Jurassic World Official Trailer!
- Thread starter Buizel91
- Start date
Welp. My expectations are down. It appears to be marketed in the same vein as Marvel/DC or Nolan movies. The music cue of the old movie didn't seem to add much. The science bashing was present in earlier films, but it could be explained by carelessness rather than inherent evil. Curious how this one will handle it.
Ah, so the company is doing dodgy genetic research and creating monsters in their labs for no reason?
Guys. That just doesn't end well. Don't do that.
Alternatively, if you absolutely must do that, plan for things going wrong and have some kind of adequate security at hand. Nobody seems to think of this.
Guys. That just doesn't end well. Don't do that.
Alternatively, if you absolutely must do that, plan for things going wrong and have some kind of adequate security at hand. Nobody seems to think of this.
My first impression was: "wow, that CGI looks really bad."
How is it that a film from 1993 still manages to have some of the most incredible looking computer effects ever made, and we've never managed to top it since?
The idea of using velociraptors like hunting dogs is pretty neat though.
How is it that a film from 1993 still manages to have some of the most incredible looking computer effects ever made, and we've never managed to top it since?
The idea of using velociraptors like hunting dogs is pretty neat though.
I had to chuckle when the chick said its our first genetic hybrid, ALL of the dinosaurs are genetic hybrids.thaluikhain said:
The book really hits the point that the dinosaurs we see are not what dinosaurs were like like the DNA was far to damaged to make a real copy. The scientists basically did their best to fill in the gaps, theres a long boring discussion that was cut from the movie between the Dr. we get like two scenes with and Hammond were the Dr. tells him that the Dinosaurs arent really Dinosaurs but what we want dinosaurs to look like.
Also I dont think the idea of creating bigger and badder predators for the park is that far off, after all kids are team carnivore not team herbivore, you want to boost sales? Create a new bad ass predator.
@ Soviet Heavy: I am glad someone else also likes the idea, saw a lot of complaining but it makes sense Raptors would have been the equivalent of a wolf back in their time period.
I think the problem is that JP used a ton of animatronics and people mistake them for CGI, particularly the Raptors and the T-Rex. The actual CGI looks pretty bad honestly.
Compare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAhqbOvWCZ4
to
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnRxQ3dcaQk
The first is CGI and looks like it, the second was dudes dressed up like raptors.
The introduction of a large dinosaur fish looked interesting, not sure why anyone would want to make a hybrid dinosaur though.
I bet it's a cross between a t-rex and that big one with the large fin on it's back from the last film.
Not sure what to make of the tame raptors just yet.
I bet it's a cross between a t-rex and that big one with the large fin on it's back from the last film.
Not sure what to make of the tame raptors just yet.
carlsberg export said:
Neither a dinosaur nor a fish.
Im guessing T-Rex + Raptor, being sold as a Utah Raptor.
Edit: My bad it looks more like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liopleurodon
Marine Reptile.
Yeah that's the one.Joseph Hutzulak said:carlsberg export said:
Neither a dinosaur nor a fish.
Im guessing T-Rex + Raptor, being sold as a Utah Raptor.
Edit: My bad it looks more like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liopleurodon
Marine Reptile.
I just remembered that they depict the raptor as the size of Deinonychus when in real life it was much smaller.
Just remember all of the dinosaurs are "designer" dinosaurs they were made to create what we want to see, remember even in real life we have very little to go off of about what dinosaurs really looked like.carlsberg export said:Yeah that's the one.Joseph Hutzulak said:carlsberg export said:
Neither a dinosaur nor a fish.
Im guessing T-Rex + Raptor, being sold as a Utah Raptor.
Edit: My bad it looks more like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liopleurodon
Marine Reptile.
I just remembered that they depict the raptor as the size of Deinonychus when in real life it was much smaller.
The specimens are few and far between and we almost never get a complete skeleton, and even then we have a few samples to actually extrapolate on.
So I am the only one onboard the hyped train (the unseen hybrid was a great tease for me)?
Yes the synopis is so cliche (Deep Blue Sea anyone) and what in god names did do with the original creator of the park since I can assume he must be dead in order for them to restablist the Jurassic Park/ World again??
Yes the synopis is so cliche (Deep Blue Sea anyone) and what in god names did do with the original creator of the park since I can assume he must be dead in order for them to restablist the Jurassic Park/ World again??
Yeah that is true.Joseph Hutzulak said:Just remember all of the dinosaurs are "designer" dinosaurs they were made to create what we want to see, remember even in real life we have very little to go off of about what dinosaurs really looked like.carlsberg export said:Yeah that's the one.Joseph Hutzulak said:carlsberg export said:
Neither a dinosaur nor a fish.
Im guessing T-Rex + Raptor, being sold as a Utah Raptor.
Edit: My bad it looks more like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liopleurodon
Marine Reptile.
I just remembered that they depict the raptor as the size of Deinonychus when in real life it was much smaller.
The specimens are few and far between and we almost never get a complete skeleton, and even then we have a few samples to actually extrapolate on.
I do forget that most of the fossils we see in museum's are casts of incomplete finds.
hell they have only ever found teeth of megaladon and we assume it must have looked like a great white but bigger.
Meh!
I just watched this with the missus; the trailer finished and we looked at each other with scrunched-up faces.
"So what's the difference between this and the first one?" She asks.
"It's genetically modified!" I reply.
"So was the first one!"
Yup.
I just watched this with the missus; the trailer finished and we looked at each other with scrunched-up faces.
"So what's the difference between this and the first one?" She asks.
"It's genetically modified!" I reply.
"So was the first one!"
Yup.
Your telling me if Jurrasic Park existed in real life you wouldnt go as soon as you could afford it?DizzyChuggernaut said:
To be fair you made a good point, I would want to go but they would have to issue something like an m60 to the tourists as standard ha haDizzyChuggernaut said:
Congrats Steven, dinosaurs look faker than the ones you made up 21 years ago. Probably cost more too.
Yeah, that was the first thing I noticed. Everything shiny looks great, anything biological, not so much.Johnny Novgorod said:
Also, I'm not that enthusiastic about the whole 'newly designed killer dinosaur' thing. Still, in the end I'll probably go see it. I loved the first Jurassic Park too much to want to miss it.
Captcha: safety first
At least captcha has its priorities straight.
I mostly thought of one thing:
STARLORD VELOCIRAPTOR MOTORCYCLE GANG WOOP WOOP!
Other than that I hope that they won't retreat old ground too much. And that the designer-dino isn't too stupid.
STARLORD VELOCIRAPTOR MOTORCYCLE GANG WOOP WOOP!
Other than that I hope that they won't retreat old ground too much. And that the designer-dino isn't too stupid.
A while back they did state that we would see a lot of original JP-style animatronics in Jurassic World, so I'm actually quite optimistic on that one. And it also helped that certain bits that were CGI in the old movies were cleverly masked by things like bad weather and/or darkness. Some of the broad daylight CGI bits look pretty outdated, worse than these ones.Johnny Novgorod said: