Jurassic Park/World megathread - Spared no expense.

[wtfNeedSignUp]

I agree, but I'm kinda on board with the idea that countries and militaries want their own weaponized dinosaurs. Like think about it: In the '90s, John Hammond had a dream of opening up a theme park about dinosaurs because it would bring about awe and wonder to families alike (but as a businessman, he needed to turn a profit, so it was still an exploitation of animals and science). Ian Malcolm was going on about his chaos theory about how there's no way to control that which nature itself had wiped out millions of years ago. In a pre-9/11 world, I don't think any of them could've foreseen greedy corporations and countries wanting to have weaponized dinosaurs; maybe that was an implied thought in Lost World, but I don't think there was anything hinting at military wanting dinosaurs or the cloning techniques for themselves.

Post-9/11, and war is pretty much everywhere and thrown around so willy-nilly. While this could bring about a ham-fisted environmental message or something that'd make PETA weep with envy, if militaries have been trying for decades to mass-produce their own super soldiers, what if it's easier to do it with dinosaurs? As much as it's a waste of resources, they'd probably save up on the manpower using these freaks of natures to do their own dirty work instead.

Think either way, Malcolm's chaos theory has been proven time and time again and yet no one listens to him. The events of Fallen Kingdom was a Pandora's box? Nah, it was a Pandora's box back with the original Jurassic Park, it just "evolved" with the times.

But that's only if the writers were actually smart enough to plan that far ahead or realized this on their own accord. It's Hollywood, chances are super slim that they did.

If we're going in a not completely retarded route, the biggest people after Dinos will be pharmaceutical companies, exotic animal lovers and Chinese shamans who want to snort their bones. The military employing them is way more bother than it's worth, you are more likely to have some psycho capture one and unlease it in a school to see what happens. But like I said it's the laziest solution because most moviegoers immediately jump to the army being evil (at least as long as it's not specifically the USA army foot soldiers).

 

[Newman's Lovechild]

Why get uppity over dinosaur accuracy? Well, for one thing, the 'freaks of nature' theme was present in a small way since the first book, but it only really got pushed hard in the Jurassic World phase of the franchise, 20+ years later. Why? Could it possibly be because of a boom in paleontological study and interest, prompted in part by the first film, and the easy dissemination of new discoveries and revisions via the internet, contrasted with the stagnating unoriginality of Hollywood in general and the JW movies specifically, which needed to scrabble for a lame excuse why these in-universe products of bleeding-edge technology now look so dated, unchanged and unrefined? A little bit? Maybe?

I mean, Kari, I'm sorry, I like you, but this:

Spinosaurus gets the most flack for this due to the T-Rex fight, but if it's a super freak by design, then why wouldn't it have ripped apart a T-Rex like that?

... could be the poster quote for swallowing whatever Colin Treverrow or whoever feeds you. It just needed to be about raptors to be perfect. The spinosaurus was a super freak because of Ingen scientists. That's right. Nothing at all to do with script writers and concept artists being directed by executives rubbing themselves raw over the thought of the money they'd make from the newest toothy monster spectacle. It's all about the lazy unscrupulous money men in the films, not the lazy unscrupulous money men making them.

Like everyone was okay with the Raptors being just that, except no one should be all for it because it was explicitly stated in the book they're complete sociopathic monsters

The bit in the books that comes to mind, about raptors being sociopathic monsters, is from the sequel novel, The Lost World. That's explained by raptors being intelligent enough that they run on socialization as well as instinct, and the cloned raptors of Isla Sorna having no chance to experience those social cues from 70-80 million years hence. That's right, JP raptors grew up with no father figure. Even then, it's a hefty retcon from the first novel, where storm drains full of breeding raptors were coexisting and peacefully ordered. It didn't really have anything to do with monkeying with their genes.

