Jurassic World

Sure, every time we are to blame, but if the movies never provide a valuable alternative (and it seems like nothing can stop the dinosaurs, like people with bullets should have), the audience will logically conclude this is time to cut your losses and run.

To be fair, guns pretty much are the ultimate put-down. Get a big enough rifle and you can put down a rampaging elephant, which is tougher than most dinosaurs would be. That's not even counting high speed weapons like miniguns, and heavy weapons that come in man portable or bigger sizes. A single tank would have done the job for the entire movie. Warships firing their own cannons would have leveled the whole island and everything on it.

Face it, action movies that don't just roll in heavy weapons have to be based entirely on either stupidity or law abidance, just because military grade gear can take out anything short of a natural disaster. That's why countries use such things in the first place.

You know, I wonder if there were any unique species that were on Isla Nublar and Sorna that went extinct because InGen brought the dinosaurs back. I know Jurassic Park: The Game mentioned how there was actually a tribe of natives that lived on Nublar and InGen forcibly removed the entire population before they started construction, so there were major ethical concerns with building the park on an island in the first place.

Heavy weapons aren't easy to come by if you aren't a government. InGen does not own tanks.

But, fun fact, that was actually a plot point in the first novel. One of the points of contention with Hammond was that he refused to allow heavy weapons on his island for fear that they might damage his expensive animals. Muldoon was able to convince him to allow one heavy weapon, which wound up being the RPG he would use later in the book, but everything else was just worthless peashooters that provided only the illusion of safety.

It never comes up in the movie, largely because Muldoon winds up heavily demoted in his role and then unceremoniously killed off, but it's not like the film's guns work any better. Jurassic World, on the other hand, as able to provide a sort of Spiritual Successor to this plot point in the form of the security team being sent after the iRex with nonlethals.

And then there's The Lost World having Nick steal the bullets out of Roland's gun, because Nick and Sarah are the worst people in the film and literally every single death that occurs in the movie is their fault.

edited 13th Dec '17 3:15:56 PM by TobiasDrake

They did not even have actual guns. Besides Muldoon's toy, they had a selection of tranquilizers, nets, bolas, cattleprods, and kitchen cutlery. No one even knew about the stock of gas grenades in a locked room, because apparently Arnold and Hammond never bothered to inform anyone.

In the book the T Rex was more of a stalker

Probably she didn't have much better to do

did the T Rex get a restraining order at least?

She died horribly when the island was firebombed?

Or maybe Muldoon exploded her head? It's been a while

One of them was tranqed, took an hour to feel it, and drowned in a river, while the other died in the firebombing.

"Heavy weapons aren't easy to come by if you aren't a government. In Gen does not own tanks."

No, but they had helicopters mounting miniguns. After they went for lethal weapons, it should have been game over. Even if they didn't have tanks, they sure as fuck had jeeps. Just mount one of those miniguns on a jeep and Irex would have been toast. Should have been toast from the copters but movie logic hates real life with a burning passion to the point even the movies based on real life usually get shit wrong.

Probably related to Dan Olson's prior claim that the I. rex is treated with rules-less invincibility.

Yup, seems like it. Not sure how I feel about the human thing. Honestly, I'm getting sick of Hollywood drudging up old baggage and cramming new shit inside it. We didn't need Jurassic World. Give us a new franchise with dinosaurs in it. Fuck, if Jurassic Park hadn't been involved in this at all, I would have been fine with the very earliest premises of bionic dinosaurs as military super weapons, or a human dino hybrid. But that's NOT Jurassic Park. It does match up with the theme of corporate short-sightedness that the books were going for, but you're not competing with the books in this. You're competing with the movies. And the movies all centered on the idea of a park, where the dinosaurs are living creatures being used for profit.

A dinosaur based super weapon belongs in its own franchise with that built in as the premise. It's a fine premise. It's not a JP premise. If they wanted it to be a JP premise, then it really needed to be hinted at in Lost World and used in JP 3, not kept completely off the screen until now.

