tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post3507776490746312114..comments2024-03-23T12:02:36.626-07:00Comments on Mark P. Witton's Blog: Can dinosaur movies have too many dinosaurs?Mark Wittonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02524696111911168322noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-19696164771492581342022-07-08T16:03:07.991-07:002022-07-08T16:03:07.991-07:00These truly are confusing times. Most people I'...These truly are confusing times. Most people I've seen critiquing Dominion said that the movie focused too much on the humans or that the scenes featuring dinosaurs were too short. <br /><br />I btw have to disagree with putting Peter Jackson's King Kong onto this category. One of the major complaints people had at the time with the movie was that it took what felt like 40 min until the characters even reached the island (personally, I liked the build-up). And unless you want to talk about monster scenes in general and include the bug pit and the titular ape himself, there's only two dinosaur scenes in that movie, the stampede and the V. rex fight. They actually filmed a lot more, like an ambush attack by a ceratopsian, but those were cut for time and pacing. Weta Workshop went as far as designing a whole Dixonian ecosystem for their version of Skull Island, but most of those designs only saw the light of day in a spec-evo companion book.T.K. Sivginhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01719600818183559916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-760137495775896632022-07-05T21:13:32.472-07:002022-07-05T21:13:32.472-07:00I think that's cool. I would point out that mo...I think that's cool. I would point out that most of these problems are a problem of Michael Bay's approach to film making. According to Leslie Ellis, noted youtube film critic, the Bay approach is to fill up the film with as much action as possible, without regard to story structure of dramatic effect.<br />Paleofan 150millhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06455341408391374049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-70751123703351640252022-07-05T03:40:43.180-07:002022-07-05T03:40:43.180-07:00If they let the actors act and the dinosaurs be di...If they let the actors act and the dinosaurs be dinosaurs the movie would be better than having non stop specticle.Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08847122481807279472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-61202986379405726772022-06-30T06:52:33.188-07:002022-06-30T06:52:33.188-07:00The Jurassic films are making dino porn, it's ...The Jurassic films are making dino porn, it's like asking if a porno can have too much sex. When your audience is dino-horny 13 year olds the answer is no.kmichaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05430854438111260663noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-64444575267512190152022-06-30T01:37:39.647-07:002022-06-30T01:37:39.647-07:00I think we're in agreement: to clarify, I don&...I think we're in agreement: to clarify, I don't mean "too many dinosaurs" in the literal sense of number of dinosaur individuals in a film, but more as shorthand for "too much senseless dinosaur action", as you describe. You could weave whole populations of dinosaurs into the right plot and still have a good film.Mark Wittonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02524696111911168322noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-22203913048870997622022-06-30T00:32:23.957-07:002022-06-30T00:32:23.957-07:00"If you're the sort of person who punches..."If you're the sort of person who punches the air every time a Jurassic film includes a new species, no matter how fleetingly and inconsequentially, you've probably enjoyed the last three films. If, however, you tire quickly of what can be repetitive dinosaur sequences and want a little more in terms of story and characterisation from your Jurassic experience, you're more likely to view this dino-centricity as mindless, dull prehistoric noise."<br /><br />That reminds me of my favorite quote from RickRaptor105's JWFK review ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5G0OdV8sY0 ): "If all you care about are dinosaurs chasing people, you will love [Fallen Kingdom]...but a problem is Jurassic Park used to be about much more than that. The first movie had great characters with great interactions and actual ethical discussions. If you remove Jurassic Park's heart and intelligence, you get Jurassic Park 3. If you add additional stupidity, you get [Fallen Kingdom]". CC is the only JP sequel I can honestly describe as having "great characters with great interactions and actual ethical discussions", especially in S3.<br /><br />"Anything too scientific and “boring” is unlikely to feature, as is anything too violent or horrifying. This, I suspect, is why the Jurassic films are the only game in town for dinosaur motion pictures."<br /><br />That reminds me of my comment on Alteori's "DINOSAUR 2000" review ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jylThNVxHMU ): "I'm glad you pointed out the Carnotaurus killing those almost-ready-to-hatch baby Iguanodon & also mentioned Tarzan (which begins w/a leopard killing a cute little baby gorilla). I've been thinking about both movies recently in reference to how disappointing Dominion is: 1 of the best/darkest parts of the JP novels is when the compys eat the baby, yet no kids have ever been eaten in the movies; Dominion had the perfect opportunity to change that w/dinos & pteros re-taking over the world (& thus, conflicting w/humans much more than in the other movies) & wasted it; If Disney can kill off cute little baby characters multiple times, why can't the JP/JW franchise do so even once despite having MUCH more reason to?"