That leads, in a way, to the second thing. The flipside of the coin. The book had a throwaway line about "these aren't really real dinosaurs" but that was absolutely not the thing that the first film blasted in our faces. Almost the exact opposite.
It might be difficult for zoomer kiwis to understand what a sea change it caused in the perception of dinosaurs. The 'dinosaur renaissance' had been going since 1969 but it took twenty-four years and a major Hollywood blockbuster with revolutionary special effects for the public to get the memo that dinosaurs weren't cold blooded swamp wallowers. Hell, even the image of a horizontal-stance Tyrannosaur was probably mind blowing to some.
The point was, these were really real dinosaurs. The JP dinosaurs were designed with what was known and agreed upon in paleontological circles, at the time. The biggest exception was the tiny frilly Dilophosaurus, but everyone knew that was bullshit, either from prior knowledge or a hundred "Did you know!? Dilophosaurus wasn't a tiny frilly poison spitter!!!" articles in media. These days it would probably be raised aloft as the greatest example of what JW dinosaurs should be. Aside from that, they beefed up the Deinonychus proportions and then they found Utahraptor yadda yadda and gave the Tyrannosaurus angry eyes. The frog DNA was a plot point but only to give the controlled populations of animals a chance to produce viable offspring. It didn't turn them into weird frog/dinosaur hybrid monsters, like something that passed through Seth Brundle's transporter pods.

Everyone likes to latch onto JW Henry Wu's recycled and slightly paraphrased line about theme park monsters, but they seem to miss some of the accompanying things that book Wu had to say about the situation. Things like, the park had gone through generations of clone modifications because each iteration, including the animals in the park at the time, were deemed to move too fast for future park visitors to believe they were real. Meaning the first dinosaurs the Ingen labs produced were as near as dammit to the real thing, and had to be genetically hobbled to be slowed down for the expectations of the renaissance-ignorant public, rather than beefed up into slavering monsters. I can imagine Ingen geneticists gathered round their first egg, waiting for it to hatch, and their consternation when this feathery thing plopped out. How's that for another parallel between fiction and reality; excuses and expectations? Except in the original Jurassic Parks case, the theatergoing masses embraced these fast moving, warm blooded, realistic dinosaurs. "It doesn't live in a swamp!"

It's very unusual, almost unique? That Jurassic Park was this big, barnstorming blockbuster film that actually advanced science, both in presenting it to the public and inspiring a generation of future paleontologists. It's been painful, even if it's somewhat inevitable, to watch it fall into sequel degeneration, to see these dynamic 'new' dinosaurs turn into stock movie monsters lot #735, to hear the dudebros wail how "science ruined dinosaurs!" when it turned out dromaeosaurs were big toothy ground hawks rather than bipedal monitor lizards.* Would it be too much of an expectation to see the fictional geneticists keep refining their science, in step with RL paleos? To say "hey, we found another scrap of Velociraptor DNA to replace that frog junk, we're a step closer to the real thing! Oh wow, this one came out without bunny hands!" rather than taking the opposite, horribly cynical tack to justify devolving the whole thing into something that could have Michael Bays or Roland Emmerichs name on it. Not to turn it into some dry, sober documentary - the original film wasn't that - but also not to turn it into something so butt fuckingly stupid.

To constantly see otherwise reasonable people fall for the simple I mean simple explanations of "this is why our movies have to be shittier" is another layer of frustration. You go for that, I begin to wonder how long you've been waiting for that nigerian prince to pay you back.

* Two things:
1. That response reminded me of the smug, fat kid at the start of JP, sneering about turkeys. Ironic.
2. These people were only interested in Velociraptor as a hyperactive movie monster, not as a real animal that we're still learning about. Disappointing.

 

[Kari Kamiya]

Why get uppity over dinosaur accuracy? Well, for one thing, the 'freaks of nature' theme was present in a small way since the first book, but it only really got pushed hard in the Jurassic World phase of the franchise, 20+ years later. Why? Could it possibly be because of a boom in paleontological study, prompted in part by the first film, and the easy dissemination of new discoveries and revisions via the internet, contrasted with the stagnating unoriginality of Hollywood in general and the JW movies specifically, which needed to scrabble for a lame excuse why these in-universe products of bleeding-edge technology now look so dated, unchanged and unrefined? A little bit? Maybe?

