It's also shocking how good are the themes present in JW saga (maybe even more interesting than the original trilogy) just for the movies to run past them and say "Oh look guys we got a bigger scarier raptor OMG so epic look at chris Pratt playing with cgi raptors 😱😱😱"
What is also staggering is the fact that so many people support the newer movies by paying for them. Jurassic World 3 made as much money as Jurassic Park 1 did. The movie makers have realized they don't need good plots or cinematography, people will throw money at their garbage anyway. All that matters anymore in the entertainment industry is the advertisement campaign. Building up hype *before* release of movies/video games has become 95% of success, without exagguration. Movie trailers are now even made with the sole purpose of presenting the entire movie's plot in a 5 minute sequence of cutscenes. After watching a trailer you basically know the entire plot. And somehow these are the tricks that work the best for getting people to go watch your movie. People are morons, truly.
Even as I didn't comprehend much about the philosophical nature of this conversation, the camera work and the backround lights and colours are masterclass. You don't get bored even if you don't understand a single word! Great acting, camera and lighting, pure class.
I also like "yeah, I know, it's a lot worse" *After I wrote that I realized that literally any line in Goldblums speech he gives in that scene could probably be inserted into the statement lol. What great dialog writing.
I do kind of feel the same way about the advancement of ai recently. It's sort of out of control and I always think about this quote when I hear about what's happening in 'ai learning' or whatever. It's a monumental advancement, but it's damaging so many people and professions. They're now pushing it onto people to help with simple things like writing sentences. It's very obviously a bad idea, but it's being pushed because it's a 'move forward'. This film really does introduce you to the idea of reckless science.
"Genetic power is the most awesome force this world has ever seen, but you're wielding it like a kid that's found his dad's gun" -One of my favorite lines of the movies
To paraphrase Dr Malcolm, I tell religious people when they argue that their God exists that they "wield religion like a grown ass person that still believes in Santa Claus". But just saying dinosaurs alone easily discredits all religious myths, too.
The amazing thing is the reversal of Goldblum's character. He started as a guy who looks like a rock star and hits on women and became the voice of reason and humility.
As a kid, this scene interested me because I thought the slide shows on the screens were pretty cool. I never really paid much attention to the dialogue until I was older, but now that I do now, I believe that they all have good points about the morality of what John Hammond was doing.
''You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could,'' Oh boy that quote could be applied to so much stuff. Especially modern films.
I think such conversations as these at the dinner table were aloft in the world post Newton. But I love conversations like these. One of my favourite `actions` in the whole film.
I don’t know, this feels just as applicable to almost anything humanity does ever. Progress is only possible by taking knowledge laid down by our predecessors.
I mean but isn't that what all science consists of? Standing on the shoulders of geniuses past. Perhaps more accentuated in this case but nonetheless...
@@UnaStamus91 All of Science is an `approximation toward the mechanics of the universe`, I think. Humanity has done rather well at it in its conception, but not so much in its application. I view your query as one of `is Science seamless ?` ( if I may, that is ). I think there are some very rare moments in its history that would test the assertion that it is. A few examples would be the Uncertainty Principle and The Theories in Relativity. All those things that make the universe discreet. It sounds bizarre, but I often wonder whether time is continuous. In saying that I`d be laughed out of Primary School, let alone College.
Goldblum's acting is terrific here. He sounds like an actual academic. I love the little things about his acting too; for instance how he hesitates a bit when Hammond brings up condors. See how he doesn't immediately dismiss Hammond?---as a person would in real life, he hears "Condors", processes it and where Hammond is about to go with it, and then reacts physically before saying anything, as if he's doing his best to restrain himself. That's the best kind of performance---like he's going beyond acting and living it out.
Great observation! No one can teach these things..it gotta catch me from within And he did it by immersing himself in hiss character.. Like Jamie fox did with Ray
What you two are describing is known as Naturalism and dramatic pauses. It’s actually very common to learn that in acting. Another thing you learn in acting to make the role you, so bring your natural mannerisms into it to make it more believable. Needless to say, I’m in Acting 1 in college 😅
i love how he hits the table when he talks about profiting off the research, showing how serious his thoughts on the subject are despite his quiet and restrained tone
You don't know many "academics"... It is entertainment, presented as a morality tale. It has nothing to do with reality, all these personalities are rather absurd stereotypes.
"your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should." -hardest hitting line in the entire franchise
@@nursyakirah4341 that they were too busy dreaming of fame and notoriety without thinking the ramifications it would have on the world. I.E, the most recent movie
Responsibility to whom? These are atheistic scientists are they not? Objective moralism does not exist in their world view, and if they think objective morals exists they are not consistent with their world view. Rape of the natural world is not wrong, no such thing as good and evil. I had more respect for Dr Hammond, atleast he is consistent with his world view. ( Evolution theory). Malcom is putting Christian or religious ethics of (good and evil) in his way of reasoning in defending the Animals. He is thinking like a theist. In most theist world view anything that has life has value, because God who is the standard of good says that they have value and that he has given man the responsibility in the care of the earth and everything that lives on it. But it seems that Malcom Totally contradicting what he claims to be, unless I am wrong and he is a creationist, I do not think the book or movies gives a hint of him being a believer of God, so I am assuming he is the typical atheist scientist. And if he is the typical scientist that holds to evolutionary system and denies creationism then he really has no objective moral standards to stand on, he has no logical reason on calling something “rape” as in a negative thing,. But he abandons his views and uses Religious argument as if we have a responsibility to care for others, as if nature or the animals have any value to them. According to evolution theory we are just cluster of cells and none holds no value. Those dinosaurs do not deserve special treatment, just like the rock that we kick for fun. Natural selection does not care about morals. Dr Hammond is correct in his actions and is consistent with what he claims to be, if creationism is false. Bioethical “responsibility” is really just a man made rules, that is neither right or wrong. It would be stupid to follow if you are going to benefit taking advantage of others. It is about survival of the fittest.
I agree- I loved this scene when I first saw it and none of the sequels have come close since to exploring the ethical issues and ramifications of the cloning technology.
This scene shows one of the things I love about this movie. It’s authentic. You understand the motives behind every character, no one is straight up evil or good. The characters are so well written
@@michaelnally2841 Nedry was an underpayed worker who wanted quick money. The lawyer was a capitalist who didn’t see the beauty of the scientific discovery but only profit. Both things happen really often in the real world. That’s what I mean with authentic
@@peteschupp4545 I know that’s why I said they were the closest. Now I’m the Boom though John Hammond was basically an evil greedy SOB but I prefer this version he just feels like a guy with a dream and his ambitions blinded him to the risks of having these animals here plus it makes him far more likable and making you feel bad when he realizes his dream was a disaster that almost got his grandkids killed.
@@peteschupp4545 Nedry was the closest to an evil person in the movie, but you can still understand his motivations - desperate people in real life would no doubt do the same thing. Hammond was more of a twinkly eyed grandfather figure in the movie than the ruthless SOB in the book - but he still has heavy shades of grey that make him flawed and human. He was a man with a dream, and his desire for that dream was so unshakable, he was blind to all the risks that would soon be unleashed.
@@peteschupp4545 Nedry was a contractor. He put a bid in for the job and it was accepted. When he found out the potential of the sucess of the park he asked for more than what he had bid for. If you accepted a bid from a contractor you hired and then they came back and asked for more would you have given them more?
Actual intelligent main characters discussing the ethics of bringing the dinosaurs back. Whereas, in Jurassic World, a handsome Raptor trainer walks around and not having anything remotely intelligent to say other than witty remarks and comebacks.
Why would they need to do that anyway? We already know the risks and everything. If they had did what you wanted it would be a boring drag of things that we already know and already heard of it would be a waste of space and pointless.
+Joshua Willis I think their point is kind of what Malcolm I'd saying: you stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something. Kind of true, this movie had significantly more substance to it. Although I really like Jurassic World
+Maddy Harvey Which part of Jurassic World did you like? The Indominous Rex forgetting it has camouflage powers because of plot or the part where the main female protagonist out runs a T-Rex in high heels? To be honest I mistook that movie to be mostly a comedy after a while constantly stating, "These people can't be that stupid." I laughed so many times in the movie theater I am pretty sure the rest of the people were getting pissed at me but I just couldn't help myself.
That part made me think of the scene in Jurassic World with the T-Rex inside the lion enclosure. It was just so unnatural. That enclosure belonged to the lion and this dinosaur that's been dead for 65 million years just knocks the lion out of its place as one of the top predators on the planet
Jewish people are the best. Love Goldbloom's intricacies in this and other movies and how jewish people care so much about the other people and the natural world, even above their own interests!
One of the interesting things about this movie, Hammond never once seemed even remotely malicious. Most movies like this, you would expect him to be a secret evil genius or something, but his intentions were good
Part of the genius of the movie is that *there is no true villain*. Nedry does what he does out of greed, but he doesn't do it to hurt any of the main characters, and he couldn't have predicted that there'd be a bug in the computer system that shut down the tour vehicles alongside the security system. The raptors are devious and predatory, but that's what they're supposed to be. We see them as murderous for killing off the people, but that's just them being what they are. Hammond wasn't trying to kill anyone, he was trying to expand the knowledge and experience of mankind. The lawyer starts off as an ambulance chaser, sure, but he's also *doing his job* to get compensation for the dead man's family.
it's probably one of the changes for the better made by the movie. That it's all basically science gone wrong. Mankind playing God, with noble intentions, and getting his comeuppance for it. But it does create a bit of a plot contrivance that hammond is extremely eager to do something fantastic, and keeps mentioning how he spared no expense, But he clearly spared plenty of expenses, including, apparently, not paying his computer techs enough that one of them was willing to engage in corporate espionage. In the book, Hammond was a much more selfish unlikable character. A conman, basically. Who is much more believable as someone who would have spared every expense. And in the end is killed by the monsters he created
Let me just say one thing yes he had a idea and ran with it but he was PLAYING GOD and look what happened then Jurassic world came along same problems but this time they wanted to combine the most dangerous predators T. rex and raptor in my defense yeah he had a awesome idea but did not fully think it through
This scene contains great acting, especially from Jeff Goldblum, his dialogue delivery is absolutely brilliant. Also RIP Richard Attenborough, another great actor.
@@typhoonhurricane18 Indeed. This scene is a lesson in acting; flawlessly executed. It's so convincing that it seems as though a real live debate is being filmed as opposed to scripted dialogue.
Plus the fact that almost none of these characters were A, or even B list stars at the time of the movie. Laura Dern makes one of the most important and simple points, that trades on her character's specific knowledge as a paleobotanist. Sam Neill is a quiet everyman, but his discomfort means something in the face of his character's career as a renowned paleontologist. Sir Richard Attenborough lends the whole proceeding a gravitas that a lesser actor could easily fail to impart. Even a line like "coupon day" offers a casual sliminess that exposes the reckless greed of the whole enterprise. I didn't hate Jurassic World quite as badly as many others, but it couldn't hold a candle to this movie.
@@trevalyan006 Yeah indeed. None of the cast in this scene, besides Richard Attenborough who was a seasoned actor, had done much of note before this film. It's by far the best of the Jurassic park films; none of the sequels made the mark quite like the original. Actually most, if not all, sequels fail to equal their predecessor. This is a common issue throughout the film industry.
@@1980extremeG And don't forget that not only was he a seasoned actor but that Richard Attenborough was also a seasoned,award-winning director. Fun fact:Attenborough was a bad-ass World War II veteran.When the film set for Jurassic Park was hit by a devastating and brutal hurricane in 1992,Attenborough actually SLEPT through it! When Steven Spielberg asked Attenborough how he could have slept through a hurricane,Attenborough simply replied that he survived The Blitz in World War II.
I skipped this scene a lot when I was a kid because I didn't know what the characters were talking about, now I'm older and I completely understand an important life lesson is heard here never a truer word has been spoken
***** This corresponds with what Jeff Goldblum was saying during the egg hatching scene. As a creationist, I can agree with this too, and is precisely the flaw of making man look like the supreme being. The flaw is too many people see DNA as something like a microchip and don't understand the significant differences. I learned in basic physics class and IT about how electrical currents work, that they are all made of switches, microwaves, and wires that run on consistent electrical currents and that all that a processor in a computer is is just that, a series of switches, and it only thinks in terms of 0's and 1's. Therefore, it thinks the way it's programmed to think. DNA is extremely different. I learned in forensics from someone who also teaches biology that DNA is a chemical that displays the blueprints of life, and in my eyes, if it is the blueprint of life, than when hydrated with H2O, it becomes the soul and therefore made free, especially considering how sophisticated the substance really is, therefore way more independent, sophisticated, spiritual, and chaotic than a microchip. That's the big difference. Personally, I've seen this philosophy displayed in both science fiction and fantasy, and it seems as if a mad scientist is often compared to the evil wizard in this perspective.
Charlezard Watched this many times as a young kid and never really cared what they were talking about. Now as I watch it as an adult I can appreciate the dialogue more and what the films real message is I suppose.
Charlezard I went and say it in 3D during the rerelease last summer. During Dennis Nerdy's first scene I shouted "Hello...Newman!" and the whole theater burst into laughter.
In the movie John Hammond is portrayed as a dreamer, someone who wants to show dinosaurs to the world regardless of the risks because he wants to entertain. He really exemplifies the saying, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." In the book, Hammond is just after profits at all costs. Unlike movie Hammond, he remains obstinante and even hostile towards anyone questioning him. And in the end Hammond suffers a vastly different fate.
@@shawerful5209more or less but in the book Hammond is more than just money hungry it's almost to the point he doesn't even care about his grandkids when they go missing hell id even say he'd want them to go missing even if it meant the park would do better
We have been jugling that question since WW2. Do we continue too do what we make possible because they are always costs both positive and negative that we need too be willing too pay for anything we do.
Indubitably Yup progress is balance of course there is negative things that come out of everything only the naive would say other wise but it also cant be an excuse for mediocrity, ignorance and irresponsibility. Any new development will always be a juggling act between risk and reward.
Back when the Jurassic Park franchise was good. The makers of Jurassic World stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as they could, before patenting it, packaging it, slapping it on a plastic lunchbox, and now they're selling it.
haha. Nice. Your solid reference aside, that is how it is now with these modern remakes/revamps. Taking something that was art, and just creating a fast paced, CGI packed, dumbed down blockbuster.
Personally, I hope they drive the franchise so far into the ground we eventually get the "Cyborg Dennis Nedry vs. Dinosaur Super Soldiers" movie that they were spit-balling a ways back.
Goldblum is absolutely astounding in this movie. In this scene in particular you really truly feel the weight of what he says, he carries it in such a way that feels real, like you can see through where he looks and where he places emphasis that he's working through what he says, he's engaged with the conversation. It's not just what he says but the way he says it that stands out so well. It's like you can feel him picking out each word he needs to say, and his emotion carries with in each sentence. It's minute and in the grand scheme of the movie it doesn't seem like a lot but in scenes like this that require that kind of character focus it really adds and incredible layer of depth.
The arguments of Ian, Ellie, and Alan are actually really good acting. Especially what Ian and Ellie said, because they are completely right about chaos and unpredictability.
@@thehighground7926 You shouldn't reference movies as a guide to determine what we should or shouldn't do lol :P. If you create a t-rex, you'd put safeguards in please. And you'd have backup systems. Just because we're separated by millions of years of evolution doesn't mean that a t-rex suddenly has magic powers that allows it to escape through, say, a concrete or hardened steel enclosure several meters thick on all sides. You can drop the magical fears that millions of years somehow will create a system that can not be contained. The reason the dinosaurs escaped in the movie was because they tied all their security to a single power system, and when that went offline, they escaped. Its just a bad security design. If done properly it can work. The same logic you're using on the other hand leads to the luddite attitude that John was complaining about in this very clip. What about nuclear power? Well that's really dangerous if things go wrong. Well guess what, it doesn't mean we huddle in the darkness or use inferior sources of energy. It just means we apply our brainpower to create multiple redudant safeguards and security systems so that runaway nuclear fission does not occur. Its the exact same with any potentially dangerous, but scientifically rewarding endeavour. You're obviously not going to be going on jeep tours through some outback where an ultrasaurus or a stegasaurus is roaming. You're going to apply your brainpower to come up with safe enclosures people can view from a distance, if tourism is even the goal in the first place. I think what I'd be most concerned about is the development of prehistoric viruses that might be able to bypass our immune systems in much scarier ways than we've seen with covid-19. But again, it can be controlled and contained with the proper safeguards.
Me as a kid: "This is lame. Where are the dinosaurs?" Me now: "This is a great scene. The dialogue, acting, and cinematography are spot-on and it's a key part of the plot. I can finally appreciate all that. That said, I definitely would not complain if Rexy burst through the wall and ate them all."
Speaking of. The last Fallen Kingdom trailer pissed me off because there is a jump scare in there that would have been perfect but they ruined it by having shown it before the film's release.
Said the same thing when I was a Kid at 10 years old in '94 watching this movie on VHS with my siblings..."We said this was the boring part..." Lol #Goodtimes
Spot on observation. After rewatching this for the first time in years, Jeff's dialogue with Sir Richard Attenborough is quite thought provoking, especially for a family film!
@JurassicHero 3 yes but these lions are obviously smaller than even an average dinosaur, they are much easier to contain, they have been groomed for show and grow up around humans, while in jurrasic park/world it is shown that maybe a select few people can control dinosaurs that are smaller in comparison to other larger ones and the rest grow up in a natural environment free to do as they please as long as they don't hurt humans which would have been inevitable.
"Donald, Donald, let him talk. There's no reason -- I want to hear every viewpoint. I really do." You don't expect a guy like Hammond to say that, and it says so much about him as a character. He truly wanted this park to succeed, to bring a sense of wonder and joy to the world, that he wanted to hear what those who would be against him would say. He certainly had his flaws; the way he did things for example, and how he believed he could push through with sheer determination, but underneath all that, there was a kindly old man who just wanted to bring something magical to the world, for everybody to experience, not just the wealthy.
I'm sure that's one of the reasons he invited him to tour the park even though he disliked him. He knew Malcolm would be pessimistic about the whole idea and he desperately wanted to prove him/the naysayers wrong
This version of Hammond is a much kinder and open-minded man compared to the book version. In the book he is a pioneer of science too, but he's so much colder and monstrous. He only has his grandkids on the island, because the parents saddle him with them, he doesn't really care for them. He notes the criticism the group gives him, but hardly listens to it. And finally, when everything goes wrong, he resolves to start from scratch and make a new park, failing to understand that things went wrong, because he could not control them if he wanted. *Spoiler warning* It's a good thing he doesn't make it off the island.
@@42luke93 The insinuation that he'd drain out someone's blood just to make a buck. He has no moral limit. The mosquito overlap is a happy result of good writing :)
When I was little I thought the food was a cooked dinosaur because of the scene before this and the way they looked down at their plates with disgust 😂
@szs voc bruh don't preach to me about food I grew up poor! My point is the food infront of them is fake! It's not even steaming hot when they brought it in!
What impresses me the most about the writing of this scene is it takes all of Ian Malcom’s long drawn-out objections from the book and condenses them down into two minutes of dialogue without it getting confusing, and without the point being lost. Even using direct lines from the book like the “shoulders of geniuses” and “could/should” line.
It’s really a masterclass on philosophical dialogue actually. Full of rational arguments, logical fallacy, appeals to authority, ethical dilemmas, fantastically written and acted.
The best line in this scene is “Genetic power’s the most awesome force the planet has ever seen, but you wield it like a kid who has found his dad’s gun.” It sums up just how unprepared to handle this power InGen is.
Because in order to make these scenes work, you need writers that can write meaningful, impactful dialogue, and actors that can deliver those lines convincingly. I'd argue that we still have some actors that can do that, but too many writers these days lack the experience and cultural relevance to handle the load. So now the strategy is to write snarky, quippy lines and distract the audience with CGI explosions.
Before Jurassic Park, way before Jurassic Park, lawyers were referred to as "BloodSucking Lawyers" In the movie titled "The Money Pit" with Tom Hanks and Shelly Long.
In the book he's actually described as young and physically fit, though obviously not used to the outdoors. He's also fairly calm and useful in the crisis and survives right to the end - the only confrontation comes when he refuses to go down into the underground raptor nest with Grant and Harding to count the eggs. Grant and Harding know they need to know how many raptors might have escaped the island (for the good of humanity). Gennaro doesn't care anymore and wants to leave immediately and nuke the place from orbit. Grant freaks out on him, shoves him and basically tells him that his law firm allowed this situation to happen and he's not allowed to duck his duty any more, he's going down there with them to help fix it or Harding is going to ram a shock prod up his ass. He ends up helping. He finishes out the book on mainland Costa Rica in diplomatic limbo same as Grant.
This scene feels so real. The setup of Hammond's arc from incredulous and defensive to shutting down the park of his own volition is incredible writing.
It a pathos heavy reductive argument great for cinema if not actual discussion, but at its core there is a valid point. Discovery, Progress, Achievement, these words are rooted in moral arguments about the common/greater good and ultimately exist to hand-wave consequences. But the problem is that calling them "The rape of the natural world" is asserting a consequentialist moral maxim that is equally rooted in the same argument. The slight of hand here is by calling it "rape" you get to apply pressure to the oppositions in that by association of language you have connected the violation of bodily anatomy to the carelessness of interacting systems. If Hammond had any skill in ethical philosophy he could point out the sheer hubris of that statement and the underlying hypocrisy, then clarify that humanity is itself and expression of what we call nature. To resurrect and extinct species due to deforestation is equivalent because we are still altering unintelligent consistences with the actions of intelligent beings in either case. Malcolm could of course counter that we can predict the resulting effect of re-introducing condors but not this kind of tropic cascade. But that would render his own core argument invalid as Hammond could throw Malcolm's own Chaos theory in his face to be demonstrative his selective bias in the argument. Malcolm should have just bluntly stated; "I don't trust your motives given the fact that this is a for profit institution that like most cooperate enterprises will seek to maximize those profits via acceptable risk." but that doesn't make for a good line now does it? XD
He's acknowledging the absurdity and irony of it. He hired Grant and Satler to defend Jurassic Park against Gennaro and Malcolm, but they are against the project while the lawyer is suddenly for it when an hour before he was threatening to have it shut down.
@@AdhamOhm Satler was a happy accident. He only wanted Grant there, but when he found that she was an expert in paleobotany he figured "Why not, we got one person who knows the dinos and the other that knows the old plant." That being said, Grant's answer was more neutral. Despite his dislike of it, he's well aware of how much the world is changing and how much we struggle to catch up to it. His answer was mostly "I don't know." rather than yes or no. Whereas Ellie was much on the no, simply because she doesn't think either humanity or the dinos would survive in the same ecosystem together. Malcolm, being a chaotician is more or less in the negative due to his work on unpredictability.
Spared no expense...until it came down to payroll. Nedry even notes that the park was automated to the point where it could be run with a skeleton crew for 3 whole days.
He actually makes the argument later on that hiring Nedry was a mistake, how they depend too much on automation, and that “next time, it will be perfect”. But by that time people are in danger, and Ellie makes the point that the control he seeks to have will remain an illusion.
That's possibly because Malcolm was kind of an ass about it. The last guy was closest to scientific - admitting he didn't know and striking a tone of caution, rather than doom dismissed out of hand.
“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” My favorite line among so much brilliant dialogue in this scene.
quoted that line to my dad last weekend (April 2022) - we were talking about how there are so many unnecessary features for appliances, like washing machines you can control with your smartphone or screens on your fridge. More features = more things to break and higher costs. Love that line. Came back here to watch lol.
And the virologists like that scumbag Fauci that are doing this that lead to the Covid pandemic and killed 7 million plus people. Now just imagine if that was the most docile virus in Wuhan. All we’ve seen is the Dilophosaurus escaping and haven’t even gotten close to the Raptor Pit which is still contained.
Dino dna mereinkonkeet ingen meveliikanlinin meretta vuodeltin piikki pukken pistoolin lacbtbaidt punainen teltanienen varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kansijot Petri Mikaelnen vatanen ulkomaalaisten opiskelijoiden kaupungkinlanitsen new Yorkin johtokunta päätti msiteriö sen tukinimuksenene ensin apuijen meksikolainen kanssanlaisen of ingen vartijan sotilas porukka poliisi armeijan joukot ensin apuijen aluksenista sairaalaanaan laivanoijenen hargairin laivastonijenen laivanoijenen perän vaunujenen juokkot. sataman nostonurijeeinen keijunut konkkuijenen laaiitteettenen keijunut telineetintä valtuudet John Hammond nimessä Petri Mikaelnen vatanen ensin apuijen varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kansijot of ingen nimin Petri san merekka angu tohtori Petri ambulance Lihjan auto hargairin Fleetwood rv tukinimuksenene auto bussi Lihjan auto hargairin bussi ambulance renkaat Scania sackian vaunujenen perän vaunujenen vaihto lava kuorman auto ambulance Jeep vartijan sotilas porukka poliisi armeijan vartijon systems varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen systems jäärääsejeelemän häätäänäälyynstyystysyneksen sen henkilön kunnatienen auto perän vaunujenen sairaalaanan kuuluuijetsunust ambulance nostonurijeeinen keijunut konkkuijenen laaiitteettenen tarvikkeeta ensin apuijen suuri joukkot vartijan ammattitutkinto Jurassic World of ingen park and Sorna Rica, costa varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kaisjot kirja viihiityn helikopterijenen lento kone helikopterijenen myös Autoijeenen lauta noston silita laivanoijenen ambulanceian matkkausjanan aluksenijenen hargairin perän vaunujenen sotilas vartija porukka poliisi armeijan joukot kaupungkinlanitsen myös asunkkanlaisen himisinijeesinen kanssanlaanaajaanlaisen hengen pelastaajaansekseen Jurassic World of park Isla nublar ingen vartijan sotilas porukka armeijan ingenpiikkipukken lacbtbaidt pistoolin ingen matkan laukkuun Lauren lapkus sinun puolen varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kaisjot käis kirjoitukset Petri Mikaelnen vatanen ensin apuijen
This is the best scene in the entire franchise. It identifies the narcissism of humanity and the destructive path it leaves just to attain a sense of control.
It applies beautifully to liberals. Everything they do, they might think whether or not they could, (with other people's money, of course) but not if they should.
@@JohnPopcorn06 Oh, what's so special about humans anyway? We've proven that we're basically the only species capable of destructive tendencies and they simply go beyond nature taking its course. What you call 'special', I call it fucking arrogance.
You think Hammond created the park and funded the Dino research just to have something to be in control of? Also did you know this movie is actually fiction?
Yeah I agree. That quote pretty much encapsulates the whole movie. That’s why the new Jurassic park movies are absolutely terrible. What made this movie really great is Hammond and his team being arrogant enough to think that they could harness and control nature. The park isn’t even open to the public yet and all the dinosaurs start to breed with each other.
0:41 Great bit of performance here. Malcolm seems almost nervous to be be first to speak out against the park, especially after Donald and John’s humorous exchange. Once he gets going he’s much more confident, but he seems almost shy to initiate criticism while everyone else is all wide-eyed (especially cuz at this point he doesn’t know if Alan and Ellie are on his side.) But that makes it all the better, because as awkward as it is to sour the mood in the room, he still feels morally obligated to do it anyway.
I agree. No matter how opposed Malcolm may be to the idea of Jurassic Park, he's still extremely impressed (and who wouldn't) and wants to give credit where credit is due for accomplishing the biggest scientific achievement in mankind's history. But that doesn't give Hammond immunity to criticism and Malcolm knows this.
"If I were to create a flock of condors on this island, you wouldn't have anything to say about it." "Yeah, but John, if a condor park breaks down the condors don't eat the tourists."
I fucking hate Dr. Wu in JWE how he intentionally agitate your dinosaurs, and even has the AUDACITY to tell you "keep guest casualties to a minimum." Dr. Wu is a literal terrorizer.
@The Wraith It's not like there was a shockwave that killed them all, the impact resulted in sudden and violent changes to the ecosystem that they couldn't survive. Sudden changes like that are brutal in general and disproportionately impact specialist species, of which, most known dinosaur species (and mega fauna reptiles in general) at the end of the Cretaceous period were specialized in some way or another. The survivors changed and adapted and eventually became other species, like Phorusrhacidae (Terror Birds).
+.m. Yeah, look at what the capitalists did at Chernobyl! Oh wait, that was communism. Never mind, ignore the commentary about how it's lack of humility by the powerful, this is specifically capitalism not any other case of abuse of power. To be absolutely fucking clear... this is not a "capitalism vs communism" thing, this is about how PEOPLE abuse the power that science has, the moral of the story applies just as much as if the film had been re-located to some sort of tech-advanced North Korea where they were setting up a dinosaur resort for the party faithful.
This is filmmaking. Great dialogue, great actors, great lighting, great shots. Everything comes together to transport the viewer into the dream world of film.
What's great about this scene is that you really feel for Hammond, even though you know deep down that his critics are right. You leave the scene not thinking Hammond is the bad guy with an ego, but that he is too naive to see his through his optimism.
The movie version of Hammond being a goodhearted but naive guy who just wanted to give people something to enjoy rather than the greedy asshole he was in the book is the best change from a book to a movie, in my opinion.
@@lucashenderson2775 Haven't read the novels, but wow - that seems like such a huge stretch to a book reader and a film go-er. I wasn't around when this film came out, but I assume everyone liked it. Correct?
@@notahamster333 It's easily the most critically and audience acclaimed of the whole series and set the record for highest grossing movie of all time up to that point, so yeah.
I love how this scene serves as a foil to when they first got on the island. The lawyer was skeptical, and they were all excited and now it’s the exact opposite.
