Tip jar

If you like CaB and wish to support it, you can use PayPal or KoFi. Thank you, and I hope you continue to enjoy the site - Neil.

Buy Me a Coffee at ko-fi.com

Support CaB

Recent

Welcome to Cook'd and Bomb'd. Please login or sign up.

March 28, 2024, 07:35:56 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Which Jurassic Park sequel is better?

Started by up_the_hampipe, December 27, 2013, 02:45:58 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Santa's Boyfriend

Quote from: Pepotamo1985 on December 28, 2013, 12:36:56 PM
is it just me, or does CGI generally age terribly? And is this because the technology is improving at such a rate that what was legitimately once mind blowing is rendered visually redundant ever more quickly, or did it always look a bit/a lot rubbish?

I think it really depends on how they're used and what you use it for.  Starship Troopers, for example, still looks really good today, mainly because CGI has always been very good at showing creatures with solid skins and few moving parts.  But American Werewolf in Paris, which was released at the same time, went with the whole digital dog thing before such technology was really good enough.  It didn't look particularly good at the time, but it's pretty much unwatchable today.

An effect doesn't age as such, but as effects get better, what would've been acceptable a few years ago would seem sub-par next to far superior effects now available.

I'm wondering if Peter Jackson is going to go back and re-do a few CGI sequences in Lord of the Rings.  He's bound to insert Martin Freeman into the intro, so he might well do that whilst he's there.

SavageHedgehog

I think both are pretty good, or at least very entertaining, relative to films with similar ambitions like the Transformerseses, or even The Mummy films, or as they've been brought up the MIB films (didn't get why the third got such a pass personally, found it very forced and lazy). That may seem like a bit of a cop-out, but that's how I feel. The second is the better film, but the third is a very easy watch.

Mister Six


Quote from: SavageHedgehog on December 28, 2013, 06:45:06 PMthe MIB films (didn't get why the third got such a pass personally, found it very forced and lazy)

Compared to the second MIB film, which is literally exactly the same plot as the first movie minus any emotional heft or sense of discovery, it's a masterpiece of original thinking.

I don't think it's a brilliant film, but they obviously put more effort into it than they did with the second one, and it gave some work to the bloke from A Serious Man, so it's not all bad.

BritishHobo

Quote from: Serge on December 27, 2013, 08:26:16 PM
My favourite part of III is the quick shot of the pteranodon emerging from the mist on the bridge (at about 30 seconds into this clip). Unfortunately, watching that has just reminded me that Téa Leoni is in III, which is why it could never be better than II for me.

I was going to link that as well. The rest of the scene with the rock-jumping and the rescue is a bit pap, but that one moment is worth the whole film.

Mister Six

Oh! Yes! Jurassic Park! I'd go with number two, because the 'dinosaur in the city' stuff is so gloriously insane.

SavageHedgehog

Quote from: Mister Six on December 29, 2013, 04:38:43 PM
Compared to the second MIB film, which is literally exactly the same plot as the first movie minus any emotional heft or sense of discovery, it's a masterpiece of original thinking.

Yeah, but "better than a film that wasn't any good" doesn't necessarily leave you with anything good. I thought the
Spoiler alert
Chocolate Milk
[close]
stuff was just inexcusable. Maybe it was meant to be funny, but it just came across as terrible writing.

Replies From View

I remember enjoying Jurassic Park 2 as a kind of "now we've shown you the basic world, let's have an adventure in it" kind of affair, whereas the third one felt more overtly a rehash with straining going on to make it vaguely different.  Yes they finally included pteranodons, and a carnivore even bigger than a T-rex!!! and they also made the raptors more intelligent to raise the stakes, but these felt to me like clear indications that the well was thoroughly dry.

No idea what they'll be able to eke out for Jurassic Park 4, nor whether it's really needed since we know the CGI wizards can do dinosaurs now.  It'll be in 3D, naturally, but zzzzzz.

Serge

I still say that '4' should have absolutely no dinosaurs in it whatsoever, just the characters from the earlier films in a low-key indie film kind of scenario.

Replies From View

That would be great actually.  A film about Goldblum's character learning piano called "Jurassic Park 4:  Arpeggios" or something.

Replies From View

Or how about just show Jurassic Park in cinemas again and call it "Jurassic Park 4"?  Imagine all the critics warning everyone that it is just the first film again and cinema audiences misunderstanding that as meaning it is as good as the first film.

And then audiences peeling out of screenings all baffled saying "that was just the first film" and spreading the warning but it keeps getting misunderstood so it ends up being a massive megahit forever.

Even loads of poor people abroad like the Comic Relief ones saying "Cor it is as good as the first Jurassic Park film!" and wasting loads of money on the cinema that they should be spending on food because they are starving.  Imagine that!

And then Jurassic Park 5 could be a documentary about all this.

Glebe

Or how about Jeff Goldblum's Park? Jeff Goldblum goes off and starts HIS OWN park, to rival Dickie Attenborough!

Thomas

I think David Attenborough should be involved, and Jurassic Park 4 done wholly as a documentary about wildlife on the island.

Replies From View

Quote from: Glebe on December 30, 2013, 12:38:39 AM
Or how about Jeff Goldblum's Park? Jeff Goldblum goes off and starts HIS OWN park, to rival Dickie Attenborough!

Dickie Attenborough isn't a park yet, though.  Unless you just mean that a park would be a good rival for him anyway.

Glebe

Quote from: Replies From View on December 30, 2013, 01:21:25 AMDickie Attenborough isn't a park yet, though.  Unless you just mean that a park would be a good rival for him anyway.

No, I do mean dear Dickie darling is a park. He's open 10:00 AM - 6 PM MON -FRI, 10:00 AM - 8 PM SAT and 11:00 - 5 PM SUN. ADMISSION: Adults - £6.50 Children £2.50. There is a Student Discount of 50p. Student cards should be shown at time of purchase. Please note fire exits.

Mister Six

Quote from: SavageHedgehog on December 29, 2013, 07:28:07 PM
Yeah, but "better than a film that wasn't any good" doesn't necessarily leave you with anything good. I thought the
Spoiler alert
Chocolate Milk
[close]
stuff was just inexcusable. Maybe it was meant to be funny, but it just came across as terrible writing.

I'm just saying why it got a pass. MIB II squandered a promising-looking franchise so quickly and comprehensively that when the third one turned out to be a reasonably enjoyable action film with some new ideas and funny conceits (the Andy Warhol bit) it was actually a pleasant surprise.

What was the
Spoiler alert
chocolate milk
[close]
thing?

Old Nehamkin

Quote from: Mister Six on December 30, 2013, 03:09:49 AM
I'm just saying why it got a pass. MIB II squandered a promising-looking franchise so quickly and comprehensively that when the third one turned out to be a reasonably enjoyable action film with some new ideas and funny conceits (the Andy Warhol bit) it was actually a pleasant surprise.

Yeah, and Josh Brolin does an uncannily great job at playing a young Tommy Lee Jones. The aforementioned Michael Stuhlbarg is good as well. and it's got Jemaine from Flight of the Conchords in it. And Alice Eve, eh lads. It's not a great film by any means but it's way more enjoyable than it has any right to be. I wouldn't buy it on dvd or anything, but if it came on TV I'd think "Oh, I might watch that" and then maybe watch it.

SavageHedgehog

Quote from: Mister Six on December 30, 2013, 03:09:49 AM
What was the
Spoiler alert
chocolate milk
[close]
thing?

Jay has
Spoiler alert
chocolate milk cravings, which proves to Emma Thompson's character that he is at the center of time travel disruption or something, and can remember things that others can't for some reason
[close]

SteveDave

2 because even the dinosaurs look bored in the 3rd one.

Santa's Boyfriend

Apparently there was a script kicking around for a sequel featuring dinosuars with artificially high intelligence and that ran around with weaponry and stuff.

Lt Plonker

Quote from: Santa's Boyfriend on December 28, 2013, 09:53:48 AM
Agreed.  But it's also worth noting a few other things about JP1:  Firstly, they dinosaurs were animated by stop motion animators using stop motion skeleton things, whose movements were then tracked in the computer - which means they were using people who already knew how to make things look heavy.  A lot of films afterwards didn't do this.

It's the weight that absolutely sells the T-Rex paddock escape scene. Such an amazing scene and it stills stands up today. A flawless bit of CG.

I think what also makes JP special is that, relatively speaking, there isn't that much CG in the film at all. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there's something like 6 mins of actual dinosaur-based fun in the entire film. It isn't over indulgent in its use of CG.

El Unicornio, mang

Quote from: Santa's Boyfriend on December 30, 2013, 12:36:09 PM
Apparently there was a script kicking around for a sequel featuring dinosuars with artificially high intelligence and that ran around with weaponry and stuff.

Yep: "A Dirty Dozen-style mercenary team of hyper-smart dinosaurs in body armour killing drug dealers and rescuing kidnapped children." Yikes!

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/18166

Replies From View

They should make a Jurassic Park / Gremlins crossover film.

Benevolent Despot

Quote from: Lt Plonker on January 02, 2014, 10:50:34 AM
I think what also makes JP special is that, relatively speaking, there isn't that much CG in the film at all. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that there's something like 6 mins of actual dinosaur-based fun in the entire film. It isn't over indulgent in its use of CG.

Behold 4-tonne animatronics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4J9TBlFxAg

And poor men in raptor suits: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAzQr3Ml0UI

Lt Plonker

Quote from: Benevolent Despot on January 02, 2014, 03:16:10 PM
Behold 4-tonne animatronics: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4J9TBlFxAg

And poor men in raptor suits: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAzQr3Ml0UI

The raptor suit video is amazing, cheers! I hadn't seen that before. God, the motion on its neck/head as it bimbles along the hallway is incredible! I love the practical stuff like this because it helps ground the CG stuff more. Ace.