Page 1 of 1

What makes something 'Jurassic Park' to you?

Posted: Tue Jul 11, 2023 3:36 pm
by Dinos4Ever
Something that always comes to my mind when I think of JP is a vast coniferous jungle, with ferns littering the forest floor. The ground is soggy, but not swampy and the forest is intercut with long, dusty plains and fern-covered rocks/canyons dripping with water. I also thing of ruined buildings and dinosaurs that have the right look to them i.e: a molted dark green T. rex with a large nasal and eye ridge, or an orange-brown raptor that has a rectangular-shaped head. Also, the images of rusty old equipment/structures, like a bridge, or a vine covered concrete structure always come to mind. Finally, I think of on-location jungle coupled with the most brilliant animatronic work and amazingly realistic sets all on top of a "life finds a way" theme. Oh and don't forget John Williams, his music is as recognizable as any theme out there.

Re: What makes something 'Jurassic Park' to you?

Posted: Sun Dec 10, 2023 3:52 pm
by TyrannosaurTJ
I think what makes it is the dinosaurs, the characters, the music, and the setting primarily. I always felt that TLW had the best aesthetic, but I do appreciate the way the Visitor's Center is set up in the first film and the overall theme park drive-through safari thing works for it. Also, some elements of science fiction and science reality are tossed in there in terms of the ethics and implications of humanity's hubris. I appreciate the show, not tell aspects of the series as well too.

Re: What makes something 'Jurassic Park' to you?

Posted: Mon Dec 18, 2023 5:13 pm
by Troodon_formosus
The thematics of Jurassic define it for me. The series overall is an exploration into the complex relationships between civilization and nature, science and business, knowledge and chaos. It's about people from a wide range of backgrounds finding themselves in a rapidly-changing world whose future is unpredictable and not even the people in the highest positions of power can really, truly control the tools at their disposal. It's about how there will always be some degree of dark matter in biological science even though it feels like something we should be able to fully understand. Biology lies in a space between the hard sciences whose laws are mathematically defined and rigid, and the soft sciences that are entirely theory with little more than statistics to give predictions. This makes things like animal behavior, ecology, and genetics seem as though they should be predictable and fully comprehensible but always come with unidentified variables that can yield results we never anticipated.