Go Back   Behind The Voice Actors > TV / Movie / Game Central > Movie Discussion

Movie Discussion Discuss all things related to upcoming, latest and classic movies! Threads may contain SPOILERS!

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-13-2015   #51
Ross123
Member
 
Ross123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Cumbernauld, Scotland, UK.
Posts: 352
Default Re: "Jurassic World" (2015)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
Well, he's a 16 year old boy. It'd be weird for him not to do that. Sort of joking, sort of serious. But my problem isn't so much that he stares at girls, instead it's that it's never firmly established why he does it. I mean, like, besides the previously mentioned "he's a 16 year old boy"-thing.

We're shown that he has a girlfriend already. She seems kind of overly-attached and he seems kind of disinterested in her, or at least disinterested in her level of dramatics to him going away for a week. But is he going through actual relationship drama and problems with her? Is that why he doesn't mention her at all in the movie and instead chats, ogles and flirts with every girl he sees? Or is he just a scuzzy, cheating guy? We're never really told why and it's never really implied why. We just know he has a girlfriend and we know that he's flirting with every girl on the island. One of those two things by themselves would be fine, but you put 2 + 2 together and it equals

We're given, what, three separate scenes of him chatting/ogling/flirting with girls in the movie, all three involving the younger brother. Why not have a brief exchange of "Um, I don't think Sally (or whatever the girlfriend's name is) would be okay with you flirting all the time, Zach!" and Zach defending/explaining himself. "Ugh, Sally's been smothering me so much lately. She won't let me go out and see my other friends, I can never get time to myself. I just...I just... I don't know if we're gonna' work out.", followed by a barrage of texts from her and him groaning and putting his phone away. You know, something to indicate what state his relationship is in, and thus, something that we can gauge his behaviour on.
Well to be fair, I would be lying if I didn't mention that I have looked at girls from time to time but I wouldn't try & do anything to freak them out or make them uncomfortable which is what the oldest boy is sorta doing in this film.

And to be honest, I never bought into the fact that he & his "girlfriend" were in a relationship because to me they came off more as just really good friends.

Trust me, I would know because I have a friend who's closest friend is a girl but they're not in a relationship together. And they never will be.

But you do have a point, the fact that we never find out why he does the staring thing is kinda annoying now that I think about it. I guess I was turned off by the fact that he was doing it because let's face it, no girl wants to go out with some1 who stares at them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
Well, Trevorrow said that he wasn't going to be including classic character just for the sake of appeasing the fans (mad ups to him for that), and really, this particular story didn't need Grant, Goldblum, Ellie, Billy or anyone. None of those characters would probably ever go to Jurassic World. None of those characters would've shown up in tanks to help save the day. None of those characters really has a need to be in this story. Dr. Wu did.

People have said that a short scene at the beginning (which actually segways into your next point) of a montage that explains who/when/how Jurassic World was constructed, and cuts to reveal Malcolm watching the news report and shaking his head and turning off the TV. But even that kind of feels a little ham-fisted and existing purely to say HEY FANS REMEMBER THE GOLDBLUM?!

And hey, at least we got Malcolm out-of-focus and in the bottom frame on Lowery's desk.
I don't recall him saying that, must've missed out on it but hopefully I'll be able to hear him say this in the special features section (if they still make those) on the Blu-ray.

Oh wait I just realised, I don't buy Blu-rays just the regular DVDs for films I want to own. How sad .

As much as I would've liked a cameo from some of the original cast, you're right about them not fitting in with the rest of the movie. I honestly can't picture them showing up.

Guess I just needed something else to complain about, as if I hadn't already done enough of that.

And missed the out-of-focus Malcom moment. GOD DAMMIT!!!


Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
I'm torn on this issue. Part of me thinks that we really could've used an explanation, but another part of me doesn't. I'm moreso curious as to the logistical side of things (how fast did they build it?), but I'd be willing to listen to them explain in-universe how it came to be (how much red tape did they have to go through? How many failed attempts did they go through? How many other incidents? How long as it been operational?).
Those questions are actually more interesting than a logical explanation as to how the park got green lit for the general public.

