I'm beyond excited for Jurassic Park

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Mon Apr 20, 2015 9:04 pm

like totally stoked. Just watched the latest trailer.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 2:39 am

You're about 22 years late to the party. Unless you mean Jurassic World.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 4:07 pm

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 4:36 pm

If you'd dye your hair you'd make fewer mistakes.

Blade Azaezel · Post by **Blade Azaezel** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:14 pm

Spoiler - the dinosaur escapes, people run terrified and we all question whether science has taken a step too far

CashRules · Post by **CashRules** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 8:16 pm

Life finds a way.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:53 pm

CashRules wrote:Life finds a way.

Usually by causing mass extinctions to make way for new species.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Tue Apr 21, 2015 9:59 pm

Yeah but did you SEE the dino that escapes???? It's badass!

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Wed Apr 22, 2015 12:46 am

Gypsy-Vanner wrote:Yeah but did you SEE the dino that escapes???? It's badass!

No, no I didn't. And that's part of the problem.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:15 pm

They genetically engineered a dino out of T-rex, Velociraptor, and snakes. You can't get much cooler than that.

And, THEY CHASE THE MOTHER FUCKING DINO WITH TRAINED VELOCIRAPTORS!!!!

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Wed Apr 22, 2015 5:28 pm

Gypsy-Vanner wrote:They genetically engineered a dino out of T-rex, Velociraptor, and snakes. You can't get much cooler than that.

And, THEY CHASE THE MOTHER FUCKING DINO WITH TRAINED VELOCIRAPTORS!!!!

I had pretty much guessed the T-Rex & Raptor from the initial teaser.

Post by **Gendo** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 3:08 pm

So after seeing another trailer for this... I'm not sure I get all the hype. First off, parts 2 and 3 were both terrible, so why should we assume part 4 will be much better?

Second, so I guess the main plot is that they genetically engineered a new species; it gets loose; etc? If the monster that they're running from the whole movie is a genetically engineered new species; then it's not a dinosaur. It's just like any other Godzilla/Cloverfield/Pacific Rim monster. The whole point of Jurassic Park was that they were bringing real extinct animals to life in modern times; and the issues of them not being ever meant to be in this time. This monster isn't a dino that existed before and is now extinct... it's just a monster; an animal generically created in modern times.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Thu Apr 23, 2015 5:27 pm

Gendo wrote:So after seeing another trailer for this... I'm not sure I get all the hype. First off, parts 2 and 3 were both terrible, so why should we assume part 4 will be much better?

To answer your question...

Gypsy-Vanner wrote:THEY CHASE THE MOTHER FUCKING DINO WITH TRAINED VELOCIRAPTORS!!!!

Also, two and three tried to be direct sequels with characters from the first movie.

This movie is really what JPII should have been.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Fri Apr 24, 2015 3:08 pm

What Apollo said.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Fri May 01, 2015 11:16 am

Spielberg seems to like it, though he is the executive producer...

http://screenrant.com/jurassic-world-pa ... spielberg/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Thu Jun 11, 2015 10:09 pm

Splurged for the 7:00 IMAX 3D showing tonight. #imrichbitch.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 9:26 am

Better than the previous sequels, worse than the original (to which this movie pays quite a bit of homage to).

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 6:07 pm

Call me heartless. This movie looks shit. Chris Pratt might be the only thing good about it.

I'd rather watch the original. That one is still badass.

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 6:22 pm

^ Agree

No Jeff Goldblum, no me.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 10:02 pm

sikax wrote:^ Agree

No Jeff Goldblum, no me.

Dr_Liszt wrote:Call me heartless. This movie looks shit. Chris Pratt might be the only thing good about it.

I'd rather watch the original. That one is still badass.

You guys have no inner child.

Post by **aels** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 10:14 pm

I think the whole problem is that they do have an inner child and that inner child grew up watching the original Jurassic Park

Dr_Liszt · Post by **Dr_Liszt** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 10:34 pm

Jurassic Park is one of the best movies I've seen.

I'm being dragged to see this by my friends today.

I'd rather see Mad Max again, a million times, forever.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 11:07 pm

aels wrote:I think the whole problem is that they do have an inner child and that inner child grew up watching the original Jurassic Park

This movie feeds the inner child that saw the movie and thought "Wouldn't it be awesome if they crossed a t-rex with a velociraptor?"

The correct answer is of course "Fuck yeah!"

Post by **aels** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 11:15 pm

Pfah, those two dinosaurs perform completely different narrative functions, says I!

