SwampApe75
15427
312
9
the movie had the most feeling, great dad figure....rest peacefully
Jul 13, 2026 12:36 PM
SwampApe75
15427
312
9
the movie had the most feeling, great dad figure....rest peacefully
literallymike
And the movie had actual dinosaurs in it, not genetically modified [sic] super-rex hybrids, making them into just run-of-the-mill monster movies. Also, RIP Dr. Weir.
RenaissanceFaireMan
K, it was supposed to be three.
[deleted]
[deleted]
thecollective01
MySushi
I honestly wished he were my father when I watched this film, because mine own is a bonafide asshole who loved undermining kids to inflate his own ego. Hubris without the skill and knowledge to back it up, is how I would summarize my father's entire personality
Thepumpkinlord247
I hope you find peace in life however your dad
ThinkThisOut
“Get those things away from me!” - his character…. Much like the family pet
glovelyday
Great role. Showing how good men don't need to be fathers to be great "dads".
adjacentengels
But is he Mary Poppins, y'all?
NuclearGradeIrony
Role of a lifetime. Also: Event Horizon. Holy shit.
swedeonamoose
I still think they should have just gone full horror with the franchise after the first 3 movies, The latest movie was almost going there but then jsut did the same ol thing again.
Someshithead241
Because modern Hollywood is brainless and run purely by suits with charts and quotas
causality
Yep. I finally figured out why I despise the Jurassic World franchise. It's because every single character just constantly spews quips even while teeth are six inches from sinking into their thighs. They're Marvel movies with dinosaurs.
causality
Imagine if Ellie had said "Mr. Arnold didn't make it but he did give me a hand." That's the entire Jurassic World series.
TheEleventhHand
I've always said that the original Jurassic Park is way overdue for the "dark gritty reboot", and all they would have to do is follow the original book. It's absolutely terrifying, just about everyone dies, the kids kill Grampa, and Dr. Grant is a serious badass who fights raptors with his brain, in hand to claw combat basically towards the end of the book. Oh, and Dr. Satler is his student, not his partner, she's a paleobotanist badass all on her own..
WindowStreetJournal
This part in the book (when he's trying to get back to the HQ with the kids) was much longer, scarier and wilder in terms of action, Spielberg dumbed it down to save on budget amd fit into parental ratings.
QuatermainFT
Not sure it was "dumbed down". It wasn't 'too intelligent' if they hadn't cut. I'm personally not sure they would have added all that much. The movie telling was quite good. They wound up using the material from the book they didn't use in the original movie in later ones.
sankay369
Am I the only one who wanted the kids to get eaten? I know they were acting like kids but they annoyed me, especially in the car.
JustSomePersonThere
I fucking hate kids, and I can tell you with zero hesitation letting them be eaten would make the movie worse. No one wants to see children die violently.
sankay369
You do know it’s not real. You must be fun to be around.
JustSomePersonThere
You do know the point of a story is imaging it happening. You must be fun to be around.
causality
I wish we'd gotten to see the toxin injector raptor scene, but changing Grant from a kindly man who likes kids into a grumpy one who doesn't was a good change. Also, Lex not being a six year old who's constantly screaming and yelling and shitting on Tim is fantastic.
SwampApe75
didnt know about that!
WindowStreetJournal
Yes, those changes were good, yet I can't get past the other main chacater change, the old guy, Hammond. His greed was an important driver of actions in the book.
causality
Maybe it's the kid in me, but I like it. Hammond beig a man whose jadedness and age make him desperate to create something genuinely magical before he dies is a better character arc than the greedy flim-flam artist in the book, especially with movie Hammond's memoirs from JP Trespasser.
causality
Jurassic Park is to me special because it's a combination of "look at how wonderful are these animals, how magical are the things science can create" plus "if you use this wonderful power incorrectly it will be a disaster". Book Hammond doesn't genuinely care for anybody, not the dinosaurs, not the workers who die, not even his grandkids. He's completely profit-driven. I think that damages the first half o the equation.
SubiBryant
And make it under 2.5 hours.
WholeWheatBunnyHugger
I want the 6 hour Jurassic Park cut.
WindowStreetJournal
3hr long movies were not the trend back then, but if all the acrion in book would be included in the film, noone had complained. It's a brilliant book, much deeper and darker than the movie.
SubiBryant
Love me some Crichton but his dialog is trash. He's so good at high concept but phew boy, I'm not sure he's ever heard people speak.
WindowStreetJournal
Really? Dialogues aren't the focal point in some of his books, but e.g. Sphere relies on them, and that's also really good book. Or Disclosure.
SubiBryant
Trash may have been too harsh but Timeline's dialog was so bad it took me right out of an awesome story.
TheLiteraryMachine
Disagree. The T-rex stalking an adult human and two kids for a good portion of the book made zero sense in light of all the other prey the T-rex had available to it. Besides, a raft ride down the river is not what I'd call exciting.
InkyBlinkyPinkyAndClyde
I don't remember the Rex actually stalking them in the book. There were two of them, a big one and a little one, and they had to avoid them bc they were in Rex territory. The big one saved them at one point, but the Rex didn't even know they were there. They were just living their normal dino lives, basically. That's what I recall anyway, been awhile since I read it.
TheLiteraryMachine
The T-rex tried to get at them through the trees when they were floating down river, but the trees were too dense. The text said the T-rex actively continued up river trying to find a break in the trees. And then when they reached the waterfall, the T-rex was waiting for them at the bottom. I consider that actively going out of its way for, as someone else said, a couple of tic tacs.
neverhappytoasterdog
Guarding territory, was how I remember it being put.
Mitheral
Only if the T-Rex is only driven by hunger and not a desire to seek revenge on the animals keeping them captive.
TheLiteraryMachine
How exactly would the T-rex come to that conclusion?
Kbantar
Still with how light the science was in the movie, at least that makes far more sense than a giant spending hours chasing a couple of "Tic Tacs".
Kbantar
That is WAY too much intelligence for a realistic non-avian dinosaur. That franchise just got silly with making them virtual Nobel Prize winners. Think of the dumbest bird that ever lived. That is still smarter than non-avian dinos.
Mitheral
Maybe. It's speculated a T-Rex may have been as smart (whatever that means) as a crocodile. And crocodiles are apparently intelligent hunters that care for their young and use tools. Some species can hunt in groups demonstrating coordination and collaboration among members. https://animalsfyi.com/crocodiles-are-smart-they-can-cooperate-communicate-and-use-tools/
Kbantar
I've not heard of the coordination. That is really weird for animals that don't have parental teaching. "Dumb" animals can be much smarter than general understanding indicates like how many fish are now known to pass the mirror test when it's done in a way for them to care. Still, self destructive revenge pursuit seems a bit much for dinos. Though it's not exactly too far out there compared to most movie biology. So I retract my "old man yelling at cloud" comment. lo