|
|
[ Log In ] [ Register ]
 means the user is online now!
It effects the movieebcause they were to based it off the book. No Malcolm, no return in a major role, as originally plnned. Things jsut changed as they went. Ian origanally had a very small part, buthe ende dup saying the most. And like GoldblumRules saidCrichton like dhim, so he made sure he returned.
At 12:38:34 AM on 6/19/2000, GoldblumRules said:
Crichton, not Christon. I assume you know who Crichton is. Anyway... CRICHTON said in an interview regarding TLW book that he HAD to have Malcolm in there. Malcolm is Crichton's favorite character from all his books, it's the closest to who he is, so he took a cue from his fave author Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who brought Sherlock Holmes back from the dead so there could be more stories. Grant is a cool character but he's more based on Jack Horner than Crichton. That is why Malcolm was in the sequel and not Grant.
At 9:20:06 PM on 6/18/2000, TV Brains213 said:
WHO IS MICHEAL CHRISTON?
At 8:27:26 PM on 6/18/2000, mrContica said:
Acctually, what I think would be recycled thrash is IF they're gonna have Ian Malcolm in it again.
That would just be like, Malcolm is the new superhero who saves the world from Dinosaurs.
If they're gonna have Malcolm in, have him in like in The original Jurassic Park, his role there was way cooler than in TLW. In TLW he was suddenly a lot older and not as controversial as in the first film. Part of it may be that he didn't look half a bit as mafia in it as in Jurassic Park (the hair, the sunglasses).
One thing I find a bit stupid tho, are all the complaints that Chrichton wrote malcolm in TLW novel, just so that he could be in the movie. He didn't even die in the movie, so what would him dying in the first book, have to do with anything for the sequel?
At 3:53:23 AM on 6/18/2000, Utahraptor said:
Maybe the whole Site C and TLW rehash has been rewritten into something nice by Crichton. We just haven't heard it. If so, we'd have some newbies (6) who get involved in a dino adventure with Grant and a few other returnees.
At 3:08:12 AM on 6/18/2000, GoldblumRules said:
Actually, the part where they are trying to win our favor by saying Crichton is involved is where they have stuck his name onto the film as producer, which was in the press release last summer. It also said Crichton's creative input would be laid back. Funny how all this has worked out... If you remember the official announcement of JP3 back in June '98, Crichton was SUPPOSED to develop the damn story for the film, but apparently he got so caught up writing Timeframe that Spielberg got tired of waiting and he came up with the story premise himself. Oh, what may have been... I think if Crichton had written the story, Malcolm would again be the lead (Crichton brought him BACK FROM THE DEAD just so he could be in the second book), Hammond would die in the beginning, and Grant may have had a part too. Dodgson would've figured into the plot, bringing the Ingen/ Biosyn feud to a new height, and we would have a fresh plot instead of rehashed trash (which I hope this does not turn out to be)...
At 10:53:59 PM on 6/17/2000, Carnotaur45 said:
I'm wondering...Could they just be saying that he's involve with it, to make the fans quiet down for a bit? I mean, noone seems to happy with where the film may be going, so could Universal just be saying this to get our hopes up?
At 2:49:22 PM on 6/17/2000, GoldblumRules said:
I actually posted something and may have emailed it awhile back regarding Crichton's involvement, which was stated on the official Michael Crichton webpage. In the FAQs section I think, he's asked if he's working on JP3 to which he replied that he had no involvement at the moment. I'd doubt he helped write JP3 because if he had, Malcolm would be the lead, not a 12 year old. And the story would be based on Spielberg's idea.
Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment
|
|
Add DJP3P to your newsreader!
|
