Moviefone Editorial

Tag: jurassic-world

  • ‘Sesame Street’ Takes on ‘Jurassic Park’ in New Parody

    jurassic park, sesame street, cookie monster, sesame street parodyWhat do you get when you combine Cookie Monster with “Jurassic Park“? Jurassic Cookie, naturally.

    That’s the latest hilarious parody from the pop culture-loving kids program “Sesame Street,” which reimagines the big blue puppet as a John Hammond-type, attempting to turn a fragment of a prehistoric cookie stuck in amber into a real, giant, T-rex-size cookie. Just like in “Jurassic Park,” though, Cookie’s plan doesn’t exactly pan out, as his T-rex/gingerbread man hybrid breaks free and terrorizes the monster and his grandchildren.

    There’s a bunch of clever winks to the 1993 flick — and its upcoming sequel, “Jurassic World” — including a tense scene set in a kitchen in which Cookie and the kids have to outsmart the edible dino, and a race past a dinosaur skeleton made out of cookie fragments. (“First time cookie ever tried to eat me!” a confused Cookie Monster declares.) The tables turn for the creature, though, when the monster gets a whiff of the giant cookie’s gingerbread, and gives chase himself.

    Check out the adorable clip below. (You might want to have some cookies onhand, as a deep craving for the confections is likely to ensue.)

    Photo credit: YouTube

    %Slideshow-177%

  • 5 Reasons Chris Pratt Should Be the Next Indiana Jones

    Word ’round the campfire is that Chris Pratt tops the wish list to be the next Indiana Jones – and for good reason.

    The crazy-likable actor gets to show off his action hero bona fides in “Jurassic World,” which is all but a demo reel for how ready Pratt is to don the fedora and whip. In honor of his latest franchise hitting theaters this weekend, here are 5 reasons why he should headline another.

    1. Fans Love Him
    When rumors surfaced earlier this year that Pratt was linked to the role, the internet showed their generous support. Some went so far as to Photoshop Pratt’s face on Indy’s body (see below).


    Someone just slap this image on a poster with a release date, please.

    2. He Can Handle the Role’s Physical Demands
    While Pratt has yet to be provided with a chance to really show off his dramatic range on the big screen, his two franchises -– “Guardians” and now “Jurassic” -– have given him plenty of runway to do what the original Indy, Harrison Ford, called “physical acting.” Namely, “running, jumping and falling down.”

    Pratt is one of Hollywood’s most unlikely and welcomed action heroes; his ability to sell the demands of an action scene in a believable way, coupled with his charming on-screen presence, are similar to those Ford used to find great success in the role. As successors go, you could do so much worse.

    3. Great Wit and Comedic Timing
    Ford’s performance as Indy is just as iconic as the character himself. Among the many successful elements of Ford’s take on the character was his dry sense of humor. Indy doesn’t crack jokes per say, but he does offer humorous remarks or observations when faced with increasingly dangerous stakes. (Ford’s physical comedy is also shown to great effect in both “Temple of Doom” and “Last Crusade.”)

    Pratt’s been making us laugh since minute one on “Parks & Rec,” and “Guardians” further proved that the comedic chops he developed there as a supporting character are even more effective in the role of leading man.

    4. He’s Already a Member of the Disney Family
    When your first attempt at leading man status, requiring you to appear opposite a talking raccoon and sentient tree, mints money at the box office, the studio responsible keeps you in mind for any and all future projects. With Marvel and Lucasfilm under the Disney umbrella, it’s understandable why the Mouse House would want to “keep it in the family” when it comes to casting Indy.

    “Guardians” massively expanded the actor’s fanbase; Disney is surely banking on them to see Pratt as Indy like they did to see him as Star-Lord.

    5. Spielberg‘s a Big Fan
    During press rounds leading up to the release of “Jurassic World,” Steven Spielberg has gone on record praising Pratt for his movie star status. The filmmaker has spent years developing a fourth “Jurassic”; he wouldn’t have signed off on Pratt to be “JW’s” male lead if he didn’t see why audiences like the actor so damn much.

    On top of that, according to Deadline, Spielberg would be more than happy to direct Pratt in an Indiana Jones movie – assuming the script meets his approval.

    With the guy behind every one of Indy’s four adventures seemingly onboard with having the actor enlist for a fifth, it’s virtually a done deal.

    Here’s hoping Pratt will soon get to sign on that dotted line.
    %Slideshow-294945%

  • ​Is Hollywood Heading for a Summer Box Office Disaster?

    “Spy” should have been more of a sure thing at the box office.

    The film, which reunites Melissa McCarthy with her “Bridesmaids” and “The Heat” director, Paul Feig, entered the weekend with good buzz, great reviews and modest competition. Pundits guessed it would open as high as $35-40 million.

    Its actual opening, estimated at $30.0 million and good for first place, is nothing to sneeze at. Still, a debut that’s as much as $10 million off expectations for such a seemingly can’t-miss movie has to rate somewhere between disappointing and troubling.

    “Spy’s” underperformance wasn’t the only ominous sign at the box office. Horror prequel “Insidious: Chapter 3” opened on the low end of expectations, premiering in third place with an estimated $23.0 million. “Entourage,” which started out strong with a mid-week Wednesday opening of $5.7 million, was supposed to make $17 to $20 million over the weekend — not bad for a poorly-reviewed, R-rated adaptation of the HBO series that went off the air four years ago. But the continued adventures of Vinnie Chase and his “Bro-pack” eventually underwhelmed, debuting in fourth place with an estimated $10.4 million for the weekend. (Its five-day take is estimated at $17.8 million.)

    Overall, the box office was down 4.4 percent from last week — which in turn was down 10.3 percent from the weekend before, which declined 16.4 percent from the weekend before that. These declines come as the numbers from May reveal a box office that’s 17.7 percent behind last year. That’s despite such huge May 2015 hits as “Avengers: Age of Ultron,” “Pitch Perfect 2,” and “San Andreas.” Then again, even “Ultron” didn’t open as big as it was supposed to or maintain the momentum of the previous “Avengers.” (At this point in its run, 2012’s “The Avengers” had earned $577.9 million, $139.9 million more than “Ultron.”)

    If this trend keeps up, the summer box office will end up $718 million behind last summer’s $4.1 billion take. That would be a disaster for an industry whose bread and butter is summer earnings, particularly from big-budget spectacles that are about all Hollywood knows how to market anymore.

    What’s behind the unenthusiastic response to this summer’s movies? Here are five conclusions the studios can draw from the summer so far.

    1. You Can’t Count on Star Power
    McCarthy has done well in the past as part of an ensemble, or paired with at least one other star who’s a current draw (Sandra Bullock, for example). But on her own? Not so much. Last summer’s “Tammy” did earn some $84.5 million overall, but it was all McCarthy’s show, and it didn’t earn the dollars or the reviews that her teamwork movies have.

    Similarly, “Tomorrowland” boasted George Clooney‘s best opening in years, but his name alone wasn’t enough to sell the movie across the board. Neither was Reese Witherspoon (or Sofia Vergara, the highest-paid actress on TV) for “Hot Pursuit.” About the only stars who’ve helped sell tickets this summer are Anna Kendrick (“Pitch Perfect 2”) and Dwayne Johnson (“San Andreas”), and both were relentless in promoting their movies on TV and in social media.

    2. You Can’t Count on Counter-programming
    For months, this column has argued that counter-programming is no longer an effective strategy, whether you’re putting out a female-driven film on a weekend where a male-driven movie is expected to dominate, or vice versa.

    Certainly, guys weren’t drawn to the testosterone-heavy “Entourage” just because “Spy” has a female lead. In a way, this is actually good news. After all, “Spy,” “San Andreas,” and “Ultron” have succeeded in part because they appealed to both men and women. There have been a lot of (justified) complaints about Hollywood sexism in recent months, complaints about the relative lack of work for women both in front of and behind the camera, but at least the industry is starting to wake up to the fact that women buy movie tickets, too, and maybe it would be a good idea to take their tastes into account.

    3. Moviegoers Have Short Memories
    “Mad Max: Fury Road” had some of the best reviews of the year, featuring stars Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron, and was a big-budget action spectacle meant to appeal to men and women alike. It’s earned a pretty good $130.8 million in four weeks. But it must have disappointed any industry observers who expected it to do better because it was based on a familiar franchise. After all, the last installment was 30 years ago, with another male lead. (What was his name, again?)

    Similarly, no one went to see “Poltergeist” ($44.5 million in three weeks) just because it’s a reboot of a horror classic from 33 years ago; indeed, any moviegoer old enough to have fond memories of the original film or its 1980s sequels was likely disappointed with the new version. Hollywood has a tendency to mine any known title for the sake of a little brand familiarity, but after a certain number of years, that doesn’t matter to young moviegoers who don’t revere the original, nor to old moviegoers who fear their fond memories will be tarnished by the updated version. Which is one of the few clouds on the horizon for next week’s “Jurassic World,” a franchise reboot that comes 14 years after the previous installment.

    4. The “Originality” Problem
    Audiences say they’re tired of retreads and sequels, but when an original movie like “Hot Pursuit,” “Tomorrowland,” or “Aloha” hits theaters, viewers don’t show up — or, in the case of “Spy,” don’t show up in droves as expected.

    Pundits have seen these results as a sign that original movies don’t work, but they’re really just a sign that original movies don’t work if they’re not well-made or well-marketed. “San Andreas,” derivative as it is, did fine. Hopes remain high for upcoming original films “Inside Out” (the Pixar name should be enough to sell it) and Amy Schumer‘s much-buzzed comedy “Trainwreck.” And it’s worth noting that some of this summer’s most successful (or most likely to succeed) sequels — “Ted 2,” “Magic Mike XXL,” “Minions” — are from franchises that started out as original films. The sequels should work just as well as the first installments did — if they’re properly executed, and if marketers don’t drop the ball.

    5. Anticipation
    Some pundits theorize that moviegoers are staying home until the premieres of the films they really want to see — next weekend’s “Jurassic World,” perhaps, or “Inside Out” on June 19. Until then, they’re saving their money. Why blow your comedy dollar on “Spy” if you can see “Ted 2” in three weeks? Or why see “Poltergeist” when “Insidious: Chapter 3” is opening two weeks later? That seems to be the argument, though “Poltergeist” opened almost as big as “Insidious,” with $22.6 million, before dropping like a rock in the two weekends since.

    In the end, it should just be as simple as making movies people actually want to see, and getting the word out about them to drum up interest. There just haven’t been many movies so far this summer that people wanted to see as much as they wanted to see last year’s “Maleficent,” “X-Men: Days of Future Past,” and “Godzilla.” At least two of those films were well-made, and all of them were well-marketed. This summer still has three months left to go. CGI dinosaurs and CGI potty-mouthed teddy bears may be enough to make up for May slackness, but if not, Hollywood had better cross its fingers that it has more to offer this summer that will entice viewers out of their living rooms.

  • ‘Jurassic World’ Is a Direct Sequel to ‘Jurassic Park’


    It’s been clear since the first trailers were released that “Jurassic World” has taken great pains to incorporate the feel of “Jurassic Park,” including numerous callbacks to the original flick both overt and subtle. It turns out that that’s no accident, since director Colin Trevorrow has revealed that filmmakers consider “World” a direct sequel to “Park” — and are essentially pretending that “Park”‘s first two sequels never happened.

    In an interview with Yahoo! Movies, Trevorrow explained that all those callbacks are intentional, though “World” is by no means a remake of the first film. But the director purposefully chose to focus “World”‘s action on events happening after those in “Park,” he said, and is ignoring the storylines from 1997’s “The Lost World: Jurassic Park” and 2001’s “Jurassic Park III” entirely.

    “According to Trevorrow, the previous sequels aren’t being written out of continuity so much as placed to the side, as they both unfolded on a different island,” Yahoo! writes.

    “Lost World” was a serviceable — if lackluster — sequel, but “JPIII” was pretty terrible, so it makes sense that Trevorrow and co. would choose to steer the ship back toward the magic of the 1993 original. And as the director tells it, he was determined to pay tribute to “Park” (and its director, Steven Spielberg) and restore its luster for a new generation of filmgoers.

    “I felt like I had a responsibility to do it,” Trevorrow told Yahoo!. “Mostly for Steven, in thanks for all he’s done for all of us and how much his movies meant to me in my childhood. But also, if one is asked to do this, it’s almost insulting to everyone else to say no. We’d all love this privilege – to be able to re-create a film that meant so much to us.”

    “Jurassic World” is due in theaters on June 12.

    [via: Yahoo! Movies]

    %Slideshow-177%

  • The First ‘Jurassic World’ Clip Features… Charming Banter? (VIDEO)


    The MTV Movie Awards will soon be upon us (Sunday night, although anything not related to Westeros that night is just not on our radar), and to celebrate, the cable giant has treated the world to an exclusive first clip from this summer’s high anticipated adventure “Jurassic World.” As Samuel L. Jackson said in the original film: Hold onto your butts.

    Actually, no, your butts should be just fine, since this clip doesn’t feature any of the rampaging dinosaur action we’ve come to expect from the series, but instead focuses on the charming, romantic comedy-style banter between Chris Pratt, playing a dinosaur trainer of some kind, and Bryce Dallas Howard, who is the operational manager of the now fully functional and open-to-the-public park. She is trying to convince him to come back and assess the new, genetically reconstituted mega-dinosaur that her crackpot scientists have created; he is reluctant to do so. Also, there’s some fairly obvious product placement for a little Mercedes SUV that is parked in the background, framed in glorious sunlight.

    It’s a cute little scene and while the absence of dinosaurs is tragic, the back-and-forth between the stars is lovely and you get a little taste of Michael Giacchino’s tropically-tinged score. Also, this sequence clearly sets up that part in the trailer where Pratt rides his motorcycle with the domesticated raptors that made us yelp for joy (it was more of a yodel).

    “Jurassic World” is open for business on June 12th. Expect more big time summer movie exclusives ahead of (and during) the MTV Movie Awards on Sunday.

  • The 6 Best ‘Jurassic World’ Parodies on the Internet (VIDEO)

  • Mark Duplass on ‘Lazarus Effect’ and Turning Down ‘Huge Movies’ (EXCLUSIVE)

    Mark Duplass Lazarus Effect InterviewQuite frankly, it’s shocking that Togetherness”), while appearing in or co-directing or producing one out of every three movies that debuts at Sundance or South by Southwest (things like “Safety Not Guaranteed,” “The One I Love,” “Creep,” etc.) and filming bits in high profile studio movies (everything from “Zero Dark Thirty” to “Tammy”). Homeboy is busy.

    In “The Lazarus Effect,” though, he plays a character who might have even more on his mind than Duplass himself, as a grad school scientist working on a new serum that can bring people back from the dead. When his wife and fellow scientist (played by Olivia Wilde) is killed during an experiment, he makes the decision to use the serum on her… and things go horribly, horribly wrong.

    We got to chat with Duplass on the phone about why he likes horror movies so much, where his acoustic version of the old HBO theme song came from, how he decides what projects to tackle, and why he won’t admit that he had to turn down “Jurassic World” even though we all know that he totally did (it was directed by his “Safety Not Guaranteed” collaborator Colin Trevorrow).

    Moviefone: You certainly have an affinity for these types of movies. Where does that come from and do you want to do direct one of these movies?

    Mark Duplass: Well, you know, we’ve flirted with the horror genre a little bit. There’s a movie called “Baghead” that I directed in 2008 that’s kind of touching on that genre a little bit. I grew up watching cheesy horror movies in the late ’80s after going to the mall with my friends. So there was always a deep love and appreciation for it. As a director, I’ve gravitated to more emotionally sensitive dramedies but there’s always been this interest in me to explore all types of genres, not just horror movies. I’m lucky to be at a point in my career where I’m asked to be in a movie like “Lazarus Effect.” Part of the reason I haven’t done a lot of this stuff before isn’t me not wanting to be in them but not having the profile to get those cool jobs.

    What was the appeal of “Lazarus Effect” specifically? It seems indebted to some of those ’80s horror movies you mention, particularly “Flatliners.”

    Oh for sure. I saw “Flatliners” in the theater. But mostly it was a desire to be a lead in a movie for Jason Blum and to work with David Gelb. When I met with him I was a huge fan of “Jiro Dreams of Sushi” but what’s to say — a guy who directs a really slow-paced food documentary can make a slick horror movie. But then I realized that he’s one of our country’s premiere trailer cutters and directs a bunch of commercials so I thought, This is good – this guy can do slick and he can do heart. And if I’m going to take a chance on a horror movie, Blumhouse + David Gelb is the train I want to hitch myself to.

    The movie is currently PG-13. Was there ever a version of the movie that was harsher?

    All of these movies are built to go one way or the other. But when we were making this movie, we all felt that because of the DNA of the film, because the script really obeys the horror genre really well and has all the elements that would allow for it to be a 3,000-screen movie, it would be smart of us to make a PG-13 movie. I’m a big fan of reverse engineering your art to something that can be successful. To me that’s less selling out and more buying in and being intelligent about what is going to get the most eyeballs on your stuff. I do the same thing with my independent films. I think it’s smart to have a little business sense about you. That’s part of what I love about Blumhouse. But we all had our eyes on this thing be a bigger play and PG-13 was a big part of that.

    And I’m sure there’ll be a slightly scarier version on Blu-ray.

    I bet there will! I can’t be sure but there could be something!

    Can you talk about working with this ensemble?

    Yeah, the goal was really simple: when you’re normally dealing with a high concept, like, say, bringing people back from the dead, it’s usually set in the future where people are wearing all shiny black leather and they talk strange and they don’t feel human. So we were like, if we have any take on this at all, it’s that these people should feel normal and kind of dorky, like a group of researchers and in an ideal world it will connect people more closely to what they’re going through.

    Not to give too much away but the ending of the movie certainly leaves the possibility open for a sequel. Would you come back?

    That’s a really great question. To be honest with you, I haven’t even thought about it. But anytime there’d be a team like David and these actors and Jason doing anything together, I’d definitely have to think about it.

    You did another Blumhouse horror movie before this called “Mercy.” It’s finally on Netflix but was very much shelved. What was that experience like and did that experience color your interaction with Blumhouse?

    I see what you’re saying. But no. Jason called me up and said, “I’ve lost an actor, want to come do this thing for three days and it starts shooting in 20 minutes.” And I was like, “F*ck yeah I’ll do it.” So I had no emotional attachment to that movie whatsoever. I have a long history with Jason Blum and we’re good friends and we see the industry in similar ways. We both believe that movies should be made cheaply and being aggressive and taking chances. I’m very much ideologically aligned with Blumhouse. As much as our content looks extremely different, from a philosophical standpoint we could be twins.

    There was another horror movie you did last year called “Creep,” which I saw at South by Southwest and loved. When the Weinstein Company picked it up there was talk that it was going to be the beginning of a trilogy. Do you know what’s going on with that?

    We’re figuring it all out right now. There’s still a desire from all of us to do this thing as a trilogy but since then my life has kind of exploded, and Patrick Brice, who directed that movie, has kind of exploded as well. So we’re all trying to figure out the timing of when we can get that thing done. The love is still there. The schedule is starting to be a bit of a problem. But we’re in the middle of it.

    You’re always working. How do you decide what to do? And how do you delegate your time between projects?

    It’s changing on a year-by-year basis. It used to be what can I get. Like, “What can I get? Yeah I’ll do it.” But now I’m getting to this point in my career, just to be candid, where I have to turn down things because I don’t have enough time for them. And that’s crazy. The things I’ve had to say no to in the past year have, quite honestly, been heartbreaking, just because I’m on “The League,” I have “Togetherness” to do, I have four Netflix movies that I’m producing, I have all my Sundance movies. I have a full slate. So it’s changing for me right now and I’m looking at carving out a little more time for those cool acting projects. Like spending a week doing “Zero Dark Thirty” was one of the most rewarding experiences of my life and I’m actively looking to do more things like that.

    Can you talk about some of the things you turned down? Did you turn down “Jurassic World”?

    I can’t really talk about it because I feel weird for the actors who ended up taking them because most directors say, “You’re my first choice.” And that would be really weird. But I will definitely say that there have been some huge movies that I’ve had to say no to that if I knew that five years ago I would think, What the f*ck are you doing? And that is a growing pain of where I’m at right now. That said, I get to do so much amazing stuff. Being able to make “Togetherness” with my brother and some of my best friends and to be on “The League” with some of the funniest people on the planet who are also some of my best friends and to get to produce movies for people like Patrick and foster their careers, like I am so lucky. And you don’t get to do everything.

    Didn’t you shoot all of “Togetherness” before even turning it into HBO?

    Yes we did. My brother and I write and direct all of the episodes of the show and we make it like an independent film where we shoot and edit it all ourselves. And they’re incredibly supportive. We’re ramping up Season 2 right now and we’re going to do it the same way.

    One of the great joys of “Togetherness” coming out was that great HBO theme song you guys did. Where did that come from?

    You’re talking about the dumbest thing we’ve ever done that was actually kind of fun. Well, Jay and I played in bands growing up, always, and one of our joke things we used to do when we were the Indigo Boys, basically two dudes playing acoustic guitars in coffee shops, in the middle of a set we would break out the HBO theme song and slowly people would realize it was happening and every time we did it we would blow the place up. So we were trying to think of something special to honor our 30 year love and commitment and marriage to HBO and it seemed like the right thing.

    “The Lazarus Effect” is in theaters now.
    %Slideshow-268678%

  • Super Bowl Movie Trailers 2015, Ranked From Best to Worst

    %Slideshow-264726%
    So there was a pretty big game going on tonight, sandwiched around a jaw-dropping Katy Perry / Lenny Kravitz / Missy Elliott performance. And during said sporting event, they happened to show some trailers during the commercial breaks. Everybody’s happy!

    We decided to run down the Super Bowl movie trailers in order, from best to worst. Feel free to tell us if you agree, and if these crucial opinions swayed your opinion about any upcoming films.
    super bowl movie trailers

  • Check Out This Terrifying New Dinosaur From ‘Jurassic World’

    Jurassic WorldThe Indominus Rex is here, and it’s freaking terrifying. The official site for “Jurassic World” introduced this creepy new “attraction,” with all sorts of high-tech details that would make anyone rethink booking a vacay to this resort. It’s 40 feet long, and it can run up to 30 miles per hour – at least, that’s how fast it can run when it’s safely in its dino-jail. Who knows how fast it could run if when it escapes?

    If that doesn’t put the fear of dinosaurs in you, contemplate this. According to the official website, “Indominus’ teeth are being constantly replaced – a genetic distinction common to all theropods as well as nearly all sharks.” Sounds like a great idea, guys. Thanks a lot.

    “Jurassic World” opens on June 12.

    [Via CinemaBlend]
    %Slideshow-177%

  • ‘Jurassic Parks and Recreation’ Is the Chris Pratt Mash-Up You’ve Been Waiting For (VIDEO)

    Jurassic Parks and Recreation
    Chris Pratt has transformed himself from the affable Andy Dwyer on “Parks and Recreation” into a bona fide action star, thanks to high-profile turns in “Guardians of the Galaxy” and this summer’s upcoming “Jurassic World.” Now, one enterprising YouTuber has combined those elements into one awesome mash-up trailer.

    “Jurassic Parks and Recreation” offers audiences a chance to see Andy Dwyer transferred from Pawnee, Indiana to Isla Nublar, where he works for the recently-opened Jurassic World. Unfortunately for Andy, his laidback approach to life doesn’t really work well when there’s a dangerous hybrid dinosaur on the loose, leading to some awkward moments — and comedy gold.

    Check out the mash-up (which uses the “Jurassic World” trailer as a frame in which clips from “Parks and Recreation” are inserted) below, and try not to be too disappointed that the real movie probably won’t feature any of Andy’s hijinks. Could someone send this to director Colin Trevorrow and see if he’d be willing to re-cut the film?

    [via: Thanks Mom Productions, h/t The A.V. Club]

    Photo credit: YouTube

    %Slideshow-177%