A Spirited Perfect Ten

[AEfx]

I see your point (and might even say I have a preference for the aesthetic you're describing), but it's pretty dogmatic to say there's one correct way to shoot a scene.

Personally, I think you can make a case that Jurassic World is self-consciously campy and a work of self-parody in which case "breaking the illusion" is part of the plan.

It's not that there is one correct way, there are a dozen ways that could have been done and still obeyed the rules, it's that humans perceive filmed content in a certain way cognitively. And the only time you can break some of those rules is when you have a reason cinematically - a Hitchcock, for example, who is intentionally trying to disorient you. That wasn't his intention here - it was that he was trying to be "different" for the sake of it, when this just wasn't the film you do that on.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Reminds me of a night with two Princesses.

I think I heard about that. Wasn't that the night you got the nickname... Mr. Completely?

 

[VJ]

You all sweat like this??

Love that movie!

 

[TalkingHead]

It's not that there is one correct way, there are a dozen ways that could have been done and still obeyed the rules, it's that humans perceive filmed content in a certain way cognitively. And the only time you can break some of those rules is when you have a reason cinematically - a Hitchcock, for example, who is intentionally trying to disorient you. That wasn't his intention here - it was that he was trying to be "different" for the sake of it, when this just wasn't the film you do that on.

How do you know why the director made the choices he did? Even if he said it in an interview, it doesn't really change the range of subjective responses to the film.

 

[AEfx]

How do you know why the director made the choices he did? Even if he said it in an interview, it doesn't really change the range of subjective responses to the film.

Because it was totally illogical? What he did is the equivalent of saying, "That don't make sense." If someone was writing a piece and said that, they would be grammatically incorrect. However, if it was used for effect (say, in representing an uneducated character's dialogue) that's one thing. But when presenting it otherwise, it exposes a lack of basic skills. That's what JW does to the language of film which is a lot more specific than one may think.

I'm actually watching the film as we speak. Talking about it today led me to do so. I like it, don't get me wrong. But watching it for the first time in a few months I'm even more convinced that it's full of "film school" level tricks that just fall flat and were not appropriate for a film like this. It's rare that inept direction shows itself so clearly, but because everything else in the film holds up so well, it's just so glaringly obvious.

The reason it bothers me so is two-fold - one, this could have been a GREAT film if it had even decent direction (or someone who wasn't trying out film school tricks on one of the most anticipated films of the decade), and two, I really hope either Lucasfilm changes their mind ("creative differences") or they have someone standing over his shoulder, because Episode IX is probably the most important film of this next trilogy to get emotionally and logistically correct. And this director shows a huge lack of skill in both.

 

[Cesar R M]

Well, that's convincing.



And I did. I wrote that I could criticize multiple things (actually everything), but I started with the fact that the filmmakers didn't know how to use the tools they had chosen themselves for their own movie (my whole paragraph about the film's look). Why don't we talk about the actual movie. Let's get into film criticism, which is not the same as film reviews (Rotten Tomatoes only aggregates the latter).

So what do you think in the movie actually worked?

You can filter the type of critics in rottentomatoes. so its not just a " film aggregator" .

I dont know what transformers you had as a kid, but mine werent what was on the screen.

It was neither beautiful nor compelling storytelling by any stretch of the imagination

perhaps he was distracted by BumbleBee Urinating on John Turturro.
Or the "steel balls" of the giant devastator construticon ?

 

[Cesar R M]

Behold! The PandaJesus is among us!

 

[truecoat]

So what do you think in the movie actually worked?

This worked.

 

[Bairstow]

So what do you think in the movie actually worked?

 

[BrerJon]

Six beers when you board plus six beers at every port? How much alcohol can you possibly consume where that's not enough to get plenty drunk every night without ever buying a drop from Disney?

When people go to the Bahamas, they want to drink rum way more than wine or beer. Disney knows this, so has called out liquor specifically. I bet on a European cruise they'd make it so it would be wine you couldn't drink your own on board, but rum would be fine!

On a four or five day cruise, where a passenger may have a couple of strong homemade drinks in their cabin each day, this probably adds up to about $150 price increase given the cost of buying from the bar, tipping etc. On one hand, they could have just raised prices - never seems to hurt the parks - but on the other hand, it does mean non-drinking guests don't have to subsidise the increase for others.

For those who did like to make strong drinks in their cabins, it amounts to a big price rise and an increase in inconvenience, and is a good reason to go with the competition who may have the same policy but be considerably cheaper.