I totally get that as a dinosaur geek and I'd like to see more accurate dinosaurs in media, I'm just willing to keep my suspension of disbelief for these movies (first film especially relied on it, but that's held up so well nowadays that even knowing everything's not real and have inaccuracies doesn't stop it from being awe-inspiring--period-pieces are fun) and then drop it later to fill in some gaps. I don't know if it was always there in the script or if it was added in later, but I honestly appreciate Claire mentioning in Jurassic World that the dinosaurs aren't accurate because the audiences (think it was the test audiences) are so used to what dinosaurs looked like in fiction that they purposefully made them according to expectations, and also to keep children's attentions away from their phones. Yeah, it's an instance of the movie being annoyingly meta like every other Hollywood movie these days, but it gives off a haunting feeling that the dinosaurs being "fake" meant it made things easier for the scientists, and especially Claire, to treat them like a product and not actual living animals, thumbing their noses at nature. Hence Claire's character arc in the movie where she realized what she had gotten herself into and the consequences that followed.

It's most likely unintentional, though, and it's just my brain filling in gaps. I dunno, it's the only reason I can think of as to why it is the movies got to a point where a dinosaur like Blue has been weirdly stated to have empathy and why the dinosaurs were let free because there's some kind of underlying message about needing to treat nature with absolute respect and the kind of corruptions science can find itself in. Fallen Kingdom was really silly in that regard because lolwut Raptor tears doesn't make sense, but it was still a fun romp in the theater.

... could be the poster quote for swallowing whatever Colin Treverrow or whoever feeds you. It just needed to be about raptors to be perfect. The spinosaurus was a super freak because of Ingen scientists. That's right. Nothing at all to do with script writers and concept artists being directed by executives rubbing themselves raw over the thought of the money they'd make from the newest toothy monster spectacle. It's all about the lazy unscrupulous money men in the films, not the lazy unscrupulous money men making them.

*pokes* Colin Treverrow didn't even work on Jurassic Park III, so I dunno why he'd even be brought up here when Spinosaurus wasn't his decision. But regardless of that, I always liked Spinosaurus before the movie was even filming because it was like a giant crocodilian with a beautiful sail, that was my biggest draw to the movie as a nine-year-old outside of "Omg new Jurassic Park I can actually see in theaters!". It killing the T-Rex was shocking and an absolute upset (I wish I could've witnessed those paleontologists losing their shit in the theater), but it just further made Spinosaurus all that more terrifying in the movie (the Pterosaurs were still scarier) and yet apparently we're supposed to believe that the Spinosaurus was like some kind of failed experiment or something to that effect, or at least a failure in that it doesn't act like the other dinosaurs? I still think it's almost a missed opportunity there has been no Spinosaurus vs Velociraptors in anything, maybe it was planned but they knew they couldn't ever get away with it after the T-Rex scene.

So yeah, call me a Spinosaurus-stan if only because it was isolated to Sorna, and it's not like it actually fought and killed our beloved Roberta. I feel like there could've been more done with it. (EDIT: Just found out Spinosaurus is in Camp Cretaceous which I need to get back into, and is the same one from III. But I thought it was confirmed in supplementary material that the Spinosaurus on Sorna died/was terminated?)

The bit about raptors being sociopathic monsters in the books that comes to mind is from the sequel novel, The Lost World. That's explained by raptors being intelligent enough that they run on socialization as well as instinct, and the cloned raptors of Isla Sorna having no chance to experience those social cues from 70-80 million years hence. That's right, JP raptors grew up with no father figure. Even then, it's a hefty retcon from the first novel, where storm drains full of breeding raptors were coexisting and peacefully ordered. It didn't really have anything to do with monkeying with their genes.

Haven't finished reading Lost World so I didn't get to the Raptors, but it's still interesting that it had to be pointed out they're sociopaths, and them specifically. I was mainly referencing the daycare scene where they brutally eviscerate a baby that was just curious about its visitors, maybe 'cause it wasn't of their pack.

