Current Events > Jurassic World: Rebirth's monster revealed via toy release (SPOILER)

(+) Yeah! (+)

Theyre calling it the Distortus Rex, or D-Rex.

Apparently its one of the first failed attempts at cloning a T-Rex on the very first island before they perfected the science for Isla Nublar in JP1.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/d/dfea6cca.jpg

I actually dont hate the idea.

Okay, yeah, the idea of cloning mistakes is a lot more interesting than the idea of trying to create new dinosaurs.

That's fucking awful.

Actual dinosaurs are more than good enough.

ai123 posted...

That's fucking awful.

Actual dinosaurs are more than good enough.

Its just a big dumb loud monster movie now.

At least they are exploring plausible ideas now.

Im waiting for the one where they use dinosaurs in the military

ai123 posted...

That's fucking awful.

Actual dinosaurs are more than good enough.

It beats the hybridization that World did, tbh. Seems moreI dont want to say realistic, but the trial and error of the cloning processes are interesting to me. I like to return to a more horror element.

I kinda like em. Definitely feels like a failed experiment.

To be honest, seeing Chris Pratt lead velociraptors into battle was the point where I turned it off and was done with the franchise.

The first film was such a great concept, but since then it's just got exponentially dumber.

ai123 posted...

To be honest, seeing Chris Pratt lead velociraptors into battle was the point where I turned it off and was done with the franchise.

The first film was such a great concept, but since then it's just got exponentially dumber.

I agree. I was not a fan of the direction they took those movies at all. Which is why Im slightly hopeful for this change in pace. Dominion was terrible. Id even argue that JP3 was better than all three of the World films.

ai123 posted...

That's fucking awful.

Actual dinosaurs are more than good enough.

You can only do so many movies with just actual dinosaurs, though, and they clearly want to continue because the movies make money. If they're going to continue, a more plausible idea, like cloning mistakes, is interesting compared to more outlandish junk like creating new dinosaurs or combining dinosaurs with humans or whatever.

This is 100% better than fucking locusts.

After JP3 I was done and even then as a kid I could tell it and 2 were much lesser than the first (and I still kinda liked 2 back then). None of the new ones interested me at all and I could tell exactly what they were going to be. I know they'll keep making JP movies because they still bring in money, but from a creative standpoint they really just need to stop.

It's a chestburster with eyes. So pretty much the one from Spaceballs.

https://i.imgur.com/qaXSnBm.gif

Did they try to use dolphin DNA at first instead of frog?

So Jurassic Park is just monster movies now?

Did they find it in the Barbisol can?

mercurydude posted...

It's a chestburster with eyes. So pretty much the one from Spaceballs.

https://i.imgur.com/qaXSnBm.gif

The director said he used inspiration from the Rancor from Star Wars and the Xenomorphs from Alien, so you pretty much nailed it.

The more I think about it, the more I think my dislike for the newer ones makes me like this idea more, because it's not trying to add a new concept to the series like those did, it's taking an already existing concept (cloning dinosaurs) and basically just going "Okay, so what about the times they messed up."

Like, it doesn't require any new "science," any new villain with stupidly questionable motives, etc. It's literally just... They messed up a bunch before they got it right.

Ivynn posted...

So Jurassic Park is just monster movies now?

Well this one is supposed to be more survival/horror driven instead of the hybrid monsters and cheesy comic relief they were going with.

HashtagSEP posted...

You can only do so many movies with just actual dinosaurs, though, and they clearly want to continue because the movies make money. If they're going to continue, a more plausible idea, like cloning mistakes, is interesting compared to more outlandish junk like creating new dinosaurs or combining dinosaurs with humans or whatever.

Really? The whole world of dinosaurs, with all its variety is only worth 4 or 5 movies before you need to start inventing hybrids and deformed experiments?

Seems more like lazy shit tier thinking along the lines of 'next time let's do an even bigger monster'. It's schlocky b-movie garbage with a ridiculous budget.

HashtagSEP posted...

The more I think about it, the more I think my dislike for the newer ones makes me like this idea more, because it's not trying to add a new concept to the series like those did, it's taking an already existing concept (cloning dinosaurs) and basically just going "Okay, so what about the times they messed up."

Like, it doesn't require any new "science," any new villain with stupidly questionable motives, etc. It's literally just... They messed up a bunch before they got it right.

Thats pretty much how Im feeling about it. It looks darker and grittier. I know the first movie had a lot of bright tropical scenes, but the World movies feel like they used an iPhone Tropical Island filter and dialed the brightness and saturation to 100%. Kinda took me out of the suspense.

Ah yes they tried beluga DNA at some point before figuring out that frog DNA is best.

ai123 posted...

Really? The whole world of dinosaurs, with all its variety is only worth 4 or 5 movies before you need to start inventing hybrids and deformed experiments?

Seems more like lazy shit tier thinking along the lines of 'next time let's do an even bigger monster'. It's schlocky b-movie garbage with a ridiculous budget.

The Indominus Rexs official size is actually slightly taller and longer than the D-Rex.

ai123 posted...

Really? The whole world of dinosaurs, with all its variety is only worth 4 or 5 movies before you need to start inventing hybrids and deformed experiments?

For a series still based on the original concept of "Jurassic Park?" Yeah... Kinda.

Like how many times can they mess up an amusement park or keep going to islands completely unprepared for the exact same threats every single time?

Obviously one solution is to just... Stop making movies, but if they're going to keep doing so, then yeah, you do kinda need to up the ante, some. That was a big issue with 3, it had started to wear thin. Thus, an idea that actually makes sense within the original universe created, and not something that adds a bunch of new concepts on top of it, is the best course.

