 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: "Jurassic Park III" posted by the-real-CarlEber on July 28, 2001 at 07:42:06:
FWIW, I like all of the Jurassic Park movies and each is a remarkable film when gauged on somewhat different scales. The first had the grandest scope and suspense, the second, the best storyline and in-jokes and most intense and literal "cliffhanger," and the third, the most convincing effects (i.e., human/dinosaur interaction). So what are the flaws? Well, in the first, Spielburg sacrifices continuity for thrills (i.e., especially with the embarassingly obvious Tyranosaurus paddock changing elevations scene) and indulges in his "cute kid" sentimentality waaaaay too often, in the second the velociraptor/compound battle sequence was too staged and fortuitously resolved (i.e., it starts looking like a theme park ride culminating in the last second escape to a conveniently waiting helicopter), and in the third, under Joe Johnston, the action sequences lacked the level of intense suspense Spielburg brings to the director's chair (i.e., the dinosaurs even looked too rehearsed, but at least none of them missed their mark).Taken as a series, the worst conceptual flaw was the killing of the main hero in the second act of the third movie! Huh? Yep, I'm commenting on the same movies and you're probably wondering who the heck I'm refering too. Well, the "hero" of the Jurassic Park series isn't any of the live action characters, but rather the noble T-Rex which saves their bacon in the first film and does away with the villain of the second! Unfortunately, "Mr. Spineysaurus" does away with our hero mid way through the third film leaving us only the obnoxious couple and poor suckered Dr. Grant to root for. In the end, another wise-beyond-his-years kid saves the day, but this viewer was left thinking he would've probably been better off with the velociraptors as guardians.
As I said, and in spite of these criticisms, I passionately like all 3 movies and consider each one a gem; thay will be enduring classics, IMHO. With the departure of the terradactyls there is even the hint of a fourth on the horizon, but that will depend on whether Hollywood's raptors can devour enough box-office receipts from #3. What I'd really like to see next would be for James Cameron to direct the fourth in the continuing saga. I realize that the liklihood of that is slim and none, but knowing what he can do with this kind of subject matter I bet it would be a tightly filmed nail-biter with VERY ferocious dinos!
Cheers,
AuPh
Follow Ups:
It's all a matter of personal opinion any way...I found something to enjoy in each movie, but wouldn't call them high art...which is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on the viewer and his or her preferences. Notice I did not say they were not cleverly crafted to be certain things to certain people...there is a talent in being able to judge the masses, pull their strings, please a lot of people, and sell a lot of merchandice (and have enough confidence or comfort with that approach to show the gift shop at JP in the first movie)
Me? I can enjoy JP for what it is, but am still bothered by many sticking points. Especially ridiculous set-ups (eg having a girl go for a flashlight when there's a T-Rex outside the vehicle), or things which the audience takes in step eagerly when maybe they shouldn't (eg Dr Grant knowing that the Raptors will attack from the sides when the victim is distracted by one in front, based on fossil record...but the park warden/big game hunter has no clue to their proclivities despite opportunities to view them in action in captivity). Or things that beg pointed questions (eg how did they replicate ancient plant life?). That being said, there are a lot of neat little things peppered throughout.
The other movies have their good and bad points too, and everyone can be an armchair director or scriptwriter. But for me, at least, I can't watch the original or sequels without at some time (or multiple times) thinking either "Why oh why did they do THAT, it spoils a great scene, or takes the luster off a great idea" or "Damn, there were so many missed opportunities that would make more sense and have been better cinema or a better thrill ride" or "That's just plain__________ (stupid, ridiculous, corny, contrived, etc)." Examples? The loud cell phone in the Spino (easily heard from far away, and conveniently found)...and didn't Mr. U have a similar sounding phone when he was called by Kirby, or am I mis-remembering things? TLs annoying screaming. T-Rex piss. Pristine chocolate and snacks in a warm jungle environment. The use of Barney, already done in the tragic Godzilla movie. 20mm weapon with no recoil, and which of course never do any visible damage to the Spino. Why is the dude in the tree dead? Missed stylistic opportunities (ie slightly prolonged Pterandon chase scene, with Pteranodon claws and legs seen in the underwater shots, trying to grab the swimming humans as they would fish, etc; more dramatic use of the Marines, both as movie plot excitement and a symbolic manner of showing mankind's way of dealing with animals, etc, but not an Ewok vs stormtrooper type of thing; and so forth and so on). Oh, and in JPII, what got into the confined spaces of the ship to eviscerate the crew? The small T-rex? Might of been interesting, if less plausible, if velociraptors had also stowed away, and disperesed amongst the city after arrival in the US of A, without a tidy wrap-up at the movie end...but having T-rex and Raptors on the mainland I suppose would have been too busy, etc, in the movie. For me JPIII felt like watching a long trailer...I was left anticpating a full fleshed out plot with improved scenes and dialog...ie appetizer rather than a well-balanced meal.
