May 7, 2001 6:48 PM   Subscribe

Dinosaurs are back in the new trailers for Jurassic Park 3. You can also read some spoilers for the movie here.
posted by hidely (25 comments total)
I was going to point out that the spoilers come from a satire site (and one that had some problems with spamming MeFi in August of 2000). Then I realized that you must know this, hidely, because all of the links that you have posted include at least one link to thesatyr.com. If you're not spamming, that's cool: I've been called bad names on MeFi before for pointing out spammers, so I'm not in that business much anymore. But mix it up a little, dude. There's tons of webpages out there that aren't on thesatyr.com, and people might tend to think that you are spamming - if I've associated your name with the site, other people might as well. And, of course, I've let the cat out of the bag now.
posted by iceberg273 at 7:09 PM on May 7, 2001

"I've been called bad names on MeFi before for pointing out spammers, so I'm not in that business much anymore."

Coulda fooled me. Gee whiz could we, oh gee I dunno, just gauge and rate people on the quality of their links and not what their personal bias may or may not be? Maybe this argument belongs on MetaTalk maybe?
posted by ZachsMind at 7:31 PM on May 7, 2001

Taken to MetaTalk...

To keep my post somewhat on-topic, I can't say that I'm looking forward to this movie at all. When the first one came out it was great.. I'd read the book & enjoyed it immensely, and at the time the computer effects were mind-blowing. Then the second one came out, & while I'd again read the book, I was a bit disappointed. The book seemed written strictly as movie fodder and the movie just wasn't that good.. and now a third one? I don't know, I have my doubts.
posted by zempf at 7:46 PM on May 7, 2001

What started out as an ahead of its time book about cloning and biotech and nature has just collapsed into a money machine. zempf has an interesting point though - I didn't know anyone even read the second book.
posted by Sellersburg/Speed at 7:58 PM on May 7, 2001

I'm going to ignore the stupid comments. SPAM generally comes in the form of "CLICKS HERE FOR A GRATE SITE!!!" During the course of my day I visit approximately 3 sites. Fark, Satyr and Metafilter. I wasn't aware that my visiting habits have to be more diverse in order for me to be a poster here, but I don't think I'm going to alter them just to apease a holier-than-thou poster who visits 10 sites a day.

On to dinosaurs: The original JP movie was 100x better than the second and I hope the third can rectify that.
posted by hidely at 7:59 PM on May 7, 2001

By the way, Michael Crichton does dilute many of his novels with potential movie fodder -take the 13th Warrior for instance. Timeline is going to reallly be pitiful too, I'm sure.
posted by hidely at 8:03 PM on May 7, 2001

The use of the term "dilute" presumes that Mr. Crichton is capable of producing a novel above movie-fodder level. The evidence clearly indicates otherwise.
posted by jjg at 8:11 PM on May 7, 2001

Yes, I read the second book.. what a waste of time. I also read Airframe before I became convinced that Jurassic Park was an anomaly & Crichton is a crappy writer. Airframe especially seemed written for the screen, as if you could see the dollar signs dancing in his eyes as he was writing it.. and of course it never got turned into a movie. No big loss there.
posted by zempf at 8:21 PM on May 7, 2001

It seems like an endless stream of these movies is inevitable. For the forth one I'd like to see a crossover with Predator. Here is the treatment in true Indiana Jones fashion by making it up as I go.

It is revealed that the aliens caused the Dinosaurs to become extinct due to overhunting. Something since solved by establishing hunting seasons that rotated planets. Knocked a comet out of it's orbit to hide their mistake. Then they planted human life on Earth after accidently destroying the human home world because one of the Predators had set his ship's weapon to planetary rather then personal by mistake. Explaining the asteroid belt as well.

The Predators are overcome by dinosaur slaying nostalgia and make the trip to Earth to kill a few 'saurs for old times sake. This is at the same time that Arnold and his latest bunch of mercenaries are infiltrating the island to score some dino eggs for rival "Prehistory Park."

Now we have Predators, Arnold, and dinosaurs ready to rumble and rumble they do! A lot. Now I don't have an ending since we'll just film four or five and test for the best reaction. The only thing is left is to write some dialogue, which should consist of a lot of snappy one liners in true Arnold Fashion. Hmmm

Just before killing the T-rex end boss Arnold slags out, "I'm putting you back to the Stone Age!"

And just before jumping out of the Predator's ship that he has set to crash into the Island in a BIG explosion (ending #2) he taunts "Sorry, but I took the last parachute, my bad!"
posted by john at 8:23 PM on May 7, 2001

Crichton also has his books made into videogames sometimes.
posted by Potsy at 8:29 PM on May 7, 2001

If they want to release this so badly, why can't it just be straight-to-video?

And yeah, the first one really WAS ahead of its time. I remember talking to my parents about the issues the movie addressed. I admit, I've never read the book--but I was barely twelve when the movie came out.

I barely even remember the second one. Other than that Julianne Moore's talent was wasted in it.
posted by lannie628 at 8:35 PM on May 7, 2001

I will go see it multiple times, I imagine. Even though I have faith that it will be shitty, the dinos will be worth seeing. Then again, I am a real sucker for dinosaurs anyway.
posted by bargle at 9:01 PM on May 7, 2001

"Michael Crichton does dilute many of his novels with potential movie fodder -take the 13th Warrior for instance."

I'd really like to know where you came up with that. The book the The 13th Warrior came from was written in 1976 and is considered a fairly well researched piece of historical fiction.

So either you're talking out of your bottom or you know something I don't.

