|
@aaron0288 When the raptors are 'shackled' they are part animatronic. Skin texture and eyes were added through CG but at least the actors had something to interact with. I can understand the reasoning; animatronics must be crazy expensive to get right and even the apatosaurus was only a brief (albeit great) scene. |
Jurassic World • Page 23
-
Scurrminator 9,045 posts
Seen 3 months ago
Registered 16 years ago -
OllyJ 4,866 posts
Seen 22 hours ago
Registered 17 years ago@vijay_UK it's a 12A. -
OllyJ 4,866 posts
Seen 22 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoScurrminator wrote:
I think when the I Rex tries to sniff out Chris Pratt, that's a model too. I think. If it wasn't it was well good.
@aaron0288 When the raptors are 'shackled' they are part animatronic. Skin texture and eyes were added through CG but at least the actors had something to interact with.
I can understand the reasoning; animatronics must be crazy expensive to get right and even the apatosaurus was only a brief (albeit great) scene. -
Nah, that thing is entirely CGI.
ILM was on fire with this. The dinosaurs have a real sense of weight, they're extremely well realised.
But I suppose they have done this four times now, and CGI has been top of the line throughout. Even the much derided third film has great effects. -
Spinosaurus is still the largest animatronic ever built isn't it? -
OllyJ wrote:
It was CGI but I read they used some form of performance capture for the CGI. I think that helps place the animation in the scene.
Scurrminator wrote:
I think when the I Rex tries to sniff out Chris Pratt, that's a model too. I think. If it wasn't it was well good.
@aaron0288 When the raptors are 'shackled' they are part animatronic. Skin texture and eyes were added through CG but at least the actors had something to interact with.
I can understand the reasoning; animatronics must be crazy expensive to get right and even the apatosaurus was only a brief (albeit great) scene.
I found the effects wonderful, great work by ILM, but also how it was used by the director. -
OllyJ 4,866 posts
Seen 22 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoI stand corrected. great graphics in my opinion. -
Did The scene with the raptor pen seem a bit off for anyone else?
once they got back to safety it felt very stilted, like no one in the scene just escaped being mauled by a dinosaur, odd lack of terror and everyone seemed too relaxed, then the guy weirdly shifting positions between shots so he'd be in place for the 'stay away from the bars' biT -
CrispyXUKTurbo wrote:
I believe so, and it was said to be quite ungainly. Probably because it was so big. Thing is... It looks a bit goofy on screen when compared to the CGI, which is far more elegant and, ironically, more "real".
Spinosaurus is still the largest animatronic ever built isn't it? -
aaron0288 652 posts
Seen 5 hours ago
Registered 13 years ago@Scurrminator
Yeah they had maquettes. None were actually animatronic, just still models. They were the only other shots really that I thought would've been so much better with animatronics. They were perfect for it.
And to people asking if they should take their 5/6 year olds, all I can say is YES! For the love of god take them. My dad took me to see JP when I was 5, and while the raptors in the kitchen scene scared the shit out of me, that film has had such an affect on my life in the best possible way. 12A is today's PG anyway. Just do it, they'll love it.
Edited by aaron0288 at 14:45:00 14-06-2015 -
StarchildHypocrethes 33,974 posts
Seen 9 hours ago
Registered 17 years agoI was just reading the Guardian review of this and it mentioned that Jaws is 40 years old... 40 years!?
That shit is just wrong. -
Pretty sure it was 15 years old the first time I saw it .gif)
-
Does this have quite a bit of blood and gore in it? A friend of mine seems to think so, but I can't help but think it can't be that bad as it's a 12A right? -
It's the rape scenes that got to me the most, gore I can live with -
MrWorf 64,193 posts
Seen 2 minutes ago
Registered 20 years agoI'm off to see it again tonight, I rarely watch a film twice. Star Trek (2009) was the last film that made me go back to watch it again. -
vijay_UK 3,961 posts
Seen 6 years ago
Registered 12 years agoOllyJ wrote:
Didn't know that, thanks.
@vijay_UK it's a 12A. -
Ultrasoundwave 6,440 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 11 years agoI saw it Friday and I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would, unfortunately.
Don't get me wrong, it was a fun ride and definitely worth seeing in the cinema, but for me the stupid stuff weighed it all down for me.
The whole military aspect was the main culprit - Wilson Fisk decides he wants the raptors to fight in the army (big lol) then when the raptors switch sides and kill all his men, he STILL WANTS TO USE THEM!. Then, after he witnesses the I-Rex going on a rampage killing everything in its path, he says he wants to order a mini-IRex too!
Really stupid stuff.
Add to that the slow-mo hero raptor tag-teaming the T-Rex at the end and Chris Pratt re-establishing himself as the Alpha with a nod and a wink.
Like I said, LOADS of stupid in this film, but still fun. -
Razz wrote:
I'm going to see it again this week too, and I rarely double dip at the cinema either.
I'm off to see it again tonight, I rarely watch a film twice. Star Trek (2009) was the last film that made me go back to watch it again. -
The box office... In the US it doubled expectations.
$204 million weekend.
Second biggest opening weekend, behind the first Avengers film.
The biggest opening for Universal ever. The biggest opening for Legendary Pictures ever.
And the international take is not yet final.
As of now, Jurassic World has amassed $330 million in a single weekend.
Insane!
Edited by Gearskin at 18:48:15 14-06-2015 -
$511 million, global take.
Holy. Shit -
Ultrasoundwave 6,440 posts
Seen 2 hours ago
Registered 11 years agoCue a fast-tracked sequel in :
3.....2......1..... -
It's still a lot of money, but: how did they make this for $150m?! -
Jimez 392 posts
Seen 6 months ago
Registered 7 years agoUltrasoundwave wrote:
With the first spoilered part, i mean why carry on wanting an army of Raptors whom can turn on you in an instant. That moment when the Raptors turned on the military was a good moment. Luckly Wilson got what was coming to him
I saw it Friday and I didn't enjoy it as much as I thought I would, unfortunately.
Don't get me wrong, it was a fun ride and definitely worth seeing in the cinema, but for me the stupid stuff weighed it all down for me.
The whole military aspect was the main culprit - Wilson Fisk decides he wants the raptors to fight in the army (big lol) then when the raptors switch sides and kill all his men, he STILL WANTS TO USE THEM!. Then, after he witnesses the I-Rex going on a rampage killing everything in its path, he says he wants to order a mini-IRex too!
Really stupid stuff.
Add to that the slow-mo hero raptor tag-teaming the T-Rex at the end and Chris Pratt re-establishing himself as the Alpha with a nod and a wink.
Like I said, LOADS of stupid in this film, but still fun.
The 2nd part, made a bit of sense but overall a little iffy
Edited by Jimez at 19:29:38 14-06-2015 -
Jimez wrote:
Hubris, it's what the military industrial complex is all about.
With the first spoilered part, i mean why carry on wanting an army of Raptors whom can turn on you in an instant. That moment when the Raptors turned on the military was a good moment. Luckly Wilson got what was coming to him
The 2nd part, made a bit of sense but overall a little iffy -
Yeah, these are the same guys who volunteer to go lie in a desert and get shot at. -
It's not the troops I was talking about, but big military business/politics. -
Why would they care about the troops? -
Syrette 51,181 posts
Seen 3 hours ago
Registered 19 years agoVery, very good film this. Doubt they'll be a better family-friendly (the noisy kids in the cinema were an annoyance) action blockbuster this year.
With that said, it did absolutely did not deserve the round of applause a couple of people semi-successfully instigated at my local cinema yesterday afternoon, upon the closing credits.
Edited by Syrette at 20:11:32 14-06-2015 -
Sorry but this was naff. 5/10
Bland, unlikeable characters, clichéd by-the-numbers scenes, obscene amounts of product placement. One of the characters even has the cheek to complain about corporate sponsorship of the dinosaurs when the movie's shoving starbucks & pepsi logos at your eyeballs every 2 minutes)
Dont get me started on the repeated unnecessary shots of bryce howard's heaving bosom (..wait a sec)
The whole film is a rollercoaster ride that's been done 3 times already.
I enjoyed 3 better than this. There, I said it.
.gif)
Sometimes posts may contain links to online retail stores. If you click on one and make a purchase we may receive a small commission. For more information, go here.
