-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Jurassic World Official Trailer
- Thread starter skynidas
- Start date
- Status
brandonh83
Banned
That looks awesome.
Jawmuncher
Member
Looks pretty cool if you ask me.
Now that we've all seen it, what did you hate so much about it? Seems fine/good to me. Doesn't look like a Godzilla reject to me. Did you see something else perhaps?
shinobi602
Member
brandonh83
Banned
T-Rex will always be the boss. But I like that they kept this very reasonable looking. It's still cool looking enough as a new animal but without going overboard. It's a nice happy medium.
Goldrusher
Member
Looks incredibly bland and generic after all the hype.
Just another carnosaur.
After the cuttlefish rumors, I was expecting something with a smooth skin with colorful patterns.
Maybe even some lion-like beast with 4 legs.
Just another carnosaur.
After the cuttlefish rumors, I was expecting something with a smooth skin with colorful patterns.
Maybe even some lion-like beast with 4 legs.
Banjotanooki
Member
lol, it looks just like Rudy from Ice Age 3.
Demoncarnotaur
Member
It's probably time for a separate spoiler thread if someone wants to do that.
TheSadRanger
Banned
brandonh83
Banned
I think the idea is that it looks like it could have been a normal dinosaur but it has features that images can't really show, such as the camo or whatever. I don't think they wanted to design something too over the top looking and settled for something more natural. If they had gone overboard with it I think it could have ended up looking too cheesy or something that doesn't really "fit." I'm glad it doesn't look like it came from whackytown.
Anton Sugar
Member
I'll make it. Send me anything you want included, I'm just gonna have an OP full of pics and info. Nothing fancy.
SoldnerKei
Member
mwhahaha and I was wondering where I saw another so obviously evil dino, that's totally true lol
The perfect Dark
Banned
Anton Sugar
Member
Spoiler thread: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=147588296
Mostly related to dinos at this point.
Mostly related to dinos at this point.
WordAssassin
Member
Was there... did the dinosaurs have forked tongues before? I don't remember that.
Or did you mean on the new dino? Cause yeah that woulda been weird.
Anton Sugar
Member
There was a rumor that it had spliced cobra DNA, and therefore had a forked tongue and could spit venom.
Although the forked tongue may have always been a fan assumption...not sure if that ever leaked. Maybe in a concept, sure.
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
No, that's the right image. I hate it because it's just a JP style raptor with horns and quills. And it looks positively weird next to T-rex because it's structure and shape don't lend itself being bigger than T-Rex. Me no likely. Not one bit.
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
In the first novel, and it was both super awkward, came out of fucking nowhere, and has no relation at all that what we can reasonably expect from non-avian dinosaurs.
It was used when Tim and Lex (reversed in age in the novel) were locked out of the maintenance tunnel behind a waterfall, and the mature rex (there's an adolescent second rex in the novel) uses it's forked tongue to search the space behind the waterfall and -upon finding and grabbing Tim with it- tries to drag Tim out of there.
And that's when Muldoon's tranquilizer dart set in. Why that was even a thing I don't know. Tim's response, in line with every other braindead Crighton character, was that was only doing what it was supposed to do as an animal. Right.
Quite frankly, I wouldn't really call Michael Crighton a good writer (based on just three novels, with one posthumus, so ymmv). Just someone willing to do the 'science' part of it, but the rest is mostly okay after that point. It's why the starting scene of the novel, with the girl on the island, shows up as the first scene for TLW the movie, because those first parts are kept creepy and intimidating. It quickly goes to shit after the T-rex paddock escape (about page 50 or so), which is almost word for word in the movie. Including that cliff, if I'm not mistaken. Have to look it up; this could be fun.
edit:
the movies have always used singular tongues, because reasons, but this is also what birds have. Crighton couldn't make up him mind at times whether dinos were reptiles or birds (which is completely understandable given the time), which is where the awkwardness of the writing comes from, imo.
brandonh83
Banned
If this exact same design were for a "normal" dinosaur no one would have a problem with it. I think maybe when people see it in the film it'll click more.
Tongue seems to be a bit short for that mouth.
Shpeshal Nick
aka Collingwood
Little off topic, but is it weird that I only just realised they used a 3D printer in the original Jurassic Park
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
If the design was for a raptor sized dino, I'd have no problem with it. Bigger than the T-Rex? I hate it.