In any case, to each their own...everyone can enjoy or dislike whatever they like...
and all are well thought out. Dave, a great post, I commend you.
(nt)
Even special effects can move me sometimes like the first JP... but I have enough hollywood movies...
There was no Tyranosaur paddock changing elevation, unless there is another version of the movie that I'm unaware of.I must also take issue on the weakest points: I DO NOT feel that Spielberg got trapped into his child-like sentimentality overmuch in the FIRST movie. But I do agree that in the second movie, the idea that Jeff's daughter could do some gymnastics on a bar, and knock a raptor through a wall and tens of feet out and down to the ground....that was just about as silly as the show "Dark Angel"....I'm tired of chicks that "kick ass"...chicks don't kick ass in real life! And nobody could kick a raptor's ass...they were indeed portrayed the best in the first movie...like all other aspects, again, the first movie "rules"!
"and in the third, under Joe Johnston, the action sequences lacked the level of intense suspense Spielburg brings to the director's chair"....
I COULD NOT AGREE MORE WITH THAT!
It is a pleasure to converse with you, Audiophil!
Lol! Dark Angel does indeed suck! She's no Buffy.Rob C
... paddock changing elevation scene, I assure you it does occur. Not only do I have this film on LD (and eventually all 3 on DVD), I saw this movie more times than I care to remember when it first came out. Note: My wife and I took everyone we knew to it at the one theater displaying it in DTS in Dallas, just as an excuse to keep going back. Heck, Spielburg probably made the other two sequels on the profits of our repeated sojourns! ;^)I recommend your going back and watching the scene where the Tyranosaur eats the goat. That's on even terrain, obviously with the intended purpose of allowing future spectators to observe the Tyranosaur "dining." Notice that the Tyranosaur pops the cables to his enclosure upon realizing that there's no electricity to hold him/her in and subsequently smashes the Park RVs including the one containing Spielburg's patented "cute kid who's smarter than every adult in the picture." Okay, are you still with me? Next you'll see the vehicle pushed to the side of the road, NOT the opposite side mind you, but the same side where the hungry T-Rex ate part of the goat and smashed through the paddock. What happens next, do you recall? Grant and the girl climb down the snapped cable next to the T-Rex paddock, which had in the previous scene been at ground level! After that we have the vehicle with the boy trapped inside pushed over the side, almost nailing Grant, lodging in this tree which, based on what follows, must've been three times the height of the tallest Redwood in California!
I will agree with you that Spielburg didn't overuse the child-like sentimentality even though I felt that he was chomping at the bit a couple of times. Overall, I think we agree very strongly about the consistent quality of the Jurassic Park series, even when the directing chores fell to someone else with a different style on the third outing. It's a good thing to remember just how many times good series been weakened by substandard entries just to rake in the cash from disappointed filmgoers. Alien III & IV come to mind, but there are many others, including Spielburg's own "Temple of Doom" sequel to "Raiders of the Lost Ark." Note: I think that he learned a valuable lesson from that about respecting the audience and followed that weak entry up with a film that's arguably superior to the first in that series. Consistency of quality is the the way to maintain a successful franchise and keep 'em comin' back for more! Now bring on those dinos! :o)
AuPh
I'll have another look, but I've seen the thing many times too, and it must not have bothered me.My fave parts are the very beginning, and the part where the Aussie guy says "...they remember..."
I'd love to see a Redwood in CA....I assume you've seen one? It'd be nice to get there before all the soccer moms who vote democratic, but otherwise still pollute the air with their SUV's, cause global warming to destroy all life on our planet...blah blah, yada yada. One degree in a hundred years...hmm, I thought I felt warmer than I did back in 1900...
