• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Jurassic World Official Trailer

Status
Not open for further replies.
Curler said:
There IS an exception of course. The cassowary
Click to expand...

lol
Even the Cassowary has a full coat of beautiful naturalistic-looking feathers.
]
cassowary-drumming.jpg
Click to expand...

Only their heads, legs, and feet are featherless; which is a feature that is pretty common in many birds today.

Also, yeah they're pretty viscous. That so called "killing claw" is the stuff of legends.

Edit: These guys make me wonder how vicious the "Terror Birds"/Phorusrhacids would have been; those things were like 6 foot tall megafauna-killing predators.
 
MisterGrey3000 said:
lol
Even the Cassowary has a full coat of beautiful naturalistic-looking feathers.


Only their heads, legs, and feet are featherless; which is a feature that is pretty common in many birds today.

Also, yeah they're pretty viscous. That so called "killing claw" is the stuff of legends.
Click to expand...
Now that's a modern day velociraptor!
 
There's stories of cassowaries terrorizing and straight up killing people (it's been years since the last one though).

Queensland, Australia. Philip Mclean, a 16 year-old boy, and his brother, three years his junior, encounter a cassowary. Despite the size of the brightly coloured flightless bird before them, the Mclean brothers attempt to bludgeon it to death with clubs. It is a fatal mistake. Armed with its long- and sharp-clawed foot, the bird kicks the younger boy, who flees. His elder brother lands a blow on the beast but is knocked to the ground. Lying prone, Philip is kicked in the neck by the cassowary, opening a deadly wound. The boy manages to get up and run but dies shortly afterward as a result of a haemorrhaging blood vessel in his neck.
Click to expand...


Of course, there was also that one time on Rook Island where Jason took a shot in the gut and nearly died, but thankfully he crafted a green tube of life saving shit that must have instantly closed that eviscerated stomach.
 
Amalthea said:
HD5w9KU.jpg


I'm confused.
Click to expand...

still hopeful that we'll see feathered freaks in the presumed
old park
, since the 'free evolution' of the animals was a theme with the novel and somewhat less the movies. The T-rex being the same is due to size. You can only grow really big if you live really long. The growth rate Hammond gave in the original movie was waaaay too fast btw. Growing an animal that size takes decades, not months.

also, if we're talking about 'what animal is what' Horner - along with other people obviously - has actually made the case that dinosaur grew like (shape-shifting) birds and that as a result of cutting through some skulls, triceratops is actually the adolescent form of Torosaurus. Though it remains Triceratops in name due to some naming shenanigans.

It's a interesting talk, so here:
Where are the baby dinosaurs?
 
plop said:
Ugh. A genetically engineered hybrid dinosaur? Is this a SyFy Channel shit-o-rama or a big budget Hollywood feature?.
Click to expand...
They already used frog DNA..Why not continue to tamper? You KNOW if this could really be done, people- being the greedy species it is, WOULD do this. The creed is greed, and mankind would not resist the chance.
 
Green Mamba said:
The movie brought it on itself.
Click to expand...

Pretty much.

I mean what do you expect?
The first film (while obviously still pretty inaccurate in many areas) made it a priority to try and be as accurate as possible with these animals while still creating a wonderful sci-fi film that didn't fall victim to every monster trope in the book; it's also been 15 years since the last film was released and scientist have made a lot of new discoveries about these animals.
I think it's only fair that paleobuffs and paleontologist alike would complain about the "No Feathers" stance.
 
Rewatching TLW and I really dislike how they made the Rex into an evil movie monster. In the original, it acts like an animal, never being aggressive or killing for the sake of killing

In TLW, the parents return to push the trailer off the cliff after the infant is safe and then return again to rip Eddie in half and goes on a rampage through the city. It's evil monster behavior, not a realistic predator like in the first
 
dreamcastfan said:
They already used frog DNA..Why not continue to tamper? You KNOW if this could really be done, people- being the greedy species it is, WOULD do this. The creed is greed, and mankind would not resist the chance.
Click to expand...

