The Lost World, Jurassic Park 3 and Sorna's treatment by Jurassic World

Tbh Sarah carrying the vest is indeed silly. Was the snake in Burke's clothes poisonous? Could have been a hysterical overreaction. I never understood why people complained about the gymnastics scene, I mean it was established earlier in the movie that that was one of her skills just like Lex being a hacker. If anything both movies had young females not only screaming for their lives but also using their skills to help save someone. Kelly was trying to save her father. Does the ship not show some damage? I mean it wouldn't be a total wreck , it's a Trex bull after all and not Godzilla.

Kelly using her gymnastics to defeat the raptor is established but it's still silly IMO. I don't think the snake was poisonous but does that matter because can anyone overreact to the point that they would run into the jaws of a T. Rex?!

The captain of the ship had nothing but his hand left but the room was undamaged. Yes the Rex isn't Godzilla but that room should have some damage right?

Dr. Wu wrote:

Kelly using her gymnastics to defeat the raptor is established but it's still silly IMO. I don't think the snake was poisonous but does that matter because can anyone overreact to the point that they would run into the jaws of a T. Rex?!

The captain of the ship had nothing but his hand left but the room was undamaged. Yes the Rex isn't Godzilla but that room should have some damage right?

But Kelly using gymnastics to kick a raptor is not a plot hole. Like for example someone could kick say a Jaguar in that same situation.

The who killed the crew in the ship I think that was explained with a deleted scene that included raptors getting into the ship.

If I said plot holes what I really meant is that TLW has more logic issues and silly stuff than plot holes. Like I said in a previous comment "TLW does have some logic issues and plain stupidity".

The same can be said for FK.

I believe the raptors on the boat were on concept art but I don't know if it was filmed. If it was I think we would know about it by now.

But FK has way more logic issues and much bigger errors. It even breaks basic rules of physics that were intact in the previous films like Owen and even the dinosaurs becoming superheroes to move the plot out of a creative deadend. And it happens quite frequently which is why it breaks the suspension of disbelief, by the middle I felt boredom creeping in and I realized that I had simply checked out because I couldn't take the rubbish anymore.

Bionic wrote:

But FK has way more logic issues and much bigger errors. It even breaks basic rules of physics that were intact in the previous films like Owen and even the dinosaurs becoming superheroes to move the plot out of a creative deadend. And it happens quite frequently which is why it breaks the suspension of disbelief, by the middle I felt boredom creeping in and I realized that I had simply checked out because I couldn't take the rubbish anymore.

You're right FK does break rules of physics but perhaps it doesn't bother me because I'm not that critical to movies that I love. I'll be like "It's just a movie so sometimes things just make no sense. Just go along with the ride".

I LOVE the franchise (watched JP on VHS when I was 5 years old and never stopped watching it and the sequels) and films in general but whenever I used to get critical of movies that I love I just stop having fun watching them.

As long as I like the movie, the errors big or small, won't bother me anymore.

FK may not be considered a critically good film because of it's major flaws but to me it's still a damn good Jurassic Park movie.

In regards to the Boat scene, it was the T-rex, the evidence is all there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEahCE2Gvdg

Even a scene about the T-Rex waking up before the SS Venture crash was storyboarded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjynA3E5Brw

Now I have more context. Thank you for that.

eagc7 wrote:

In regards to the Boat scene, it was the T-rex, the evidence is all there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEahCE2Gvdg

Even a scene about the T-Rex waking up before the SS Venture crash was storyboarded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjynA3E5Brw

I love this explanation but I really do wish they had shown the hole in the side of the ship. Also I would have had one survivor among the crew, and he would have been the one who had succeeded in trapping the Rex down below. I understand the explanation that a mortally wounded man did it but I think one person living would have been cool(and more realistic considering how many places you can hide on a ship) and then him screaming to stop as they let the Rex out.

I’m really glad Klayton made that video. In all my years of watching the film I never noticed the Cage was actually on deck and had been broken. Funny how the eyes can miss stuff.

Troyal1 wrote:

eagc7 wrote:

In regards to the Boat scene, it was the T-rex, the evidence is all there

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEahCE2Gvdg

Even a scene about the T-Rex waking up before the SS Venture crash was storyboarded
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjynA3E5Brw

I love this explanation but I really do wish they had shown the hole in the side of the ship. Also I would have had one survivor among the crew, and he would have been the one who had succeeded in trapping the Rex down below. I understand the explanation that a mortally wounded man did it but I think one person living would have been cool(and more realistic considering how many places you can hide on a ship) and then him screaming to stop as they let the Rex out.

I’m really glad Klayton made that video. In all my years of watching the film I never noticed the Cage was actually on deck and had been broken. Funny how the eyes can miss stuff.

Yeah i 100% agree they should've shown the hole in the ship as that would've left no doubt to anyone that the carnage was done by the T-Rex.

Dr. Wu wrote:

If I said plot holes what I really meant is that TLW has more logic issues and silly stuff than plot holes. Like I said in a previous comment "TLW does have some logic issues and plain stupidity".

The same can be said for FK.

I believe the raptors on the boat were on concept art but I don't know if it was filmed. If it was I think we would know about it by now.

Thus far, I've not seen any evidence there was ever consideration for the raptors to be on the boat. There is one piece of concept art of a raptor in a place with water on the floor, but there's little context surrounding it and we can't be sure what it actually is.

