Deadpulse Posted December 8, 2017 Share Posted December 8, 2017 Wasnt a fan of the trailer. Not because it gave too much away or anything like that, it simply didnt make me want to see the movie. It didnt make it look good, went in the opposite direction for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted December 9, 2017 Author Share Posted December 9, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted December 9, 2017 Share Posted December 9, 2017 Is it just me, or did the Alita: Battle Angel look really, really, really, really, really stupid with effects that look as bad as those parts in The Matrix sequels that looked like Neo was an anime cartoon in the middle of a live action movie? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrILL! Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 Looks dope! Miles Morales is awesome. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 On 12/7/2017 at 7:22 PM, deltarich87 said: Showing them get rescued by the T-Rex was terrible though. Removes any suspense from the scene. We know they aren't gonna die but we wouldn't have known how they escaped the situation. Dude, people aren't going to watch this movie for the plot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 49 minutes ago, RuskieTitan said: Dude, people aren't going to watch this movie for the plot. I think it's funny that you think this isn't true. You must think people flocked to Transformers 1-90 for the plot. Once it makes millions on millions of dollars, I'll come back and ask you what happened. Because either people didn't care about the plot, or the plot was better than you said it was, so either way you are going to be wrong. 652 million dollars for the plot of Jurassic World. What's a better plot, scientists messing with science to create genetically modified theme park attractions (once again the exact plot of Jurassic Park with a tiny twist), or nature once again trying to eliminate unnatural dinosaurs through natural causes? Of course you won't respond because you didn't have literally a single rebuttal to the points I had the first time, so you tried a snarky response to somebody else in order to make yourself feel better about being proven wrong. And, as has been stated by producers of the movie, everything that happens in the trailer happens in the first 57 minutes of a 2 hour movie. So since you alluded to the fact that you will know exactly what happens in the movie, could you go ahead and tell me exactly what happens in the third act? Don't paint it in broad strokes. Get really detailed and accurate. Tell me exactly what happens with the new dinosaur threat that wasn't even shown in the trailer. Or just let it go. You almost let it go when you completely ignored my rebuttal to your snarky statement, but you tried to get a cheap shot in elsewhere, so tell me how you're right after I've just proved everything you've said wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 5 hours ago, HorizontoZenith said: I think it's funny that you think this isn't true. You must think people flocked to Transformers 1-90 for the plot. Once it makes millions on millions of dollars, I'll come back and ask you what happened. Because either people didn't care about the plot, or the plot was better than you said it was, so either way you are going to be wrong. 652 million dollars for the plot of Jurassic World. What's a better plot, scientists messing with science to create genetically modified theme park attractions (once again the exact plot of Jurassic Park with a tiny twist), or nature once again trying to eliminate unnatural dinosaurs through natural causes? Of course you won't respond because you didn't have literally a single rebuttal to the points I had the first time, so you tried a snarky response to somebody else in order to make yourself feel better about being proven wrong. And, as has been stated by producers of the movie, everything that happens in the trailer happens in the first 57 minutes of a 2 hour movie. So since you alluded to the fact that you will know exactly what happens in the movie, could you go ahead and tell me exactly what happens in the third act? Don't paint it in broad strokes. Get really detailed and accurate. Tell me exactly what happens with the new dinosaur threat that wasn't even shown in the trailer. Or just let it go. You almost let it go when you completely ignored my rebuttal to your snarky statement, but you tried to get a cheap shot in elsewhere, so tell me how you're right after I've just proved everything you've said wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuskieTitan Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 On the real though, when I watch the first official trailer, I try to get a sense of what the movie will be about. As others have pointed out, certain situations that should have been a tense moment for the audience (such as that Carnotaurus finding the trio and then charging at them) have been flat-out spoiled by the fact that the trailer immediately resolves what happens by showing the exact thing that saves them. The trailer would have been a lot better if it left it up in the air as to how they got themselves out of the pickle they were in. It's not just for Jurassic World. I feel the same way about any trailer I watch. And while yes, I can avoid clicking on trailers on my computer, I can't exactly change the trailer if I'm in theaters watching another movie, or watching a game at someone's place and it comes on TV. In the end, of course I'm very likely to see this movie in theaters, just like I saw the previous one. I never contended that people go to see this movie for the plot or anything of that nature. I have no idea why you went on an incredibly long tirade not once but twice, when I simply made a comment that the trailer gave away an awful lot in terms of resolving points of conflict. Again, I tend to stop viewing trailers, especially those trailers that are released closer to the actual release date, as I prefer not to have the majority of my movie spoiled ahead of time. This was a far lengthier response than I ever expected to have to make when I call out a movie for revealing too much in the first trailer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacReady Posted December 10, 2017 Share Posted December 10, 2017 Just now, RuskieTitan said: This was a far lengthier response than I ever expected to have to make when I call out a movie for revealing too much in the first trailer. Then don't call a movie out for revealing too much in the first trailer when the first trailer reveals precisely NOTHING past the 57 minute mark. Only point I agree on is the T-Rex saving them. That was something they should not have shown. If you would have said that, I wouldn't have turned into an *******. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMonarch1110 Posted December 12, 2017 Share Posted December 12, 2017 On 12/10/2017 at 12:36 PM, RuskieTitan said: certain situations that should have been a tense moment for the audience (such as that Carnotaurus finding the trio and then charging at them) have been flat-out spoiled by the fact that the trailer immediately resolves what happens by showing the exact thing that saves them. Meh. It is pretty out of context and don't really see any problem with any of that. Don't think this trailer gave anything away except for one sequence of the movie with the dinosaurs running. That was almost the whole part of the trailer that showed dinosaurs. I also watched without sound so maybe that had something to do with it. I'm guessing this movie will be about like any other Jurassic Park movie and I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm sure it'll be one of the few movies the wife and I find time to watch in theaters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thrILL! Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 YES!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RamRod Posted December 14, 2017 Share Posted December 14, 2017 This is something I would probably hate but with the Safdie brothers doing it it has my attention. 48 Hrs. is a Walter Hill/Eddie Murphy classic so hopefully they do it justice. After Good Time I'm optimistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Acgott Posted December 15, 2017 Author Share Posted December 15, 2017 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonu62882 Posted December 15, 2017 Share Posted December 15, 2017 ^Is this like all female ghostbusters all over again? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiltman Posted December 15, 2017 Share Posted December 15, 2017 9 minutes ago, jonu62882 said: ^Is this like all female ghostbusters all over again? I think the idea came from the same “place”...but the team behind this seems way more capable than the one that lead Ghostbusters the fact that it wasn’t in development hell for decades with dozens of scripts Frankensteined together helps Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.