They used frog DNA as a piggyback for dinosaur DNA. They didn't say "Just so you know, Dr. Grant, we fused the DNA of a frog and a dinosaur. So look out for T-Rexes leaping over the trees and eating flies."

Making a hybrid dinosaur that breaks free just sounds like a plot from some reject science fiction flick from the 80s.
 
More_Badass said:
Rewatching TLW and I really dislike how they made the Rex into an evil movie monster. In the original, it acts like an animal, never being aggressive or killing for the sake of killing

In TLW, the parents return to push the trailer off the cliff after the infant is safe and then return again to rip Eddie in half and goes on a rampage through the city. It's evil monster behavior, not a realistic predator like in the first
Click to expand...

I agree except for the city rampage part. It was thrown into a new environment completely different from anything it's ever know. I can see it being scared and lashing out at everything. That's not to say that part isn't shit, but I can see where the T-Rex is coming from.
 
More_Badass said:
Rewatching TLW and I really dislike how they made the Rex into an evil movie monster. In the original, it acts like an animal, never being aggressive or killing for the sake of killing

In TLW, the parents return to push the trailer off the cliff after the infant is safe and then return again to rip Eddie in half and goes on a rampage through the city. It's evil monster behavior, not a realistic predator like in the first
Click to expand...

Nope, You're wrong. The Parents push the trailer off the cliff because it's in their territory and is perceived as a threat after having kidnapped the juvenile. It continues to track the humans because Sarah smells like the juvenile. And the san diego rampage was fueled by the stimulants the ship crew gave it.
 
Kinsei said:
I agree except for the city rampage part. It was thrown into a new environment completely different from anything it's ever know. I can see it being scared and lashing out at everything. That's not to say that part isn't shit, but I can see where the T-Rex is coming from.
Click to expand...
Yeah that's true

Wow, I forgot how ridiculous parts of that movie was. Sarah, the supposed expert who can survive on dino island alone and knows how to stay downwind, decides to keep the bloody vest around. The return of ninja Rex, somehow staying quiet enough to stick its head in a tent and not alert anyone else in the vicinity. The stupid stupid plan to remove dinosaurs from the island and bring them to a city. Gymnast-kicking a raptor out a window.

The RV scene was intense but I had forgotten how repetitive it was. Like four times, they start climbing, slip, fall back to the bottom, start climbing again.

The best part for me had to be the raptor attack in the grass and facility. Minus the kick of course, but the rest of that scene was pretty great

unholyrevenger72 said:
Nope, You're wrong. The Parents push the trailer off the cliff because it's in their territory and is perceived as a threat after having kidnapped the juvenile. It continues to track the humans because Sarah smells like the juvenile. And the san diego rampage was fueled by the stimulants the ship crew gave it.
Click to expand...
That logic never made any sense IMO. The Rexs had a nest. Because the infant was moved, now their territory shifted?

The previous scene showed that the Rexs only cared about their infant and making sure it was safe. To come charging back over and then working together to push the RV off the cliff and then coming back again to attack Eddie just didn't fit the behavior we had seen before and in the first movie
 
More_Badass said:
Wow, I forgot how ridiculous parts of that movie was. Sarah, the supposed expert who can survive on dino island alone and knows how to stay downwind, decides to keep the bloody vest around.
Click to expand...

I still can't get over Sarah not realizing the Rex's could be tracking the infants blood on her vest, or even some other predator. I mean fucking seriously, after the trailer attack she even mentions the Rex's can smell good and even if she forgot about it Roland even brings up the blood during one of their rest stops and she says somehting like it's not mine it's the baby Rex's and it still doesn't click that "oh shit i should probably ditch this". But hey she's expert, apparently.

One of the worst characters in the film.
 
strafer said:
I saw TLW 15 times in the theaters, it was a pleasant experience.
Click to expand...
When I was younger, it was literally my favorite movie. I don't even remember how many times I had seen it.