Demoncarnotaur
Member
From my understanding it was originally intended to be larger than a Raptor and smaller than a Rex, but that eventually changed.
I hope Sideshow does Jurassic World items though. These would look great as a statue.
Ah! Is it bigger than the T-Rex in the film? Where did you read that?
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
It's called Indominus Rex, not Second-fiddle Rex. If you name something Indominus after something else already called Tyrannosaurus, what are you trying to say? You are trying to say it's the biggest baddest mofo there is.
Charles Foster Kane
Rosebud
add spikes to make it look tough.
Well, yeah, that's the point. This is literally a designed by commitee dinosaur.
brandonh83
Banned
They absolutely were. That movie had phenomenal creature designs. Some downright horrifying like those fucking nightmare worms.
This whole thing is so goddamn meta.
I agree completely. I still go back and play the game for it. Probably one of my favorite of all time due to how much of it I've played over the years.
brandonh83
Banned
Yep basically the haters are just going to go above reason and say "you mean it was the filmmakers that designed it, not the JW scientists trololol" so it's worthless to debate, just like the feathers debacle.
Green Mamba
Member
Indominus's design is like stuck in the 90s dinosaur fanboy condensed into a single creature. Pretty emblematic of the film's attitude, both within the confines of its plot and the actual film's attitude towards paleontology. Some fun layers of meta here at least, mostly at the film's expense though.
brandonh83
Banned
So how was the rest of the movie?
Shogmaster
Sloppy seconds
Neogaf needs a thumbs up button.
Green Mamba
Member
Haven't seen it, but I think the trailer and supplementary material they've released so far have been pretty telling about the film's attitudes toward the modern science.
br0ken_shad0w
Member
brandonh83
Banned
They're not making a documentary. They're genetically engineered animals made for show. It's a dinosaur theme park created to make money. In JP3 Grant says that they're not dinosaurs, but genetically engineered monsters made for show, and that's exactly right. They don't have some vendetta or agenda against modern science or what we currently know about dinosaurs. It's a sequel to a movie that was made before some of this information came to light. I seriously doubt the filmmakers were like "fuck science!" when they made these decisions. There's a lot of context involved.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I don't really see how you think you can make this type of comment without having seen the film first.
I mean, damn son.
Which is to say that it's more interested in being a movie that continues to portray the iconic designs that were established with the original film, which is sound logic considering it takes place in the same universe.
If a brand new dinosaur franchise that wasn't about genetically designed frog hybrid creatures was to pop up and portray dinosaurs with all the updates in the field, I'd love to see it; I really do. I just don't expect that from Jurassic Park. The original film embraced bird-like dinosaurs because it was distinct and different from the way hollywood monsters were portrayed. They took what they liked, and discarded what they didn't, for the sake of more interesting film.
brandonh83
Banned
Oh hell I would totally love to see a movie, somehow, with the updated information. It's just that I get why they're not doing it here, and it has nothing to do with ignorance toward science.
I like the new dinosaur but something bugs me. Lets say you are really tired and boring of all those T-Rexes, Triceratopses, Stegos etc. Is something like the the new Dinosaur really something that makes you go: Ooooooh, this changes everything!!!
I mean, yeah it looks dangerous and cool but still pretty much like your usual dinosaur. If they wanna get my hyped again I would create smth that is maybe like... twice the size of a Rex or smth like this lol.
I mean, yeah it looks dangerous and cool but still pretty much like your usual dinosaur. If they wanna get my hyped again I would create smth that is maybe like... twice the size of a Rex or smth like this lol.
Supposedly, the real real reason the hybrid was made was to sell as a bioweapon to the US military.
TheVampire
Banned
You know I got thinking today.
Why not always have a small military presence on the island?
Dinosaurs are not going to be able to destroy a tank or APC.
Why not always have a small military presence on the island?
Dinosaurs are not going to be able to destroy a tank or APC.
Green Mamba
Member
Of course there's no vendetta, but deliberately ignoring it to slavishly adhere to twenty year old continuity (which isn't internally consistent anyway) and ignoring the responsibility Jurassic Park actually has over the public's knowledge of the science (basically an iron grip) isn't much better.
- Status