If we were just seeing how the movies themselves handled Sorna then I'd say it's fine; however, something that rubbed me the wrong way was how they retconed Sorna to be a wasteland in order to make the first half of FK work via a website.

Megaspino2 wrote:

If we were just seeing how the movies themselves handled Sorna then I'd say it's fine; however, something that rubbed me the wrong way was how they retconed Sorna to be a wasteland in order to make the first half of FK work via a website.

Colin, Derek Connolly and J.A. Bayona never cared for Sorna. They did not like TLW or JP3 and might have thought the general public and casual fans did not care for Sorna either. But that did backfire when after JW:FK many people in the general public and casual moviegoers were saying "Wait...What the heck happened to the other island!?". Wich is yet another proof that "The general public does not care about TLW or JP3" is nothing but one big myth.

In fact I think people are wrong when they think the hardcore Jurassic fanbase is just a small group and the general public only cares for the original. This fanbase is bigger than people think, and the casual moviegoer cares more about the franchise than just "Oh yeah, the original is a classic".

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Colin, Derek Connolly and J.A. Bayona never cared for Sorna. They did not like TLW or JP3 and might have thought the general public and casual fans did not care for Sorna either. But that did backfire when after JW:FK many people in the general public and casual moviegoers were saying "Wait...What the hell happened to the other island!?". Wich is yet another proof that "The general public does not care about TLW or JP3" is nothing but one big myth.

In fact I think people are wrong when they think the hardcore Jurassic fanbase is just a small group and the general public only cares for the original. This fanbase is bigger than people think, and the casual moviegoer cares more about the franchise than just "Oh yeah, the original is a classic".

If you honestly believe that the general public cares for Isla Sorna, you are delusional. If you were to go outside, away from the fan forums, social media, YouTube, and actually ask them, you will find that around 90% of them believe that all of the films take place on the same island; they honestly can’t tell the difference between Isla Nublar and Isla Sorna and when you see the film from their perspective, it’s very easy to see why.

We never see the so-called “factory floor” at all in TLW (which is frankly idiotic!) and when it’s finally shown in JP///, they completely waste every interesting opportunity they had with such a location. As for the temperate rainforest seen and new dinosaurs seen in both movies, there was nothing preventing from being on Isla Nublar. The additional dinosaurs (both old and new species) could simply have been kept in holding paddocks and/or part of the tour that the endorsement team never got to see as a result of the storm. Regarding the temperate rainforest with its redwood trees, since TLW used a few elements of the original; it could simply have been a microclimate on certain locations of the island. It seems to be exactly the case when we return to Isla Nublar in Jurassic World, T. rex Kingdom has exactly that same type of environment.

It certainly doesn’t help that TLW never explains why the former is now suddenly irrelevant, even though they filmed a scene that would have explained what happened to Nublar and why Sorna is now so important, and yet this scene was idiotically removed from the final cut of the movie! What makes this even worse is that this scene was both in the comic adaptation of the movie and on certain TV broadcasts of TLW, it’s not in the home media release; even now more than 20 years since it was released!

Which is a shame because if this InGen boardroom scene (along with Roland Tembo’s introduction) were to be added in the movie, I would accept Isla Sorna wholeheartedly. And I would be wanting to have a satisfactory response as to why Isla Sorna is now unviable in Jurassic World: Dominion.

However, on the subject of TLW's logic issues, what happened to Nick van Owen? He just disappears from the third act entirely, and the movie never explains why! Did he get arrested, did he just quit or Dr. Malcolm just push him out of the helicopter?

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Megaspino2 wrote:

If we were just seeing how the movies themselves handled Sorna then I'd say it's fine; however, something that rubbed me the wrong way was how they retconed Sorna to be a wasteland in order to make the first half of FK work via a website.

Colin, Derek Connolly and J.A. Bayona never cared for Sorna. They did not like TLW or JP3 and might have thought the general public and casual fans did not care for Sorna either. But that did backfire when after JW:FK many people in the general public and casual moviegoers were saying "Wait...What the hell happened to the other island!?". Wich is yet another proof that "The general public does not care about TLW or JP3" is nothing but one big myth.

In fact I think people are wrong when they think the hardcore Jurassic fanbase is just a small group and the general public only cares for the original. This fanbase is bigger than people think, and the casual moviegoer cares more about the franchise than just "Oh yeah, the original is a classic".

Even if they themselves don't care for Sorna they still decided to have Sorna mentioned for the fans. If Sorna is not needed for the story I'm completely fine with just a mention.

Even though we don't like the fate of Sorna at least the film alluded to it having no dinosaurs. Yes you would have to read a website to what how but as long as the film alluded to no dinosaurs on Sorna to me that's fine.

Gondrasia wrote:

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Colin, Derek Connolly and J.A. Bayona never cared for Sorna. They did not like TLW or JP3 and might have thought the general public and casual fans did not care for Sorna either. But that did backfire when after JW:FK many people in the general public and casual moviegoers were saying "Wait...What the hell happened to the other island!?". Wich is yet another proof that "The general public does not care about TLW or JP3" is nothing but one big myth.

In fact I think people are wrong when they think the hardcore Jurassic fanbase is just a small group and the general public only cares for the original. This fanbase is bigger than people think, and the casual moviegoer cares more about the franchise than just "Oh yeah, the original is a classic".

If you honestly believe that the general public cares for Isla Sorna, you are delusional. If you were to go outside, away from the fan forums, social media, YouTube, and actually ask them, you will find that around 90% of them believe that all of the films take place on the same island; they honestly can’t tell the difference between Isla Nublar and Isla Sorna and when you see the film from their perspective, it’s very easy to see why.

What I am saying is true. Therefore I am not "delusional". I do not "believe" anything. I know for a fact that one of the major questions asked by both hardcore fans and the general public right after Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom was "Wait...What about taking the dinosaurs to Sorna?" or "What the hell happened to Site B?".

And If you do not believe me, you can do a simple Google search and you are going to see that it is not just hardcore fans that care about Sorna. Many casual fans and people in the general public were very aware that there was another island and many remember that it was in fact called Site B.

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=lLprXpTNGMXUsAWcwrjADg&q=jurassic+world+fallen+kingdom+sorna&oq=jurassic+world+fallen+kingdom+sorna&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i22i30l3.3492.10468..10723...1.0..0.313.6679.0j28j8j1......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131j0j0i10i19j0i22i10i30i19j0i22i10i30.KloVdqFWFH8&ved=0ahUKEwiU5-v99JfoAhVFKqwKHRwhDugQ4dUDCAU&uact=5

And I do not doubt that there are people that do not care for Sorna. That goes without saying. But to suggest that the vast majority of the general public is not aware of Sorna or the fact that there are 2 islands? Sorry but that is just pushing it and not quite truthful.

I think I need to remind everyone again that The Lost World was THE movie of 1997 right before Titanic came along (but Titanic was released in mid december of that year so it is more of a 1998 phenomenon). People make it seem like TLW was this obscure direct to video sequel that nobody really cared about...

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

What I am saying is true. Therefore I am not "delusional". I do not "believe" anything. I know for a fact that one of the major questions asked by both hardcore fans and the general public right after Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom was "Wait...What about taking the dinosaurs to Sorna?" or "What the hell happened to Site B?".

And If you do not believe me, you can do a simple Google search and you are going to see that it is not just hardcore fans that care about Sorna. Many casual fans and people in the general public were very aware that there was another island and many remember that it was in fact called Site B.

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=lLprXpTNGMXUsAWcwrjADg&q=jurassic+world+fallen+kingdom+sorna&oq=jurassic+world+fallen+kingdom+sorna&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i22i30l3.3492.10468..10723...1.0..0.313.6679.0j28j8j1......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131j0j0i10i19j0i22i10i30i19j0i22i10i30.KloVdqFWFH8&ved=0ahUKEwiU5-v99JfoAhVFKqwKHRwhDugQ4dUDCAU&uact=5

A google search specifically for Sorna, giving results primarily from movie sites, jurassic park sites, and Klayton, does not have any bearing whatsoever on what the GA thinks or cares about in general. I bet, if you went out, in public, to random people who watched the newest films, and asked them about Sorna, the vast majority would be surprised there even was another island. It's not because they're stupid, it's just the fandom that actually cares enough is actually pretty small compared to the GA. But I guess I can't claim with 100% certainty, since I haven't actually done this of course. I'm pretty confident in this though.

Quote :

A google search specifically for Sorna, giving results primarily from movie sites, jurassic park sites, and Klayton, does not have any bearing whatsoever on what the GA thinks or cares about in general. I bet, if you went out, in public, to random people who watched the newest films, and asked them about Sorna, the vast majority would be surprised there even was another island. It's not because they're stupid, it's just the fandom that actually cares enough is actually pretty small compared to the GA. But I guess I can't claim with 100% certainty, since I haven't actually done this of course. I'm pretty confident in this though.

You can't be confident in this if you haven't done your survey. If one saw the movies recently and thinks they all take place on the same island you'd have to be a bit silly or simply must not have payed much attention. I saw TLW for the first time at the age of 9 on VHS and I understood right away that it was a different place and not the actual park. The entire premise of TLW is the existence of site B and even JP3 explains that Grant is not familiar with Sorna. Now if one saw TLW and JP3 the last time when they were kids then I could understand that they are not aware of these details anymore.
Kids and teenagers who only saw the World films would obviously not be aware of Sorna either. But again that just shows why a clear explanation of its aftermath in the current films should be mandatory. It would spike the interest of the younger generation in the entire franchise and would remind those who haven't seen the old films in ages that yeah it actually were two islands with dinosaurs.

TyrannoFan wrote:

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

What I am saying is true. Therefore I am not "delusional". I do not "believe" anything. I know for a fact that one of the major questions asked by both hardcore fans and the general public right after Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom was "Wait...What about taking the dinosaurs to Sorna?" or "What the hell happened to Site B?".

And If you do not believe me, you can do a simple Google search and you are going to see that it is not just hardcore fans that care about Sorna. Many casual fans and people in the general public were very aware that there was another island and many remember that it was in fact called Site B.

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=lLprXpTNGMXUsAWcwrjADg&q=jurassic+world+fallen+kingdom+sorna&oq=jurassic+world+fallen+kingdom+sorna&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0i22i30l3.3492.10468..10723...1.0..0.313.6679.0j28j8j1......0....1..gws-wiz.....0..0i131j0j0i10i19j0i22i10i30i19j0i22i10i30.KloVdqFWFH8&ved=0ahUKEwiU5-v99JfoAhVFKqwKHRwhDugQ4dUDCAU&uact=5

A google search specifically for Sorna, giving results primarily from movie sites, jurassic park sites, and Klayton, does not have any bearing whatsoever on what the GA thinks or cares about in general. I bet, if you went out, in public, to random people who watched the newest films, and asked them about Sorna, the vast majority would be surprised there even was another island. It's not because they're stupid, it's just the fandom that actually cares enough is actually pretty small compared to the GA. But I guess I can't claim with 100% certainty, since I haven't actually done this of course. I'm pretty confident in this though.

Notice how many of those who were asking "What happened to Sorna?" were not aware of the websites.

So those were not hardcore fans. Those were just very casual fans or members of the general public. So casual fans and the general public is at the very least aware that there is another island. The only way people could not know this is if they never saw TLW or JP3 or if they do not know anything Jurassic.

Gondrasia wrote:

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Colin, Derek Connolly and J.A. Bayona never cared for Sorna. They did not like TLW or JP3 and might have thought the general public and casual fans did not care for Sorna either. But that did backfire when after JW:FK many people in the general public and casual moviegoers were saying "Wait...What the hell happened to the other island!?". Wich is yet another proof that "The general public does not care about TLW or JP3" is nothing but one big myth.

In fact I think people are wrong when they think the hardcore Jurassic fanbase is just a small group and the general public only cares for the original. This fanbase is bigger than people think, and the casual moviegoer cares more about the franchise than just "Oh yeah, the original is a classic".

If you honestly believe that the general public cares for Isla Sorna, you are delusional. If you were to go outside, away from the fan forums, social media, YouTube, and actually ask them, you will find that around 90% of them believe that all of the films take place on the same island; they honestly can’t tell the difference between Isla Nublar and Isla Sorna and when you see the film from their perspective, it’s very easy to see why.

We never see the so-called “factory floor” at all in TLW (which is frankly idiotic!) and when it’s finally shown in JP///, they completely waste every interesting opportunity they had with such a location. As for the temperate rainforest seen and new dinosaurs seen in both movies, there was nothing preventing from being on Isla Nublar. The additional dinosaurs (both old and new species) could simply have been kept in holding paddocks and/or part of the tour that the endorsement team never got to see as a result of the storm. Regarding the temperate rainforest with its redwood trees, since TLW used a few elements of the original; it could simply have been a microclimate on certain locations of the island. It seems to be exactly the case when we return to Isla Nublar in Jurassic World, T. rex Kingdom has exactly that same type of environment.

It certainly doesn’t help that TLW never explains why the former is now suddenly irrelevant, even though they filmed a scene that would have explained what happened to Nublar and why Sorna is now so important, and yet this scene was idiotically removed from the final cut of the movie! What makes this even worse is that this scene was both in the comic adaptation of the movie and on certain TV broadcasts of TLW, it’s not in the home media release; even now more than 20 years since it was released!

Again. You are saying that bad storytelling should be removed by objectivly worse storytelling. That's NOT how you make a good story. Not only that, but you will always have quite a few people, not just fans, but movie buffs who what to see this franchise succeed, who remember the Sorna movies as well. So all you are doing is leaving the following questions wide open and unanswered:

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?
What happened to the Sorna population?
Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

By not answering any of those questions within the movie, you are accepting bad storytelling, which in turn, leads to even MORE of it down the road. Garbage in, garbage out. Not only that, but no other franchise is uses sites as legit canon sources nearly as much as this one. Even the movies in the Godzillaverse are not dependant on the sites as canon because of how connected the movies are. Again, why should we accept using all these sites as legitimate canon sources so heavily when no other franchise, even niche ones like Godzilla, does?

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Gondrasia wrote:

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Colin, Derek Connolly and J.A. Bayona never cared for Sorna. They did not like TLW or JP3 and might have thought the general public and casual fans did not care for Sorna either. But that did backfire when after JW:FK many people in the general public and casual moviegoers were saying "Wait...What the hell happened to the other island!?". Wich is yet another proof that "The general public does not care about TLW or JP3" is nothing but one big myth.

In fact I think people are wrong when they think the hardcore Jurassic fanbase is just a small group and the general public only cares for the original. This fanbase is bigger than people think, and the casual moviegoer cares more about the franchise than just "Oh yeah, the original is a classic".

If you honestly believe that the general public cares for Isla Sorna, you are delusional. If you were to go outside, away from the fan forums, social media, YouTube, and actually ask them, you will find that around 90% of them believe that all of the films take place on the same island; they honestly can’t tell the difference between Isla Nublar and Isla Sorna and when you see the film from their perspective, it’s very easy to see why.

We never see the so-called “factory floor” at all in TLW (which is frankly idiotic!) and when it’s finally shown in JP///, they completely waste every interesting opportunity they had with such a location. As for the temperate rainforest seen and new dinosaurs seen in both movies, there was nothing preventing from being on Isla Nublar. The additional dinosaurs (both old and new species) could simply have been kept in holding paddocks and/or part of the tour that the endorsement team never got to see as a result of the storm. Regarding the temperate rainforest with its redwood trees, since TLW used a few elements of the original; it could simply have been a microclimate on certain locations of the island. It seems to be exactly the case when we return to Isla Nublar in Jurassic World, T. rex Kingdom has exactly that same type of environment.

