Recommended Posts

Quote: "The 4th movie is never good." Add Shrek 4 to that list.

JP3 was in 2000 so I don't mind seeing people running away from dinosaurs again after 13 years. :p But the dino rendering has to feel lifelike, the plot has to be good, not stupid and convincing. First two were based on Michael Cricton's novel and yet the 2nd movie wasn't as good.

1st movie's plot was good: Zoo like theme park on Isla Nublar where they think they have dinosaurs under control until that fat guy disables security to sell the embryos and all hell breaks loose

2nd movie's plot was crap: Stupid girlfriend going to Isla Sorna and Hammond's nephew wanting the dinos captured on land

3rd movie's plot was okay-ish: Parents lie to Alan Grant that they will only be scouting the island from the plane and then knock him out. The dinosaur rendering in JP3 was crap though and visibly inferior to the first 2 movies, I LOLed at the fight between the T-Rex and Spinosaurus. They almost felt like robotic monsters.

You haven't played Telltale Games' Jurassic Park by any chance? The story in the game revolves around that embryo can, simultaneous to the film. It's an adventure game with a lot of quicktime events, which sounds kind of horrible on paper, however they absolutely nailed the first Jurassic Park's feel and it was very funny too. Oh, and the kid was likeable (for me anyway), unlike the ones in the film.

Suffered my way through it. I did say in my post "like the game" Biosyn sending a person to find Nedry if he didn't turn up.

I don't think a film set on the same island running parallel would be the way to go, people would think it would be too much like the first film.

Suffered my way through it. I did say in my post "like the game" Biosyn sending a person to find Nedry if he didn't turn up.

I don't think a film set on the same island running parallel would be the way to go, people would think it would be too much like the first film.

Yeah, missed that, latched on to the last paragraph for some reason, too tired I guess.

I suppose you're right about using the same locations. On the same note maybe they should use completely different set of characters, the original actors are kind of old to be running in the jungle. Hopefully Spielberg will have likeable children this time or I'm going to be rooting for the dinosaurs again.

They also must knock the dinosaurs' intelligence to more plausible levels. In the sequels it kept poking at my suspension of disbelief.

Plot:

Terrorists in Alaska manage to acquire dinosaur DNA and in collaboration with a rogue scientist manage to create an aerosolised retrovirus that turns humans into dinosaurs. However, a freak snow storm damages the laboratory and unleashes the retrovirus on its creators, transforming them into aggressive dinosaurs. Desperately seeking warmer conditions the dinosaurs head south, wreaking havoc in Canada before arriving in Washington State. With the US military powerless to take on the thick skinned creates the CIA comes up with an ingenious plan to lure them to the Mexican border, where they can be used to battle the Mexican drug cartels. Unfortunately the plan goes awry as the dinosaurs are travelling through California when a group of survivalists attempt to take them down with high calibre assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, leading to chaos on the streets of Los Angeles. Things take a turn for the worse as the creatures make their way towards a vulnerable nuclear power plant near the San Andreas fault, where a breach of the reactor would result in a quake that would cause the entire western landmass to slide into the sea. With time fast running out the US President has little option but to launch a tactical nuclear strike against the rampaging beasts. As the country mourns its losses the film ends with a subtitled scene in Mexico, where viewers see the leaders of the Mexican drug cartels discussing their plan to unite to invade the United States.

  • Like 2

Plot:

Terrorists in Alaska manage to acquire dinosaur DNA and in collaboration with a rogue scientist manage to create an aerosolised retrovirus that turns humans into dinosaurs. However, a freak snow storm damages the laboratory and unleashes the retrovirus on its creators, transforming them into aggressive dinosaurs. Desperately seeking warmer conditions the dinosaurs head south, wreaking havoc in Canada before arriving in Washington State. With the US military powerless to take on the thick skinned creates the CIA comes up with an ingenious plan to lure them to the Mexican border, where they can be used to battle the Mexican drug cartels. Unfortunately the plan goes awry as the dinosaurs are travelling through California when a group of survivalists attempt to take them down with high calibre assault rifles and rocket-propelled grenades, leading to chaos on the streets of Los Angeles. Things take a turn for the worse as the creatures make their way towards a vulnerable nuclear power plant near the San Andreas fault, where a breach of the reactor would result in a quake that would cause the entire western landmass to slide into the sea. With time fast running out the US President has little option but to launch a tactical nuclear strike against the rampaging beasts. As the country mourns its losses the film ends with a subtitled scene in Mexico, where viewers see the leaders of the Mexican drug cartels discussing their plan to unite to invade the United States.

Sounds Resident Evil-esq

Id kill myself if that was the plot to JP4. I'm a huge Jurassic Park nerd, I've read the books back to front maybe 10-15 times and seen the films as many if not more times.

It probably won't be but I would think somewhere in there the dinosaurs are going to be able to think for themselves, I wonder what the new script draft contained...hopefully better then this...

pjmuliz8.jpg

It probably won't be but I would think somewhere in there the dinosaurs are going to be able to think for themselves, I wonder what the new script draft contained...hopefully better then this...

pjmuliz8.jpg

Yeah I've read multiple rumours, dino hybrids, military trained dinos, etc..

