This. I felt he at least had a character arc in this movie, as opposed to Neil in JP3 who's like "oh no we're on the island" and then just runs and shouts for 90 minutes and then escapes.
the stuff with the t-rex on the mainland at the end was good. still a huge step down from the first movie, obviously, but i'd still have it comfortably in 2nd or 3rd place
I watched the first 2 but then the premise became just too moronic. Like cloning dinos on a remote island is still somewhat believable and some of them breaking out and escaping into the world, okay. But once the cat is out of the bag messing with dinos in any capacity would become a serious crime so every military branch of every first world nation should have dozens of divisions developing all kinds of contingency plans to kill the lizards.
Why it's not like dinosaurs could take back the planet. Big ass predators like T-rex need big prey and lots of it. Wtf are they going to eat? Humans? Pretty sure you could kill a t-rex with a 9mm though it wouldn't be easy. Maybe if they made prehistoric marine predators but even then I'm pretty sure a sperm whale would mog a mosasaurus. We used to have giant predators running around like dire wolves and cave bears they didn't last long after we came around.
embarrassing when homosexuals try to rank franchises that have only ONE good film, the first one
jurassic park, matrix, mission impossible, rambo etc. >inb4 "b-but that one sequel is actually good!"
no it's not
true tho. only the de palma one was really good. the woo sequel was already almost fantasy(not his fault, just the wrong director for a spy thriller) and the series got more and outrageous with every sequel.
At the heart of your post I can't really argue that Jurassic Park is the only film worth a rewatch from anyone over the age of 15, but then you have to go and embarrass yourself by claiming there's only one good Rambo movie and one good Mission Impossible movie, beliefs that are based solely in your own moronation.
Honestly I think quality wise they just go in release order, and it has a lot to do with the fact that they ran out of source material.
The first movie was able to base itself off of the novel almost faithfully, but made a few crucial changes which came back to bite them later on.
The 2nd movie was a complete rush job. Crichton had zero plans to write a sequel and was basically obliged to because of the success of the movie. However the problem now was that he had to combine his novel canon and the film canon.
He had to retcon Malcom's death in the 2nd novel because he survived in the film, and I believe he only created Isla Sorna because in his novel, Nublar ended with the army firebombing the whole island to shit.
3 trying to continue the money train but was received so poorly they had to kill the series for a while
And 4 to 6 were purely just cash-grabs at a point where studios realized you can nostalgia bait the frick out of people and still make millions (see Star Wars)
As a kid I thought TLW was much more boring and contrived than the original. Based Roland was the only good character. JP3 was equally stupid, but it didn't feel like it was trying to be anything more than just a typical action movie. JW was better than 3, but FK just felt like they ran out of ideas and started flinging shit at the wall. Why would they not save the island getting destroyed for the last movie? I get that they had to justify the dinos getting on the mainland somehow, but they already did that in TLW. They should have saved the volcano erupting for the last movie so the dinos could all go extinct again and there'd be some closure. We all know Universal just wants to leave the last movie open-ended so they can make another sequel 10 years from now.
I like Chris Pratt, but his character ruined this franchise. He's too much of an action hero. The first movie was good because Sam Neill wasn't a young buff guy. He was a smart grumpy scientist who looked like he could be your dad. Richard Attenborough was a kindly grandfather type of character like Obi-Wan Kenobi who kids always love. The dinos aren't exactly threatening anymore if the main protagonist is a more competent version of a Marvel hero played by the same actor.
Wow. An actual list I agree with. Glad to see 3 isn't at the bottom of the list anymore. Had to skip through Fallen Kingdom to keep myself from falling asleep and I just finished reading the synopsis for Dominion and I'm just in awe they could frick up this badly.
none of the movies after the first one are any good so it's basically jurassic park and then everything else, ranking the contents of a sack of shit doesn't matter
yeah nah, the quality between Lost World and any of the Jurassic Worlds is night and day. You are right that the first one is the only truly good one, but 2 is absolutely better than 4 and 5 and there's really no comparison
>the lost world better than anything
kys
not op but he's right, that's how bad that fricking serie is.
At least 2 was made by an actual filmmaker
this. it's basically action porn, some of the scenes work narratively and some don't. the gymastic scene was obviously a scene that didn't.
compare that to JP3 which has a plot for the first act, then barely any dialogue and much worse action cenes than JP2 for the rest of the movie.
the script was terrible but (a) the script to JP3 was worse, and (b) the Trevorrow trilogy is unwatchable
This is the only bad scene in the entire film. Although Malcolm is admittedly a boring lead.
