Jurassic World | The Cynical Blockbuster
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 июн 2024
- Support this channel at: / filmsandstuff
Also Follow me on Twitter at: / jburd22
Jurassic World is a truly bizarre film, isn't it? Whereas the first film is filled with awe and wonder, this sequel takes a cynical and nihilistic approach to achieve a similar commercial success. Here I break down exactly what the film is saying, and whether there's any merit to it.
Music provided by Epidemic Sound
Jurassic World musical covers by Daryl Leigh Lynn
0:00 Intro
2:44 The Park Is Open
5:36 The Worst Intentions
9:08 Redemption
12:47 Nostalgia
14:12 Rex Dangervest
18:36 Frankenstein's Monster
22:03 Outro 
Кино
watching clips from Jurassic Park and World back to back makes me realize how oversaturated and aggressively color corrected today's movies like Jurassic World are. JW almost doesn't look like a 'movie', there's something about the softer film grade of the original JP that's just more inherently appealing to the eye.
I think they used a blue filter for the camera and it doesn't help that most of the dinosaurs looked mostly grey.
I think Jurassic World may be the worst case of color grading I’ve ever seen in a major blockbuster, to be honest. I remember watching in the theater back then and thinking “it can’t be SUPPOSED to look like this”.
@@anisioc.3426 It's because of the CGI. Color correction can work if applied properly e.g. used on tangible props. For whatever reason, these directors can't understand that animatronics are the ONLY way to go; all of these CG dinos look beyond fake. Go back to the simpler time: film and robots. You'll thank us because we'll definitely thank you lol
It's all on the camera work and framing
@@hanburgundy4317 Practical effects look better in terms of color, lighting, texture, etc. but it tends to look unsettlingly fake when it comes to movement (which is usually a plus when it comes to horror). A combination works best: the original JP used animatronics for relatively still shots, but CG when the dinosaurs were required to DO something.
imagine how impactful a scene or two of Indominous alone, plodding through the jungle at night, with no purpose, over Owens short monologue of how she was created and raised so terribly. Maybe add in some sympathetic music for effect. Would have changed our feelings over her and the people at hand DRAMATICALLY. Unfortunately so many remakes and sequels focus on repackaging the original for nostalgia's sake, filling it with cheeky call backs that it completely forgets to be its own film/story.
Man I would've loved that.
Like its much more intelligent and self aware than the hulking brute surface, cursed with awareness though also still unnaturally aggressive.
I wish it invaded the main park where all the tourists were. Total carnage
It should be noted that the T-rex in Jurassic Park is never shown to explicitly hunt and consume people like the Raptors do. When Ferrero is killed on the toilet, the T-rex gives an inquisitive tilt of the head and picks him up, shaking him and obviously killing him, but it's never shown to actually eat anyone on camera. It was intentionally filmed to behave more like a curious dog than a cold-blooded killer, while the Raptors pack acts as the main antagonist of the 3rd act of the film.
Now in Jurassic World, the T-rex stand-in is shown to be a calculated killer, so they send the Raptors after it? To act as our pseudo protagonists for like 20 minutes before they start hunting people as well? The Raptors have always been a hostile presence in a some way, so it just confuses the tone and makes everything a bizarre mishmash of poorly planned ideas.
Dammit Michael, I should have thought of that.
They could have just removed the scene where the kid cries over the divorce, seeing as that plot point goes nowhere and is completely forgotten about
"And _The Rise of Skywalker_ is, of course...parody."
Bruh 🤣🤣🤣
best SW parody since Spaceballs
The entire sequel trilogy is off brand Star Wars that misses the point.
Ewan Callister nah the prequels are definitely flawed but they do so much that the Disney movies don’t. Like tell a complete story, have characters that make more sense, good music, interesting cinematography instead of just feeling like nonsensical nostalgia baiting and focus tested safe blandness like the ST
@Tom Ffrench Uhm I'm not sure about what you mean with "decostrunctionist", but the Sequels are the ones who are about the relationship with the Originals. The Prequels wanted to reflect current american war politics. They had different goals
@@VulturePilot the only correct thing here is about the score. The Prequels have amazing music, rivalring even the OT
The "Rex Dangervest" title card killed me
Roll Sizzlebeef!
Giratina The Renegade pokemon From MST3K’s “Space Mutiny” episode.
It's exactly what Andy would have named the character.
LEGO Movie 2 wasn't so bad
sadly the Indian Actor who played Simon Masrani in Jurassic World name Irfan Khan has very recently passed away as recent as the month of April
RIP. He was the only sympathetic human like character in the whole film
That's awful. Was it covid-19? :(
@@penrilfake No. Something else. Can't remember right now.
Well that's sad his character was pretty cool, though also dead so
He died from cancer that he was suffering from for 2 years
12:41 'If these boys don't serve Claire's story, why are they even in this movie?'
The only obvious thing I could come up with was that of being a substitute for the younger audiences.
And because the first Film had children from divorced parents, too. So they put this element in JW but it went nowhere. I didn't touched me emotionally and the scenes with the mother calling while being at the attorney's office did nothing to me, nor to the story. It was B-Plot that could be handled with throwaway lines.
I can never think of a good reason for Nick Robinson to be in a movie. Something about him just rubs me the wrong way.
Or just a bunch of checkmarks. The original had kids? Okay, we must have kids.
20:19 THANK YOU
That's my biggest complaint. The IRex got kicked around and everything she went through got swept aside for 'Lmao Monster go Chomp'
Equating her with Frankenstein's Monster is so painfully true.
makes it even dumber when people openly complained about the T-Rex vs. Spinosauras fight in Jurassic Park 3 was way too short and underwhelming (which is true), and then they just LITERALLY put it on repeat but one's a mutant instead basically, like did they even watch the prior films or just do a sequel based on what they remembered watching at some point?
@@oneandonlysound3453 I would have loved the Spinosaurus (and in recent years it has grown on me) had they just not done the whole fight scene between it and a T. Rex; the whole thing was beyond cringey and the VFX crew even said in the BTS footage that "it shows that this is the new dino on the block" or some such cringey shit.
I feel like a bunch of you forget that she was intentionally designed to be a monster. It didn’t matter whether it got kicked around or what not, it still murdered it’s sibling, still viciously mauled innocent animals just for shits and giggles, and intentionally murdered anything in it’s path regardless of whether it was hungry or not.
Yep! Mine too, I think as a whole the movie had some great themes to explore, the morality of training creatures that *might be untrainable and possibly using them as a weapon. The idea that man needs to make things that they don't truly understand and end up making something that can be worse for them in the long run. They set it up pretty okay but then end up making you want to hate the creature that didn't even have a chance where they should have really emphasized the idea man meddling with things for it's own gain and profit by making and again failing at it.
I think you hit the nail on the head, feels like a lot of these soft reboots try to capture the feeling of the original without ever really contributing anything meaningful to the story
Exactly. I enjoy Jurassic World for what it is: schlock action and humor set in a world I already love. As a standalone film, however, it's pretty trash, and as a genuine "sequel" or successor to the JP series it really offers nothing new to the overall storyline. I go back and forth between which I like/dislike more: Jurassic World and JP///, as neither really captures the magic or terror of the first two (Jurassic Park and The Lost World) films.
@@hanburgundy4317 I hear that, though JPIII end up worse imo; the script was non existant (for real) so they didn´t knew how to end the movie
Hans Ollo Jp3 felt so incomplete tho.
@@hanburgundy4317 Man, JP 3 is my sick movie. When you're sick and feeling miserable it's exactly the kind of garbage you can watch.
Used to watch it when I stayed home from school.
@@hanburgundy4317 But why should i enjoy rehashed trash, time is precious i don't want to waste it on 5/10 movies.
There's something you missed about Dr Wu. The first time you see the character, what is he doing? Erasing something on paper. If you're at all familiar with laboratory etiquette and scientific morality, you'd know that is a big no-no. This establishes him being an untrustworthy and morally ambiguous scientific mind.
Oh you’re right!
Forgive my ignorance, but could you elaborate on why that is?
@@OGrupxe The original comment is from almost a year ago, but TL;DR: to erase something implies you are hiding something.
Unethical record keepers will seek to normalize their data by erasing anomalous results. This makes it appear that the record keeper has an agenda. It appears the record keeper is being dishonest and trying to make the data fit their hypothesis, rather than testing the hypothesis properly and accepting the data as they come. The agenda doesn't matter. It only matters that it appears they have one. And they often do.
The ethical and honest thing to do is to mark a line through a correction, then add the new data to the record with a footnote or some other way to indicate the location of what is being corrected, the reason for the correction (new data, obsolete reference, bad art skills, misunderstood data), and any other relevant information. Even misspelled words should never be erased. Mark through and correct. You are supposed to write with a pen or some other method that makes it impossible to alter your marks without it being obvious. Your records may be used by someone else, and them knowing that a set of data was unproductive allows them to re-test, replicate, or disregard the method that caused those data to become unproductive. Not only is it ethical to show your mistakes, it is important to know why you made them, and even more important to show other people what they were, why you made them, and how to avoid making them, too. It's a huge time-saver and a lot of the reason science can progress at all without constantly having to test every variable each time.
We understand that water does not boil in all conditions and temperatures, but there was a series of steps that had to be taken along the way to find out all those conditions and temperatures at which it does. Now we can use those records to jump straight to the ideal conditions we need for a given test.
Once you are writing your final paper, you can correct things within the paper as needed because all the research has been done and you are just writing your conclusions based on the data within the record. Once the paper is finalized, in order to change anything you have to make reference to corrections and why and... you get the idea, I hope. honestly data collection is not for everyone.
@@HiddenThicket Oh, interesting!
So, basically, our buddy Wu was always kind of obsessed with the idea of creating something perfect and taking the credit for it, huh?
Wonder if he told Eli, in Fallen Kingdom, to dispose of the Indoraptor after it was deemed a failure (Lacked the DNA conditioning to be trained, which they could acquire from Blue's blood), which Eli obviously wouldn't do, but still.
That's some nice attention to detail, if intentional.
Thank you for taking your time on explaining
@@OGrupxe I mean, Wu is just taking a very similar role to his book counterpart, the end
"The film sacrificed its own story to celebrate the original."
And in doing so accomplished neither its own story nor did it celebrate the original.
This is what seems to always fail in these cynical sequels banking on nostalgia; they don't _get_ the original, so they can't give it the homage it deserves, but they waste so much time and effort trying that they never manage to be worthwhile on their own merits either.
If regurgitated catchphrases and seeing old setpieces revisited is enough for you, they work, but if you want more you're out of luck.
Agreed there. Admittedly the films that have tried to replicate the spirit of their forebears rather than the exact contents have often been divisive (Rian Johnson, I love your film but I hate that I do), but I think they're the only ones out of this wave of reboots and sequels which will have any true longevity.
The other obvious examples I'd include in that category are the Planet of the Apes prequel trilogy, the 2014 Godzilla (not King of the Monsters) and Fury Road (made by the same director so maybe it doesn't count).
Disagree. The problem with opinions is everyone has one and they think they're right. First of all, if JW hadn't celebrated the original, the box office wouldn't have reflected that. Furthermore, they green-lit sequels because of the renewed interest of the public in these movies, unlike the public's waning interest in Star Wars. Jurassic sequels have a different problem; they're mostly bad but for other reasons. Sure, many movies suffer from what you explain, but certainly not the 2 jurassic films this video mostly focuses on.
A movie can be fun without being critically good. Jurassic World was bad, and I know the original is far better, but I still had fun watching it anyways.
