Hello There, Guest! Register

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Opinions on JW
#1
I personally really like the fourth installment but it does have a few problems. Some characters are likeable but not really interesting. Jurassic World is really just an action film while JP 1-3 are more suspenseful thrillers. Not a lot of focus on the park. The writing is not all that great (for some scenes but for others it's pretty good). That all being said, I still really enjoy the film but I'm still hoping JP5/JW2 will have more suspense.

What are your thoughts on Jurassic World? Loved it, hated it, liked it, dislike it, thought it was only okay, just meh. And why.
Reply
#2
I really liked Jurassic World, but it is often a little too on the nose, rushed, and lacks the subtle yet complex plot and characters that makes Jurassic Park soar above the rest.

I wish it would have tried to take its time more with some sequences to help build higher stakes and tension, all while fleshing the characters out more. As they stand now, they seem awfully underdeveloped. Masrani was my favorite new addition, but sadly we can't explore him any further going forward.

Jurassic World really succeeded in bringing the plot to new places, and injecting some fun of adventure back into the franchise.. but not without some frustrating setbacks. I think I would have enjoyed it a lot more if I didn't have to wait 14 years, but all the same, the plot of a reopened park wouldn't be nearly as rewarding.
Jurassic Outpost founding member & news staff. Follow me on Twitter.
Reply
#3
I really don't like it. I have no problems with the main story elements, and am looking forward to seeing where they'll be taken in the future, but I think the film itself is a borderline disaster. Poor script, poor characters — and a serious mishandling of those who could've been great. (Masrani, for one.) I know some here might've seen this before, but I put together a fairly extensive piece on where I thought it went wrong last October, if anyone cares to have a look: The Great Jurassic World Disappointment.
@JHNMCHLTNR | The JHN behind @thejhnfiles. Patiently waiting for Jurassic Park to become a reality.
Reply
#4
I certainly don't love it. 

I've never wanted hybrids in the Jurassic franchise and I'm still not sold. The fact that the novel provides a possible route that the writers could have taken by having Wu/Masrani wanting to improve the current crop of dinosaurs/carnivores. Throwing a bunch of dinosaurs together to make an angry killing machine is just too far away from what the franchise should be, in my opinion.

I'm still not thrilled with a whole new Park, what with the fact a new Park craps all over ''life finds a way''. I wish we were intoduced to new dinosaurs and not have a lot of rehash stuff (the Gallimimus scene for one, divorce sub-story being another). I didn't like the pacing issues, I think some of the writing was silly and could have done with some improvement (Hoskins whole character for a start) and I'd like to highlight that some of the casting choices were a bit too plain and generic.

Ultimately, I think it is the third best Jurassic film ever made. It just could have been a lot better.
Simon Masrani Wrote:“The key to a happy life is to accept you are never actually in control.”
Reply
#5
While I personally wouldn't call the film a borderline disaster, even I don't see it as a great film. I love it but it's in my opinion only a good film. Hope that the sequel is greater.
Reply
#6
I hate to say it but I thought I hated JP3 untill I saw everything JW did wrong in my eyes.

JP3´s main sin is the humilliation of the icon of the franchise.

JW´s had way too many things I hated. First of all I hated when I found out it was going to be about a hybrid that made the T Rex (and all dinosaurs) look inferior I was like ´´What the hell, this is what everyone hated about JP3´´. And yeah. I get what they were trying to do but I still did not like it. But my most hated part of the film is how they ignored the Rex SPino rematch thinking they solved it with a skeleton and how they thought they gave the Rex redemption by having it get nearly killed only to be saved by a raptor and mosasaurus. Im still in denial about all that.

I also hated the whole ´´People are tired of dinos´´ when zoos have been popular for 200 years... And f don´t get me started on how they ignored the events of TLW...

And I feel bad saying that because Colin seems like a genuine well intentioned man but there were just so many things that the movie did that I hated...

Having said that, the soundtrack was one of the very few things I loved. Very underrated if you ask me.
Link to the T Rex Spinosaurus rematch petition in Jurassic World 2 that Colin Trevorrow noted. We hope everyone joins and help us share it.

https://www.facebook.com/Petition-to-hav...920665797/
Reply
#7
Jurassic World does not feel as intimate as Jurassic Park, or even Jurassic Park III. At times it seems there are too many characters, and you never truly learn the motives that drive them. (The Lost World: Jurassic Park has a ton of characters as well, but they seem better fleshed out or even just given enough discerning traits to understand them in the story's context.)

I still don't understand how InGen went from genetic research company to private army. The Lost World: Jurassic Park seemed to hint the company is much bigger than just the park on Isla Nublar and headquarters in San Diego (their own ships, helicopters, vehicles, etc.), but we never truly learn the history behind the company in the films' universe.

Another grievance I have is the complete overhaul of the Pteranodons' design. In The Lost World: Jurassic Park the animal we saw in close-up looked very majestic. In Jurassic Park III they looked downright menacing and terrifying in the mist (teeth aside, it's a cool design and the Pteranodons are given one of the best, most thrilling sequences in the third film), but in Jurassic World the Pteranodons and Dimorphodons looked like cartoon characters!

I would have vastly preferred Jurassic Park III's designs to have been used. Those looked far better than the animated creatures from Jurassic World.

Of course, I'm not a huge fan of Indominus rex, though its design is impeccable and the first time we see it (with Masrani and Claire discussing the animal and its sibling) is well executed.

I'm not really on board with Henry Wu being bribed by Hoskins either. From the novel, we learn Wu started working for InGen because Hammond persuaded him with the promise of a quick career and sufficient funds, instead of toiling at a university and having to beg for money - still, Wu came across as someone who wanted to succeed, but certainly not at all costs.
Something lost between Jurassic Park and Jurassic World is his expressed concern about the Velociraptors; he doesn't say it out loud, but his face is telling enough when Grant inquires about the baby dinosaur and then the adult Velociraptors - those animals are nothing but trouble.
Yet, in Jurassic World, he doesn't seem the least bit concerned the Velociraptors are being trained and might possibly be used for military projects.

It's not all negative though! First of all, I support this sentiment:

Quote:Colin seems like a genuine well intentioned man

Colin Trevorrow has been an absolute delight; from appearing on podcasts to sharing pictures taken on set and answering fans' questions on Twitter, he was always willing to interact with the community. One very moving story involves Mariah Lambes, who was an extra in Jurassic World (she can be seen sitting behind the boys during the Mosasaurus show). Mariah was being treated for leukemia, and Colin sent her a set of signed posters to auction off on Ebay so she could earn some extra money for her treatment.
(She's doing fine now, she works at a Disney store at the moment and has a deeply rooted love for anything Disney and Star Wars - and she and her husband adopted to adorable dogs!)

As RexRevenge said, Colin is a genuine person and he loves the franchise as much as we do. It's clear from Jurassic World it was truly a labor of love and the throwbacks to the original (despite my great dislike for the sheer number) show he wanted this film to be not just for audiences all over the world, but for fans of the Jurassic Park franchise especially.

All in all, I don't hate it. It has some fun scenes, cool ideas and it revived interest in the franchise worlwide. Could it have been better? Yes, I believe so - there were quite a few missed opportunities and the whole InGen backstory is too confusing and complicating, though I assume we will learn more about their motives in the sequel(s).
Reply
#8
(06-11-2016, 01:05 AM)Dr. Wu Wrote: While I personally wouldn't call the film a borderline disaster, even I don't see it as a great film. I love it but it's in my opinion only a good film. Hope that the sequel is greater.

Fair enough. I can see why calling it a borderline disaster might be seen as pushing it a bit — but it's just that the film left me so completely and utterly underwhelmed. Perhaps I was expecting too much, but I remember, when Trevorrow was announced as director, it was stated that one of the reasons he'd been chosen was for his ability to develop characters. That got me excited, which is why I was floored by how poor some of Jurassic World's characters ended up being — not to mention the occasionally atrocious dialogue.

Jurassic World is very, very watchable, but it's a popcorn movie. It's a paint-by-numbers adventure, but has little to no substance — even though, to its credit, it does try to have some more than some other films.
@JHNMCHLTNR | The JHN behind @thejhnfiles. Patiently waiting for Jurassic Park to become a reality.
Reply
#9
(06-11-2016, 02:09 PM)JHNMCHLTNR Wrote: Fair enough. I can see why calling it a borderline disaster might be seen as pushing it a bit — but it's just that the film left me so completely and utterly underwhelmed. Perhaps I was expecting too much, but I remember, when Trevorrow was announced as director, it was stated that one of the reasons he'd been chosen was for his ability to develop characters. That got me excited, which is why I was floored by how poor some of Jurassic World's characters ended up being — not to mention the occasionally atrocious dialogue.

Jurassic World is very, very watchable, but it's a popcorn movie. It's a paint-by-numbers adventure, but has little to no substance — even though, to its credit, it does try to have some more than some other films.

I think by calling JW a good film I actually meant a very watchable popcorn flick. I guess I'm easily satisfied. All I wanted to see was dinosaurs causing mayhem and I got that. And yes, JW does have some pretty bad dialogue lol. My favorite was when Hoskin said "Looks like the fox got in the hen house." But several critics may just see all four films as just popcorn movies and while I don't mostly agree with that, the novels are much more in depth.
Reply
#10
Everyone has some valid points here. I will now fully disclose my bias. I am a die-hard JP fan. I live, sleep, and breathe it (but then again most of us here probably do as well). I thought Jurassic World was good. My personal favorite is Jurassic Park. I can't find one thing wrong with that film. My second favorite was TLW. I love that film as well. JPIII had wonderful special effects. The plot was severely lacking though. JW is my third favorite. My biggest critique of the film was the lack of practical effects. The Pteranodon and Dimorphodon CGI was horrid. I throughouly enjoyed JW's plot despite some minor pacing issues. I would have loved to see more of the park as this was probably our last shot at getting a fully functional dinosaur theme park. All in all JW was good, had its problems, but still a solid blockbuster and great addition to the JP universe.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)