Comic Fury Webcomic Hosting - Should Jurassic Park be rebooted?

You are not logged in. Log in, Register, More info
Forum > General discussion > Should Jurassic Park be rebooted?
Pages: [1] [2]

"Should Jurassic Park be rebooted?", 10th Aug 2018, 12:31 PM #1
MK_Wizard

User avatar
Posts: 2453
Registration date: 17th Jun 2017
Location: Canada
Now I know reboots are a touchy and debatable subject, but people will inevitably do them no matter what so we could either give them a chance or just stick to our classics. Personally, I like reboots when they are well done or at least, entertaining. Mind you, I am very easy going. Unless the movie is exceptionally bad, I like to sit back and enjoy the show even if it isn't as good as the classic. However, I think for same cases, the reboot is better than the original.

With all that said, Jurassic Park is suddenly growing in popularity again with the coming of Jurassic World and there's a lot of hype and fan wishes regarding to where it will go. One of this big wishes is that Jurassic Park will be rebooted as a whole. Now, I loved the first movie that started it all, but I have to be honest, I am open to it being rebooted because I read the book and I know for a fact that the movie left out a lot of scenes and made a lot of changes to the story and characters. I should also tell you that it was a heck of a lot more violent and not as Hollywoodesque. Think a tiger attack but five times more violent. Plus, the dinosaurs are treated more like animals rather than monsters which in a sense makes them all the more scary. They will hunt anything and everything that they consider prey including kids if it's easier. I should also warn you that most of the time, when people got attacked, they didn't get away unless they were exceptionally lucky.

I'm thinking that if it does get rebooted, I would want it to be truer to the book and I want it to keep that R rating. Also, I would want everything about dinosaurs that we know now to be incorporated into the story so that the scientific aspect is up to date.
_______________________
10th Aug 2018, 1:07 PM #2
MST3KFan

User avatar
Posts: 3108
Registration date: 31st Aug 2014
Location: Minnesota, USA
I love the first Jurassic Park movie. It's a classic. It's also the only movie I've ever see in the theater twice. (Mainly cause my parents wanted to see it, so I went with them after having gone by myself earlier in its release as a kid.) I'd love to see it in theaters one more time somehow to be honest.

I even made it kind of a tradition to see every Jurassic movie that came out in theaters after that. So I've seen all five movies in theaters.

The thing is...after Jurassic Park III, you could tell they were stumped with what to do with the franchise given it took over a decade for them to make Jurassic World.

And speaking of that movie... Now I know a lot of people praise Jurassic World, but I couldn't help but feel the whole time watching the movie they kept shoving nostalgia down our throats rather than tell an interesting story. It was all like "Remember this stuff for Jurassic Park!?" "Remember THESE things from Jurassic Park?" "REMEMBER JURASSIC PARK!?"
Jurassic World and Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom's main villain dinos weren't even real dinosaurs, but genetic created monsters made of various killer dinosaurs.
Plus both movies pushed the whole "Let's use dinosaurs as weapons!" human villain thing, which I roll my eyes at as the whole idea doesn't make sense. Dinosaurs are not destructive like nuclear bombs and stuff. They're big creatures that can be killed with enough firepower.
Where they leave off with JW: FK should be pretty much a perfect end to the franchise, but I know they've already got plans for a Jurassic World 3 going.


Anyway, I'd be all for a reboot if as you said, it remains faithful to maybe the novel a bit more. Don't rehash everything the 1993 movie did. Give us that sense of wonder like we got when we first saw the Brachiosaurus on screen, or fear when the T-Rex broke out of the paddock. Also, at least keep the John Williams theme. I still get goosebumps when I hear that theme.
_______________________
image

10th Aug 2018, 1:11 PM #3
MK_Wizard

User avatar
Posts: 2453
Registration date: 17th Jun 2017
Location: Canada
I am glad someone else agrees. I think that rebooting Jurassic Park as being faithful to the book while having up to date dinos would be great. Heck, I would even be open to making it into a mini series on Netflix. It was a pretty big book with lots of details.
_______________________
10th Aug 2018, 3:24 PM #4
Jean_Q_Citizen

User avatar
Posts: 1704
Registration date: 21st Oct 2015
Location: That place where I am
Only if Weird Al does it.