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Fri Jun 12, 2015 11:50 pm

aels wrote:Pfah, those two dinosaurs perform completely different narrative functions, says I!

You know damn well that's not what your inner child would say.

Post by **thesalmonofdoubt** » Sat Jun 13, 2015 2:14 am

Well - saw this last night and my verdict, wasn't nearly as good as I was hoping.
Love Chris Pratt but he didn't really shine at all in this - which wasn't the main distraction - the main distraction is that it was kinda silly, which is fine up to a point but it crossed that point and was actually distracting.

7/10 - mostly for the effects and that it was still fun

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Sat Jun 13, 2015 10:19 pm

thesalmonofdoubt wrote:Well - saw this last night and my verdict, wasn't nearly as good as I was hoping.
Love Chris Pratt but he didn't really shine at all in this - which wasn't the main distraction - the main distraction is that it was kinda silly, which is fine up to a point but it crossed that point and was actually distracting.

7/10 - mostly for the effects and that it was still fun

I agree w/ 7/10 & the reasoning.

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 6:09 am

Unvoiced_Apollo wrote:
thesalmonofdoubt wrote:Well - saw this last night and my verdict, wasn't nearly as good as I was hoping.
Love Chris Pratt but he didn't really shine at all in this - which wasn't the main distraction - the main distraction is that it was kinda silly, which is fine up to a point but it crossed that point and was actually distracting.

7/10 - mostly for the effects and that it was still fun
I agree w/ 7/10 & the reasoning.

Pretty much all that

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 6:38 am

I hate Chris Pratt.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 4:53 pm

Hipsters hate Chris Pratt.

sikax · Post by **sikax** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 5:24 pm

Hipsters enjoy ecstasy, too.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 5:25 pm

I hate hipsters.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 5:35 pm

Hipsters hate hipsters.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 6:26 pm

I still hate Chris Pratt.

Post by **thesalmonofdoubt** » Sun Jun 14, 2015 11:27 pm

Gendo wrote:So after seeing another trailer for this... I'm not sure I get all the hype. First off, parts 2 and 3 were both terrible, so why should we assume part 4 will be much better?

Second, so I guess the main plot is that they genetically engineered a new species; it gets loose; etc? If the monster that they're running from the whole movie is a genetically engineered new species; then it's not a dinosaur. It's just like any other Godzilla/Cloverfield/Pacific Rim monster. The whole point of Jurassic Park was that they were bringing real extinct animals to life modern times; and the issues of them not being ever meant to be in this time. This monster isn't a dino that existed before and is now extinct... it's just a monster; an animal generically created in modern times.

To this, I actually didn't think parts 2 and three were terrible, they just weren't great, 2 being better than 3 and both being substantially worse than 1. But, by way of foreboding, everything that was wrong about 3 was what was essentially wrong about JW.

It was that old trope of introducing a tid bit early on in the piece then making the entire movie around this tid bit that completely ignores the context of the previous two movies. In the case of 3, it was all around the Raptors ability to communicate/ even strategize with each other in a reasonably unrealistic way (setting traps etc).

In JW - the movie attempts to take this one step further and have the raptors cast as both adversaries and allies. The story moves from casting these as barely contained killing machines and in the next minute, its fine and safe to just get on a motor bike and literally run with them in a herd as a part of their pack. The final battle even has some sort of head nod thing going on between the good guys (which now includes the raptors, a T-rex and our heroes) which just stretches the credibility factor to the point where it pulls you completely out of the movie.

The "Genetically engineered new monster" is far less of a distraction and can be, and is explained in context of the universe. Essentially the explanation is - none of these creatures are actual dinosaurs, they are all "Creations" made up from a variety of DNA sources cobbled together to create their best impressions of the beasties .. and that's completely fine. Building a bespoke dinosaur doesn't seem to change the flavour of anything given the context.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Mon Jun 15, 2015 6:32 am

I just saw it. It was okay.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Mon Jun 15, 2015 12:10 pm

Derived Absurdity wrote:I just saw it. It was okay.

OK. Who are you and what have you done with the real Derived Absurdity?

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 2:07 am

I was in a good mood and I thought that one red-haired lady was hot, so it was okay for me.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:51 am

Lololol, I wanna see this movie:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0369610/par ... tt_stry_pg

I'm not sure how long it'll be before someone fixes it, so I'll quote the shit:

Sex & Nudity
EditHistory
8/10

A man is shown having hardcore cross species sex with a velociraptor, including many kinky toys/items including mouth gags, mayonaise, dildos and dinosaur feces. This is a very common occuring theme, with most of the storyline made up of kinky scenes.