I have to differ in a big way on Raiders. The third was better than the second, but if you think the third was better than the original...then there's no hope for you! ;) I REGRET THAT I NEVER SAW THE ORIGINAL IN THE THEATER....and for some odd reason, Spielberg is such a jacka$$, that not only has he not released them on DVD, but he didn't re-release Raiders in theaters on its 20 year anniversary....what an a$$!!
I am pleased to see that my thread has generated a response in keeping with the other site I used to waste time at...and unfortunately, there will be a whole new herd of Carl-haters...
I, um, polarize people...in case you didn't notice.
Hi,
when i was a kid, i watched Bergman, read the great philosophers, blah, blah, blah. I wanna have fun. I liked JP3 quite a bit. Btw, i used to use the T rex scene to adjust my home theatre (thea-tah) *and* to show it off. The goat was to the left, cliff to the right. Seen it a million times. My theater can't do this, but the roar of the Rex should make your innards quiver like jello in an earthquake. Can't really afford that much subwoofer.
Late, thanks for you support. I've seen one Bergman in film class, have a feeling it wouldn't see "wide release" these days, nudge nudge.Someday I will have a supreme home theater in a mansion...until that time, I live with my two channel music only system, and it's very fulfilling.
Hi,
i have a dual purpose monster; it seems insatiable in it's desire to gobble money. But it's great, something like ST:Voyager is a bit different with a decent stereo kicking out the sound. If you're talking movies with a lot of music, it sounds wonderful, i am thrilled to really hear the classics for the first time.
However, it took me a long, long time to get here. It's posted in Inmate Systems, i am currently building some basic bass traps.
I just love standing in a muggy sweltering garage drilling five bazillion holes. Don't tell anybody, but i sneak in one of those
weirdo movies where they talk all funny once in a while....
I build speakers, but bought (instead of built) my room treatments...how's that for backwards? I of course have commerically made speakers too...I was just drilling a baffle out last night...
It's taken me a while to get where I am too.
I may post my system in inmate's systems at some point.
> > > "...this place is loaded with primadonnas" < < <I'm a HUGE fan of the Jurassic Park movies and I'd be the first to say that the fact that they're fun is good enough. Nevertheless, finding fault with sloppy film direction or plot-holes which draw attention to themselves doesn't make the film patron a primadonna any more than it makes a great albeit flawed film into a bad movie!
> > > "The goat was on the left, cliff to the right. Seen it a million times." < < <
If you're questioning my observations, I'd suggest watching that scene a few more times. Also, it isn't a "cliff" it's part of the T-Rex paddock enclosure! As far as where the sound originates that isn't nearly as important to me as visual continuity (i.e., where the Park vehicle is located when the scene starts and the location of the tree where it ends up). Unfortunately, my LD player turned to "toast" recently or I'd go back and do a step by step and relate the obvious continuity gaff in more detail. *SIGH* I guess it's time to buy the DVDs even though I can't part with the LDs (that's another story).
BTW, several people who saw this film with us while it was still playing in the theaters made similar observations, so it isn't just my faulty perception. The unfortunate part of this is that the scene could've easily been fixed (i.e., made less awkward or confusing) without any loss of tension. Personally, I think Spielburg was so concerned about getting the effects and thrills right that he failed to concentrate on visual continuity issues that might surface with repeated viewings. Note: This is VERY understandable when one considers the fact that he was in the process of filming Schindler's List at the same time!
On a lighter note, you mentioned watching Bergman when you were a kid and it reminded me that one of my favorite promos for advertising action movies on the TBS Superstation awhile back was "It ain't Bergman, but things blow up!" :o)
Cheers,
AuPh
Hi,
i have the dvd, gave my LD to Sis. There is an error. I remember watching a Bergman about a priest who loses his faith. Since i have never been religous; i didn't think much about it. The next day... i 'got it', and was depressed for a month.