It certainly doesn’t help that TLW never explains why the former is now suddenly irrelevant, even though they filmed a scene that would have explained what happened to Nublar and why Sorna is now so important, and yet this scene was idiotically removed from the final cut of the movie! What makes this even worse is that this scene was both in the comic adaptation of the movie and on certain TV broadcasts of TLW, it’s not in the home media release; even now more than 20 years since it was released!

Again. You are saying that bad storytelling should be removed by objectivly worse storytelling. That's NOT how you make a good story. Not only that, but you will always have quite a few people, not just fans, but movie buffs who what to see this franchise succeed, who remember the Sorna movies as well. So all you are doing is leaving the following questions wide open and unanswered:

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?
What happened to the Sorna population?
Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

By not answering any of those questions within the movie, you are accepting bad storytelling, which in turn, leads to even MORE of it down the road. Garbage in, garbage out. Not only that, but no other franchise is uses sites as legit canon sources nearly as much as this one. Even the movies in the Godzillaverse are not dependant on the sites as canon because of how connected the movies are. Again, why should we accept using all these sites as legitimate canon sources so heavily when no other franchise, even niche ones like Godzilla, does?

Wich is why I say that the "Oh it is just a movie, do not take it seriously, ignore the unrealistic" argument is used in a very arbitrary way.

It is very often used by defenders of Jurassic World and Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom to defend the plot holes and things that do not make sense of those movies. (It is also very often used by The Last Jedi defenders whenever someone shows proof that it breaks the laws of that universe). "It is just a fantasy film for kids so relax" we are often told.

But then the minute I mention the idea of having a Rex Spino rematch those very same people that defend JW and JWFK by telling me to "not take these films seriously" and "forget the unrealistic" go in full panic and alarm mode and go on and on about how having a rematch is "unrealistic" or "forced" or "takes away the seriousness of the movie" or "could affect the quality of the film".

But I thought you were not taking these films seriously?

Seriously wich one is it? Some of you tell me to ignore and not take seriously how Rexy has turned into a superhero that always comes out of nowhere to rescue the humans but then the very same people that tell me that also tell me to forget about the rematch because of how unreal and not serious it makes the movie. Wich one is it?

And let me clarify that I do not mind if someone chooses to ignore the unrealistic and take the films not seriously...What I do question is those who use that argument in a very arbitrary way. Whenever someone questions the films they like others have to back off and relax. But the minute someone suggests an idea they do not like, oh all of the sudden the seriousness and quality of the films is very important to them.

Nothing personal with anybody my post is not to offend anybody. I am only saying be consistent.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Again. You are saying that bad storytelling should be removed by objectivly worse storytelling. That's NOT how you make a good story. Not only that, but you will always have quite a few people, not just fans, but movie buffs who what to see this franchise succeed, who remember the Sorna movies as well. So all you are doing is leaving the following questions wide open and unanswered:

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?
What happened to the Sorna population?
Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

By not answering any of those questions within the movie, you are accepting bad storytelling, which in turn, leads to even MORE of it down the road. Garbage in, garbage out. Not only that, but no other franchise is uses sites as legit canon sources nearly as much as this one. Even the movies in the Godzillaverse are not dependant on the sites as canon because of how connected the movies are. Again, why should we accept using all these sites as legitimate canon sources so heavily when no other franchise, even niche ones like Godzilla, does?

That's just your opinion. The JW films can be considered good or bad storytelling. It's subjective.

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Which is why I say that the "Oh it is just a movie, do not take it seriously, ignore the unrealistic" argument is used in a very arbitrary way.

It is very often used by defenders of Jurassic World and Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom to defend the plot holes and things that do not make sense of those movies. (It is also very often used by The Last Jedi defenders whenever someone shows proof that it breaks the laws of that universe). "It is just a fantasy film for kids so relax" we are often told.

But then the minute I mention the idea of having a Rex Spino rematch those very same people that defend JW and JWFK by telling me to "not take these films seriously" and "forget the unrealistic" go in full panic and alarm mode and go on and on about how having a rematch is "unrealistic" or "forced" or "takes away the seriousness of the movie" or "could affect the quality of the film".

But I thought you were not taking these films seriously?

Seriously wich one is it? Some of you tell me to ignore and not take seriously how Rexy has turned into a superhero that always comes out of nowhere to rescue the humans but then the very same people that tell me that also tell me to forget about the rematch because of how unreal and not serious it makes the movie. Wich one is it?

And let me clarify that I do not mind if someone chooses to ignore the unrealistic and take the films not seriously...What I do question is those who use that argument in a very arbitrary way. Whenever someone questions the films they like others have to back off and relax. But the minute someone suggests an idea they do not like, oh all of the sudden the seriousness and quality of the films is very important to them.

Nothing personal with anybody my post is not to offend anybody. I am only saying be consistent.

Rexy was presented in a heroic light to audiences in JW just like at the end of the first JP.

It only had a more superhero vibe because of the destruction of Main Street. Do you really think Rexy was actively trying to protect the humans in either JP or JW?

Dr. Wu wrote:

#TRexSpinorematch wrote:

Which is why I say that the "Oh it is just a movie, do not take it seriously, ignore the unrealistic" argument is used in a very arbitrary way.

