[Movie] Jurassic World 2: Fallen Kingdom

[RobertoCarlos]

There is no evidence that T-Rex had feathers.

Yeah I'm not buying every single dinosaur had feathers. Crocodiles don't.

- - - Updated - - -

If it makes lots of money, it's then a good film - why can't people grasp this concept about entertainment

Why..... why did you have to say that. Please don't feed it. Hes been arguing that point to no one up until now

[Pengekaer]

The core appeal of the Jurassic Park films is seeing humans stripped of their technological advantage and then interacting with dinosaurs. The park is just a mechanism to allow this to happen, since if these animals were in the middle of New York City, technology would quickly come into play and make it uninteresting.

That's why I think it would be more interesting to completely jettison the entire plot and try an "alternate Earth" plot based in the past. For example, what if Christopher Columbus sailed to America and didn't find natives but dinosaurs instead? Then you could explore how european settlers would have attempted to colonize the New World and protect their initial forts from T-Rex attacks and the like. That would make a more interesting story because the humans would lack the technological advantage they do now. My first thought is that the initial colonies would all be islands, since it would be easiest to eliminate the large predators on an island and then safely establish a bulwark there.

Agreed. It could be some 16th century settlers finding the Dinosaurs on some Carribean island or in the Middle of the Pacific Ocean. Would be a really interesting storyline if done properly.

[Immitis]

There is no evidence that T-Rex had feathers.

relatives of the t-rex have been found to have proto feathers so evidence points to the t-rex also likely having proto feathers its just a matter of finding an impression in good enough condition before we know for sure, regardless, we know most dinosaurs had proto feathers

jurassic world shouldve looked like this instead of appealing to nostalgia

[shaunika123]

We have the original. Its pretty much a perfect film. Would be near impossible to improve apon and if they did I would legit be impressed. Did you see Jurassic park 3?

The recent mummy movie? Jurassic world has flaws but its still a fun movie

"this pile of burning garbage is at least warm" is not really an argument

i dont want any more sequels, that's my point
unless there is a genuine idea for one instead of "well we need to make a JP sequel, so someone come up with something"
even the lost world was too much.

but if you HAVE to make a new one, then dont make the exact same movie a 4th time in a row.
because the problem is that they're TRYING to replicate jurrasic park, when it cant be done.
so instead of trying to replicate it, maybe do something original with the material?

[LiiLoSNK]

"this pile of burning garbage is at least warm" is not really an argument

i dont want any more sequels, that's my point
unless there is a genuine idea, for one instead of "well we need to make a JP sequel, so someoen come up with an idea"
even the lost world was too much.

effortless unoriginal garbage is being sold to people like him for hand over fist cash so film studios aren't inclined to come up with genuine work. That's why everything is either a remake, sequel, or a reboot these days. Less work with no loss of income.

[RobertoCarlos]

"this pile of burning garbage is at least warm" is not really an argument

i dont want any more sequels, that's my point
unless there is a genuine idea, for one instead of "well we need to make a JP sequel, so someoen come up with an idea"
even the lost world was too much.

World we live in im afraid. When big international movies cost over 100million to make. Studio's are less likely to take risks on properties that don't have an established fan base or brand recognition.

No one makes you watch these films. I havent spent a cent on it, I have the internet.

If you want to help support lower costing films where you are more likely to get original ideas then you need to start going to the theater and showing your support with your wallet.

Valerian tried something different and lost massive amounts of cash

[LiiLoSNK]

but if you HAVE to make a new one, then dont make the exact same movie a 4th time in a row.

The Jurassic Park Sequel Formula

1: We've discovered a new dinosaur and it's totally bigger than all the ones we knew about
2: Escape the new big bad dinosaur
3: Go to step 1 and make a new movie

[shaunika123]

World we live in im afraid. When big international movies cost over 100million to make. Studio's are less likely to take risks on properties that don't have an established fan base or brand recognition.

No one makes you watch these films. I havent spent a cent on it, I have the internet.

If you want to help support lower costing films where you are more likely to get original ideas then you need to start going to the theater and showing your support with your wallet.

Valerian tried something different and lost massive amounts of cash

movies were always expensive, and yet somehow not 99% of them were based on something we recognize

i am showing my support, when i can, unfortunately no theaters near me show any movies in their original language(everything is fucking dubbed in hungary and it's aids) so i have to spend a bunch of money to go to Budapest just to be able to see them.
i can proudly say that the only "bad" movie i spent money on this year was dunkirk (and even that's something that's more of a personal issue than an objective negative one of the film because it has lots of fantastic stuff, but if a film has no good characters i wont like it)

and please dont go to the "world we live in im afraid" argument, if something sucks in today's world, i should be more than welcome to complain and protest.

but as i said, there is nothing inherently wrong with sequels/remakes/etc if they have something new to say

look ad mad max: fury road, it's one of the best films of the decade and it's the 4th part of a franchise (just like JW, now compare the two)

The Jurassic Park Sequel Formula

1: We've discovered a new dinosaur and it's totally bigger than all the ones we knew about
2: Escape the new big bad dinosaur
3: Go to step 1 and make a new movie

dont forget to cram in the "nature is beautiful, amazing and cannot be controlled" and the "men are evil greedy bastards" messages in there

[RobertoCarlos]

The problem with that is, entertainment value is entirely subjective, therefore the films that make the most money are generally the most enjoyed - explain to me why this doesn't make them the best films if the most amount of people enjoy them?

The same way you can say crack cocaine is good because it sells a lot. Or Mcdonalds food or Justin Bieber music. Popular doesnt mean quality.

- - - Updated - - -

movies were always expensive, and yet somehow 99% of them werent based on something we recognize

They also used to be a spectacle that guaranteed people in seats regardless because there wasnt much else to do. Now we have streaming devices, the internet etc, theres far more competition to get those people in seats

[The Oblivion]

Another genius. Emoji movie cost 50mil to make, probably another 50mil on advertising, and came up 180mil worldwide. Must mean the movie is good. It made almost double the cost of what it took to make the movie. Not a sucky movie with boosted numbers by mindless drones or children.

You should call imdb and tell them that the 2/10 rating is unfair and that their opinion is shit.

- - - Updated - - -



I enjoy tons of bad movies and lazy reboots. I just don't try to argue that they're good and I definitely don't try to argue that something is good just because it did well at box office.

it obviously is a good movie to a large number of people. just because it doesnt suit your, arguably, bad taste, doesnt mean its bad. Bad movies flop. Good movies make money. its pretty cut and dry when it comes to theatrical releases.

[LiiLoSNK]

The problem with that is, entertainment value is entirely subjective, therefore the films that make the most money are generally the most enjoyed - explain to me why this doesn't make them the best films if the most amount of people enjoy them?

It doesn't work like this though. There are plenty of movies that get horrible ratings, yet sell more tickets than movies that get higher ratings.

Your logic implies that everyone who bought a ticket for the movie will like the movie. If it's selling tons of tickets, that has to do with it having a previously established fan-base or that the marketing for the movie was done well. Neither of these factors have anything to do with whether the movie is good or not.

[The Oblivion]

The same way you can say crack cocaine is good because it sells a lot. Or Mcdonalds food or Justin Bieber music. Popular doesnt mean quality.

- - - Updated - - -



They also used to be a spectacle that guaranteed people in seats regardless because there wasnt much else to do. Now we have streaming devices, the internet etc, theres far more competition to get those people in seats

mcdonalds wouldnt make money hand over fist if it tasted like total shit to most people. The movie may not be the BEST, but too say they arent good is just being edgy for the sake of it. Movies that are popular and make a ton of money very clearly are GOOD to the majority.

[shaunika123]

The problem with that is, entertainment value is entirely subjective, therefore the films that make the most money are generally the most enjoyed - explain to me why this doesn't make them the best films if the most amount of people enjoy them?

actually no it's not about how well they enjoy the movie

it's about how well the movie is marketed, once you buy the ticket, the movie already got its money from you no matter how bad it is
sure if the movie is so awful that world of mouth kills it right away (like after earth for example) then that wont work

but stuff like batman v superman and jurrassic world will easily coast on marketing and recognizability
plus they have enough dumb spectacle in them to appeal to the idiotic popcorn chewing masses

that doesnt make them good movies tho.

even if they read/hear the movie is bad, what do you think average joe will do on his weekend?
go see the 4th sequel of something he loved as a kid
or something he doesnt know and might end up not liking

the best examples are the transformers movies

they have been critical bombs for the past 10 years, hell even the audience reception is mixed at best for the newer ones
and yet they still make tons of money? why? because people see transformers and spend money on it.

and transformers movies are absolute garbage by any concievable measure

[The Oblivion]

It doesn't work like this though. There are plenty of movies that get horrible ratings, yet sell more tickets than movies that get higher ratings.

Your logic implies that everyone who bought a ticket for the movie will like the movie. If it's selling tons of tickets, that has to do with it having a previously established fan-base or that the marketing for the movie was done well. Neither of these factors have anything to do with whether the movie is good or not.

ticket sales from millions of viewers > the opinion of hundreds reviewers.

[LiiLoSNK]

it obviously is a good movie to a large number of people. just because it doesnt suit your, arguably, bad taste, doesnt mean its bad. Bad movies flop. Good movies make money. its pretty cut and dry when it comes to theatrical releases.

Many good movies have flopped. Shawshank Redemption flopped. Wizard of Oz flopped. Fight Club flopped. Your idea of "good" matches literally zero professional film critics and is part of the reason why most films now are so lazy.

[LiiLoSNK]

ticket sales from millions of viewers > the opinion of hundreds reviewers.

Again, ticket sales are from advertising. Not based at all on how good the movie is.

[RobertoCarlos]

mcdonalds wouldnt make money hand over fist if it tasted like total shit to most people. The movie may not be the BEST, but too say they arent good is just being edgy for the sake of it. Movies that are popular and make a ton of money very clearly are GOOD to the majority.

Oh I agree, people saying its bad are just trying to be edgy.

I don't know what they expected. They need to work on being better informed customers. Theres stuff like trailers to watch before hand if you feel you may not enjoy the movie. And if the movie is completely different from said trailer I could understand why they are annoyed, but you knew what you were getting going into this film. To complain about it on a forum years later is just insanity, but thats internet folk for you.

[shaunika123]

Of course, I was wondering when the masses become stupid because you're so superiorly cultured right

the masses have always been stupid

remember gladiator fights?

[LiiLoSNK]

Not really, new movie comes out, it sucks, the first bunch of people who saw it get a bad time, tell their family, friends, write reviews etc - and less people go to watch that film. Is that really so hard to figure out. Me saying that the highest grossing films are the best ones is 100% true and correct.

If it's true then why are other movies higher rated than the highest grossing films? You don't even seem to understand how the film industry itself works if you think sales are mainly based off initial word-of-mouth family discussions.

[RobertoCarlos]

the masses have always been stupid

remember gladiator fights?

Dont forget religion.