That leads, in a way, to the second thing. The flipside of the coin. The book had a throwaway line about "these aren't really real dinosaurs" but that was absolutely not the thing that the first film blasted in our faces. Almost the exact opposite.
It might be difficult for zoomer kiwis to understand what a sea change it caused in the perception of dinosaurs. The 'dinosaur renaissance' had been going since 1969 but it took twenty-four years and a major Hollywood blockbuster with revolutionary special effects for the public to get the memo that dinosaurs weren't cold blooded swamp wallowers. Even then, I've seen some post-JP media play up the angle of cold blooded dinos. Hell, even the image of a horizontal-stance Tyrannosaur was probably mind blowing to some.
The point was, these were really real dinosaurs.

Was gonna reply to this part but you had answered yourself further down.

The frog DNA was a plot point but only to give the controlled populations of animals a chance to produce viable offspring.

Sad thing is that the movie didn't bring up the bird and reptile DNA they had also used in the book. All that was mentioned was frog DNA for all of them, which was just a weird decision overall.

Everyone likes to latch onto JW Henry Wu's recycled and slightly paraphrased line about theme park monsters, but they seem to miss some of the accompanying things that book Wu had to say about the situation. Things like, the park had gone through generations of clone modifications because each iteration, including the animals in the park at the time, were deemed to move too fast for future park visitors to believe they were real. Meaning the first dinosaurs the Ingen labs produced were as near as dammit to the real thing, and had to be genetically hobbled to be slowed down for the expectations of the renaissance-ignorant public, rather than beefed up into slavering monsters. I can imagine Ingen geneticists gathered round their first egg, waiting for it to hatch, and their consternation when this feathery thing plopped out. How's that for another parallel between fictional and real excuses and expectations?

I forgot Wu said that in the book, it would explain his frustrations about having to keep up demands and why he became an egomaniac. I really do wish the movies pointed that out more, which is why as I mentioned above that I wonder if Claire's comment about that was in the original World script or if that had to be added in later. Also is interesting that no one in the movies questions or protests it, either. I know Hammond hired a bunch of yes-men, but I don't think that was completely the case in World?

We probably can agree that normies definitely ruin everything since they practically by demand made the dinosaurs be genetically designed to be outdated like how they were remembered in fiction.

It's very unusual, almost unique? That Jurassic Park was this big, barnstorming blockbuster film that actually advanced science, both in presenting it to the public and inspiring a generation of future paleontologists. It's been painful, even if it's somewhat inevitable, to watch it fall into sequel degeneration, to see these dynamic 'new' dinosaurs turn into stock movie monsters lot #735. Would it be too much of an expectation to see the fictional geneticists keep refining their science, in step with RL paleos? To say "hey, we found another scrap of Velociraptor DNA to replace that frog junk, we're a step closer to the real thing! Oh wow, no bunny hands!" rather than taking the opposite, horribly cynical tack to justify devolving the whole thing into something that could have Michael Bays or Roland Emmerichs name on it. Not to turn it into some dry, sober documentary - the original film wasn't that - but also not to turn it into something so butt fuckingly stupid.

We don't want movies to become too meta, though (we already get enough of that nowadays), unless Jurassic Park had that capability of doing so but no one else had the same grasp on nuance and science/engineering like Michael Crichton had. He wasn't involved in the Lost World's script simply because he was too busy writing the book, right? Or did he have some disagreements with Spielberg and left him to his own devices?

The franchise has to be in this muck probably because the filmmakers were afraid of being as ambitious as the first film, either they knew they could never be as good, or they feared audience/critic reception. III wanted to try to have its cake and eat it too, but it was definitely holding itself back when it should've been exploring the world more. Maybe instead of focusing completely on InGen, we should be looking more into Biosyn and what plans they had in mind. What about Costa Rica where dinosaurs had migrated to and was terrorizing the locals, did they ever clear those dinosaurs out? Are we ever going to get pygmy dinosaurs to be sold as pets to little Timmy and then see the rise of child mortality, or what happens when these dinosaurs get sent to the pound or released out into the wild when the kids tired of them/got hurt? Or even if they became successful popular pets, would the demand be too great and cause further irregularities in the clones that'd make them more dangerous or more like abominations than before? Are we going to see the end result of a dinosaur-human hybrid experiment because science has just gone way too far because humans get too fucking high off of power? Will they ever develop accurate dinosaurs in their cloning journeys, and will we ever see the ice age mammals like the mammoth be walking together with these dinosaurs, but things get fucked up because, well, science went too far?

