Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why are there no good dinosaur films?

briannazigler.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 485 posts

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#371

Post by throw0101d »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #230
pferde wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Matrix 4 did not do much of anything with, well, anything. Maybe except for the meta-commentary in the first act where the lead character is hesitant to make a pointless sequel to a popular franchise, but is forced to by his corporate abusers.

The Wachowskis weren't forced to, they, as humans, have the power to say "nu-uh". But I suppose they were made an offer they couldn't refuse. Or worse: WB owned the franchise and were going to make a sequel with or without them (or the actors). I'm sure the franchise will get a "hard" reboot at some point.

> But I suppose they were made an offer they couldn't refuse.

"I have never seen [Jaws: The Revenge], but by all accounts it was terrible. However, I have seen the house that it built, and it is terrific."

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Caine#Personal_life

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#372

Post by aimor »

conductr wrote: post #22

My son is a dinosaur enthusiast to say the least. At some point, well into his accumulation of Dino facts we read an old book I had as a kid (mid 80s) and the book says all kinds of weird stuff I forget but abruptly ends with “they went extinct and we may never know how” and my son (age 4 at the time) is at a loss for words, “it was a asteroid dad, what dummy wrote this book?” For weeks he’d randomly look at me, “hey…

When I was a kid I loved "Dinosaur Time" by Peggy Parish (and illustrated by Arnold Lobel). Originally published in 1974 it ends, "Dinosaurs lived everywhere for a long time. Then they died. Nobody knows why. But once it was their world. It was Dinosaur Time."

There was a revision to the book (not sure the date) with changes to the text and an expanded author's note at the end that talks about the new things we understand about dinosaurs including how Brachiosaurus are no longer believed to have spent their time in water to support their weight and how it's now believed an asteroid killed off the dinosaurs.

Original: https://archive.org/details/dinosaurtime00pari

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#373

Post by gdbsjjdn »

GMoromisato wrote: post #94

The Alien, Terminator, and Matrix franchises have similar problems. Aliens successfully changed genres, from horror to action. But subsequent movies could never recapture the primal horror of the original or the fun action of the second. It's almost like there are only two local optima in the Alien movie universe and Alien + Aliens took them both. Terminator is the same. The first movie was a perfect sci-fi action mo…

As something of an Alien fangirl 3 and 4 are more failures from a production standpoint than from a creative one. If you look at all the rejected pitches for Alien 3 there's a lot of interesting ideas which were never explored and a lot of studio fuckery in the final cut. I don't think the Fincher cut is amazing but I think it proves that there could be another excellent Alien movie.

Alien: Resurrection is plotted terribly and has all the shitty Joss Whedonisms you expect, but there's something undeniable about Winona, Sigourney and Ron Perlman in the grungy space aesthetic. The idea of Ripley as an Alien hybrid who is simultaneously attached to and repulsed by the Xenomorphs is interesting. Unfortunately they saddled the movie with a French director who couldn't speak English (and Joss Whedon, who arguably shouldn't speak at all).

The Terminator franchise is definitely more boxed-in: there's a core narrative about an important person who changes the world. Everyone else lives in contemporary LA, and the post-apocalyptic future is pretty boring.

The Animatrix anthology shows you can do lots in the Matrix world without needing the core characters. The themes and world-building could support a show like Cyberpunk: Edgerunners which is only tangentially related to the movies.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#375

Post by throw0101d »

biofox wrote: post #331
GMoromisato wrote: post #94

The Alien, Terminator, and Matrix franchises have similar problems. Aliens successfully changed genres, from horror to action. But subsequent movies could never recapture the primal horror of the original or the fun action of the second. It's almost like there are only two local optima in the Alien movie universe and Alien + Aliens took them both. Terminator is the same. The first movie was a perfect sci-fi action mo…

Similarly, in the Star Trek universe, the original films captured all of the local optima: Wrath of Khan - Star Trek does a Shakespearian tragedy. The Voyage Home - Star Trek does a family-friendly time-travel romp. The Undiscovered Country - Star Trek does political allegory. And just like The Matrix, later films do not exist.

Don't forget Galaxy Quest.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#377

Post by dmonitor »

Spooky23 wrote: post #93
mpalmer wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This applies to most modern scripts. Writers/studios have largely decided people don't care about detailed, reasoned-out worlds with unspoken "show-don't-tell" internal logic. Are they wrong? I shudder to consider. Shows like Better Call Saul and Andor are the most recent high-profile counter-examples. So detailed and lived-in, because the writers wanted to ask interesting questions: How does the Empire do what it do…

Andor succeeded despite the bureaucracy porn. Good stories are universal. You need to care about the protagonists. The exposition is important, but doesn’t drive success. The best example of that is the original Star Wars. Contrast Star Wars to Kurosawa’s The Hidden Fortress — which inspired many aspects of Star Wars. Essentially the same story with different framing. Both are still excellent films. Shitty sequels or…

A big reason BoBF is so bad is because the exposition it focuses on is fucking lame as hell. It was also contradictory to the character's premise, a bounty hunting nomad deciding to settle down and become crime lord of bumfuck nowhere is the opposite of what his character arc should be.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#378

Post by saalweachter »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #359
wmeredith wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except diesel doesn't explode like that. (I don't know what's wrong with me that I can't just enjoy movies.)

It’s computer world diesel. The swapped out for kerosine for efficiency, and the tank was 1/3rd full with a ton of high pressure vapor. Diesel doesn’t “explode”, but it can deflagrate very quickly with the right vapor conditions.

Alternatively, we've seen them do things like replace all the doors and windows in a building with bricks when no one's looking.

Maybe they loaded the truck up with a variety of explosives as it was driving down the highway.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#379

Post by nicce »

marcosdumay wrote: post #341
joshmarinacci wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Finding the impact crater pretty much cemented it. It absolutely happened. The remaining questions are around if the impact was enough to trigger the extinction on its own or if other factors compounded the problem.

> The remaining questions are around if the impact was enough to trigger the extinction Well, in the sense that we can never be sure of anything, yeah. But it not being enough is a really extraordinary idea.

I believe the main question here is that whether they were doomed without asteroid regardless, and in that sense we can’t blame asteroid alone or primarily.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#380

Post by gota »

gdbsjjdn wrote: post #373
GMoromisato wrote: post #94

The Alien, Terminator, and Matrix franchises have similar problems. Aliens successfully changed genres, from horror to action. But subsequent movies could never recapture the primal horror of the original or the fun action of the second. It's almost like there are only two local optima in the Alien movie universe and Alien + Aliens took them both. Terminator is the same. The first movie was a perfect sci-fi action mo…

As something of an Alien fangirl 3 and 4 are more failures from a production standpoint than from a creative one. If you look at all the rejected pitches for Alien 3 there's a lot of interesting ideas which were never explored and a lot of studio fuckery in the final cut. I don't think the Fincher cut is amazing but I think it proves that there could be another excellent Alien movie. Alien: Resurrection is plotted te…

Edit: as check wikipedia to see what he has worked on I see there is a section about a controversy and I realize the parent post may mean something about a moral characteristic of Joss Whedon, not his capability as a creator.

> Joss Whedon, who arguably shouldn't speak at all

Please argue. Isn't he a succesfull writer/director/showrunner?

Seems like he is one of the people able to "making the archetypes of blockbuster films into fun, likable people" (the core argument of the article), as evidenced by the fan following of Buffy, success of the first Avengers movie, etc.

It is possible, if not likely, that the failings of one or more of his projects are not his fault (as we have evidence he is able to make fun things to watch)

Post reply on HN