Some of Crichton's later books can obviously be labeled glorified movie treatments, but not Eaters of the Dead.
posted by y6y6y6 at 9:14 PM on May 7, 2001

Some people just refuse to learn from their mistakes. But then again, it's difficult when the acrid stench of a franchise makes it hard to breathe.
posted by Oddsea at 9:23 PM on May 7, 2001

y6y6y6 - Actually I was referring to what he did with Eaters of the Dead, when he helped produce the 13th Warrior. First and foremost, the most dilutive thing he did was change the name to Eaters of the Dead. Secondly, he adapted Beowulf to give it an air of authenticity craved by movies. And don't assume that just because he wrote it early on doesn't mean that it was never intended by Crichton for the big screen. He was ambitious from an early age.
posted by hidely at 9:26 PM on May 7, 2001

I'm resigned to installing windows every four months now and I've slowly gained a taste for what software breaks windows (as Quicktime does). I guess this will turn up in a month or two in MPEG or ASF -- bah, I don't understand the sole use of Quicktime for movie trailers.
posted by holloway at 9:36 PM on May 7, 2001

Probably because Sorenson Video compresses a little better and looks nicer than MPEG. Also, because Apple probably pays big bucks to the studios to keep the trailers QT-only. ;)
posted by darukaru at 9:50 PM on May 7, 2001

I liked both books, and the first movie - the second one was "eh" - I will go see this though, seeing stupid people run away from flesh-hungry dinos is a fun way to waste an afternoon...
posted by owillis at 9:54 PM on May 7, 2001

This third installment looks to be darker in tone and style than the revious two. I was pleasantly surprised by the trailer, and I'll be there on opening day.
posted by toddshot at 10:00 PM on May 7, 2001

Quicktime 5 is out. I've had way fewer problems with it than I did with 4, and performance-wise it's already impressed me. Now I can watch those full-screen quicktime trailers on my puny Celeron 375 with little or no skippage. Psnarf. No promises, though.
posted by techgnollogic at 10:44 PM on May 7, 2001

"Actually I was referring to what he did with Eaters of the Dead, when he helped produce the 13th Warrior"

I'm not even sure why I care about this but.......

The screen play was written by Warren Lewis and William Wisher. Maybe your beef is with them?

I'm failing to see how it's "delutive" (?) to change the name to "Eaters of the Dead", or even "The Seventh Warrior". They both seem like good titles to me. What am I missing here?

"Secondly, he adapted Beowulf to give it an air of authenticity craved by movies."

What??? No, I don't think so. Yes, it's a retelling of the Beowulf poem, but what's wrong with that? His version was a much better read. And if you've ever read Eaters of the Dead I don't see how you can say it was made with a movie in mind. It's hard core historical fiction.

What's your beef with Crichton? He's written many good novels. Most filled with hard science. Some of them get made into movies. Some of them aren't so good. But as a body of work they stand up. Are you jealous?

"He was ambitious from an early age."

And he seems to have kicked ass. Westworld rocked. The Andromeda Strain was a fantastic novel. ER seems to have done well. And FilmTrack did some great work in the 80's.

If you want to dis somebody, why not find somebody that doesn't walk the walk?


(Damn, I've been reduced to calling names again. Darn it all.)
posted by y6y6y6 at 11:43 PM on May 7, 2001

Since when is film critcism "dissing?" You sound like a hybrid Saturday Night Fever/ghetto punk. Flaming is innapropriate on metafilter. I trust you'll avoid that from now on.
posted by hidely at 5:25 AM on May 8, 2001

By the way, your expertise with looking people up in the imdb.com is mindblowing. But maybe if you actually looked at the credits screen you'd know that Crichton was the chief consultant for 13th Warrior.

P.S. How does calling someone ambitious equate to an insult?
posted by hidely at 5:27 AM on May 8, 2001

"Human beings never think for themselves, they find it too uncomfortable.
For the most part, members of our species simply repeat what they are
told--and become upset if they are exposed to any different view. The
characteristic human trait is not awareness but conformity, and the
characteristic result is religious warfare. Other animals fight for
territory or food; but, uniquely in the animal kingdom, human beings
fight for their ┬┤beliefs.┬┤ The reason is that beliefs guide behavior,
which has evolutionary importance among human beings. But at a time when
our behavior may well lead us to extinction, I see no reason to assume
we have any awareness at all. We are stubborn, self-destructive conformists.
Any other view of our species is just a self-congratulatory delusion."

[Michael Crichton in "The Lost World"]

I admit I haven't read "The Lost World" but I've read a few excerpts from it and such as the above impress me much by his ability to explain philosophical views simply and effectively.

I read Jurassic Park and my favorite part was the chapter on Chaos Theory. I read Timeline and my favorite part was the beginning where he was explaining the whole Quantum Physics part. Crichton has a fantastic ability to explain complicated theory in english so even the average reader can appreciate it. You can tell he does good research for what he does write about.

I saw the 13th warrior. I thought it kinda sucked and could of been REALLY cool.
posted by Qambient at 9:17 AM on May 8, 2001

Could HAVE! HAVE! Arrrgh!

I read both Jurassic Park and The Lost World and thoroughly enjoyed both. I was disappointed, however, that they left a good portion of the computer work and Chaos Theory out of the JP film, and that the LW film was an amalgamation of Jurassic Park, The Lost World and total crap. (i.e. the opening beach scene in the LW movie was originally the opening chapter of JP, if I remember correctly.)

I'll probably see the movie, if only to see William H. Macy do something different.
posted by Danelope at 5:55 PM on May 8, 2001

« Older Let us prepare for impact.   |   NASA to send glow-in-the-dark plants to Mars. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments