Jurassic World teaser for the teaser trailer

Full trailer coming Thanksgiving. Please be good

Yeah, saw that a couple minutes ago. Almost jumped out of my chair until I realised it was a trailer to a trailer >_< Really excited for it though; JP was one of the few magical moments of my childhood.

I can't wait to see if they've actually updated the dinosaur designs to include the scientific facts that have been discovered since the 1990's and the original movies. Their most recent toy line (2009) has velociraptors completely devoid of feathers.

Yeah I don't get the idea of a trailer for a trailer either.

I'm pumped!

The little bubble car is a little odd though. I figure we'll probably get that explained more in the movie. Seems incredibly unsafe though the way it was shown. Too early to make any real judgments on it. I'm incredibly excited though. I think Chris Pratt will end up being a good choice and I like him as Star Lord. The first Jurassic Park movie is still good in today's standard and I like the Lost World but 3rd one suck ass. I just hope this new Jurassic Park movie does well next year and it will be interesting to see if people are still into Dinosaurs since there hasn't been any Dino movies like in years.

I wish they would use mechanical dinosaurs instead of CGI. Hopefully the CGI is muted (fat chance). But it is what it is.

Not happening. No feathers was already confirmed long ago. It makes sense because in the books, the dinosaur DNA was spliced with reptiles to fill in the missing DNA strands. The first film briefly mentioned this when they talked about combining frogs with dino DNA. So the reptilian look is a result of that.

The originals had CGI did it not?

Major cop out.

Yes, hopefully they lean more toward the animatronics. *crosses fingers*

I just want to see some people get eaten alive:-)

What's the point in making a trailer for a trailer? Just show the full trailer

It just hit me, we are getting a new Jurassic movie. We haven't had one in more than a decade. I'm still trying to fully realize that we are finally getting a new Jurassic movie.

From what I understand about film-making, they use a mechanical dinosaurs during filming and in post-production they cover it with light CGI to make sure it doesn't look silly from specific angles.

that's becoming a thing now for whatever reason.

on topic, Nope, Hollywood's not going to con me out of $10 anymore.

From what incredibly little was shown; the cast of the original movie looked liked fairly ordinary individuals which helped sell it. These people look like gap models.

me too

I'm fine with that. Granted, I wouldn't have a problem with them updating the dinosaurs, but it's okay if they don't. Lacking feathers still retains the consistency of the dinosaurs' image within the series. If that's a problem, the first movie (accidentally) gave an explanation in that the dinosaurs were all genetically modified with DNA from modern frogs and reptiles. I can't see anyone but the hardcore science nerds actually having a big problem with the "no feathers" thing. And to them, I'd ask why they aren't complaining that the entire premise relies on getting viable dinosaur DNA from flies which were trapped in amber (which is impossible). Seeing as how the entire premise of this world is based on a scientific impossibility, it seems weird for people to accept that and then complain about the dinosaurs not having feathers. Who gives a shit about the feathers? If that's such a dealbreaker, then you'd be complaining that the entire premise of Jurassic Park is based on faulty science. Which means that you're probably not gonna watch the movie anyway, so who cares?

That being said, I don't expect much from this movie. While I absolutely LOVE the first movie, I doubt it's gonna be easy to recapture that magic (and many people think that even goddamn Stephen Spielberg wasn't at the top of his game on that movie). I thought the first movie had a magical sense of wonder and discovery to it, that helped draw me into its world. But after that, it was just more dinosaurs eating people. Where else is there to go? It's like Alien. Much of the magic of Alien was in the sense of discovering the unknown. But once that's done, what else is there to do? James Cameron managed to squeeze one more good movie out of that franchise and that was that. Afterwards it was just Aliens killing people and people killing Aliens.

So yeah...I'd love for Jurassic World to recapture the magic of the first movie, but it's an uphill battle if for no other reason than that the premise has become so familar. Another park, more dinosaurs, I'm sure shit goes wrong again, more people get eaten by dinosaurs, more dinosaurs get killed by people. I'm not ruling the movie out entirely, but I loved Jurassic Park because at the time it felt like it was sort of treading new ground. It felt fresh. I suspect it's gonna be very hard to recapture that feeling. And without recapturing that feeling, there's a huge risk of it being just te same old shit that we've already seen before.

They're doing trailers for trailers now? That's stupid.

Anyway I didn't know there was a new Jurassic Park movie due to be out soon. Will be keeping an eye on this one.

Leaked stuff

Trailer 1

Trailer 2

Trailer 3

That third one... DAMN

I hope that they take into account that crossbreeding can generally lead to illness in animals and premature death.

One of the great things about Jurassic park was that simply than being a monster movie; it did put thought and effort into explaining shit and arguing ethically.

For instance: Hammond is portrayed as some stereotypical evil businessman a lesser movie would have. He's an idealist would good intent but: Ultimately living in a fantasy world fucking with nature. He isn't just some shitty 2d cutout.

One of the best scenes early in the movie is simply the scientists breaking out of the theater chairs and going behind the Wizards curtain of the illusion he has created.

Jurassic Park 2 lacked any of this. Which is why is kinda sucks.

Might just be the video quality or early footage but the dinosaurs looked kinda crappy...

@korvus: I think it's really early footage and we weren't even supposed to see that. The velociraptors are ripped right out of the first one.

They also had watermarks all over. They'll hopefully have cleaned it up for the actual trailer, that said the Raptors in JP, where the best looking ones in the series, so a return to the original design I personally don't see as a bad thing.

I don't mean the design I mean the movement/animation is exactly the same in that clip. Remember in the first one when the velociraptors were about to jump at the heroes right before the T-Rex came? The movement looks the exact same.

Yeah, I see what you mean. I'm wondering if it's perhaps an Easter egg to show fans that the Velociraptors are more in line with the originals in terms of behavior, because I know a lot of people who disliked how they where portrayed in JP3, the ones in the first film would never have let Grant and the others go even if they gave the Eggs back.

Not expecting much, but I hope it turns out good. Freaking LOVE the original trilogy especially the first movie. It is relieving to not see any of that human dino hybrid shit from that old art work in theeaked footage. The leaked footage in general is at least intriguing and show potential.

Is Star-Lord really teaming up with raptors? lol

Looks SO terrible.

That "depends on what they cooked" line or whatever was bad and the delivery was bad. Not that I'm expecting Shakespeare, but I will catch it at home.

Getting the guy that made that one successful indie probably wasn't the best idea.

The trailer didn't quite leave me excited. I will still go see it as soon as it comes out, but my expectations are not high.

@Master_Live: Pratt is much better than that, his delivery of every line in that trailer felt phoned in.

@Aljosa23: The trailer is out mate

They really did, seems like he was just collecting the check.

Hmmm I am curious. Not uber hyped or anything, but will likely check it out in theaters unless it gets awful ratings...

Yep, this looks exactly like I figured it would. Pretty much the same story as Jurassic Park, swap out the T. rex for a bigger dinosaur. That doesn't necessarily mean it's gonna be a bad movie, but this mostly looks like more of the same and what's new looks silly. This trailer does not do a good job of convincing me that this is a movie that I should see.

Still hyped even if the film will likely be bad lol.

I was really hoping Chris Pratt would not deliver another cringe-worthy performance...based on the trailer I guess I was expecting too much of him =/

Movie is all about Human, Raptors and T-Rex will fight against D-Rex

This is what story is about. Just like Godzilla but this time its all super safe and day light. No more dead people, no more unsafe feel, no more break out. this time its all about hunting bad D-Rex.

What you think about plot?

But can it open doors?

If they're all ladies like in the original JP maybe doors get open for her.

I can't wait to see this damn movie.

I liked the piano Jurassic theme but it feels out of place. The song made it seem like the trailer would end with people being slaughtered in a horrible way by dinosaurs but the trailer ended upbeat with the main character teaming up with velociraptors. Also, I can't wrap my head around him teaming up with velociraptors. What the hell man?

I know that they're probably going to be genetically engineered velociraptors that have been bred to be docile and trainable, or something. So, if that's the case (and I may be very wrong about this), then I guess it kind of makes sense and fits in with the scientists genetically engineering a new super-dinosaur.

Problem 1: Even if that's the case, doesn't that violate the entire horror of building a super-dinosaur? Whenever Chris Pratt's character mentions how it's such a bad idea to build a new dinosaur, the scientists can just reply, "yeah, but everyone said the raptors were uncontrollable too, and now you're teaming up with them. Even if this new dinosaur runs amok and kills everyone, give it another 20 years and we'll have that one as docile as a puppy too." The "horror" of Jurassic Park was sort of an anti-science message about playing god with forces that we don't understand. But that message sort of gets diminished when everyone said the same thing about the raptors and then we've gotten them trained in less than 20 years. That's not a "stop playing god" message, that's just a "give the product sufficient testing before releasing it" message.

