MovieChat Forums > MrFilmJunkie > Replies
MrFilmJunkie's Replies
see what?
how does that make sense? revenge on whom? the mob wants to get rid of decommissioned loopers and and sending them to their past counterpart only causes the risk of mission failure, as people will more likely struggle to kill "themselves" instead of another person.
i was wondering the same thing.
also, why do loopers have to kill their own future counterpart, instead of sending them to another looper?
sure, but fallen kingdom delivers far more practical fx than you can expect from modern blockbusters. so why do you complain?
well, i'm waiting for that twist since the first episode, as william resembles the gunslinger character from the original westworld.
he was eaten by the same creature as zara.
"panic mode" with $710+ million box office worldwide? yeah, sure, panic as they haven't bought enough champagne maybe...
did you miss the opening sequence?
the question is, how did "jurassic world" get more positive reviews, when "fallen kingdom" is undeniably better made in terms of direction, special effects, set pieces and so on? the only good thing j.w. had in comparison was a more interesting premise (fully functioning dino theme park). so do critics do their reviews based on the concept rather than the actual movie?
don't be such a drama queen. the $150M opening is considered a good success and surpassed expectations.
and what else do you want to see in blockbuster movies then? superheroes flying around? spaceship battles? giant robots battling?
*yawn*
as far as i remember, he said (during the production), he wasn't sure if his scenes will even stay in movie. so i didn't expect more than this.
in fallen kingdom, it's a blend of cgi and animatronics, just like in the original jurassic park. the "clamping down on the kids in the Jeep" in the original was cgi as well, even the car was cgi in that shot.
that's one of the reasons why i liked fallen kingdom more than jurassic world. more animatronics again. overall, the fx looked considerably better than in the last movie. wouldn't you agree?
no way would the characters and story be considered "as good as the original" in 1993. even the lost world was considered a lackluster sequel by many critics in 1997.
i thought fallen kingdom was a highly enjoyable movie, but i wouldn't call it a gem.
no brachio, but another "long neck", probably an apatosaur (even two of them, one bigger and a smaller one).
i dunno. it was pascal laugier's weakest movie so far, imho.
i thought maybe the home invaders were just part of the girl's imagination and the mother actually died of something else (cancer, an accident etc.) and the villains are just metaphorical or whatsoever. but apparently i didn't miss a deeper meaning, as there is none. which makes the movie and its events pretty random.
thanks, that's as much as i got.
who are the two home invaders? are they also just an imagination? how exactly did the mother die?
if you think a camrip was "far from blurry" then go see an eye doctor asap. also, there's no "exempt from copyright or piracy law".