@@theldaniel170 I disagree with you. I think that Jurassic World set out to celebrate the original but failed in its efforts. Nostalgia can be used to great effect, but this movie - like so many other "sequels" in recent years - just uses "member berries"; it doesn't use the nostalgic pieces to any purpose other than, "hey, you 'member this?" If it doesn't directly pertain to the plot or the characters, a nostalgic setpiece is just there to tug on the heartstrings of nostalgic folks and that's the sort of disingenuous movie-making that pisses of fans like me lol
@@theldaniel170 You do know Star Wars was a hot button movie series right? I mean, think about the Forced Awaken, how many people were dupe by it? The public didn't lose interest in Star War, Star Wars lost interest in tge public
I felt sorry for the Indominus. Forced into being and into a life of suffering and isolation but it gets branded as the “bad guy” because of its creators. I like how you pointed out they didn’t explore anything from the Indominus’s POV and slapped a title on it. Yeah it killed people, but so did the Rex in the original park. In the OG JP, the Rex was an incidental hero at the end of the movie but here it is clearly set up to be the “good dinosaur” along with Blue. It’s simple good vs evil with no in between.
These dinosaurs have caused a lot of pain and suffering and I am somewhat disturbed that fallen kingdom thinks these creatures are beautiful and should be protected, at least the carnivores anyway. The herbivores are easy to control but still dangerous.
It was meant to kill, it killed its sibling at birth.
Rapt0r_Gamez well some shark species eat their siblings while still in the womb
Jose Sosa carnivores are just animals. They’re not bad. They’re just trying to survive like everyone else. The real crux of the argument is that dinosaurs were extinct and are being reintroduced into ecosystems not meant for them. It’s not their fault, they’re just born that way; that was their only crime. The real villains are humans and their hubris.
Rapt0r_Gamez but you’re right the Indominus was designed to kill
"LOL I'm not hungry" lmao
King Aegypt because she wasn’t really hungry. 😅 She killed for sport.
@@namwonglue The terrifying thing is that as far as we can tell, humans are the only animals to kill for sport. If only they went with that angle in the movie
@@coyraig8332 look up chimpanzees killing rival chimp groups.
@@bjrnhalfhand2258 Killing for sport is killing for fun. Very different from killing to defend your territory
@@coyraig8332 nope. Have you heard of the cougar that killed some womans alpacas for years? Like over 100+ kills for sport. There is an outcry to not kill the cougar but its such a pain in the ass that even an animal lover like myself can sympathize with the woman having her livestock be griefed
”The film sacrificed its own story to celebrate the original.”
*cough chough* The Force Awakens *cough*
I don’t see it. Not at all like the points made in this video. The entire climax of TFA concerns the new characters, their new conflicts and arcs. At no point is anything from the original brought over to take center stage.
@4Freedom4All I don’t really get what you’re referring to.
@4Freedom4All Still no idea what this has to do with anything.
@@robinanwaldt You are completely clueless, aren't you?
@@derekhofstetler3998 Only clueless as to what these random opinions have to do with the matter at hand at all. Because they don’t.
I can't help but to feel sorry for the Indominus Rex: she's brought into a world that she doesn't know and didn't ask for and where she is hunted down by the same beings who created but did not understand her.
To me, Jurassic World is the story of a tragic antagonistic narrative.
I find your comment excellent! I absolutely agree with you.
@@nicpenagos9708 Thank you. :)
Have you seen the film? The Indominus Rex literally slaughters loads of animals _for pleasure!_
@@Kyle-gw6qp first off : we don't see that , we see many dead or dying sauropods and pratt says "she did it for sport" without witnessing her in the act ...
She might have acted in self defense or in response to a treat display made by a large male , and then you have a creature that was raised to only know fight , with a creature that can only fight since flight is not an option , and the irex might have just come out on top ...
That or she was sentient (hunting for sport implies that) wich makes what they have done to her a lot worse than everything else : imagine being locked in an enclosure for your whole life without any parental figure or friend , because she endured that , she was there only her instincts and anger towards the pepole that prevent her from escaping , she was effectively a boiling pot of stress , and when she got out she did what they educated her to do : followed her instincts , killing feels nice to a predator because you get to eat aftherward , and the brain sends a reward when somenthing you're biting stops moving , so she did just that , and she is as guilty of murder as the pepole that locked her in that enclosure are ...
@@davidegaruti2582 But you fundamentally misunderstand. Yes, it is a predator. Yes, the harsh treatment of the creature is unfortunate. And yes, the harsh treatment by the people was what ultimately created a monster. But that is the issue, yes, it is the people's fault, but the end result is the same. A monster has been created. It is perfectly normal to sympathize with the monster, however the monster is a problem that must be dealt with. It is unfortunate, but it is necessary.
Well put video essay. It made me realize the genius of Spielberg is that his movies work on every level: action, romance, but also values, reflection, messaging. His work comes form deep convictions.
Whereas some others...
R.I.P Irfan Khan.
Nice LEGO Movie 2 reference with Dangervest 😂
And I’d love a video on the sequel 👀
I really like Lego Movie 2. It's nowhere the masterpiece the first one was, but I thought it was really solid.
Films&Stuff I agree. It definitely had wholesome motives and themes in my opinion but the first movie was really lightning in a bottle.
Dr Wo isn’t wearing a Steve Jobs turtleneck, he’s wearing an Elizabeth Holmes turtleneck.
Still have the VHS!! Iconic!
Ditto
Me, too :D Mine even has the "Own the Original" red sticker on it. I also have JP on laserdisc (not to mention dvd, blu-ray, etc. lol) Still have my action figures, too.
@@hanburgundy4317 And here i am w just my childhood vhs copy painstakingly recorded from the when it played on tv and every adbreak was a race to pause and unpause lol
Same here! Even has the same wear and tear!
As much as I like thr jurassic park franchise, the sequeals have legitimately good concepts, ideas and overall themes. One of the biggest problems I see is the constant switching and deletion of scenes within the franchise. Like you always see people asking "oh why did it do this, what happened to that, etc" that's more of a directive desicion then a narrative one. So that criticism is usually off for me.
