|
KiddieGrinder posted:Robots.
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:That depends; can the robot feel pain? They aren't programmed to, however some develop feelings and gain consciousness and become wise-cracking smart asses.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
KiddieGrinder posted:Robots. But if they opened Westworld on the same island too...
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Devol_Tettran posted:But if they opened Westworld on the same island too... Okay then disaster is afoot. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
I think we're all forgetting that according to Mario, after World you get Galaxy. No human interference? Easy. Just put all the dinosaurs on a distant planet. ...and just wait until a spaceship full of humans crash lands on that planet. Try and tell me that movie wouldn't make a billion dollars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Oblivion4568238 posted:As far as park success goes, remember that Jurassic World has, in universe, been going successfully for ten whole years, and is only going to go down in flames because they decided to invent new dinosaurs. But, they must be doing something right to make that original idea of Jurassic Park work for such a long time. Quoting in case it got lost on the bottom of the last page, and because there is something new from the last time I checked that site. In addition to the InGen intern position from before, the Careers page also has applications for Veterinarian and Paddock Supervisor now. The news block on the home page and the CEO's Blog on the Media page have also been updating monthly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:15
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Nedry was merely the catalyst, it would have hosed up at some point. I absolutely agree, Jurassic Park in the first movie failed strictly due to human error. There could have been ways to show the park fall apart in unforeseen (and more importantly, unforeseeable) ways, but the movie didn't do that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:24
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:By this logic, no zoos anywhere should ever work. Debating the tactical reality of Jurassic Park's security system is missing the point quite spectacularly.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:28
|
|
|
"The park only failed because Nedry shut the fences off" seems like a conclusion that can only be reached by ignoring an awful lot of the movie. For instance, the opening scene of the movie where humans aren't prepared to control the forces of nature, which leads to: Gennero posted:Let's get something straight, John. This is not a weekend excursion, this is a serious investigation of the stability of the island. Your investors, whom I represent, are deeply concerned. Forty-eight hours from now, if they aren't convinced, I'm not convinced. And I can shut you down John. None of them are convinced.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
oddium posted:"The park only failed because Nedry shut the fences off" seems like a conclusion that can only be reached by ignoring an awful lot of the movie. That quote is completed bastardized. As someone who watched that movie daily as a child, I am very upset.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:56
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Debating the tactical reality of Jurassic Park's security system is missing the point quite spectacularly. Also debating the "tactical realism" doesn't really refute my point. There's nothing inherently flawed in the idea of a dinosaur zoo. The first zoos undoubtedly had accidents and fatalities, and yet we have fully functional zoos today. Xenomrph fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:The problem is that zoos contain animals. The dinosaurs in Jurassic park are not animals, they're monsters. The point is that no matter what precautions you take, because you're meddling with powers you cannot possibly comprehend you done gonna get hosed up This is exactly not the point of Jurassic Park, at all. The movie doesn't do quite the same job of focusing on hubris and the fallibility of man and his machines that the book does, but it repeatedly shows the animals behaving as animals, and not as horror-movie monsters. (T-Rex ride attack, basically everything to do with the herbivorous dinosaurs, T-Rex jeep chase, Gallimimus stampede/attack, Final fight in the visitor center.) There's a good dose of humans misunderstanding dinosaur behavior thrown in, though. (Nedry becoming food.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:It's missing the book's point, perhaps, but it's not exactly the viewer's fault that the movie shows everything going to poo poo very specifically because of one person's greed. "All major theme parks have delays. When they opened Disneyland in 1956, nothing worked!" "Yeah but John, if the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists."
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:07
|
|
|
Whole bunch of John Hammonds itt
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:It's missing the book's point, perhaps, but it's not exactly the viewer's fault that the movie shows everything going to poo poo very specifically because of one person's greed. While I love the movie, they really messed up this plot point when they made Hammond a lovable grandpa instead of a guy obsessed with a dream. The movie shows Hammond as someone who dreamed too big and forces outside his control brought it down, but in the book it's all on his head. For instance, in the book Wu wants to modify the dinos to make them more domestic: slower, easier to handle, easier to see on a tour. Hammond vetoes the idea because he doesn't want that: he wanted "real" dinos, he got them, and he's going to keep them. He's the head honcho and it's because of him the dangerous dinos aren't culled, he's why they don't have the equipment needed to contain the animals, he cheaped out on the parts he didn't deem essential, etc.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:"All major theme parks have delays. When they opened Disneyland in 1956, nothing worked!"
