General Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom News Thread V.1

I would love Ellie Sattler to be back. People only remember Grant and Malcolm, I'm tired of seeing this everywhere. How can you forget the amazing character of Ellie? She's the most underrated character from the original trio.

So yep, I rather see her back than Grant or Malcolm. Enough with overrated characters. Fire me.

I'd still rather have Malcolm and/or Grant, but if I could get Sattler back I'd be quite pleased nevertheless. Her characterization was fine in JP3 though I never want to see her kids (guess teenages by now) on screen again. Taylor Nichols though would be interesting in more than just cardboard cutout role lol, you know if he actually did something

Anyway it's not as if Goldblum has rejected the idea of returning either, but they just don't have good enough writers to get him in I guess

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

I would love Ellie Sattler to be back. People only remember Grant and Malcolm, I'm tired of seeing this everywhere. How can you forget the amazing character of Ellie? She's the most underrated character from the original trio.

I remember reading an issue of Total Film before JW came out that one of the scripts that was written before the one we got had her coming back. IIRC, the title of the script was 'The Return Of Dr. Sattler', though that wasn't going to be the name of the movie.

Mistral wrote:

but they just don't have good enough writers to get him in I guess

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

but they just don't have good enough writers to get him in I guess

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Ha ha

Ha ha

Spoiler:

But it is the excuse they have used in the past, as in they supposedly can't write them in.

Mistral wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

but they just don't have good enough writers to get him in I guess

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Ha ha

Ha ha

Spoiler:

But it is the excuse they have used in the past, as in they supposedly can't write them in.

Perhaps it's simply because bringing old characters back isn't a significant priority to the writers

Perhaps it's because the writers would rather work on developing their own characters.

Point is that it really wouldn't be that hard to write old characters back in if they really wanted to, and I think the above two options are more likely than simply dismissing the writers as "not good enough".

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

but they just don't have good enough writers to get him in I guess

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Ha ha

Ha ha

Spoiler:

But it is the excuse they have used in the past, as in they supposedly can't write them in.

Perhaps it's simply because bringing old characters back isn't a significant priority to the writers

Perhaps it's because the writers would rather work on developing their own characters.

Point is that it really wouldn't be that hard to write old characters back in if they really wanted to, and I think the above two options are more likely than simply dismissing the writers as "not good enough".

This. We don't need useless cameos. People need to get over nostalgia and accept things change. We can't have all JP movies centered around Malcolm just because everyone likes him.

I'm glad we'll have new characters, I can now have another favorites and like more characters.

I don't want old JP characters returning neither. This is a new trilogy for a new generation IMO. Let's enjoy the new characters and their stories.
If we want to see Malcolm etc, let's watch JP and TLW again.
Also, I rather having screenwriters who admit (if Mistral's theory turned out to be true) not to be able to write old characters in the new script and consequentially avoid it, than screenwriters who put them thinking they know how to do that and delivering some of the worst sequels ever made (I'm looking at you, "Independence Day: Resurgence").
The only classic character returning was Wu, and I really don't think they put him in for nostalgia sake (90% of non-fans don't even remember him from the 1st movie).

owenpratt wrote:

I don't want old JP characters returning neither. This is a new trilogy for a new generation IMO. Let's enjoy the new characters and their stories.
If we want to see Malcolm etc, let's watch JP and TLW again.
Also, I rather having screenwriters who admit (if Mistral's theory turned out to be true) not to be able to write old characters in the new script and consequentially avoid it, than screenwriters who put them thinking they know how to do that and delivering some of the worst sequels ever made (I'm looking at you, "Independence Day: Resurgence").
The only classic character returning was Wu, and I really don't think they put him in for nostalgia sake (90% of non-fans don't even remember him from the 1st movie).

+1!

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

but they just don't have good enough writers to get him in I guess

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Ha ha

Ha ha

Spoiler:

But it is the excuse they have used in the past, as in they supposedly can't write them in.

Perhaps it's simply because bringing old characters back isn't a significant priority to the writers

Perhaps it's because the writers would rather work on developing their own characters.

Point is that it really wouldn't be that hard to write old characters back in if they really wanted to, and I think the above two options are more likely than simply dismissing the writers as "not good enough".

Sadly I do have to agree.

