Matt C

Jurassic World 2 coming June 22nd 2018

241 posts in this topic

3 minutes ago, Stefancos said:

Both the film and score were almost the dictionary definition of "distinctly average".

 

I wouldn't say they were awful though. But it did prove that Gia in no way in the same league as Williams.

 

Well, I hate Giacchino's music (for the most part -- there are one or two exceptions), and I hate him even more because everyone else likes him, so there's that... :)

 

(even putting Williams and Giacchino in the same sentence is offensive. DAMN, I just did it myself!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love what Giacchino did with JW, but would be excited for Velazquez to do such a huge project. He clearly has the potential to be the next big thing. I've been a big fan of him for many years and his score for 'The Impossible' is perfection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather new composers with the new directors from here on. Nothing Giacchino did in JW was particularly impressive; like Star Wars I'd rather all the new Jurassic films had their own voice.

 

And I say this as a Giacchino fan. He was clearly going through the motions by the time he started JW, having had no break after Inside Out and Tomorrowland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He was so burnt out, he resorted to using Goldsmith's friendship motif from Star Trek when Rexy and Blue have their moment together.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JW was about par for the course when it comes to Giacchino for me.  Decent, usable, ultimately forgettable overall score with one nice theme and a couple of good cues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JESUS CHRIST! Budget is $260 million!?!

http://www.scified.com/news/jurassic-world-2-will-have-a-budget-of-260-million-dollars

 

Does this mean animatronics are back or something, because that's a staggering increase from the $160M budget of the all-CGI JW. Trevorrow said they were too expensive beyond the Brachio head, and Universal wouldn't pay for them any longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The budget of Avengers 3 & 4 combined is $1 billion, so this is hardly that shocking

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jay said:

The budget of Avengers 3 & 4 combined is $1 billion, so this is hardly that shocking

 

Yeah but those films end in gigantic all-CGI battles that last for like 20 minutes and probably cost $100m alone. Seems highly unusual for the Jurassic Park series to me, but yeah... inflation I guess.

 

Maybe they're going a more epic route than expected, similar to the Planet of the Apes reboots? The film starts with dinosaurs already reclaiming parts of the planet?

 

Oh yeah, Chris Pratt's fee might have gone up somewhat. ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Jay said:

25 years of inflation later

 

So does a cinema ticket cost over 4 times more then it did in 1993?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got this beauty for about 70 bucks and it's fucking gorgeous -the photo doesn't do it justice though

 

dinostoreus_scipionyx-finished-lg.jpg


And it's also on 1:1 scale, like the compy 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also some details about the plot:

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/jurassic-world-2-colin-trevorrow-plot-details-director-a7357141.html

 

“The dinosaurs will be a parable of the treatment animals receive today: the abuse, medical experimentation, pets, having wild animals in zoos like prisons, the use the military has made of them, animals as weapons,”

They're seriously going with the "trained raptors as soldiers" thing then?

That always struck me as the absolute worst idea I ever heard for a fourth Jurassic Park film, the first time I heard it suggested many, many years ago.

 

So I'm not entirely convinced I should be excited about this.

While I like Jurassic World fine enough, the whole "trained raptors" thing does go pretty heavily AGAINST the first film where they're the "supreme danger".

Of course the third film already detracted a bit from that concept, which is on the one hand interesting, but on the other hand a bit of a shame.

 

Maybe it's OK if the raptors break free, eat their employers and basically wreak havoc on everyone and everything! :D

Will likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree. For years this "weaponised raptors" used by the military story has floated around, since JP2 I believe, and I always cringed when I read about it.

 

The reality is, as interesting as it is, you can only do so much with this concept. It's why Crichton didn't want to write a sequel in the first place, and only did so under pressure from Spielberg (who repaid the favour by quickly jettisoning most of his book). In fact the wonder and awe was pretty much gone after the first film, which is why the second two films were of declining quality, and why Jurassic World was essentially a remake. So right now they're where they were after the first one, with no where to go. Just another example of something that should be left alone.

Will likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the idea behind the second movie with the "wild island full of dinosaurs".

There's definitely a lot of fun and excitement to be had with that.

 

Also:

577243_v1.jpg

 

22 minutes ago, BloodBoal said:

Raptors vs terrorists! It's gonna be awesome!

Maybe it indeed could be! Or at the very least, absolutely hilarious and ridiculous for all the wrong reasons. :D

But I'd prefer that as a parody on Jurassic Park. Or something unrelated. Not as official part of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Militarized raptors were set up in the previous film. Why would anyone be surprised it's a part of the next one?

Muldoon likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly what Nick1066 said.

I'm not surprised. I was just hoping against hope that they'd somehow find a way to avoid it in the end.

 

Just like I was hoping against hope for many years that they'd find a way to avoid aliens in Indiana Jones.

Unfortunately that happened anyway. Despite it being an idea that was never going to fit comfortably with the rest of the series. :(

Nick1066 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Pieter_Boelen said:

 

Just like I was hoping against hope for many years that they'd find a way to avoid aliens in Indiana Jones.

 

I never hoped they wouldn't use aliens in an Indiana Jones movie because I never imagined they'd ever use aliens in an Indiana Jones movie.

 

All they had to do was say the Crystal Skulls were inhabited by the ghosts of dead Mayan spirits or some nonsense like that and problem solved. Still a rubbish movie, just a little less cringeworthy. 

 

As it is, Indy 4 occupies a place on my mental and physical shelf right next to JP II & III, any Alien film after the second one and the Matrix sequels...i.e., it doesn't exist. I ignore it just as Spielberg is likely to do. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

As it is, Indy 4 occupies a place on my mental and physical shelf right next to JP II & III, any Alien film after the second one and the Matrix sequels...i.e., it doesn't exist. I ignore it just as Spielberg is likely to do. 

 

I actually like ALL of those movies you mention. I'm a staunch defender of JP II and III, ALIEN 3 and 4 (and PROMETHEUS, as well as the first AvP), as well as the MATRIX sequels. I even like INDY 4 for much of it, while also recognizing some of the flaws. I do, however, have far more issues with JP IV. Not as a popcorn film (where it succeeds moderately well), but as a betrayal of the first 3 films. That's why I can't picture even an excellent director like Bayona saving the upcoming 5th film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I liked Prometheus OK, and I'll see the next one. Jurassic World was a film I skipped in the theatre because I thought it would be awful and I ended up enjoying the hell out of it. It was a celebration of the first film and, like me, simply ignored the next two. 

 

I moderately enjoyed Indy IV when I saw it but I think I had a bit of Phantom Menace syndrome at the time. Now I just think it's an abomination best not spoken of in polite society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like PHANTOM MENACE too, he, he....seems like I like to stick up for all those films that everyone else hates. :)

 

 

Richard and Will like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well by "Phantom Menace syndrome" I meant the known psychological phenomenon that began in 1999 of tricking yourself into believing something is better than it actually is because it's been so anticipated for so long that your mind won't allow you to acknowledge its badness as a defence mechanism, usually protecting the part of your childhood brain that loves the original source material so much.

 

The passage of time tends to be the only known cure for this syndrome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

I never hoped they wouldn't use aliens in an Indiana Jones movie because I never imagined they'd ever use aliens in an Indiana Jones movie.

Haha, good one!

 

Unfortunately the idea of aliens for Indy 4 had been floating around since halfway into the 1990s.

I read about it on TheRaider.net ages before the film was even officially announced.

They had a plot summary of the original script there which was literally called Indiana Jones and the Saucer Men from Mars.

 

Turned out that this was NOT fake! But it *was* terrible.

For all the faults with the final film, I'm still intensely grateful at least it turned out better than that original concept.

According to Spielberg, it was Independence Day that prevented it. So as crazy as it sounds, thank you Roland Emmerich for saving us a truly terrible movie!

 

In the end, I can appreciate parts of it. Just like I don't particularly hate the Star Wars prequels.

But deeply flawed they most certainly are and I refuse to believe nothing better could have been made from them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But that would cause a continuity conflict! You can't bring THE Dennis Nedry back.
A much more reasonable, down-to-earth way to bring Nedry back is to say that he uploaded a computer version of his brain into the original park's database. Not only is it a trendy plot point (Captain America 2 used it) but it also explains why Nedry's password protection in the first film was so thorough: he was the computer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now