I honeslty just want these movies to have their own identity, regardless if they are good or not. The lost world was a really good film, exploring the concept and themes of nature. The dark, gritty aspect of it. Family, and how family can get divided, and be felt vulnerable. How bad descions can have a butterfly effect of consequences etc. Granted their are some goofy moments and cut scenes. But its a good sequel overall. It told its own story, but it constantly felt like it was holding its own potential.
21:44 is my favorite because it perfectly tells and visualizes what these movies are all about. The nostalgia. No compelling story or characters, nothing of substance, just a constant stream of references and ‘remember this?’
Edit: that ending line though. Slow clap.
Wait rise of Skywalker is a parody? Wow that makes far too much sense.
I agree to an extent but the story is still too reactionary in its writing. If the parody thing is to be believed then they should have leaned heavily towards comedy instead of promising a deep story for things we should care about. With how the story treats its characters it does not feel like a parody but just bad writing.
Whole sequel trilogy is a parody
Even the name. Parodies the dumb 3 word mysterious title that every Star Wars movie has.
That’s would make so much more sense. But the people behind it make is seem like the opposite
Really interesting - tons of stuff that never occurred to me, even though I’ve seen the movie multiple times. One thing though - I always thought Claire was supposed to be the the protagonist? Not Owen.
you've never seen a story with multiple protagonists, or duotagonists or tritagonists and so on? I'm sure you have, you just weren't aware of what they were called before!
Marketing and merchandising for both World movies sure tries to tell otherwise...
Jordan Williams the protagonist is usually the character in a story who changes the most. Owen doesn’t really change at all, so I never viewed him as the protagonist.
Geewrecks I imagine that’s because Chris Pratt was a more well known actor at the time.
@@MaryHallberg What is usually isn't always the rule Mary, otherwise in the Batman series, The Joker would be the main character because he goes through more growth than the batman because the DC writers are obsessed with a clown in a purple suit.
This video puts into words a lot of issues I’ve had with the film since theaters. A big one is that Owen is a terrible role and a miscast for Pratt.
Though he does do a good job wile being miscast eh? I’ll admit In the movie I enjoy each of his scenes, He gave it his best with what he was given I think.
@@grimprime0158 i thought he was awesome. Nailed his role perfectly. Super beleivable. Considering i first saw him in parls and rec
Having Chris Pratt in these films turns this franchise into more action oriented instead of sci-fi or adventure, especially since in recent times, Chris Pratt seems to be associated with action-hero archetype. The modern incarnation the likes of Sylvester Stallone or Bruce Willis
"A moment of sympathy to acknowlage how much pain this being has went through, but instead it's death is a gag"
Now I feel bad
Excellent, insightful analysis and conclusion. I never realized how tragic a figure the Indominus Rex was before this, and how this film could have been so much better if it had understood that. (Indeed, all the dinosaurs are tragic figures. As Sattler, Grant and Malcolm explain to Hammond in the first film, these animals don't know what century they're in, have all of a suddenly been thrown together with man, and "What you (Hammond) call discovery, I call the rape of the natural world.")
Your scientists were so caught up in wether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should
Excellent comment... and I absolutely agree with you.
Amazing quote...
@@nicpenagos9708 👍
Jurassic Park was written by an amazing author who had something to say and Jurassic World was a studio marketing production and that is it.
If it was studio marketing production, how come it took 14 years to make and Steven Spielberg himself picked this one over the countless earlier versions he received?
@@Linnnaeus taking a lot of years to make doesn't mean it was the right one to make. I Mean, look at Jurassic Park 3. They had a script sitting there that was basically going to be either 1. a cold/virus/flu killing off the dinosaurs and basically the same kinda decision made that could've had that jeff goldblum/malcom scene be nearly the same. Or the way it started with the volcano problem. An entire promise either direction within itself that could've been a full film and wasn't used PRIOR to JP3. This version "Jurassic World" basically make the park and waits for it to go wrong and watch a lot of people die is honestly more guilty than 3 for laziness because for all it's flashy looks and "big scenes" etc but not one character is even relatable. It's still the "flashier modern" lazy route. I had hopes for fallen kingdom but after the volcano explosion it's absolute garbage, worst in the series by far.
How many studio marketing products achieve as much? Very few. Even Universal itself failed with the Fallen Kingdom.
That´s excatly what the movie is about
I find the JW series to be very realistic from a social commentary standpoint. What we've seen is exactly what would happen if things played out in the reality of this world. Perhaps people disliked them because it subconsciously hit too close to home (the human interaction/motivations), and they wanted more fantasy.
I've heard the meta-narrative take before but never quite explained so well, great video
LOL, the laugh track with Poe.
Hello there AT-AT Chat! Love your Star Wars videos! I think you are to Star Wars to what Klayton Fioriti is to Jurassic Park!
i feel like this happens a lot where Hollywood tells stories that have messages that condemn themselves, yet there usually not meant to be read that way or aren’t blatant so it seems like they are just completely tone deaf
I love all the JP sequels. They all bring something to the table, usually something deeper than expected. People love to trash them because they all live in the shadow of the original, but that's just kinda the way it is when your first blockbuster is a masterpiece and you've still got a franchise to build.
I love em too! No film is perfect and I love this video for pointing that out too.
Well you are free to enjoy bad things, i mean, even Windows 8 had its fans. But one claim is just objectively wrong: People don't love to trash them because some "shadow of the original", they trash them because they are worse films with weaker stories, uninteresting characters (and motivations) and worse Dino behaviour.
The appreciation for JP1 is not just blind nostalgia. Thats complete nonense.
i think jurassic world had some decent commentary regarding society today and the absolute need to be constantly sensitized by something fresh. The fact the older brother cared more about impressing the next girl (notice how disinterested he was from the first girl we were introduced to) he met than dinosaurs really hit this idea home. Sure yah their story was used as stand-in characters for the audience to hammer home the nostalgia, but i feel their addition was to point at the constant reliance on new things to be satiated. The contrast between the brothers tried to show how we should live our lives like the younger brother and just enjoy the moments...the older brother later appreciating his kid brother and protecting him showed a nice arc.