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
Well seeing as how Jurassic world is a thing it didn't get cancelled. I expect there was a monumental legal tussle between the USA and the Costa Rican governments when they realized what exactly was happening there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
I'm real pleased that the message people are taking from a tale of hubris is how dumb that guy was and how much better they'd do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:33
|
|
|
feedmyleg posted:I think we're all forgetting that according to Mario, after World you get Galaxy. No human interference? Easy. Just put all the dinosaurs on a distant planet. Uhh that movie was After Urf and it was allegedly terrible
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:34
|
|
|
The Something Awful Forums > The Finer Arts > Cinema Discusso > Jurassic World - Hammond did nothing wrong
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:36
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:and yet we have fully functional zoos today. And in these fully functional zoos that we have today every now and then lions eat a keeper or some toddler falls in and hyenas eat him. And those animals didn't cost $2 billion a head to create and keep. Or weigh 50 tons.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
In the end, Nedry can't be blamed for his deception, which is explicitly referred to as "Hammond's mistake", any more than the dinosaurs can be blamed for escaping. He's not so much a character that instigates the park's downfall as he is a manifestation of Hammond's folly. He's just another force Hammond tries to control, and inevitably smashes down the walls Hammond erects to contain his illusion
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
Now I want to see a JP movie that takes place in the Clamp Center.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:51
|
|
|
Mercury Hat posted:but in the book it's all on his head. It's not, not really. The book's talking about the interaction of all these separate actors as a part of a whole system. Hammond is a lucky street corner magician with dimestore tricks (about the only characterization true to that in the movie is movie Hammond talking about starting out with his flea circus). Wu's desperate for professional/academic recognition and wants to eventually publish. Nedry's otherwise competent but being dicked around by Hammond first with the top secret specs and then with the pay. These are relatively thin archetypal characters, but none of them ever intended anything as horrific as what was eventually accomplished or what happened during the "inGen incident". The chaos and unpredictability comes when smashing these actors together in the system.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
The failure of the park is not that the animals escaped. The failure is illustrated in the scene with the dying triceratops. The animals are not monsters, but they also aren't dinosaurs. You can't bring dinosaurs back - even if you did, the atmosphere is wrong and the plant life is wrong. So, the basic premise of the park is flawed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
I haven't read the book, even though I keep meaning too. Just out of curiosity, does Nedry meet his demise in the same way as the film?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
MacheteZombie posted:I haven't read the book, even though I keep meaning too. Just out of curiosity, does Nedry meet his demise in the same way as the film? Yeah, but it's much much much gorier. I thought it was the coolest thing ever as a nine year old. quote:"But he couldn’t see. He couldn’t see anything, and his terror was extreme. He stretched out his hands, waving them wildly in the air to ward off the attack he knew was coming. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Yeah, but it's much much much gorier. I thought it was the coolest thing ever as a nine year old. Cool. I need to snag a copy and read it soon. After I re-watched JP1 as an adult, I was always bothered by Hammond's grandpa routine and from how it sounds, Book-Hammond sounds more like what I want him to be as a character. Edit: Your edit: 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The failure of the park is not that the animals escaped. The failure is illustrated in the scene with the dying triceratops. Gonna quote myself because I love self-fellatio quote:The fact that the Rex and the raptors got out to eat a bunch of people was just the cherry on top of the sundae.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Party Boat posted:I'm real pleased that the message people are taking from a tale of hubris is how dumb that guy was and how much better they'd do it. But there's nothing in the movie to show that the park was inevitably doomed to fail and could never work ever. If that was one of the movie's goals, it half-assed it. ruby idiot railed posted:And in these fully functional zoos that we have today every now and then lions eat a keeper or some toddler falls in and hyenas eat him. And those animals didn't cost $2 billion a head to create and keep. The price tag and animal size are salient points, but not insurmountable. Those are logistics problems. We're still talking about animals here, it's not like they're unknowable Lovecraftian horrors from beyond space and time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The animals are not monsters, but they also aren't dinosaurs. You can't bring dinosaurs back - even if you did, the atmosphere is wrong and the plant life is wrong. So, the basic premise of the park is flawed. Grant even specifically calls attention to this in the third movie.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:17