<br /><br />"the tedium of such scenes was not lost on Steven Spielberg himself, who has candidly spoken of how bored he was making the (relatively) dinosaur-heavy The Lost World:"<br /><br />As others have said elsewhere, the TLW movie should've stuck closer to the TLW novel as originally planned.raptor_044https://www.blogger.com/profile/10538231485096397412noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-18850012762521798892022-06-29T21:22:25.133-07:002022-06-29T21:22:25.133-07:00I think that something that you overlooked is, as ...I think that something that you overlooked is, as Tom Parker pointed out on Twitter, a large incentive for adding more species is likely more profits for Mattel. I highly doubt that scaly Atrociraptors or Deinonychus (since that's what they originally were in the concept art) were ever in-demand dinosaurs in the same way that the Giganotosaurus, Quetzalcoatlus, and Therizinosaurus were, especially since the "Velociraptors" are already just misnamed Deinonychus. My hypothesis on their inclusion is as follows. Universal was hesitant on only including feathered raptors in addition to Blue. Colin Trevorrow likely originally just had regular InGen / Masrani "Velociraptors" in the Malta scene. Mattel wanted new scaly raptor species instead. After all, presumably, a child can more easily convince his or her parents to buy a dinosaur toy if it's a new species rather than just a new paint job. After Trevorrow changes the Malta raptors to Deinonychus, Universal calls and requests a cooler sounding name ending in "raptor." This results in the Atrociraptors. I've thrown this hypothesis around on Discord, and no one's ever come up with a better reason for featuring Atrociraptor instead of more "Velociraptors." Mattel wanting more money is probably the only real reason why Battle at Big Rock also exists, especially given the price tag on that short film. <br /><br />Even if dinosaurs are limited in what they can do on-screen, I disagree that this franchise has already plumbed the depths of all possibility. There's a lot of source material out there that can be adapted. Ethan Storrer (helped create the Battle at Big Rock Allosaurus) said in his interview with Klayton Fioriti that industry has declined adaptations of video games Turok and Dino Crisis cause they felt that dinosaurs belonged to Universal. A lady on Twitter (apologies; can't remember her handle) commented that she has a dinosaur-themed screenplay that was rejected for likely the same reason. I'm still surprised that no one's tried to adapt Dinotopia again. There's also the Cadillacs and Dinosaurs comics and Dino Riders TV show. Maybe Marvel will one day feature Devil Dinosaur or the Savage Land. Apparently, a lower budget adaptation of the self-published novel Primitive War is in development. I'm also a bit surprised that Disney has yet to remake their 2000 Dinosaur movie. <br /><br />Undoubtedly, the biggest obstacle to any of these adaptations is that they need a big budget or have to settle with lower quality effects or less screen time for the dinosaurs. Big budgets are risky in this franchise-dominated movie market, though I'll blame audiences as much as studios for that. Given everything that you wrote here, less screen time might be best, though it'll always mean that some fans of any of the aforementioned source material will be disappointed that something was cut. <br /><br />My personal head canon for the T. rex ("Rexy") killing the Carnotaurus in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is that she's exhibiting similar behaviour to a lion killing a hyena: eliminating competition. I've no clue what Trevorrow was thinking with that scene, but I think that, timing during a volcanic eruption aside, my logic seems at least plausible. <br /><br />While it'd be nice if there was more focus on the new species, I can't say that I wasn't at least a little delighted that more interesting species like the Therizinosaurus, Quetzalcoatlus, and Pyroraptor were included in Dominion, even if very briefly. Sounder1995https://www.blogger.com/profile/05124496714655577191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-46609084043804440172022-06-29T20:59:34.107-07:002022-06-29T20:59:34.107-07:00I have in part to disagree. It is not the number a...I have in part to disagree. It is not the number and frequency of dinosaurs, but the way these scenes integrate with the rest of the movie which makes dinosaur presence/absence well-done. Take as example the super-mega-amazing desert scene in Prehistoric Planet set in the Nemegt Basin, with literally >200 dinosaurs around a water hole. Imagine such scene wisely included inside a well-done Jurassic Park movie directed by a smart visionary director vs the same scene into a badly-writtem Jurassic World Dominion directed by director with no idea of what actually do with such scene. In the fist case, we'd likely remember it as the "amazing mass scene", in the second case as "that dino orgy nonsense". Dinosaurs in dinosaur movies are never "too much" if the rest of the movie is a real movie and not just a sequence of randomly included dumb scenes.Andrea Cauhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10855060597677361866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3653345901774701895.post-49778110998700651682022-06-29T15:26:37.426-07:002022-06-29T15:26:37.426-07:00In general, no a movie about Dinosaurs cannot have...In general, no a movie about Dinosaurs cannot have too many Dinosaurs. Just as a movie like Topgun about Aircraft Pilots can't have too many airplanes, so too with Dinosaur cinema.<br />Paleofan 150millhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06455341408391374049noreply@blogger.com