General Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom News Thread V.1

Are the bones fossils or are they new? I dont know how to tell the difference.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

The shot is BEAUTIFUL, very Bayona, Oscar Faura & The Orphanage, the lighting is everything!!!

Also looks like we have our first shot of Lucy!!

So unfair to have the first character pic the kid...Wish we got the villain or Claire instead.

What's your problem with the kid? xD

I'm butthurt because I didn't want kids in this movie, so I'm hating the character from the start.

No offense, but that's pretty shallow. Kids have always been part of JP films since they represent how well kids and dinosaurs go together. After all, children were and still are a big part of the JP fanbase. It's a tradition. I don't see how you thought that this movie and quite frankly the next one would be any different.

No offense, but that's just your opinion and equally as shallow, if you want to call it that. We've been over this before. Never in my life I've heard anyone someone say that having kids is crucial for JP film. And even if everyone did think so and that was just my opinion (just as yours is what it is), they still don't automatically need to be in every sequel ever just because. Getting too stuck on "traditions" can be detrimental and further emphasizing the image of generic formula the sequels already have.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

The shot is BEAUTIFUL, very Bayona, Oscar Faura & The Orphanage, the lighting is everything!!!

Also looks like we have our first shot of Lucy!!

So unfair to have the first character pic the kid...Wish we got the villain or Claire instead.

What's your problem with the kid? xD

I'm butthurt because I didn't want kids in this movie, so I'm hating the character from the start.

No offense, but that's pretty shallow. Kids have always been part of JP films since they represent how well kids and dinosaurs go together. After all, children were and still are a big part of the JP fanbase. It's a tradition. I don't see how you thought that this movie and quite frankly the next one would be any different.

Not offended. The world is in constantly change, so they should change that and exclude kids. Progress isn't made without changing stuff. Many things are tradition and well...Things change. Evolution needs that. We need real important characters for the history, not useless kids. 

Also, it's kinda funny when people say how kids love dinosaurs and been part of the franchise while I was a kid I NEVER saw a kid that liked dinosaurs, I was even mocked back then for loving dinosaurs.   So that "kids love dinosaurs" is very overhyped line, IMO.

https://twitter.com/BryceDHoward/status/839877821430398976

Bryce whited out the title

What if the kid isn't useless? She could have a very important role in the film.

Eric Kirby and those JW kids had important roles for the convenience of the plot, but that doesn't mean they were needed.

I don't know why Kelly was there. Spielberg cut down almost everything from book he half forced Crichton to write, but kept her for some reason? Well at least he didn't adapt Arby...

Dr. Wu wrote:

What if the kid isn't useless? She could have a very important role in the film.

No.

You know who deserves to appear because he is important? Wu.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

Remember: That casting call said the person had to be at least 9 by Feb 2017 and not older then 10. Checked on IMDB.

Given the 9>x>10 parameters plus London:

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm8561214/

This is only thing that fits, unless we're talking about an Unknown.

You guys all owe me 10 bucks

Mistral wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

The shot is BEAUTIFUL, very Bayona, Oscar Faura & The Orphanage, the lighting is everything!!!

Also looks like we have our first shot of Lucy!!

So unfair to have the first character pic the kid...Wish we got the villain or Claire instead.

What's your problem with the kid? xD

I'm butthurt because I didn't want kids in this movie, so I'm hating the character from the start.

No offense, but that's pretty shallow. Kids have always been part of JP films since they represent how well kids and dinosaurs go together. After all, children were and still are a big part of the JP fanbase. It's a tradition. I don't see how you thought that this movie and quite frankly the next one would be any different.

No offense, but that's just your opinion and equally as shallow, if you want to call it that. We've been over this before. Never in my life I've heard anyone someone say that having kids is crucial for JP film. And even if everyone did think so and that was just my opinion (just as yours is what it is), they still don't automatically need to be in every sequel ever just because. Getting too stuck on "traditions" can be detrimental and further emphasizing the image of generic formula the sequels already have.

Uh..No. Traditions/fundamentals are important to movies, video games, and in life in general. And what I'm stating isn't an opinion. It's a fact. You, Spino, and Troyal are the exceptions to the rule. I agree that we need something new and Universal is blundering that, but that doesn't mean that you have to remove traditions/fundamentals to do so. The last time that happened was JP3. And that movie still has a bad reputation to this day.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Mistral wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

The shot is BEAUTIFUL, very Bayona, Oscar Faura & The Orphanage, the lighting is everything!!!

Also looks like we have our first shot of Lucy!!

So unfair to have the first character pic the kid...Wish we got the villain or Claire instead.

What's your problem with the kid? xD

I'm butthurt because I didn't want kids in this movie, so I'm hating the character from the start.

No offense, but that's pretty shallow. Kids have always been part of JP films since they represent how well kids and dinosaurs go together. After all, children were and still are a big part of the JP fanbase. It's a tradition. I don't see how you thought that this movie and quite frankly the next one would be any different.