ETA: No, I take that back. It doesn't match the books at all, and doesn't belong in JP. In Gen's problem was short sightedness, but not malice. They honestly thought there was nothing wrong and that the animals weren't going to get loose and kill people the way they did. Going from that to super weapon, especially after Muldoon used a rocket launcher to kill them, would be completely unfounded in this series. Make another and have that be the premise, and I'll judge whether it's watchable on who you got for it, and how bumpy production was. You know, like every other film out there.

edited 13th Dec '17 6:49:08 PM by Journeyman

To be fair, military contractors don't think there's anything wrong with what they do either. They don't wake up every morning and go, "Time for another day of contributing to the wholesale death and destruction of the human species. Muwahahaha, the screams of helpless victims shall sing in my dreams tonight."

They wake up and go, "Man, it's great to make stuff that keeps our soldiers safe when they're out in the field. I wonder how many lives my latest creation is going to save?" They design more efficient killing implements with the intended purpose that those implements will eliminate "Bad Guys" efficiently, reducing the risk to the lives of "Good Guys". Even Hoskins, douche as he was, talks about how weaponizing the raptors is a way to reduce casualties.

There is nothing off-theme about exploring this in Jurassic Park; the military-industrial complex is just a new form of corporate bullshit for Jurassic Park to tackle with horrifying dinosaur-based consequences. Wherever there is an asshole in a suit making short-sighted decisions, Jurassic Park is happy to bring the raptors.

edited 13th Dec '17 10:50:31 PM by TobiasDrake

I think what I was reacting to is that it's a stretch going from "If I keep these things in their cages on display they won't kill any humans at all" to "If we keep these things under control, they'll only kill the right humans!" Hammond from the books probably would have been okay with that, if he saw a profit in it. Hammond from the movies would have been appalled at the very notion, given he wanted to do something even his grandkids could enjoy.

What child wouldn't enjoy hunting humans for sport from the back of their laser-Achillobator.

edited 14th Dec '17 5:39:16 AM by Unsung

Hammond died offscreen before Jurassic World even opened, and InGen was already telling him where to shove his opinion as early as The Lost World. Film Hammond wouldn't have agreed with militarizing the dinosaurs, but Film Hammond's opinions have not been relevant to the fate of the dinosaurs for literally decades in-universe.

Heck Masrani talking about "finishing Hammond's vision" showed that he didn't understand Hammond much. The whole point of the end of JP was that Hammond realized that the park wouldn't work, and gave up on it. It's probably why he got to live in the film. He learned his lesson whereas his book counterpart never did and so died a karmic death.

JW, either forgot that detail or ignored it.

Could that part be talking about Film Hammond's "original vision" of what the park would be like instead of what Film Hammond eventually realized about his park?

Masrani probably convinced Hammond that if he did A, B, and C, then a restarted park could actually work. Revitalized the old man's dream and got Hammond's blessings.

Which is awkward because he learns it abruptly offscreen. We're never actually shown his journey to realizing that he was in the wrong; he just continues stubbornly being wrong until the last five minutes of the film, where he spontaneously declares that he's totally against the park now 'cause of reasons.

We get plenty of scenes of him being wrong so various members of the cast can tell him where to shove it, but he never actually develops from these discussions. No admissions of, "Maybe you're right," or statements that indicate he's taking what the others are saying under consideration. He's just abruptly unf*cked at the end so the film can be over.

"This park would hypothetically be workable if I didn't try to automate everything or cut corners and took the time to understand these animals but that's hard work so fuck that. The dream is dead, everyone"

edited 14th Dec '17 12:12:21 PM by Bocaj

The dream is dead. [theme music plays]

Both partly true and partly not. Thousands of dinosaur species had their chance, gradually dying out or evolving into new forms once their present ones were no longer suitable to the environment. A fraction of those were then wiped out by meteor before it could be determined how adaptable their species is.

Therefore, no one can disprove that T. rex is the pinnacle of all evolution.

edited 15th Dec '17 8:57:42 AM by Tuckerscreator

It's her◊ world. We just live in it.

She's the sand guardian, guardian of the sand?