That’s his arc right there- he went from dino-weaponizing is bad, to dino-weapoinzing is useful. His experiences expanded his viewpoint and he learned from it. That’s character growth. Burt Macklin would be so proud…
Havent seen it…but because of the points you listed…I just wanted to go to see stupid people get eaten.
I thought it was OK when I saw it the first time. Hope kept me liking it more than it deserved.
I now realize that it is horrible. A total snooze fest and an absolute waste of time. Bad effects don’t help, either.
I was very disappointed. I can’t believe this director is directing Episode IX of Star Wars.
I have not and never will see Jurassic World. The first movie is the best, followed by the third, and this one sounds worse than the second one.
While it’s hardly the only problem with the second and fourth movies, as a rule of thumb you can judge the movies by how bullshit their everything-goes-to-hell plot is.
Jurassic Park - The park has not been opened yet and has only a skeleton crew during a storm, when an employee shuts down part of the security system for the purposes of industrial espionage.
Jurassic Park II - A team of hunters and mercenaries on the island to recapture escaped animals take heavy casualties when the alleged “heroes” release said animals and sabotage their equipment.
Jurassic Park III - A couple of rich people make a poorly considered trip to the abandoned park to rescue their son and attract the attention of one of the animals.
Jurassic Park IV - A six ton animal in an active theme park can turn invisible and neither the people in charge of the theme park nor the military who developed it know this, so they let it out.
Wait a minute. Any movie that has a guy saving his margaritas can’t be completely worthless.
It was mentioned upthread, but that guy is actually Jimmy Buffet.
I like dinosaurs and I like monster movies in general, so a lot of the problems listed are things I can live with. Flat characters are not necessarily bad as long as they’re edible.
The problem I had with JW compared to JP is that JP put a lot of effort into treating the dinosaurs as real animals. As an example, the dilophosaurus that killed “Newman” in JP started with a threat warning, showed some behaviors that it wasn’t sure whether he was edible or not, and only killed him after an encounter that felt like real behavior to me. By comparison in JW, when a giant dinosaur disrupts the nests of pterosaurs, they fly halfway across the island to eat people?! What the hell kind of threat response is that? There’s simply no reason for the to do that unless the park owners were starving their animals or the script writers just wanted pterosaurs to eat people.
I don’t mind that the plot was bad, I mind that they spent so much time on the bad plot. If this movie is just about seeing people get eaten by dinosaurs, why spend so much time on how terrible it is that an overworked executive sent her nephews to a babysitter? Did the military subplot do anything besides set up a sequel?
The plot is mostly a clone of the first movie, and I’ve never really liked JP1 in the first place, so for me it was quite disappointing for that reason. Most of the other reasons I see for people disliking it I don’t care about all that much, they’re just set-ups for action sequences and do a decent job within that framework.
I love Jurassic Park and hate The Lost World
here’s a good websight with lots of complaints about TLW
I hated that part of the movie for exactly that reason. In a movie about a giant mutant dinosaur, they still managed to take me out of the moment with a “But that makes no sense!” scene.
If nothing else, spawning the zookeeper photo meme somewhat redeems it.
As a summer blockbuster action flick, I enjoyed it. I also liked that it had an Indian guy as something other than a level II programmer in the background. And it had a mosasaur, which earns it a ton of forgiveness. Also, for once they didn’t do a scene where a car teeters on a bluff in the jungle while its occupants are attacked by a T-rex. And it was sort of cool that the park execs acknowledged that after three years everyone stopped caring about dinosaurs and they had to make new ones.
As a story, it was clearly fucking awful. There are just so many plot holes. In addition to those we’ve already discussed:
-
In the first movie, the dinosaurs started breeding because Henry Wu wasn’t too choosy about what sort of DNA he used to fill gaps in the dino genomes. In this movie, the giant engineered uber-theropod kills everyone because… Wu wasn’t too choosy about what sort of DNA he used to make it.
-
They spend about half the movie telling us how much bigger, faster and stronger the giant engineered uber-rex is than a normal T-rex. Then they let out the T-rex, which is the same size and can go toe-to-toe with it for 20 minutes.
-
The giant killer dinosaur has good enough recall to remember where its tracking chip was implanted. Okay, I’ll buy that. The giant killer dinosaur knows what a fucking tracking chip is!
I figured that the T-Rex was able to go toe-to-toe with the ubersaurus because it was an actual creature with instinctual and practical knowledge of how to fight other predators, while the ubersaurus was an untrained fighter in an enormously powerful body.
The ubersaurus was able to fool thermal imaging cameras, a bunch of animal behavior experts, various other park executives and a bunch of mercenaries. It was also able to communicate with a pack of raptors. Oh, and it killed every sauropod in the park just for shits and giggles. I think it’s a bit of a stretch that it couldn’t figure out “bite the other dinosaur’s neck.”
Hey man, it’s a Batman vs. Bane scenario!
Thank you, internet, for always having a picture of everything.
I love the Jurassic Park approach to DNA. It’s like a video game where you just combine creatures*. “So we combined chameleon, raptor and tyrannosaur DNA and now we have a tyrannosaurus who can change colors and talk to raptors. Also, they can change gender because we used frog DNA once and I guess that’s a thing some frogs do.” I don’t think DNA works like a Lego set.
*Electronic Arts had a game called Impossible Creatures based on this. Combine a scorpion and a lion for a lion with pinchers and stingy-tail!
In a sense, the military sub-plot was actually the entire plot. They just stated very little of it outright.
So the sub-text, interpreted:
Indomitus Rex wasn’t really created to be a sideshow sponsored by Verizon. It was really built from the ground up as a military project. When it uses camouflage and kills everything in sight, that’s supposed to be a feature, not a bug. (Because Hollywood says that all the military wants are obedient killers, but that’s a rant for a different thread.)
So, in effect, the company board was approached with lots of different requests for new research. Their decision was $20 million budgeted for a new park attraction, and that they don’t do military contracts.
The military then went to Wu and said “Hey, now that you have a $20 million for park attractions, what if you actually design the genetics so that it’s also a super-soldier. The park gets its attraction and then we’ll discover how cool it is for other applications and buy all the clones.”
I assume they kicked back some money to Wu.
Anyway, now we have a super-soldier dinosaur and no one in the park knows what it is capable of except Wu, who’s not talking much. This explains pretty much everything that happened from there on without needing to fall back on coincidence, incompetence, etc. very much.
Mixing and matching DNA can work at the DNA level. If you’re missing the code for a particular protein in one animal, you can often find virtually identical code in a different animal. That concept of substitution from the first movie makes a lot of sense scientifically, though it’s pretty far beyond what we can do now.
The ability to change genders is kind of stretching what you’d expect to be possible…
Of course, they take even farther because this is both Michael Crichton and Hollywood. Crichton never saw a concept that couldn’t be exaggerated until it kills people and Hollywood knows that audiences don’t want to watch protein folding, they want lions with pinchers and stingy tails. 
Jurassic World was another Hollywood blockbuster filled with empty content. It reeks of commercialism, “sequelitis”, and is a kiddie movie which is taken seriously by adults.
It is not art in any way.
I wasn’t on the line for it, and will not be on line for part 5. It is faint praise for one to say that it was the best Jurassic Park movie.
But sure, go ahead and say how cool the dinosaurs were.