It is very often used by defenders of Jurassic World and Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom to defend the plot holes and things that do not make sense of those movies. (It is also very often used by The Last Jedi defenders whenever someone shows proof that it breaks the laws of that universe). "It is just a fantasy film for kids so relax" we are often told.

But then the minute I mention the idea of having a Rex Spino rematch those very same people that defend JW and JWFK by telling me to "not take these films seriously" and "forget the unrealistic" go in full panic and alarm mode and go on and on about how having a rematch is "unrealistic" or "forced" or "takes away the seriousness of the movie" or "could affect the quality of the film".

But I thought you were not taking these films seriously?

Seriously wich one is it? Some of you tell me to ignore and not take seriously how Rexy has turned into a superhero that always comes out of nowhere to rescue the humans but then the very same people that tell me that also tell me to forget about the rematch because of how unreal and not serious it makes the movie. Wich one is it?

And let me clarify that I do not mind if someone chooses to ignore the unrealistic and take the films not seriously...What I do question is those who use that argument in a very arbitrary way. Whenever someone questions the films they like others have to back off and relax. But the minute someone suggests an idea they do not like, oh all of the sudden the seriousness and quality of the films is very important to them.

Nothing personal with anybody my post is not to offend anybody. I am only saying be consistent.

Rexy was presented in a heroic light to audiences in JW just like at the end of the first JP.

It only had a more superhero vibe because of the destruction of Main Street. Do you really think Rexy was actively trying to protect the humans in either JP or JW?

But in the first one her "heroic" moment was an awesome surprise because of how unexpected it was.

Since then that the T Rex out of nowhere has been done 5 times in the series (twice in JWFK). At this point it is a gigantic cliché that almost borders on a running gag.

But my point is that some of the people that defend JW and JWFK are willing to ignore and defend how unrealistic that is. They are also willing to ignore and defend how unrealistic it is to always have Blue as a superhero like sidekick. They are also willing to ignore and defend that unrealistic subplot of using dinosaurs in a war. Not to mention they are willing to ignore and defend plot holes like the Mosasaurus being able to get out of the tank into main street like nothing.

Those are all fine and should be ignored because "It is only a movie and we should not be thinking too much about it because relax it is just entertaiment" according to JW and JWFK defenders.

But another top predator like a T Rex fighting another big predator like a Spino again? GOD FORBID. Call the Cops! Most unrealistic and worst thing ever!! (according to them) (Even though every single JP film has had carnivores fighting each other) But it is the end of the world if another therapod fighting another big therapod for a second time!! Most un Jurassic like thing ever!!! (Even though Steven Spielberg liked the idea of Jurassic having a King Kong esque feel) but oh well…

See my point?

If you like the unrealistic Avengers like JW triple team it is just fine because "It is only entertaiment and we are not supposed to be taking this thing too seriously because it is just fantasy".

But if you want a rematch (wich is more realistic than many of the things in JW and JWFK) you are accused of wanting something that is "unrealistic" and that "takes away the seriousness and quality of the film".

Oh so now we are taking the films seriously? But other times we have to just "relax and ignore the unrealistic".

Sorry, but that arbitrary double standard irks me.

For me I do take the films seriously but don't ignore the obvious flaws.

Does how the scientists bring back the dinosaurs make complete sense? The franchise from the beginning had flaws. Some bigger than others but at the end of the day they are just movies. Some of the films have more higher quality than others but all can still be enjoyed and have fans.

I don't see how JW is like Avengers. After the fight Rexy and Blue looked at each and Blue put one foot back signalling that she's not not going to fight her. It wasn't a "We're best friends now!" moment. Has this trilogy been more action packed? Absolutely but that doesn't mean they're now superhero like films.

Dr. Wu wrote:

For me I do take the films seriously but don't ignore the obvious flaws.

Does how the scientists bring back the dinosaurs make complete sense? The franchise from the beginning had flaws. Some bigger than others but at the end of the day they are just movies. Some of the films have more higher quality than others but all can still be enjoyed and have fans.

I don't see how JW is like Avengers. After the fight Rexy and Blue looked at each and Blue put one foot back signalling that she's not not going to fight her. It wasn't a "We're best friends now!" moment. Has this trilogy been more action packed? Absolutely but that doesn't mean they're now superhero like films.

In JW Blue starts like any other wild animal. then becomes the sideckick pet of Owen then all of the sudden becomes "bad" and loyal to the Indominus because reasons, then all of the sudden has a moment and then becomes "good" again because yes.

My point is that the people that are willing to overlook, ignore, defend and like very unrealistic things like that are the same ones that argue to me that my not so unrealistic suggestion can not happen because of how "unrealistic" and "forced" it is.

Dr. Wu wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Again. You are saying that bad storytelling should be removed by objectivly worse storytelling. That's NOT how you make a good story. Not only that, but you will always have quite a few people, not just fans, but movie buffs who what to see this franchise succeed, who remember the Sorna movies as well. So all you are doing is leaving the following questions wide open and unanswered:

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?
What happened to the Sorna population?
Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

By not answering any of those questions within the movie, you are accepting bad storytelling, which in turn, leads to even MORE of it down the road. Garbage in, garbage out. Not only that, but no other franchise is uses sites as legit canon sources nearly as much as this one. Even the movies in the Godzillaverse are not dependant on the sites as canon because of how connected the movies are. Again, why should we accept using all these sites as legitimate canon sources so heavily when no other franchise, even niche ones like Godzilla, does?

That's just your opinion. The JW films can be considered good or bad storytelling. It's subjective.

Uh...No.

JW:FK ensured that the first two sequels are still canon with Sorna being mentioned by name. Therefore, the 3 questions I asked are fair and legitimate. From a basic storytelling standpoint you have to answer why the dinosaurs weren't taken to Sorna and what happened to the island. You can't just ignore it altogether. If the movie has certain plot holes and doesn't address them and instead, needs a site to answer them for it, then from a basic storytelling perspective, it IS bad storytelling.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Again. You are saying that bad storytelling should be removed by objectivly worse storytelling. That's NOT how you make a good story. Not only that, but you will always have quite a few people, not just fans, but movie buffs who what to see this franchise succeed, who remember the Sorna movies as well. So all you are doing is leaving the following questions wide open and unanswered:

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?
What happened to the Sorna population?
Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

By not answering any of those questions within the movie, you are accepting bad storytelling, which in turn, leads to even MORE of it down the road. Garbage in, garbage out. Not only that, but no other franchise is uses sites as legit canon sources nearly as much as this one. Even the movies in the Godzillaverse are not dependant on the sites as canon because of how connected the movies are. Again, why should we accept using all these sites as legitimate canon sources so heavily when no other franchise, even niche ones like Godzilla, does?

The key word being “objectively”, what you believe to be even worse is what I believe to be really no different than what previous Jurassic films have done. However, having re-watched all of the movies, I can safely say that all of those questions can be easily answered without having to read the websites.

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?

Isla Sorna was out of the question for a couple of reasons. The first reason being that it’s still owned by Masrani Global, we see in Jurassic World that the corporation took control over everything that InGen owned and ran previously; the dinosaurs, the technology, the staff and, in this case, the islands. We see the vast land development that they’ve made on Isla Nublar, what’s not to say that they’ve also done or were planning on doing the same with the other island that they also own?

The second reason that Sorna was unviable is that it’s too well known to be a safe sanctuary for the dinosaurs. It’s too obvious to just transport them to the only other island in the world that was also populated with dinosaurs at one point, it’s where people would go looking next. And not only does a company that both exploited and abandoned the dinosaurs still privately own it, but as shown in JP/// it’s vulnerable to access by illegal tourist operators and mercenaries.

Regarding the other islands, I would say due to being next to Isla Sorna, they’re also out of the question because they would become the next place to look for dinosaurs after Sorna; thus they’re too obvious a location to have them kept safely isolated.

Whereas Sanctuary has the unique advantage of being in an unknown location, its real name has not been disclosed and thus it becomes the ideal location to protect the dinosaurs and keep them isolated from the rest of the world.

What happened to the Sorna population?

Isla Sorna’s ecosystem collapsed, how this might have happened could be seen in JP/// most notably with the Spinosaurus. It was shown to be an animal that was both very powerful, being able to take down a sub-adult Tyrannosaurus with relative ease, and tenacious to the extreme, following a small group of humans for many miles both on land and in the water.

One can only imagine the sheer devastation that such a relentless animal that’s essentially the precursor to the Indominus rex caused on Isla Sorna before and after the events of the film, taking down multiple carnivores and herbivores; completely disrupting the healthy equilibrium that had previously existed in TLW.

Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

Like how they did such an excellent job in protecting the islands at the start of Jurassic Park ///? All the U.S. Navy did was just have a reconnaissance plane fly over the island every now and again, and broadcast a warning to aircraft that flew too close.

They only really got involved with multiple ships, aircraft and troops on the ground because Ellie asked her husband to send the navy to rescue Alan. But by that point, it was already too late to protect the island from the multiple illegal operations that had occurred before and with animals such as the Spinosaurus roaming about on Sorna, it would become a short matter of time before there would be nothing for the navy to protect.

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?

Outside of the non-canon Jurassic World Evolution, we know basically zilch about the other islands near Isla Sorna. Who knows if they would be capable of sustaining any population.

An explanation I heard from Jack Ewins about the dinosaurs not being taken to Isla Sorna is that the island was still owned by Masrani Global, so taking them there would be illegal. Of course, Mills' whole operation was illegal anyway, so I'm not sure how well that explanation holds up, but I digress.

A fan explanation I see tossed around is that Sorna was volcanic, so it would only be a matter of time before it blew up as well. We never see a volcano on Sorna, though, and simply being run on geothermal power does not necessitate the existence of a volcano in the immediate area.


What happened to the Sorna population?

Per the DPG website, the ecosystem suffered major damage from Jurassic World's construction and the introduction of the illegally cloned species in 1999. It's never gone into extreme detail what exactly happened, but those are the main reasons given on the website. I don't personally believe the theory that it was only the Spinosaurus that caused the issue like I see a handful of other fans (not just on here) point out in these discussions.

Now, in other works (namely the Claire prequel novel), Sorna's biggest problem was actually poaching—stated by Simon Masrani himself. When asked about the island's status, all Masrani said was that there was "enough" of a population, and mind you, most of the book takes place in 2004, just one year before the park's opening. I find this information to clash somewhat with the information given on the DPG website since the book would imply the island was doing relatively fine at least some ways into 2004; on the other hand, the website would imply the ecosystem was in dire straits basically from 1999 to 2005. True, one could say Masrani was being purposefully vague and downplaying the island's problems because he was talking to the interns and not an actual employee of InGen/Masrani Global, but it didn't come off that way to me when I read it.

Regardless, Colin Trevorrow's present narrative is that Isla Sorna died out and by summer 2018 at the latest, Isla Nublar was the only place left on the planet with living dinosaur presence.

Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

They were, but clearly not efficiently enough to prevent consistent poaching and the Dino-Soar tour boat. Hell, when Udesky ignored a direct order to get out of the illegal air space above Sorna, not a thing happened. No additional military resources arrived to make sure the island was safe, or at least none we ever saw or were told about. Imagine if instead of Udesky, it was some heinous monster that decided to drop an atom bomb on the island. There'd be nobody to stop that guy.

I do wish the films themselves explained this stuff, but yeah.

Gondrasia wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Again. You are saying that bad storytelling should be removed by objectivly worse storytelling. That's NOT how you make a good story. Not only that, but you will always have quite a few people, not just fans, but movie buffs who what to see this franchise succeed, who remember the Sorna movies as well. So all you are doing is leaving the following questions wide open and unanswered:

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?
What happened to the Sorna population?
Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

By not answering any of those questions within the movie, you are accepting bad storytelling, which in turn, leads to even MORE of it down the road. Garbage in, garbage out. Not only that, but no other franchise is uses sites as legit canon sources nearly as much as this one. Even the movies in the Godzillaverse are not dependant on the sites as canon because of how connected the movies are. Again, why should we accept using all these sites as legitimate canon sources so heavily when no other franchise, even niche ones like Godzilla, does?

The key word being “objectively”, what you believe to be even worse is what I believe to be really no different than what previous Jurassic films have done. However, having re-watched all of the movies, I can safely say that all of those questions can be easily answered without having to read the websites.

Why weren't the dinosaurs sent to Sorna and some of the other islands?

Isla Sorna was out of the question for a couple of reasons. The first reason being that it’s still owned by Masrani Global, we see in Jurassic World that the corporation took control over everything that InGen owned and ran previously; the dinosaurs, the technology, the staff and, in this case, the islands. We see the vast land development that they’ve made on Isla Nublar, what’s not to say that they’ve also done or were planning on doing the same with the other island that they also own?

The second reason that Sorna was unviable is that it’s too well known to be a safe sanctuary for the dinosaurs. It’s too obvious to just transport them to the only other island in the world that was also populated with dinosaurs at one point, it’s where people would go looking next. And not only does a company that both exploited and abandoned the dinosaurs still privately own it, but as shown in JP/// it’s vulnerable to access by illegal tourist operators and mercenaries.

Regarding the other islands, I would say due to being next to Isla Sorna, they’re also out of the question because they would become the next place to look for dinosaurs after Sorna; thus they’re too obvious a location to have them kept safely isolated.

Whereas Sanctuary has the unique advantage of being in an unknown location, its real name has not been disclosed and thus it becomes the ideal location to protect the dinosaurs and keep them isolated from the rest of the world.

What happened to the Sorna population?

Isla Sorna’s ecosystem collapsed, how this might have happened could be seen in JP/// most notably with the Spinosaurus. It was shown to be an animal that was both very powerful, being able to take down a sub-adult Tyrannosaurus with relative ease, and tenacious to the extreme, following a small group of humans for many miles both on land and in the water.

One can only imagine the sheer devastation that such a relentless animal that’s essentially the precursor to the Indominus rex caused on Isla Sorna before and after the events of the film, taking down multiple carnivores and herbivores; completely disrupting the healthy equilibrium that had previously existed in TLW.

Wasn't the U.S. Navy supposed to be protecting the islands?

Like how they did such an excellent job in protecting the islands at the start of Jurassic Park ///? All the U.S. Navy did was just have a reconnaissance plane fly over the island every now and again, and broadcast a warning to aircraft that flew too close.

They only really got involved with multiple ships, aircraft and troops on the ground because Ellie asked her husband to send the navy to rescue Alan. But by that point, it was already too late to protect the island from the multiple illegal operations that had occurred before and with animals such as the Spinosaurus roaming about on Sorna, it would become a short matter of time before there would be nothing for the navy to protect.

Again, why weren't ANY of these things explained in the movie? Even some throwaway lines would have been better then nothing.

"We can't put them on Sorna because the poachers would wipe them out like they did before."

"I thought the U.S. Navy was protecting the islands." "Well, they did until North Korea got atomic weapons. All the ships went to the Pacific and we had to try and protect them. The problem was that the poachers were far more prepared, Masrani couldn't move fast enough in time, and they simply outgunned us. That's why some of the Sorna dinosaurs were relocated on Nublar."

Those simple lines were all that were needed to answer the Sorna questions I brought up. Yet the scriptwriters were one of two things: They were either too focused on taking dinosaurs on the mainland that they basically got tunnel vision or they were simply too lazy to care. None of that is good storytelling at all. You can't ignore why we can't do Y instead of Z in a story/series of stories when you ensured that Y is still canon. It would be one thing if Trevorrow said that the Sorna movies were no longer canon. Then the JW movies could get away with ignoring them. But considering how JW:FK mentioned Sorna BY NAME, they can't do that.