Violence & Gore
EditHistory
2/10

This film isn't very violent, the biggest of violence happening when someone falls over and scrapes their knee, someone gets a splinter while masturbaiting, someone hits their head on the top of a doorframe, and an entire family of orphans is ripped apart slowly while everyone is watching and crying.

Profanity
EditHistory
9/10

28 uses of the word "c_nt", 17 uses of the word "f_ck", 30 "sh_t".

Alcohol/Drugs/Smoking
EditHistory
8/10

2 men are smoking marijuana, as it is a commonly occuring theme throughout the film. They run around while intoxicated on alcohol and weed, dry humping everything around them including people, electric fences, dinosor fecal matter, and jars of mayonaise. They joke saying that they're 'High as a kite'

Frightening/Intense Scenes
EditHistory
6/10

Most of the dinosaur chase scenes are intense and scary. There are several jump scares within the movie where dinosaurs appear in certain places.

If your kid can handle intense and sometimes violent scenes then, they're still f*cked, cuz these dinosours are f*cking scary.

A full overview of the film can be found at http://bit.do/jurrasicworldoverview" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; . it is advised that you look at it.

Total 23/50

Page last updated by porkchoppal, 1 hour ago
Top 5 Contributors: jmanz2, brendan_number1, carinthered, mattiasflgrtll6, GurningChimpII (View full history)

Anakin McFly · Post by **Anakin McFly** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 8:22 am

why is "Two women argue over the phone and one of them cries." listed under Violence/Gore?

and under 'Profanity': "Name-calling (crazy, insane, ridiculous, monster, son of a bitch, killing machine, mother hen and mad science) and exclamations (shut-up, sheee-yoot.)"

also, the movie was awesome.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Tue Jun 16, 2015 6:27 pm

Looks like there's been a couple edits. Porkchoppal gave me a few laughs at least.

Whitey · Post by **Whitey** » Wed Jun 17, 2015 9:59 pm

I'd give it 7/10. It's entertaining, looks good, Chris Pratt and co are decent but I think the script is kinda letting them down.

Gypsy-Vanner · Post by **Gypsy-Vanner** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 9:56 pm

I saw it finally and yeah, a bit underwhelming but the dino's were cool. The story they tried to interject with the kids and parents was stupid. They should just take a page out of the Fast and Furious movies and forget moral points and go for big explosions and stuff.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Tue Jun 23, 2015 10:47 pm

The dinos should have been all of the movie and instead they were a fifth of the movie.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Wed Jun 24, 2015 4:44 am

Also there should have been no Chris Pratt. And those two kids should have been eaten.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 12:35 am

Derived Absurdity wrote:Also there should have been no Chris Pratt. And those two kids should have been eaten.

Disagree w/ the former. Agree w/ the latter.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 2:33 am

There should have been more sex with mayonnaise jars.

Derived Absurdity · Post by **Derived Absurdity** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 3:36 am

I don't really have much of a problem with Chris Pratt, except for the fact that the only reason I think he's super-famous right now is because he's blandly handsome and white. Also he chose to appear in Zero Dark Thirty, which is shit.

But also he was really miscast in this movie. He's supposed to be a loveable charming goofball and instead he was cast as a gruff charmless hardass. It didn't work.

BruceSmith78 · Post by **BruceSmith78** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:24 am

He's super famous mostly because he was the main character in a super popular Marvel movie and he did a great job with the character, although I'm sure being a handsome white guy helped him get cast.

Unvoiced_Apollo · Post by **Unvoiced_Apollo** » Sat Jun 27, 2015 4:49 pm

Derived Absurdity wrote:I don't really have much of a problem with Chris Pratt, except for the fact that the only reason I think he's super-famous right now is because he's blandly handsome and white. Also he chose to appear in Zero Dark Thirty, which is shit.

But also he was really miscast in this movie. He's supposed to be a loveable charming goofball and instead he was cast as a gruff charmless hardass. It didn't work.

Honestly, I think it didn't work more because of the writers than Pratt. Let's face it, I enjoyed the movie, but that's because of how terrible the script was. Seriously, they try to have the traditional opposites attract chemistry between him and Howard, but that kiss comes out of nowhere & you never feel any chemistry from those two.

I think if the writing had been better he could have been believable as the gruff harass w/ the heart of gold.