Telltale Games

Faceslasher · 01/13/2012, 06:34 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sadonicus

Give it up already!

I know, fine let him have his shit sequel. Just dont cry and moan that Universal laughs at you all for this. I do enjoy CGI dinosaurs with CGI cars and teenage actors and naked ladies flying all over and all that CGI gore flying, lets make Jurassic Park all CGI now!!!!!!!!!!!!

You guys do know Stan Winston is dead right? And Michael is dead, and some of the crew are dead, the dinosaurs are gone. Nothing can be changed now.

Shadowknight1 · 01/13/2012, 09:35 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faceslasher

You guys do know Stan Winston is dead right? And Michael is dead, and some of the crew are dead, the dinosaurs are gone. Nothing can be changed now.

Puppeteering and animatronics have pretty well died since Stan Winston and Jim Henson died.

*Silverwolfpet* · 01/14/2012, 03:51 am

Hey guys, keep it nice here, okay? Opinions are awesome for being diverse, but don't jump at each other's throats, please.

Faceslasher · 01/16/2012, 01:35 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silverwolfpet

Hey guys, keep it nice here, okay? Opinions are awesome for being diverse, but don't jump at each other's throats, please.

I'm not, I'm letting these guys know Jurassic Park cannot be remade without Michael and Stan alive. They are dead, Jurassic Park is dead.

waroftheworlds01 · 01/16/2012, 09:09 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faceslasher

I'm not, I'm letting these guys know Jurassic Park cannot be remade without Michael and Stan alive. They are dead, Jurassic Park is dead.

That's laughable. There are other speical effects teams out there you know? A remake of Jurassic Park is still a possibility. It just probably won't be with any of the original team involved. I just can't see Steven Spielberg being a part of a remake of one of his own films.

But to say that someone else at some time won't remake Jurassic Park is just silly. Have you seen all the remakes coming out recently? I have no doubt that Jurassic Park is standing in line as well.

Sadonicus · 01/18/2012, 03:43 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by waroftheworlds01

But to say that someone else at some time won't remake Jurassic Park is just silly. Have you seen all the remakes coming out recently? I have no doubt that Jurassic Park is standing in line as well.

Yeah, thats nothing I would consider being a good thing. Actually I really HATE that in Hollywood!

Faceslasher · 01/19/2012, 08:23 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by waroftheworlds01

That's laughable. There are other speical effects teams out there you know? A remake of Jurassic Park is still a possibility. It just probably won't be with any of the original team involved. I just can't see Steven Spielberg being a part of a remake of one of his own films.

But to say that someone else at some time won't remake Jurassic Park is just silly. Have you seen all the remakes coming out recently? I have no doubt that Jurassic Park is standing in line as well.

Jurassic Park can't be remade. Why do you want a remake? Hollywood is more worried about SOPA then they care about Jurassic Park. The only special effects team to make Jurassic Park famous was Stan and ILM. Steven is way too busy with other films, JP4 is the last stop on the train. Either you remake Jurassic Park yourself or continue boycotting. Steven will never touch Jurassic Park again.

waroftheworlds01 · 01/19/2012, 10:14 am

ILM is still around. And it is a job after all. I find it hard pressed that they would say no to working on a Jurassic park film, remake or not. And there are other directors who would more than likely love the idea of working on a Jurassic Park movie.

I wouldn't mind a Jurassic Park remake because, unlike yourself I assume, you think that remakes ruin the original when that actually couldn't be further from the truth. Believe it or not, there are people who haven't seen Jurassic Park. Remakes put the originals in the spot light again. Most people when they hear a movie is a remake they check out the original either before or after seeing the remake. And it's not like a bad remake causes the original to become a bad film itself as well.

Also, there's no harm in a remake when there's so much from the first novel that can still be adapted. I still think that a Jurassic Park two part, or three part mini-series should be made for the first and second novels. They would closely resemble the novels and it would be fun to watch.

You keep saying that becasue Winston is gone, because Crichton is gone, and because Spielberg is busy there's no way that Jurassic park can get back on its feet but in the end it's Universal's call. If they want Jurassic Park back, remake or otherwise, it's coming back with out Steven or not.

BlankCanvasDJ · 01/19/2012, 11:15 am

I don't think it should be remade but the idea that a Jurassic Park remake couldn't be done because Stan Winston (or anybody else) is dead is ridiculous. You could have said the same thing about Willis O'Brien after King Kong, but they remade that. Twice.

I don't think the movie needs to be redone at all. But a big-budget miniseries that stays faithful to the books? There's a thought...