But sadly, we will never get an answer to any of them. I doubt the Blu-ray special features section will even touch upon them.


Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
Well, the original "Diabolus Rex" was probably a bit on-the-nose. When you name your dinosaur "Devil King Lizard" or whatever, you're asking for trouble. At least "Indominable King Lizard" is slightly less foreboding.
Yeah, Diabolus Rex sounds even more ridiculous than Indominus Rex. But still, I believe the film makers could've come up with something better than both of them.
__________________
Crazy man, just crazy. The whole world's going crazy. Or maybe it's just me that's crazy.
Ross123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2015   #52
SupremeTarantulas
Senior Member
 
SupremeTarantulas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Strongsville, Ohio
Age: 31
Posts: 2,114
Default Re: "Jurassic World" (2015)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
This definitely needs a better viewing for final opinion, wasn't big on any character, except Chris Pratt's, and turning the kills into action scenes takes out the suspense if them in the original, I'd say the sequels too, but 1 those don't count, and 2 don't recall if there was suspense in those kills or scenes besides the Pteranodon scene in 3. The whole romance thing was wooden, doesn't really develop much or anything, and honestly the first 3 movies were fine without that side drama, instead focusing on bonding their characters, which they don't even do here, well from memory anyway. A lot of the movie too, like them stopping the inbred dinosaur with the T-Rex is predictable so I'll wait till once it's on DVD and I rewatch it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
wut
Not sure what you're referring to here, so I'll rephrase it the best I can, First off note that I'm gonna rewatch it to improve my opinion, before defending stuff and pointing them out. I followed the story fine, but wasn't big on the characters, not even catching their names, and everything they did with seemed wooden and bland to me, the romance between Chris Pratt didn't really blossom, they addressed that they had one date, then saying they didn't get along well, then kissing, nothing really developed in that, the whole thing is shoehorned IMO. It seems all attributes, personalities etc. we're shoehorned in, just to do something with them. The female lead doesn't even know her nephew's ages, and on top of that, saw the dinosaurs as just animals, something a real scientist wouldn't do. The two brothers had some good scenes, as do Pratt and the female lead, but the former have more development and a better relationship than the latter, but the divorce thing was unneeded, 3 did the same thing, but this time no parents to the rescue, and in the original, Tim and Lexi's parents were divorcing I think, in the book they were, not sure on the movie, and the scene where the younger brother is talking and the older one isn't really interested, is rehashed as a homage to what Tim says in the car with Grant in the original, the homages are decent, but this kinda just a rehash of the characters from the original.

In the original and the others, there's no romance side stories, just bonding as they struggle to survive. Lost World I'm not sure on, just that Malcolm and Sara are together, and honestly romance isn't needed in these movies IMO, it's just distracting, and takes away from the tone of the movie. Same goes for the comedy and action scenes in here. The scenes in the original, and both Lost World and 3 all have some suspense in them, but here the more action like scenes take away from that. I'm typing from memory hence stating I'm going for a second opinion here, but I do recall comedic scenes here, which I wasn't a fan of. I had a few typos I corrected but them using the T-Rex to stop the inbred dinosaur was predictable. I mean what other options were? Godzilla? I was getting a bit tired, hence my post ending up like this, which is the main reason I'll re watch before I post a final opinion, but for now, the only character who had a real personality was Chris Pratt's, and the only one I liked at that.
SupremeTarantulas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2015   #53
TylerMirage
It's time to oil up
 
TylerMirage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,781
Default Re: "Jurassic World" (2015)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross123 View Post
And to be honest, I never bought into the fact that he & his "girlfriend" were in a relationship because to me they came off more as just really good friends.

Trust me, I would know because I have a friend who's closest friend is a girl but they're not in a relationship together. And they never will be.
Yeah, no, they're definitely in a romantic relationship (at least she thinks so). You don't go all "overly attached girlfriend" asking for photos every day, lean in for a kiss and text "I miss you" with a heart symbol and duck face if she's just a friend.

Plus, she's credited as "Zach's Girlfriend".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross123 View Post
I don't recall him saying that, must've missed out on it but hopefully I'll be able to hear him say this in the special features section (if they still make those) on the Blu-ray.

Oh wait I just realised, I don't buy Blu-rays just the regular DVDs for films I want to own. How sad .
It was just something he said during production. He might've tweeted it or perhaps it was in an interview, I just recall him saying something along those lines. I'm sure if you scrounged around you could find the quote, if you're really interested.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross123 View Post
And missed the out-of-focus Malcom moment. GOD DAMMIT!!!
Oh, it's literally a handful of blink-and-you'll-miss-it shots. You'll only see it if you're specifically looking for it. There's no audible mention of it, there's no jerk-off close-up of it, there's not even any implication that it's relevant. It's more-or-less a glorified easter egg by the props team.

http://i0.wp.com/bitcast-a-sm.bitgra...malcolmbok.jpg

They promoted it before the movie came out, and that's really the only reason anybody noticed it in the first place. If you see the movie again, basically look at the bottom of the screen whenever Lowery and his workstation are in frame.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross123 View Post
Yeah, Diabolus Rex sounds even more ridiculous than Indominus Rex. But still, I believe the film makers could've come up with something better than both of them.
But I believe that was the point. "Indominus Rex" is only ridiculous from our POV because we, the audience, are fully aware of the disaster that's about to ensue. The characters aren't. Only Owen voices his opinion of how silly it is because he chuckles when Claire mentions the name. It's supposed to be red flag as to the eye-rolling procedures that go on in the park and all of that bureaucracy.

Think about the whole Iron Patriot naming scheme in Iron Man 3 (the only people who thought that rebranding War Machine as Iron Patriot would be cool were the Government of the United States and the kid). Or even the focus-grouped name for the unstable molecular substance that form Cybertronians in Age of Extinction, transformium. Both of those (and Indominus) were focus-grouped-tested, marketed, product-based names in order to sell a product or sell an image of something. And both of them sound ridiculous, and that's the point.

Plus, when it comes to naming dinosaurs, nobody really stops and thinks "How bad/evil would this thing sound in a movie? Like, if this thing were alive and ate people, how scary and/or silly would it sound?". When you think of the three names that Tyrannosaurus Rex has had (or almost had), they're just as foreboding. Manospondylus Gigas ("massive giant lizard" [I think]), "Dynamosaurus Imperiosis" ("dynamic imperial lizard") and Tyrannosaurus Rex ("tyrant lizard king"). All pretty silly/scary, just like "Indominus Rex".

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
Not sure what you're referring to here...
I was referring to your original post, which was a massive wall of text with a whole slough of run-on sentences that didn't make a whole lot of sense. But you've since rephrased it, so it's all good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
The female lead doesn't even know her nephew's ages, and on top of that, saw the dinosaurs as just animals, something a real scientist wouldn't do.
1.) She doesn't know their ages because...that's...kind of the point. That's to help sell how incredibly busy (and inattentive to anything outside of her own little world) she is.
2.) She didn't see the dinosaurs "as just animals". For one thing, they are "just animals". And secondly, she viewed them as assets. We'd be lucky if she viewed them as "just animals".
3.) She views them as assets because she's NOT a scientist. She's essentially the Chief Operating Officer of the entire theme park. Masrani is like the CEO and Claire is like the COO. (EDIT: She's technically classified as the park's "Operations Manager"). The CEO of General Motors may not know how to re-torque the tires of a semi truck, but they can predict quarterly earnings and customer satisfaction ratios because that is their job. Point being is that she's not a scientist and there's a reason why she views them as assets instead of living animals.
TylerMirage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2015   #54
SupremeTarantulas
Senior Member
 
SupremeTarantulas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Strongsville, Ohio
Age: 31
Posts: 2,114
Default Re: "Jurassic World" (2015)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
Yeah, no, they're definitely in a romantic relationship (at least she thinks so). You don't go all "overly attached girlfriend" asking for photos every day, lean in for a kiss and text "I miss you" with a heart symbol and duck face if she's just a friend.