I mean I personally do want to see the old characters back. But I know if I was a writer helming the new JP films that those characters would be so "sacred" that I wouldn't want to write them in, for fear of ruining their characters and making it forced feeling. 

I completely understand the writers wanting to focus on mainly new characters when I put myself in their shoes. I also think people are underestimating how good these new characters could potentially be. 

We have to remember that we have only seen one movie in the "new trilogy" so to speak. The characters we know are probably going to get developed a lot more. Personally I think they did a pretty excellent job at making Claire a character that I'm somewhat invested in, and that's just from JW alone. 

And please Tom Hardy lol

Troyal1 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Mistral wrote:

but they just don't have good enough writers to get him in I guess

Yeah, I'm sure that's it.

Ha ha

Ha ha

Spoiler:

But it is the excuse they have used in the past, as in they supposedly can't write them in.

Perhaps it's simply because bringing old characters back isn't a significant priority to the writers

Perhaps it's because the writers would rather work on developing their own characters.

Point is that it really wouldn't be that hard to write old characters back in if they really wanted to, and I think the above two options are more likely than simply dismissing the writers as "not good enough".

Sadly I do have to agree.

I mean I personally do want to see the old characters back. But I know if I was a writer helming the new JP films that those characters would be so "sacred" that I wouldn't want to write them in, for fear of ruining their characters and making it forced feeling. 

I completely understand the writers wanting to focus on mainly new characters when I put myself in their shoes. I also think people are underestimating how good these new characters could potentially be. 

We have to remember that we have only seen one movie in the "new trilogy" so to speak. The characters we know are probably going to get developed a lot more. Personally I think they did a pretty excellent job at making Claire a character that I'm somewhat invested in, and that's just from JW alone. 

And please Tom Hardy lol

But surely they can bring back one of the original writers to help them out. There has to be at least one of them still alive.

owenpratt wrote:

I don't want old JP characters returning neither. This is a new trilogy for a new generation IMO. Let's enjoy the new characters and their stories.
If we want to see Malcolm etc, let's watch JP and TLW again.
Also, I rather having screenwriters who admit (if Mistral's theory turned out to be true) not to be able to write old characters in the new script and consequentially avoid it, than screenwriters who put them thinking they know how to do that and delivering some of the worst sequels ever made (I'm looking at you, "Independence Day: Resurgence").
The only classic character returning was Wu, and I really don't think they put him in for nostalgia sake (90% of non-fans don't even remember him from the 1st movie).

I agree. Also, that's why Wu's return is awesome, he doesn't need to be loved or remembered to be important and awesome. 

That's a Sorna-like environment, I'd say.

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

That's a Sorna-like environment, I'd say.

I don't know, but this Jurassic World sequel keeps surprising me. And we still don't even know the plot ahah

I think it's the manor's portal.

If part of the plot takes place in a British manor and part of it on an overgrown Isla Nublar, and it involves new companies having access to dino DNA for their own (perhaps nefarious) purposes, maybe it will bear some significant similarities to the JP4 Sayles script.

Replace the British manor with a castle in the Swiss Alps, consider the return to Nublar to "rescue" the dinosaurs (Nedry's can anyone?), and the plot involving new companies and new uses for the dinosaurs and the dinosaur cloning technology, and it sounds pretty similar to the Sayles script.

Oh God. Please don't say that!

God damn this was cruel lol. 

https://instagram.com/p/BSWHKVujEra/

Well, I guess that officially closes any chance of Sam being in JW2.

Part of me IS hoping that this some kind of clever disguise to throw fans off course by making us think he's not involved when he actually is. But in reality I know what this means.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

Well, I guess that officially closes any chance of Sam being in JW2.

Part of me IS hoping that this some kind of clever disguise to throw fans off course by making us think he's not involved when he actually is. But in reality I know what this means.

Did he actually tweet that? I was under the impression that they edited it and posted it on Instagram to fool people, but I could be wrong. Because when I headed over to his Twitter page he had already deleted it. I'll check around and see

For a few years, I've believed that he'd never come back because of how JP3 broke him and that the wait for JW to get made finished off any hope of that. It's no secret that he was quite disgruntled during the filming of JP3. The way I see it, if he is not interested in being Dr. Grant anymore, then kill him off, and bring back Malcolm and Ellie as well as Lex and Time who get their grandfather's dinosaurs and islands back at the very end of the movie franchise.

