going to ask - are there any original Jurassic Park characters coming back? No Jeff Goldblum Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WyattSheepMask Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Only original character to come back in Henry Wu, played by B.D. Wong, from the first movie. no Sam Neil, no Laura Dern, no Jeff Goldblum. Vince Vaughn was rumored in an early draft but nothing came of it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted November 27, 2014 Awards Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 As far as we know, anyway... They could be keeping someone secret... What if Chris Pratt's character is Ellie's son from the third film? They never mentioned her husband's surname... Clutching at straws encased in amber there but you never know! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members chokeout Posted November 27, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted November 27, 2014 There was a draft of a script with Dinosaur / soldier hybrid super soldiers wasn't there. I'll happily settle for a modified Dinosaur over that. Plus the second that thing fucks a T-Rex up it's becoming the coolest thing ever. When was it filmed? Do we think there's any chance Dickie Attenborough got in a cameo before he died? Thats the only cameo I'd be bothered about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keith Houchen Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Don't think so, the director did say that there is statue of him in the park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted November 27, 2014 Awards Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 I remember reading that the company that run the park in the new film bought the island from InGen after John Hammond's death, so it's unlikely. A statue would be good (provided it doesn't get knocked over or destroyed in the carnage or something). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members Bellenda Carlisle Posted November 27, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted November 27, 2014 I had high hopes for Jurassic World but dodgy CGI aside why do we need a genetically mutated dinosaur? Aren’t T-Rex’s & other assorted dinosaur’s running wild through a park filled with families a scary enough prospect already? I like that it's an extra mean genetically mutated new dinosaur for one reason - they can kill it. I hate animals being baddies in films, I get no enjoyment in seeing sharks, wolves, dinosaurs or whatever being the bad guys while the brave humans beat them, it's bullshit, in real life humanity is the menace and has killed nearly all the animals. At least if it's an evil dinosaur they created you can't really fault them for wanting to slay it and it won't make me sad. I understand that might be very particular to me though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awards Moderator HarmonicGenerator Posted November 27, 2014 Awards Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 (edited) Quote from the director on the invented dinosaur: Trevorrow says, “There is no shortage of awesome [real] dinosaurs. We could have populated this entire story with new species that haven’t been in any of these movies. But this new creation is what gave me a reason to tell another Jurassic Park story. We have the most awe-inspiring creatures to ever walk the Earth right in front of us, but for some reason that’s not enough. We’re always hungry for the next thing, and those who profit from it are always looking to feed that hunger. The focus groups want something bigger than a T-Rex. And that’s what they get.” He talks through the trailer bit by bit in this link:http://www.empireonline.com/features/jurassic-world-teaser-trailer-tour Edit: Director on the John Hammond thing: "It opened in 2005," says Trevorrow of the fully-operational theme park. And InGen are out of the picture. "Masrani Global, owned by Irrfan Khan's character, bought InGen after John Hammond's passing with a very earnest mission to realise his dream. We have a website that deals with all that backstory (www.masraniglobal.com/main.html). It will get more interesting as we get closer to June." Edited November 27, 2014 by HarmonicGenerator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WyattSheepMask Posted December 4, 2014 Share Posted December 4, 2014 This poster for the new Star Wars was just posted on twitter. Not sure how official it is, but I like it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members bAzTNM#1 Posted December 4, 2014 Paid Members Share Posted December 4, 2014 (edited) Not a religious person at all, but those crucifix lightsabres look fecking weird. What was the point in changing something successful? Edited December 4, 2014 by bAzTNM#1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EdgarTheSlouch Posted December 4, 2014 Share Posted December 4, 2014 Not a religious person at all, but those crucifix lightsabres look fecking weird. What was the point in changing something successful? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.