Plus, she's credited as "Zach's Girlfriend".



It was just something he said during production. He might've tweeted it or perhaps it was in an interview, I just recall him saying something along those lines. I'm sure if you scrounged around you could find the quote, if you're really interested.



Oh, it's literally a handful of blink-and-you'll-miss-it shots. You'll only see it if you're specifically looking for it. There's no audible mention of it, there's no jerk-off close-up of it, there's not even any implication that it's relevant. It's more-or-less a glorified easter egg by the props team.

http://i0.wp.com/bitcast-a-sm.bitgra...malcolmbok.jpg

They promoted it before the movie came out, and that's really the only reason anybody noticed it in the first place. If you see the movie again, basically look at the bottom of the screen whenever Lowery and his workstation are in frame.



But I believe that was the point. "Indominus Rex" is only ridiculous from our POV because we, the audience, are fully aware of the disaster that's about to ensue. The characters aren't. Only Owen voices his opinion of how silly it is because he chuckles when Claire mentions the name. It's supposed to be red flag as to the eye-rolling procedures that go on in the park and all of that bureaucracy.

Think about the whole Iron Patriot naming scheme in Iron Man 3 (the only people who thought that rebranding War Machine as Iron Patriot would be cool were the Government of the United States and the kid). Or even the focus-grouped name for the unstable molecular substance that form Cybertronians in Age of Extinction, transformium. Both of those (and Indominus) were focus-grouped-tested, marketed, product-based names in order to sell a product or sell an image of something. And both of them sound ridiculous, and that's the point.

Plus, when it comes to naming dinosaurs, nobody really stops and thinks "How bad/evil would this thing sound in a movie? Like, if this thing were alive and ate people, how scary and/or silly would it sound?". When you think of the three names that Tyrannosaurus Rex has had (or almost had), they're just as foreboding. Manospondylus Gigas ("massive giant lizard" [I think]), "Dynamosaurus Imperiosis" ("dynamic imperial lizard") and Tyrannosaurus Rex ("tyrant lizard king"). All pretty silly/scary, just like "Indominus Rex".



I was referring to your original post, which was a massive wall of text with a whole slough of run-on sentences that didn't make a whole lot of sense. But you've since rephrased it, so it's all good.



1.) She doesn't know their ages because...that's...kind of the point. That's to help sell how incredibly busy (and inattentive to anything outside of her own little world) she is.
2.) She didn't see the dinosaurs "as just animals". For one thing, they are "just animals". And secondly, she viewed them as assets. We'd be lucky if she viewed them as "just animals".
3.) She views them as assets because she's NOT a scientist. She's essentially the Chief Operating Officer of the entire theme park. Masrani is like the CEO and Claire is like the COO. (EDIT: She's technically classified as the park's "Operations Manager"). The CEO of General Motors may not know how to re-torque the tires of a semi truck, but they can predict quarterly earnings and customer satisfaction ratios because that is their job. Point being is that she's not a scientist and there's a reason why she views them as assets instead of living animals.
I kind of took a nap, woke up, and slapped my thoughts on here before planning my post, plus auto correct made some jibberish words to my knowledge, or Latin ones in predictable's case. I just remembered Claire's name after typing, but only name I locked on to, but names and characters I usually miss, besides Grant, Malcolm, Lexi, and Tim, didn't even catch Ellie and Hammond's names at first. The characters are gonna take a while getting used to, and need a reviewing that especially for sequels, the dinosaurs are the main focus this time around, which distracts anything they try to do with the characters, which is kind of why I confused Claire with a scientist, that and her lab coat, but even then it doesn't do much for her personality, just portaying Claire as a stereotypical emotionless CEO, but Gammond was that way in the books, before Speilberg humanized him, I get the point of Claire being so busy she forgets her nephew's birthdays, but they didn't do that thing with Hammind and didn't need to, so it comes off as distracting unneeded humor, even if they're trying to make her serious, it's not as her forgetting their names. Forgetting when she last saw them is one thing, but a serious moment they should have her guess.
SupremeTarantulas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2015   #55
TylerMirage
It's time to oil up
 
