What's the deal with Lockwood?

What's the deal with Lockwood? We haven't seen him in the marketing or trailers (until very recently), whilst Gunnar and Mills have been practically front and centre. I mean, it seems kind of weird that everyone would be so enigmatic about such an important character, unless there was some big twist regarding him.

James Cromwell doesn't appear on any of the on-set featurettes or give us any insight about the character (in fact he doesn't appear to have been interviewed about the film, period). Could this be because saying anything about the character might give some big twist away?

Either
A) Lockwood is the main villain of the film who manipulated Owen and Claire, and has orchestrated both the dinosaur auction and the Indoraptor's creation.
B) Lockwood is suffering from some kind of terminal illness or something, his last wishes are for the dinosaurs to be transported to some reserve. However, he dies very early on in the film, maybe even before they leave for Nublar, and the scenes in his mansion happen after he has died.

Evidence for Theory A

In an on-set interview, the producers rather enigmatically stated that they didn't believe Lockwood was a villain per se. That's an odd turn of phrase if the character's a 100% good guy; why would they have to make that statement? This indicates that he does something morally questionable in the film that puts him against our heroes. Another article on the character stated that, whilst he would not be "an outright villain", he would have "questionable ways of dealing with the situation". This indicates that he's going to do (or order to be done) something that puts him at odds with Owen and Claire.

The Facebook page on the set visit (which was pretty right on most counts) stated that Lockwood was one of the film's antagonists. Most obviously, the dino-auction that Gunnar is running is happening in the basement of Lockwood's goddamn mansion, so it's impossible that he wouldn't know what's going on (if he's alive)

Evidence for Theory B:
In the only footage of Lockwood we've seen to date, he appears to be sitting in a wheelchair. His voice also does not sound at all healthy; it sounds like someone who is not in good health. Secondly, he does not appear to be in his mansion when all the shit with the Indoraptor is going down. He's not at the auction, in the house, anywhere.

Thirdly, Rafe Spall's character Mills is mentioned explicitly as being the "executor for the Lockwood fortune" and the one responsible for it should anything happen to Lockwood (until Maisie turns 18 of course). Why would that be so important if Lockwood's not dead yet (and survives the events of the film)? Answer, he dies at some point.

Which theory is closer to being true? One, neither or both?

Theory B is more likely. With the frail way he's being portrayed in the footage we've seen (à la John Hammond in Lost World), and the fact that he's the only parental figure of the resident child-appeal character, I think it's unlikely that he'll be a villain, especially considering that we know that Fallen Kingdom has at least five villainous/antagonistic characters already - that is, the Indoraptor, Rafe Spall, Ted Levine, Toby Jones and B. D. Wong, not to mention all of the accompanying mercenaries and generic suits at the dinosaur auction.

Also, I don't think James Cromwell is know for his villainous roles. My guess is that he'll be a charismatic grandpa figure like Hammond with genuine motives, but he'll die (for one reason or another) before the third act kicks in.

Mr. Robustus wrote:

Theory B is more likely. With the frail way he's being portrayed in the footage we've seen (à la John Hammond in Lost World), and the fact that he's the only parental figure of the resident child-appeal character, I think it's unlikely that he'll be a villain, especially considering that we know that Fallen Kingdom has at least five villainous/antagonistic characters already - that is, the Indoraptor, Rafe Spall, Ted Levine, Toby Jones and B. D. Wong, not to mention all of the accompanying mercenaries and generic suits at the dinosaur auction.

Also, I don't think James Cromwell is know for his villainous roles. My guess is that he'll be a charismatic grandpa figure like Hammond with genuine motives, but he'll die (for one reason or another) before the third act kicks in.

He has played villains in the past; LA Confidential, American Horror Story: Asylum, The Longest Yard, a season of 24 and Big Hero 6, to name but a few. He was even on a list of actors born to play villains. Also, if he is a charismatic grandfatherly figure... why be so enigmatic about his character and motivations if there wasn't some big twist? Also, there is such a thing as casting against type; it keeps the twist hidden.

Why would the producers enigmatically state that they didn't think he was a villain per se when asked whether the character was a hero or a villain? That's an odd turn of phrase if the character's a 100% good guy; why would they have to make that statement? Another article on the character stated that, whilst he would not be "an outright villain", he would have "questionable ways of dealing with the situation".