Faceslasher · 01/21/2012, 02:51 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by waroftheworlds01

ILM is still around. And it is a job after all. I find it hard pressed that they would say no to working on a Jurassic park film, remake or not. And there are other directors who would more than likely love the idea of working on a Jurassic Park movie.

I wouldn't mind a Jurassic Park remake because, unlike yourself I assume, you think that remakes ruin the original when that actually couldn't be further from the truth. Believe it or not, there are people who haven't seen Jurassic Park. Remakes put the originals in the spot light again. Most people when they hear a movie is a remake they check out the original either before or after seeing the remake. And it's not like a bad remake causes the original to become a bad film itself as well.

Also, there's no harm in a remake when there's so much from the first novel that can still be adapted. I still think that a Jurassic Park two part, or three part mini-series should be made for the first and second novels. They would closely resemble the novels and it would be fun to watch.

You keep saying that becasue Winston is gone, because Crichton is gone, and because Spielberg is busy there's no way that Jurassic park can get back on its feet but in the end it's Universal's call. If they want Jurassic Park back, remake or otherwise, it's coming back with out Steven or not.

Please tell me which remake actually was better then the original?

Lets remake BTTF by having Marty played by Eminem and Doc played by Snoop Dogg

Faceslasher · 01/21/2012, 02:52 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlankCanvasDJ

I don't think it should be remade but the idea that a Jurassic Park remake couldn't be done because Stan Winston (or anybody else) is dead is ridiculous. You could have said the same thing about Willis O'Brien after King Kong, but they remade that. Twice.

I don't think the movie needs to be redone at all. But a big-budget miniseries that stays faithful to the books? There's a thought...

Stan made the puppets, stan directed the puppets. Stan is dead, steven is never EVER gonna touch Jurassic Park, google it. He said he is done with JP. Find another producer, I'll ring up Tommy Wiseau. He's an excellent director/producer.

waroftheworlds01 · 01/21/2012, 06:59 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faceslasher

Please tell me which remake actually was better then the original?

True Grit (2010)
Cape Fear (80's)
Dawn of the Dead (2000's)
The Thing (80's)
The Fly (80's)
3:10 to Yoma (2000's)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (70's)
Piranha 3D

Those are movies that I loved a lot more than the original. There's more but these were some of the better remakes. And then there's the much longer list of movies that I felt , although not as good, lived up to the original. Movies like Peter Jackson's King Kong or the most recent reboot of Nightmare on Elm Street. This all opinion based anyway. There's no real way to say if a movie is better or not. But remakes aren't bad. If fact, most of the time they're good movies. It's just that people have this weird understanding that they should but a remake down for no other reason than it's a remake. Which isn't really fair.

Sadonicus · 01/22/2012, 03:11 am

Nightmare on elm street is a good example of how uncreative and unnecessary a remake can be, its nothing near the quality of the original. And remakes are only good when they are very different from the original and stand for their own right, like The thing and Dawn of the dead, and only use the name and core idea for publicity or the director simply loves the original. And also it makes sense to remake a film when there actually is a reason, either by far better technological possibilities or when the material can be interpreted in other new ways, like after 20 or 30 years, not 10. Remaking just for the sake of it and slightly adapting it to the younger generation is just uncreative. When they are too lazy to think of something new or taking risks, they deserve to be inevitably compared to the original and loose miserably.

I dont need to see ten times more dinosaurs, younger actors and a darker theme for Jurassic Park like in the remakes they poop out these days.

About a closer adaptation of the book, guys, just cut it off. Books cannot be adapted one to one, its a different medium goddammit. There were similar scenes in the sequels like the river scene in JP 3, it dont have to be a page by page copy of the scenarios of the book, wheres the point in that? Spend millions of dollars because some fans are too lazy to imagine the things that they read???

Faceslasher · 01/24/2012, 03:38 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by waroftheworlds01

True Grit (2010)
Cape Fear (80's)
Dawn of the Dead (2000's)
The Thing (80's)
The Fly (80's)
3:10 to Yoma (2000's)
Invasion of the Body Snatchers (70's)
Piranha 3D

Those are movies that I loved a lot more than the original. There's more but these were some of the better remakes. And then there's the much longer list of movies that I felt , although not as good, lived up to the original. Movies like Peter Jackson's King Kong or the most recent reboot of Nightmare on Elm Street. This all opinion based anyway. There's no real way to say if a movie is better or not. But remakes aren't bad. If fact, most of the time they're good movies. It's just that people have this weird understanding that they should but a remake down for no other reason than it's a remake. Which isn't really fair.