There is an excellent chocolate maker (Len Libby's) on the way to the new theater (it has a decent sound system), give me a good matinee thriller, dark chocolate covered cashews, some popcorn n lemonade....
and i'll pretend that cramped little art theater, with it's small screen and tinny sound doesn't exist, along with 'My Dinner with Andre' How about a short, 'Tyron the Rex eats Andre for dinner'
> > > "I'd love to see a Redwood in CA....I assume you've seen one?" < < <Not up close and in person, but in 1080I on our new HDTV. Does that count? :o)
> > > "It'd be nice to get there before all the soccer moms who vote democratic, ..." < < <
I think I'll avoid discussing anything political here; you think your posts polarize people? ROTFLOL!!! You must not get "Outside" much (i.e., the "secret" Outside Asylum forum page is where political debate ensues; that forum is in transition like some of the other Asylum forums still are, but it's not for the faint of heart, I assure you!). We probably have diametrically opposed political viewpoints so we'd better stick to film.
> > > "I beg to differ in a big way on Raiders." < < <
That's fine. I did say that it was "arguably" better than the first. ;^) Personally, I consider both very high quality entries and I wouldn't be able to choose one above the other, but what the hey, that's just me. IMHO, Jeff Boam's script for "Last Crusade" is outstanding though.
Take care, Carl... and uh, have that polarity checked! (grin)
Cheers,
AuPh
"Not up close and in person, but in 1080I on our new HDTV. Does that count? :o)"..........NOPE! And 1080 progressive would be better...
"I think I'll avoid discussing anything political here; you think your posts polarize people? ROTFLOL!!!"
You have no idea who you're talking to...
"I have the death sentence on twelve systems..." yada yada. Ask Audiogon who I am, and if I polarize people (their discussion forum is no longer with us, btw...I was in 572 threads there, many of which were flame free I'm proud to say)...Ask Slate...not that there aren't dozens more like me there.
I am perhaps the number one pariah of online audio discussion, simply because I can be ruthless in defending my positions when provoked. I got banned on the first day I participated, from a chat HERE with your bud Steve "Koyaan", and wasn't even trying to inflame him. Honest Steve, I wasn't...a few others finda tried to bang me, so I went off.
I then came back to the chat, first without permission, and later with, and now I'm sure Steve can't wait to discuss cables with me again. He's a good guy, I bet, and obviously dedicated to his work...that's highly honorable, unlike another audio website.
Not to mention the fact that several of my threads here have been deleted or otherwise blocked in the two weeks I've been here...ask "angela100" how much she likes me...and then tell her I still demand an apology for her cowardly smear campaign at the other site (she's too horrified to actually stand up to me). She drew first blood...and I'll have the last laugh...Not that I don't love women...Barbra Streisand's a woman, but I don't love her.
Philander, I like you. I think we have a lot in common, regardles of where your political views may lie. I stand by my point about the soccer moms with SUVs...they all own one, and 80% or so voted for someone who would take them out of production given his way (which I happen to agree with....not so much for "green" concerns, but for the simple fact that they have no place on an interstate highway at 80+ mph, and that's the only place they're used. Physics dictate low speed, off road use. They're a glutanous waste of resources, and everyone knows it. They aren't safer...nothing that heavy could be "safe", especially when it rolls over or impacts the frontal corners, unless it's made of "scrith"...just look at the crash tests if you don't believe me).
Take care, Carl
don't use film as a substitute for an amusement park visit.
We never said it was a substitute...and besides, some of us don't use film as a substitute for real intellectual endeavors and discourse...
... and film is as close as we'd dare get to an amusement park! ;^)Seriously Rich, you can "use" film for whatever you want, but I tend to enjoy most cinema with the rare exception of that which bores me to sleep.
What else do you want to know?
AuPh
Just kidding! I recommend you watch Spielburg's directorial debut,
the TV movie, "Duel" (1971?) with Dennis Weaver. Scripted by
Richard Matheson, based on his own short story, which BTW, was inspired
by a real-life personal experience of Matheson! This film milked
the suspense for all it was worth! Finely crafted. - AH
Speaking of "Duel" or perhaps by way of an mischievous segue, I recommend Ridley Scott's "The Duelists" made just prior to his highly successful "Alien." This highly crafted period drama is a fascinating study of obsessive/compulsive behavior. Note: I was tempted to say "highwayman rage" but since it involves to Napoleonic soldiers that would be a stretch! ;^)AuPh
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
