Jurassic World: Jurassic Wuh?

Holy shirt! Sorry, but I told you I would, and I did. Two days in a row, and still going strong. Slightly more structure to today's post ('slightly' being the operative word) and a proper discussion of film, which is something I'm pretty sure I promised in my first post and never fully delivered on. All happening now though, isn't it!? That's probably a bit premature, but can't we all just share in the excitement? No? Okay.

Yesterday (25/11/14 for posterity's sake) the trailer for 'Jurassic World', the fourth in the 'Jurassic' series, which began in 1993 (my birth year, jus' sayin', a lot of pretty good things came out that year (that sounds awful in that context, sorry)) was released online. Apparently it was 'two days early', from which we can assume that cinema-goers on the 27th would have seen the big screen version of the trailer. While 'two days early' makes it sound like an accidental leak, I'm inclined to believe that in the cynical world of Hollywood producers, nothing is accidental. In many ways it was a clever decision. On the internet, nothing will get shared and talked about more than something which isn't supposed to be there (allegedly). Indeed, as far as I can see, since the moment the video appeared the term 'Jurassic World' has been quite highly trending, and much discussion has been provoked. 

However, there is something to be said for trailers premiering in the pre-movie ad marathon we're subjected to at the cinema. Yes, the surprise of the video suddenly appearing was nice, but imagine if that surprise had been presented in surround sound widescreen intensity, especially for a big budget epic like this. The moment when the Mosasaurus (I googled) explodes out of the water to gobble up a f'n shark, while still eye-catching, would almost certainly be mind-blowing in a cinema setting.

Universal Pictures / YouTube Screen Shot

On top of that bowel-trembling image, there's the surprisingly obvious idea of just releasing the trailer online a day or two after it appears in theatres. In that case, you get the best of both worlds; the appetising high-def glorious experience of those who see it 'live', for whom images like the one above will surely stick in the mind for a while, and then added to that, the social media effect we've seen already. Admittedly, you might see a drop-off in the amount of tweets and sharing, but I suspect that that would be offset by the tweets of folks losing their shit having seen it in the cinema. Anyway, onto the actual film itself.

The official plot summary (via The Daily Telegraph) reads:

“22 years after the events of Jurassic Park, Isla Nublar now features a fully functioning dinosaur theme park, Jurassic World, as originally envisioned by John Hammond. This new park is owned by the Patel Corporation. Owen, a member of Jurassic World’s on-site staff, conducts behavioural research on the Velociraptors. After many years, Jurassic World’s attendance rates begin to decline and a new attraction, created to re-spark visitor interest, gravely backfires.”

One of the most telling tweets I saw in the immediate fallout of the 'leak' was along the lines of "everything looked great until 1:21." For those unsure what occurs at 1:21 that is so heinous as to ruin the whole experience, it is the point in the trailer where we are introduced to the concept of the 'genetically modified hybrid'. Basically, a super dinosaur, and the new attraction that 'gravely backfires' mentioned above. On the one hand, I have no real issue with this. Some people seem to get too hung up on every single movie being 'believable' when sometimes its better just to look at it as a big, stupid action movie and have fun with it. On the other hand, when you've got a whole park, on land and in sea, of dinosaurs, it seems a bit lazy to have your main antagonist be a scientifically-engineered super dino. I understand that getting people to buy into a plot which bears a fair few similarities to the original films concept may seem difficult, but the park itself looks to be so futuristic and packed with new dino's that I get the sense I'm going to feel like I'm missing more than I'm seeing.

So why am I still so excited? Well, it's personal confession time, folks, so gather round. I don't consider myself to have many fears at all. Not out of a sense of arrogance or over-machoness, but just because I seem to be nonplussed by quite a lot of sights. We all scream a little at jump scares, but beyond that there's not much. However, for some reason, I have an issue with dinosaurs. I'm aware it makes no sense; they're extinct, and highly unlikely to come back (!?), and yet there it is. Shots like the one above, and the T-Rex in the first film, give me the heebee jeebees. I don't know where it comes from; someday I'll probably look into it, but for now I'm just going to enjoy the thrill and hide the fear. Again, I may have revealed to much of myself (not like that, officer!), so we'll get back to the movie.

In terms of casting, man of the moment Chris Pratt as our everyman hero 'Owen' seems a perfect fit in the same way he was perfect for Guardians of the Galaxy. Bryce Dallas Howard as the parks misguided scientist/ park runner who is responsible for the 'super-dino' is also a top choice, although one hopes that she maintains a certain air of action and authority, and doesn't just descend into screaming damsel-in-distress once the film really heats up. I like the homage/reference back to the first film with brand new 'kids-in-peril' Gray (Ty Simpkins, of Inception (2010)) and Zach (Nick Robinson, of The Kings of Summer (2013)) who will attempt to survive, and to stop the audience only caring about the ancient reptiles.

By the way, even with the building tension, and teeth-gnashing dinosaurs, the creepiest part of the trailer is right at the beginning, when Judy Greer, playing what I assume is the kids mum (although IMDb lists her simply as 'park visitor'), tells them that "if anything chases you, run." As a cryptic warning itself, it's unsettling enough, but add the fact that she whispers it, and I'm close to giving back my tickets and sticking with Disney World.

There's plenty of ridiculousness around, of course. The pseudo-science and historical dino-inaccuracies have already received a bit of a backlash, but that's nothing new in this franchise. What is new (and ridiculous) is Pratt's leather vest and the hilarious moment when he motorbikes along with a group of galloping Raptors.

The only question is: who will reach 88 miles an hour first?
Universal Pictures / YouTube Screen Shot

Most ridiculous though, is the lack of doctor cameos. Namely, Doctors Grant (Sam Neill), Sattler (Laura Dern), or Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum). I get that you want to move on with the franchise, but could you not just have Alan Grant appear with a world-weary, confused expression to angrily proclaim the park a bad idea? And personally, I don't ever want to watch a film that doesn't include this:

 Those are my thoughts on the upcoming 'Jurassic World' film (scheduled for a 12 June 2015 release) but what are yours? Feel free to leave a comment. Personally I'm approaching this film cautiously, as you would a sleeping T-Rex, but who knows? It could surprise us all. As an eccentric Doctor once said, "Life...................... finds a way."

A very good day to you, Sirs and Madams, until we meet again.