Problem 2: One of the problems I have with velociraptors that have been genetically engineered to be controllable is that we still don't have komodo dragons that are engineered to be controllable. I mean, if you can do that to a goddamn velociraptor, then surely we can engineer goddamn komodo dragons to be as lovable as a dog. But there's a reason why we don't have rich people replacing their watch dogs with watch komodo dragons. Partly because taming them like that is sort of impossible. But more importantly, even if it is possible, what the hell is the incentive to do it? Why would the new Jurassic Park waste their money doing that? For security reasons? That would be stupid. BUY MORE GUNS. But hey, maybe they did it for the express purpose of allowing human/dinosaur shows in the same way that people liked to watch Siegfried and Roy play with Tigers. I can maybe kind of get that with the amusement park angle, but then isn't there the big nagging reminder that Roy actually got mauled by a Tiger during one of their shows. And it would be a sort of big concern if the investors of Jurassic World wasted billions of dollars funding the park, only to have it all go to shit because one day during a performance with a packed audience, the velociraptors suddenly decide to tear Chris Pratt to pieces and eat his intestines in front of a bunch of kids. That kind of publicity would not be very good for business.

Still, I can maybe sort of kind of see how they might justify taming the raptors. It would require a huge stretch of the imagination, but for the sake of argument let me buy into that.

The bigger issue here is the new super-dinosaur. What the hell is the possible incentive for THAT? It sure as hell isn't for the audience to gawk at. Seeing as how tourists go to Jurassic Park/Jurassic world to see dinosaurs, who the hell wants to go watch a dinosaur that never even existed? That's not a dinosaur, that's just some shit that someone cooked up in a lab. I mean, in the world of Jurassic World, hypothetically people can genetically engineer six-legged lions with two heads. Still, tourists aren't going to go pay to see that shit. Tourists pay to see lions, and that shit ain't a lion. It's an abomination.

So...the new dinosaur isn't a tourist attraction. If that's the case, why the hell does it even exist? I'll even accept the scientists trying to create a new dinosaur just to see if they could, but can't they do that perfectly well without making a huge-ass dinosaur that they can't control? And even if they fucked up and ACCIDENTALLY made a super-dinosaur that they couldn't handle, they still raised it from a goddamn embryo. As soon as they saw that it was too big and too violent for whatever purposes they had, then they had years to shoot it in the head, declare their experiment a failure, and start over again.

Seriously, people are harping on Chris Pratt teaming up with the velociraptors too much. While I agree that seems stupid, that is the smaller of the problems here. The bigger problem is the super-dinosaur that the trailer makes out to be the big bad monster of the movie. What the hell incentive is there to make that thing at all, seeing as how it isn't even a real dinosaur and therefore doesn't belong in an amusement park where the point is to watch dinosaurs? And even if that thing was intended to be something else and just ended up a horrible uncontrollable monster by accident, what is the incentive for letting it get that big instead of killing it when it was a baby or at least relocating it before opening the park for business?

I'm pretty excited.

Exotic keepers of animals have and do crossbreed tigers and lions (as well as other creatures) specifically as a a tourist attraction.

So (ignoring the fact it's a fucking dinosaur) that concept is quite grounded in reality.

@uninspiredcup said:

@MrGeezer said:

The bigger issue here is the new super-dinosaur. What the hell is the possible incentive for THAT? It sure as hell isn't for the audience to gawk at. Seeing as how tourists go to Jurassic Park/Jurassic world to see dinosaurs, who the hell wants to go watch a dinosaur that never even existed? That's not a dinosaur, that's just some shit that someone cooked up in a lab. I mean, in the world of Jurassic World, hypothetically people can genetically engineer six-legged lions with two heads. Still, tourists aren't going to go pay to see that shit. Tourists pay to see lions, and that shit ain't a lion. It's an abomination.

Exotic keepers of animals have and do crossbreed tigers and lions (as well as other creatures) specifically as a a tourist attraction.

So (ignoring the fact it's a fucking dinosaur) that concept is quite grounded in reality.

I'll have to research ligers a bit more, but I suspect that millions of dollars weren't invested in their creation for the sole purpose of being a tourist attraction. And furthermore, that if they were the result of a huge investment made solely to increase tourism, that they'd be the primary attraction and not something that apparently is kept hidden or is a side attraction (as the Jurassic World trailer seems to indicate).