Weird Al - Jurassic Park
_______________________
image
10th Aug 2018, 3:54 PM #5
MK_Wizard

User avatar
Posts: 2453
Registration date: 17th Jun 2017
Location: Canada
Very funny, but seriously, give the book a chance and you'll see the potential. And I liked the movie, but there are so many details in the book series that got left out that are worth mentioning in a reboot. Plus, the characters are very different in ways I actually prefer. For instance, I like the book version of Alan better.
_______________________
10th Aug 2018, 4:33 PM #6
Jay042
Old school
User avatar
Posts: 947
Registration date: 7th Nov 2009
Location: Dallas, Texas
Every time the subject of reboots comes up, I am reminded of the fact that Humphrey Bogart's version of The Maltese Falcon was in fact the third time Hollywood tackled that Dashiel Hammet story, so was Elizabeth Taylor's Cleopatra.
_______________________
image
10th Aug 2018, 4:39 PM #7
ebarie

User avatar
Posts: 173
Registration date: 18th Jul 2014
Location: Central Florida
It already was. It was called Jurassic World.
_______________________

image

"Entertainment one page at a time."
10th Aug 2018, 4:45 PM #8
MK_Wizard

User avatar
Posts: 2453
Registration date: 17th Jun 2017
Location: Canada
Actually, Jurassic World is a continuation though in some ways, it is a reboot. I meant a reboot as in completely going back to square one.
_______________________
11th Aug 2018, 10:15 AM #9
Cooke
it's pronounced "Kooky"
User avatar
Posts: 1779
Registration date: 4th Sep 2016
Location: Ireland
As a concept where they would be sticking close to the book and telling it slightly different I can see why it could be a good idea. Practically, when it comes to these large tent pole franchises and reboots, the big movie making machine has proven time and again that it's creatively bankrupt.
If your looking for a movie made by committee that they want to appeal to the largest audience possible (sorry no R raring for you) play it safe and take no real risks then a reboot's just for you. Where it's more about selling the franchise as opposed to telling a story. Then a reboot's for you.

In other words, that's a no from me.

ebarie was right. Jurrasic World is a reboot and it's exactly how they would do a new Jurrasic Park.
_______________________
11th Aug 2018, 11:26 AM #10
Theta Sigma
Alley Dweller
User avatar
Posts: 616
Registration date: 5th Feb 2016
Location: Glasgow
I really like the original film, but I have to admit, I think I'm one of the few people on Earth who actually prefers the book. Mostly for Crichton's trademark cynicism and satire, which got largely lost in Spielberg's more lighthearted vision, but I also prefer most of the characters as they are in the novel and find many of them pretty caricatured and cartoonish in the film, with some being pretty much unrecognisable (I actually love Attenborough's performance as Hammond, but he's a far cry from the leech he was originally, which to me actually weakens the story). The sequel novel was also pretty good though not anything special, I definitely enjoyed it more than any of the film sequels. In terms of craft, I don't know if the original can be topped, since Spielberg is one of the great directors, but the story could definitely bear a revisit.

I think the problem with rebooting it would be that most audience members still have fond memories of the film and don't know much about the book, so a version of the story that incorporates the original tone and characterisations would probably be met with a lot of hostility. I think it'd just be too much of a risk for the studio, who have a guaranteed hit with every nostalgia-baiting sequel they make. There is also the possibility of course, that a reboot could be just as mediocre as the sequels are, and that from a purely quality-based standpoint, it might be best to retire the franchise altogether.

Another Crichton story I'd love to see remade would have to be Congo, the book is gold, but the film adaptation was just a travesty! I doubt that anyone would protest another attempt at making it for the screen, especially if it kept that edge I love so much.
_______________________
image
11th Aug 2018, 12:04 PM #11
MK_Wizard

User avatar
Posts: 2453
Registration date: 17th Jun 2017
Location: Canada
I just have this to say about reboots in the general; you will always displease at least one crowd, but I don't think it's grounds for not rebooting and it never will be. Think of works like Batman, Transformers, He-Man and My Little Pony. They stayed alive thanks to reboots. Yes, some of them were flops and could have been better, but what about the ones that were gems? And in the defence of reboots, is everything that's original good? No. So while I agree that those who are nostalgic will initially react badly, that doesn't mean we shouldn't go ahead and try. And even if the reboot is bad, just take it as a lesson of how not to do it next time.
_______________________
11th Aug 2018, 1:33 PM #12
Product Placement
paid to be there and look good
User avatar
Posts: 439
Registration date: 15th May 2011
Location: Iceland
MST3KFan:Plus both movies pushed the whole "Let's use dinosaurs as weapons!" human villain thing, which I roll my eyes at as the whole idea doesn't make sense. Dinosaurs are not destructive like nuclear bombs and stuff. They're big creatures that can be killed with enough firepower.

Now, I haven't seen the JW:FK but I don't remember anything about weaponizing dinosaurs in Jurassic World 1.

The reason why the Indominus Rex was created was because every time the park introduced a new carnivore, there was a huge spike in tourism and they had run out of viable carnivores to clone.
11th Aug 2018, 2:22 PM #13
Cooke
it's pronounced "Kooky"
User avatar
Posts: 1779
Registration date: 4th Sep 2016
Location: Ireland
MK_Wizard:I just have this to say about reboots in the general; you will always displease at least one crowd, but I don't think it's grounds for not rebooting and it never will be. Think of works like Batman, Transformers, He-Man and My Little Pony. They stayed alive thanks to reboots. Yes, some of them were flops and could have been better, but what about the ones that were gems? And in the defence of reboots, is everything that's original good? No. So while I agree that those who are nostalgic will initially react badly, that doesn't mean we shouldn't go ahead and try. And even if the reboot is bad, just take it as a lesson of how not to do it next time.


I know it's a hypothetical but the standard industry practices for these big franchise reboots can't be ignored. Whenever we see old film franchises get the "reboot" treatment we should be a bit cynical about it.

Case in point. The Robocop reboot that arrived a few years ago and shortly faded away. Utter utter garbage. No reason for that movie to exist. It did nothing that the original did better. It had nothing new to say. So why make it?

I would guess that if they made a specific Jurassic Park reboot it would follow closely to the safe formula of the newer ones.

Also, displeasing one crowd can be grounds for not rebooting. What if that crowd is your largest market share and they don't like it? Now you've just devalued the license as a whole. Not a good idea in the long run.
_______________________
11th Aug 2018, 4:28 PM #14
Robotwin.com

User avatar
Posts: 2918
Registration date: 22nd Sep 2010
Location: USA, Milky Way
I like the idea of a TV miniseries based on the novel. Maybe that's more like an adaptation and not necessarily a "reboot." They did that with The Shining, a great classic movie that Stephen King disapproved of, and although its TV miniseries was more faithful, it wasn't as memorable.
11th Aug 2018, 4:40 PM #15
TheHiddenElephant

User avatar
Posts: 100
Registration date: 1st Dec 2017
Only if there are fluffy dinosaurs. We demand fluffy dinosaurs.
_______________________
image
11th Aug 2018, 5:55 PM #16
MK_Wizard

User avatar
Posts: 2453
Registration date: 17th Jun 2017
Location: Canada
Hey, the T-Rex had feathers and it was assumed to still be scary. Look for yourself.
image
_______________________
11th Aug 2018, 6:37 PM #17
TheHiddenElephant

User avatar
Posts: 100
Registration date: 1st Dec 2017
MK_Wizard:Hey, the T-Rex had feathers and it was assumed to still be scary. Look for yourself.
Image


image
_______________________
image
11th Aug 2018, 7:46 PM #18
Product Placement
paid to be there and look good
User avatar
Posts: 439
Registration date: 15th May 2011
Location: Iceland
The newest critique on dinosaur depictions is that we might not be putting enough muscles and fat on the skeletons, which gives an inaccurate depiction of what they looked like.

Essentially, if we put the absolute minimum padding around skeletons of modern day animals, we get stuff like this:


Hippo:
image


Rhino (the horn wouldn't fossilize):
image



Swans:
image



Cow:
image
11th Aug 2018, 8:01 PM #19
MK_Wizard

User avatar
Posts: 2453
Registration date: 17th Jun 2017
Location: Canada
That is a very good point. Weight and flesh makes a big difference too and with that said, maybe some dinosaurs are chubbier than we think.
_______________________
11th Aug 2018, 11:57 PM #20
GabbyGood

User avatar
Posts: 295
Registration date: 9th Nov 2014
Location: Denver
Theta Sigma:I really like the original film, but I have to admit, I think I'm one of the few people on Earth who actually prefers the book. Mostly for Crichton's trademark cynicism and satire, which got largely lost in Spielberg's more lighthearted vision, but I also prefer most of the characters as they are in the novel and find many of them pretty caricatured and cartoonish in the film, with some being pretty much unrecognisable (I actually love Attenborough's performance as Hammond, but he's a far cry from the leech he was originally, which to me actually weakens the story).


I 100% agree with ya! I loved the book more than the film but mostly due to its gruesome deaths once shit hits the fan. Like others have said I really think Jurassic world is serving as the franchise reboot, so I’m a little uncertain about rebooting the OG. I feel like for what it is, Jurassic Park is a classic that should be left alone. We need some new original ideas IMO.

And more birb dinos
Birbosaurs

Dinobirbs....

Mmkay I’ll see myself out.
_______________________
image
Instagram Tumblr

Avy by AngryRob
Forum > General discussion > Should Jurassic Park be rebooted?
Pages: [1] [2]