Jurassic World

It feels to me the current trilogy is trying to go back to the mad science exploit of genetics that had larger focus on the first book (and therefore more plot potential for conflict), and to a lesser extent (for the moment) of the ramifications of the dinos as part of a larger ecosystem (something the books explored more prominently while setting up their respective plots).

Jurassic World Three will probably have a backstory of more failed attempts to cash grab dinos until we're in a Planet of the Apes scenario and the dinos now run amok in the ecosystem. Now Claire and Owen regret even trying to save the creatures, Maise's hated the world over for not just letting them die, and we've gotta follow the trio as they stop In Gen from trying, yet again, and risking the destruction of some of the last human settlements on the planet.

I'm only half joking there. If that's not the plot, it'll probably be something close. Like finding an old In Gen lab and finding out there's a disease or toxin you can spread that only kills dinosaurs.

That sounds more like the plot to Jurrasic Park 7 than 6.

Like, I think we're another film between the end of Fallen Kingdom and dinosaurs dominating the North American ecosystem.

It seems like the next plot point is that the genomes are out now. Any company could clone dinosaurs now.

I expect the next film will be dealing with the wealthy cloning dinosaurs as pets or work animals.

Rexy and Blue are absolutely going to turn up of course.

I imagine a major factor would be the californian population vastly underestimating how dangerous these invasive species are. Mostly because the californian elite own some and don't want them bring taken away.

Maybe the call to adventure is that there's been word of raptor killings so Claire, Owen and the gang try to locate blue before she leads to more deaths, but the situation turns out to be much deeper than that.

"Okay so remember how raptors were changing genders to reproduce in the original park? Yeah so there's this thing called parthenogenesis..."

That would work. But keep in mind that Henry Wu has all the genomes and anyone who employs him can clone any dinosaur they like.

Yeah, Komodo Dragons use it when there's a lack of males. It's a female self-fertilizing to create male offspring. I don't know what other species do it.

Phoenixes apparently

Hah!

Goes without saying. The fire IS their version of parthenogenesis, after all. They're like certain trees. Sometimes it takes fire to hatch seeds/eggs.

Also X-Men joke

Did not know that. :P

You know, for those who expressed support for cuddly raptors earlier, you could have some heartwarming "Owen cuddling with the Raptor Squad" in It's not the Raptor DNA and The Scaly Raptor. The latter has the extra plus of giving Owen and said Raptor Squad a way to communicate, allowing the latter to answer several questions that the former has about them (from their proneness to rebellious behavior and potentially fatal aggression towards him as they grew up, to siding with the Indominus during the movie's events). Spoiler for the second question: The Indominus threatened to kill Owen and Barry if the raptors didn't follow its commands... and then broke its word when it ordered them to attack Owen and co. in the plaza.

Just saw Fallen Kingdom. I actually liked it more than the first of the new trilogy, which I didn't expect. Probably helps that a lot of character stuff that bugged me wasn't in this one.

Anyhow, the Indoraptor is now my son. What do you mean this good boy could kill me?!

I actually see Indoraptor as sort of a dino-Joker. Got a twisted, black sense of humour but still a sadistic, murderous jackass.

In a general sense I liked a lot more of the individual themes that show up in this film, but as a whole it doesn't really work as a movie the same way Jurassic World did. The first film had a very clear threat and you understood that the movie will be over when the Indominus was killed. This film loses track of what the character's goals are, and a number of scenes simply reset to get everyone to a particular set-piece (most notably the entire Outrun the Fireball sequence leading into the cliff jump, and then Maisie hiding in her bed from the Indorapter).

The direction was also all over the place, with a significantly more silly tone in a number of scenes like Claire's boisterous laugh when Owen claims he left her (she may have done it to further tease Owen, but even that counts), Owen's limbs slowly regaining feeling as the lava flow inches towards him and the bald ramming dinosaur making the wealthy elite crowd fling around like it was Looney Tunes. As stated several times, the villains are so cartoonishly Only in It for the Money evil that it is directly at odds with the more Well-Intentioned Extremist style the franchise has established (the "so busy wondering if you could that you never stopped to wonder if you should" type).

All that said, Pratt and Howard do well anchoring the movie. There is a Sequel Reset on their relationship, but it's clear both are different people after the events of the first film (Claire is much better with empathy, Owen looks lost and trying to rebuild his life). The sidekicks are better fleshed out, even if only superficially, and they fill logical roles in the story instead of just being comic relief or have Nominal Importance before being killed.

I liked the film but it did feel like the script was written around a few set pieces and the rest was just getting people into place for those scenes. Lockwood could be completely removed without the plot changing, the reveal about Maisie was entirely pointless, her role would be exactly the same if she really WAS the granddaughter.

Alternate Brachiosaur scene (parody).

That was great. XD

Something that confuses me is why the hell does every shady group want to use uncontrollable monsters that are expensive to house and feed instead of just hiring humans who are cheaper to provide for and less likely to disembowel you the second they get the chance.

Heh, that reminds me.

So you can sic Indoraptor by pointing at a target with a laser attached to a rifle.

That scene made me wonder: Wouldn't it cheaper, faster, accurate, and more reliable to...you know, just shoot with that rifle?

It would. But to these gangster types it's not about cheap and reliable, it's about making a statement and increasing the fear factor: cross us, get in our way and you (or your loved ones) won't just get shot... they'll be savaged by a murderous sadistic dino.

Just goes to show ya that humanity is simultaneously the smartest and dumbest species of the planet.

Actually, both Indoraptor and I-Rex are developed for battlefield.

No sane military force would ever use that, not because of ethical or safety reasons, but because how much of time and money it takes to maintain those.

For causing terror, a single Indoraptor would be able to pay for nearly a hundred, or even a thousand depending on what kind of people. THAT would do both the display of power and actual job much better.

I'm reminded of playing Halo 5 where you have squad commands over your AI teammates, and finding that pointing them to target a specific enemy is actually rather impractical when you have your own gun and are already aiming at said enemy anyway.

To play the Devil's Advocate, I suppose if the enemy you're pointing at is something that wouldn't go down in one or several rifle rounds, it might be effective to sic what must be at least 2,000 lbs/900 kg of murderous meat on it.

Also, this is something that I said about I-Rex and the raptors as well: creatures like that would've been devastatingly effective in wars like the Vietnam War, ones that take place in heavily forested areas.

Agreed on the heavily forested areas. Fact is, dinosaurs like this are best used as an area denial weapon. Saturate an area with enough packs of them, and the enemy won't be able to make it through. It's like the stories you here of soldiers going through a jungle, and getting massacred by the crocodiles hiding in the river that runs through it. That being said, landmines are probably cheaper, and while they are a pervasive, persistent threat for decades after, a fully functioning pack of raptors is even worse. A landmine is a threat if you step on it. A raptor is a threat if it so much as smells you and goes on the hunt.

Lesson to take from this: A movie is just a movie. It's not meant to educate, only to entertain. Don't think too hard on it, or you'll probably keep cursing the incompetents in Hollywood. Reality doesn't usually make much of a movie. There's only a relative handful of real life events that make good movie fodder, and even then, the movies vastly exaggerate most of them anyway.