Supplementary material seems to handle it better than the film-industry at this point, which is sad. Maybe it should've all just been left to fan speculation, even if it would've meant the fan community was kept small.

 

[Owen Grady]

This. I don't get why fans get uppity about this when it's been there since the beginning that they're abominations by design. Spinosaurus gets the most flack for this due to the T-Rex fight, but if it's a super freak by design, then why wouldn't it have ripped apart a T-Rex like that? It was hunting the humans out of spite, it doesn't give a shit. Like everyone was okay with the Raptors being just that, except no one should be all for it because it was explicitly stated in the book they're complete sociopathic monsters, but the films somehow didn't include that tidbit (outside of maybe Lost World).

I dunno. Think it's been mentioned in this thread or elsewhere once before (probably by @Owen Grady) but the dinosaurs have gotten real romanticized while heavily scrutinized as the franchise expanded and science marched on, and that's pretty unfair since it's been shown time and time again they're not of nature, they're what humans envision them to be. Some instincts are just not there in these dinosaurs at the end of the day.

Yeah, this. Another thing that really bothers me is people, most notably many Jurassic Park "fans", forget that when this movie first came out, it had (for its time) the best, most accurately portrayed dinosaurs that had ever been displayed in anything. Ever. Period. Nobody in the world had ever seen real, breathing dinosaurs like these before. This movie radically altered the public's perception of dinosaurs and pushed it forward by decades. It showed dinosaurs to be quick, intelligent, bird-like, and most importantly, as animals. Without Jurassic Park, it's entirely possible that people for many years after 1993 would still hold the view of dinosaurs all being big, dumb, slow lizard-like monsters that all died because they were too stupid to do otherwise.

But nowadays nobody appreciates that. All you ever fucking hear from these people is the usual nitpicky shit about how "oh T. rex could obviously see non-moving prey" and "its velociraptor are too big" and of course "the dinosaurs don't have feathers! They aren't bird-like ENOUGH!" I think one of the biggest reasons I cannot stand this sort of thing is the same reason I despise "progressive" politics. There is no appreciation and respect for the accomplishments of the past. Any prior movement towards the goal will be ignored as only history's blemishes will be recognized. And the goal is eternally being shifted.

Without powerleveling, I work and volunteer around a lot of these kinds of people and it is difficult for me not to express my irritation at this sort of constant autism. I am in the complicated position of being a big prehistory fan who also has a great love of storytelling and the art of entertainment, working among a bunch of scientists. I have touched on this in other posts but those in the scientific community, as well as adult dinosaur enthusiasts in general, are notoriously autistic, left-brained people who can barely comprehend the idea that somebody might not want to completely adhere to the principles of reality for something that isn't being done for entirely scientific purposes. Never mind the movie's reasonable in-universe explanation of genetic tampering. Artistic liberties, the idea that maybe you might want to create a bit of fantasy or embellishment of reality to "wow" somebody just that little bit more, or simply sell a few extra movie tickets, is all too often lost on these people.

I heard it said once that the entire premise of Jurassic Park is really just a B-movie concept taken and elevated to a greater cinematic level due to the result of great filmmaking and innovative storytelling. This is a very fair assessment. Without a good story and characters, as well as a compelling ethical message, all Jurassic Park is is a visually appealing two-hour romp about dinosaurs coming back from extinction somehow and chasing down people to eat. Look dude, you can blow your load over feathered dinosaurs in Jurassic Park all day long, but if your movie doesn't focus first on actually being entertaining, and telling a good story, and portraying believable characters, normies won't bother with it for long, and after it comes out and the hype wears down nobody but you and your insipidly cliquish group of paleophiles will ever give even a passing thought to this movie ever again. Until the newest scientific studies are released. And then even you won't care for it.

I mostly do not care about accuracy in Jurassic Park, or in any kind of mainstream dinosaur entertainment in general. As a child I fell in love with the oversized, featherless abominations called raptors in those films, and with the visually impaired tyrannosaurs and frilled, venom-spitting dilophosaurus. I fell in love with the ridiculously overpowered Spinosaurus and toothed Pteranodons. And then as I grew up and my passion stuck with me I learned the truth about their real life counterparts and fell in love with them too. I was able to distinguish fact from fiction, and my interest in prehistory blossomed and evolved.

