Creation is an act of sheer will. Next time it will be flawless...(est. 2016)
 
Jurassic Mainframe NewsHomeCalendarAbout UsJurassic-PediaFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in

Share | 
 

 How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
Rhedosaurus
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 4354
Points : 5405
Reputation : 63
Join date : 2016-06-08
Location : Armada, Michigan

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 13, 2018 12:22 pm

@TyrannosaurTJ wrote:
@Rhedosaurus wrote:
@TyrannosaurTJ wrote:
TBH I feel the longer we go without it being directly and implicitly mentioned, the harder it will be in the future for it to be mentioned again here. That's been kind of my thought about it since JW's viral stuff was the only mention of the status of the island and so far FK's viral is the only mention thus far although that is more indirect in a lot of ways too. I will probably be bothered if it isn't name-dropped in the film at this point with an explanation imported for why it hasn't been a center of focus in the slightest lately.

As for if we get to see it, I think if it's part of the story it should get included physically as well, but like I said, the longer we go without it getting a direct mention in the newer films the harder it will be for it to reappear in a meaningful way in the future and that is something I particularly dread.

I think if that happens then there are 2 ways how the Sorna movies can still be canon. But first, the rights have to go back to the Crichton estate and then Disney gets the rights. More on this condition later. Anyway, here are the 2 ways.

1. We get a movie or at least an animated cartoon show that take place between JP3 and JW.

2. The 5th and 6th movies get ret-conned out of the franchise. Like Fox ret-conned X-Men 3 and much, if not all, of Wolverine Origins out of existance.

Now let me explain my Disney condition. Many fans-which includes you Ty-consider Universal's handling of the franchise poor since TLW. There are just so much things that Universal could have done, yet didn't. I honestly think that Disney were to get the rights, then they would treat the franchise with far more respect. I believe that if Universal were to regain the franchise, then it is doomed.

I don't think the 5th and 6th movies need to get retconned out of the franchise here at least at this very moment. Especially considering that FK isn't even out yet. Outside from the previews, FK hasn't struck me as a continuity violator nearly as much as JP3 was which basically tried to reinvent the Raptors without explanation and even the Pteranodons. Marketing pegged it as evolution, but a simpler explanation already existed and was there so it has "precedence" in a way with the version numbers argument. Outside of that fans are basically more or less a complication to the continuity status of things due to how vocal the group is of whatever they are hoping to be achieved in the end.

I mean a lot of people are just dead set on eliminating something because it is new and different, but we need to realize that films (like all stories) need to have a way to reinvent themselves to stay relevant and keep people interested as well as coming back for more and more. Outside, if the particular thing in media flops creatively and critically the studio needs to do damage control with it and either work it out of the canon or just say it doesn't count. The fandom is too vehemently against certain ventures because of petty reasons at times though and often it is the vocal minority of them that are getting heard.

Take that vitriol for JPTG. As a game, yeah it is nothing but a mess of Quick Time Events and button presses that left people hoping to poke around and explore Nublar unfulfilled. Taking a step back and viewing JP:TG as it was you'll realize that as a story it is truly awesome and as authentic as you can get. You just have to enjoy it as a an interactive movie versus game and not a lot of people can/would/or will make that distinction because they can't get over that it was meant to be a game. So as such, Uni has basically motioned to it being "soft canon" where parts are and parts aren't. Now, outside of this I don't think something like TLW or JP3 are being treated like that, I'm just seeing the lack of mention that is as in-your face as someone saying "Oh. Yeah. That happened and wow." is not going to be their due out of relevance more than a need to mention it for the sake of mentioning.

I think Uni may eventually get a better handle on the franchise, but they do need to stay consistent with it and not necessarily become tone-deaf to the vocal minority that want wacky things, but actually hear everybody, get to know their brand intimately, and approach it in a way that allows them direct it in a meaningful way. I mean my main point here is that something like the "JP3 Spino being the JW Spino Skeleton on Main street" should not have happened at all. Not only is it anatomically inaccurate to the animal, but it is quote mining Trevorrow from an interview where he was making light of it getting smashed.

Just curious, what makes you think that Universal will get a better handle on the franchise when even you have said that they haven't treated as well as they should? I still say that TLW coming out in 1997 was the last real time that they truly cared and between the F&F franchise being the only real franchise they care about nowadays, Dreamworks still having no real identity, the Dark Universe being mortally crippled, and everything else, I still don't think they ever will.

The fact that this entire topic/thread is being talked about is a huge indictment on Universal's handling of the whole franchise by itself. And I'm not even listing all the other reasons.