Also your point about grey the younger brother not revealing his knowledge about dinosaurs at any relevant time missed the mark, when the indominus was attacking he clearly notified claire that they needed 'more teeth' to handle the threat. This idea literally saved their lives as it prompted claire to unleash the trex who has 'more teeth'
I think a movie yelling at me that I will find it boring is both boring and insulting
Jurassic World has always been a guilty pleasure of mine. I knew it wasn't perfectly made, but it still worked well enough for me to have fun with it. Somehow, this video made me like it more. Thanks for giving me that
In the books, Genaro actually went back to save the kids, and he was buff as hell as well.
He wasn't the typical "bloodsucking lawyer" trope.
He died too?
@@caneloex5897it's been quite a few years since I read it, but I remember being shocked (having seen the movie first) how very few that *doesn't* die in the book 😅
I’m actually surprised that this movie has a deeper meaning behind it.
More like it's failure to become a proper homage to the OG or pave it's own story is a more insightful story itself than the actual movie.
Why are people hating on this movie recently?
"In the end, Jurassic World is a film made with the best intentions"
Wow. (22:44)
Me too.
“Some of the worst things imaginable,
Have been done,with the BEST INTENTIONS....”
-Alan Grant
That actually sent chills down my spine thinking about how that one line in the first movie is being played out in the production of its sequels.
The road to hell intentions .
@@jaygonzalez8575 The road to hell is paved with good intentions .
Dead dove DO NOT eat
The kids were highly annoying. I hate them, I HATE them a lot I tell ya!
The kids in the first Jurassic Park film were the only ones that had a logical reason to be there. The kids in Jurassic World were pointless and don't get me started with the little girl in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom.
@@honeydenison83 I like the kid in Jurassic park: the lost world too
I really wished that the older one was eaten by the Mosasaurus
And they never die in these movies...
Annoying characters never die for some reason
Outstanding video man. You really nail what I do find interesting about Jurassic World, the meta-commentary about the film business. Thanks and I can't wait for your next video
So, I really like the younger kid as a child actor. He's a bit one note (he's almost the same exact 'kid stereotype' in Iron Man 3) but he's a kid so I sort of expect that. I don't like the kids in Jurassic World. They didnt do much of anything for the story other than act as a raised stake any time it felt like the heroes were succeeding a little too much. Thing is, Jurassic World didnt need raised stakes. The stakes have never been higher than the park being actively open when a carnivore escapes its enclosure. I didnt mind a ranger like character as a moral compass, but I did miss some of Chris' usual goofball antics; they reduced him to a reason to have raptors in the film. I feel like if he had been a newly hired park ranger still stunned by awe the way that Dr. Grant in the original film was, his character would have gone over better. I just straight up hate Claire. We went from celebrating badass women to handing the audience the most stereotypical business woman they could crank out on a silver platter, complete with demonizing her decision to put her career over having children. I love dinosaurs and the original so of course I still love this movie, but it was so frustrating coming from the original to this. The best part was bringing back Rexy for the final fight, but I also felt bad that the Indom's death was reduced to a gag. I feel like her fleeing from Rexy back into the island would have wrapped back into the idea of her trying to figure out where she fit in the food chain, as it would signal that Rexy was the apex and showed her place as such. As it was, it just makes it seem like the Mosasaur is better than either of them. True or false in real life, it's not good to celebrate the fan favorite dino from the first film only to show her up with a dino that wasnt even the main focus of any of the movies.
I also have a lot to say about this movie it seems lol.
He’s a child here, so it makes sense he’d be one note, but he has a wide range on that one note. He can showcase subtle emotions at times, building them up to something more, that’s hard for even some adult actors to pull off convincingly. Sure, he’s not to the point he can give you many different characters, but if he can tap into an array of emotions and get a good emotional response from the audience, he’s being set off for a good future as he grows up and learns more.
At least the kid from iron man 3 didn't overstayed His welcome and and was needed when the plot need it. He Was one of the few good things from iron man 3 and i was glad he had a cameo in endgame even if most people overlook it
Me: *likes the movie Jurassic World*
Everyone: Well actually-
I liked it too 😂
@@eikpaker1273 Same lol.
“A monster is being created to turn profits”
Sounds like this movie
Thats...what they said
Bruh
I didn’t even notice it but you’re right, the first Jurassic movie was quite progressive only for Pratt to be the full on masculine archetype that we’ve seen in every other blockbuster.
"Progressive"?
Sam Neil came off as pretty “manly” and don’t get me started on shirtless Jeff Goldblum.
@@matthewsmith3078 Nothing, uhhh, will ever beat, uuhhh, Jeff Godlblums manliness.
This is a very insightful essay. I really enjoyed it, and freely confess I couldn't have reached these same revelations about its content without watching this. Thanks and keep uploading.
The Indominus Rex can camouflage! Luckily we installed a tracker so we know where it is at any time.
OMG! where did it go!
QUICK LEAVE THE CAGE OPEN AND SEND PEOPLE IN TO LOOK FOR THE KILLER DINOSAUR!
what don we just check the trac-
SHUT UP, NERD! CAN'T YOU SEE WE HAVE AN EMERGENCY HERE!?
Even if there is no tracker.
I have an idea. Lets check the wall outside the enclosure. The thing weighs a ton, it'll be easy to spot the tracks.
That's a stupid idea, because it's definitely outside the enclosure considering some scratch marks on the wall. Instead, we should go inside the enclosure for no apparent reason.
@@nebuloushammer8773 yeah or just anything else BUT entering the cage. That´s so dumb on so many levels
"Jurassic world is a movie made with the best intention"
Me: Oh yeah, it's all coming together
Spared no expense.
r/MurderedByWords
17:36 "Owen is the morale center" Lets a Raptor eat Hoskins when he has a Rifle in his hand!
To be fair Hoskins deserved it
@@WhyTho525 That's vengeful, not moral.
@@NikhchansGaming
True, but Hoskins still deserved it. He kinda dug his own grave when he decided that releasing the raptors was a good idea.