No offense, but that's just your opinion and equally as shallow, if you want to call it that. We've been over this before. Never in my life I've heard anyone someone say that having kids is crucial for JP film. And even if everyone did think so and that was just my opinion (just as yours is what it is), they still don't automatically need to be in every sequel ever just because. Getting too stuck on "traditions" can be detrimental and further emphasizing the image of generic formula the sequels already have.

Uh..No. Traditions/fundamentals are important to movies, video games, and in life in general. And what I'm stating isn't an opinion. It's a fact. You, Spino, and Troyal are the exceptions to the rule. I agree that we need something new and Universal is blundering that, but that doesn't mean that you have to remove traditions/fundamentals to do so. The last time that happened was JP3. And that movie still has a bad reputation to this day.

If we were exceptions, things wouldn't change. 

Kids aren't traditions. We don't need them to see dinosaurs, to see the "awe and wonder" behind them, to see how magnific they are. 

Traditions change. Cultures change. Just see it, it's in our history. Movies can change, like traditions. And the kid is useless by the way, she will steal screentime from real important characters whose decisions can change the whole history. That's what boils my blood.

They'll throw precious time in the trash. I don't doubt we'll see another divorce plot.

By the way, don't compare the T.rex, the icon and star of the franchise, with a kid. T.rex means 100000000x more than a kid, that's why JP3 is hated.

Kids are a tradition in the JP films but traditions can change. I'm all for kids being in the films if they can act and have importance to the story.

What if "Lucy" is Dr. Wu's daughter? I know Dr. Wu doesn't at all seem the parent type but ever since I read a article on Jurassic Outpost on the topic I began to wonder. In the new set photo you can see amber in the mansion or museum.

She's not Wu's daughter. I'm sure of that. She'll be a daughter of someone that has divorce issues probably and the typical kid, maybe a dino nerd but nothing more than this.

I mean, no problem if some JP movies had kids, but we don't NEED all the movies to have them. It's forced.

But what if she is? Would you like that? Personally, I believe it can be true.

I don't know what to feel about this, if it's true.

It would be a little weird but if true it could give Dr. Wu some humanity in the movie. I know you hate him being portrayed as a mad scientist.

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Mistral wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

The shot is BEAUTIFUL, very Bayona, Oscar Faura & The Orphanage, the lighting is everything!!!

Also looks like we have our first shot of Lucy!!

So unfair to have the first character pic the kid...Wish we got the villain or Claire instead.

What's your problem with the kid? xD

I'm butthurt because I didn't want kids in this movie, so I'm hating the character from the start.

No offense, but that's pretty shallow. Kids have always been part of JP films since they represent how well kids and dinosaurs go together. After all, children were and still are a big part of the JP fanbase. It's a tradition. I don't see how you thought that this movie and quite frankly the next one would be any different.

No offense, but that's just your opinion and equally as shallow, if you want to call it that. We've been over this before. Never in my life I've heard anyone someone say that having kids is crucial for JP film. And even if everyone did think so and that was just my opinion (just as yours is what it is), they still don't automatically need to be in every sequel ever just because. Getting too stuck on "traditions" can be detrimental and further emphasizing the image of generic formula the sequels already have.

Uh..No. Traditions/fundamentals are important to movies, video games, and in life in general. And what I'm stating isn't an opinion. It's a fact. You, Spino, and Troyal are the exceptions to the rule. I agree that we need something new and Universal is blundering that, but that doesn't mean that you have to remove traditions/fundamentals to do so. The last time that happened was JP3. And that movie still has a bad reputation to this day.

If we were exceptions, things wouldn't change. 

Kids aren't traditions. We don't need them to see dinosaurs, to see the "awe and wonder" behind them, to see how magnific they are. 

Traditions change. Cultures change. Just see it, it's in our history. Movies can change, like traditions. And the kid is useless by the way, she will steal screentime from real important characters whose decisions can change the whole history. That's what boils my blood.

They'll throw precious time in the trash. I don't doubt we'll see another divorce plot.

By the way, don't compare the T.rex, the icon and star of the franchise, with a kid. T.rex means 100000000x more than a kid, that's why JP3 is hated.

But not all traditions and cultures change for the better. History has shown that many 'social changes' and 'economic changes' had led to the decline of societies (Rome). Even more so, there have also been cases where changes have been so radical to cultures, that they either reject it and revert back to it before it gets out of control (Napoleon undoing most/all of the social reforms of Revolutionary era France) or they wind up transforming it into something far worse (Soviet Russia, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Cambodia, Nazi Germany and the IslamoNazi countries of Iran and Lebanon). That's not to say that reforms shouldn't be added, but that doesn't mean that you outright throw out everything good.

I'm actually wasn't comparing T. rex to a kid as so much as I thinking about Grant and Sattler separating, though in fairness, that was my fault for not explaining it better.