It’s just a matter of perspective. They were never excited about the rides that would come online or how much the park could charge. They were incredibly excited by seeing actual dinosaurs, and wanted to know all they could about how that came to be. When they did, they were obviously impressed by some of it, but also concerned or worried by some more profound aspects. And that’s what’s showing here I think.
The lighting is amazing in this scene, the fact that everyone has an angelic glow around the back of their heads as if they are playing god is just one of the many things that makes this scene great.
When you also look at the framing, characters like Malcom are embodying shadows and light, images of the revelations of truth. Whereas Hammonds background is a slideshow of natural beauty, idealistic images of the “perfect earth”
Yes! The imagery is sublime! And the dinosaurs in the background, in the slide show, must be foreshadowing the fact that there will be more dinosaurs in the movie! Such symbolism!!!!!!
I remember watching this scene as a kid and being like" this is so boring". Now as an adult, it is ONE of the best scenes in Jurassic Park franchise, describing Man's greatest blunder, Hubris.
This scene explains why it's so hard to make a good sequel to this film. Here you have the main characters, who've just been wowed by this amazing feat of genetics, explaining to the guy who pulled it off why this is a *terrible* idea. Every single movie that comes after this one is based on *ignoring* their advice.
Thing is that these guys aren't necessarily 100% in the right. The reason the park failed wasn't because "Nature good industry bad", it's because Jon Hammond left the park's entire digital security to ONE GUY, whom he underpaid and (in the books) abused. The future films pretty much have to force some fuck-up to happen, like Jurassic World where they're like "Oh we lost track of this dino, guess we'd better wander into its paddock with minimal security and leave the door WIDE OPEN. Should we release some sleep gas first just in case? NAAAAAH!" Hell, in Lost World the fuck-ups are literally the "heroes" sabotaging In-Gen and then bringing a baby T-Rex to their own basecamp... so sabotaging themselves in other words XD But yeah, if anything JP is less a story of nature vs. corporation and closer to being a cautionary tale on not cutting corners and respecting your staff.
Also, mind you that in the book pretty much everyone dies. So there was never a real point in making a sequel. Funnily enough there's also a second and a third book, which makes even less sense.
An underrated line in this scene comes from Ellie as well. "You have plants in this building that are poisonous (dangerous), I mean you picked them because they LOOKED good-" Perfectly underscores the mentality of JP at it's core
Funny how as a kid I can barely recall this scene at all. I think I just automatically dismissed it as 'boring adult talk with no dinosaurs'. Now here I sit some 15 years later and I'm the adult who understands and enjoys it. Weird.
Seriously. I used to watch this everyday as a kid. But now, hearing Malcolm's argument-which was spoken eloquently btw- I may have found my new favorite scene in this movie.
same. But it's the Jurassic Park magic. as a kid you love it because of the Dinosaurs and all the cool stuff. When you're older and you see this kidn of scene you love Jurassic Park because it's just that good a movie
As a kid I was wondering whether Ellie Sattler was wondering wether they were eating dinosaur (and were they??) or whether she was just as disgusted by fish as I was as a kid. Didn't make the connection that she wasn't hungry because of just watching the raptors get fed.
What is so amazing about this scene to me is how even as a kid I had no desire to skip over this scene. I was maybe 6 years old, watching this scene, not really able to fully comprehend this kind of adult conversation, but I knew the adults in it were having this discussing things pointed and profound. There’s an energy to it, like I knew they were saying important, consequential things and it had me hooked. It’s the realistic rhythm of the dialogue and performances, something about it made sense it’s importance to what was happening in the story, and that was long before I could comprehend it. And I was just a child who loved dinosaurs and by all accounts should have been eager to fast-forward these talky, mature moments and get to the actual dinosaur points.
0:02. I love her reaction to the meal here. It's a perfectly prepared and well presented piece of sea bass, and she can't eat it because of what she just witnessed.
What did she witness? It's been a really long time since I saw this movie. Over a decade. Also, why are the characters against Jurassic Park again? I do remember when they got to the park they were all really excited and in awe, but here they're not.
@@Spitfire_94 She witnessed a cow being lowered into a velociraptor's cage and the movie showed her face wrinkling in nauseous disgust as the movie's sound effects suggested that the velociraptor was shredding the cow alive in order to eat it...
Defining scene. It also shows how smart the three scientists are. That even after they got over the awe of what has been going on, they can still be objective and see the dangers of what such a situation they find themselves in. And of course they were proven right. These aren't action heroes, they're scientists, which gives weight to their later actions as well, going up against apex predators and surviving. While also protecting others. Ian was so scared of what this park was about, yet he stood in front of one of the biggest apex predators in the history of the world to distract it away from the kids. Same for the others. No military training. No super powers. Just them against nature's best and coming out on top by their sheer determination. That's why this movie rocks.
I think the reason is that Jurassic park was never meant to be a block buster. The sequels are, but the original JP movie is a smart, well crafted movie that just so happened to make sure over 900 million dollars in its first run… this might actually explain why the sequels try to cater to a more adrenaline loving crowed.
@@doubleflores8350 Oh my friend, JP was DEFINITELY meant to be a blockbuster, because when S. Spielberg and Universal bought the rights in 1990, he already was envisioning a themed park to be built around the movie (which it did in Los Angeles in '96, with Jeff Goldblum as one of the stars present). The difference is that in the 90s, the audience wasn't so short sighted like they are today, the studios could easily insert quality and thought-provoking material into the script and not be just concerned with special effects and cheesy characters that run on social agendas like it is today.
@@zac-1 woah woah woah WOOOOAH did you seriously just say that consider yourself lucky I didn't get into it with you I could have but it's not worth it however when other Star Wars fans such as myself see your reply I can't control what they say he's right there guys ☝
The chef: "No, no that's cool. Slaved away over a hot stove to prepare that Chilean Sea Bass for you, but no you have to go meet some kids and not eat a bite. It's fine, no it's fine. You go, clearly you have more important things to do."
Things like that always make me imagine spin off movies involving the most obscure and bizarre background characters seen in movies. It's like a curse, every single film I watch I distract myself thinking about it. I think I'm a little bit mental tbh.
“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they COULD, they didn’t stop to think if they SHOULD…” Simple line and yet one of my all time favorite movie quotes.
I was a weird kid, so I enjoyed these types of scenes. The subtle foreshadowing to disaster and the rhetoric behind it all was amazing. This scene has definitely grown with me throughout the last 30 years (I was 6 years old when the film was released), and back then I was fully supportive of Malcolm, but today I understand Hammond's point of view and his ambitions. I often imagine that if Hammond had consulted Malcolm, Sattler and Grant before any dinosaurs were engineered, JP would have turned out very differently.
As a kid, I always missed all the great dialogue in the movies like this one. Dinosaurs were WAY more important. Now as an adult, I can finally appreciate the actual plot and the dialogues!
@@raven4k998 Nah, this is impossible. I was very interested in biology in high school and am actually studying medicine. Still, the main idea of the film always went right over my head as a kid
This scene is so good. I actually can agree with ALL points of view. From the dreams of an old man trying to bring wonder into the world, to the rational scientists warning him of the implications. The dialogue is phenomenal and feels so incredibly real. Being an adult now, i have been able to hear debates that sound exactly like this around dinner tables. Its amazing
Malcom was a whiner. The dinosaurs never would stand a chance against armed, organized humans except in the sort of contrived circumstances you see in a movie. Sure, there would be some accidents, especially while setting up, but zoos suffer deaths and maulings too, people die in all sort of vocations like construction, farming and mining, and you don't hear people going on darkly about those.
@@ConfirmedCynic The difference is dinosaurs haven't been alive for millions of years, which means they didn't have any real, hard, scientific evidence as to how they moved or hunted, or lived.....other than looking at fossils and inferring what happened. With zoos, they're filled with animals observed for years...which means we have current data on how the animals go about their lives. That was NOT the case with dinosaurs. And with them adding frog DNA to fill in gaps, they created the scenario where they were able to breed and create more problems.
@@ConfirmedCynic That's all well and good, but dinosaurs are hardly comparable to an old, half-crippled flea-ridden puma. The beasts you see in Jurassic Park are for the most part complete UNDERestimates of the real things. The Tyrannosaurus was neither the apex predator of its time, nor the largest of the carnivorous dinosaurs to live. There were beasts twice, nay, three times its size that could also wade in water, had fully functioning arms and groups. We're talking creatures almost the size of hotels. Try shooting a rifle at that and see what happens. You'll need rockets, planes, etc, just to take down one of millions of what was a common predator. Don't forget the less direct ramifications. Look at Yellowstone and the wolf population, and you see the man shooting them all allowed the Moose and Elk to run rampant, destroying plant life and thus the soil (filling the rivers with silt and eroding them with the lack of roots to hold the mud in place). Now, imagine different plant eaters, except that they have no natural predators (aside from the extremely dangerous other dinosaurs), that are 150 feet long and capable trampling a town into dust. The best part? These animals were so powerful and so adaptable that it took a force that we can barely comprehend, one that would dwarf the result of all of our nukes being set off at once, to destroy them. Keep in mind too that Dinosaurs existed for more than twice the amount of years they've been gone. It's been 65 million years since the asteroid hit what is now southern Mexico, while merely a single of the three periods (Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous) is nearly that length alone. To put it in perspective, we humans have existed for approximately half a million years with our current DNA, give or take depending on who you want to believe. 500,000 vs. almost 200 million. But we would be on top? Sure. This is hardly even a fantastical argument, considering that there are men alive as we speak attempting to make what happened in Michael Crichton's fiction reality. Unfortunately for them, dinosaur DNA found in amber tends to be almost completely eroded, and thus cannot just be 'filled in' with frog DNA (you would end up with a slightly altered frog). Other creatures, however, that have not been extinct for nearly as long may very well be resurrected in our life times (mammoths, massive cats, predatory whales the size of ships and 60 ft. long sharks, to start off). Once they are created, some will get free, sooner or later. Either by accident, or by some sort of freak act of bio-terrorism. In fact, knowing humans, using deadly animals as weapons against each other is no more far-fetched than what we already do, which is use deadly viruses and bacteria against each other. While the original scientists who resurrect new creatures may do it in such a way that they are infertile, or less dangerous, others in their wake will do the opposite, hoping to create a host of weapons. Then, they'll take the next step, which is to modify the creatures to be MORE deadly than their historical counterparts. This is what happens when man plays god. Man loses, sooner or later.
I dunno, his point was, "The endangerment of condors is our own fault, and it's a relatively recent development that we ought to try to reverse. Dinosaurs went through the complete process of natural selection, and to undo that process and manipulate their entire existence in a world that has grown without them is vastly beyond human capability, not to mention an incredible disrespect for nature itself." Seems a pretty solid argument to me.
This is the best, most captivating scene in the film. and its a writers dream. Just people sitting at a table, discussing a subject, and the audience is captivated.
Honestly I think he educated a generation about discretion better than any man ever. I will always hear him whisper screaming, "They didn't stop to think if they should!" whenever that quote comes up. During all this soft education about potential people get a real hard look at someone screaming "Caution!" in such a brilliant unforgettable way. Somehow he made caution seem completely sexy, which is really quite a feat. It took wardrobe, directing, writing and an all star delivery but if there's any one warning sign people learned in the history of cinema. It doesn't seem like a memorable line but absolutely everyone remembers this one. I dunno who to thank for that, spielberg or goldblum or crichton but damn. Nice job guys, you might actually have gotten a message incepted. I dunno how this links back to oppenheimer but I'm certain it does, somehow.
Personally I think, that Dr. Sattler sums the problem better up than Dr. Malcolm: "How can you know anything about an exstinct ecosystem, and therefore how can you ever assume that you can control it."
@metalgearhead99 That line always troubles me, because it doesn't sound like something a chaotician like Dr. Malcolm would say. "Nature selected them for extinction" implies the belief in some sort of underlyning universal order
@metalgearhead99 Agreed (-; Interesstingly, in the original Crichton novel, Malcolm's arguments are more in line with Dr. Sattler. He argues against Hammond's claim that the park is completely under control, and therefore safe, because a system with living creatures, especially whose behavior is unknown, is far too complex to be without accidents
@@Pridd100 Not necessarily, I look at Malcolm saying "Nature Selected them for extinction" that Malcolm would more be picturing a game show wheel being spun and it happening to land on "Dinos go Boom". Him using the term 'Selected' is the same as us looking back at a gameshow and saying "They selected the winner" When the winner really just won through random chance of a wheel spin than any great plan. Abit of a stretch of an analogy, but that's just how I view it. Malcolm is looking back in Hindsight only, not in a preordained sense.
Hammond could have used this tech to bring back animals that have recently gone extinct, or in danger of being extinct, and still make billions + respect and gratitude of the world, but he had to go with Dinos.
This used to be a boring part for me as a kid: "Just show me dinosaurs!", now as an adult it's a fascinating conversation about ethics and morals in science Crazy how the human brain matures, this should be shown in Ethics classes
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, that they didn't stop to think if they should." My favorite line in the whole movie.
Mine too! People need to do that once in a while! A lot of people jump to conclusions, or actions, and don't think of the consequences... (People have problems!)
The truth is it would be absolutely horrifying if there were a park with actual dinosaurs that have been extinct for millions of years roaming in it. This scene gives it historical context.
A bear or elephant attack is already horrific. Can you imagine the absoloute hell of being attacked by bigger, more agressive animals that come from a more hostile time?
I would prefer alot of the bigger dinosaurs to attack and kill me then a bear or an elephant. Most bear attacks do not end with the bear killing the human it attacked. Most end when the bear doesnt consider the human a threat anymore. This means the human that got attacked most often is still very much alive. Just bloodied and mangled and bleeding to death.Most people who get attacked and killed by a bear. They die of blood loss. NOt the bear biting something that instantly kills you. A t rex chomping me. The pressure of his bite alone would be enough to kill me far faster then a bear could.
@@georgebarton1582 Also got to bare in mind that the majority of the large Theropods like T-Rexes wouldn't have really gone for humans as food. We''re too small.
I spent three hours chatting with Richard Attenborough a few years before his death. We were both looking very scruffy and nobody around us had the faintest idea who he was. He was very charming.
@@NealX_Gaming It was on a plane and in the BA Club lounge at Heathrow. We had seats 2A and 2C (front row club) on a flight to Vienna. The plane developed a fault and we had to go back to the lounge until a replacement could be found. That was an Airbus instead of a 737 so BA said people in Club should keep their seat assignments but other passengers should pick any seat in economy. An American decided to try to sit in Club and when a member of the cabin crew told him it was free seating in economy and that he would have to leave, he pointed at the two of us and said loudly "What about those two? They don't look like they should be in here" At the time I took a hundred flights a year in Club between London and Vienna and, of course, Richard Attenborough was Richard Attenborough even though he had holes in his jeans and wore trainers.
I love Grant's everyman approach: "Dinosaurs and man, two species separated by 65 million years of evolution, have just been suddenly thrown back into the mix together. How can we possibly have the slightest idea of what to expect?"
@@LordVaderTyrannus Species - a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. They were breeding before extinction and considering the eggs Grant finds after TRex breakout i am more than positive that they fit this term.