Scientists claim that they worry about dinosaur inaccuracies in media because they don't want to mislead people away from the so-called "truths" about dinosaurs (implying anything as fluid as the science of paleontology can consistently be referred to as truth, considering how often its facts are updated). But the people who will eventually matter to the field, and who really want to learn more about these animals and contribute to their field of study, will discover, sooner rather than later, and in their own pursuit of knowledge, which portrayals are accurate. I am confident in this because I was one of those individuals.

This does not mean that I don't appreciate attempts at modern scientifically accurate portrayals of dinosaurs. Hell, I almost shit my pants watching the new trailer for Prehistoric Planet (seriously, if you haven't heard about it, click that link. It's gonna be Planet Earth meets Walking With Dinosaurs with a Hans Zimmer soundtrack. David Attenborough narration included). But there is a place for that. And modern pop-culture cinema usually isn't the place to expect it.

Spoiler: Dude where the fuck have you been?

By the way, if you're wondering why I of all people haven't been participating in this thread lately with the new movie on the horizon, it's because I've decided to try and avoid information on the film entirely. When Fallen Kingdom came out I told myself I would only watch the trailers for info and of course, they spoiled everything. So I'm going to try going cold turkey this time, but since I was mentioned, I figured I'd drop by. All I have (accidentally) heard about it over time is that the original cast trio are returning, Biosyn is making an appearance, Blue has a baby, and some of the dinosaur species involved. Oh, also I stumbled into a teaser trailer which mostly just had Chris Pratt giving a cool one liner to Bryce Dallas Howard and then careening down a city street on his motorcycle with raptors chasing him. This got me fairly excited despite my concerns about the franchise's direction because I think it's neat that they're bringing back the motorcycle+raptor stuff in a poetic way, and also because seeing a straight white dude be a badass on film in Current Year is basically the same thing as seeing a dinosaur in real life.

I'll see you guys next month.

 

[A Grey Cat]

You think this should be called a Jurassic Part Griefing Thread? Ever since the sequel, the entire "franchise" has been on a downward spiral.

I'm on the fence about that since this thread is meant to discuss the good aspects of the series as well as the bad. Really all the jp franchise is guilty of (imo so far anyways) is being a franchise at all. It could have been an important piece of movie and literature history if it had just stuck to those first two movies (and two novels) from 89 to 97. But some things in Tinseltown never change and one of those is the green eyed monster that is franchising.

 

[LaxerBRO]

Just saw the promo for Jurassic Park: Dominion and I refuse to believe humanity in it's collective effort could not exterminate a species of animals the size of dinosaurs.

 

[Agarathium1066]

Just saw the promo for Jurassic Park: Dominion and I refuse to believe humanity in it's collective effort could not exterminate a species of animals the size of dinosaurs.

The very idea that a '20 minutes into the future' setting couldn't tear through most dinosaurs as presented in the movies is silly. Turn back the clock a while and it was a bragging right to have blown away a massive creature and brought back a trophy from Africa. The American Bison was nearly wiped out because people wouldn't stop slaughtering them and they're massive bastards.

Larger species would've been wiped out in a matter of a few years if there was free reign to kill them. That's not getting into a concerted effort by corporations and governments to take down these potential threats.

I mean what, do raptors carry Stingers to take out helicopters? Bullshit.

 

[Neet Tokusatsu]

Just saw the promo for Jurassic Park: Dominion and I refuse to believe humanity in it's collective effort could not exterminate a species of animals the size of dinosaurs.

The very idea that a '20 minutes into the future' setting couldn't tear through most dinosaurs as presented in the movies is silly. Turn back the clock a while and it was a bragging right to have blown away a massive creature and brought back a trophy from Africa. The American Bison was nearly wiped out because people wouldn't stop slaughtering them and they're massive bastards.

Larger species would've been wiped out in a matter of a few years if there was free reign to kill them. That's not getting into a concerted effort by corporations and governments to take down these potential threats.