But now I realize that the original is superior in so many ways it's not even funny. The build up in the first JP is just perfect. The first big action scene doesn't happen till an hour into the movie, but the movie never feels like it drags IMO.
 
OMG, the San Diego scene is so stupid

1) What the hell was he planning on showing all the people on the dock? Just the boat docking? Whose smart idea was it to have a T Rex in the hull and bring it there first rather than straight to the zoo?

2) Now that I know about the unfilmed raptor scene, the massacre on the boat is even more ridiculous. The fact that they didn't change the movie and let it as is, with such a massive plot hole, is just astounding.

3) A T Rex strolling through suburbia. The arguing parents and kid taking a picture. Nuff said

4) Ian's one liners. "We should have stayed in the car" "Follow the screams" His personality just doesn't match the tone of what was happening there or the rest of the movie. How about giving a real warning instead of staring and "This is going to be bad"
 
More_Badass said:
Basically that neck break was physically impossible. Spinosaurs didn't have strength to generate enough torque and force to do something like that. I.e they mainly subsided on fish because of that lack of strength compared to other predator

And anyway, the bullish design of the Rex was more imposing and threatening than Spino's narrow croc snout and sail IMO
Click to expand...

More because it evolved specifically to eat fish. Everything about the animal screams adaptation to catch and prey on giant fish. You're still right though, I think T-Rex with it's bite force should have killed Spinosarus once it got that neck in it's jaws. Spino's best weapons against T-Rex would probably have been it's longer arms and claws.
 
BeforeU said:
So fucking disappointed in the trailer. Mutant dinosaurs? I mean come on. fuckk.
Click to expand...

It's thematically consistent with ideas touched on in the first Crichton novel.

In the book, there is a conversation where Wu suggests to Hammond his plans for genetically modified dinosaurs that are more in line with people's expectations of how dinosaurs should look and behave. Hammond refuses because he believes that the park should provide a a 'natural' presentation of dinosaurs. Wu rebuts this by highlighting that their dinosaurs were never 100% natural recreations anyway.

The core theme of manipulating nature for man's entertainment is a key part of the Jurassic Park mythology, and having a fit-for-purpose new beasty in the form of Indominus Rex is more in the spirit of Crichton's world than say, a T-Rex terrorising San Diego or Raptors talking to Dr. Grant in his sleep.
 
A D-rex? LOL. This fucking movie...


Is this supposed to be a reboot or a sequel?

Sucks that a movie from 20 years ago has better looking dinosaurs than a movie in 2014.
 
Surface of Me said:
So this dude know's how dinosaurs walked? mmk
Click to expand...

Yes. He knows Apatosaurus anatomy because he worked to reconstruct the bones of one. We get a sense of how the animal moved by understanding the joins and the range of motions. If the leg moved a certain way and the bones prevent it, then you know its wrong.

Also, here's inside information on trouble brewing behind the scenes in Jurassic World.

2CELs4S.jpg


That's Thomas R Holtz, one of the world renown experts on theropod dinosaurs.
 
Cow Mengde said:
Yes. He knows Apatosaurus anatomy because he worked to reconstruct the bones of one. We get a sense of how the animal moved by understanding the joins and the range of motions. If the leg moved a certain way and the bones prevent it, then you know its wrong.

Also, here's inside information on trouble brewing behind the scenes in Jurassic World.

2CELs4S.jpg


That's Thomas R Holtz, one of the world renown experts on theropod dinosaurs.
Click to expand...
Not very knowledgeable about behind the scenes stuff. Why couldn't they take the advice?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Strung | Official Trailer | Peacock
0
96
HRK69 replied
Moana | Official Trailer
2
67
1K
jason10mm replied
Clayface - Official Teaser Trailer
2
52
760
EverydayBeast replied
Jurassic World Rebirth | Official Trailer
2 3
142
8K
Pagusas replied
The Odyssey | Official New Trailer
2
190
Ikutachi replied
Top Bottom