There, you're welcome.

Probably my favourite film.

Brilliant.

Not a huge fan of Spielberg in general, but I think the first JP is probably my favourite work of his. Pitch-perfect direction and full of iconic moments.

Favorite movie of all time. I rewatch it on the regular, just watched all of them a last Christmas. Reread the books, too.
Also, the first two movies had the best toys.

KSubzero1000 wrote: ↑May 27th, 2019, 10:33 pm There, you're welcome.

Also, thanks!

Jurassic Park is one of my favourite films. When I first saw it is probably the most afraid I have ever been during a film. I even cried and asked my dad if we could leave. I led a pretty sheltered youth as my parents were incredibly strict so Disney and light peril were all I had been exposed to prior to seeing it aged 9. My dad was so excited he took my brother and I to the opening night in London’s Empire Leicester Square. All of which was a huge deal. My younger sister went with my mum to the arcade in the Trocadero (another piece of history). After that bizarrely I wasn’t afraid of anything Hollywood could throw at me and in adulthood most conventional horror films barely raise a whimper.

It’s in that sweet spot where cinema was just starting to use cgi, but knew it wasn’t yet good enough for close ups so still only used it sparingly. JP has pretty much perfect balance between use of practical and digital effects work.

As for the many sequels, well, it’s all downhill from here.

Someone in the aging 360/PS3 thread mentioned they found the dinosaur effects to be losing their appeal and I think they're right and wrong. As the movie gets better and better resolutions, certain shots stand out and feel like they don't blend into the film as well anymore, such as the first Brachiosaurus scene. But, the animation of the dinosaurs and the designs are still aces, I think, which keeps those effects still enjoyable. Plus, the physical dinosaurs on screen are just wonderful.

There's a great shot in this film that always stands out to me but I never hear anyone mention.

In the kitchen scene when Tim runs for the freezer one of the raptors jumps down and runs after him and there is a shot where the camera is practically on the floor between the raptor's legs so you can see it's feet on either side in the foreground and then Tim going for the freezer door in the background. It's so simple but such a great use of perspetive. Unfortunately Google image search doesn't find it.

FemalePheromones wrote: ↑June 6th, 2019, 7:13 am There's a great shot in this film that always stands out to me but I never hear anyone mention.

In the kitchen scene when Tim runs for the freezer one of the raptors jumps down and runs after him and there is a shot where the camera is practically on the floor between the raptor's legs so you can see it's feet on either side in the foreground and then Tim going for the freezer door in the background. It's so simple but such a great use of perspetive. Unfortunately Google image search doesn't find it.

I think that's also one of those Spielberg shot's that happens out of necessity, too. Since they had people wearing Raptor legs, you couldn't show the whole body without CGI.
Plus, the movie really enjoyed reminding us of those toe claws, since they were so nasty.

Yeah like Flabyo said above the use of practical effects for close ups really helps to sell it.

Much like in Jaws where the majority of the shark is actual footage of real sharks so that when you see the "actual jaws" you kind of believe it's real.

An absolutely perfect movie as far as I’m concerned - one of those rare cases of a movie adaptation that is far superior to the book it was based on, and my particular generation’s ET/Star Wars, i would argue. I have noticed that slightly older people don’t hold in quite the same regard, though.

For me, it just nails the requisite balance of scale and spectacle to make for a perfect blockbuster. It feels small scale enough (with just a handful of named characters) for the big set-piece moments to have real weight and impact, and it's so well-paced that it's one of those movies that feels 20 minutes long. Every time I watch it, i can never quite believe how fast it flies by - 'Wait, they're already back at the visitor center??!?! The movies nearly over?!?!?'. I also love how it doesn’t merely view the dinosaurs as monsters to be overcome or avoided - they’re treated with equal parts awe and horror, which is really insightful as to what makes them so fascinating to the little boy in us all.

Part of what makes it such a tremendous movie is that, in a film sold mainly on it’s spectacle and visual effects, it has such a memorable cast of colourful characters, and such superb costume design that each of them would be instantly recognisable from their silhouette alone. The script is also excellent - not too clever, not too dumb, and packed with quotable lines.

A classic. None of the sequels are even a pale shadow of a shadow of it.

KissMammal wrote: ↑June 6th, 2019, 8:13 pm one of those rare cases of a movie adaptation that is far superior to the book it was based on

I could massively argue this but don't want to derail the thread.

To each their own...

FemalePheromones wrote: ↑June 6th, 2019, 8:16 pm

KissMammal wrote: ↑June 6th, 2019, 8:13 pm one of those rare cases of a movie adaptation that is far superior to the book it was based on

I could massively argue this but don't want to derail the thread.

To each their own...

Im going to camp in the middle ground. I think both are fantastic examples of their separate medium. It’s Lost World that pains me so much as the book ins flat out brilliant. Whereas the film is a bit pants.

True that. With The Lost World they basically kept the most boring aspects of the book and changed all the interesting bits.

I like the film well enough, but I did prefer what I read of the book. I read it on a flight about ten years ago and never went back to it once we landed.

The only downside is Malcolm spends the second half of the book injured and whacked out on painkillers again. It being Dodgson that infiltrates the island instead of Ingen makes much more sense though. And obviously the less said about the final act of the film the better.

Ah sorry I misread, I'm talking about the first book, haven't read The Lost World.

Ah fair enough. I'd definitely recommend both. Personally I think they're both better than the films but even if you don't think that you'll still enjoy them.

FemalePheromones wrote: ↑June 6th, 2019, 9:04 pm The only downside is Malcolm spends the second half of the book injured and whacked out on painkillers again. It being Dodgson that infiltrates the island instead of Ingen makes much more sense though. And obviously the less said about the final act of the film the better.

Haha. This was a running joke in my family as like you say he spends most of the book like that. I completely forgot!