_______________
The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.

If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton




If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Bbrink1996
Hatchling
Hatchling
avatar

Posts : 83
Points : 561
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2017-07-05

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 13, 2018 2:00 pm

I really don't get where all the "Isla Sorna isn't canon anymore" fear mongering is coming from. No where has there ever been any confirmation that the events of TLW and JP3 didn't happen so I don't get what all the fuss is about.

If it makes sense for Isla Sorna to pop up or be mentioned in FK then by all means do so, I and many others would love it, but if there is no reason for it to be mentioned then they don't have to. And if they don't then it also doesn't mean that Isla Sorna is wiped from the canon.

_______________
"Behold the horror that lurks behind the veil of glimmering starlight!"
Back to top Go down
View user profile
TyrannosaurTJ
Compsognathus
Compsognathus
avatar

Posts : 118
Points : 736
Reputation : 12
Join date : 2017-03-11
Location : Ohio, United States

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:06 pm

@Rhedosaurus wrote:
@TyrannosaurTJ wrote:
@Rhedosaurus wrote:
@TyrannosaurTJ wrote:
TBH I feel the longer we go without it being directly and implicitly mentioned, the harder it will be in the future for it to be mentioned again here. That's been kind of my thought about it since JW's viral stuff was the only mention of the status of the island and so far FK's viral is the only mention thus far although that is more indirect in a lot of ways too. I will probably be bothered if it isn't name-dropped in the film at this point with an explanation imported for why it hasn't been a center of focus in the slightest lately.

As for if we get to see it, I think if it's part of the story it should get included physically as well, but like I said, the longer we go without it getting a direct mention in the newer films the harder it will be for it to reappear in a meaningful way in the future and that is something I particularly dread.

I think if that happens then there are 2 ways how the Sorna movies can still be canon. But first, the rights have to go back to the Crichton estate and then Disney gets the rights. More on this condition later. Anyway, here are the 2 ways.

1. We get a movie or at least an animated cartoon show that take place between JP3 and JW.

2. The 5th and 6th movies get ret-conned out of the franchise. Like Fox ret-conned X-Men 3 and much, if not all, of Wolverine Origins out of existance.

Now let me explain my Disney condition. Many fans-which includes you Ty-consider Universal's handling of the franchise poor since TLW. There are just so much things that Universal could have done, yet didn't. I honestly think that Disney were to get the rights, then they would treat the franchise with far more respect. I believe that if Universal were to regain the franchise, then it is doomed.

I don't think the 5th and 6th movies need to get retconned out of the franchise here at least at this very moment. Especially considering that FK isn't even out yet. Outside from the previews, FK hasn't struck me as a continuity violator nearly as much as JP3 was which basically tried to reinvent the Raptors without explanation and even the Pteranodons. Marketing pegged it as evolution, but a simpler explanation already existed and was there so it has "precedence" in a way with the version numbers argument. Outside of that fans are basically more or less a complication to the continuity status of things due to how vocal the group is of whatever they are hoping to be achieved in the end.

I mean a lot of people are just dead set on eliminating something because it is new and different, but we need to realize that films (like all stories) need to have a way to reinvent themselves to stay relevant and keep people interested as well as coming back for more and more. Outside, if the particular thing in media flops creatively and critically the studio needs to do damage control with it and either work it out of the canon or just say it doesn't count. The fandom is too vehemently against certain ventures because of petty reasons at times though and often it is the vocal minority of them that are getting heard.

Take that vitriol for JPTG. As a game, yeah it is nothing but a mess of Quick Time Events and button presses that left people hoping to poke around and explore Nublar unfulfilled. Taking a step back and viewing JP:TG as it was you'll realize that as a story it is truly awesome and as authentic as you can get. You just have to enjoy it as a an interactive movie versus game and not a lot of people can/would/or will make that distinction because they can't get over that it was meant to be a game. So as such, Uni has basically motioned to it being "soft canon" where parts are and parts aren't. Now, outside of this I don't think something like TLW or JP3 are being treated like that, I'm just seeing the lack of mention that is as in-your face as someone saying "Oh. Yeah. That happened and wow." is not going to be their due out of relevance more than a need to mention it for the sake of mentioning.

I think Uni may eventually get a better handle on the franchise, but they do need to stay consistent with it and not necessarily become tone-deaf to the vocal minority that want wacky things, but actually hear everybody, get to know their brand intimately, and approach it in a way that allows them direct it in a meaningful way. I mean my main point here is that something like the "JP3 Spino being the JW Spino Skeleton on Main street" should not have happened at all. Not only is it anatomically inaccurate to the animal, but it is quote mining Trevorrow from an interview where he was making light of it getting smashed.

