|
The dialogue seems pretty attuned to the thematic concerns of the franchise so far, but it's also incredibly ham-handed, blatant exposition, and it's easy to see why this kind of gracelessness automatically puts people on edge when you compare it to the slickness of the original's presentation. I do like the arc of the raptors through the series, though. They start as emotively charged "bad guys" in JP1, are ambiguous agents of natural selection in JP2, by JP3 they're surprisingly sympathetic doppelgangers of the human cast and now, it seems, they're finally a part of the family for realsies. T-Rex, meanwhile, got murdered and usurped by her villainous doppelganger the last time around, and based on everything we've seen so far seems to have been completely supplanted by Satanosaurus. Some neato trajectories there, and they make me feel like the movies really are progressing.
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
IMB posted:How strange that a 90-second dialogue only scene pulled from the middle of a movie no one has watched yet looks weird out of context. It doesn't look "weird", it's poorly written and acted. That of course doesn't mean the movie as a whole won't be fun as heck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
The CGI car in the background kept distracting me from the dialogue.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 19:53
|
|
|
I thought Chris Pratt did fine with that scene but Howard couldn't really sell her lines. It also has more than 10 seconds of dialogue involving things I don't care about (their previous relationship). Though if the movie stays true to the scene and they absolutely do not end up together at all in the end, that'd be pretty good. But, Dan Didio posted:He's the wacky, carefree romantic! Nah. That dude ain't romantic.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 20:29
|
|
|
It's not a damning scene, just forced. The movie is telling us the romantic conflict we're expected to accept that they have. What if the scene showed him asking her out for the first time, and she scanned her itinerary right in front of him before saying no? It would be on the level of Sattler bailing on Malcolm in the middle of listening to himself talk.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 20:33
|
|
|
The scene doesn't seem good, mostly because I can't imagine it does anything that shouldn't come up elsewhere in the movie. Also it's clunky. It is pretty funny to contrast it with how the Sattler/Grant relationship is handled in JP1, which is ambiguous to the point of near confusion (and the movie's kinda better for it).
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
porfiria posted:It is pretty funny to contrast it with how the Sattler/Grant relationship is handled in JP1, which is ambiguous to the point of near confusion (and the movie's kinda better for it). What? Grant flat-out says to Malcolm they're a couple.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:I kind of liked that scene, and I agree that it's nice to see Chris Pratt be funny rather than stoic, like the trailers kind of portray him. Ah, now eventually you do plan to have dinosaurs on your, on your dinosaur trailer, right? Hello?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:14
|
|
|
Timby posted:What? Grant flat-out says to Malcolm they're a couple. Well yeah, but it's kind of unclear up that the point, and even then the exchange is kind of odd. It's something like. MALCOLM Is Dr. Sattler single? GRANT Why do you wanna know? MALCOLM Oh I see so you're.... GRANT Yeah! And the way Sam Neil delivers the line is weirdly defensive--like he says it really weird.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
It's a particularly weird exchange for sure, and the relationship is deliberately left ambiguous despite it--Spielberg actually cut a bunch of dialogue that would've locked them in as an item, I believe.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Well yeah, but it's kind of unclear up that the point, and even then the exchange is kind of odd. It's something like. It's the same ambiguity as in the original Star Wars. Luke: So, what do you think of her, Han? Han: I'm tryin' not to, kid. Luke: Good. Han: Still, she's got a lot of spirit. I don't know, whaddya think? You think a princess and a guy like me... Luke: No. Although that's written like a comedy scene, Hamil plays it the same way. The 'no' is more of a command than an opinion.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Well yeah, but it's kind of unclear up that the point, and even then the exchange is kind of odd. It's something like. Isn't this scene like, less than 30minutes into the movie though?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
Timby posted:What? Grant flat-out says to Malcolm they're a couple. Grant cuts off the question with a defensive "Yeah." He could have been protecting her from Malcom. Script rewrites added a Grant-Sattler relationship (e.g., kissing and calling him "honey"), but Spielberg removed those portions from the final version. Toady fucked around with this message at 21:46 on Apr 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure she calls him honey when they're in the trailer talking to Hammond in the beginning. Edit: Yup. quote:John Hammond: No, no, no I can manage this. I know my way around the kitchen. I'll come right to the point. I like you, both of you. I can tell instantly about people. It's a gift. I own an island, off the coast of Costa Rica. I've leased it from the government and I've spent the last five years setting up a kind of biological preserve. Really spectacular, spared no expense. It'll make the one I've got down in Kenya look like a petting zoo. And there's no doubt, our attractions will drive kids out of their minds.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
I think the only time is the "Smaller versions of adults, honey" line, but there was much more in the script drafts, including kissing and declarations of love.
