u/RecognitionSea4608

I was thinking about the future of the Jurassic Saga, I quite liked Rebirth, and I'm curious to see if the franchise can be revitalized with the next installments. However, I'm still really furious with the way Dominion was handled. On paper, there were some good starting points, in my opinion, like the reunion with the old leads and the return of Dogson, now a tech bro, in full ultracapitalist frenzy. There was even a return to the moral and ethical dilemmas represented by the storyline of the conspiracy and Dr. Wu. But I considered all of this to be the bare minimum I could expect.

Unfortunately it was all badly wasted and sacrificed on the altar of blockbuster action spectacle. The feeling I got after a new (suffering) rewatch was that the film was conceived as an attempt to tie together cool sequences written stand alone without any initial logical connection. Looks like someone said, "Hey, wouldn't it be cool to have a Fast & Furious-style chase with trained Atrociraptors?" and then "Let's also put in a Pyroraptor that lives isolated near a frozen lake," not to mention the Dimetrodon! "Too iconic to be left out again. Where do we put them? Let's put them random in a cave, so we also have a jump scare."

Honorable mention goes to Alan Grant, who sees a sauropod from the plane, and is even able to recognize the species as Dreadnoughtus (which, of course, he would never have seen before), and to the dinosaurs that in just a few years have spread across the planet with the speed of a virus. Kudos to them for their prolificacy and super-accelerated growth rate. This last aspect in particular was almost "correct" in Rebirth when they decided that dinosaurs were now only surviving more in tropical areas. Also, I think they built the most "plastic" animatronics ever seen. How can you go wrong with something like this?

I mean, I hate to say it, but it seemed like a film heavily influenced by business decisions (did they want to take few risks and do an F&F with dinosaurs? Did they want to pump the toys?) and with a script where as many things as possible were stuffed in for fear of leaving any out. Too much fan service and also poorly done. My impression is that whoever wrote it never really loved JP or that they didn't fully understand him. Let me give you a silly example: in JP Alan Grant repeatedly points out that dinosaurs are closely related to birds, a theory that was still quite new at the time. How can you waste the opportunity to confront him, let me tell you, with Pyroraptor to make him realize how right he was 30 years later? Okay, this is just a small example, but I think it's in line with the issues I mentioned earlier.

What do you think about all this?

I was thinking about the future of the Jurassic Saga, I quite liked Rebirth, and I'm curious to see if the franchise can be revitalized with the next installments. However, I'm still really furious with the way Dominion was handled. On paper, there were some good starting points, in my opinion, like the reunion with the old leads and the return of Dogson, now a tech bro, in full ultracapitalist frenzy. There was even a return to the moral and ethical dilemmas represented by the storyline of the conspiracy and Dr. Wu. But I considered all of this to be the bare minimum I could expect.

Unfortunately it was all badly wasted and sacrificed on the altar of blockbuster action spectacle. The feeling I got after a new (suffering) rewatch was that the film was conceived as an attempt to tie together cool sequences written stand alone without any initial logical connection. Looks like someone said, "Hey, wouldn't it be cool to have a Fast & Furious-style chase with trained Atrociraptors?" and then "Let's also put in a Pyroraptor that lives isolated near a frozen lake," not to mention the Dimetrodon! "Too iconic to be left out again. Where do we put them? Let's put them random in a cave, so we also have a jump scare."

Honorable mention goes to Alan Grant, who sees a sauropod from the plane, and is even able to recognize the species as Dreadnoughtus (which, of course, he would never have seen before), and to the dinosaurs that in just a few years have spread across the planet with the speed of a virus. Kudos to them for their prolificacy and super-accelerated growth rate. This last aspect in particular was almost "correct" in Rebirth when they decided that dinosaurs were now only surviving more in tropical areas. Also, I think they built the most "plastic" animatronics ever seen. How can you go wrong with something like this?

I mean, I hate to say it, but it seemed like a film heavily influenced by business decisions (did they want to take few risks and do an F&F with dinosaurs? Did they want to pump the toys?) and with a script where as many things as possible were stuffed in for fear of leaving any out. Too much fan service and also poorly done. My impression is that whoever wrote it never really loved JP or that they didn't fully understand him. Let me give you a silly example: in JP Alan Grant repeatedly points out that dinosaurs are closely related to birds, a theory that was still quite new at the time. How can you waste the opportunity to confront him, let me tell you, with Pyroraptor to make him realize how right he was 30 years later? Okay, this is just a small example, but I think it's in line with the issues I mentioned earlier.

What do you think about all this?

I was thinking about the future of the Jurassic Saga, I quite liked Rebirth, and I'm curious to see if the franchise can be revitalized with the next installments. However, I'm still really furious with the way Dominion was handled. On paper, there were some good starting points, in my opinion, like the reunion with the old leads and the return of Dogson, now a tech bro, in full ultracapitalist frenzy. There was even a return to the moral and ethical dilemmas represented by the storyline of the conspiracy and Dr. Wu. But I considered all of this to be the bare minimum I could expect.

Unfortunately it was all badly wasted and sacrificed on the altar of blockbuster action spectacle. The feeling I got after a new (suffering) rewatch was that the film was conceived as an attempt to tie together cool sequences written stand alone without any initial logical connection. Looks like someone said, "Hey, wouldn't it be cool to have a Fast & Furious-style chase with trained Atrociraptors?" and then "Let's also put in a Pyroraptor that lives isolated near a frozen lake," not to mention the Dimetrodon! "Too iconic to be left out again. Where do we put them? Let's put them random in a cave, so we also have a jump scare."

Honorable mention goes to Alan Grant, who sees a sauropod from the plane, and is even able to recognize the species as Dreadnoughtus (which, of course, he would never have seen before), and to the dinosaurs that in just a few years have spread across the planet with the speed of a virus. Kudos to them for their prolificacy and super-accelerated growth rate. This last aspect in particular was almost "correct" in Rebirth when they decided that dinosaurs were now only surviving more in tropical areas. Also, I think they built the most "plastic" animatronics ever seen. How can you go wrong with something like this?

I mean, I hate to say it, but it seemed like a film heavily influenced by business decisions (did they want to take few risks and do an F&F with dinosaurs? Did they want to pump the toys?) and with a script where as many things as possible were stuffed in for fear of leaving any out. Too much fan service and also poorly done. My impression is that whoever wrote it never really loved JP or that they didn't fully understand him. Let me give you a silly example: in JP Alan Grant repeatedly points out that dinosaurs are closely related to birds, a theory that was still quite new at the time. How can you waste the opportunity to confront him, let me tell you, with Pyroraptor to make him realize how right he was 30 years later? Okay, this is just a small example, but I think it's in line with the issues I mentioned earlier.

What do you think about all this?

Since the Engineers were introduced to Prometheus, they have immediately struck me. I found it brilliant that they were characterized as an advanced species but that there is no qualm in eliminating their creations in a way that recalls God's fury in the Old Testament. I really hope they can come back again, maybe in a sequel to Alien: Covenant, and that we can better understand their culture. In particular, I've always wondered whether Planet 4 or Origae-6 itself were meant to be the Engineers' home world, though I suspect not, and that they are just worlds colonized by them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that there were some hints about Jesus being an Engineer and that his crucifixion is the real reason of the choice to destroy humanity. Or do I remember wrong? Anyway, I really wish these elements were explored.. what do you think?

Since the Engineers were introduced to Prometheus, they have immediately struck me. I found it brilliant that they were characterized as an advanced species but that there is no qualm in eliminating their creations in a way that recalls God's fury in the Old Testament. I really hope they can come back again, maybe in a sequel to Alien: Covenant, and that we can better understand their culture. In particular, I've always wondered whether Planet 4 or Origae-6 itself were meant to be the Engineers' home world, though I suspect not, and that they are just worlds colonized by them. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to recall that there were some hints about Jesus being an Engineer and that his crucifixion is the real reason of the choice to destroy humanity. Or do I remember wrong? Anyway, I really wish these elements were explored.. what do you think?

I had a thing for Dark Angel, the show created by James Cameron starring Jessica Alba. At the time it was considered the "next big thing" of television science fiction, but was then canceled after just two seasons. Yet it seems to me that he can still boast some credit today, especially among fans of future cyberpunk dystopians. I must admit that I would be intrigued by the possibility of a revival, even if very unlikely.

If you remember, Dark Angel envisions a near future where the government has conducted secret experiments on children, turning them into genetically enhanced super soldiers, all in the dystopian Seattle of 2019 (LOL). Alba's character, Max Guevara, raised in a clandestine military facility, manages to escape together with other “transgenic” subjects who have become a sort of family for her. Years later, we find her committing to a normal life, working as a courier and trying not to attract unwanted attention, even though this plan is doomed to fail.

I also loved her because she tackled mature themes like state control, identity, personal freedom and female empowerment, which fit perfectly into the poetics of Cameron himself, father of other strong and complex female protagonists, such as Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley and Queen Alien XD.

Perhaps it was a series far too ahead of its time, and I think it would have a lot to say today in the current television landscape. In you opinion, would a Dark Angel revival or reboot be a good idea?

I had a thing for Dark Angel, the show created by James Cameron starring Jessica Alba. At the time it was considered the "next big thing" of television science fiction, but was then canceled after just two seasons. Yet it seems to me that he can still boast some credit today, especially among fans of future cyberpunk dystopians. I must admit that I would be intrigued by the possibility of a revival, even if very unlikely.

If you remember, Dark Angel envisions a near future where the government has conducted secret experiments on children, turning them into genetically enhanced super soldiers, all in the dystopian Seattle of 2019 (LOL). Alba's character, Max Guevara, raised in a clandestine military facility, manages to escape together with other “transgenic” subjects who have become a sort of family for her. Years later, we find her committing to a normal life, working as a courier and trying not to attract unwanted attention, even though this plan is doomed to fail.

I also loved her because she tackled mature themes like state control, identity, personal freedom and female empowerment, which fit perfectly into the poetics of Cameron himself, father of other strong and complex female protagonists, such as Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley and Queen Alien XD.

Perhaps it was a series far too ahead of its time, and I think it would have a lot to say today in the current television landscape. In you opinion, would a Dark Angel revival or reboot be a good idea?

I had a thing for Dark Angel, the show created by James Cameron starring Jessica Alba. At the time it was considered the "next big thing" of television science fiction, but was then canceled after just two seasons. Yet it seems to me that he can still boast some credit today, especially among fans of future cyberpunk dystopians. I must admit that I would be intrigued by the possibility of a revival, even if very unlikely.

If you remember, Dark Angel envisions a near future where the government has conducted secret experiments on children, turning them into genetically enhanced super soldiers, all in the dystopian Seattle of 2019 (LOL). Alba's character, Max Guevara, raised in a clandestine military facility, manages to escape together with other “transgenic” subjects who have become a sort of family for her. Years later, we find her committing to a normal life, working as a courier and trying not to attract unwanted attention, even though this plan is doomed to fail.

I also loved her because she tackled mature themes like state control, identity, personal freedom and female empowerment, which fit perfectly into the poetics of Cameron himself, father of other strong and complex female protagonists, such as Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley and Queen Alien XD.

Perhaps it was a series far too ahead of its time, and I think it would have a lot to say today in the current television landscape. In you opinion, would a Dark Angel revival or reboot be a good idea?

I recently rewatched RoboCop, the 2014 remake directed by José Padilha. I wanted to see if time had somehow altered my judgment of the film. Even though I didn't consider it a masterpiece, I liked it quite a bit when it came out in theaters. After 12 years, however, it seems even better to me.

I'll start by saying that it's nowhere near the original 1987 RoboCop. I believe, however, that he has many excellent ideas and has taken some interesting liberties, even if all the satire that characterized the original masterpiece is missing

.

The plot is set in 2028, the year in which the multinational OmniCorp is a leader in the robotics technology sector. Thanks to their patrol robots such as the ED-209 and the EM-208 android policemen, it has allowed the United States of America to win numerous wars in which they have been involved; however, it cannot sell its products on the civilian market, both because of public opinion, opposed to the use of robots as a police force, and because of the Dreyfus Act which explicitly prohibits it.

To get around this problem, OmniCorp leader Raymond Sellars asks his marketing team, in collaboration with scientist Dennett Norton, to design a new product, combining man and machine, to be used as a guardian of the law, hoping to convince the public of the soundness of the idea by focusing on the fact that there is still a man inside the machine.

Today these premises seem much more real and disturbing to me than when the film was released in 2014. Multinationals aiming for defense procurement and constantly trying to circumvent the laws, manipulate public opinion with the goal of mere profit, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. What do you think? Is this a movie that, while not a masterpiece, could be reevaluated nowadays?

I recently rewatched RoboCop, the 2014 remake directed by José Padilha. I wanted to see if time had somehow altered my judgment of the film. Even though I didn't consider it a masterpiece, I liked it quite a bit when it came out in theaters. After 12 years, however, it seems even better to me.

I'll start by saying that it's nowhere near the original 1987 RoboCop. I believe, however, that he has many excellent ideas and has taken some interesting liberties, even if all the satire that characterized the original masterpiece is missing.