MENTAL Oh stop acting like I’m being nitpicky, that’s a pretty huge fucking mistake. It would be like saying fish are a species or mammals are a species.
@@LordVaderTyrannus You are correct. Dinosaurs is a clade whereas something like Troodon is a species. People giving you a hard time like MENTAL are dumb-asses.
It's like a kid being so excited over something and getting his soul crushed when, in his enthusiasm, is called out for being selfish and short-sighted. Love that face.
The line that always stuck out to me was when Ian said "before you even knew what you had", that is the key line. John Hammond didn't even know what he was unleashing into the world. He just thought the idea of Dinosaurs today would be so magnificent. A spectacle for all, the 8th wonder of the world! John Hammond thought like a showbiz man without even considering doing proper scientific research or consulting with biologists and paleontologists. He couldn't even see the error of his ways until it was too late.
Everybody else who tried to do what he did also did not see the errors of their ways until it was too late. They all found out the hard way that we are not in control of nature.
The Book really nailed this point home hard, Jurassic Park is their Pandora's box, the simple innocent act of bringing dinosaurs back to life opened the floodgates to the horrifying reality of genetic manipulation.
@@gamechanger8908 the scary thing about Jurassic Park is that the "science fiction" part isn't that far fetched. With some luck and some advancement, we could build a dinosaur very soon!
"You're meant to come down here and defend me against these characters and the only one I've got on my side is the bloodsucking lawyer!" Such a great line - shows just how bad John Hammond wanted his vision to work out... too bad it didn't
I mean it did work out, just not everyone there had the same goals to uphold the park and create a perfect park. Like the lawyer who wanted to abuse its power with money and the desk worker who wanted to destroy the park for his own gains.
Growing up makes me feel bad for the lawyer. He comes down to this island to represent a client who seems to be on the absolute cutting edge of scientific discovery (and probably paying really well to boot) and all he does is get ignored and insulted by everyone including his own employer before finally getting eaten with nobody else giving a damn. As a kid I remember thinking he was an absolute weasel but as an adult he's just some normal guy doing a job whose main crime was being a coward when the T-Rex showed up.
@@francoisona Why are Athiests always the most toxic people on forums? I personally don't believe in a god but about half the people I know do. You don't have any friends or family who believe I higher power? Would you go up to you're grandmother and tell her that her skydaddy isn't real? You're a true asshole, and that's coming from a guy with a Hitler profile pic
I remember as a kid I didn’t understand what was being said so I just skipped over this to get to the dinosaur parts. Now I watch this scene many times and enjoy the philosophical, ethical, and common knowledge debates almost as much as the dinosaurs themselves.
Dr. Grant was always my favorite character in the movie. Not just his change of heart towards kids, but the fact that he is the guy open to all experiences and reacts accordingly. That and he's the guy who loved dinosaurs as a kid, finally got to see them alive in person, and respects that their animals still, not some marketed commodity. Ian Malcolm and Robert Muldoon both come a close second to me.
From what I have read, Hammond seems to be quite a bit of a greedy asshole in the book. In the movie, I think he was done better because he was not doing it for just money. He basically had a fantasy that he wanted to share with the world and seemed like he was doing the right thing, but was just too short sighted and stubborn to admit what he was doing was dangerous until he saw what they were truly capable of. It kind of makes you feel sorry for him more so than in the book.
It digs even deeper than just the good intentions. The technology is there and is in our real world and it's no longer about if it's good or bad intentions, it's about who's gonna push the button first. To quote Arnold Schwarzenegger in a subpar Terminator sequel. "You only postponed it. Judgement Day is inevitable."
Read the book as a kid...i thought it was dry at points but was very well written and Crichton's bio engineering jargon and such is on point. I very much wanted him to explore into the other islands besides Nublar and Sorna. Because it was explained that Ingen owned all five i believe.
I did and boy was it a joyride with thrills and ass-clenching moments. Like when they found out that instead of 8 raptors (all of them are behind electrified fence mind you) there 37 in park total. And don't get me started on the very first scenes with a baby and injured worker. They were pretty damn graphic.
@@calliph It's great, and even though the sequel film didn't live up to this movie, The Lost World novel is even better than the first. Read them both, you'll love them.
Movies, like books, are designed to tell a story, but the best ones show you a perspective (morally and ethically). This scene shows many different perspectives that even years later is still shocking, humbling and awe-inspiring.
It's STAGGERING how much better this movie is versus the newer ones.
The first new one was not too shabby I didn’t see the other two though lol
The latest one was absolute garbage
It's also shocking how good are the themes present in JW saga (maybe even more interesting than the original trilogy) just for the movies to run past them and say "Oh look guys we got a bigger scarier raptor OMG so epic look at chris Pratt playing with cgi raptors 😱😱😱"
Jurassic world was good. As for the other two not really lol.
What is also staggering is the fact that so many people support the newer movies by paying for them. Jurassic World 3 made as much money as Jurassic Park 1 did. The movie makers have realized they don't need good plots or cinematography, people will throw money at their garbage anyway.
All that matters anymore in the entertainment industry is the advertisement campaign. Building up hype *before* release of movies/video games has become 95% of success, without exagguration. Movie trailers are now even made with the sole purpose of presenting the entire movie's plot in a 5 minute sequence of cutscenes. After watching a trailer you basically know the entire plot. And somehow these are the tricks that work the best for getting people to go watch your movie.
People are morons, truly.
As a kid, you thought this scene was boring. As an adult, you realize it’s the best scene in the movie.
Idk about the best scene but definitely more entertaining when you’re an adult
Agreed!
Exactly!! One of the best ever scene in SS's career.
The T-Rex/Raptor ending was epic too 😌 but yes!
When I was a kid I knew exactly what he was saying, you can't contain dinos. Even a kid knows that.
Me as a kid
"WHY ARE THEY STILL TALKING, SHOW ME SOME DINOSAURS DAMN IT!"
Me as an adult
"fascinating"
@The Red Guy
read the book my guy
haha
Ikr!
Even as I didn't comprehend much about the philosophical nature of this conversation, the camera work and the backround lights and colours are masterclass. You don't get bored even if you don't understand a single word! Great acting, camera and lighting, pure class.
Similar thing for me with Raiders of The Lost Ark.
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with if they could do it, they forgot to ask if they should?" Such a great line
I also like "yeah, I know, it's a lot worse"
*After I wrote that I realized that literally any line in Goldblums speech he gives in that scene could probably be inserted into the statement lol. What great dialog writing.
Man that was the best line ever.
I do kind of feel the same way about the advancement of ai recently. It's sort of out of control and I always think about this quote when I hear about what's happening in 'ai learning' or whatever. It's a monumental advancement, but it's damaging so many people and professions. They're now pushing it onto people to help with simple things like writing sentences. It's very obviously a bad idea, but it's being pushed because it's a 'move forward'. This film really does introduce you to the idea of reckless science.
Afraid we are gonna experience this with AI
Applies to everything man has created. Nuclear weapons, biological weapons, AI.
"Genetic power is the most awesome force this world has ever seen, but you're wielding it like a kid that's found his dad's gun"
-One of my favorite lines of the movies
Yes but half of that sentence isnt actually true.
same! Such great dialogue in this movie, that I believe is quite underrated :)
He's not wrong.
"your scientists were so preoccupied with wether or not they could they didn't stop to think if they should." Is my personal favorite line.
To paraphrase Dr Malcolm, I tell religious people when they argue that their God exists that they "wield religion like a grown ass person that still believes in Santa Claus". But just saying dinosaurs alone easily discredits all religious myths, too.
The amazing thing is the reversal of Goldblum's character. He started as a guy who looks like a rock star and hits on women and became the voice of reason and humility.
Anastasios Gkotzamanis wasn’t he always a guy who dresses like a rock star and hits on women? It’s why we love him so much.
That's why Dr. Ian Malcolm is my favorite character of Jurassic Park. The humility and reason he possesses. It foreshadows reality.
@@kaijufan6246 So true
And yet people overlook him because he talks funny.
And even in Jurassic World 2, Dr Malcolm still was the voice of reason and humility
As a kid, you thought this part was boring. When you're more mature, you love it.
The genius of Steven Spielberg.
i used to think: i´m hungry
Completely agree. As a kid, any scene without dinosaurs were boring. As an adult you really appreciate them.
More the genius of Michael Chriton... these lines were some of my favorite from the book :DD
Most of the great lines are actually directly from Michael Crichton, so kudos to him!
As a kid, this scene interested me because I thought the slide shows on the screens were pretty cool. I never really paid much attention to the dialogue until I was older, but now that I do now, I believe that they all have good points about the morality of what John Hammond was doing.
''You stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as you could,'' Oh boy that quote could be applied to so much stuff. Especially modern films.
Especially "You didn't acquire the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it". That hit pretty well
I think such conversations as these at the dinner table were aloft in the world post Newton. But I love conversations like these. One of my favourite `actions` in the whole film.
I don’t know, this feels just as applicable to almost anything humanity does ever. Progress is only possible by taking knowledge laid down by our predecessors.
I mean but isn't that what all science consists of? Standing on the shoulders of geniuses past. Perhaps more accentuated in this case but nonetheless...
@@UnaStamus91 All of Science is an `approximation toward the mechanics of the universe`, I think.
Humanity has done rather well at it in its conception, but not so much in its application.
I view your query as one of `is Science seamless ?` ( if I may, that is ).
I think there are some very rare moments in its history that would test the assertion that it is.
A few examples would be the Uncertainty Principle and The Theories in Relativity.
All those things that make the universe discreet.
It sounds bizarre, but I often wonder whether time is continuous.
In saying that I`d be laughed out of Primary School, let alone College.
Goldblum's acting is terrific here. He sounds like an actual academic. I love the little things about his acting too; for instance how he hesitates a bit when Hammond brings up condors. See how he doesn't immediately dismiss Hammond?---as a person would in real life, he hears "Condors", processes it and where Hammond is about to go with it, and then reacts physically before saying anything, as if he's doing his best to restrain himself. That's the best kind of performance---like he's going beyond acting and living it out.
Great observation!
No one can teach these things..it gotta catch me from within
And he did it by immersing himself in hiss character..
Like Jamie fox did with Ray
What you two are describing is known as Naturalism and dramatic pauses. It’s actually very common to learn that in acting. Another thing you learn in acting to make the role you, so bring your natural mannerisms into it to make it more believable. Needless to say, I’m in Acting 1 in college 😅
100% and even the tapping of his finger on the table in frustration and anticipation to present his rebuttal.
i love how he hits the table when he talks about profiting off the research, showing how serious his thoughts on the subject are despite his quiet and restrained tone
You don't know many "academics"... It is entertainment, presented as a morality tale. It has nothing to do with reality, all these personalities are rather absurd stereotypes.
"your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should."
-hardest hitting line in the entire franchise
Faerhad Targaryen a line that sticks with you forevermore
can u explain more what does it mean by that line? quite confused
@@nursyakirah4341 He was bringing up some issues related to bioethical responsibility.
@@nursyakirah4341 that they were too busy dreaming of fame and notoriety without thinking the ramifications it would have on the world.
I.E, the most recent movie
Responsibility to whom? These are atheistic scientists are they not? Objective moralism does not exist in their world view, and if they think objective morals exists they are not consistent with their world view.
Rape of the natural world is not wrong, no such thing as good and evil. I had more respect for Dr Hammond, atleast he is consistent with his world view. ( Evolution theory). Malcom is putting Christian or religious ethics of (good and evil) in his way of reasoning in defending the Animals. He is thinking like a theist. In most theist world view anything that has life has value, because God who is the standard of good says that they have value and that he has given man the responsibility in the care of the earth and everything that lives on it. But it seems that Malcom Totally contradicting what he claims to be, unless I am wrong and he is a creationist, I do not think the book or movies gives a hint of him being a believer of God, so I am assuming he is the typical atheist scientist. And if he is the typical scientist that holds to evolutionary system and denies creationism then he really has no objective moral standards to stand on, he has no logical reason on calling something “rape” as in a negative thing,. But he abandons his views and uses Religious argument as if we have a responsibility to care for others, as if nature or the animals have any value to them. According to evolution theory we are just cluster of cells and none holds no value. Those dinosaurs do not deserve special treatment, just like the rock that we kick for fun. Natural selection does not care about morals.
Dr Hammond is correct in his actions and is consistent with what he claims to be, if creationism is false. Bioethical “responsibility” is really just a man made rules, that is neither right or wrong. It would be stupid to follow if you are going to benefit taking advantage of others. It is about survival of the fittest.
Everything Malcom says in this one scene in less than 5 mins is more memorable than anything that’s been said across 3 Jurassic world movies
absolutely. 👍👍
Fax
this was real life, didn't seem like a movie
I agree- I loved this scene when I first saw it and none of the sequels have come close since to exploring the ethical issues and ramifications of the cloning technology.
That, and walking around in a black leather jacket despite being on a jungle climate island.
You're not lying lol
“Like a kid that’s found his Dad’s gun.” Such an excellent simile.
This is Jeff Goldblum's defining scene as an actor. He owned it.
Nah his defining scene was when he's nearly shirtless laying back on the table 😂
@@morningstar577 nah man it's gotta be the one where he's laughing like he's stoned af
@@morningstar577I was looking for this comment😂👍🏾
His defining scene is surely "Insect Politics" in The Fly.
That’s because this was before he decided to make nearly every future role a caricature of himself.
This scene shows one of the things I love about this movie. It’s authentic. You understand the motives behind every character, no one is straight up evil or good. The characters are so well written
Closest to being evil is the bloodsucking lawyer or Nedry
@@michaelnally2841 Nedry was an underpayed worker who wanted quick money. The lawyer was a capitalist who didn’t see the beauty of the scientific discovery but only profit. Both things happen really often in the real world. That’s what I mean with authentic
@@peteschupp4545 I know that’s why I said they were the closest. Now I’m the Boom though John Hammond was basically an evil greedy SOB but I prefer this version he just feels like a guy with a dream and his ambitions blinded him to the risks of having these animals here plus it makes him far more likable and making you feel bad when he realizes his dream was a disaster that almost got his grandkids killed.
@@peteschupp4545 Nedry was the closest to an evil person in the movie, but you can still understand his motivations - desperate people in real life would no doubt do the same thing. Hammond was more of a twinkly eyed grandfather figure in the movie than the ruthless SOB in the book - but he still has heavy shades of grey that make him flawed and human. He was a man with a dream, and his desire for that dream was so unshakable, he was blind to all the risks that would soon be unleashed.
@@peteschupp4545 Nedry was a contractor. He put a bid in for the job and it was accepted. When he found out the potential of the sucess of the park he asked for more than what he had bid for. If you accepted a bid from a contractor you hired and then they came back and asked for more would you have given them more?
Actual intelligent main characters discussing the ethics of bringing the dinosaurs back. Whereas, in Jurassic World, a handsome Raptor trainer walks around and not having anything remotely intelligent to say other than witty remarks and comebacks.
Why would they need to do that anyway? We already know the risks and everything. If they had did what you wanted it would be a boring drag of things that we already know and already heard of it would be a waste of space and pointless.
+Joshua Willis Doing nothing like they did (only saying witty remarks and comebacks) is what is pointless.
+Joshua Willis I think their point is kind of what Malcolm I'd saying: you stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something. Kind of true, this movie had significantly more substance to it. Although I really like Jurassic World
+Maddy Harvey Which part of Jurassic World did you like? The Indominous Rex forgetting it has camouflage powers because of plot or the part where the main female protagonist out runs a T-Rex in high heels? To be honest I mistook that movie to be mostly a comedy after a while constantly stating, "These people can't be that stupid." I laughed so many times in the movie theater I am pretty sure the rest of the people were getting pissed at me but I just couldn't help myself.
+Steven Schmaling I watched it for the fight scene at the end :/
"What you call discovery, I call the rape of the natural world". Malcolm killed it with that line.
That part made me think of the scene in Jurassic World with the T-Rex inside the lion enclosure. It was just so unnatural. That enclosure belonged to the lion and this dinosaur that's been dead for 65 million years just knocks the lion out of its place as one of the top predators on the planet
I like how Ellie is the one who steers the conversation back to a more productive line of thinking after that. It's justified hyperbole, but still.
The character was a libtard as opposed to the other scientists but they conveyed his viewpoint fairly
The cringe of the line "We will have a coupon day" when discussing having brought the Dinosaurs back, makes me certain humanity is doomed"
Jewish people are the best. Love Goldbloom's intricacies in this and other movies and how jewish people care so much about the other people and the natural world, even above their own interests!
As a kid: Boring scene. Show me the dinosaurs.
As a 34 year old now: It's my favorite scene of the movie.
Hmm I didn't think it was boring. But I wasn't that young I guess.
chris harden when I saw the food I was hungry. 😋
Yes!
Yeah even my sisters love this scene.
I started quoting Malcom and they finished the scene by banging the table at the same time.
Lawyer jokes went over my head as a kid, now they feel as over the top as marvel jokes.
One thing that always bothered me about this scene. They never ate that delicious looking Chilean Sea Bass.
They just watched a cow get mauled by raptors and lost their appetite.
Same 😡
I always thought it was “chilli and sea bass” which to me sounded interesting at best.
The food is fake.. They wouldn't eat it anyway.
Dr. Sattler didn't seem to think it looked delicious.
One of the interesting things about this movie, Hammond never once seemed even remotely malicious. Most movies like this, you would expect him to be a secret evil genius or something, but his intentions were good
road to hell is paved with good intentions.
yes, villains who act evil for no good reason is actually boring and unrealistic.
Part of the genius of the movie is that *there is no true villain*. Nedry does what he does out of greed, but he doesn't do it to hurt any of the main characters, and he couldn't have predicted that there'd be a bug in the computer system that shut down the tour vehicles alongside the security system. The raptors are devious and predatory, but that's what they're supposed to be. We see them as murderous for killing off the people, but that's just them being what they are. Hammond wasn't trying to kill anyone, he was trying to expand the knowledge and experience of mankind. The lawyer starts off as an ambulance chaser, sure, but he's also *doing his job* to get compensation for the dead man's family.
it's probably one of the changes for the better made by the movie. That it's all basically science gone wrong. Mankind playing God, with noble intentions, and getting his comeuppance for it. But it does create a bit of a plot contrivance that hammond is extremely eager to do something fantastic, and keeps mentioning how he spared no expense, But he clearly spared plenty of expenses, including, apparently, not paying his computer techs enough that one of them was willing to engage in corporate espionage.
In the book, Hammond was a much more selfish unlikable character. A conman, basically. Who is much more believable as someone who would have spared every expense. And in the end is killed by the monsters he created
"Some of the worst things imaginable have been done with the best intentions." - Alan Grant (Jurassic Park III)
Let me just say one thing yes he had a idea and ran with it but he was PLAYING GOD and look what happened then Jurassic world came along same problems but this time they wanted to combine the most dangerous predators T. rex and raptor in my defense yeah he had a awesome idea but did not fully think it through
This is what superb screenwriting is. Arguably one of the best scenes of the entire movie.
It was in the book you know
David koepp goat
All thanks to Michael Crichton
This scene contains great acting, especially from Jeff Goldblum, his dialogue delivery is absolutely brilliant. Also RIP Richard Attenborough, another great actor.
Agreed. The lines are taken almost directly from Ian Malcolm's lines in the novel but Goldblum really brings them to life.
@@typhoonhurricane18 Indeed. This scene is a lesson in acting; flawlessly executed. It's so convincing that it seems as though a real live debate is being filmed as opposed to scripted dialogue.
Plus the fact that almost none of these characters were A, or even B list stars at the time of the movie. Laura Dern makes one of the most important and simple points, that trades on her character's specific knowledge as a paleobotanist. Sam Neill is a quiet everyman, but his discomfort means something in the face of his character's career as a renowned paleontologist. Sir Richard Attenborough lends the whole proceeding a gravitas that a lesser actor could easily fail to impart. Even a line like "coupon day" offers a casual sliminess that exposes the reckless greed of the whole enterprise.
I didn't hate Jurassic World quite as badly as many others, but it couldn't hold a candle to this movie.
@@trevalyan006 Yeah indeed. None of the cast in this scene, besides Richard Attenborough who was a seasoned actor, had done much of note before this film. It's by far the best of the Jurassic park films; none of the sequels made the mark quite like the original. Actually most, if not all, sequels fail to equal their predecessor. This is a common issue throughout the film industry.
@@1980extremeG And don't forget that not only was he a seasoned actor but that Richard Attenborough was also a seasoned,award-winning director.
Fun fact:Attenborough was a bad-ass World War II veteran.When the film set for Jurassic Park was hit by a devastating and brutal hurricane in 1992,Attenborough actually SLEPT through it!
When Steven Spielberg asked Attenborough how he could have slept through a hurricane,Attenborough simply replied that he survived The Blitz in World War II.
I skipped this scene a lot when I was a kid because I didn't know what the characters were talking about, now I'm older and I completely understand an important life lesson is heard here never a truer word has been spoken
thats with every movie XD
kyle sharpe lol agreed
***** I was different. I watched the scene fully and seemed to understand the gist of it and as I grew up I understood more and more.
***** This corresponds with what Jeff Goldblum was saying during the egg hatching scene. As a creationist, I can agree with this too, and is precisely the flaw of making man look like the supreme being.
The flaw is too many people see DNA as something like a microchip and don't understand the significant differences. I learned in basic physics class and IT about how electrical currents work, that they are all made of switches, microwaves, and wires that run on consistent electrical currents and that all that a processor in a computer is is just that, a series of switches, and it only thinks in terms of 0's and 1's. Therefore, it thinks the way it's programmed to think.
DNA is extremely different. I learned in forensics from someone who also teaches biology that DNA is a chemical that displays the blueprints of life, and in my eyes, if it is the blueprint of life, than when hydrated with H2O, it becomes the soul and therefore made free, especially considering how sophisticated the substance really is, therefore way more independent, sophisticated, spiritual, and chaotic than a microchip. That's the big difference.
Personally, I've seen this philosophy displayed in both science fiction and fantasy, and it seems as if a mad scientist is often compared to the evil wizard in this perspective.
***** Amen to that
This is really one of those watch again 15 years later, as an adult, movies.
Charlezard Watched this many times as a young kid and never really cared what they were talking about. Now as I watch it as an adult I can appreciate the dialogue more and what the films real message is I suppose.
Charlezard I went and say it in 3D during the rerelease last summer. During Dennis Nerdy's first scene I shouted "Hello...Newman!" and the whole theater burst into laughter.
Charlezard I remember watching this scene hundreds of times as a kid and I never had any idea what they were talking about
I never paid attention. It was just a cool dinosaur movie of course
In the movie John Hammond is portrayed as a dreamer, someone who wants to show dinosaurs to the world regardless of the risks because he wants to entertain. He really exemplifies the saying, "The road to hell is paved with good intentions."
In the book, Hammond is just after profits at all costs. Unlike movie Hammond, he remains obstinante and even hostile towards anyone questioning him. And in the end Hammond suffers a vastly different fate.
COMPY FOOD!
I am probally wrong, but the book one sounds like a illumination villain. The greedy businessman who just want power and money
@@shawerful5209more or less but in the book Hammond is more than just money hungry it's almost to the point he doesn't even care about his grandkids when they go missing hell id even say he'd want them to go missing even if it meant the park would do better
Yeees, the adaptation of the book is so good, that really make shine the geniuses in that production. Truly a Master Piece.
I might regret asking this, but what happens to him in the book?
"You were so preoccupied with whether or not you could, you didn't stop and consider whether you should"…..now there is a life lesson for all time.
We have been jugling that question since WW2. Do we continue too do what we make possible because they are always costs both positive and negative that we need too be willing too pay for anything we do.
Something Victor Frankenstein could have learned a great deal from.
Indubitably
Yup progress is balance of course there is negative things that come out of everything only the naive would say other wise but it also cant be an excuse for mediocrity, ignorance and irresponsibility. Any new development will always be a juggling act between risk and reward.
Indubitably And the federal government for that matter lol
That's how I describe the new jurrasic world movie
Back when the Jurassic Park franchise was good. The makers of Jurassic World stood on the shoulders of geniuses to accomplish something as fast as they could, before patenting it, packaging it, slapping it on a plastic lunchbox, and now they're selling it.
The best youtube comment I've ever seen.. and can also be said about many things in today's world..
haha. Nice. Your solid reference aside, that is how it is now with these modern remakes/revamps. Taking something that was art, and just creating a fast paced, CGI packed, dumbed down blockbuster.
It's one big pile of shit...
Even “The Lost World” was terrible and Michael Crichton wrote the book and I think also the screenplay for it.
Personally, I hope they drive the franchise so far into the ground we eventually get the "Cyborg Dennis Nedry vs. Dinosaur Super Soldiers" movie that they were spit-balling a ways back.
"the lack of humility before nature that's being displayed here is staggering"
BEST quote of the movie....
Willverinerage you misquoted tough
yes, I did lol but they got it
The whole paragraph long quote where he talks about standing on the shoulders of geniuses was the best.
For me it is “Must go faster”
“Gee the lack of humility... before nature... that’s being displayed here... uh... staggers me”
Goldblum is absolutely astounding in this movie. In this scene in particular you really truly feel the weight of what he says, he carries it in such a way that feels real, like you can see through where he looks and where he places emphasis that he's working through what he says, he's engaged with the conversation. It's not just what he says but the way he says it that stands out so well. It's like you can feel him picking out each word he needs to say, and his emotion carries with in each sentence. It's minute and in the grand scheme of the movie it doesn't seem like a lot but in scenes like this that require that kind of character focus it really adds and incredible layer of depth.
The arguments of Ian, Ellie, and Alan are actually really good acting. Especially what Ian and Ellie said, because they are completely right about chaos and unpredictability.
Lmao that's exactly why they call Ian the expert of chaos theory
In the second book Hammond’s nephew called him a nut but Ian Malcolm is still alive and he got eaten by the baby t-Rex
And what’s scary is it’s a possibility this will be a reality. I’ve seen several articles about scientists trying to bring dinosaur embryos to life
@@nelixsulu6201 I hope they don’t. Because Jurassic Park gave us a good example of what happens if we did have dinosaurs and humans together
@@thehighground7926 You shouldn't reference movies as a guide to determine what we should or shouldn't do lol :P. If you create a t-rex, you'd put safeguards in please. And you'd have backup systems. Just because we're separated by millions of years of evolution doesn't mean that a t-rex suddenly has magic powers that allows it to escape through, say, a concrete or hardened steel enclosure several meters thick on all sides. You can drop the magical fears that millions of years somehow will create a system that can not be contained.
The reason the dinosaurs escaped in the movie was because they tied all their security to a single power system, and when that went offline, they escaped. Its just a bad security design. If done properly it can work.
The same logic you're using on the other hand leads to the luddite attitude that John was complaining about in this very clip. What about nuclear power? Well that's really dangerous if things go wrong. Well guess what, it doesn't mean we huddle in the darkness or use inferior sources of energy. It just means we apply our brainpower to create multiple redudant safeguards and security systems so that runaway nuclear fission does not occur.
Its the exact same with any potentially dangerous, but scientifically rewarding endeavour. You're obviously not going to be going on jeep tours through some outback where an ultrasaurus or a stegasaurus is roaming. You're going to apply your brainpower to come up with safe enclosures people can view from a distance, if tourism is even the goal in the first place.
I think what I'd be most concerned about is the development of prehistoric viruses that might be able to bypass our immune systems in much scarier ways than we've seen with covid-19. But again, it can be controlled and contained with the proper safeguards.
Me as a kid: "This is lame. Where are the dinosaurs?"
Me now: "This is a great scene. The dialogue, acting, and cinematography are spot-on and it's a key part of the plot. I can finally appreciate all that. That said, I definitely would not complain if Rexy burst through the wall and ate them all."
Speaking of. The last Fallen Kingdom trailer pissed me off because there is a jump scare in there that would have been perfect but they ruined it by having shown it before the film's release.
Lol. "where r da deenosars"
Said the same thing when I was a Kid at 10 years old in '94 watching this movie on VHS with my siblings..."We said this was the boring part..." Lol #Goodtimes
Spot on observation. After rewatching this for the first time in years, Jeff's dialogue with Sir Richard Attenborough is quite thought provoking, especially for a family film!
Some things just take time, understanding and seasoning to fully appreciate, I guess.
Favorite Quote: "Yes, but if the Pirates of the Caribbean breaks down, the pirates don't eat the tourists"
@JurassicHero 3 yes but these lions are obviously smaller than even an average dinosaur, they are much easier to contain, they have been groomed for show and grow up around humans, while in jurrasic park/world it is shown that maybe a select few people can control dinosaurs that are smaller in comparison to other larger ones and the rest grow up in a natural environment free to do as they please as long as they don't hurt humans which would have been inevitable.
What part is that saying lol
Seth Eaton “thank you”
that is questionable, a pirate gotta do what a pirate does best.
Pirates of the Pancreas.
"Donald, Donald, let him talk. There's no reason -- I want to hear every viewpoint. I really do."
You don't expect a guy like Hammond to say that, and it says so much about him as a character. He truly wanted this park to succeed, to bring a sense of wonder and joy to the world, that he wanted to hear what those who would be against him would say. He certainly had his flaws; the way he did things for example, and how he believed he could push through with sheer determination, but underneath all that, there was a kindly old man who just wanted to bring something magical to the world, for everybody to experience, not just the wealthy.
I'm sure that's one of the reasons he invited him to tour the park even though he disliked him. He knew Malcolm would be pessimistic about the whole idea and he desperately wanted to prove him/the naysayers wrong
This version of Hammond is a much kinder and open-minded man compared to the book version. In the book he is a pioneer of science too, but he's so much colder and monstrous. He only has his grandkids on the island, because the parents saddle him with them, he doesn't really care for them. He notes the criticism the group gives him, but hardly listens to it. And finally, when everything goes wrong, he resolves to start from scratch and make a new park, failing to understand that things went wrong, because he could not control them if he wanted. *Spoiler warning* It's a good thing he doesn't make it off the island.