Toady fucked around with this message at 21:52 on Apr 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:It's the same ambiguity as in the original Star Wars. Yeah it seems so. Like why not respond to Malcolm's initial question with a flat, "no we're together." And it's almost exactly midway through the movie. (Also as a side note, Laura Dern's 25 in JP, and Sam Neil's like 46. Golblum's 41). I remember being baffled by the whole thing when I was seven, and I still think the way it plays is quite interesting. There's a bit of touching between them at the beginning, and I guess there's no other way to interpret Ellie's desire to get Grant to interact with kids. And apparently there was a cut scene that made things all totally explicit. But in the final film they're curiously chaste--when they reunite at the end of the movie it's a emotional embrace but there's no kiss.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
I always assumed that they had been in a serious relationship before the events of the movie, but it's kinda winding down and complicated.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Toady posted:Grant cuts off the question with a defensive "Yeah." He could have been protecting her from Malcom. Script rewrites added a Grant-Sattler relationship (e.g., kissing and calling him "honey"), but Spielberg removed those portions from the final version. Sattler was practically in heat around Malcolm in the shooting script: code:code:feedmyleg fucked around with this message at 22:07 on Apr 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
I never felt like the relationship was ambiguous. They live in a trailer together, they talk about having kids a few different times in a way that indicates that has been a long-standing disagreement in their relationship, Ellie calls Grant honey, Grant straight up says that he and Ellie are dating when asked about it by Malcolm... The scene with Malcolm is meant to confirm 100% that Grant and Ellie are together, but that they've reached a place in their relationship where people can't even tell that they're together.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Sharing a mobile paleontology lab doesn't necessarily mean they're together. Just before Hammond's helicopter landed, the script had them embrace and kiss, but the removal suggests the ambiguity was deliberate. They could be a couple, but it's one interpretation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
She wants kids, he doesn't. It's not rocket science guys.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 22:30
|
|
|
JP3 plays with the ambiguity by having Grant playing with toy dinosaurs with a child, and then you find out it's not his kid, and Ellie is married to someone else.
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 22:34
|
|
|
Mr. Flunchy posted:She wants kids, he doesn't. It's not rocket science guys. Malcolm seems to understand it as well. But I certainly DON'T understand - is Grant in a relationship with (in the book) one of his students, or not? "Maltby's solution is to insist that this scene provided an exemplary case of how Casablanca 'deliberately constructs itself in such a way as to offer distinct and alternative sources of pleasure to two people sitting next to each other in the same cinema,' i.e. that it 'could play to both 'innocent' and 'sophisticated' audiences alike.' While, at the level of its surface narrative line, the film can be constructed by the spectator as obeying the strictest moral codes, it simultaneously offers to the 'sophisticated' enough clues to construct an alternative, sexually much more daring narrative line. This strategy is more complex than it may appear: precisely BECAUSE you knew that you are as it were 'covered' or 'absolved from guilty impulses' by the official story line, you are allowed to indulge in dirty fantasies - you know that these fantasies are not 'for serious,' that they do not count in the eyes of the big Other... So our only correction to Maltby would be that we do not need two spectators sitting next to each other: one and the same spectator, split in itself, is sufficient." -Zizek, "Shostakovich in Casablanca"
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
porfiria posted:Yeah it seems so. Like why not respond to Malcolm's initial question with a flat, "no we're together." And it's almost exactly midway through the movie. (Also as a side note, Laura Dern's 25 in JP, and Sam Neil's like 46. Golblum's 41).