Just curious, what makes you think that Universal will get a better handle on the franchise when even you have said that they haven't treated as well as they should? I still say that TLW coming out in 1997 was the last real time that they truly cared and between the F&F franchise being the only real franchise they care about nowadays, Dreamworks still having no real identity, the Dark Universe being mortally crippled, and everything else, I still don't think they ever will.

The fact that this entire topic/thread is being talked about is a huge indictment on Universal's handling of the whole franchise by itself. And I'm not even listing all the other reasons.

You uh.... answered that question yourself here. Just saying. Razz

I'll go over your points again here though: Dark Universe is crippled, F&F is well...F&F, and Dreamworks has no identity. They hedged their bets with all these things and they've not worked out entirely with maybe exception of F&F, but that is unable to compete with the MCU and Star Wars at this point. The Jurassic series is quite literally the only single thing they have left that could/would/possibly save them from the widening gyre of death that awaits them.

As to what changed my mind? Nothing really changed my mind so much here except good ol' fashioned logic and my "wait and see" attitude. I mean the fact I could finally take a step back and see the bigger picture here at work.

Outside of that I still feel Uni handles JP criminally compared to how other studios handle their properties, but I think the reason for that was because after what happened with JP3 (it being a flop critically and even mediocre financially) Uni stopped seeing the value in it until JW came out and showed there was life there basically. The problem is I also understand that JP needs someone that functions as a figurehead or franchise leader of sorts in order for it to continue and I think Trevorrow has taken the role himself to ultimately take the reins of the franchise and lead it. He's proven himself (mostly) with Jurassic World and considering he's no longer on Star Wars Episode IX he is available to do it now.

JP didn't really have a franchise leader before aside from Spielberg, but Spielberg himself is a movie director and not a franchise director. He set it up, but became inundated with it when it stopped presenting a challenge, but he still insisted on sitting on it. I think Trevorrow is slowly coming to being a "franchise director" in the case of Jurassic World going forward. Considering he brought it back up into relevance. As to how he'll lead that, or what he does with it, if he throws it down and takes Spielberg's path of being a movie director instead of a franchise director it entirely remains to be seen I feel. But that's where I sit right now with this after getting some needed perspective.

_______________

Paleontology Enthusiast, Life long Learner, Citizen Scientist, Jurassic-series Media Archivist
Jurassic-Pedia - The Jurassic Encyclopedia
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.jurassic-pedia.com/
Herrerasaurus
Ankylosaurus
Ankylosaurus
avatar

Posts : 445
Points : 979
Reputation : 13
Join date : 2017-05-25

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:30 pm

@Bbrink1996 wrote:
I really don't get where all the "Isla Sorna isn't canon anymore" fear mongering is coming from. No where has there ever been any confirmation that the events of TLW and JP3 didn't happen so I don't get what all the fuss is about.

If it makes sense for Isla Sorna to pop up or be mentioned in FK then by all means do so, I and many others would love it, but if there is no reason for it to be mentioned then they don't have to. And if they don't then it also doesn't mean that Isla Sorna is wiped from the canon.
I completely agree. Its rare for a franchise to make sequels non-canon (exception:terminator franchise).
Back to top Go down
View user profile
deinocoop
Hatchling
Hatchling


Posts : 54
Points : 891
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2016-07-14

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 13, 2018 11:13 pm

U ask me, I preferably likes it when bits and pieces of context are continued into brand new movies and/or episodes. Sorna shouldn't be an exception to this rule. Now we just need to see FK to know for sure.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Six-Foot Turkey
Triceratops
Triceratops
avatar

Posts : 886
Points : 1472
Reputation : 49
Join date : 2017-05-25
Location : United Kingdom

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Feb 14, 2018 12:00 pm

Unless Universal come out and say "Sorna, TLW and JP3 aren't canon", then they're canon.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
brunofernando
Embryo
Embryo
avatar

Posts : 40
Points : 573
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2017-05-08
Location : São Paulo, Brazil

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Feb 14, 2018 3:02 pm

You guys are overreacting about all of this. TLW and JP3 are still canon, nobody ever said it wasn't. Period.

And stop asking for cartoons or a movie that "connects the two trilogies". It won't happen. And it's not about Universal caring or not about the franchise, it just doesn't make sense to bother filming a movie just for the sake of some fans. They're already releasing a book about Claire's past, maybe they mention Sorna there.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rhedosaurus
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 4354
Points : 5405
Reputation : 63
Join date : 2016-06-08
Location : Armada, Michigan

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Feb 14, 2018 6:23 pm

@brunofernando wrote:
You guys are overreacting about all of this. TLW and JP3 are still canon, nobody ever said it wasn't. Period.

And stop asking for cartoons or a movie that "connects the two trilogies". It won't happen. And it's not about Universal caring or not about the franchise, it just doesn't make sense to bother filming a movie just for the sake of some fans. They're already releasing a book about Claire's past, maybe they mention Sorna there

Yes it is. Think about it, Star Wars has books and comic books about it that expand the franchise. You see this even today. And look at Marvel. Ever since the MCU has turned into a juggernaut, you see them expand their animated TV shows and market more stuff then they have since the 1990's. Jurassic Park should be a MEGA-franchise just as big or at least close as both franchises. But it isn't.

If Star Wars can mention/talk about the prequels in SW7 and have Star Wars Rebels connect the prequels with OT, then why can't we have a cartoon that does the same? Sorry, but just one book out of all the potential other stuff Universal could/should have done just doesn't cut it.

As for Sorna, the longer they go about not talking about it in the movies, the more people think that it's not canon.




_______________
The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.

If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton




If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Bbrink1996
Hatchling
Hatchling
avatar

Posts : 83
Points : 561
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2017-07-05

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Fri Feb 16, 2018 9:13 am

@Rhedosaurus wrote:
As for Sorna, the longer they go about not talking about it in the movies, the more people think that it's not canon.

That makes no sense. If something isn't mentioned for a while in franchises doesn't it suddenly disappears from the canon. And if people need to be reminded that Sorna exists every movie then I really can't help them because they have memory issues.

_______________
"Behold the horror that lurks behind the veil of glimmering starlight!"
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rhedosaurus
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 4354
Points : 5405
Reputation : 63
Join date : 2016-06-08
Location : Armada, Michigan

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Fri Feb 16, 2018 6:07 pm

@Bbrink1996 wrote:
@Rhedosaurus wrote:
As for Sorna, the longer they go about not talking about it in the movies, the more people think that it's not canon.

That makes no sense. If something isn't mentioned for a while in franchises doesn't it suddenly disappears from the canon. And if people need to be reminded that Sorna exists every movie then I really can't help them because they have memory issues.

It's the matter of keeping the old fans. You can't just keep on building something on the past without mentioning said past. You always need to keep on old fans in some form. It's how franchises have historically worked.

_______________
The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.

If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton




If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Troyal1
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 1658
Points : 2613
Reputation : 62
Join date : 2016-06-08

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:49 pm

@Bbrink1996 wrote:
@Rhedosaurus wrote:
As for Sorna, the longer they go about not talking about it in the movies, the more people think that it's not canon.

That makes no sense. If something isn't mentioned for a while in franchises doesn't it suddenly disappears from the canon. And if people need to be reminded that Sorna exists every movie then I really can't help them because they have memory issues.

It really has nothing to do with being reminded. I think it’s actually really important to the story. I mean we have a movie here that is literally advocating for saving the Dino’s and whether they are worth protecting or not. So why wouldn’t someone bring up that there are plenty left on Sorna that are safe from a volcano?

And if all the animals on Sorna died it would be great to find out.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Six-Foot Turkey
Triceratops
Triceratops
avatar

Posts : 886
Points : 1472
Reputation : 49
Join date : 2017-05-25
Location : United Kingdom

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Sat Feb 17, 2018 4:12 pm

Watch them take the Dinosaurs to one of the other islands and completely ignore Sorna
Back to top Go down
View user profile
BarrytheOnyx
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 1163
Points : 2121
Reputation : 59
Join date : 2016-06-17
Location : Stratford Upon Avon, England

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:06 pm

@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
Watch them take the Dinosaurs to one of the other islands and completely ignore Sorna

Is that sarcasm? Seriously, I can't tell anymore. You mention "other islands" as the dinosaurs' intended destination yet believe that Sorna would be overlooked?

My additional two cents: after thinking this over, it does make sense that Isla Sorna was the source of Masrani Global's dinosaur stock in Jurassic World. They built all of their genetics facilities on Isla Sorna, and the first park's gene labs were too small to create a vast host of dinosaur batches to populate a large island and were left abandoned to the elements. Masrani probably could not finance and build the gene labs and breeding facilities to the same extent as Hammond had, certainly not fast enough to capitalize on growing public curiosity, and without them had no option but to harvest dinosaur "assets" and raise money to build new labs with them as attractions. Sadly, all Malcolm, Sarah and Hammond achieved in 1997 was delay the inevitable.

_______________
"Life will find a way."

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Six-Foot Turkey
Triceratops
Triceratops
avatar

Posts : 886
Points : 1472
Reputation : 49
Join date : 2017-05-25
Location : United Kingdom

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:10 pm

@BarrytheOnyx wrote:
@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
Watch them take the Dinosaurs to one of the other islands and completely ignore Sorna

Is that sarcasm? Seriously, I can't tell anymore. You mention "other islands" as the dinosaurs' intended destination yet believe that Sorna would be overlooked?

