|
man nurse posted:I mean I think there's very little argument that the first three movies are a definite case of "the sequel isn't as good, the third one is even worse". But I did find them entertaining on some level, 2 in particular. Jurassic World is a funny case where I don't think anyone was really under the illusion that the movie was "good" in any objective sense, but there was definitely a collective feeling that it nonetheless "hit the spot," so to speak. It was a shockingly huge hit (it broke The Avengers' opening weekend record at a time when everyone figured it was gonna take a Star Wars or Avatar sequel to top that) and while the subsequent two also put up good numbers, everyone seemed to intuitively know not to expect anything like the first Jurassic World, that one just hit the zeigeist. My guess: I think there's something particularly compelling to people about a dinosaur theme park, both for its own sake and because that's what makes Jurassic Park unique. Without that it's "a dinosaur movie" which is always awesome (potentially) but it's less distinctive. I think they sensed that and you can tell there was an attempt with the latter two to extend the concept beyond "a dinosaur movie," though what makes it "Jurassic Park" is that it's a park. I think for a lot of people Jurassic World felt like the most satisfying sequel based on that alone, even before considering anything else.
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2023 08:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 23:13 |
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Jurassic World feels too mean to me, especially within the context of previous entries to the series. The way the movie drags out killing the au pair/nanny/assistant makes it seem like the director thinks she deserves her fate. Sir Kodiak posted:To me, though, the solution to this is that there should have been half a dozen similarly over-the-top kills. Because you're right it comes off as some sort of judgment to have just this one lady get so thoroughly wrecked by the dinos. A Fancy Hat posted:The nanny death is weird because it's insanely violent and elaborate compared to the rest of the movie, then nobody mentions her after that. The entire Jurassic World trilogy is so bloodless and unmemorable, but this feels like something from a straight-up dinosaur horror movie. I'm obviously in the minority here (and I've only seen Jurassic World once, like, seven years ago so that scene's not exactly fresh in my memory) but it strikes me a little backwards (or maybe overly cynical) to be horrified by a horrific scene and presume you had the wrong reaction to it. I know Carol J. Clover "Men Women and Chainsaws" and all that but Jurassic Park in particular is not a series that expects you to cheer when people are violently eaten. In general I feel like most "schadenfreude" deaths in movies tend to be tamer than most specifically so you won't feel horrified by them. The ones that come immediately to mind for me - Burke in Aliens, Ludlow in The Lost World, Nedry in Jurassic Park - actually all happen off screen, in fact.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2023 20:51
|
|
|
Alright I finally went and reviewed a clip of the scene in question to see what I can make of it with fresh eyes (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE3OYwFhleg). I don't think any schadenfreude is intended but I think I may know why it comes off that way to some folks, because there are competing interests at work here: it's trying to sell horror and spectacle at the same time. My impression is that the lengthy death scene is a genuine attempt at evoking horror and sympathy from the audience: without it you're just left with the sight of pandemonium at a theme park, which is inherently ironic and easy to read simply as comedic, so they need something to sell the danger. There's a limit to how much gore or number of deaths they want to show, so instead they go for a protracted and frightening death scene to do the job. This is a fate that is so bad it made you feel for a character you didn't even like; that's what these kids are up against. The thing is the scene is obviously also intended to be a gratuitous special effects and creature showcase. It's rather spectacular to see the camera follow this woman as she's quickly hurled into the air, dropped into the water, and then picked back up again only to have both her and the pteranodon unexpectedly swallowed by a massive, leaping prehistoric water creature. It's sort of like watching a circus where the acrobats ends up falling to their deaths but the ringleader and production just carry on like nothing happened. I think the ambivalence is interesting but I can see why people might look at it and feel like the movie "doesn't care" about the woman's suffering.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2023 13:04
|
|
|
Also I'm noticing the Youtube account that uploaded the vid is called "Vore in Media" and the description has a bunch of short keyword-like tags like "Hard, Fatal, Oral, Malicious, Bite Size, Fun Size, Female Pred" and am starting to wonder what their intentions with this video were... 
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2023 13:15
|
|