Originally Posted by pr_capone:
The two kids were aggravating characters and shitty actors. I actively cheered for them to be eaten throughout the entire film which sucks because I really liked the younger one in Iron Man 3.
:-)
I was half forced to watch the original JW this weekend and I was thinking the exact same thing about the little brother. I'd seen it before....it's been a long time though.....and I had forgotten what a little punk he was.
1 - he wouldn't climb down the fence so he got shocked and almost died
2 - he decided to just sit there in the kitchen and not move while two raptors are looking for him
3 - he wouldn't get out of the suv stuck in the tree
I'm sure there's more.
FYI I thought the new one was all right. loved the ending.
GO BLUE! [Reply]
Originally Posted by pr_capone:
I disliked it because I felt it could have been far more intelligent of a film than it was. Claire (played by Bryce Dallas Howard) was one of the most cardboard cutout characters I've ever seen on the big screen. I'm saying she was on par with Cate Blanchett playing Irina Spalko in Crystal Skull.
The two kids were aggravating characters and shitty actors. I actively cheered for them to be eaten throughout the entire film which sucks because I really liked the younger one in Iron Man 3.
Vincent D'Onofrio, who I normally quite enjoy, overacted the living shit out of his role. It was as if he watched Michael Rooker in Guardians and Walking Dead and decided that was the perfect way to play the overzealous paramilitary representative.
Entirely too many holes in the story, terrible acting top to bottom, and too many unbelievable sequences (that bitch's heels aren't gonna break as she wears them running through the entire movie... including the time when she is leading a T-Rex down a muddy path with just a flare / no automatic recall on those stupid hamster balls? / wild dinos are cool with people in hamster balls running around their territory? / Chris Pratt flying around the jungle on a road bike and not eating trees, rocks, and mud even once / ect, ect, ect...).
I get it... mindless dino fun. The first JP was excellent because it was both entertaining and intelligent... this one is just pandering to the lowest common denominator. Which is, of course, fine... but I was expecting SO much more.
I agree with all of this, except we diverge in the last sentence. I probably wasn't expecting as much. That may be because I didn't see it when it first came out, so I'd read enough about it to lower my expectations. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Why Not?:
Lol. Sorry, guys. I hated it.
I loved the Matrix, but I can see how people would dislike considering it's a ripoff of a collection of movies ( Terminator, Tron, Blade Runner, and Ghost in the Shell) [Reply]
Jurassic World' Passes 'Avengers' to Become Third Biggest Film in History
By Brent Lang
Jurassic World is now the third highest-grossing film in history, behind only Titanic and Avatar.
The dinosaur thriller has racked up $1.52 billion, pushing it past Marvel’s The Avengers and its $1.52 billion haul. Universal, the studio behind Jurassic World, has cracked the top five list of highest-grossing films twice this year after propelling Furious 7 to $1.51 billion globally. Prior to 2015, no Universal release had ever passed $1 billion at the worldwide box office.
Jurassic World has grossed $614.3 million at the domestic box office, making it only the fourth film in North American history to cross $600 million mark. It has generated an additional $907.3 million at the foreign box office.
The film stars Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard, with Colin Trevorrow handling directing duties. More than a decade separated installments in the series, as Jurassic Park III hit theaters in 2001.
Jurassic World& has one remaining territory left to open — Japan, where it debuts on August 5. With ticket sales winding down in the U.S. and China, the two biggest markets for film, Jurassic World is unlikely to topple Titanic and its $2.18 billion haul and Avatar and its $2.79 billion bounty from their spots on the chart.
“It will have to settle for No. 3 and go home crying,” jokes Phil Contrino, vice president and chief analyst at BoxOffice.com. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bowser:
Still haven't seen it, lol
I finally got around to seeing this on Friday.
My wife and I were laughing out loud for the whole movie - sometimes at parts that were meant to be funny, sometimes at parts that weren't meant to be funny.
It was neat to see a big t-rex fight. It was neat to see a giant water dino eat stuff.
The story was retarded/nonexistent and the acting was horrible.
Were they going for a sharknado type thing here with better special effects?
I understand that it is supposed to be mindless dino entertainment, but I'm disappointed in our country if this is the third highest grossing movie of all time (or whatever it is). I'm pretty sure I won't be watching this one again.
I've only see the first JP movie, so I can't compare it to the second and third movies. [Reply]