My additional two cents: after thinking this over, it does make sense that Isla Sorna was the source of Masrani Global's dinosaur stock in Jurassic World. They built all of their genetics facilities on Isla Sorna, and the first park's gene labs were too small to create a vast host of dinosaur batches to populate a large island and were left abandoned to the elements. Masrani probably could not finance and build the gene labs and breeding facilities to the same extent as Hammond had, certainly not fast enough to capitalize on growing public curiosity, and without them had no option but to harvest dinosaur "assets" and raise money to build new labs with them as attractions. Sadly, all Malcolm, Sarah and Hammond achieved in 1997 was delay the inevitable.

I'm making a joke. Imagine if, after all this complaining and hoping that Sorna is at least mentioned in the film, the filmmakers instead have the Dinosaurs taken to one of the other several islands without even mentioning Isla Sorna just to mess with the fans.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Six-Foot Turkey
Triceratops
Triceratops
avatar

Posts : 886
Points : 1472
Reputation : 49
Join date : 2017-05-25
Location : United Kingdom

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:13 pm

Wasn't Isla Sorna protected after TLW? Would Masrani have control to just take Dinosaurs from Sorna?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
BarrytheOnyx
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 1163
Points : 2121
Reputation : 59
Join date : 2016-06-17
Location : Stratford Upon Avon, England

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:16 pm

@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:

I'm making a joke. Imagine if, after all this complaining and hoping that Sorna is at least mentioned in the film, the filmmakers instead have the Dinosaurs taken to one of the other several islands without even mentioning Isla Sorna just to mess with the fans.

Ahh, understood. My bad!

@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
Wasn't Isla Sorna protected after TLW? Would Masrani have control to just take Dinosaurs from Sorna?

That's the thing, in theory it should have been, but it clearly didn't stop others from coming to the island in small numbers or in force (JP3). And honestly, considering that InGen's merge with Masrani Global made it a subsidiary of the much larger corporation, I think Masrani was able to find a way to overrule the original agreement.

_______________
"Life will find a way."

Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rhedosaurus
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 4354
Points : 5405
Reputation : 63
Join date : 2016-06-08
Location : Armada, Michigan

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 20, 2018 12:44 pm

@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
Wasn't Isla Sorna protected after TLW? Would Masrani have control to just take Dinosaurs from Sorna?

That's the thing, in theory it should have been, but it clearly didn't stop others from coming to the island in small numbers or in force (JP3). And honestly, considering that InGen's merge with Masrani Global made it a subsidiary of the much larger corporation, I think Masrani was able to find a way to overrule the original agreement.[/quote]

In practice, it was. Remember how at the end of TLW how Papa Rex and his kid were escorted back to Sorna by the US Navy and how at the end of JP3 how the U.S. Marine Corps picked up Grant, the Kirbys, and Billy? One would think that they would still be protecting Sorna and the rest of the islands even even MORE vigilence due to JP3.

Not only that, but how in the world did Masrani manage to bypass all the red tape? One would have thought that even after the buy-out of Ingen, that the U.S. government would have regulated Sorna to the point where removing as much dinosaurs as Masrani is supposed to have done would have been impossible. Not only that, but Wu could have easily managed to clone new dinosaurs. And I still find it hard to believe that the Brachiosaurus's that we saw in the JW:FK trailer are new ones and not the originals/the decendants of the originals.

_______________
The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.

If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton




If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
TheDreamMaster
Administrator
Administrator
avatar

Posts : 999
Points : 2957
Reputation : 30
Join date : 2016-06-07
Location : USA

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Feb 21, 2018 9:53 am

@Herrerasaurus wrote:
@Bbrink1996 wrote:
I really don't get where all the "Isla Sorna isn't canon anymore" fear mongering is coming from. No where has there ever been any confirmation that the events of TLW and JP3 didn't happen so I don't get what all the fuss is about.

If it makes sense for Isla Sorna to pop up or be mentioned in FK then by all means do so, I and many others would love it, but if there is no reason for it to be mentioned then they don't have to. And if they don't then it also doesn't mean that Isla Sorna is wiped from the canon.
I completely agree. Its rare for a franchise to make sequels non-canon (exception:terminator franchise).

Weird as Terminator is probably the only one with an excuse to say "multiple timelines!".

I don't know where all this Disney stuff has come from lately. I'm going to wait until the merger is complete, and see if Disney is willing to give me any more Aliens or Predators films before hoping they pick up something like the JP license.

