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

471–480 of 485 posts

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#471

Post by xnx »

worldsayshi wrote: post #356
wishfish wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me, the sequels were worthwhile just for one solitary scene. In the third movie, Trinity is piloting the ship and has to gain higher than usual altitude for some reason that I've now forgotten. This takes her above the black clouds permanently enveloping the Earth. Sunlight pours into the cockpit. For the first and only time in her life, she sees the real sun with her own physical eyes. She's overwhelmed. It's jus…

A hint at subverting the Cyberpunk genre with Solarpunk. Too bad there hasn't been any genre defining Solarpunk movie yet.

> genre defining Solarpunk movie yet

Brief moments at the start of Interstellar

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#472

Post by xnx »

wishfish wrote: post #180
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…

To me, the sequels were worthwhile just for one solitary scene. In the third movie, Trinity is piloting the ship and has to gain higher than usual altitude for some reason that I've now forgotten. This takes her above the black clouds permanently enveloping the Earth. Sunlight pours into the cockpit. For the first and only time in her life, she sees the real sun with her own physical eyes. She's overwhelmed. It's jus…

In the right hands (Christopher Nolan?) the Matrix would be an amazing reboot.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#473

Post by anonymars »

anonymars wrote: post #297
Spooky23 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Andor succeeded despite the bureaucracy porn. I am not sure what specifically you're referring to, but take this scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKl0F640914 A master class in gripping tension, moreover one that--like Breaking Bad--puts you in the awkward position of rooting for the bad guy. Because, as you say, we care about the protagonists, and in a way she is one. And then in Season 2 when Krennic is talk…

I come back to this one too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5qs5tOkGTQ (very mild S2 spoiler). There's so much going on in Anton Lesser's performance.

And then of course later on in the season (much bigger S2 spoilers): https://youtu.be/KWYE1vp4xEw, https://youtu.be/I6SZ--qibXM (I can't find a singular video containing the whole sequence)

And finally: https://youtu.be/mMoAf9xeZNI (also big S2 spoiler)

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#474

Post by mk_stjames »

csours wrote: post #37

I adore the opening shots of Jurassic Park. If you recall, the opening scene has a dinosaur being transferred from a container to a pen. If you haven't seen it for a while, you might remember seeing the attack. I know I did. But go back and watch it, you might be surprised. === Also, I challenge you to find a better technical exposition scene than Mr. DNA. Seriously, if you can think of a better technical exposition…

Stargate, where Daniel Jackson (James Spader) explains to the military officers how he's found that the symbols on the cartouche aren't hieroglyphs, they are star constellations, and that they represent a course from an origin to a position in space, and then following that, he gets shown the gate, where it is explained to him what they think it is and what they are trying to do with it.

It's double sided exposition where the audience gets to just bask in it, and it is brilliantly portrayed.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#475

Post by SergeAx »

Answering a headline question: Dinosaurs are not patentable. You simply can't make T-Rex part of the studio's IP portfolio. Spielberg's franchise is based on the park's identity, including its font, logotype, merchandise, and more. I am 90% sure he had real theme park(s?) in mind when developing the first movie. The movie industry has long envied Disney's parks, which provide a steady income stream, regardless of whether new movies are produced or not.

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#476

Post by xsmasher »

mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #204
OJFord wrote: post #40

Because there's only one story to tell, for adults, and it's the Jurassic Park (et al.) story. You can't tell a period story for adults, with dinosaurs birthed normally and no modern science, because then it's not a 'talkie', and we're about a century past it being possible to have the budget for a state of the art dinosaur-prop film with no dialogue.

The other alternative is for time travellers to be marooned in the past. (A là Homer Simpson who wishes he didn't kill that fish.)

À la Eckels in "A Sound of Thunder." (This is HN, if I didn't make the correction someone else would.)

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#478

Post by SlowTao »

chasd00 wrote: post #121
SlowTao wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty much this. I saw the latest Jurassic whatever film on the weekend. 6 out of 10. It is some cheap but well done thrills that achieves exactly what it set out to do. Not every film has the strive for some great metaphors, and the ones in the film are basically "greed bad" but that doesn't stop the action for more than a minute at best.

The pc cliches involving the random family put my teeth on edge. I kept hoping they’d get picked off one by one and that would the reason for the R rating. You can tell a movie is bad when you actually despise the characters meant to be the most endearing.

I didn't really think of the family as a PC addition but I can see that angle as well. I kind of just switch off any kind of higher analysis on films like this. I didn't mind the family but that is mostly because they didn't dwell on them for long periods. If the entire film was them... yeah I probably wouldn't be so happy with this one.

But this one was following such cliche on who survives and who doesn't, they were always going to live. ;)

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#479

Post by robertlagrant »

wmeredith wrote: post #334
robertlagrant wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The moment when he picks them up off the mid-explosion truck gives me chills every time. The build-up is so good.

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

If you don't like that bit you should probably also fast forward the flying guy and the trucktop sword fight!

Re: Why are there no good dinosaur films?

#480

Post by taco_emoji »

jxjnskkzxxhx wrote: post #244
taco_emoji wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does the pace of discovery matter at all? Fast or slow compared to what? What could you even do about it in any case?

> Why does the pace of discovery matter at all? Because I'd rather not die from cancer than die from cancer. I can't comprehend you even ask.

I notice you ignored the other questions.
Post reply on HN