My dad was a lawyer and took us to see this. He laughed so hard at the blood sucking part. Only when I grew up did I realize why he laughed so hard.
What does Blood Sucking refer to in the quote? Money?
@@42luke93 The insinuation that he'd drain out someone's blood just to make a buck. He has no moral limit.
The mosquito overlap is a happy result of good writing :)
@@natecw4164 Oh! I get it now!! Thanks
Because of the mosquito too being used for the DNA it make it more funny since the quote is in context.
How did he take to the lawyer getting eaten?
I'm more disturbed by the fact nobody touched their plates than the dinosaurs. That fish looked amazing.
When I was little I thought the food was a cooked dinosaur because of the scene before this and the way they looked down at their plates with disgust 😂
I think they lost their appetite after seeing the velociraptor maul the cow in the previous scene
They lost their appetite and they were having a very important discussion... Even so they wouldn't have eaten it coz food's fake
@szs voc bruh don't preach to me about food I grew up poor! My point is the food infront of them is fake! It's not even steaming hot when they brought it in!
@szs voc what?? Bro please tell me you don't believe movie food is real!
What impresses me the most about the writing of this scene is it takes all of Ian Malcom’s long drawn-out objections from the book and condenses them down into two minutes of dialogue without it getting confusing, and without the point being lost. Even using direct lines from the book like the “shoulders of geniuses” and “could/should” line.
Indeed I remember this being the core of the book, the scene is perfectly written , acted and directed :) Its so short and effective.
Yeah, I remember putting my critical analysis hat on when reading two to three pages worth of dialogue.
It’s really a masterclass on philosophical dialogue actually. Full of rational arguments, logical fallacy, appeals to authority, ethical dilemmas, fantastically written and acted.
The best line in this scene is “Genetic power’s the most awesome force the planet has ever seen, but you wield it like a kid who has found his dad’s gun.” It sums up just how unprepared to handle this power InGen is.
yeah and this is the Danger we are heading for with genetic engineering power being developed to manipulate genetics coming right for us all🤣🤣🤣
"the only one on my side is the blood sucking lawyer" that always cracked me up XD
kieran stott ".....thank you."
kieran stott As a lawyer I find this offensive.... wait I do not :D
Panzergredi That's because you know it's true ;-)
Because lawyers are logical thinkers and everyone else is just trying to be poetic.
From the movie "Blade 2":
Blade: You're human?
Lawyer: Almost: I'm a lawyer.
These are the scenes SO MANY PEOPLE are afraid of putting on movies nowadays. But they are the cheapest, the most interesting, and the most memorable.
Because in order to make these scenes work, you need writers that can write meaningful, impactful dialogue, and actors that can deliver those lines convincingly. I'd argue that we still have some actors that can do that, but too many writers these days lack the experience and cultural relevance to handle the load. So now the strategy is to write snarky, quippy lines and distract the audience with CGI explosions.
Amen to that...
@@channell11 Nowadays many think all audiences want is 30 minute battles. No we want an equal amount of action and scenes like this.
Oppenheimer has out done it now, scenes like this is the whole movie.😂
@@channell11 You dont see Chris Pratt fighting in this dialogue?🤣🤣🤣🤣 (Neither do I)
Even as a kid, I’ve always gotten a kick out of how Hammond described Gennaro as “the bloodsucking lawyer”.
Before Jurassic Park, way before Jurassic Park, lawyers were referred to as "BloodSucking Lawyers" In the movie titled "The Money Pit" with Tom Hanks and Shelly Long.
😂
He wasn't wrong 😢😂😂 definitely not wrong.
everyone talks about malcolms speech (which is great) however one of the things i've always loved about this scene is that the lawyer thanked him
In the book he's actually described as young and physically fit, though obviously not used to the outdoors. He's also fairly calm and useful in the crisis and survives right to the end - the only confrontation comes when he refuses to go down into the underground raptor nest with Grant and Harding to count the eggs. Grant and Harding know they need to know how many raptors might have escaped the island (for the good of humanity). Gennaro doesn't care anymore and wants to leave immediately and nuke the place from orbit.
Grant freaks out on him, shoves him and basically tells him that his law firm allowed this situation to happen and he's not allowed to duck his duty any more, he's going down there with them to help fix it or Harding is going to ram a shock prod up his ass. He ends up helping. He finishes out the book on mainland Costa Rica in diplomatic limbo same as Grant.
This scene feels so real. The setup of Hammond's arc from incredulous and defensive to shutting down the park of his own volition is incredible writing.
“What you call discovery... I call the rape of the natural world”
The dialogue and delivery in this scene is phenomenal
The best way to sum up the whole thing.
It a pathos heavy reductive argument great for cinema if not actual discussion, but at its core there is a valid point.
Discovery, Progress, Achievement, these words are rooted in moral arguments about the common/greater good and ultimately exist to hand-wave consequences. But the problem is that calling them "The rape of the natural world" is asserting a consequentialist moral maxim that is equally rooted in the same argument. The slight of hand here is by calling it "rape" you get to apply pressure to the oppositions in that by association of language you have connected the violation of bodily anatomy to the carelessness of interacting systems.
If Hammond had any skill in ethical philosophy he could point out the sheer hubris of that statement and the underlying hypocrisy, then clarify that humanity is itself and expression of what we call nature. To resurrect and extinct species due to deforestation is equivalent because we are still altering unintelligent consistences with the actions of intelligent beings in either case. Malcolm could of course counter that we can predict the resulting effect of re-introducing condors but not this kind of tropic cascade. But that would render his own core argument invalid as Hammond could throw Malcolm's own Chaos theory in his face to be demonstrative his selective bias in the argument.
Malcolm should have just bluntly stated; "I don't trust your motives given the fact that this is a for profit institution that like most cooperate enterprises will seek to maximize those profits via acceptable risk." but that doesn't make for a good line now does it? XD
@@Mister-Thirteen Mumbo jumbo cast a spello.
@@dr.feelgoodmalusphillips2475 Pardon?
@@Mister-Thirteen Jeez do you walk around with a thesaurus on hand? I guarantee you do not talk like this in person.
"... the only one i have on my side is the blood sucking lawyer!" That alone, should tell you something is wrong with your thinking.
He's acknowledging the absurdity and irony of it. He hired Grant and Satler to defend Jurassic Park against Gennaro and Malcolm, but they are against the project while the lawyer is suddenly for it when an hour before he was threatening to have it shut down.
As soon as the lawyer saw the Brachiosaurus and said "we'll make a fortune with this park" he became Hammond's brown nose.
@@AdhamOhm Satler was a happy accident. He only wanted Grant there, but when he found that she was an expert in paleobotany he figured "Why not, we got one person who knows the dinos and the other that knows the old plant." That being said, Grant's answer was more neutral. Despite his dislike of it, he's well aware of how much the world is changing and how much we struggle to catch up to it. His answer was mostly "I don't know." rather than yes or no. Whereas Ellie was much on the no, simply because she doesn't think either humanity or the dinos would survive in the same ecosystem together. Malcolm, being a chaotician is more or less in the negative due to his work on unpredictability.
@@Shanethefilmmaker A well done analysis
its not his lawyer. He represents the investors. Its like insurance agents mandating a shit ton about your life. Of course he hates the guy.
I love how Hammond keeps saying “spared no expense” and yet one of the major flaws of Jurassic Park is that he did. Case in point when he hired Nedry
No one values IT.
Source: i work in IT.
Indeed expenses were spared
Hammond was a Carny at Heart and they often use Deception.
Spared no expense...until it came down to payroll. Nedry even notes that the park was automated to the point where it could be run with a skeleton crew for 3 whole days.
He actually makes the argument later on that hiring Nedry was a mistake, how they depend too much on automation, and that “next time, it will be perfect”. But by that time people are in danger, and Ellie makes the point that the control he seeks to have will remain an illusion.
We thought Jeff was talking about creating dinosaurs, he was talking about the movie franchise.
yeah, basically he was in a nutshell.🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
At least he got well compensated to act in later movies!
Human Evolution and constant progression too
Could apply the whole of entertainment media as well.
He is talking about film industry as a whole.
20+ years later, they still ignore Malcolm's warning
Greed is a strong motivator.
Disney love $
"Spared no expanse, mr/ms Rafu. Here we're building a new....world. Can you see that?"
That's possibly because Malcolm was kind of an ass about it. The last guy was closest to scientific - admitting he didn't know and striking a tone of caution, rather than doom dismissed out of hand.
@@TheGreenReaper Was he a bit of an ass? Sure. But he was right.
“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.” My favorite line among so much brilliant dialogue in this scene.
I agree! Can vs Should
quoted that line to my dad last weekend (April 2022) - we were talking about how there are so many unnecessary features for appliances, like washing machines you can control with your smartphone or screens on your fridge. More features = more things to break and higher costs. Love that line. Came back here to watch lol.
Probably the only line that holds without him coming across as overly preachy.
That was a brilliant scene. It brought out the arguments from all sides: scientific, moral, and financial.
Oddly, the best scene in this movie IMO. No dinosaurs, no action, no CGI. A testament to great film making.
This scene nails the theme of the novels
It has plenty of CGI... But it's far from being nothing but CGI which is great indeed.
Yeah, this scene is an encapsulation of the book’s overall moral message.
@@Antarctide it wasn’t all CGI some of it was life sized animatronics
The best scene in Jaws also has no action, just dialogue.
“You’re scientists were so preoccupied on whether or not they could, they never stopped to think if whether or not they should.” Perfect summary of AI
Just replace Scientists with engineers and programmers and you are all set
Poetic considering Michael Crichton also made westworld.
And the virologists like that scumbag Fauci that are doing this that lead to the Covid pandemic and killed 7 million plus people. Now just imagine if that was the most docile virus in Wuhan. All we’ve seen is the Dilophosaurus escaping and haven’t even gotten close to the Raptor Pit which is still contained.
Waiy until they start eating people 😮
@@Egotolegend2Engineers are pretty much scientists in their own field, if you think about it.
“The lack of uh.. humility shown before nature uh... staggers me”.
God I love the way he delivers that statement. One of my favorite lines in the franchise.
Two actors that have a knack for delivering their lines like they're saying it for the very first time; Sir Ian McKellen and Jeff Goldblum.
😂😂❤
Man lives by altering his environment (ie, nature) to suit his needs. He doesn't owe nature any humility.
Nature is the world's greatest serial killer. We are all just keeping out of her way.
Richard Attenborough's performance is incredible. He really was John Hammond.
Dino dna mereinkonkeet ingen meveliikanlinin meretta vuodeltin piikki pukken pistoolin lacbtbaidt punainen teltanienen varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kansijot Petri Mikaelnen vatanen ulkomaalaisten opiskelijoiden kaupungkinlanitsen new Yorkin johtokunta päätti msiteriö sen tukinimuksenene ensin apuijen meksikolainen kanssanlaisen of ingen vartijan sotilas porukka poliisi armeijan joukot ensin apuijen aluksenista sairaalaanaan laivanoijenen hargairin laivastonijenen laivanoijenen perän vaunujenen juokkot. sataman nostonurijeeinen keijunut konkkuijenen laaiitteettenen keijunut telineetintä valtuudet John Hammond nimessä Petri Mikaelnen vatanen ensin apuijen varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kansijot of ingen nimin Petri san merekka angu tohtori Petri ambulance Lihjan auto hargairin Fleetwood rv tukinimuksenene auto bussi Lihjan auto hargairin bussi ambulance renkaat Scania sackian vaunujenen perän vaunujenen vaihto lava kuorman auto ambulance Jeep vartijan sotilas porukka poliisi armeijan vartijon systems varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen systems jäärääsejeelemän häätäänäälyynstyystysyneksen sen henkilön kunnatienen auto perän vaunujenen sairaalaanan kuuluuijetsunust ambulance nostonurijeeinen keijunut konkkuijenen laaiitteettenen tarvikkeeta ensin apuijen suuri joukkot vartijan ammattitutkinto Jurassic World of ingen park and Sorna Rica, costa varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kaisjot kirja viihiityn helikopterijenen lento kone helikopterijenen myös Autoijeenen lauta noston silita laivanoijenen ambulanceian matkkausjanan aluksenijenen hargairin perän vaunujenen sotilas vartija porukka poliisi armeijan joukot kaupungkinlanitsen myös asunkkanlaisen himisinijeesinen kanssanlaanaajaanlaisen hengen pelastaajaansekseen Jurassic World of park Isla nublar ingen vartijan sotilas porukka armeijan ingenpiikkipukken lacbtbaidt pistoolin ingen matkan laukkuun Lauren lapkus sinun puolen varoitusnutsnuijeksen viivojenen kaisjot käis kirjoitukset Petri Mikaelnen vatanen ensin apuijen
The great escape takes on new meaning ...
Vastly different than how he was in the book. In the book he wasn't anywhere near as likeable
Can’t believe Sean Connery turned down the role, but Richard was great in every way.
@@christopherweber9464 the sand pebbles takes on a new meaning
This is the best scene in the entire franchise. It identifies the narcissism of humanity and the destructive path it leaves just to attain a sense of control.
It applies beautifully to liberals. Everything they do, they might think whether or not they could, (with other people's money, of course) but not if they should.
There is nothing narcissistic about understanding that we humans are special.
To attain a sense of control? Or to forget the pain of separation?
@@JohnPopcorn06 Oh, what's so special about humans anyway? We've proven that we're basically the only species capable of destructive tendencies and they simply go beyond nature taking its course. What you call 'special', I call it fucking arrogance.
You think Hammond created the park and funded the Dino research just to have something to be in control of? Also did you know this movie is actually fiction?
I love the line "Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should"
Yeah I agree. That quote pretty much encapsulates the whole movie. That’s why the new Jurassic park movies are absolutely terrible. What made this movie really great is Hammond and his team being arrogant enough to think that they could harness and control nature. The park isn’t even open to the public yet and all the dinosaurs start to breed with each other.
0:41 Great bit of performance here. Malcolm seems almost nervous to be be first to speak out against the park, especially after Donald and John’s humorous exchange. Once he gets going he’s much more confident, but he seems almost shy to initiate criticism while everyone else is all wide-eyed (especially cuz at this point he doesn’t know if Alan and Ellie are on his side.) But that makes it all the better, because as awkward as it is to sour the mood in the room, he still feels morally obligated to do it anyway.
I agree. No matter how opposed Malcolm may be to the idea of Jurassic Park, he's still extremely impressed (and who wouldn't) and wants to give credit where credit is due for accomplishing the biggest scientific achievement in mankind's history. But that doesn't give Hammond immunity to criticism and Malcolm knows this.
She's at Octagon.
Kudos to Goldblum for that, man's the very embodiment of awkward charisma.
"If I were to create a flock of condors on this island, you wouldn't have anything to say about it."
"Yeah, but John, if a condor park breaks down the condors don't eat the tourists."
I fucking hate Dr. Wu in JWE how he intentionally agitate your dinosaurs, and even has the AUDACITY to tell you "keep guest casualties to a minimum." Dr. Wu is a literal terrorizer.
@The Wraith Well guess what The Wraith, Space is natural too.
@The Wraith It's not like there was a shockwave that killed them all, the impact resulted in sudden and violent changes to the ecosystem that they couldn't survive. Sudden changes like that are brutal in general and disproportionately impact specialist species, of which, most known dinosaur species (and mega fauna reptiles in general) at the end of the Cretaceous period were specialized in some way or another. The survivors changed and adapted and eventually became other species, like Phorusrhacidae (Terror Birds).
Lol reminds me of weird al’s song. “They sure don’t look like Barney” and “they think I’m their dinner not their friend” lol
@The Wraith At the time of the film the Meteor wiping out Dinosaurs hypothesis had yet to become accepted I believe.
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could they didn't stop to think if they should!"
Ahh the splendours of capitalism
+.m. Yeah, look at what the capitalists did at Chernobyl! Oh wait, that was communism. Never mind, ignore the commentary about how it's lack of humility by the powerful, this is specifically capitalism not any other case of abuse of power.
To be absolutely fucking clear... this is not a "capitalism vs communism" thing, this is about how PEOPLE abuse the power that science has, the moral of the story applies just as much as if the film had been re-located to some sort of tech-advanced North Korea where they were setting up a dinosaur resort for the party faithful.
Amazing and profound line.
I'd apply this statement to Pokemon Go
We should have destroyed Mew sooner. Mewtwo, our greatest invention, failed to do the job.
This is filmmaking. Great dialogue, great actors, great lighting, great shots. Everything comes together to transport the viewer into the dream world of film.
What's great about this scene is that you really feel for Hammond, even though you know deep down that his critics are right. You leave the scene not thinking Hammond is the bad guy with an ego, but that he is too naive to see his through his optimism.
And he even survived in the end. Which cannot be said about his novel counterpart. Who actually was a delusional asshat and got killed by compys.
He was benign. Not volatile in nature just foolish. Liked this comment.
The movie version of Hammond being a goodhearted but naive guy who just wanted to give people something to enjoy rather than the greedy asshole he was in the book is the best change from a book to a movie, in my opinion.
@@lucashenderson2775 Haven't read the novels, but wow - that seems like such a huge stretch to a book reader and a film go-er. I wasn't around when this film came out, but I assume everyone liked it. Correct?
@@notahamster333 It's easily the most critically and audience acclaimed of the whole series and set the record for highest grossing movie of all time up to that point, so yeah.
I love how this scene serves as a foil to when they first got on the island. The lawyer was skeptical, and they were all excited and now it’s the exact opposite.
Good catch!
Austin Hawkins thats cause Lawyer only cares about $$$$$
Everybody wants something until they actually get it. Shatters the naive illusion when reality kicks in.
@@ayoutubechannel1413 yep found a 1849 gold rush.
It’s just a matter of perspective. They were never excited about the rides that would come online or how much the park could charge. They were incredibly excited by seeing actual dinosaurs, and wanted to know all they could about how that came to be. When they did, they were obviously impressed by some of it, but also concerned or worried by some more profound aspects. And that’s what’s showing here I think.
The lighting is amazing in this scene, the fact that everyone has an angelic glow around the back of their heads as if they are playing god is just one of the many things that makes this scene great.
When you also look at the framing, characters like Malcom are embodying shadows and light, images of the revelations of truth.
Whereas Hammonds background is a slideshow of natural beauty, idealistic images of the “perfect earth”
Steven Spielberg is the king of lightning. Once you notice it in all his films, you can’t unsee it!
Nice observation. Groovy also.
Yes! The imagery is sublime! And the dinosaurs in the background, in the slide show, must be foreshadowing the fact that there will be more dinosaurs in the movie! Such symbolism!!!!!!
Of Mice and Men
I remember watching this scene as a kid and being like" this is so boring". Now as an adult, it is ONE of the best scenes in Jurassic Park franchise, describing Man's greatest blunder, Hubris.
This scene explains why it's so hard to make a good sequel to this film.
Here you have the main characters, who've just been wowed by this amazing feat of genetics, explaining to the guy who pulled it off why this is a *terrible* idea.
Every single movie that comes after this one is based on *ignoring* their advice.
More importantly, ignoring the disaster that resulted from toying with things we don't understand and can't control.
Every single Jurassic Park/World movie after this is hot garbage. Plain and simple.
Thing is that these guys aren't necessarily 100% in the right. The reason the park failed wasn't because "Nature good industry bad", it's because Jon Hammond left the park's entire digital security to ONE GUY, whom he underpaid and (in the books) abused. The future films pretty much have to force some fuck-up to happen, like Jurassic World where they're like "Oh we lost track of this dino, guess we'd better wander into its paddock with minimal security and leave the door WIDE OPEN. Should we release some sleep gas first just in case? NAAAAAH!"
Hell, in Lost World the fuck-ups are literally the "heroes" sabotaging In-Gen and then bringing a baby T-Rex to their own basecamp... so sabotaging themselves in other words XD
But yeah, if anything JP is less a story of nature vs. corporation and closer to being a cautionary tale on not cutting corners and respecting your staff.
Also, mind you that in the book pretty much everyone dies. So there was never a real point in making a sequel.
Funnily enough there's also a second and a third book, which makes even less sense.
@@echoplots8058 Life finds a way
An underrated line in this scene comes from Ellie as well.
"You have plants in this building that are poisonous (dangerous), I mean you picked them because they LOOKED good-"
Perfectly underscores the mentality of JP at it's core
2000 a day 10000 a day and people will pay it gotta love the greed that he brushes off so casually🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
This and the Flea circus speech are her best moments in the movie imo
This dialogue could also apply to the choice of dinosaurs for the park. The majority are carnivores, some of them among the most dangerous in history.
That happened in the book too. Plants that are highly toxic on skin contact, around the pool.
@@EGRJ Yes, Ellie's line here is a good example of the lesson from the book. Hammond made this park with no study done on dinosaur behavior.
Funny how as a kid I can barely recall this scene at all. I think I just automatically dismissed it as 'boring adult talk with no dinosaurs'. Now here I sit some 15 years later and I'm the adult who understands and enjoys it. Weird.
Seriously. I used to watch this everyday as a kid. But now, hearing Malcolm's argument-which was spoken eloquently btw- I may have found my new favorite scene in this movie.
same. But it's the Jurassic Park magic. as a kid you love it because of the Dinosaurs and all the cool stuff. When you're older and you see this kidn of scene you love Jurassic Park because it's just that good a movie
I know right. This is now one of my favorite parts because it's so relevant to our day and age. Classic "movies foreseeing the future" thing.
As a kid I was wondering whether Ellie Sattler was wondering wether they were eating dinosaur (and were they??) or whether she was just as disgusted by fish as I was as a kid. Didn't make the connection that she wasn't hungry because of just watching the raptors get fed.
Same!
What is so amazing about this scene to me is how even as a kid I had no desire to skip over this scene. I was maybe 6 years old, watching this scene, not really able to fully comprehend this kind of adult conversation, but I knew the adults in it were having this discussing things pointed and profound. There’s an energy to it, like I knew they were saying important, consequential things and it had me hooked. It’s the realistic rhythm of the dialogue and performances, something about it made sense it’s importance to what was happening in the story, and that was long before I could comprehend it. And I was just a child who loved dinosaurs and by all accounts should have been eager to fast-forward these talky, mature moments and get to the actual dinosaur points.
"God, I hate being right all the time..."
-Dr. Malcolm, when they first encounter the T-Rex.
Dude. I didn’t understand why he said that shit until you connected it. Ty.
Chaos
One of the best scenes in the movie and it's just five people talking at a table.
Yes, but also 12 people talking at a table makes one of the greatest film in history.
@@sunnygolightly9996 some of them were angry though
@@Kruppt808 and we enjoyed every second of it.
@@sunnygolightly9996 which film is that?
@@danieljoseph6404 12 Angry Men
0:02. I love her reaction to the meal here. It's a perfectly prepared and well presented piece of sea bass, and she can't eat it because of what she just witnessed.
What did she witness? It's been a really long time since I saw this movie. Over a decade.
Also, why are the characters against Jurassic Park again? I do remember when they got to the park they were all really excited and in awe, but here they're not.
@@Spitfire_94 They're getting over the shock and are starting to think more rationally.
I don’t even eat fish and if I witnessed that I would’ve consumed that whole plate.
@@Spitfire_94 She witnessed a cow being lowered into a velociraptor's cage and the movie showed her face wrinkling in nauseous disgust as the movie's sound effects suggested that the velociraptor was shredding the cow alive in order to eat it...
You must eat(or work) in some fancy restaurants, I was wondering what that was . +1 for naming it
Defining scene. It also shows how smart the three scientists are. That even after they got over the awe of what has been going on, they can still be objective and see the dangers of what such a situation they find themselves in. And of course they were proven right. These aren't action heroes, they're scientists, which gives weight to their later actions as well, going up against apex predators and surviving. While also protecting others.
Ian was so scared of what this park was about, yet he stood in front of one of the biggest apex predators in the history of the world to distract it away from the kids. Same for the others. No military training. No super powers. Just them against nature's best and coming out on top by their sheer determination. That's why this movie rocks.
Massively underrated comment. Well said.
Current year blockbuster dialogue :
"Somehow Palpatine returned".
F
I think the reason is that Jurassic park was never meant to be a block buster. The sequels are, but the original JP movie is a smart, well crafted movie that just so happened to make sure over 900 million dollars in its first run… this might actually explain why the sequels try to cater to a more adrenaline loving crowed.
@@doubleflores8350 Oh my friend, JP was DEFINITELY meant to be a blockbuster, because when S. Spielberg and Universal bought the rights in 1990, he already was envisioning a themed park to be built around the movie (which it did in Los Angeles in '96, with Jeff Goldblum as one of the stars present). The difference is that in the 90s, the audience wasn't so short sighted like they are today, the studios could easily insert quality and thought-provoking material into the script and not be just concerned with special effects and cheesy characters that run on social agendas like it is today.
star wars was always shit
@@zac-1 woah woah woah WOOOOAH did you seriously just say that consider yourself lucky I didn't get into it with you I could have but it's not worth it however when other Star Wars fans such as myself see your reply I can't control what they say he's right there guys ☝
The chef: "No, no that's cool. Slaved away over a hot stove to prepare that Chilean Sea Bass for you, but no you have to go meet some kids and not eat a bite. It's fine, no it's fine. You go, clearly you have more important things to do."
Things like that always make me imagine spin off movies involving the most obscure and bizarre background characters seen in movies. It's like a curse, every single film I watch I distract myself thinking about it. I think I'm a little bit mental tbh.
In the previous scene, they experienced the mauling of a cow by velociraptors and thus lost their appetite.
That's oddly specific 😂😂 looks like people didn't eat Chilean sea bass prepped by you.
I have a feeling that the Chef teamed up with Nedry for revenge.
Jurassic Park VI - Revenge of Alejandro
“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they COULD, they didn’t stop to think if they SHOULD…”
Simple line and yet one of my all time favorite movie quotes.
👍 same
It perfectly describes some scientists
The lesson wasn't received because we have the Jurassic World franchise.
Could apply to many things, military, Google, Apple, Microsoft, drones..
they never stop to think if they *should*
Anthony Fauci (and Peter Daszak), Gain of Function Research
I was a weird kid, so I enjoyed these types of scenes. The subtle foreshadowing to disaster and the rhetoric behind it all was amazing. This scene has definitely grown with me throughout the last 30 years (I was 6 years old when the film was released), and back then I was fully supportive of Malcolm, but today I understand Hammond's point of view and his ambitions. I often imagine that if Hammond had consulted Malcolm, Sattler and Grant before any dinosaurs were engineered, JP would have turned out very differently.
You weren't weird. You just liked well written scenes and didn't need dinosaurs to be entertained.
Far from weird my friend…
@@whyyoutrippindeebo3514mature
As a kid, I always missed all the great dialogue in the movies like this one. Dinosaurs were WAY more important. Now as an adult, I can finally appreciate the actual plot and the dialogues!
wait can you make a condor with frog dna?🤣
@@raven4k998 Nah, this is impossible. I was very interested in biology in high school and am actually studying medicine. Still, the main idea of the film always went right over my head as a kid
@@Bergen98 hey if they can make a dinosaur with frog dna they can do it with a condor as well it just may not behave like a real condor that's all🤣
@@Bergen98 it's not impossible you can get a pig pregnant so a condor frog hybrid can also happen trust me I know these things🤓
Yes. Dialogue >>>
As an adult I only can stand the 1st half of the movie 😂 The action scenes are not as fun as I had thought.
This scene is so good. I actually can agree with ALL points of view. From the dreams of an old man trying to bring wonder into the world, to the rational scientists warning him of the implications.
The dialogue is phenomenal and feels so incredibly real. Being an adult now, i have been able to hear debates that sound exactly like this around dinner tables. Its amazing
Gameriffic even with the bloodsucking lawyer hellbent on patenting and packaging the experience at absurdly high prices?
Malcom was a whiner. The dinosaurs never would stand a chance against armed, organized humans except in the sort of contrived circumstances you see in a movie. Sure, there would be some accidents, especially while setting up, but zoos suffer deaths and maulings too, people die in all sort of vocations like construction, farming and mining, and you don't hear people going on darkly about those.
@@ConfirmedCynic The difference is dinosaurs haven't been alive for millions of years, which means they didn't have any real, hard, scientific evidence as to how they moved or hunted, or lived.....other than looking at fossils and inferring what happened.
With zoos, they're filled with animals observed for years...which means we have current data on how the animals go about their lives. That was NOT the case with dinosaurs. And with them adding frog DNA to fill in gaps, they created the scenario where they were able to breed and create more problems.
@@ConfirmedCynic Whoever said zoos were a good thing either?
@@ConfirmedCynic That's all well and good, but dinosaurs are hardly comparable to an old, half-crippled flea-ridden puma. The beasts you see in Jurassic Park are for the most part complete UNDERestimates of the real things. The Tyrannosaurus was neither the apex predator of its time, nor the largest of the carnivorous dinosaurs to live. There were beasts twice, nay, three times its size that could also wade in water, had fully functioning arms and groups. We're talking creatures almost the size of hotels. Try shooting a rifle at that and see what happens. You'll need rockets, planes, etc, just to take down one of millions of what was a common predator. Don't forget the less direct ramifications. Look at Yellowstone and the wolf population, and you see the man shooting them all allowed the Moose and Elk to run rampant, destroying plant life and thus the soil (filling the rivers with silt and eroding them with the lack of roots to hold the mud in place). Now, imagine different plant eaters, except that they have no natural predators (aside from the extremely dangerous other dinosaurs), that are 150 feet long and capable trampling a town into dust. The best part? These animals were so powerful and so adaptable that it took a force that we can barely comprehend, one that would dwarf the result of all of our nukes being set off at once, to destroy them. Keep in mind too that Dinosaurs existed for more than twice the amount of years they've been gone. It's been 65 million years since the asteroid hit what is now southern Mexico, while merely a single of the three periods (Triassic, Jurassic, Cretaceous) is nearly that length alone. To put it in perspective, we humans have existed for approximately half a million years with our current DNA, give or take depending on who you want to believe. 500,000 vs. almost 200 million. But we would be on top? Sure.
This is hardly even a fantastical argument, considering that there are men alive as we speak attempting to make what happened in Michael Crichton's fiction reality. Unfortunately for them, dinosaur DNA found in amber tends to be almost completely eroded, and thus cannot just be 'filled in' with frog DNA (you would end up with a slightly altered frog). Other creatures, however, that have not been extinct for nearly as long may very well be resurrected in our life times (mammoths, massive cats, predatory whales the size of ships and 60 ft. long sharks, to start off). Once they are created, some will get free, sooner or later. Either by accident, or by some sort of freak act of bio-terrorism. In fact, knowing humans, using deadly animals as weapons against each other is no more far-fetched than what we already do, which is use deadly viruses and bacteria against each other. While the original scientists who resurrect new creatures may do it in such a way that they are infertile, or less dangerous, others in their wake will do the opposite, hoping to create a host of weapons. Then, they'll take the next step, which is to modify the creatures to be MORE deadly than their historical counterparts. This is what happens when man plays god. Man loses, sooner or later.
This was Dr. Malcolms finest moment, just one great point after another.
I thought Dr. Hammond made a good point with his Condor's reference.
+1AndyOnly until it was debunked
not really, Malcolm's retort was weak I thought.
I dunno, his point was, "The endangerment of condors is our own fault, and it's a relatively recent development that we ought to try to reverse. Dinosaurs went through the complete process of natural selection, and to undo that process and manipulate their entire existence in a world that has grown without them is vastly beyond human capability, not to mention an incredible disrespect for nature itself." Seems a pretty solid argument to me.
+KVergara agreed
This is the best, most captivating scene in the film. and its a writers dream. Just people sitting at a table, discussing a subject, and the audience is captivated.
This scene means so much more now that I'm older.
Jeff Goldblum's unique speech, and mannerisms make just about any scene he's in, great.
Honestly I think he educated a generation about discretion better than any man ever.
I will always hear him whisper screaming, "They didn't stop to think if they should!" whenever that quote comes up. During all this soft education about potential people get a real hard look at someone screaming "Caution!" in such a brilliant unforgettable way. Somehow he made caution seem completely sexy, which is really quite a feat. It took wardrobe, directing, writing and an all star delivery but if there's any one warning sign people learned in the history of cinema.
It doesn't seem like a memorable line but absolutely everyone remembers this one.
I dunno who to thank for that, spielberg or goldblum or crichton but damn.
Nice job guys, you might actually have gotten a message incepted.
I dunno how this links back to oppenheimer but I'm certain it does, somehow.
It’s because he, uh-has a particular way…of talking.
@@insomnimac8368That’s why it’s my favorite line as well
Personally I think, that Dr. Sattler sums the problem better up than Dr. Malcolm:
"How can you know anything about an exstinct ecosystem, and therefore how can you ever assume that you can control it."
@metalgearhead99 That line always troubles me, because it doesn't sound like something a chaotician like Dr. Malcolm would say. "Nature selected them for extinction" implies the belief in some sort of underlyning universal order
@metalgearhead99 Agreed (-; Interesstingly, in the original Crichton novel, Malcolm's arguments are more in line with Dr. Sattler. He argues against Hammond's claim that the park is completely under control, and therefore safe, because a system with living creatures, especially whose behavior is unknown, is far too complex to be without accidents
@metalgearhead99 Yeah, that about sums it up
@@Pridd100 Not necessarily, I look at Malcolm saying "Nature Selected them for extinction" that Malcolm would more be picturing a game show wheel being spun and it happening to land on "Dinos go Boom". Him using the term 'Selected' is the same as us looking back at a gameshow and saying "They selected the winner" When the winner really just won through random chance of a wheel spin than any great plan.
Abit of a stretch of an analogy, but that's just how I view it. Malcolm is looking back in Hindsight only, not in a preordained sense.
@metalgearhead99 nature? They were killed by a giant rock XD
Malcolm: "Your park is a reckless cash-grab."
Hammond: "Condors tho."
@Keldor Miro
The Sequel Trilogy does feel like Disney's own Jurassic Park.
...... Yep
Hammond could have used this tech to bring back animals that have recently gone extinct, or in danger of being extinct, and still make billions + respect and gratitude of the world, but he had to go with Dinos.
Yes! Great comment.
@@afhamzaki2588 imagine if disney owned Jurassic Park rights... 0-0
As a child, I had no appreciation of this scene but now as an adult, I appreciate every shot, every word, every second of it.
"The lack of humility before nature that's being displayed here is, uh... staggering."
RIP, Richard Attenborough
@@e.tezani3877 settle down there, sport.
johnny vietnam take it easy chief
This used to be a boring part for me as a kid: "Just show me dinosaurs!", now as an adult it's a fascinating conversation about ethics and morals in science
Crazy how the human brain matures, this should be shown in Ethics classes
I love this part too. Me and my dad quote this scene all the time. I must have made the poor guy watch this movie a thousand times
usukcok
See I was a kid and loved the dialogue. It gave the dino scenes so much more gravitas
As a kid, the only thing I really enjoyed about this scene was that Hammond's little laugh at 3:43 reminded me of Mickey Mouse
So true, but when i grew up, now this part also makes sense and i equally enjoy the debate
Malcolms speech represents every Hollywood movie & TV franchise made today. I can't believe how accurate it is
"Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, that they didn't stop to think if they should." My favorite line in the whole movie.
Mine too! People need to do that once in a while! A lot of people jump to conclusions, or actions, and don't think of the consequences... (People have problems!)
That line (and pretty much the whole discussion) could be applied to the plot of Jurassic World.
This quote has become used quite well used.
@@rogerwilco2 but not practiced.
It's definitely a great one. Mine was always "I am saying that life will find a way."
The truth is it would be absolutely horrifying if there were a park with actual dinosaurs that have been extinct for millions of years roaming in it. This scene gives it historical context.
A bear or elephant attack is already horrific. Can you imagine the absoloute hell of being attacked by bigger, more agressive animals that come from a more hostile time?
I would prefer alot of the bigger dinosaurs to attack and kill me then a bear or an elephant.
Most bear attacks do not end with the bear killing the human it attacked. Most end when the bear doesnt consider the human a threat anymore. This means the human that got attacked most often is still very much alive. Just bloodied and mangled and bleeding to death.Most people who get attacked and killed by a bear. They die of blood loss. NOt the bear biting something that instantly kills you.
A t rex chomping me. The pressure of his bite alone would be enough to kill me far faster then a bear could.
@@georgebarton1582 who ordered 1 hungry T-Rex?
@@georgebarton1582 I think I prefer a bear than a raptor cutting and eating my guts while I still can feel it.
@@georgebarton1582 Also got to bare in mind that the majority of the large Theropods like T-Rexes wouldn't have really gone for humans as food. We''re too small.
I spent three hours chatting with Richard Attenborough a few years before his death. We were both looking very scruffy and nobody around us had the faintest idea who he was. He was very charming.
Where was this?
@@NealX_Gaming It was on a plane and in the BA Club lounge at Heathrow. We had seats 2A and 2C (front row club) on a flight to Vienna. The plane developed a fault and we had to go back to the lounge until a replacement could be found. That was an Airbus instead of a 737 so BA said people in Club should keep their seat assignments but other passengers should pick any seat in economy. An American decided to try to sit in Club and when a member of the cabin crew told him it was free seating in economy and that he would have to leave, he pointed at the two of us and said loudly "What about those two? They don't look like they should be in here" At the time I took a hundred flights a year in Club between London and Vienna and, of course, Richard Attenborough was Richard Attenborough even though he had holes in his jeans and wore trainers.
@@peterd788 Great story, Attenborough never really got the credit for how good an actor he was.
@@michaelmuldowney8 Brighton Rock, 10 Rillington Place, say no more.
@@peterd788 He won two successive Golden Globes for supporting actor - The Sand Pebbles and Doctor Dolittle - but Oscar ignored him both times.
Mr. Goldblum owns the movie as usual.
He steals almost every scene he's in.
That Chilean Sea Bass looks great though.
Why thank you!!!
- The Chef who cooked it, which no one touched
Spared No Expense!
is it ill-tempered?
Seriously. Not even watching a cow be eviscerated by prehistoric monsters could turn me off from food
I'ma eat that chilean sea bass then request to get my ass off that island
I love Grant's everyman approach: "Dinosaurs and man, two species separated by 65 million years of evolution, have just been suddenly thrown back into the mix together. How can we possibly have the slightest idea of what to expect?"
Dinosaurs aren't even a species though
@@LordVaderTyrannus Species - a group of living organisms consisting of similar individuals capable of exchanging genes or interbreeding. They were breeding before extinction and considering the eggs Grant finds after TRex breakout i am more than positive that they fit this term.
MENTAL Oh stop acting like I’m being nitpicky, that’s a pretty huge fucking mistake. It would be like saying fish are a species or mammals are a species.
Дмитрий Гусарев Yea but Tyrannosaurus and Velociraptors weren’t breeding with each other were they?
@@LordVaderTyrannus
You are correct. Dinosaurs is a clade whereas something like Troodon is a species.
People giving you a hard time like MENTAL are dumb-asses.
2:33
You can see how John Hammond subtly dies with Ian's remarks. Brilliant.
.
It's like a kid being so excited over something and getting his soul crushed when, in his enthusiasm, is called out for being selfish and short-sighted. Love that face.
NEVER. EVER. noticed it til now. 😳
I was only 5 years old in ‘93 but I can remember Jurassic Park was huge when it came out
The line that always stuck out to me was when Ian said "before you even knew what you had", that is the key line. John Hammond didn't even know what he was unleashing into the world. He just thought the idea of Dinosaurs today would be so magnificent. A spectacle for all, the 8th wonder of the world! John Hammond thought like a showbiz man without even considering doing proper scientific research or consulting with biologists and paleontologists. He couldn't even see the error of his ways until it was too late.
Everybody else who tried to do what he did also did not see the errors of their ways until it was too late. They all found out the hard way that we are not in control of nature.
The Book really nailed this point home hard, Jurassic Park is their Pandora's box, the simple innocent act of bringing dinosaurs back to life opened the floodgates to the horrifying reality of genetic manipulation.
Also the fact with biotechnologies likes these, they didn't foresee people developing them as living breathing biological weapons.
@@gamechanger8908 the scary thing about Jurassic Park is that the "science fiction" part isn't that far fetched. With some luck and some advancement, we could build a dinosaur very soon!
@AnthonyJMurph The very next video recommended to me was "Making a meatball entirely out of wooly mammoth"
:,)
"You're meant to come down here and defend me against these characters and the only one I've got on my side is the bloodsucking lawyer!"
Such a great line - shows just how bad John Hammond wanted his vision to work out... too bad it didn't
I mean it did work out, just not everyone there had the same goals to uphold the park and create a perfect park. Like the lawyer who wanted to abuse its power with money and the desk worker who wanted to destroy the park for his own gains.
Growing up makes me feel bad for the lawyer. He comes down to this island to represent a client who seems to be on the absolute cutting edge of scientific discovery (and probably paying really well to boot) and all he does is get ignored and insulted by everyone including his own employer before finally getting eaten with nobody else giving a damn. As a kid I remember thinking he was an absolute weasel but as an adult he's just some normal guy doing a job whose main crime was being a coward when the T-Rex showed up.
@@geneparmesan8748 Gennaro gets a different treatment in the book, if that makes you feel better.
why, what happened?
🤣
God rest your soul, Michael Crichton. You were a brilliant mind and author.
Your reference to your skydaddy in this thread is really out of place.
Just a sec Are you so entrenched in your beliefs that you’ve forsaken common expressions?
Just a sec Unnecessary hostility is not becoming of someone who considers themselves enlightened, FYI.
@@francoisona go back to worshipping Allen, stinky
@@francoisona Why are Athiests always the most toxic people on forums? I personally don't believe in a god but about half the people I know do. You don't have any friends or family who believe I higher power? Would you go up to you're grandmother and tell her that her skydaddy isn't real? You're a true asshole, and that's coming from a guy with a Hitler profile pic
I remember as a kid I didn’t understand what was being said so I just skipped over this to get to the dinosaur parts. Now I watch this scene many times and enjoy the philosophical, ethical, and common knowledge debates almost as much as the dinosaurs themselves.
Dr. Grant was always my favorite character in the movie. Not just his change of heart towards kids, but the fact that he is the guy open to all experiences and reacts accordingly. That and he's the guy who loved dinosaurs as a kid, finally got to see them alive in person, and respects that their animals still, not some marketed commodity. Ian Malcolm and Robert Muldoon both come a close second to me.
From what I have read, Hammond seems to be quite a bit of a greedy asshole in the book. In the movie, I think he was done better because he was not doing it for just money. He basically had a fantasy that he wanted to share with the world and seemed like he was doing the right thing, but was just too short sighted and stubborn to admit what he was doing was dangerous until he saw what they were truly capable of. It kind of makes you feel sorry for him more so than in the book.
Hammond isn't a character you should ever feel sorry for
It digs even deeper than just the good intentions. The technology is there and is in our real world and it's no longer about if it's good or bad intentions, it's about who's gonna push the button first. To quote Arnold Schwarzenegger in a subpar Terminator sequel.
"You only postponed it. Judgement Day is inevitable."
@@saped3974 I don't think you know how to troll very well, considering there was a book. Or just really ignorant.
@@saped3974 The book is what inspired the movie, bucko.
@@saped3974 Imagine being so confidently wrong. Also it's "intellectual"
Currently reading the book. Way more focus on this type of conversation throughout the book. If you love this scene, read the book.
Read the book as a kid...i thought it was dry at points but was very well written and Crichton's bio engineering jargon and such is on point. I very much wanted him to explore into the other islands besides Nublar and Sorna. Because it was explained that Ingen owned all five i believe.
I did and boy was it a joyride with thrills and ass-clenching moments. Like when they found out that instead of 8 raptors (all of them are behind electrified fence mind you) there 37 in park total. And don't get me started on the very first scenes with a baby and injured worker. They were pretty damn graphic.
i've heard this from a few different people. i need to get around to reading it.
@@calliph It's great, and even though the sequel film didn't live up to this movie, The Lost World novel is even better than the first. Read them both, you'll love them.
Agree..and The lost world book is like 1000000000000 times better than movie
Movies, like books, are designed to tell a story, but the best ones show you a perspective (morally and ethically). This scene shows many different perspectives that even years later is still shocking, humbling and awe-inspiring.