TylerMirage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,781
Default Re: "Jurassic World" (2015)

I really recommend that you get some rest and formulate your thoughts before you make these posts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
...which is kind of why I confused Claire with a scientist, that and her lab coat
Have you seen a lab-coat before, pete? Lab-coats aren't typically skirt-length, form-fitting, low-cut Armani-style outfits with a stylish belt and worn with high-heels.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pete View Post
I get the point of Claire being so busy she forgets her nephew's birthdays, but they didn't do that thing with Hammind and didn't need to...
It's almost as if they were two different characters. The 65-70 year old Hammond ("spared no expense") is a savvy business man who is obviously far-better at multi-tasking and has a real, pre-existing relationship with his grandkids vs. the 35 year old Claire ("profit margins are up but operating costs are at an all-time high") is so utterly focused on her work that it's almost detrimental to any bond or relationship she encounters or tries to form.

Plus, keep in mind that the movie not only establishes just how busy and job-focused Claire is in nearly every waking moment, but the fact that she hasn't seen her nephews in seven years. 2+2=4. I guess I'm just not really understanding the complaint. An extremely busy person with an extremely busy job and virtually no social or personal life doesn't know the exact ages of her two nephews and has to grow and learn more about them.
TylerMirage is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-14-2015   #56
SupremeTarantulas
Senior Member
 
SupremeTarantulas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Strongsville, Ohio
Age: 31
Posts: 2,114
Default Re: "Jurassic World" (2015)

Quote:
Originally Posted by TylerMirage View Post
I really recommend that you get some rest and formulate your thoughts before you make these posts.



Have you seen a lab-coat before, pete? Lab-coats aren't typically skirt-length, form-fitting, low-cut Armani-style outfits with a stylish belt and worn with high-heels.



It's almost as if they were two different characters. The 65-70 year old Hammond ("spared no expense") is a savvy business man who is obviously far-better at multi-tasking and has a real, pre-existing relationship with his grandkids vs. the 35 year old Claire ("profit margins are up but operating costs are at an all-time high") is so utterly focused on her work that it's almost detrimental to any bond or relationship she encounters or tries to form.

Plus, keep in mind that the movie not only establishes just how busy and job-focused Claire is in nearly every waking moment, but the fact that she hasn't seen her nephews in seven years. 2+2=4. I guess I'm just not really understanding the complaint. An extremely busy person with an extremely busy job and virtually no social or personal life doesn't know the exact ages of her two nephews and has to grow and learn more about them.
It's done in a serious tense, but can be used as a comedic tense basically and really aside from Chris Pratt we don't need a comedic film to make it more family friendly, but the reason for the complaining, well the short version, Claire is bland. If they meant to make the opposite Hammond they ended up making not very likable, interesting, etc. I'll see if I can rephrase once the characters are more of a focus.

I meant to edit the part about confusing her white suit with one, but again with the sleep thing, posted lab coat, before thinking D'oh. Didn't even pay attention to rest of her outfit, just thinking white jacket equals lab coat. Regarding Zach and his girlfriend, being tempted hen your away from your spouse is common, and on the Dominus Rex and it's escape plan/attempt, think that they were trying to a raptor level intelligence cause if that were them, they'd probably pull something like that.
SupremeTarantulas is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:24 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.