I liked the first one better. Jurassic Park is a film that cannot be remade, especially since Steven said so himself that he will never touch JP after JP IV again.

waroftheworlds01 · 01/25/2012, 06:23 pm

LOL Okay, I know your mind will never be changed and I respect that. In the long run, a remake really isn't necessary. The first film is one of my favorite films of all times and I honestly watch it at least once a week.

However, if they ever did decide to remake it or make a Jurassic Park 4 (which I've heard they are but who can really know for sure?) I will be in line waiting to see it because I love the series on all fronts (Movies, Novels, Comics, Action Figures, and Video Games.) I love the series so if they have plans to expand it in any way them I'm all for it.

Faceslasher · 01/25/2012, 07:05 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by waroftheworlds01

LOL Okay, I know your mind will never be changed and I respect that. In the long run, a remake really isn't necessary. The first film is one of my favorite films of all times and I honestly watch it at least once a week.

However, if they ever did decide to remake it or make a Jurassic Park 4 (which I've heard they are but who can really know for sure?) I will be in line waiting to see it because I love the series on all fronts (Movies, Novels, Comics, Action Figures, and Video Games.) I love the series so if they have plans to expand it in any way them I'm all for it.

Also, Steven said he won't be directing JP IV, just like JP3.

waroftheworlds01 · 01/25/2012, 08:29 pm

Yeah, but i know Joe Johnson wanted to return though. I remember they had an interview with him saying that he might return after he finished Captin American but that movies had been made and released already with no real news on Jurassic Park so......

Orange Intercouse · 08/29/2012, 06:02 pm

The facebook page has 1,859 fans now.

cormoran · 09/09/2012, 06:34 pm

I hate remakes.

It shows a lack of imagination in Hollywood. Actually the most imaginative thing to come of this phenomenon is how with every remake, Hollywood manages to use a new re- word. remade, reimagined, redefined, restarted, rebooted. Here's a re- word for you Hollywood; Retarded.

I'm waiting for the day when they announce a remake to a movie that's not even out yet. It WILL happen.

Numinous · 09/18/2012, 07:10 pm

The problem with remakes is that all too often they are simply a cash grab. The best example of this is the new Spiderman movie. This movie wasn't made with a deep appreciation and understanding of the story and history of the character. It was made because if they DIDN'T make it then the rights to the franchise would revert back to Marvel and Sony would lose a "cash cow". They pushed out whatever they could for the sake of keeping the film rights, not for the sake of making a quality movie.

IMO Jurassic Park II and III are a similar thing. Just making a Jurassic Park movie to cash in on the franchise. There was no quality story in there, just dinosaurs chasing people. Boring. Who cares. I don't have high hopes for a Jurassic Park IV either.

IF anyone was to go back to the source material to try and make a different Jurassic Park movie (please no "remake". Speilberg's movie was a great movie and doesn't need to be improved upon) the ONLY way it would be any good was if it was about the characters and the themes of the original. The whole dinosaur chasing people stuff needs to be of secondary importance. A new Jurassic Park would need to be a serious, deep character driven movie, not an action packed hollow movie like so much of what Hollywood pumps out these days. Can anyone say "Transformers"? No thanks. I like my movies with substance.

01/14/2012, 03:51 am	#163
Silverwolfpet Wolfy Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Romania Posts: 3,042	Hey guys, keep it nice here, okay? Opinions are awesome for being diverse, but don't jump at each other's throats, please. __________________ I am a community moderator, here to assist, keep the peace, and keep these boards clean and friendly for all. I am a volunteer, and not a Telltale employee, and my opinions are my own. Something awesome this way comes... ^.^ www.silverwolfpet.com