On topic, I hope they mention Sorna directly. Seems everyone took Colin's comments to heart about it more or less being a reboot tied to the original film. I will still consider them canon (along with the game, minus whatever needs to be retconned), and regardless.

_______________
Make the Sayles JP IV script into an animated series! Admit it, you'd watch it.
 
"We'll use the Force."- Finn
 "That's not how the Force works!"- Han Solo
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Gondrasia
Compsognathus
Compsognathus
avatar

Posts : 117
Points : 988
Reputation : 2
Join date : 2016-06-14
Location : London

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Feb 21, 2018 2:38 pm

I would like to see one or two lines regarding Isla Sorna and it’s currently situation, but honestly I wouldn’t mind if they didn’t mention it. Isla Sorna is easily one of the more forgettable parts of the Jurassic Park franchise, the general public believes that all four movies take place on the same island (Isla Nublar) and I don’t blame them because The Lost World and JP/// have not handled or portrayed Sorna well at all.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
BoulderFaceplant
Ceratosaurus
Ceratosaurus


Posts : 196
Points : 880
Reputation : 23
Join date : 2017-01-16

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 27, 2018 6:03 pm

@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
@BarrytheOnyx wrote:
@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
Watch them take the Dinosaurs to one of the other islands and completely ignore Sorna

Is that sarcasm? Seriously, I can't tell anymore. You mention "other islands" as the dinosaurs' intended destination yet believe that Sorna would be overlooked?

My additional two cents: after thinking this over, it does make sense that Isla Sorna was the source of Masrani Global's dinosaur stock in Jurassic World. They built all of their genetics facilities on Isla Sorna, and the first park's gene labs were too small to create a vast host of dinosaur batches to populate a large island and were left abandoned to the elements. Masrani probably could not finance and build the gene labs and breeding facilities to the same extent as Hammond had, certainly not fast enough to capitalize on growing public curiosity, and without them had no option but to harvest dinosaur "assets" and raise money to build new labs with them as attractions. Sadly, all Malcolm, Sarah and Hammond achieved in 1997 was delay the inevitable.

I'm making a joke. Imagine if, after all this complaining and hoping that Sorna is at least mentioned in the film, the filmmakers instead have the Dinosaurs taken to one of the other several islands without even mentioning Isla Sorna just to mess with the fans.

At this point, with the DPG website refusing to confirm whether Sorna has dinosaurs on it, I’m expecting it to be completely ignored. The planned destination will indeed probably just be some other island. Not to mess with the fans, but just because they want to stir up contrived drama by making it seem like the Nublar dinosaurs are the only ones left.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Six-Foot Turkey
Triceratops
Triceratops
avatar

Posts : 886
Points : 1472
Reputation : 49
Join date : 2017-05-25
Location : United Kingdom

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Feb 27, 2018 7:34 pm

@BoulderFaceplant wrote:
@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
@BarrytheOnyx wrote:
@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
Watch them take the Dinosaurs to one of the other islands and completely ignore Sorna

Is that sarcasm? Seriously, I can't tell anymore. You mention "other islands" as the dinosaurs' intended destination yet believe that Sorna would be overlooked?

My additional two cents: after thinking this over, it does make sense that Isla Sorna was the source of Masrani Global's dinosaur stock in Jurassic World. They built all of their genetics facilities on Isla Sorna, and the first park's gene labs were too small to create a vast host of dinosaur batches to populate a large island and were left abandoned to the elements. Masrani probably could not finance and build the gene labs and breeding facilities to the same extent as Hammond had, certainly not fast enough to capitalize on growing public curiosity, and without them had no option but to harvest dinosaur "assets" and raise money to build new labs with them as attractions. Sadly, all Malcolm, Sarah and Hammond achieved in 1997 was delay the inevitable.

I'm making a joke. Imagine if, after all this complaining and hoping that Sorna is at least mentioned in the film, the filmmakers instead have the Dinosaurs taken to one of the other several islands without even mentioning Isla Sorna just to mess with the fans.

At this point, with the DPG website refusing to confirm whether Sorna has dinosaurs on it, I’m expecting it to be completely ignored. The planned destination will indeed probably just be some other island. Not to mess with the fans, but just because they want to stir up contrived drama by making it seem like the Nublar dinosaurs are the only ones left.

I like the explanation they've given. Seems feesible considering the amount of time that has passed since JP3.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Levine
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 583
Points : 3062
Reputation : 16
Join date : 2013-01-12
Location : Texas.

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Sun Mar 04, 2018 9:57 pm

Considering how the DPG site is utilizing it, I'm pretty certain it will be name-dropped when they're discussing the plans for Nublar stock relocation.