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
Axeface posted:The dialogue seems pretty attuned to the thematic concerns of the franchise so far, but it's also incredibly ham-handed, blatant exposition, and it's easy to see why this kind of gracelessness automatically puts people on edge when you compare it to the slickness of the original's presentation. quote:Dr. Ellie Sattler: So, what are you thinking?
|
|
#
?
Apr 9, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
Wasn't that literally a quote by one of the animatronics people?
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 00:15
|
|
|
Toady posted:Sharing a mobile paleontology lab doesn't necessarily mean they're together. Just before Hammond's helicopter landed, the script had them embrace and kiss, but the removal suggests the ambiguity was deliberate. They could be a couple, but it's one interpretation. Having them share the trailer and claim they were saving champagne for a special occasion doesn't mean they're a couple, but it definitely implies it along with the other list of stuff in the movie.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 00:22
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4EY4qZO4vC4 Yes. I am down for this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 00:49
|
|
|
The REAL Goobusters posted:Yes. I'm not only because he should be living with the raptors so that entire conversation needed to occur while 2 raptors are following a laser pointer or something. Raptors are scaly cats
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
I thought that scene was fine. Jurassic park was never the most high art/cinema. It's gonna be fine guys.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:10
|
|
|
Luminous Obscurity posted:Wasn't that literally a quote by one of the animatronics people? To which Spielberg replied, "Don't you mean extinct?" Or something to that effect.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:I'm not only because he should be living with the raptors so that entire conversation needed to occur while 2 raptors are following a laser pointer or something. The verdict? Whether big or small, cats are cats. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
The REAL Goobusters posted:I thought that scene was fine. Jurassic park was never the most high art/cinema. It's gonna be fine guys. Jurassic Park is the most high art/cinema.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:27
|
|
|
Jurassic Park is what happens when the uh... Watchmen... Goes too far or something
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:32
|
|
|
The REAL Goobusters posted:I thought that scene was fine. Jurassic park was never the most high art/cinema. It's just a Unix System.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:42
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Jurassic Park is the most high art/cinema. Jurassic Park is poo poo compared to the TRUE summer film of 1993. Last Action Hero
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 01:49
|
|
|
Ehud posted:Having them share the trailer and claim they were saving champagne for a special occasion doesn't mean they're a couple, but it definitely implies it along with the other list of stuff in the movie. Well, the trailer is a mobile lab full of equipment. But there are suggestions of a relationship, like when she puts the handkerchief around his neck, yet there's also no kissing or other public displays of love. My interpretation, which someone else mentioned, was a past relationship that cooled off, but they still work together. Koepp's script left no doubt, so the removal of those portions is interesting.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Happy Noodle Boy posted:Jurassic Park is poo poo compared to the TRUE summer film of 1993. I liked Last Action Hero  . But holy poo poo, that movie gets loving dark towards the end of it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
Xenomrph posted:There's a great YouTube video from a "big cat" nature preserve where they investigate if lions and tigers will chase a laser pointer. I'm hoping they've based the raptors off parrots. Raised poorly or treated badly and they can be complete assholes that want nothing more than to chew your flesh off, but well trained and with mutual respect they can be the friendliest animals around.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 12:13 |
|
|
The magic of the Grant/Sattler relationship ambiguity is that just like real life, you are questioning if two people are an item or not based on subtle hints and clues. its a lot more organic than whatever happened in the new clip on the last page.
|
|
#
?
Apr 10, 2015 05:30
|
|