When I was sitting in cinema watching how the Indominous Rex was killed by the sea dinosaur I had the scene in my mind when Samuel L. Jackson's character was killed by the shark in Deep Blue Sea and I laughed out loud :P
There HAS to be a video where someone dubs Samuel L Jackson's lines over the I.Rex
Cinemasins did it.
There was a lot in Jurassic World. What I liked best was the discussion on how audiences weren't impressed with dinosaurs anymore. It was a perfect critique of CGI movies. And the only animatronic puppet dinosaur died, slaughtered ruthlessly by the CGI monster.
This is the best defense I have seen for Jurassic World. As someone who lives for Jurassic Park, I hate seeing mindless youtubers ragging on the movie because they thought it was a cash grab when it was actually made with the best intentions and the hopes of telling a unique story
I agree, I actually love this movie, as well as it's sequel (although this one is better). Of course its not Jurassic Park, but that doesn't mean it was bad at all.
I quite like it myself and I just personally see a lot of the things people hate on in a different way. It is what it is.
“Some of the worst things imaginable have been done with the best intentions.”
-Dr. Alan Grant
-Gray Taylor, Esq.
@@antisora13 touché
I appreciate your video, especially the last few minutes of it. Thanks.
Oh my God I love your break down of this movie. I've never seen it explained like this. Also the music you used here really played into all of it. Gonna re-watch this many times more. I can't wait for you to do a clip on the new movie when it comes out.
A good deconstruction that puts some aspects of the movie into a different context and with an interesting conclusion that you arrive at.
Some really great insights here; thanks for sharing!
You uploaded this video on the 23rd anniversary of The Lost World: Jurassic Park United States opening. Good timing!
That line about parody had me deeeeeaaaaaddddd
Really good vid.
Would love to get your take on ‘Fallen Kingdom’
I really liked that movie.
Great video essay! I'm always impressed by them. You know your Cinema.
This is by far my favorite analysis of Jurassic World. You nailed all my problems and my likes, and I really hope I get to see you do Fallen Kingdom.
„Somehow, Palpatine returned“ - *Laugh track* LOL
Background music: Jurassic Park Theme 100% slower
Any of these points come across in the same way that these points do when used with The Last Jedi and Rise of Skywalker. Just because there is depth, doesn't mean the movie is good or fun to watch, or that it even fits in any way with the series its a part of.
19:00 - I'm gonna need you to say "Guillermo" again, chief.
In all seriousness, though, what a brilliantly-made video. Wonderfully structured, great writing, and solid analysis. This is the most intelligible breakdown of Jurassic World's metaphysical nature (and all that it entails) that I've yet seen.
JP: Music plays to a magnificent brachiosaurus
JW: Music plays to buildings
SO GOOD DUDE
The original film was a masterpiece from every angle. Every scene tells us something deep about the plot, subtext and themes which were far deeper than an action film of that era needed to be which were delivered with tact and rarely felt heavy handed
Gosh it's so well explained, you're my new favorite channel
This is such an awesome point of view to take! This totally changes the way I will watch movies and specifically the way I view the newer Jurassic and Star Wars movies. What an awesome take!
22:26 the T-rex crashed through a Spinosaurus skeleton, to reference the fight in JP3 and let T-rex take 'revenge' and retake it's crown as the most badass dino.
The problem with Jurassic World is that its meta meaning implies that the movie itself shouldn’t have been made. And I agree-it shouldn’t have been made. The studio was too dumb to see its own cynicism onscreen. I’m not even sure Colin Trevorrow fully understood what he was doing.
Don't know how Colin got to direct what with his lack of experience has a director and writer.
I mean, it wasn't meant to be made, but it was made nonetheless, because of money. That's something they try to comment on with the Indominus. I think it was intentional. I think he got it
This goes for a lot of Trevorrow's work. Even though his Episode IX script broadly works better than TRoS, you can see the same problems in that I don't think he really understands how to tunnel into a character and build the story out from there.
@@prathapkutty7407 There's been a trend for putting filmmakers with one indie film under their belt on huge blockbusters, to be fair, and almost all of those ended badly for someone be that the director or the film. Josh Trank and Gareth Edwards fall into the same category.
Alec Ferris Gareth Edwards is a fantastic director. The only real problems with Godzilla and Rogue One is stale characters, which is more the fault of the writers.
Underrated channel. Loving these vids
Wooah. Great job! Good editing, good writing... I just discovered your channel and congrats. It's pretty good!
This video is awesome. Really good deconstruction.
I really like Jurassic world, for me it’s a guilty pleasure and my favorite of the Jurassic Park sequels but I can see the issues that people have with this movie and despite all the flaws, it’s still a fun, entertaining movie and seeing this on the big screen back In 2015 was one of the best movie going experiences I’ve ever had.
I really liked this video, it really helped me relax after a bad day. I'll definitely be checking out your other videos now
God damn, this channel is so awesome. I can’t believe that I’m just finding it.
Ok now you HAVE TO talk about fallen kingdom 😩😩😩❤️❤️❤️
Thank you so much for pointing out the flaws with Owen Grady. I absolutely cannot stand him, and Chris Pratt in general (except in The LEGO Movie), so it's cathartic to finally hear someone draw attention to his flaws. Honestly all of the best characters in this movie die except for Lowery, which is a real shame because the main cast is incredibly soulless.
In my eyes, Jurassic World is interesting for its meta-critique on blockbuster films but that doesn't make it good on its own. I think it's below average overall, and Fallen Kingdom is an embarrassing superhero movie that's just setup for more, worse superhero movies. Would love to hear your thoughts on it too if you make that next video.
JP is my favourite film of all time, I love TLW, and I try to forget about the rest. I never asked for a JP4, I just wish good things could be left to rest.
I agree he was so bland and wooden in this movie. None of the new characters seem interesting and seem so one dimensional. Only a few like Masrani and Wong stood out for me.
@northern_lights ohhh yeah don't get me started on Chris Pratt's personal life and all the stupid religious shit he's done. Not to mention he's homophobic too.
It seems to be the way that Trevorrow writes male heroes. Have you seen his Episode IX draft? He turns Poe Dameron into the same macho cutout.
@@telekinesticman He's not homophobic. That's trash that the media feeds you. He's a normal dude who refuses to cave to the hollywood cesspool. Everyone has the right to practice their religion, within their bounds. I'm not a big believer myself, but I respect other people's choices. I can criticize them, but it's not up to me to judge them for it.
@northern_lights Judge his work, not his beliefs. It's fucking ignorant to judge a guy for his beliefs. He's not forcing it down anyone's throats like Hollywood does with their sjw propaganda drivel.
You know, as a spino fan, I took particular notice when the T-Rex destroyed the spino skeleton in the main area of JW. That fits right in to the greater narrative that you told here, so I’d believe it.
Incredible, absolutely incredible analysis. Love to see you continue this
DAMN!! Watching Irrfan (Misrani in JW) in the video made my eyes moist. what a great loss to Cinema! RIP sir!
Yeah, he was a wonderful actor.
23:01 yess please!!
Fantastic video! My mom took me to see the original in theater and I'll never forget the lesson I learned. God creates dinosaurs, god destroys dinosaurs, god makes man, man destroys god, man creates dinosaurs.
19:12 "And how our fear in monsters PALES in comparison..."
Well played sir.
The thing i loved of JW since day one was concreted by you my man: "cynism", it´s a movie that knows what it is and how you percive it and how the world would judge it, this was before most modern blockbusters felt in love with that formula; yet they used new themes and a new story.
This gave me much more respect for Jurassic World somehow.
Also constantly dunking on Rise of Skywalker was amazing
Sweet you think so too, Jurassic world in my book was a damn solid movie, I'd rank it close to the original though I did not grow up with that as like my first exposure to dinosaurs, that would be Walking with Dinosaurs XD
Rise of Skywalker was better than the JW trilogy.
I like the way you look through movies. New subscriber, looking forward to more bud. stay safe!
When Owen was describing the Indo rex being raised and isolated I did feel bad for it. However, you had to stop it from doing what it only knew how to do
I've never come across to a video essay more spot-on. From the irony and/or tragedy of the Indominus Rex to the miscast of Chris Pratt.
I'd also like to point out how the Park in 'Jurassic Park', despite not officially open yet, felt bigger than the Park in 'Jurassic World', despite the latter already opened.
He never said Pratt was miscast
So, in the end, it was a big pile of nothing
I liked Jurassic World
No, that was Fallen Kingdom
Damn good work man. I really do see the shortcomings and its efforts
Wonderful video, thank you so much for this.
When are you coming back????? You have incredible content that I would pay to watch.
Being a new dad at the time, I never got around to seeing the sequel. I also fell asleep during the first one in theaters... not out of boredom, out of necessity haha. Never fallen asleep during a movie I didn't put on with that intention before.
I should rewatch it and then watch the sequel.
The sequel is easily one of the most hilariously dreadful movies of all time. If you enjoy watching Trainwreck films you genuinely have to watch it for a laugh
Make sure that when you do watch it, don't watch it with the mindset of it being bad or disappointing. Come in with the mindset that it will be good and you can form your opinion around that, which is what a lot of people seem to forget. If you come in expecting to hate it, you will probably hate it
Gotta say that while there’s a lot to criticize in Fallen Kingdom, there are some excellent action scenes. Maybe even exciting enough to keep a new dad awake.
@@Linnnaeus
Oh I don't let people manipulate my interpretations of things.
Like... I only saw many movies like Borat and Anchorman way after they'd been hyped. People spent weeks convincing me how good they were. I hated Borat and still love the first Anchorman. I don't let people change my mind before I even form it.
i enjoyed this movie but the times the plot expected me to stretch my imagination to it's limits were tough. Entering the Indominus enclosure when you had a tracking chip in it at the time. The treatment of raptors from the uncontrollable killing machines to now a pack of trained attack dogs. I feel like had this movie made a few less unrealistic left turns i would remember it more fondly
For real. The first three movies and both books by Chrichton highlighted and illustrated that raptors - although highly intelligent and capable of working together - cannot be contained or trained or controlled. This movie threw all of that out of the window in exchange for "well, ya just gotta know 'em, that's all,". Like Hagrid or some shit lol
The third movie played with the concept that the raptors could behave in a less predatory fashion when the objective switched from Hunting to preserving their young. While I generally enjoy the 3rd movie more than most that was the one aspect I took issue with because it wasn’t consistent with the books. Sadly world took that concept and stretched it to its illogical conclusion
@@GetAwesomeGaming I always felt that the T. Rex was the main attraction; the "big" ride at the theme park, the one that everyone talks about. But, the Rex isn't or wasn't necessarily the biggest or scariest ride out there: it was the raptors. The way the first two movies handled the raptors as being _far_ too dangerous to even think about messing with was perfect; it really established how much we should fear them. JP/// going the whole maternal parents route - even to the extent of them not eating what'shisname - was an odd choice and kind of killed the mythos surrounding the raptors.
Then, Jurassic World and Fallen Kingdom took it a step further and made then trainable, lovable friends; big dogs. It ruined their mystique. We should NEVER look at raptors (from the audience viewpoint) as anything but disturbingly dangerous and frightening. Owen should have been wrong about his raptors the whole time; especially Blue.
Somehow, in the movie about genetically modified dinosaurs, the most unrealistic thing for me was that those Jeeps still worked. The batteries, tires, and gas were all just fine after sitting and rotting for like 30 years.
This was a wonderful video. That’s why I love the lost world, Steven decided he couldn’t do the same film twice.
I like the interpretation of what the Indominus represents here, that it’s a physical form of sequals and the often shallow intentions behind them, however I feel I ought to note that there are several other and very interesting interpretations, the main two that spring to mind being consumerism in general (somewhat ironically but I think that just adds to it) and how the public view dinosaurs. I must point out that the latter interpretation is one developed by Hoopsanddinoman, so I take no credit for it, but it works with the idea that people simply aren’t interested in dinosaurs, they have no respect for the science or the fact that these were animals that lived millions of years ago, they just want to think about them as vicious monsters constantly fighting each other, hence why Lowery’s line about the first park seems referential to the reception of the original film, back then people just needed real dinosaurs and that was enough, supported by Clare’s line “20 years ago de-extinction was right up there with magic” and Owen asking “aren’t dinosaurs wild enough?”, because simply put, people have no interest in them anymore, it’s all about making monsters, which is destroying our image of them as animals, which itself can be seen through the scene with the dying apatosaurus, a classic dinosaur so many people grew up knowing about, suddenly destroyed by this new image. Side note, Trevarrow knows which dinosaurs to put where, there is a reason certain genera were in the gyrosphere scene, for instance. Think of the t-rex as less representative of the original film (though it could be a representation of multiple things, it’s down to interpretation) and more of the ultimate manifestation of what a dinosaur is, T. rex is the classic, the icon, the real-world animal, forced to face up against this man-made idea, which works as well because the Indominus Rex is like a tyrannosaur mirror image, the only animal Clare reveals to Owen was in it was a T. rex and it’s called Indominus Rex, it’s kinda hard to miss. The biological animal, Tyrannosaurus rex, ultimately is the one against the movie monster, Indominus Rex. This is definitely an idea I think should be explored more, as I say I take no credit for this, but it seems to be an interesting topic.
Finally, someone gets what I'm thinking!!
"people simply aren’t interested in dinosaurs, they have no respect for the science or the fact that these were animals that lived millions of years ago, they just want to think about them as vicious monsters constantly fighting each other"
I'm glad you point that out, because I feel like this movie also brings jab to the fanbase of the franchise. They don't really like dinosaurs as animals, they just see them as ferocious monsters whose sole purpose is to battle each other. I've been in a lot of Jurassic fan groups and what they mostly talk about is "Who will win or "Which dinosaur is better". Heck, I dare to say that Giga vs T-Rex battle is the thing they want to see the most in Dominion. It's like Jurassic is slowly turning into kaiju films, if anything the last two films are any indication; both have dinosaur battles in the climax. Fallen Kingdom even has two dinosaur battles. The fans love it and the filmmakers know it, so that's what they give, and I bet Dominion will be no different; the fight between two theropods will be the highlight of the film
Perhaps... just shove dinosaur fights here and there and the fans will probably eat it up, and calling it the best movie ever
@@aryshandono3249 I completely get what you mean, one of the things a lot of people said about Jurassic World when it came out is that it feels like a fan-film, which to an extent was true, given a lot of the creative decisions, and the idea of dinosaurs was more upheld, I mean Trevarrow’s favourite dinosaurs are Ankylosaurus and Microceratus, and the megatherapod battle at the end was almost like an added bonus but also a one-off thing. The issue is that with the success of Jurassic World it’s become clear that there’s more of a focus on the stuff people, especially the casual movie goer, liked about it, including dinosaur fights, and now it’s almost become formulaic.
Zack and Gray (Yuck) were incredibly annoying, maybe only topped by the Kirby Kid, from the 3rd one!
Can I ask how? (genuine question) Zack, Gray and especially Eric in JP3 are the least annoying. The films gradually got better with the kids. The first one they scream, are fairly incompetent and can be annoying (Tim could've helped, at least Lex did), Kelly was meh, Eric was the best, literally had no issues, Zack and Gray were competent and Maisie in the new one was perfect minus that ending decision.
@@DEDITS-gd8qt I guess in the End it comes down to Sympathy for the little brats..it's subjective perception!
Yeah, I mean I wasn't a huge fan of the kid in 3, but it didn't really mess up the narrative or flow of the film. The kids in jurassic world were totally pointless and added zero to anything whatsoever. The one in fallen kingdom is just a horribly written disaster.
As opposed to Jurassic Park where it was about several subjects, had subtle comedy, and the kids were not just sitting around or purposely being stupid "oh let's go outside the gate" no they were trying to survive. Lex is a brilliant hacker, and Tim "being a kid" is shown but not in the ignorant/moronic way the kids in world are.
Honestly I know people really dislike Malcolm's kid in Lost World but the way the whole thing comes together (even if the dino kicking scene is silly) it works way better upon 2nd watch when you realize they were actually trying.
The "world" series is honestly paint-by-numbers bs and we definitely could've gotten a way better 4th film if they'd followed the original "extinction" plot where it was a cold/flu/virus and they had to chose whether or not they should be saved, similiar to how fallen kingdom began but devolved into total trash.
I think it comes down to this: can you remove the characters from the story and still have it function normally?
- With Jurassic Park, it would be impossible. Lex and Tim are Hammond's main focus and they are the catalyst to Grant and Sattler's relationship moing to the next level.
- With The Lost World, yes; you could remove Kelly and Malcolm's motivations would still be the same: save Sarah.
- With Jurassic Park ///, it would be almost impossible. Eric is the sole reason they go to the island. You _could_ workaround this, but it'd take some effort.
- With Jurassic World, it'd be easy. Claire doesn't care about her nephews, but "learns to" as soon as they're in danger? I don't buy it. Her whole arc could be just as easily established without them. Add on the fact that the kids are genuinely unlikable and yeah, just ditch em.
- With Fallen Kingdom, again it's a yes. You could remove the little clone girl and not have much if any impact on the story. God, it'd be a LOT better without her. Such a stupid decision... clone child... yuck. "They're alive... like me." Barf.
@@hanburgundy4317 😂 That thing you wrote at the End was pretty funny, yeah really cheesy line! As far as the Kids go. I just went for the superficial viewpoint, you analyzed this thing on a deeper level and we come to the same conclusion, i like it.
Thank you for this, it's definitely helped me personally to more clearly define a huge number of issues I had with the film!
Great analysis! Wonderful presentation!! Thanks!!!