_______________

"A creature of the future, built with pieces of the past!"
"This is the most dangerous creature that ever walked the Earth!"
"That thing cannot leave this building."
Back to top Go down
View user profile https://natsukis.meme.bakery
BarrytheOnyx
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 1163
Points : 2121
Reputation : 59
Join date : 2016-06-17
Location : Stratford Upon Avon, England

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:50 am

That's what I hope as well, at least establish that they're relocating the dinosaurs to a similar and more compatible habitat, seeing as how there really is no a clear-cut alternative to Sorna or the other Cinco Muertes islands, no one would accept the mainland as their original intended destination unless the heroes were being duped by Lockwood.

_______________
"Life will find a way."

Back to top Go down
View user profile
BoulderFaceplant
Ceratosaurus
Ceratosaurus


Posts : 196
Points : 880
Reputation : 23
Join date : 2017-01-16

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Mar 06, 2018 7:03 pm

Well, Trevorrow said in 2015 that the second and third films were retconned, then backpedaled. That makes it sound like there were never any plans to incorporate Sorna in this trilogy. In the newest DPG video, Claire says, “Are we going to be the generation that let dinosaurs go extinct again?” Implying that all the dinosaurs will go extinct if they aren’t rescued from the Nublar volcano. Then you have the flimsy explanation on the DPG website that the Sorna ecosystem was “thrown into chaos” by people taking dinosaurs off the island. But how would that make it so there are literally no dinosaurs left on Sorna? It’s flimsy logic that wouldn’t hold up in a movie, more evidence that Sorna is basically retconned out of the franchise as far as the actual films are concerned. The website writers were probably tasked with coming up with a reason why the Nublar dinosaurs are made out to be the last ones on earth, and they couldn’t even do that. Hello, what about DX virus?

It’s so unnecessary, too. Even if there were dinosaurs alive on another island, the Nublar ones would still be worth saving. My hope is that the InGeneral podcast or someone asks the filmmakers the hard question: what is the condition of Isla Sorna? And if the dinosaurs are all gone, why?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Six-Foot Turkey
Triceratops
Triceratops
avatar

Posts : 886
Points : 1472
Reputation : 49
Join date : 2017-05-25
Location : United Kingdom

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Tue Mar 06, 2018 7:51 pm

@BoulderFaceplant wrote:
Well, Trevorrow said in 2015 that the second and third films were retconned, then backpedaled. That makes it sound like there were never any plans to incorporate Sorna in this trilogy. In the newest DPG video, Claire says, “Are we going to be the generation that let dinosaurs go extinct again?” Implying that all the dinosaurs will go extinct if they aren’t rescued from the Nublar volcano. Then you have the flimsy explanation on the DPG website that the Sorna ecosystem was “thrown into chaos” by people taking dinosaurs off the island. But how would that make it so there are literally no dinosaurs left on Sorna? It’s flimsy logic that wouldn’t hold up in a movie, more evidence that Sorna is basically retconned out of the franchise as far as the actual films are concerned. The website writers were probably tasked with coming up with a reason why the Nublar dinosaurs are made out to be the last ones on earth, and they couldn’t even do that. Hello, what about DX virus?

It’s so unnecessary, too. Even if there were dinosaurs alive on another island, the Nublar ones would still be worth saving. My hope is that the InGeneral podcast or someone asks the filmmakers the hard question: what is the condition of Isla Sorna? And if the dinosaurs are all gone, why?

Did he directly say it was retconned or did fans just overthink like they usually do?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Bbrink1996
Hatchling
Hatchling
avatar

Posts : 83
Points : 561
Reputation : 1
Join date : 2017-07-05

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Mar 07, 2018 6:17 am

@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
@BoulderFaceplant wrote:
Well, Trevorrow said in 2015 that the second and third films were retconned, then backpedaled. That makes it sound like there were never any plans to incorporate Sorna in this trilogy. In the newest DPG video, Claire says, “Are we going to be the generation that let dinosaurs go extinct again?” Implying that all the dinosaurs will go extinct if they aren’t rescued from the Nublar volcano. Then you have the flimsy explanation on the DPG website that the Sorna ecosystem was “thrown into chaos” by people taking dinosaurs off the island. But how would that make it so there are literally no dinosaurs left on Sorna? It’s flimsy logic that wouldn’t hold up in a movie, more evidence that Sorna is basically retconned out of the franchise as far as the actual films are concerned. The website writers were probably tasked with coming up with a reason why the Nublar dinosaurs are made out to be the last ones on earth, and they couldn’t even do that. Hello, what about DX virus?

It’s so unnecessary, too. Even if there were dinosaurs alive on another island, the Nublar ones would still be worth saving. My hope is that the InGeneral podcast or someone asks the filmmakers the hard question: what is the condition of Isla Sorna? And if the dinosaurs are all gone, why?

Did he directly say it was retconned or did fans just overthink like they usually do?

Pretty sure it was overthinking.

_______________
"Behold the horror that lurks behind the veil of glimmering starlight!"
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rhedosaurus
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 4354
Points : 5405
Reputation : 63
Join date : 2016-06-08
Location : Armada, Michigan

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Mar 07, 2018 8:43 am

@Bbrink1996 wrote:
@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
@BoulderFaceplant wrote:
Well, Trevorrow said in 2015 that the second and third films were retconned, then backpedaled. That makes it sound like there were never any plans to incorporate Sorna in this trilogy. In the newest DPG video, Claire says, “Are we going to be the generation that let dinosaurs go extinct again?” Implying that all the dinosaurs will go extinct if they aren’t rescued from the Nublar volcano. Then you have the flimsy explanation on the DPG website that the Sorna ecosystem was “thrown into chaos” by people taking dinosaurs off the island. But how would that make it so there are literally no dinosaurs left on Sorna? It’s flimsy logic that wouldn’t hold up in a movie, more evidence that Sorna is basically retconned out of the franchise as far as the actual films are concerned. The website writers were probably tasked with coming up with a reason why the Nublar dinosaurs are made out to be the last ones on earth, and they couldn’t even do that. Hello, what about DX virus?

It’s so unnecessary, too. Even if there were dinosaurs alive on another island, the Nublar ones would still be worth saving. My hope is that the InGeneral podcast or someone asks the filmmakers the hard question: what is the condition of Isla Sorna? And if the dinosaurs are all gone, why?

Did he directly say it was retconned or did fans just overthink like they usually do?

Pretty sure it was overthinking.

It was heavily implied that it was, but he then walked back said that they were still canon, but just 'set aside' or something like that.

_______________
The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.

If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton




If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Six-Foot Turkey
Triceratops
Triceratops
avatar

Posts : 886
Points : 1472
Reputation : 49
Join date : 2017-05-25
Location : United Kingdom

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Mar 07, 2018 9:38 am

@Rhedosaurus wrote:
@Bbrink1996 wrote:
@Six-Foot Turkey wrote:
@BoulderFaceplant wrote:
Well, Trevorrow said in 2015 that the second and third films were retconned, then backpedaled. That makes it sound like there were never any plans to incorporate Sorna in this trilogy. In the newest DPG video, Claire says, “Are we going to be the generation that let dinosaurs go extinct again?” Implying that all the dinosaurs will go extinct if they aren’t rescued from the Nublar volcano. Then you have the flimsy explanation on the DPG website that the Sorna ecosystem was “thrown into chaos” by people taking dinosaurs off the island. But how would that make it so there are literally no dinosaurs left on Sorna? It’s flimsy logic that wouldn’t hold up in a movie, more evidence that Sorna is basically retconned out of the franchise as far as the actual films are concerned. The website writers were probably tasked with coming up with a reason why the Nublar dinosaurs are made out to be the last ones on earth, and they couldn’t even do that. Hello, what about DX virus?

It’s so unnecessary, too. Even if there were dinosaurs alive on another island, the Nublar ones would still be worth saving. My hope is that the InGeneral podcast or someone asks the filmmakers the hard question: what is the condition of Isla Sorna? And if the dinosaurs are all gone, why?

Did he directly say it was retconned or did fans just overthink like they usually do?

Pretty sure it was overthinking.


It was heavily implied that it was, but he then walked back said that they were still canon, but just 'set aside' or something like that.
link?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Troyal1
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 1658
Points : 2613
Reputation : 62
Join date : 2016-06-08

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:03 am

Yeah I need to see a link to a direct quote of what he said. Because I’ve never seen him say anything either way(with my own eyes).
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Rhedosaurus
Veteran
Veteran
avatar

Posts : 4354
Points : 5405
Reputation : 63
Join date : 2016-06-08
Location : Armada, Michigan

PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:08 am

Here's the link.

[url=https://news.avclub.com/jurassic-world-will-ignore-what happened-in-the-lost-wor-1798279103]https://news.avclub.com/jurassic-world-will-ignore-what happened-in-the-lost-wor-1798279103[/url]

_______________
The undisputed dominant predator of Jurassic Mainframe.

If you don't know history, then you don't know anything. You are a leaf that doesn't know it is part of a tree. Michael Crichton




If you're concerned about where this franchise is headed, then please join us.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?   

Back to top Go down
 
How bothered will you be if Sorna isn’t mentioned?
Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Jurassic Mainframe :: The Franchise :: Film Universe :: Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom Talk-
Jump to: