I didn’t have these questions when I saw the movie in theaters. Something about watching it at home brings out the stupid, I think. I am much more forgiving in the theater.
What was the nephew’s parents plan? Send them to an amusement park, get a quick divorce and act as if everything was normal when the kids got back?
What happened to the pterodactyls? They were flying around attacking people and then they weren’t.
Why didn’t T-Rex eat Chris Pratt, the nephews and Ron Howard’s daughter at the end? I say it’s Mighty Joe Young Syndrome.
Did Ron Howard’s daughter’s assistant deserve her terrible death? I’m wondering why the movie punished her so.
I won’t get into the very dumb part about the gang hanging around to watch the showdown between T-Rex, the little raptors and Ultronasaur. They obviously knew that T-Rex was cool and shit.
I had a problem with this one too. Don’t the kids go to school? They can’t go to divorce mediation during the day or something? Also, why not just… You know…talk to your children? Clearly this movie thinks children are best if they are ignored.
They got full. No need to keep attacking.
The t-rex reached a state of enlightenment. It no longer wanted to eat people and was getting ready to go join the Guardians of the Galaxy.
She lost children because she was talking to her boyfriend. Everyone knows that losing teenagers who are terrible and trying to ditch you because you are talking to a boy is a crime worthy of death. Also, she’s British.
One the whole, I think it is a great fun stupid movie that makes exactly as much sense as it wants to. You mentioned Mighty Joe Young syndrome. I really think they were trying to capture that feel and succeed. My evidence that this was not a serious movie is that it was cast almost entirely with people who make their primary living acting in comedies. They set out to make campy schlock that doesn’t quite make sense and succeeded!
I found that a bit jarring myself. She was a little obnoxious but not so bad to deserve getting eaten alive. Surely they could have had Jimmy Buffet get eaten instead.
The movie took place just after Christmas while the kids were still on winter vacation; the parents wanted to give them one last family vacation (& a vacation of a lifetime at that) before breaking the news about the divorce to them.
Well, I’m going to give my opinions on this, because I think the movie handled much of this brilliantly. Jurassic World had lots of subtle commentary on common plots and tropes without feeling preachy. But your mileage may vary.
We don’t know. Neither do the kids. This is explicitly left open and unstated. In the end, it doesn’t matter to the events of the film, though it informs the personalities of the characters. We don’t know whether this will end in divorce, whether the couple is trying to work out their problems, or what.
So why is it there? Well, it does tell us a great deal about the two kids, and implicitly informs their story. They aren’t just nuisance plot devices. They have a plot of their own, about bonding, possibly for the first time in their lives, and overcoming a threat that might separate them. In my opinion, the older boy, though he had the self-absorbed disdain common to teenagers, probably knew more than he let on. You’ll note he didn’t react with surprise or shock, but as though he was facing something very unpleasant that he’d rather not acknowledge.
This isn’t something they can fix, so they’ve both retreated inward. And as far as it goes, a giant rampaging monster that tears apart your world and chases you down with the intent on devouring your family is a painfully apt metaphor for divorce. In a way, the dinosaur is something they can face together, and overcoming that gives them the strength to potentially overcome another, less physical, challenge.
They were driven off. They weren’t all killed, and some probably scattered but aren’t going to be a major threat to anyone.
Probably because it was exhausted and not in the mood to chow down, having just had the fight of its life. Also, humans are a pretty small dinner for a multi-ton dinosaur.
Actually, this was brilliant. The scene is both random and flawless, because the movie isn’t trying to show this as some kind of just punishment. She didn’t die because of some terrible misdeed. She died because other people made foolish, ill-considered decisions. OK, sure you might say, but why is it there at all? Because it shows the cost of those choices to someone the audience sympathized with, and because it tells the audience that nobody is safe. Before that, I figured, yeah, everybody named is gonna live. After that scene, thought anybody could die.
This also partly goes towards the movie’s unconventional characterization. Masrani is a billionaire showman, but he’s also courageous and freaked out when he realizes what’s going on. Another movie might easily have made him conniving and stupid; he has decent ideas, but simply doesn’t comprehend the danger until too late. Wu is creepily insane, yet he also gives a surprisingly clear explanation of exactly what he created. The capture team is elite, intelligent, and utterly unprepared; the mercenaries in another movie would have been idiot thugs. But they actually go in with heavy firepower and a good plan, and show surprising courage and coolness under fire, even trying to save civilians.
OK, sure. But where else are you going to get a front-row seat to Dino Rampage 2016?! Also, they were in serious trouble if things didn’t go well, anyway, as they were fast running out of places they could flee towards. Plus, everyone loves Rexy! And shes been cool in the past. She totally ate Velocirapters to save the people in the first Jurassic Park.
I’m glad I did a search because I was going to start a thread about this. Just watched it over the weekend on HBO.
I had a huge WTF moment about the T-Rex. What on earth was that lady thinking when she decided to let that animal loose? Were we supposed to understand that it had some especial training to follow flares? Is there any reason that T-Rex would beat Indominus? Why would having TWO giant dinosaurs on the loose be better than having just ONE? Why did T-Rex just saunter off at the end?
I have to assume that this was just very bad writing by writers who had painted themselves into a corner and needed a miracle to get out. Or, was there some info earlier on the movie that hinted at this be at least somewhat plausible?
Now, don’t get me wrong… I enjoyed this as a popcorn movie. The action was somewhat overdone, but I’m not expecting some deep movie, so that’s OK. I’m even OK with Assistant Lady getting chowed down. I even laughed a little at how she kept getting dropped back into the tank by the Pterodactyls. But that ending was beyond ridiculous. Especially since the plot was pretty much the same as the original movie up to that point.
When British Assistant Lady met her well-deserved end, I realized they intended Jurassic World to be cartoonish. I almost expected them to score it with Loony Tunes music, or maybe Yakkity Sax. At that point, I no longer rolled my eyes at the dumb, so when she unleashed Acme Instant Tyrannosaur, it made as much sense as any other Wily Coyote plot.
Rather sad that they killed the Roadrunner, though; I’d been rooting for him.
Anyway, by that point I was busy obsessing about Chris Pratt’s ridiculously thick and stubby fingers. After he patted one of the dinos, it was all I could think about. Seriously, those things would creep Trump out, and I’ve no idea how the OP missed such an obvious and disturbing thing in this movie. shudder
Jurassic World was a bad movie and your confusion stems from the fact that they seemed to merged a bunch of scripts together. Lots of things don’t make sense and plot lines that start go nowhere. I had started a thread about my dislike for it back in the Fall here.
I also complained about it in the original Seen it thread. Now if you’ll excuse me, I have some clouds to go yell at
Reading through your questions now, I think the filmmakers had key points that they wanted in the movie, then backtracked how they would get those things in, although they didn’t work terribly hard. They wanted two kids to be visiting, but not with their parents so that they could explore past safe boundaries, and so they thought of the kids’ parents are getting a divorce. Someone thought of an awesome death where a character is scooped up by a flying dinosaur, then tossed around, then lands in the water and is eaten by the giant swimming dinosaur. Then once they had that awesome death thought of, the screenwriter had to work in where it would be in the movie and what character it would happen to. They wanted an awesome showdown between the T-Rex and I Rex and backtracked to how they would get that in the movie. It’s just speculation, but it would make sense to me why a lot of the connective tissue of the script doesn’t exactly make sense.
what got me is it totally killed off chrichtons message in the first 2 films on what a stupid idea this would be and just because we (ie science) can do something dosent mean we need to
As my cousin pointed out when we watched all 4 back to back one weekend : remember in the lost world when the slimeball nephew was discussing attractions in the park in the tent and it made you cringe ?
They had everyone of those in Jurassic world in the exact way he described them …
Yes, this. They started with their “Coming Soon” preview of the movie and then filled in the gaps to make it a feature film.
That said, I don’t think the divorcing parents plot is a particularly weak one, but we’re not given the specifics that would explain. For example, maybe the parents want to use the time to move out and make sure the second household is ready for kids to live in it. Or they’re giving counseling one last intensive try. Or fighting over the property settlement and wanting to do it at a time that their personal conflict won’t be carried home to the kids. When you think that the movie is really about the children, it even makes a little sense that they’re vaguely aware of the divorce but don’t understand exactly what’s going on.
OK, that’s as far as I’m going to go to defend the movie.
Why does Pratt use a lever-action gun, yet never work the lever?
Why do they have dinosaurs from the non-Jurassic era, along with non-dinosaurs (pterodactyls)? I mean, what are we to believe, that this is a magic xylophone, or something?
The velociraptor DNA was spliced into Indominus Rex, which is what made the velociraptors listen to her, instead of to Chris Pratt. There was no mention whatsoever of the Tyranosaurus Rex’ DNA - just open the cage, wave flare, and then it ambled off to chomp on Indominus. And then, afterward, ambled off for its moneyshot on the helipad.
They modeled them after Deinonychus for looks (and what we theorize of behavior) and called them velociraptors 'cause it sounded cooler.
They don’t have feathers, despite current research, because they weren’t assumed to be feathered in the mid 90s when the original was made and you can’t really go back and feather them now.
