0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 12652 times.
Hey, remember that movie where Steven Seagal dies in the first 5 minutes? That was awesome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Executive_Decision
Except, its hard to escape, when the writing is so bad, and the story is littered with so many plot holes, that you could drive a genetically mutated hybrid dinosaur through it. SPOILERS AHEAD:Accepting the fact that the movie is about dinosaurs living in 2015, and that someone allowed them to reopen the park after the catastrophic events of the last three movies happened, are we seriously to believe that the characters populating this movie are all smart enough to have gotten to this point in time, but are so stupid to make so many mistakes? Here we have a park full of futuristic technology, with inventions that won't exist for decades, and creatures that might never be capable of being created, yet every scientist, engineer, dinosaur ranger, etc, etc, is completely brainless when the dino dookie hits the fan.You create two raptor, toad, lizard, t-rex, hybrid killing machines, where already one was eaten by the other, and you have ZERO FAIL SAFES to stop the mayhem from occurring?You implant ONE tracking/paralyzing device in the creature, where it apparently can easily reach it with its stubby T-rex arms? Huh? The world's smartest scientists came up with this plan?You have ZERO way to lock down the different park quadrants, so in the rare event where your ONE fail safe fails, you are completely screwed. The world's best engineers came up with this plan?
I'm keeping my fingers crossed for Jurassic Lunch where they toss him up in the air and then it's down the hatch for Steven Seagal.I'd pay $20 to see that in 3D.
You do realize in the real world this kind of negligence and shortsighted thinking happens ALL THE TIME. Again the movie itself explicitly comments on both this facet AND the oblivious consumers (US) who are more than willing to do something as bone-numbingly stupid as cavort amidst dinosaurs despite the obvious dangers. That's why the character of the ultra rich owner who calls himself a pilot despite the fact he hasn't finished training is there. He represents the answer to your criticisms. That's why Bryce Dallas Howard's character is the numbers-cruncher. You're criticizing the movie for point out obvious prevailing real world issues when it comes to $-first corporate enterprise. The most recognizable being Hollywood itself. Did you not hear about the lady who got killed in the South African animal park a few weeks ago? All your criticisms apply and that was just a freaking animal park. Jurassic World couldn't be any more relevant.
Except, the lady that just was killed in a South African animal park, died because she was ignoring the rules. It wasn't negligence on the parks part, she had her windows down despite the park's warning signs, and the lion was able to get access to her.
If you're not able to see the parallels in your own sentence then I don't know what else to say.
The reason this is the case, is not for commentary or satire, its because with logic applied, the movie couldn't happen.
Not one of the innocent bystanders that died during Jurassic World disobeyed the rules. The only ones that went against the rules, were the children, and they survived. The dozens of people slaughtered by the dinosaurs towards the end, were killed FOR following the rules, and gathering like lambs to the slaughter, into one central area with no planned way of evacuation. Where is the parallel? The entire situation happened because no one operating, designing, or funding the park had any sense fore thought, intelligence, and rationality. Its illogical, since these are the same people that built an entire masterpiece, filled with technology and innovation that we have yet to see in the real world. The reason this is the case, is not for commentary or satire, its because with small amount of logic applied, the movie couldn't happen.
Actually I just want to say that I am listening to a podcast with the director right now and he states that the idea behind the film is EXACTLY for the reasons I listed above.So, no I am giving the film exactly the credit it deserves.
Some people pick up on the meta aspects of a film, others don't. I used to be a plot stickler and didn't really have much sensitivity to the other aspects (such as what you are pointing out here). Then I went on a BFI Top 100 challenge where I am attempting to watch all of the top 100 films on their list. Many of the films are downright incomprehensible if you don't have some sensitivity to this level of film making, and it was only after watching each film a couple of times, hitting the commentary tracks and reading the scholarly articles on each film that I finally came around. It was a lot of work but totally worth it. I keep a spreadsheet, and I've now officially watched (and researched) 84 of the top 100 films. About halfway through the list I actually started enjoying old films more than modern ones. Wow, that was a shift.Anyway, back on topic - nowadays I'm willing to forgive some issues with plot if it's got some other things going on that are interesting that aren't directly related to plot. Sounds like I should check out JP.
OMG, this is awesome, thank you! Love this bit of trivia:"Steven Seagal earned a Razzie Award nomination for Worst Supporting Actor for his performance in the film but lost to Marlon Brando for The Island of Dr. Moreau.[6]" Hahahahah that is some funny stuff.
Do we REALLY think someone is going to write scholarly articles about Jurassic World? What little social commentary was there to be noted, was as subtle as a heart attack. There was product placement every where, and one of the characters actually said, "We aren't going to kill the dinosaur, it cost money!!" The plot holes, have nothing to do with any broad message. It was just a bunch of ridiculous one dimensonal characters, making AWFUL decisions one after the other, to carry the audience from one set peice to the other.