That's the part you found implausible? Not the CIA using the dinosaurs to fight Mexican drug cartels? :rolleyes:

Thought you wanted to go somewhere with that statement, I was just poking :D

It probably won't be but I would think somewhere in there the dinosaurs are going to be able to think for themselves, I wonder what the new script draft contained...hopefully better then this...

They (raptors) already had ridiculous intelligence, esp in the sequels. I'd like it more if they'd go for a survival horror approach.

On another note, I wonder how much of the current knowledge they're going to implement.

The 4th movie is never good.

Alien 4

Terminator 4

The 4th Star Wars

The 4th Bourne

etc

Bourne Legacy is fantastic. Easily the best of the Bourne films.

At least Spielberg is back to direct it. It would be cool to go back to the original Island and bring back the 2 kids

Except he isn't directing it. He is the producer.

I enjoyed the first two. The first one is obviously the best, but I thought the second one was pretty good. Incidentally, of the three, the first two were based off books, and the third one wasn't, which is why it was bad. The second one though, aside from the ending, was pretty good IMO.

Nope, I thought it was awesome too.

And if I think Terminator Salvation was number 4, and I thought that was the best one.

Terminator 4 was pretty good. It was infinitely better than T3, and about the same as T1, but Terminator 2 blows them all out the water IMO.

post-125341-0-16910500-1358021467.gif

:cry:

The first film was decent but the rest were terrible. I wasn't impressed with the second film at all, especially the Godzilla-style ending, and the third film was a train-wreck from the get-go. I'm quite surprised that they're going ahead with Jurassic Park 4, though Hollywood isn't known for its originality.

  • 1 month later...

The first film was decent but the rest were terrible. I wasn't impressed with the second film at all, especially the Godzilla-style ending, and the third film was a train-wreck from the get-go. I'm quite surprised that they're going ahead with Jurassic Park 4, though Hollywood isn't known for its originality.

Joe Johnston the Director threw out the whole JP3 script just before filming was due to start, they were on a tight schedule so had to start filming and they made the film up as they went along, he was extremely resistant to the ideas of the writers in favour of his own. Thats why JP3 was garbage.

Even though they are on a ridiculously tight schedule they could get this right, there are no more books to base the movie on I am interested to see what they make of it.

Joe Johnston the Director threw out the whole JP3 script just before filming was due to start, they were on a tight schedule so had to start filming and they made the film up as they went along, he was extremely resistant to the ideas of the writers in favour of his own. Thats why JP3 was garbage.

I'd not heard that before but it figures. I know that a similar thing happened to the previous James Bond film, Quantum of Solace, due to the writers strike and due to unions and contracts the only people who would work on the script were the director and Daniel Craig. In the end Daniel Craig ended up writing part of the script, which he said was a horrible experience.

  • 2 weeks later...

Laura Dern talks potentially returning for ?Jurassic Park 4?

Of all the projects Laura Dern has worked on, the one she is perhaps most known for is ?Jurassic Park.? That?s why it seemed only natural to ask her about the upcoming ?Jurassic Park 4,? which has been discussed for years but finally seems to be coming to fruition soon.

?I know a little and it?s been ever-changing. It?s been evolving for many years as Steven has been considering it so that?s all I can say right now,? Dern told IFC on the Spirit Awards red carpet. ?But very excited about the original ?Jurassic Park? coming out in 3D this summer. I?m going to see it soon, which will be very interesting.?

There?s little known about ?Jurassic Park 4,? specifically if it will involve the cast of the original ?Jurassic Park? or what it will be about. Dern doesn?t seem to have decided whether or not she?d want to join the movie if she had an opportunity to do so.

?Oh, I don?t know. We?ll see what they do. Right now we?re just focused on our party of this summer,? she said with a laugh.

?Jurassic Park 4? is in some capable hands. Spielberg is producing the movie along with Frank Marshall, with Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver having written the screenplay for the movie. It?s due in theaters on June 13, 2014, and does not currently have a director attached. ?Jurassic Park 3D? is due out on April 5.

  • 3 weeks later...

Safety Not Guaranteed's Colin Trevorrow to Direct Jurassic Park 4

It was announced in January that Universal Pictures is moving forward with Jurassic Park 4 and, today, a director has been named. Safety Not Guaranteed's Colin Trevorrow will helm the franchise sequel.

The Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment production will be produced by Frank Marshall and Patrick Crowley with Steven Spielberg as Executive Producer. The script was written by Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver (Rise of the Planet of the Apes).

Trevorrow's Safety Not Guarantted was released through FilmDistrict and Big Beach Films and stars Aubrey Plaza, Mark Duplass and Jake Johnson. The critically-acclaimed film debuted at the 2012 Sundance Film Festival where screenwriter Derek Connolly won the prestigious Waldo Salt Screenwriting Award. The film also won Best First Screenplay at this year?s Independent Spirit Awards, where Trevorrow was nominated for Best First Feature.

The original 1993 Jurassic Park will see a 3D re-release on April 5 of this year, also hitting IMAX 3D theaters. Jurassic Park 4, meanwhile, is scheduled for release on June 13, 2014.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!