The plot is set in 2028, the year in which the multinational OmniCorp is a leader in the robotics technology sector. Thanks to their patrol robots such as the ED-209 and the EM-208 android policemen, it has allowed the United States of America to win numerous wars in which they have been involved; however, it cannot sell its products on the civilian market, both because of public opinion, opposed to the use of robots as a police force, and because of the Dreyfus Act which explicitly prohibits it.

To get around this problem, OmniCorp leader Raymond Sellars asks his marketing team, in collaboration with scientist Dennett Norton, to design a new product, combining man and machine, to be used as a guardian of the law, hoping to convince the public of the soundness of the idea by focusing on the fact that there is still a man inside the machine.

Today these premises seem much more real and disturbing to me than when the film was released in 2014. Multinationals aiming for defense procurement and constantly trying to circumvent the laws, manipulate public opinion with the goal of mere profit, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. What do you think? Is this a movie that, while not a masterpiece, could be reevaluated nowadays?

Let me say I'm a huge The Matrix fan, but I wanted to share a reflection on another film released in 1999 that (apparently) few people remember today. Do you know The Thirteen Floor? Based on the novel Simulacron-3 by Daniel F. Galouye, it was directed by Josef Rusnak and produced by Roland Emmerich.

This film had somewhat shared some of the themes addressed by Neo and his companions, but approached them in a different, but no less intriguing, way. The Thirteen Floor not only put away the action factor typical of The Matrix, but also places a spotlight on how the real danger is not posed by technology, but rather by the use humans make of it. The film features a virtual reality that becomes a space of impunity, where repressed desires and impulses can be vented without any apparent consequences.

I saw it again recently, and I think it was really very good in many ways, thematic, existential, and visual. Furthermore, it has a truly refined philosophical structure that lead to the thought of René Descartes. If I'm not mistaken, it seems to me that what The Thirteen Floor proposed was also praised by the philosopher Slavoj Žižek for its depth.

What do you think? It probably just had the misfortune of being released in theaters right after The Matrix and - as if that weren't enough - simultaneously with eXistenZ. This may explain why his exit went so quietly. Anyway, in my opinion, that's a really great sci-fi movie.

Let me say I'm a huge The Matrix fan, but I wanted to share a reflection on another film released in 1999 that (apparently) few people remember today. Do you know The Thirteen Floor? Based on the novel Simulacron-3 by Daniel F. Galouye, it was directed by Josef Rusnak and produced by Roland Emmerich.

This film had somewhat shared some of the themes addressed by Neo and his companions, but approached them in a different, but no less intriguing, way. The Thirteen Floor not only put away the action factor typical of The Matrix, but also places a spotlight on how the real danger is not posed by technology, but rather by the use humans make of it. The film features a virtual reality that becomes a space of impunity, where repressed desires and impulses can be vented without any apparent consequences.

I saw it again recently, and I think it was really very good in many ways, thematic, existential, and visual. Furthermore, it has a truly refined philosophical structure that lead to the thought of René Descartes. If I'm not mistaken, it seems to me that what The Thirteen Floor proposed was also praised by the philosopher Slavoj Žižek for its depth.

What do you think? It probably just had the misfortune of being released in theaters right after The Matrix and - as if that weren't enough - simultaneously with eXistenZ. This may explain why his exit went so quietly. Anyway, in my opinion, that's a really great sci-fi movie.

Let me say I'm a huge The Matrix fan, but I wanted to share a reflection on another film released in 1999 that (apparently) few people remember today. Do you know The Thirteen Floor? Based on the novel Simulacron-3 by Daniel F. Galouye, it was directed by Josef Rusnak and produced by Roland Emmerich.

This film had somewhat shared some of the themes addressed by Neo and his companions, but approached them in a different, but no less intriguing, way. The Thirteen Floor not only put away the action factor typical of The Matrix, but also places a spotlight on how the real danger is not posed by technology, but rather by the use humans make of it. The film features a virtual reality that becomes a space of impunity, where repressed desires and impulses can be vented without any apparent consequences.

I saw it again recently, and I think it was really very good in many ways, thematic, existential, and visual. Furthermore, it has a truly refined philosophical structure that lead to the thought of René Descartes. If I'm not mistaken, it seems to me that what The Thirteen Floor proposed was also praised by the philosopher Slavoj Žižek for its depth.

What do you think? It probably just had the misfortune of being released in theaters right after The Matrix and - as if that weren't enough - simultaneously with eXistenZ. This may explain why his exit went so quietly. Anyway, in my opinion, that's a really great sci-fi movie.