|
|
|
KiddieGrinder posted:Not sure if you're being specious or not, but I guess that's the downside to the film. It tried to go for scientific accuracy, but fell down quite a few times (imho). Lions can open car doors and they're not especially intelligent. Octopus aren't even a mammalian intelligence and they can open gates and unscrew jars. Opening doors is a matter of pattern recognition, problem solving, and manual dexterity. It's not a high bar of intelligence. VAGENDA OF MANOCIDE fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Mar 30, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
I had pet hermit crabs, 8 of them fashioned a ladder out of cholla log and escaped their tank together. It was loving crazy. Domestication doesn't have much to do with it, a lot of animals are way smarter than we give them credit for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
Some octopi are arguably smart than a majority of mammals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
In both the book and the movie it really falls on Hammond why everything is perfectly in place for things to go wrong. He's all about creating something astounding and he succeeds, but it's all an illusion. The dinosaurs are crafted to look and feel like the public imagines them to be, the carnivores are built to be more ferocious and thus entertaining. They had incomplete dinosaur DNA and just went with reptilian and amphibian DNA to fill the sequence gaps in order to get the job done but didn't consider how it might ultimately alter the dinosaurs (ie. giving them the ability to change sex in a single sex environment), they have poisonous plants scattered everywhere because they look and feel "right" as Sattler points out. Now, in the book Hammond is considerably more unscrupulous about it and wants results no matter what the cost or what corners need to be cut, in the movie his downfall is his naivete and he's much more of a kindly grandfather figure who genuinely just wanted to have something amazing to show people, just like his flea circus on Petticoat Lane. With Jurassic Park he wanted something real, something people could "see and touch". He spared no expense and chose a tropical island in the Pacific because it suited the image, ignoring the fact that it was completely vulnerable to hurricanes. He hired Nedry for top-dollar because he was supposed to be the best, and when Nedry failed to deliver, Hammond just pushed him further and criticised him. Aside from Malcolm's arguments as to why the park is a horrible idea, Grant also points out that these are creatures that have been gone for 65 million years and are now suddenly put in an environment and circumstances completely different from what they evolved to be in, and now faced with human beings there's no telling what might happen. It's all doomed from the get-go, but Hammond & co. are trying to just push through it while going "no no, it's gonna be just fine."
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:Yeah, but it's much much much gorier. I thought it was the coolest thing ever as a nine year old. Yeah that's a pretty cool way to die.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
Crichton was super obsessed with intestines falling out in Jurassic Park.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
You never had the power, that's the illusion, and it's out now. edit: and our loved ones are dying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
I was nine when JP was coming out, and my parents wouldn't let me see the movie until I read the book first. Seeing as how the book is way, way gorier and violent, looks like the joke was on them.  The book had all kinds of crazy poo poo. Muldoon blowing a raptor apart with a bazooka, Grant nerve-gassing the raptor nest, Muldoon drunkenly taunting the raptors at the fences, Muldoon and Genarro using a bazooka to tranquilize a t-Rex, said T-Rex passing out hours later and almost biting its own tongue off (while Muldoon cheers in the control room). The whole island being napalmed to gently caress at the end. Genarro and Muldoon were huge badasses in the book.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 11:29 |
|
|
It's been a long time since I read the book, but I remember Hammond definitely being more abrasive in it. I can understand why it feels better to not have him be as sympathetic as he was in the movie, but the movie does feel like it was going for a sort of Disney parallel with him, especially since he was intending to sort of be the face of the park (which makes sense, since he started out with a flea circus and built himself into his position, which would have taken a lot of charisma). And honestly, I think that's a bit better than another Crichton straw man. Don't get me wrong, I love Crichton's work, but he had a tendency to write characters that were little more than "oh those greedy corporations/governments just don't get it".
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 23:18
|
|