Furthermore, it's mentioned that Iris, Geraldine Chaplin's character is "keeper of the family's secrets"; why would they say that if Lockwood didn't have any? This indicates that Lockwood is doing something morally questionable in the film; he most likely knows about the dino-auction, given it's happening at his mansion and that you don't arrange something that big on the fly, but probably not about the Indoraptor.

Of course, I could be just overanalysing.

There is also support for Theory B; the Korean trailer shows an amber cane (presumably Lockwood's) falling to the floor and shattering, Citizen Kane-style. This could happen after he's died (after Gunnar, Mills and Wu betray him?).

Huh, interesting. Haven't watched most of those. I have to confess that whenever I think of James Cromwell, I think of Arthur the farmer from Babe.

Still, I don't think there will be a lot about him, simply because from what we've seen, Fallen Kingdom already looks like it will be really busy, character-wise. I think it's gonna be a Small Role, Big Impact type of character. He might have been largely absent from the promotional material simply because he won't have a lot of screen time before his probable death.

Also, again, he is (as far as I know) the only living relative of the child character. I don't think Fallen Kingdom will have time to explore the emotional toll of a little girl finding out her only living relative is a secret asshole "bad guy".

Mr. Robustus wrote:

Huh, interesting. Haven't watched most of those. I have to confess that whenever I think of James Cromwell, I think of Arthur the farmer from Babe.

Still, I don't think there will be a lot about him, simply because from what we've seen, Fallen Kingdom already looks like it will be really busy, character-wise. I think it's gonna be a Small Role, Big Impact type of character. He might have been largely absent from the promotional material simply because he won't have a lot of screen time before his probable death.

Also, again, he is (as far as I know) the only living relative of the child character. I don't think Fallen Kingdom will have time to explore the emotional toll of a little girl finding out her only living relative is a secret asshole "bad guy".

Oh, yeah, a lot of people do. Then they watch LA Confidential... As for him not having a lot of screentime, yeah, that could be the reason he's been left out the marketing.

And, to be fair, she might not have time to ponder on her grandpa being a total shitbag, considering there's a terrifying mutant dinosaur seemingly hell-bent on killing her. You know there are times and places for these things.

I think the film would suffer from antagonist overload if Lockwood, the last living connection to Hammond and the birth of Jurassic Park, also turned out to be a villainous type. We already have the Indoraptor, Mills, Eversol, Wu and possibly Wheatley as antagonists as Mr Robustus pointed out, and when you whittle down the cast you only have four fully good characters (Owen, Claire, Maisie and Franklin) and one who is possibly a double agent who knows more than she should (Zia).

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

I think the film would suffer from antagonist overload if Lockwood, the last living connection to Hammond and the birth of Jurassic Park, also turned out to be a villainous type. We already have the Indoraptor, Mills, Eversol, Wu and possibly Wheatley as antagonists as Mr Robustus pointed out, and when you whittle down the cast you only have four fully good characters (Owen, Claire, Maisie and Franklin) and one who is possibly a double agent who knows more than she should (Zia).

I don't believe Zia's a double agent.

However, there is clearly some huge twist about Lockwood; villain or not, pretty much everything that's been said about his character indicates that there's some dark secret about him that is pivotal to the film's third act reveal.

Why would the producers enigmatically state that they didn't think he was a villain per se when asked whether the character was a hero or a villain? That's an odd turn of phrase if the character's a 100% good guy; why would they have to make that statement? Another article on the character stated that, whilst he would not be "an outright villain", he would have "questionable ways of dealing with the situation".

Furthermore, it's mentioned that Iris, Geraldine Chaplin's character is "keeper of the family's secrets"; why would they make a note of saying that if Lockwood didn't have any? There's got to be something he's kept hidden.

Of course, the Citizen Kane-esque scene with the amber cane seen in the Korean trailer and his overall frailty (from what we've seen, he appears to be sitting in a wheelchair) could indicate that he's not a villain and is murdered midway through (possibly by Mills).

But... there's still something weird about how such a pivotal character has appeared so little in the marketing.