 

[BrerJon]

While I share your outrage over this change, I guarantee that those making these decisions are not so stupid as to "automatically believe" anything. Their belief, whatever it is, would be based on studies and information, not an "automatic" setting or default view. And I would be extraordinarily surprised if they believed this policy would have zero impact on bookings. People in management at big companies are smarter than your average 6 year old.

They may well have underestimated the effect it will have, but it won't have been due to an "automatic" belief or one that doesn't consider basic microeconomics.

Disney is run by bean-counters, and they would have calculated that a 10% or whatever it would be drop in guests will be more than made up for from the increase in bar profits, and - just like at WDW - it's not worth making an effort to be outstanding because if one guest stops going, there's always another waiting to take their place. With more and more people discovering DCL, it was no doubt determined that now was the time they could change the policy without it making a dent in the spreadsheets.

 

[BrerJon]

The Rock is now attached to star in a Jungle Cruise movie after years of the Tom Hanks/Tim Allen version not happening.

https://www.yahoo.com/movies/dwayne-the-rock-johnson-to-star-in-disneys-127098387697.html

M*tha Nature 2: Hippo Attack!

 

[LieutLaww]

I still want to see The Rock in the Live action Bambi

 

[BrerJon]

It was neither beautiful nor compelling storytelling by any stretch of the imagination

I'd go further and say if you ask people to name a film that was ugly and an unpleasant experience on the senses to watch, Transformers movies would be quite high up on the list.

Pacific Rim is such a better giant robot movie, for so many reasons, and a Transformers movie in that style, by someone who grew up playing with the toys instead of someone like Bay who was just handed the licence by a studio, could be incredible.

 

[FrankLapidus]

Jurassic World lost some of my interest as soon as the kids were cast. There was nothing wrong with the performances, its just a concept that's been done already and worked brilliantly in Jurassic Park because of the dynamic the two children had with Sam Neill's character. For me its a shame that the best they could come up with was another "kids lost in the park" subplot.

I enjoyed the film itself, it wasn't great but a solid enough addition to the franchise. The characters on the whole were quite bland though, Jurassic Park had characters like Muldoon and Gennaro who might not have had the most screen time but were still clearly defined and added something. With Jurassic World it felt like they were checking off stereotypes derived from the first film; awkward control room analyst, naive but well-meaning billionaire entrepreneur, siblings with divorcing parents, head of security who under-estimates the dinosaurs to his cost, etc. At times it just felt too much like a homage to the first film than an attempt to further the story further.

The direction in which the story is heading seems obvious but its not one that appeals to me so while I enjoyed Jurassic World, I'm not particularly enthusiastic about what I think is coming in the next installment in the franchise.

 

[ChrisFL]

The only thing I really didn't like about JW was Chris Pratt walking around with a regular shotgun that he should already know won't really do anything

 

[Mouse Trap]

But the Transformers movies were beautiful (in fact, as a pure composer of moving images,Michael Bay i s one of our best filmmakers). Blockbusters don't necessarily have to be great storytelling, but the money spent on them should appear on screen. Blockbusters should look like 150 million bucks.

Colin Trevorrow managed to make Jurassic World look cheap. Which is a very difficult thing to do with what he had.

No, no, no, no, no!!! You me or anyone can put together a film of visual and special effects. He is no composer of anything in film. Credit is due where is due and that is to his editing and effects team.

 

[PhotoDave219]

I'd go further and say if you ask people to name a film that was ugly and an unpleasant experience on the senses to watch, Transformers movies would be quite high up on the list.

Pacific Rim is such a better giant robot movie, for so many reasons, and a Transformers movie in that style, by someone who grew up playing with the toys instead of someone like Bay who was just handed the licence by a studio, could be incredible.

Pacific Rim wins hands down for having Idris "Stringer Bell" Elba in it.

 

[Cesar R M]

Bay directed TMNT.

he didnt. he "produced it".
his protegee did(directed it).. which he followed the " Michael Bay for Dummies" book to the spot.
I mean.. TMNT is after all, " Transformers" With turtles.

Giant Friendly creatures? CHECK! Change Robots for GIANT humanoid mutant turtles.
TONS OF UNNEEDED EXPLOSIONS? CHECK!
TONS OF FIREFIGHTS THAT WERE NOT NEED? CHECK
REPLACE Ninjas with even more dumbed down Terrorists/Gunmen? CHECK!
MEGAN FOX Cleavage and Butt shots? CHECK!

 

[Cesar R M]

This part is what sold almost everyone.
loved the really good edits like this one!