User Avatar Image

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

posted by Chariloe on - last edited - Viewed by 20.4K users
Somebody started a campaign that could actually be successful, but we need more people to participate.

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.

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
  • No, I want a 3D Remake of the first.
  • My reaction every time I see this thread:

    I have the subject of remakes come up frequently on my youtube channel because I have some trailers for classic films like THEM! and The Valley of Gwangi on there. Not everything needs a remake. I don't think I could do a better job of explaining this than Ed Catmull the president of Pixar Animation. He lays it all down in this video from 24:44 to 25:59.

    Jurassic Park is a near perfect film that doesn't need to be touched. If you want to see more intense dinosaur on dinosaur action then go watch the latest remake of King Kong.
  • Orange Intercouse;563917 said:
    Why are you still feeling happy about this?
  • tobar;564024 said:

    Jurassic Park is a near perfect film that doesn't need to be touched.
    It's not actually the film he wants remade though. He wants a more closer adaptation of the novel. Personally, I would like one too. I still think a mini-series based off the novels would be cool. It's be like the made for tv Steven King movies but better.

    So the it's not the film he want's changed. He basicly wants a very close adaptation of the novels. Although, I wouldn't want it to be in theaters. I would rather either a mini- series on tv or maybe an animated dvd release.
  • interesting concept. I wouldn't mind a re-telling of the first Jurassic Park and The Lost World. Possibly make it more to the novels, the lost world novel is very different comparing it to the film, and the novel's story was amazing.. mine only thing is that the dinosaurs would have to be the same designs. It would also have to be in the same time frame (1989 or 1991, can't recall the actual date in the novel) i don't see this happening, but i would watch it. I love the original films, so if they did remake it and ruin them, i could always go back to the originals.
  • interitus;558179 said:
    It radically changed it. Prior to Jurassic Park most CGI was artifical like Terminator 2 .. the closest we go to a living thing was The Abyss. Jurassic Park showed that you could create believable living CGI animals.

    I think this image is a great picture of what movie basically feels like.

    We have actors having to react to tennis balls on a stick. I appreciate CGI and what it can do. But it should compliment real things, not replace them.
    i agree with everything you just said.
  • I really think they should re-make Jurassic park 3 instead.
    The other two are classics, YOU don't remake classics.
  • We have every right to want a remake. Other posters here have already made it clear that you can just get back to enjoying the 1st movie if you're too biased and blinded by nostalgia to enjoy the remakes.
    Pitalla;564674 said:
    The other two are classics, YOU don't remake classics.
    First of all, what the hell are you talking about? Classics get remade all the time and most of them end up being just as good (if not BETTER) than the previous versions...The only people who disagree with that are the people who are so blinded by nostalgia that they can't see how flawed and easily-bashable the original film was (even if those negative qualities are capable of being overlooked, the same thing can be said about the remakes), and those people are hopelessly wired into insulting remakes when they deserve just as much praise as the original films.

    You should learn the difference between "you don't remake classics" and "I personally don't like it when classics are remade."

    Second of all, you're calling The Lost World movie was a classic?
    AS IF!
    The Lost World movie was crap. It was the WORST of the trilogy. It had a hypocritical/moronic plot that did NOT resemble the novel in any shape or form, it had stupid characters, no sympathy for anybody EXCEPT the so-called "villains" who are actually nice to the protagonists, EVERY SINGLE SCENE was full of plotholes/contrivances, Goldblum is a HORRIBLE actor(mumbling and stammering in every sentence of BOTH movies) and the movie gives you NO IMMERSION into the fact that the dinosaurs are adapting into the island's modern ecosystem (which the novel did such a brilliant job at conveying).
    And you have the nerve to call that piece of shit a classic? :mad:

    Okay, now I'm getting back on topic:

    The only "classic" thing about the 1st movie is the dinosaur effects, which only covered about 5% of the movie's quality. It's two hours just to say "stuff goes wrong in a theme park" (or nothing new to anyone who saw Westworld). Most of it is just people running away from animals. That's really not a story, that's a Roadrunner episode. The movie is just filled with pointless drama over nothing, and Hollywood conventions. Like typical Spielberg movies, it's meant to please people who sit through movies, but don't really watch them. There's very little to no story, but it's just twisted back and forward for two whole hours. It just has people running away from animal and getting sentimental at times. The first half is nothing really, all we learn in a full hour, is that some one cloned dinosaurs. It shouldn't take that long to say.
    That's just piss-awful for fans of the novels. A true adaptation of JP would get the audience invested in MORE qualities than just cheap dino-effects every now and then. A proper adaptation of the book should be a setting-immersive experience (where the audience is immersed the world of Isla Nublar EVEN WITHOUT the dinosaurs on it. The island itself is supposed to be a world that not only looks out-of-this world even without the dinos, but it's also supposed to be a character that directs the protagonists throughout the storyline)...but the movie failed to provide that experience because it was a cheap-budget project with low production values, because Spielberg was only interested in showing off the dino-effects. A remake done as a proper adaptation would get the audience immersed in more qualities than just that.
  • jpark_08;516505 said:
    Letters are boring and unprofessional; the studio just won't take it seriously. What you really need to do is submit your ideas on baked goods like cupcakes. Everybody likes cupcakes. Each day we will ship Universal one new cupcake topped with original ideas like plot points, character castings, and test dialogue written in icing sugar. We can call it the "Cupcakes for Remakes" campaign. It's brilliant and delicious.

    Let's get started! Who knows how to bake?
    well i've had experience with cakes, but not cupcakes lol
  • Pitalla;564674 said:
    I really think they should re-make Jurassic park 3 instead.
    The other two are classics, YOU don't remake classics.
    Apparently someone hasn't been seeing the attempts by Hollywood to remake classics.

    It's comes down to money and reinvigorating a franchise/property in order to make that money, that and to appeal to the next generation.

    While I don't agree that Jurassic Park should be remade, I can see why it would be. I just don't see why it has to be so soon...if it gets remade at all.
Add Comment