It was a joke, but the alternate title now feels more accurate.

These are not films about Jurassic Park

these are more and more sequels to the classic movie
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/c7d2fdb9.jpg

The movie being PG-13 might hurt it, the movie should have been rated R if it's going for survival horror.

HashtagSEP posted...

For a series still based on the original concept of "Jurassic Park?" Yeah... Kinda.

Like how many times can they mess up an amusement park or keep going to islands completely unprepared for the exact same threats every single time?

Obviously one solution is to just... Stop making movies, but if they're going to keep doing so, then yeah, you do kinda need to up the ante, some. That was a big issue with 3, it had started to wear thin. Thus, an idea that actually makes sense within the original universe created, and not something that adds a bunch of new concepts on top of it, is the best course.

With all of JP3s flaws, I really loved the Spinosaurus and the Pteradons. People typically thought of all the intimidating ground carnivores as being the most threatening. Not many people back then considered that a huge flying dinosaur with a crazy long beak can be just as horrifying.

I guess to be totally fair, if you break down the first movie/book it's also a cheesy slasher movie with dinosaurs, but it's still smartly written enough also be more than that. That plus Spielberg's direction and the John Williams score make it into something special. The newer stuff and even the older sequels lack all of that.

hmnut7 posted...

It was a joke, but the alternate title now feels more accurate.

These are not films about Jurassic Park

these are more and more sequels to the classic movie
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/c/c7d2fdb9.jpg

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/3/3c71417b.png

ai123 posted...

That's fucking awful.

Actual dinosaurs are more than good enough.

True but theres a reason any franchise that leans into toy sales will constantly introduce new versions of things.

It looks like a beluga and Kuato from Total Recall had a child.

Southernfatman posted...

I guess to be totally fair, if you break down the first movie/book it's also a cheesy slasher movie with dinosaurs, but it's still smartly written enough also be more than that. That plus Spielberg's direction and the John Williams score make it into something special. The newer stuff and even the older sequels lack all of that.

I agree, but the main cast can only learn their lesson and make profound statements so many times before its redundant and you need to explore other concepts within the Jurassic universe.

I think this is a fresh step in an interesting direction.

Starks posted...

It looks like a beluga and Kuato from Total Recall had a child.

Open your mind!

just call it the Chad Rex

HudGard posted...

True but theres a reason any franchise that leans into toy sales will constantly introduce new versions of things.

Yeah, I know there are commercial reasons for dishing up such a godawful product.

Revealing the monster via its toy version could not be more appropriate.

Probably pumped it full of growth hormone or something.

HudGard posted...

True but theres a reason any franchise that leans into toy sales will constantly introduce new versions of things.

Its not like there aren't plenty of dinosaurs they can introduce.

But whatever, it's not that big of a deal. Its kind of a miracle the first Jurassic Park movie was so good, even the book was basically a silly B-movie.

I very much dislike the dinosaur having 6 arms though. SO FEW things have 6 appendages like that it's such a ridiculous idea that would never actually happen. Its a movie and whatever goes, but that doesn't mean I can't be pedantic about it.

Do you think Spielberg watches these movies while crying into a pile of money?

If it doesn't kill anyone by squishing them with its forehead, then I think it is a failed monster.

Not completely sold on the monster yet but Edwards is a good visual director at least and has done a few creature features before.

Consayblue22 posted...

Not completely sold on the monster yet but Edwards is a good visual director at least and has done a few creature features before.

Godzilla (2014), Monsters, and Star Wars Rogue One, to be exact. He knows what hes doing.

Consayblue22 posted...

Not completely sold on the monster yet but Edwards is a good visual director at least and has done a few creature features before.

Sometimes there's only so much you can do when you're making corporate product

After so many failures, you would think the world would unite in outlawing cloning & the like.

ProfessorKukui posted...

After so many failures, you would think the world would unite in outlawing cloning & the like.

Well the first island was kept extremely secretive by private companies.

lols

ai123 posted...

To be honest, seeing Chris Pratt lead velociraptors into battle was the point where I turned it off and was done with the franchise.

i hated how they pushed the stupied "alpha" myth

for a franchise that started trying to be scientific its just the cherry on top of stupid

One reason this is so dumb is..

It's dinosaurs! There's no shortage of cool, scary dinos in history!

LightSnake posted...

One reason this is so dumb is..

It's dinosaurs! There's no shortage of cool, scary dinos in history!

Well said.

The original was a classic. The sequel wasn't as good, but it wasn't terrible. Everything after that has been garbage. The failed early cloning attempts is a neat idea, but that actual design looks really dumb, so I don't see anything changing.

LightSnake posted...

One reason this is so dumb is..

It's dinosaurs! There's no shortage of cool, scary dinos in history!

They found a new cool, scary dino for 3 and it's the worst performing of them all.

People want a hook.

Also, it wouldn't really work for the story they're telling. You'd have to explain why this new kind of existing dinosaur was never in any of the other movies since the point is that they're not cloning new ones, they're going to the island where it started and finding ones that had been there.

HashtagSEP posted...

They found a new cool, scary dino for 3 and it's the worst performing of them all.

People want a hook.

Also, it wouldn't really work for the story they're telling. You'd have to explain why this new kind of existing dinosaur was never in any of the other movies since the point is that they're not cloning new ones, they're going to the island where it started and finding ones that had been there.

I know this is just an opinion, but I still think JP3 did dinosaurs more justice than any of the World films. I bet Spinosaurus would have given the I-Rex a run for her money without the help of velociraptors or the mososaur.