THe kid stuff is a "tradition" that should be changed. Seriously. We need to preserve some stuff but others become cliche as time passes and even forced. The kid adds nothing so, delete it.


And Dr. Wu, we can actually make Wu humane with other stuff, we don't need to add a daughter to do that, even if it made things easier for the GA. Wu is actually a human, he's not a psycho so of course there's more of him we didn't see. The problem I see is that they are making him too much cold, almost like a robot and it feels artificial. He should be developed as a human being that has flaws, but it's actually not evil for that, he's just a human that falls in misguided actions sometimes. Not a mad evil scientist that wants the world to burn and make stuff just for the fun.


We all hate him being a mad scientist, it's cliche and I'm tired of scientists being made evil.  But adding a daughter and making him abadon all his work for the daughter is a cliche arc too IMO, like Claire did basically in JW. That stuff that your work can't be the most important stuff in you life sometimes.

Maybe kids shouldn't be in every JP films but they probably will be. If there is one "tradition" I hate is divorce plots.

See? Another stuff that I hate too and hope they cut this useless stuff from the movie.

I don't know about you guys, but I'm pretty sick and tired of seeing dinosaurs in JP movies. I think it's about time that they change that tradition. The dinosaur card has been overplayed.

-Cheers

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

I don't know about you guys, but I'm pretty sick and tired of seeing dinosaurs in JP movies. I think it's about time that they change that tradition. The dinosaur card has been overplayed.

-Cheers

It's actually different to change dinosaurs and kids...

Unless you are talking about some species, sometimes we need new species in too.

PS: I know, it's a joke, just that I am fun at parties. 

To the subject at hand.......Ehh.

I certainly won't hold it against anybody if they 't want to see any kids in a JP film. Not all of us are going to want the same things out of the movie. It is what it is, and nobody should have to feel like they're being attacked for holding the opinion that they do. It's all subjective in the end.

Personally, I'm not bothered by it. In any JP film, the kids have never been the deciding factor for me. JP  would have been great with or without Lex and Tim. JP3 still would have been a steaming pile of dog sh*t without Eric. It's never been a huge thing for me, nor is it likely to be with this film.

At the end of the day, I have faith in Bayona to pull it off.

I especially agree with your 3rd paragraph. Of course, what JW2 really needs is a great human villain. Like kids, it's not the decisive factor, but come on folks, we're 5 movies in.

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

I especially agree with your 3rd paragraph. Of course, what JW2 really needs is a great human villain. Like kids, it's not the decisive factor, but come on folks, we're 5 movies in.

I agree. It is time we have a true human villain. Preferably a female one.

Well, I think Ludlow qualifies as a "villain".

Rhedosaurus wrote:

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

I especially agree with your 3rd paragraph. Of course, what JW2 really needs is a great human villain. Like kids, it's not the decisive factor, but come on folks, we're 5 movies in.

I agree. It is time we have a true human villain. Preferably a female one.

Hoskins and Ludlow wave hello. Hoskins even had a big villain speech.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

I especially agree with your 3rd paragraph. Of course, what JW2 really needs is a great human villain. Like kids, it's not the decisive factor, but come on folks, we're 5 movies in.

I agree. It is time we have a true human villain. Preferably a female one.

Hoskins and Ludlow wave hello. Hoskins even had a big villain speech.

Even so, I feel that Hoskins had some kind of puppetmaster behind the scenes. Somebody who's giving him orders. Not to say that he's a pawn, but that somebody is behind the shadows, Controlling/manipulating things that we don't know yet.

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Well, I think Ludlow qualifies as a "villain".

You win.

To be fair, I did say GREAT villain.

I think Lucy is just a young Claire. We'll see her at the beginning of the film in a flashback. One of her family members works at the museum, and she ends up tagging along one day. Eventually, she's left alone in the museum, and she decides to explore it. She ends up gaining a fascination with dinosaurs, which eventually leads to getting the job at Jurassic World. It's at JW where she starts to look at the dinosaurs as "assets", rather than the amazing beasts she dreamed about as a child. JW2 will explore her change back to the mindset she had as a child, as she heads the "Save the dinosaurs" movement.

I hath spoken.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Sickle_Claw wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

I especially agree with your 3rd paragraph. Of course, what JW2 really needs is a great human villain. Like kids, it's not the decisive factor, but come on folks, we're 5 movies in.

I agree. It is time we have a true human villain. Preferably a female one.

Hoskins and Ludlow wave hello. Hoskins even had a big villain speech.

Even so, I feel that Hoskins had some kind of puppetmaster behind the scenes. Somebody who's giving him orders. Not to say that he's a pawn, but that somebody is behind the shadows, Controlling/manipulating things that we don't know yet.

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Well, I think Ludlow qualifies as a "villain".

You win.  

Yeah I do think that in JW2 or JW3 we will see this puppet master.