Recommended Posts

Or it is because of other films coming out near same time...

If it was just that, then Universal would have announced a new date. It is very rare for a film to be pushed back indefinitely like this unless there's major problems with it.

What concerns me is that this new director is doing exactly what Joe Johnston did with JP3. From what I recall, five weeks before filming was suppose to start, Johnston rejected the entire script in order to pursue the "rescue mission" plot.

According to Variety, Trevorrow is rewriting the script: http://variety.com/2013/film/news/universal-delays-jurassic-park-4-release-1200477065/

Filming was suppose to start June 24, so in about six weeks. Sound familiar?

My expectations for this film have plummeted because of this development, coupled with the tweets that have since been deleted, I don't have any faith that this film will be even remotely decent anymore.

Well we've waited this long haven't we :/

I believe that's because the most overrated director in Hollywood, Steven Spielberg, has always been attached to this franchise. Then you add crap writers and Joe Johnston to the mix, we end up with Jurassic Park 3. Just look at the stupid idea Spielberg had where mutated dinosaurs would be used in wars.

Universal needs to get rid of everyone who's been attached to the previous films and start fresh. There's plenty of other talented writers/directors out there that could do a lot better job!

Gareth Edwards comes to mind who wrote/directed Monster (2010). Matt Reeves, Drew Goddard; I would even trust Joss Whedon with this franchise more than the people who've always been attached.

I believe that's because the most overrated director in Hollywood, Steven Spielberg, has always been attached to this franchise. Then you add crap writers and Joe Johnston to the mix, we end up with Jurassic Park 3. Just look at the stupid idea Spielberg had where mutated dinosaurs would be used in wars.

Universal needs to get rid of everyone who's been attached to the previous films and start fresh. There's plenty of other talented writers/directors out there that could do a lot better job!

Gareth Edwards comes to mind who wrote/directed Monster (2010). Matt Reeves, Drew Goddard; I would even trust Joss Whedon with this franchise more than the people who've always been attached.

Colin Trevorrow is that bad?

Safety Not Guaranteed was a fun movie but I think it needs someone who has directed a monster movie so Gareth Edwards seems a good choice

Yeah I researched him, be basically has a clean slate so there's some chance he go actually do something good to make a name for himself.

Colin Trevorrow is that bad?

It isn't that he is bad, but a relatively new director coming in and ordering major script changes either suggests the script that Universal approved was absolute rubbish or Trevorrow is going in the same direction as Johnston did with JP3. With only six weeks to filming, and no new release date, it doesn't bode well for the film to be good.

That's just my opinion and I honestly hope that I'm absolutely incorrect and it turns out to be the best film ever, but at this point, I just don't see that happening.

That's just my opinion and I honestly hope that I'm absolutely incorrect and it turns out to be the best film ever, but at this point, I just don't see that happening.

Well wasn't this supposed to be a reboot of somesorts? so they have to get it right!

  • 2 weeks later...
While we wait for the next official announcement, actor Sam Neill - best known for playing Doctor Alan Grant in 1993's Jurassic Park and 2001's Jurassic Park III - told Stuff.co.nz that he will unlikely reprise the role for Jurassic Park 4. He doesn't detail why, but hints at the reason in a brief comment. "I'm told it's a big reboot, a total re-jig." Producer Frank Marshall said last year that the film will not be a reboot, but a sequel (as expected).
  • 4 weeks later...

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

 

 

What ???

 

It's watchable but far from the best.

 

 

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.

 

The first movie was really good. But you are too young to be able to fully grasp how awesome it was back in 1993 (you were only 7 yo). I saw Jurassic Park when i was 16 in a drive-in. It was raining a bit and we were 3 in a jeep. One of the best ******* experience i ever had in a drive in.

A ?reliable source? of JoBlo.com?s has passed along some intriguing plot details for the film, which is set to be directed by Colin Trevorrow. In short, the film will take place at the original site of Jurassic Park, Isla Nublar, which is now fully operational. Yes, we actually get to see Jurassic Park as it was always intended.

Of course, things can?t remain peachy for long. Here are the alleged details:
 

JURASSIC PARK 4, set in present day Isla Nublar, is now an actual theme park, as originally intended by John Hammond in the first film. It garners 10 million visitors per year and is completely safe ? until it?s not. The park itself is described as very Sea World-esque and includes an area called the Isla Nublar Lagoon. That means underwater dino?s for the first time. No indication of what kind, but there?s concept art showing one of the aquatic dino?s, as part of a show, jumping out of the lagoon and eating a strung up great white shark like it was a fish for a dolphin at sea world.

As part of a show, you ask? That?s right, folks, this will feature ?tamed? dino?s. In fact, our source indicated that the usually menacing Velociraptors (which will finally be muzzled, along with the T-Rex ? until they?re not) will actually be used to help fight the threat, which begins in the form of a new dinosaur, not seen in any of the previous films (and not disclosed to us) shows to be much smarter than originally thought and is the main cause of havoc breaking out at the park.

So, to sum it all up, JURASSIC PARK 4 will take place back on Isla Nublar with a fully operational dinosaur theme park (I?m sure no expense was spared) that?s both prosperous and safe, until a new dinosaur figures out a way to wreak havoc, causing the use of the now tamed Velociraptors (and T-Rex? Unclear) as a means to fighting the threat.

 

 

pgjeu89o.gif

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.
  • 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!