I mean what, do raptors carry Stingers to take out helicopters? Bullshit.

The Jurassic Park franchise has a goddamn fetish for portraying dinosaurs as being impossible to kill for some reason, hell even other movie franchises don't go that far, since other movie monsters aren't bullet proof.

In reality a bunch of dinosaurs on the loose would be a minor nuisance at worse, any gun capable to kill a human would kill a raptor, any rifle capable of killing an elephant would kill a T-rex or other big predators, and that's not counting military artillery.

I wonder if there's some sort of "bible" for these movies that specifically states that no "important" dinosaur can be shown killed on-screen or something like that.

 

[Toolbox]

4chan plot leaks let's see if they are real

https://archive.ph/AWs40

https://boards.4channel.org/tv/thread/167391407

Ver archivo adjunto 3237904
Ver archivo adjunto 3237906

"coexist without affecting the ecosystem" if this is the actual plot, the ignorance of hollywood on how ecology actually works while they push 'green' messaging on people continues to astound me.

 

[AnotherOne]

I mean what, do raptors carry Stingers to take out helicopters? Bullshit.

Don't underestimate raptors

 

[user176]

The final battle for Dominion leaked, confirming that the 4chan plot leaks are real. I'm not surprised.
I snagged a clip before Universal took it down. Have a look. Quality's kinda shit as is par for something recorded on a cell phone but you can still see what's going on.

This might get Null DMCA'd for realsies so you guys might want to download it just in case.

 

[DapperShark]

Saw it yesterday, it was dumb as fuck and not in a good way, marginally better than Fallen Kingdom. Not even the original trio saves this shifest (Jeff Goldblum tried his best though, bless him).

 

[Godzilla1984]

Watching it now.
Resisting the urge to do a play-by-play.
The plot leak was on point.
The 1993 memberberries is strong.

 

[Kari Kamiya]

So Colin Trevorrow and Derek Connolly at least remained on the trilogy, but how much of the movie was them, and how much of the movie was the executives?

 

[A Grey Cat]

Ouch, you know on some level I envy people able to watch these new movies and enjoy them without the baggage of being older and jaded to where member berries have no effect on them anymore. But only marginally envy, then I remember oh right said people tend to be slack jawed sloth brains who can't think for themselves.



I'm not the biggest fan of Doug walker's nostalgia critic on fallen kingdom, at times it really feels like a bitter old man venting his frustrations out, but on some level I do agree that the sequels seem to just follow the same formula of one maybe two good scenes with the rest being pointless or needless fluff.

Soooo I don't know, even before covid I haven't been to a movie theather in ages, and I initially thought about maybe seeing this one in theaters to make it my first one in a long time but it looks like its a definite skip till I can sail the high seas for it.

 

[Godzilla1984]

Finished watching it.
Final Jurassic World Dominion verdict:

 

[Neet Tokusatsu]

The final battle for Dominion leaked, confirming that the 4chan plot leaks are real. I'm not surprised.
I snagged a clip before Universal took it down. Have a look. Quality's kinda shit as is par for something recorded on a cell phone but you can still see what's going on.
Rexy x Giga x Therizinosaurus Final Battle _ Jurassic World Dominion _ MAJOR SPOILER ALERT.mp4
This might get Null DMCA'd for realsies so you guys might want to download it just in case.

Somehow, Jurassic Park as a franchise managed to devolve into something just as retarded as Birdemic, just with a much larger budget.

 

[A Grey Cat]

Somehow, Jurassic Park as a franchise managed to devolve into something just as retarded as Birdemic, just with a much larger budget.

were i younger man or...at the very least one who can't see things for the way they really are I'd be tempted to say your comparison is a bit too harsh. But that part of my life is long past.

 

[DapperShark]

were i younger man or...at the very least one who can't see things for the way they really are I'd be tempted to say your comparison is a bit too harsh. But that part of my life is long past.

They didn't bully you hard enough

 

[Hikaru86]

I kinda wanted they to go with the whole Dinosaurs Human hybrid stuff from some old scrapped script for Jurassic Park 3 or 4 instead of this mess. Going full Extreme Dinosaurs. Oh well.