Paleoworld-101 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) The first trailer for the new Jurassic Park movie, called Jurassic World, has just been released. Check it out above, what do you guys think? I was really excited for this film. Now? Not so much... First thing i noticed was the pronated hands on the Ornithomimids How hard is it really to understand the arms weren't oriented like that?! Also, no feathers on the coelurosaurian theropods! This is 2014!!!!! Now a whole new generation of kids are going to be misled about dinosaurs once again by popular culture. Despite obvious flaws, i still hope the movie is enjoyable. But honestly it's starting to look like it's going to be another CGI action fest with no substance. Let me know what you thought of the trailer Edited November 26, 2014 by Paleoworld-101 "In Africa, one can't help becoming caught up in the spine-chilling excitement of the hunt. Perhaps, it has something to do with a memory of a time gone by, when we were the prey, and our nights were filled with darkness..." -Eternal Enemies: Lions And Hyenas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) I'm sometimes disappointed when Hollyweird gets something inaccurate when reality would have been far more impressive and spectacular. Bare-skinned lizards instead of marvelously feathered beasts mentioned above would be an example. The portrayed vs. actual effects of asteroid/comet impacts (other movies) is another. Also, hopefully the movie 'Interstellar' will become a model for action/adventure flicks in the future. A certain someone who does Star Wars prequels could have learned a thing or ten. Having said all that, I will still eagerly go and see this movie. Edited November 26, 2014 by Missourian Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ash Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 When's it set to be released? IMO: who cares about errors? Enjoy it for what it is, not what you want it to be. The majority of people who see it won't know about hand placement or feathers, and they'll enjoy it just fine. "Faith is to believe what you do not see; the reward of this faith is to see what you believe" - Saint Augustine"Those who can not see past their own nose deserve our pity more than anything else." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allosaurus Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 I'm really hopeful of this movie. A fourth installment of Jurassic Park has been up in the air for years now and I've really wanted to see it happen. That being said, I also have great concerns over the possible overuse of CGI. I don't want to see it turned into just some action movie without, as Allosauroid Enthusiast put it, substance. The scientific inaccuracies bother me (no feathers), but I want to reserve judgement on that until I see the movie. There may be a reason (within the movie) that the dinosaurs don't have feathers (or it could honestly be just because they didn't consider to be scientifically accurate). I am very excited for this movie and plan to be there opening night and really can't wait. The final scene with Pratt on the bike alongside the velociraptors seemed very similar to a scene from the book The Lost World (when Sarah and Kelly are on a bike chasing after a raptor). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triceratops Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Can't wait to see the movie! -Lyall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carcharodontosaurus Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) Love the mosasaur. The raptor motorcycle scene needs CGI improvement (they still have months of post-production left), but other than that looks great. The wrecked gyrosphere scene looks very fake though, especially the tooth. Edited November 26, 2014 by Carcharodontosaurus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MgTattooer86 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Even with all the inaccuracies, which I am sure there will be plenty, I think that it could have a positive effect on a new generation of dino fans. I remember seeing the first Jurassic Park in theatres as a kid and it had a profound effect on me. I think that if they are interested and pick up some books, learn some facts and cultivate an interest in learning, than that's awesome, accurate or not. If you show them a transitional, they'll ask for two more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 It is meant to be entertaining fiction; I think they've accomplished that goal "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) Calculating realistic looking CGI feathers would cost much more than just skin. That might have been a factor. Hollywood very often modifies reality to fit what they need for a story. If I remember right, the Troodons were too small for Spielberg, so he had them increased to make them more scary. After the movie came out, larger Troodons were found. And Hollywood will often modify historical movies to suit the audience. People like to have clear-cut good guys and bad guys, and they don't want to get bogged down in ambiguities, so Hollywood screen writers will tamper with history to make the situation and the actors more obviously good or bad, so you know who you are cheering for. (EDIT: They don't call Hollywood "the Dream Factory" for nothing, you know... ) Edited November 26, 2014 by tmaier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DE&i Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 I am really looking forward to it and thank you for the trailer Regards Elliot Regards.....D&E&i The only certainty with fossil hunting is the uncertainty. https://lnk.bio/Darren.Withers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanNREMTP Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Somehow I don't think rudists will be in this film. They are really disappointed in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmaier Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) Somehow I don't think rudists will be in this film. They are really disappointed in this. Yeah, there are very few invertebrate movies... (EDIT: Wait a minute here... there is an invertebrate movie coming out this February. The star is a porifera. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2279373/ ) Edited November 26, 2014 by tmaier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpc Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 The first trailer for the new Jurassic Park movie, called Jurassic World, has just been released. Check it out above, what do you guys think? I was really excited for this film. Now? Not so much... First thing i noticed was the pronated hands on the Ornithomimids How hard is it really to understand the arms weren't oriented like that?! Also, no feathers on the coelurosaurian theropods! This is 2014!!!!! Now a whole new generation of kids are going to be misled about dinosaurs once again by popular culture. Despite obvious flaws, i still hope the movie is enjoyable. But honestly it's starting to look like it's going to be another CGI action fest with no substance. Let me know what you thought of the trailer Did you really expect more accuracy? There are so many flaws in the earlier movies, that scientific flaws are to be expected. I, personally, was shocked and dismayed a few days ago when someone posted on Facebook.... Get this... An ad for the trailer... Yes, you read that correctly... An ad for an ad. What a load of some sort of animal manure. I will probably not even see this movie because of this stupidity.... But people are buying onto it. Baaaaaaah. Can you tell I am not a. Big fan of all things Hollywood? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanNREMTP Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Yeah, there are very few invertebrate movies... (EDIT: Wait a minute here... there is an invertebrate movie coming out this February. The star is a porifera. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2279373/ ) Sweet! Can't wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TyrannosaurusRex Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 I believe that is a pliosaur not a mosasaur. Mosasaurs necks area lot thinner than a pliosaurs. Also the teeth are definitely pliosaur. I am partially excited, but I hate how much cussing was in the last 3 I personally am looking forward to The Hobbit: The Battle Of The Five Armies more that jurrasic world. Love the mosasaur. The raptor motorcycle scene needs CGI improvement (they still have months of post-production left), but other than that looks great. The wrecked gyrosphere scene looks very fake though, especially the tooth. I honestly do not care for feathered Dino's so I am happy with how they look. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paleoworld-101 Posted November 26, 2014 Author Share Posted November 26, 2014 (edited) The mistakes bother me because some of them would have been easy to fix and there is no need to get them wrong in the first place. Like the pronated hands, how hard is it to animate the arms in the proper orientation? It's not like feathers where it would cost more money to look realistic as tmaier pointed out. I thought Jack Horner was the scientific advisor on this film? Why even have an advisor in the first place if you're not going to listen to them? I still maintain that at least the coelurosaurian theropods should be feathered, though for continuity reasons i can see why keeping the scaly dinosaurs has it's positives too. But the 'velociraptor's' changed appearance from the first and second movies to the third movie anyway so they broke continuity already. Shouldn't be too hard to do it again. My point about the influencing of this movie on children is that people will continue to be misled about dinosaurs and their old image as scaly beasts will continue to dominate. Yes it is still a good thing that this movie will get more people interested in dinosaurs, i agree, but why can't we teach them accuracy at the same time? As someone who wants to research dinosaurs for a living it bothers me that despite their popularity they are perhaps one of the most misunderstood animal groups of all, and it looks like that is going to continue. Many of the flaws in the earlier movies can be forgiven as the true nature of feathers and a few other issues were not known at the time. Now though there is no excuse Edited November 26, 2014 by Paleoworld-101 "In Africa, one can't help becoming caught up in the spine-chilling excitement of the hunt. Perhaps, it has something to do with a memory of a time gone by, when we were the prey, and our nights were filled with darkness..." -Eternal Enemies: Lions And Hyenas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanNREMTP Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 People don't like change. If the movie was made to be realistic then there is a chance that it will be boring and not recognizable from the first three movies. Hate to admit it but anything that is not science fiction but real science is boring. Keyword is fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 People don't like change. If the movie was made to be realistic then there is a chance that it will be boring and not recognizable from the first three movies. Hate to admit it but anything that is not science fiction but real science is boring. Keyword is fiction. The solution is just to teach science so that these things are recognizable. Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Missourian Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 .... Which would include teaching why the dinosaurs appear different in each movie, i.e. feathered dinosaurs were discovered after 1993. Context is critical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Down under fossil hunter Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 I have been eagerly awaiting this topic to be posted! How has no one commented that the "super villain" of this movie is a monster created from "different dino DNA" a non dinosaur lover will probably lol at this point but it had me beeped off beyond comprehension. I mean surely with all the amazing new dinosaurs we have uncovered the directors and producers could just pick one...... Carcharodontosaurs would be a popular choice, Gigantotosaurus if they want something a little less known but still a giant ferocious dino, how bout Cryo or Monolophosurus or even Masiakasaurus if they wanted something that was super cool looking. Now I know that the guys who made this also produced Godzilla, Pacific Rim etc etc and these are movies about "monsters", there is a clear distinction between the JP series and every other snarge 'Animal comes into contact with chemicals/radiation and turns into a super monster, type horror movies'. I have been looking forward to this movie more than any other in my life and I can't help but feel like this is going to be the biggest disappointment ever, I can deal with dino's without feathers, I can deal with dino's inflated to about 5 times the size they actually were but are we seriously living in a time where people are no longer enthralled by dinosaurs and that the only way to captivate them is to build something bigger, stronger, faster and more ferocious than a T-rex and in doing so create some ridiculous monster to drive revenue? Perhaps their money/time could have been better spent on a more compelling storyline and entertaining scenes. Just my opinion but I am sure Ian Malcolm would agree with me "this was a very bad idea". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auspex Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 This metaphor is a tried-and-true device throughout science fiction; it is story-telling 101. "There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant “Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley >Paleontology is an evolving science. >May your wonders never cease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeepTimeIsotopes Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 (edited) If the story is well written, I will forgive them for scientific flaws. Or maybe that frog DNA changed the dinosaurs again so they don't have feathers? Edited November 28, 2014 by Utahfossilhunter Each dot is 50,000,000 years: Hadean............Archean..............................Proterozoic.......................................Phanerozoic........... Paleo......Meso....Ceno.. Ꞓ.OSD.C.P.Tr.J.K..Pg.NgQ< You are here Doesn't time just fly by? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyanNREMTP Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Heck, I have to admit that I was more excited to see the new Star Wars trailer yesterday than Jurassic World. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickNC Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 (edited) There were 3 Jurassic Park movies? I must really be behind the times. I thought there was only the original. I doubt I'll bother watching this as it just looks like the same formula as the first movie. Hollywood is truly out of original ideas. Edited November 28, 2014 by RickNC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LanceH Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 (edited) There were 3 Jurassic Park movies? I must really be behind the times. I thought there was only the original. I doubt I'll bother watching this as it just looks like the same formula as the first movie. Hollywood is truly out of original ideas. Number 3 had pterodactyls. Edited November 28, 2014 by LanceH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now