JohnnyGossamer Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I fall somewhere in between you both. But, uh, technically the his "lady friend" could've done the same while he was elsewhere. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 (edited) She earns her redemption because you are mistaken as to what she needs to be redeemed from. It's not that she's a cold hearted bitch but that to her, the dinosaurs are numbers on a spreadsheet rather than living beings. She didn't respect them. Even her biggest problem was putting business ahead of everything including family. Yes, exactly. Which fits perfectly with my suggestion. The other stuff you say JJ does is piddly stuff. It's not connected to anything, needless of all his character. And frankly, there's never much actual danger set up in the mission control center either. Ugh, I hate his character so much. Maybe D'Onofrio could've shot him. edit: I realize my reaction to this is basically like a slasher movie. Only I didn't get the satisfaction of watching all the dumb people die. Edited June 22, 2015 by Telemachos 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted June 22, 2015 Community Manager Share Posted June 22, 2015 Yes, exactly. Which fits perfectly with my suggestion. The other stuff you say JJ does is piddly stuff. It's not connected to anything, needless of all his character. And frankly, there's never much actual danger set up in the mission control center either. Ugh, I hate his character so much. Maybe D'Onofrio could've shot him. edit: I realize my reaction to this is basically like a slasher movie. Only I didn't get the satisfaction of watching all the dumb people die. And you do realize that by firing him, you'd actually spend more time with him? Especially if you think having him open the padlock would have made for a better moment if they were reconnecting. Cause you'd have to follow what he's doing, why he decides to go back to mission control, etc. I mean if you dislike the character/actor that much then keeping him contained to the mission control scenes is better for you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claire of Themyscira Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 DEAD @ y'all being annoying as fuck. Though I do wish the lady that he tried to kiss played a role closer to his size. I love her. I think she's adorable and funny, and I was so happy to see someone from OITNB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 And you do realize that by firing him, you'd actually spend more time with him? Especially if you think having him open the padlock would have made for a better moment if they were reconnecting. Cause you'd have to follow what he's doing, why he decides to go back to mission control, etc. I mean if you dislike the character/actor that much then keeping him contained to the mission control scenes is better for you. I disliked him because within 10 seconds I knew everything about the character and I hated his generic-ness. If they'd done something along the lines of what I've been spitballing, then it's highly likely I would've been fine with him as a character. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Everything Tele just said is bullshit. (Insert My Cousin vinny gif) I'm with Vinny and Baumer on this one. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted June 22, 2015 Community Manager Share Posted June 22, 2015 You didn't like JJ'S character because he was generic and you knew who he was in ten seconds? Which is the same of most characters in this movie...and Mad Max: Fury Road. I know you disliked the movie and found it boring but come on. I doubt you would have liked it better if the same character was in the crowd. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyGossamer Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 (edited) I'm with Vinny and Baumer on this one. I'd have preferred Pesci in D'Onofrio's role. Not just Pesci but Pesci in full-on Gambini garb. D'Onofrio's character was so hysterically redundant and dumb that Pesci glaring at Blue like the picture below would've been ideal here. "How lawng does it take to train a raptah?" Edited June 22, 2015 by JohnnyGossamer 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted June 22, 2015 Community Manager Share Posted June 22, 2015 By the way I have a theory. Tele what did you think about the scene where the little kid opens the hotel room curtains and the jurassic park theme crescendos? I feel like that's a pivotal scene in the movie. I feel like that's the scene that determines whether you are in the movie or out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyGossamer Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 By the way I have a theory. Tele what did you think about the scene where the little kid opens the hotel room curtains and the jurassic park theme crescendos? I feel like that's a pivotal scene in the movie. I feel like that's the scene that determines whether you are in the movie or out. Wasn't that scene supposed to be satirical? As in, this time the bloated, overbearing, sponsored out theme park, not the dinos, are the draw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted June 22, 2015 Community Manager Share Posted June 22, 2015 Wasn't that scene supposed to be satirical? As in, this time the bloated, overbearing, sponsored out theme park, not the dinos, are the draw. I think your mileage may vary on how satirical it is but doesn't that in itself tell you everything you need to know about the movie as an audience member? And thus whether you step on board or not? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashrendar44 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Wasn't that scene supposed to be satirical? As in, this time the bloated, overbearing, sponsored out theme park, not the dinos, are the draw. People are genuinely moved by the scene (thanks to nostalgia-driven Williams powerful cue) so if that was the intent, the makers totally failed at it. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redfirebird2008 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 I'd have preferred Pesci in D'Onofrio's role. Not just Pesci but Pesci in full-on Gambini garb. D'Onofrio's character was so hysterically redundant and dumb that Pesci glaring at Blue like the picture below would've been ideal here. "How lawng does it take to train a raptah?" Joe Pesci in that movie would have been glorious. Yet another callback to 90's nostalgia. Home Alone and Home Alone 2 were damn near as big as JP1 for me and my sister. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 You didn't like JJ'S character because he was generic and you knew who he was in ten seconds? Which is the same of most characters in this movie...and Mad Max: Fury Road. I know you disliked the movie and found it boring but come on. I doubt you would have liked it better if the same character was in the crowd. At least he would've done something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 (edited) By the way I have a theory. Tele what did you think about the scene where the little kid opens the hotel room curtains and the jurassic park theme crescendos? I feel like that's a pivotal scene in the movie. I feel like that's the scene that determines whether you are in the movie or out. It was lousy. The movie took the wrong perspective. edit: I should explain a bit. The perspective that the kid loves dinosaurs and wants to see them isn't wrong. That's great. But that's not the perspective the movie takes. Instead, what's presented is that the theme park is amazing and awesome and wonderful. But that's categorically the opposite perspective of Crichton, Grant, Malcolm, etc... and in fact, it's a very corporate sensibility. In fact, the movie hammers home this point by repeating using the main Jurassic Park them not for the dinosaurs, but for the theme park rides and exhibits. But at the same time, it tries to have the opposite approach too, by having a couple of characters like Lowery mutter about how bad corporatism is, or that there might be trouble playing God. JW is the movie Hammond would've made. Not even that. It's the movie his son from TLW would've made. Edited June 22, 2015 by Telemachos 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChD Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 To be honest, despite enjoying this movie a lot, I still consider the script was pretty weak and that they could've done a lot to it. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claire of Themyscira Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 That I agree with. For starters, I would have made some different casting decisions, and I would have changed either one or both brothers to girls. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Community Manager Water Bottle Posted June 22, 2015 Community Manager Share Posted June 22, 2015 By the way I have a theory. Tele what did you think about the scene where the little kid opens the hotel room curtains and the jurassic park theme crescendos? I feel like that's a pivotal scene in the movie. I feel like that's the scene that determines whether you are in the movie or out. It was lousy. The movie took the wrong perspective. edit: I should explain a bit. The perspective that the kid loves dinosaurs and wants to see them isn't wrong. That's great. But that's not the perspective the movie takes. Instead, what's presented is that the theme park is amazing and awesome and wonderful. But that's categorically the opposite perspective of Crichton, Grant, Malcolm, etc... and in fact, it's a very corporate sensibility. In fact, the movie hammers home this point by repeating using the main Jurassic Park them not for the dinosaurs, but for the theme park rides and exhibits. But at the same time, it tries to have the opposite approach too, by having a couple of characters like Lowery mutter about how bad corporatism is, or that there might be trouble playing God. JW is the movie Hammond would've made. Not even that. It's the movie his son from TLW would've made. You mean the movie Hammond and kid would have made up until the point where hubris catches up to the park and people die? I'll just say that I think my theory holds. At that point, you were out of the movie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Old Tele Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 You mean the movie Hammond and kid would have made up until the point where hubris catches up to the park and people die? I'll just say that I think my theory holds. At that point, you were out of the movie. I was out of the movie early, yes. It and me didn't mesh from practically the get-go. But it took awhile for me to actively get annoyed by it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Killimano3 Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 That I agree with. For starters, I would have made some different casting decisions, and I would have changed either one or both brothers to girls. woulda been a little weird considering their whole plot arc is about bonding as brothers 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