This. I felt he at least had a character arc in this movie, as opposed to Neil in JP3 who's like "oh no we're on the island" and then just runs and shouts for 90 minutes and then escapes.
the stuff with the t-rex on the mainland at the end was good. still a huge step down from the first movie, obviously, but i'd still have it comfortably in 2nd or 3rd place
>points out one moment in one scene in a 2 hour film
I bet you say TFA or ROTS is better than ROTJ because ewoks
1 >>>>>>>> 3 > 2 > 4>>>>>>> 6 > 5
3>israeli Degenerate Garbage
I watched the first 2 but then the premise became just too moronic. Like cloning dinos on a remote island is still somewhat believable and some of them breaking out and escaping into the world, okay. But once the cat is out of the bag messing with dinos in any capacity would become a serious crime so every military branch of every first world nation should have dozens of divisions developing all kinds of contingency plans to kill the lizards.
Why it's not like dinosaurs could take back the planet. Big ass predators like T-rex need big prey and lots of it. Wtf are they going to eat? Humans? Pretty sure you could kill a t-rex with a 9mm though it wouldn't be easy. Maybe if they made prehistoric marine predators but even then I'm pretty sure a sperm whale would mog a mosasaurus. We used to have giant predators running around like dire wolves and cave bears they didn't last long after we came around.
1>2>who fricking cares
embarrassing when homosexuals try to rank franchises that have only ONE good film, the first one
jurassic park, matrix, mission impossible, rambo etc.
>inb4 "b-but that one sequel is actually good!"
no it's not
>mission impossible
true tho. only the de palma one was really good. the woo sequel was already almost fantasy(not his fault, just the wrong director for a spy thriller) and the series got more and outrageous with every sequel.
At the heart of your post I can't really argue that Jurassic Park is the only film worth a rewatch from anyone over the age of 15, but then you have to go and embarrass yourself by claiming there's only one good Rambo movie and one good Mission Impossible movie, beliefs that are based solely in your own moronation.
>implying Brad Bird’s Ghost Protocol isn’t as good as 1
>implying Rambo 4 isn’t a solid 7/10
You're right about the others but Mission Impossible has no less than three great movies
jurassic park was the only bad franchise you listed pleb. should've said alien, star wars, star trek etc.
Honestly I think quality wise they just go in release order, and it has a lot to do with the fact that they ran out of source material.
The first movie was able to base itself off of the novel almost faithfully, but made a few crucial changes which came back to bite them later on.
The 2nd movie was a complete rush job. Crichton had zero plans to write a sequel and was basically obliged to because of the success of the movie. However the problem now was that he had to combine his novel canon and the film canon.
He had to retcon Malcom's death in the 2nd novel because he survived in the film, and I believe he only created Isla Sorna because in his novel, Nublar ended with the army firebombing the whole island to shit.
3 trying to continue the money train but was received so poorly they had to kill the series for a while
And 4 to 6 were purely just cash-grabs at a point where studios realized you can nostalgia bait the frick out of people and still make millions (see Star Wars)
4>1>3>6>5>2
Don't @ me. Wrap this thread up
@homosexual you're gay
True
As a kid I thought TLW was much more boring and contrived than the original. Based Roland was the only good character. JP3 was equally stupid, but it didn't feel like it was trying to be anything more than just a typical action movie. JW was better than 3, but FK just felt like they ran out of ideas and started flinging shit at the wall. Why would they not save the island getting destroyed for the last movie? I get that they had to justify the dinos getting on the mainland somehow, but they already did that in TLW. They should have saved the volcano erupting for the last movie so the dinos could all go extinct again and there'd be some closure. We all know Universal just wants to leave the last movie open-ended so they can make another sequel 10 years from now.
I like Chris Pratt, but his character ruined this franchise. He's too much of an action hero. The first movie was good because Sam Neill wasn't a young buff guy. He was a smart grumpy scientist who looked like he could be your dad. Richard Attenborough was a kindly grandfather type of character like Obi-Wan Kenobi who kids always love. The dinos aren't exactly threatening anymore if the main protagonist is a more competent version of a Marvel hero played by the same actor.
Wow. An actual list I agree with. Glad to see 3 isn't at the bottom of the list anymore. Had to skip through Fallen Kingdom to keep myself from falling asleep and I just finished reading the synopsis for Dominion and I'm just in awe they could frick up this badly.
Release order seems about right for me
There is no world where 4 is better than 3.
2 is hot garbage.
none of the movies after the first one are any good so it's basically jurassic park and then everything else, ranking the contents of a sack of shit doesn't matter
yeah nah, the quality between Lost World and any of the Jurassic Worlds is night and day. You are right that the first one is the only truly good one, but 2 is absolutely better than 4 and 5 and there's really no comparison
1>2>3>4>5>6
1>2>5>3>4>>>>>>>6