So didn't got a thread about this topic when I searched "Jurassic World", which completely surprised me... Anyways. (Please spoiler things for others if ya watched it, yes?)

Just got done watching this new movie a few hours ago and gotta say... I overall enjoyed it and loved it quite a bit. There was some issues I had with it but overall, pretty good... So anyone else watched it yet and liked it as well?

*Sorry for simple original post*

I saw it earlier today, as well. I thought it was better than I expected and I enjoyed it.

I liked it as well. 7.5 out of 10. I didn't like the forced romance. Also I had to laugh at the guy who thought unleashing the raptors would be his salvation. My friend agreed with him and said he was the smartest guy there. So when the raptors inevitablly killed him I had to laugh. He trusted the raptors and didn't survive. Tsk Tsk. RIP.

It also seems exactly what a company would do despaerate for every dollar and upvote it can get its hands on.

I absolutely loved it. But then again Jurassic Park is my favourite film franchise of all time.

Hmm, dinosaurs again? Was that a Megalodon in the commercial, BTW?

Mosasaurus.

Mosasaurus, ye'h. It was a plot device but I enjoyed it anyways.

When does this one take place, before the second one or something?
I'm going to go see it tomorrow with my girlfriend, she's really excited for it, to me it could be a hit or miss.

Takes place long after the last one, basically in a park that has been running well for years and is very well established. Well, before it all goes pear shaped, of course. And then there's the obligatory running and screaming.

I'm waiting for the Director's Cut, with extra dinosaurs.

I'll see it and I'll probably enjoy it on some level but it's a bit ehhhhhhh

Not a Jurassic Park fan?

Takes places about 20 years after the original Jurassic Park movie (which came out in 1993, which was over 20 years ago). So ye'h, pretty cool. The new Jurassic World was basically built on the same island on top of the original and such.

How much scene time do the dinos get? That's why the first one was the best because it wasn't filled with CGI scenes every 10 minutes.

Also is Jeff Goldblum in it?

I AM a Jurassic Park fan. Some scenes from the sequels are ok, but the sequels have all been pretty bad overall and this one is even worse because, once again, it's not backed by a book and also once again, even though for the time during EVERY sequel we've known that dinosaurs have had feather or feather-like things, dinosaurs are still being shown without them. Finally they went and literally made it a generic monster movie with the main bad guy not even being a dinosaur but rather a genetically created killing machine.

I think for you this movie can be summarized by telling you that the main dinosaur in this movie isn't even a real dinosaur.

You know, people keep saying this stuff, but I really enjoyed The Lost World, I didn't enjoy 3 that much. 3's a fun ride, but the plot doesn't make much sense.

I liked it but I felt bad for the assistant she didn't deserve what she happened to her. Owen reminded me of Captain America when he was riding on his motorcycle alongside his raptor allies.

The Lost World was the best of the sequels, incidentally it is also the one backed by a source material. My main beef with The Lost World is the San Diego scene felt too much like a monster movie (that and animatronic tails in the long grass)

Honestly, my problem with The Lost World is how much of an idiotball Sarah is. She is supposed to be this paleontologist or something with animals, yet takes a BABY T-REX and then goes around the island with a jacket covered in the damned thing's blood. Then there's Nick who pretty much caused most of the deaths on the island with his eco-terrorist [censored].

Technically, none of the creatures in ALL Jurassic Park movies have "real" dinosaurs in the story.

As explained in Jurassic World (and Jurassic Park as well, if my memory is correct)... Their "dinosaurs" aren't necessary perfect dinosaur clones, but rather have other DNA mixed into them to make what we think are dinosaurs, but not necessary are them ever...

So really, the main villain of Jurassic World isn't a dinosaur simply because the rest are NOT either. However, if you don't nitpick that much then you should totally count the main villain as a dinosaur, simply because (just like the rest), they've used DNA from the original dinosaurs (that are long dead). Specifically Raptor and T-Rex DNA (and obviously mixed in with a lot of other animals of today to fill in the missing pieces).

As for the rest of your post...

1. It doesn't need to be backed by a book in order to have an interesting and great story, with memorable characters and all. A movie can be just that on it's own and, in my opinion, this movie does just that while still giving the original Jurassic Park idea some good justice (yet at the same time, it's still it's own story with all of it's own characters and development).

2. Like I said above, they aren't technically dinosaurs... Just new creatures made to be like 'reptilian dinosaurs' (you may say).

3. Again, what I said above about the second part. As for the former part, generic monster movie? Eh. A little. I wouldn't say the movie as a whole is generic, though the main plot itself (the one around this main villain) does share the basics of a 'generic monster movie' but it still has a lot of it's personal taste to make it not like that but instead a great movie on it's own.

I agree with you but I honestly saw that coming... An assistant, like her, is a 'trashable' character, yet still recognizable by the audience.

The DNA was taken from birds, reptiles, and amphibians, which are the closest things to dinosaurs we have today (https://xkcd.com/1211/) and they merely used that genetic structure as a shortcut to fill in the gaps. Which, by the way, makes at least good movie sense since it borrows the fact that many species are known to have vastly similar DNA. Humans to chimpanzees have over 95% similar DNA, and even mouse to humans (a much bigger stretch) have 90% genome matching (http://www.genome.gov/page.cfm?pageID=10005831)


1. You are correct, however the only even semi-decent Jurassic Park movies have been backed by a book. Jurassic Park 3 was complete and utter trash.

2. That's complete and utter crap. Canonically they used bird, frog, and reptilian DNA (movies only mentioned frog DNA though it is likely the others were glossed over) and was merely done as a shortcut using ancestral species to fill in the gaps as needed, not to create hybrids.

3. We'll have to agree to disagree on that point then, because it's a made-up monster so to me that makes it a generic monster movie just milking the Jurassic Park franchise for a cash grab.

Oh that irked me to no end. He caused all those deaths.

Just got back from watching it in 3D, and while it's certainly no No Country For Old Men worthy of endless accolades, I'd say it's a fairly solid action film. The plot's meh but not many action films have a great plot so I'm not terribly bothered.

As Jusey1 said, they explain in this one why the dinosaurs look the way they do. The Asian guy from the first one, who they talked to about the raptor eggs, explains that company wanted him to make bigger, better, "more teeth" dinosaurs and not the reality dinosaurs we know them to be because it gets them more money.

I liked all the nostalgia moments where they showed things from the first movie, I was like that's so cool! I freaking hated the kids though, the older one was just bland and the little brother was stupid and annoying... I was actually hoping the little brother would die.

Also I like how some of the people here knew how the I-rex was going to die, so when it happens I was like I knew it because the people on the forums here guessed it! So good work guys.

"more teeth" is this movie, not the first movie. The first movie they talk about using current fauna's DNA to fill the gaps, which is perfectly reasonable, and in a world where we know enough about DNA and cloning to recreate a species, we also would be able to do so well enough from current species related to dinosaurs without defects.

And, since "more teeth" is from this movie, to also quote this movie "They're dinosaurs, wow enough"