Kevin's Watch

Did you like these films. Which one was you favourite, and why?

Another example of the law of diminishing returns, like the Star Trek series.

The first one is a fairly faithful adaptation of Crichton's work, his best novel, in my opinion. And a very clever and well-executed film. The second and third movies have their moments, but the premise is more contrived and the wonder is gone.

Again I find myself totally agreeing with Roland. I like and enjoy all three films to one extent or another but the first was by far the most amazing.

I haven't watched the third... What's it like?

Darth Revan wrote:I haven't watched the third... What's it like?

One word. Pterodactyl.

heh

The first was by the far the best. After that, how many times can you jump? The second should have ended on the Island, bringing the TRex into San Diego was ridiculous in my opinion. The third I thought was interesting in that it went into more of the Rapter's intelligence. But, they should have really expanded that more I think...

Furls Fire wrote:The first was by the far the best. After that, how many times can you jump? The second should have ended on the Island, bringing the TRex into San Diego was ridiculous in my opinion. The third I thought was interesting in that it went into more of the Rapter's intelligence. But, they should have really expanded that more I think...

I was very suprised when JPIII ended. I remember looking at my watch and saying "Is that it?"

right, it was way too short...I think the rapter thing could have really been expanded more. Would have been really cool if Grant would have had a conversation or something with them. Also, I think it would have been cool to have Jeff Goldblum back as Ian. If it weren't for him, the second movie would have been completely intolerable.

Furls Fire wrote:right, it was way too short...I think the rapter thing could have really been expanded more. Would have been really cool if Grant would have had a conversation or something with them. Also, I think it would have been cool to have Jeff Goldblum back as Ian. If it weren't for him, the second movie would have been completely intolerable.

I totally agree.

THe third one is the only one I saw at the theatre. I liked it better than II essentially because the whole flight scene (boyfriend, girlfriend and daughter fleeing from raptors) in II seemed so choreographed, I couldn't stand it. But II did seem to be over too quickly. Also, I kiked Sam Neill's paleontologist better than I liked Jeff Goldblum, the mathmetician.

Furls Fire wrote:right, it was way too short...I think the rapter thing could have really been expanded more. Would have been really cool if Grant would have had a conversation or something with them. Also, I think it would have been cool to have Jeff Goldblum back as Ian. If it weren't for him, the second movie would have been completely intolerable.

Very good point Furls! But I haven't watched the third one. What happens, And don't give me one worded stories either!

Darth Revan wrote:
Very good point Furls! But I haven't watched the third one. What happens, And don't give me one worded stories either!

Amazon.com
Surpassing expectations to qualify as an above-average sequel, Jurassic Park III is nothing more or less than a satisfying popcorn adventure. A little cheesier than the first two Jurassic blockbusters, it's a big B movie with big B-list stars (including Laura Dern, briefly reprising her Jurassic Park role), and eight years of advancing computer-generated-image technology give it a sharp edge over its predecessors. While adopting the jungle spirit of King Kong, the movie refines Michael Crichton's original premise, and its dinosaurs are even more realistic, their behavior more detailed, and their variety--including flying pteranodons and a new villain, the spinosaurus--more dazzling and threatening than ever. These advancements justify the sequel, and its contrived plot is just clever enough to span 90 minutes without wearing out its welcome.

Posing as wealthy tourists, an adventurous couple (William H. Macy, Téa Leoni) convince paleontologist Alan Grant (Sam Neill) and his protégé (Allesandro Nivola) to act as tour guides on a flyover trip to Isla Sorna, the ill-fated "Site B" where all hell broke loose in The Lost World: Jurassic Park. In truth, they're on a search-and-rescue mission to find their missing son (Trevor Morgan), and their plane crash is just the first of several enjoyably suspenseful sequences. Director Joe Johnston (October Sky) embraces the formulaic plot as a series of atmospheric set pieces, placing new and familiar dinosaurs in misty rainforests, fiery lakes, and mysterious valleys, turning JP3 into a thrill ride with impressive highlights (including a T. rex versus spinosaurus smack-down), adequate doses of wry humor (from the cowriters of Election), and an upbeat ending that's corny but appropriate, proving that the symptoms of sequelitis needn't be fatal. --Jeff Shannon

Darth Revan wrote:I haven't watched the third one. What happens, And don't give me one worded stories either!

A lot. They make some kind of dinosaur that's part Allysaurus, part Suchomimus Teneransus, that just wipes out every T-Rex he comes across. Plus, the Raptors are getting smarter.....

SHATTERSTAR wrote:

Darth Revan wrote:I haven't watched the third... What's it like?

One word. Pterodactyl.

another (in many ways similar) word. Predictable.

Yeah, it's hard to break out of the mold of success. Just ask George Lucas!

JPIII had a few really cool moments. The Spinosaurus & T-Rex battle was pretty neat. If you like that sort of thing.

SHATTERSTAR wrote:JPIII had a few really cool moments. The Spinosaurus & T-Rex battle was pretty neat. If you like that sort of thing.

If you don't like it, why would you be watching the movie?

Huh? Are you just trying to confuse me?

If I was trying to confuse you, why do you think you'd understand what I was doing?