User Avatar Image

Remake Jurassic Park and The Lost World (with Spielberg as Producer)

posted by Chariloe on - last edited - Viewed by 8.2K users

Somebody started a campaign that could actually be successful, but we need more people to participate.

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Remake-Jurassic-Park-and-The-Lost-World-with-Spielberg-as-Producer/228708970475230


We must send letters to Universal (or e-mail the studio) and explain this brilliant idea:

If Universal is afraid to remake the JP movies (because of the Spielberg-fanboys who are so biased towards the original movie) then we have to convince Universal to GET SPIELBERG TO BE THE PRODUCER OF THE REMAKES. It might be the only way to convince the public that this project will be taken seriously.

"In Steve We Trust"

The posters for the remakes could even say: "STEVEN SPIELBERG PRESENTS" above the title, just like other movies he was only the producer of.

P.S.
If you don't like the term "remake," then just think of it as a "reboot" instead...because our motivation is more about the books than it is about Spielberg's films.

182 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • 11 days ago, the Facebook page had 151 fans.

    Now it has 236 fans. Awesome.


    :D

  • I really don't see a reason for a remake. Unless it would be a two parter that includes everything in the book.

  • I'm sick of all those adaptations, sequels, and remakes. I'm hating Holywood now :/ ...

  • @Lokken said: It baffles me that anyone thinks

    1) remaking these films is a good idea or at ALL needed
    2) that any studio would be stupid enough to attempt it

    the first film (and second to an extent) hit somewhat of a perfect storm with public interest, casting, and technology.

    What do you think when someone mentions Star Wars? You think of how much Lucas fucked up the franchise with the garbage prequels. In other words, leave it alone, you're not going to make it better.

    Again, its baffling this is even discussed. Its an asinine idea.

    It's not that it's needed. Why would this franchise need to be remade? It's a classic. It's just that for the sake of the memory of Michael Crichton, his books AND his genius, some of the JP community feels that there should be a seperate adaptation of this series that is more true to the novel.

    The two concepts cannot be compared and they shouldn't be. Spielberg's expertise arose when he had freedom to make stories his own. Crichton's was in bringing about stories of scientific wonder. We have spielberg's masterpiece, but Crichton's is still in the dark and should be brought out into the light.

    Most people don't even know Jurassic Park started out as a novel and even some of you admit to never reading the story. I assure you, it is much more terrifying than the movies, go read it, but don't think that this adaptation shouldn't happen because we already have a great movie. It's not replacing anything. It's simply adding content to one of the greatest film's of all time.

    Also, the prequels of Star Wars were needed to complete the story. Yes they were trash but they were needed. It didn't make the series better, true. But it also didn't make it worse. At least it didn't to a true fan.

    And while remaking the series for the sake of getting a better "novel" adaptation would be amazing, It simply will never happen. No studio will ever find it necessary. We would sooner get a dinosaur than get a remake of jurassic park.

  • No remakes, the new films should be prequels.

    The new game is a prequel to all three films so why not the new films be as well?

    I have a great idea with a younger Hammond (in his 30s or 40s) searching the world for living non-avian dinosaurs to populate a Park (In this case JP San Diego until he decides on an island location instead.) as his scientists continue to try and genetically engineer them. (It took them 10 years of research according to the first film.)
    So Hammond decides to take some (probably only eggs) from the wilds until they have occomplished to genetically engineer a dinosaur.

    Crichton's novels even mention living non-avian dinosaurs on the Earth in their prologues.

  • I want nothing to do with a remake.

    The original, current movie (and trilogy) follows the novel just fine. Sure, you can go through and nit-pick out important things that were left out, but that's always the way it is. The novel is 400 pages long. The screenplay for a 2-hour movie is 120 pages long. No adaptation is going to follow the novel exactly. Ever.

    A reboot is not going to magically include every character, every important line of dialogue, and every key scene from the novel. It would, at best, represent the novel equally as much as the original film.

    At worst, it would be an unnecessary and unoriginal moneygrab, forgettable in the shadow of the original (if it doesn't stain it).

    Instead of rebooting the franchise, those parts of the novel that have not yet been adapted to the screen can be incorporated into sequels. Remember the little girl on the beach at the beginning of The Lost World movie? Or the T-rex using its tongue to find people hiding behind a waterfall? Or the river sequence in JP3? Or the whole bit with the aviary? These are all scenes that appeared in the first novel, and the first movie didn't have to be remade to bring these scenes to life; they were incorporated into the sequels.

    Give me sequels. Give me all the sequels that you can find producers for. But there's no point in restarting from scratch when there is already a rich lineage to build upon in the current trilogy.

  • @jurassiraptor said: I want nothing to do with a remake.

    The original, current movie (and trilogy) follows the novel just fine. Sure, you can go through and nit-pick out important things that were left out, but that's always the way it is. The novel is 400 pages long. The screenplay for a 2-hour movie is 120 pages long. No adaptation is going to follow the novel exactly. Ever.

    A reboot is not going to magically include every character, every important line of dialogue, and every key scene from the novel. It would, at best, represent the novel equally as much as the original film.

    At worst, it would be an unnecessary and unoriginal moneygrab, forgettable in the shadow of the original (if it doesn't stain it).

    Instead of rebooting the franchise, those parts of the novel that have not yet been adapted to the screen can be incorporated into sequels. Remember the little girl on the beach at the beginning of The Lost World movie? Or the T-rex using its tongue to find people hiding behind a waterfall? Or the river sequence in JP3? Or the whole bit with the aviary? These are all scenes that appeared in the first novel, and the first movie didn't have to be remade to bring these scenes to life; they were incorporated into the sequels.

    Give me sequels. Give me all the sequels that you can find producers for. But there's no point in restarting from scratch when there is already a rich lineage to build upon in the current trilogy.

    Yea id have to agree, even the part in Jp3 when the velociraptor claws the mercenaries back with the toe, it was a scene from the first book and i believe the only point in which troodon is mentioned in the novel

  • @SWGNATE said: Yea id have to agree, even the part in Jp3 when the velociraptor claws the mercenaries back with the toe, it was a scene from the first book and i believe the only point in which troodon is mentioned in the novel


    Thank you sooo much for noticing this!! I haven't heard anyone else mention this ever! Also I think Nash's Death was supposed to reference the death of George Baselton by a T-rex in the novel too. The t-rex steps on him and then bites his head off. Just like the spino did to Nash.

  • I good sequel that makes up for the horrors of JP3. Or even a prequel concerning with the contruction of Jurassic park. Or a story that tell us about the troubles of site B and how it became abandoned etc.

  • Thanks, but no, thanks. I'd rather not see a remake.

Add Comment