Jurassic World | Page 24 | Inside Universal Forums

Jurassic World

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
to be fair, the divorce issues acted as an anchor. Big brother being nice to younger brother and actually brought the lost aunt all together which made several scenes near the end perfect.

Yeah, ok, but it's mentioned once and then dropped. It was thrown out there in a scene to make us care more about the boys, and then the film ends with no further discussion of it. It just needed a bit more, like a conclusion. I'm in the minority of people who didn't have an issue with the boys from the start. I enjoyed watching all the characters in the film, for whatever reason, and I agree that the boys needed SOME story, but the divorce just seemed like an attempt to give them some depth for one scene, and then ignored for the rest of the film.
 
  • Like
Reactions: greendude33
There's so many ways they could've gone besides the military nonsense. Trevorrow kept saying his inspiration was the thought of nobody being impressed by dinosaurs anymore and how lack of respect leads to more incidents. He said that it was about teens being on their phones and not paying attention to the incredible spectacle in front of them. But this isn't really what we saw in the film.

Personally, I thought it would've been wacky fun to have some sort of extreme PETAesque revolutionaries take down JW instead of the military weaponizing dinos. Perhaps some "Malcom"ites who blow his anti-JP issues to the extreme.
 
Yeah, ok, but it's mentioned once and then dropped. It was thrown out there in a scene to make us care more about the boys, and then the film ends with no further discussion of it. It just needed a bit more, like a conclusion. I'm in the minority of people who didn't have an issue with the boys from the start. I enjoyed watching all the characters in the film, for whatever reason, and I agree that the boys needed SOME story, but the divorce just seemed like an attempt to give them some depth for one scene, and then ignored for the rest of the film.
But the movie isn't about a divorce and the parents were only in 3 scenes (arguably two). So touching on the divorce issue as an anchor for the brothers was genius. It created a solution from a problem which already had a solution. Thus resulting in family issues being a problem and solution in the movie. Had the parents not being getting a divorce , neither brother would have tried as hard as they did to look out for each other.
 
The kids weren't annoying but you could basically remove them from the film and it would still make sense. Other than the minor diversion to the Discovery Center (which was awesome but didn't have a huge payoff), they really served no purpose.
 
Yeah, ok, but it's mentioned once and then dropped. It was thrown out there in a scene to make us care more about the boys, and then the film ends with no further discussion of it. It just needed a bit more, like a conclusion. I'm in the minority of people who didn't have an issue with the boys from the start. I enjoyed watching all the characters in the film, for whatever reason, and I agree that the boys needed SOME story, but the divorce just seemed like an attempt to give them some depth for one scene, and then ignored for the rest of the film.

I would rather the divorce was mentioned then dropped... It would have been AWFUL had the parents decided to reconcile at the end and that the turmoil had brought them closer together.... EEF that sh*t that would have been more unrealistic than the dinosaurs.
I also felt like the kids WERE annoying.. the teenage one was straight out of the "how to write a moody teenager" book and the younger one needs a hair cut.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IAmFloridaBorn
I would rather the divorce was mentioned then dropped... It would have been AWFUL had the parents decided to reconcile at the end and that the turmoil had brought them closer together.... EEF that sh*t that would have been more unrealistic than the dinosaurs.

Pretty sure the implication at the end of the film was that they indeed were on the road to reconciliation. At least it was left open-ended.
 
Please tell me there's an equivalent to John Hammond in the real world that will make Jurassic Park/World a reality when they find dino DNA.

About 2-3 years ago I remembered reading an article that made its way into TV news how an Austrailian entrepreneur wanted to build a real Jurassic Park, but scientists told him that it was impossible to do it from carbon dating because there's nothing left to work from over a certain thousands of years.
 
About 2-3 years ago I remembered reading an article that made its way into TV news how an Austrailian entrepreneur wanted to build a real Jurassic Park, but scientists told him that it was impossible to do it from carbon dating because there's nothing left to work from over a certain thousands of years.

Please read the article I posted above...
 
It's a good article! I wasn't trying to confirm or deny if it is possible, I was just saying that there was a guy a few years ago that wanted to "play John Hammond" and start a park and how scientists shot him down :wave:

Ah... I understand now. Yeah. We are a long time from that, even if they find a T-Rex rib-eye fresh on the plate tomorrow. We still have the dodo waiting in the wings even though we have viable DNA. ;)
 
Some of you with kids might be interested in this. This Saturday Toys R Us is giving away little Lego JW entry gate for free.

In-Store Events, Lego, Disney Infinity, Crayola, Fun for Kids at Toys"R"Us

logo_combo.jpg


Get ready for colossal fun!
Sat., June 20, 12-2pm
at ANY Toys"R"Us store

Keep the dinosaurs INSIDE the park when you come in store to Make & Take a FREE Mini LEGO® Jurassic World Gate!