01/22/2012, 03:11 am	#173
Sadonicus Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 279	Nightmare on elm street is a good example of how uncreative and unnecessary a remake can be, its nothing near the quality of the original. And remakes are only good when they are very different from the original and stand for their own right, like The thing and Dawn of the dead, and only use the name and core idea for publicity or the director simply loves the original. And also it makes sense to remake a film when there actually is a reason, either by far better technological possibilities or when the material can be interpreted in other new ways, like after 20 or 30 years, not 10. Remaking just for the sake of it and slightly adapting it to the younger generation is just uncreative. When they are too lazy to think of something new or taking risks, they deserve to be inevitably compared to the original and loose miserably. I dont need to see ten times more dinosaurs, younger actors and a darker theme for Jurassic Park like in the remakes they poop out these days. About a closer adaptation of the book, guys, just cut it off. Books cannot be adapted one to one, its a different medium goddammit. There were similar scenes in the sequels like the river scene in JP 3, it dont have to be a page by page copy of the scenarios of the book, wheres the point in that? Spend millions of dollars because some fans are too lazy to imagine the things that they read??? Last edited by Sadonicus; 01/22/2012 at 05:17 am.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01/19/2012, 10:14 am	#168
waroftheworlds01 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 869	ILM is still around. And it is a job after all. I find it hard pressed that they would say no to working on a Jurassic park film, remake or not. And there are other directors who would more than likely love the idea of working on a Jurassic Park movie. I wouldn't mind a Jurassic Park remake because, unlike yourself I assume, you think that remakes ruin the original when that actually couldn't be further from the truth. Believe it or not, there are people who haven't seen Jurassic Park. Remakes put the originals in the spot light again. Most people when they hear a movie is a remake they check out the original either before or after seeing the remake. And it's not like a bad remake causes the original to become a bad film itself as well. Also, there's no harm in a remake when there's so much from the first novel that can still be adapted. I still think that a Jurassic Park two part, or three part mini-series should be made for the first and second novels. They would closely resemble the novels and it would be fun to watch. You keep saying that becasue Winston is gone, because Crichton is gone, and because Spielberg is busy there's no way that Jurassic park can get back on its feet but in the end it's Universal's call. If they want Jurassic Park back, remake or otherwise, it's coming back with out Steven or not.

01/19/2012, 11:15 am	#169
BlankCanvasDJ Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 1,069	I don't think it should be remade but the idea that a Jurassic Park remake couldn't be done because Stan Winston (or anybody else) is dead is ridiculous. You could have said the same thing about Willis O'Brien after King Kong, but they remade that. Twice. I don't think the movie needs to be redone at all. But a big-budget miniseries that stays faithful to the books? There's a thought...

01/25/2012, 06:23 pm	#175
waroftheworlds01 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 869	LOL Okay, I know your mind will never be changed and I respect that. In the long run, a remake really isn't necessary. The first film is one of my favorite films of all times and I honestly watch it at least once a week. However, if they ever did decide to remake it or make a Jurassic Park 4 (which I've heard they are but who can really know for sure?) I will be in line waiting to see it because I love the series on all fronts (Movies, Novels, Comics, Action Figures, and Video Games.) I love the series so if they have plans to expand it in any way them I'm all for it.

01/25/2012, 08:29 pm	#177
waroftheworlds01 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Posts: 869	Yeah, but i know Joe Johnson wanted to return though. I remember they had an interview with him saying that he might return after he finished Captin American but that movies had been made and released already with no real news on Jurassic Park so......

08/29/2012, 06:02 pm	#178
Orange Intercouse Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 27	The facebook page has 1,859 fans now.

09/09/2012, 06:34 pm	#179
cormoran Senior Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Adelaide, South Australia Posts: 229	I hate remakes. It shows a lack of imagination in Hollywood. Actually the most imaginative thing to come of this phenomenon is how with every remake, Hollywood manages to use a new re- word. remade, reimagined, redefined, restarted, rebooted. Here's a re- word for you Hollywood; Retarded. I'm waiting for the day when they announce a remake to a movie that's not even out yet. It WILL happen.

09/18/2012, 07:10 pm	#180
Numinous Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Posts: 7	The problem with remakes is that all too often they are simply a cash grab. The best example of this is the new Spiderman movie. This movie wasn't made with a deep appreciation and understanding of the story and history of the character. It was made because if they DIDN'T make it then the rights to the franchise would revert back to Marvel and Sony would lose a "cash cow". They pushed out whatever they could for the sake of keeping the film rights, not for the sake of making a quality movie. IMO Jurassic Park II and III are a similar thing. Just making a Jurassic Park movie to cash in on the franchise. There was no quality story in there, just dinosaurs chasing people. Boring. Who cares. I don't have high hopes for a Jurassic Park IV either. IF anyone was to go back to the source material to try and make a different Jurassic Park movie (please no "remake". Speilberg's movie was a great movie and doesn't need to be improved upon) the ONLY way it would be any good was if it was about the characters and the themes of the original. The whole dinosaur chasing people stuff needs to be of secondary importance. A new Jurassic Park would need to be a serious, deep character driven movie, not an action packed hollow movie like so much of what Hollywood pumps out these days. Can anyone say "Transformers"? No thanks. I like my movies with substance.