Killing him would be going too far. Returning characters aren't necessary and if they're simply not a part of the story, just make a reference to them or not mention them at all.

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

Killing him would be going too far. Returning characters aren't necessary and if they're simply not a part of the story, just make a reference to them or not mention them at all.

I'm not saying to kill him on screen, but have somebody mention that he died of cancer or something like that.

Still trying to figure out if Sam himself was the one to tweet out the joke or if someone edited it.

No answer yet.

Although I doubt it matters either way to be completely honest(as far as him appearing).

I just wanted to know if it was him specifically, cause I'm nosy like that 

I see some might have misinterpreted some of my saying earlier here, but I'm too lazy to start going through them now so screw it.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

It's no secret that he was quite disgruntled during the filming of JP3.

No proof whatsoever of that, only baseless rumors.

In any case, killing him off offscreen would be just as convoluted and meaningless as Henry Jones Senior in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, or Chief Brody in Jaws the Revenge.

Mistral wrote:

I see some might have misinterpreted some of my saying earlier here, but I'm too lazy to start going through them now so screw it.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

It's no secret that he was quite disgruntled during the filming of JP3.

No proof whatsoever of that, only baseless rumors.

In any case, killing him off offscreen would be just as convoluted and meaningless as Henry Jones Senior in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, or Chief Brody in Jaws the Revenge.

Rumors don't come from nowhere and in many cases turn out to be true. Troubled movie productions more often then not=disgruntled/unhappy actors. Fant4stic anybody?

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Mistral wrote:

I see some might have misinterpreted some of my saying earlier here, but I'm too lazy to start going through them now so screw it.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

It's no secret that he was quite disgruntled during the filming of JP3.

No proof whatsoever of that, only baseless rumors.

In any case, killing him off offscreen would be just as convoluted and meaningless as Henry Jones Senior in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, or Chief Brody in Jaws the Revenge.

Rumors don't come from nowhere and in many cases turn out to be true. Troubled movie productions more often then not=disgruntled/unhappy actors. Fant4stic anybody?

Rumors can come out of nowhere and suddenly start an avalanche that just keeps rolling to no end without any factual basis. If we look at near history, many laughable medieval myths today exist not only because of the 19th century romantic movement but more importantly because in 18th century enlightenment period people made either poorly judged or otherwise subjective faulty remarks of history that had nothing to do with facts. For example the Roman inquisition was essentially turned into torture porn and witch hunts, and Columbus simply finding route to Asia into proving that Earth was round. Similarly troubled productions in films can make people imaging all sorts of background dramas that never happened (yes JP3 had well documented script issues but that doesn't automatically mean everyone incl actors were miserable). It only requires one person somewhere saying it and it spreads. Fake assumption, no matter if subjective or objective made. People then can keep pointing out to the "evidence" somewhere, from alleged "sources".

Mistral wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Mistral wrote:

I see some might have misinterpreted some of my saying earlier here, but I'm too lazy to start going through them now so screw it.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

It's no secret that he was quite disgruntled during the filming of JP3.

No proof whatsoever of that, only baseless rumors.

In any case, killing him off offscreen would be just as convoluted and meaningless as Henry Jones Senior in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, or Chief Brody in Jaws the Revenge.

Rumors don't come from nowhere and in many cases turn out to be true. Troubled movie productions more often then not=disgruntled/unhappy actors. Fant4stic anybody?

Rumors can come out of nowhere and suddenly start an avalanche that just keeps rolling to no end without any factual basis. If we look at near history, many laughable medieval myths today exist not only because of the 19th century romantic movement but more importantly because in 18th century enlightenment period people made either poorly judged or otherwise subjective faulty remarks of history that had nothing to do with facts. For example the Roman inquisition was essentially turned into torture porn and witch hunts, and Columbus simply finding route to Asia into proving that Earth was round. Similarly troubled productions in films can make people imaging all sorts of background dramas that never happened (yes JP3 had well documented script issues but that doesn't automatically mean everyone incl actors were miserable). It only requires one person somewhere saying it and it spreads. Fake assumption, no matter if subjective or objective made. People then can keep pointing out to the "evidence" somewhere, from alleged "sources".

Here's the thing. They didn't have the internet back then. With Riddit and 4Chan, a disgruntled worker for a movie studio can spill out a lot of details about a movie and get away with it. And the power to leak stuff behind the web of anonymity on the internet without getting caught is very strong. Besides, look at all the movie leaks that turned out to right in the past. Surly, you've heard of how somebody namedStantz1984, who said he was a post production worker at Sony leaked the entire script of GB2016, right? And given how movie leaks on Reddit and 4Chan have been right before, I don't see how you can causally throw out the rumor of Neill being disgruntled. I remember on Dan's JP3 page how he was unhappy with how everything turned out. Besides, you don't think that some people wouldn't be unhappy with the script problems and the end result via them writing it on the fly?

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Mistral wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Mistral wrote:

I see some might have misinterpreted some of my saying earlier here, but I'm too lazy to start going through them now so screw it.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

It's no secret that he was quite disgruntled during the filming of JP3.

No proof whatsoever of that, only baseless rumors.

In any case, killing him off offscreen would be just as convoluted and meaningless as Henry Jones Senior in Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, or Chief Brody in Jaws the Revenge.

Rumors don't come from nowhere and in many cases turn out to be true. Troubled movie productions more often then not=disgruntled/unhappy actors. Fant4stic anybody?

Rumors can come out of nowhere and suddenly start an avalanche that just keeps rolling to no end without any factual basis. If we look at near history, many laughable medieval myths today exist not only because of the 19th century romantic movement but more importantly because in 18th century enlightenment period people made either poorly judged or otherwise subjective faulty remarks of history that had nothing to do with facts. For example the Roman inquisition was essentially turned into torture porn and witch hunts, and Columbus simply finding route to Asia into proving that Earth was round. Similarly troubled productions in films can make people imaging all sorts of background dramas that never happened (yes JP3 had well documented script issues but that doesn't automatically mean everyone incl actors were miserable). It only requires one person somewhere saying it and it spreads. Fake assumption, no matter if subjective or objective made. People then can keep pointing out to the "evidence" somewhere, from alleged "sources".

Here's the thing. They didn't have the internet back then. With Riddit and 4Chan, a disgruntled worker for a movie studio can spill out a lot of details about a movie and get away with it. And the power to leak stuff behind the web of anonymity on the internet without getting caught is very strong. Besides, look at all the movie leaks that turned out to right in the past. Surly, you've heard of how somebody namedStantz1984, who said he was a post production worker at Sony leaked the entire script of GB2016, right? And given how movie leaks on Reddit and 4Chan have been right before, I don't see how you can causally throw out the rumor of Neill being disgruntled. I remember on Dan's JP3 page how he was unhappy with how everything turned out. Besides, you don't think that some people wouldn't be unhappy with the script problems and the end result via them writing it on the fly?

Even people who have said pyramids were built by ancient astronauts have "proof" somewhere they can show without blink of an eye. It's "proof" they have carefully hand picked from pieces out of context, and everything else is ignored under the excuse of conspiracy all right, but there you go.

Now, I don't care of Ghostbusters or Sony so no, I didn't know of that what you say, but even though in that particular case the details were correct, I don't think single examples prove anything in grand scheme of things. Hell, even if 90% of these film cases turned out to be true, it still doesn't mean you should trust everything you read blindly. In other words, just because things out to be true in one case doesn't mean jack for another case. Movie A circumstances don't automatically correlate into Movie B. People can make all sorts of BS statements for whatever reasons.

I'm not saying Neill being destroyed by JP3 couldn't be true, or that people couldn't be unhappy at the time of production/script issues, I mean of course it's within the realms of possibility. There's nothing saying it didn't happen. But then again, there's no actual proof it did. Only baseless rumors. Sure it might have happened, but it might just be complete myth BS. And while I do realize that one shouldn't automatically claim something as BS because there's no proof of it, it's even more foolish to claim it happened when there's no evidence whatsoever. You claim "there's no secret", but that is guess based on guess. Which may be start of a myth similar what I was talking in my historical reference.

Finally, if you really want to stick to the age of Internet aspect... JP3 is a film that entered filming in summer of 2000, long before modern social media really took off, so even if we ignore everything else and pretend everything written on internet was true, the times were different even then.