#oh michael... i could write an entire essay about the handling of his character

[cinerins]

You could say that!

[aliencowboyqueen]

Did you want 2,000 words on Alex, Michael and Kyle in Caulfield?

I'm supposed to be writing a fic but instead I lost myself in an analysis of the Caulfield plot. If you don't want to read all 2,000 words of it, it boils down to: I love Kyle Valenti and everything hurts. If you do want the full course, keep reading.

I have such intense love for the entire Caulfield plot. Alex, Michael, and Kyle all have a deeply personal stake in this operation – not one of them is there just to provide a helping hand – and I love that. And I love their dynamics and everything about what these three characters go through, each on their own as well as in relation to the other two, in this episode.

I appreciate that Michael calls Kyle out on his high school behaviour. He is not even talking to Kyle in that moment, he is calling out Alex on being willing to cooperate with him after all that. And I like the way Alex dismisses this topic. He doesn’t try to make excuses for Kyle, he doesn’t give him a cookie for having improved. He doesn’t try to pacify Michael. He simply redirects the conversation towards their mission. He has not forgotten; it simply isn’t relevant right now.

We learn a little fun titbit about Kyle: he references pop/nerdy culture without any deeper knowledge of it. He confuses Star Wars and Star Trek and I wonder if he has any actual knowledge about X-Men or if he only knows what Magneto does. Alex’s horrified expression is priceless. Kyle Valenti is not perfect even in the present day! Who’d have thought?

That little moment when Alex makes sure Michael is actually ready for this mission. I don’t think he expects him to back out, but he is giving him that option just in case.

You know what else I love? Alex is managing this operation and Kyle respects it fully. When Alex says to do something, he does it, because he knows Alex knows what he is doing. This is Alex’s sphere of expertise and he knows it, and he trusts his decisions. If they were performing a surgery, I have no doubt he’d expect Alex to follow his instructions, but in this situation, Alex is the one with the training and the experience and the plan. There is only one moment where we see him give Alex a questioning look – when Alex says you can’t just give someone a brain tumor. I’d say Kyle is actually hurt by that remark, because he is sure that his father was murdered and Alex is being dismissive about that. Other than that? Alex says jump and Kyle does.

Meanwhile, Michael’s first instinct is to protect Alex and I love that. But I also love that, in the “run towards the entrance” scene, he instantly catches up on the fact that Alex is in the one best suited to handle the situation. Alex is the one who can find out the best excuse to be there, being the one actually in the military, and the one best suited to handle it. Meanwhile, not one of them is in more danger than Michael. Michael accepts it. He realizes that sometimes, he can protect Alex, but sometimes it’s Alex’s turn to protect him.

TL;DR Michael and Kyle both respect Alex a lot. Please put that in contrast with his father and brother, who both treat him as weak and less than.

Quick thirst break to admire how hot Alex is in this episode. The moment he disarms Flint? UNF. And he also genuinely just looks great this episode; this hairstyle is wonderful on him.

Alex and Flint. It’s clear their relationship is complicated. We see Flint begrudgingly impressed by Alex disarming him. They don’t want to be on the opposing sides of this battle, but neither of them will budge. If it comes down to choosing between their respective ideologies or the other one’s well-being, one of them will be leaving in a body bag, but it’s clear neither of them wants it to get to that point (But then when it gets to that point, Flint tells Alex to get out). I wouldn’t go as far as to claim they love each other – there is clearly a lot of bad blood between them and Flint is the sort of Manes man Jesse Manes wants his son to be – but they are brothers and on some level, they care about each other. They know each other well, and their position within the family, and throughout the entire conversation they are exploiting their knowledge of each other in order to learn more about what the other one is up to. This was such a good choice, to have Alex converse with his brother rather than have the trio face only random soldiers. (Compare Alex and Flint’s conversation to Kyle’s conversation with the random soldier.)

“Will it feed my Beagle?” Can we see the beagle? Please?

“What does he have on you?” Season 2 better deliver, I’m intrigued.

“Oh spare me.” Alex Manes takes no one’s bullshit.

It was interesting to watch Kyle and Michael. We see them butt heads at every turn. They challenge and question each other every step of the way. Kyle is clearly uncertain regarding Michael’s psychic connection to the other aliens – he can’t see the effects of it, for all he knows Michael has no idea what he is doing. And Michael won’t let Kyle take credit for decoding the letters – there is a very strong emphasis on that “and” in “Alex and you, uh?”

But then the holding area. The contrast between Michael and Kyle there. Michael’s angry and broken “They are like me.” Kyle using clinical words to analyse the situation because that’s how he processes and understands it, but his expression is horrified, he feels compassion for these people. Michael’s direct and plain label of “torture” and his desperate need to save these people, Kyle’s understanding that they don’t have the capacity to do that right there and then. “And bring them where? They are feral,” you can tell he doesn’t like having to say it. He is turning Michael down, but he is no longer hostile. I really love the acting and directing choices there because the lines themselves? (“And bring them where? They are feral.” “Hey! Guerin?” “Are you sure?”) They could be shouted, they could be said through his teeth, they could be impatient. Instead, they sound concerned. From the moment Michael says “They are like me,” Kyle takes an entirely different tone with him. Kyle realizes that no matter how he is feeling, Michael is feeling worse.

The way Michael says “I know her.” Like his brain is so busy processing this situation that he has forgotten how words work. Is he telling this to Kyle? Or just to himself? There is so much feeling. Someone give Vlamis an Emmy.

Someone is approaching and there is not a moment of hesitation for Kyle. They are in an alien torture facility and Michael is an alien. Kyle could get in trouble if his cover story fails but it’d be incomparably worse for Michael. Michael might not be his favorite person in the world, but Kyle is going to make sure he is not dissected by creepy soldiers.

Kyle’s expression during the “Any human ever go there?” “Once” conversation. He thinks: I was right, my father WAS murdered. And then he looks at this old, sad, broken, tortured, isolated alien. And Kyle’s world shatters to pieces. The expression on his face breaks me. It especially breaks me on repeat viewing after having heard his later dialogue. Because it’s not an “I have my answers and can have my justice” expression. It’s: “My hero might have been a monster.”

“Then he deserved it.” First, I don’t think I’ve ever loved a character more than I love Kyle in that moment. Kyle loved and admired his father. But if he has to choose between compassion for cruelly-treated strangers and his love for his father? Kyle is not going to excuse torture and genocide. And Alex’s expression in that second. I think that for a moment, despite all the words coming out of Kyle’s mouth, Alex thought he is going to lose his support. You can see the crease between his brows, the way he is not looking at Kyle, he is getting ready for the alternative that he is going to have to fight Kyle, too. But then Kyle says that. And Alex’s expression is surprise but… it’s also concern. Tyler is such an amazing actor. That one look says “Wow, I can actually count on you, we have the same moral code, I can trust you, we are on the same side” but also “Are you okay? Are you okay? Are you okay?” Because that was broken and ruthless and Alex understands Kyle’s world just fell apart and Alex sees that he is ready to burn the remnants of it to ash. And remember, Jim Valenti was a father figure to Alex, too.

God, I feel so devastated for Michael, knowing that it was his attempt to free his mother that triggered the self-destruction of the facility. I need someone to let him know that it wasn’t his fault. It WASN’T. Because I’m sure he will feel guilty but the only people to blame are the ones who created this torture institution. I need someone to make sure he knows that.

“But make sure you get out.” Something about this line Alex says to Kyle feels important. It might be: “This is important to us both, but it’s more important that you live through this.” I’m not fully confident in my reading of it, but to me this line is both “I want this mission to yield some results, but I want you to get out safe more” and “I know that right now, you might not care to keep yourself safe. Do get out.”

I love that Alex doesn’t need to ask Kyle about Michael. Not only that, but when it seems like he is going to run blindly into the building, Kyle stops him and with no prompting at all, he gives Alex specific directions. Alex isn’t asking because in his experience it’s him and Michael against the world, the two of them on their own. It’s up to him alone to get Michael out. But Kyle knows Alex is going to look for him and he doesn’t want Alex wandering aimlessly around the facility and he wants Michael to get out, too. He says those directions in the same tone as Alex uses to say “But make sure you get out.”

I’m not going to go into That Scene because That Scene deserves a better-worded 2,000 word essay all of its own. If I could get a gif set tattooed, I’d get this scene.

Michael pulling Alex behind the vehicle, my heart.

Please don’t ask me why Michael is then left alone. I continue to be baffled.

It gives us the conversation between Kyle and Alex, however, and I’m grateful for that one. The message of it is important, but I think it’s also important in regards to the characterisation. We see that Kyle is trying to process things – Kyle wants to be on the right side of things, but he also needs to be certain what the right side is. And Alex has already made his choice and now we have it confirmed that it’s not only about Michael. I never thought it was only about Michael, but now it’s clear: Alex has deep regrets about his military career, it has affected him more than he’s been letting on, and he is never again going to let someone tell him what’s right and point him towards a target and tell him to shoot. He is never going into anything blind again.

And I hope that Kyle trusts Alex’s words, and his own instinctive understanding of who the vulnerable party truly was, more than he trusts his doubts.

[frazzledsoul]

Back when I used to type large essays on this website regularly, I always saved two until I was ready to post them. One was about Luke and his offspring, and how it was unfair of the show that he always had to prioritize Rory first. I may finish that one someday, but it’s hidden in my drafts. Suffice it to say that one of the things the S7 writers did right was make it clear that Luke was allowed to love other people as much as he loved Lorelai and Rory, and that his biological child was one of those people.

The other was that horrid plot twist at the end of Partings.

I’m not RTing the post this came from because I don’t want to clog it.

@fuckyeahgilmore said in this plot thread:

I still think Season 6 ending is well written; that final scene is heartbreaking and so effective. It is the face of a woman who is broken; void of feeling. She just gave herself over to him in an attempt to fill and unifillable hole in her heart. All of her self worth is gone because, in her eyes, the only man she’s ever loved had rejected her. The only person to ever always be there for her in gone. I think it’s well written and beyond heartbreaking. 

Oh, no. Hell to the no. Fuck no. No fucking way.

There is no way that what Lorelai did to Luke at the end of that season comes anything close to being well written or is justifiable even in the most fucked up and twisted value system in the universe. Negan, Cersei Lannister, Angelus, and Mitchum Huntzberger combined could not formulate a moral universe in which that shit flies.

This kills me because according to that horrid interview that showcased ASP’s lame ass justifications for the crap she wrote that I am linking here as proof Amy wanted people to hand her ribbons and trophies and accolades for what she wrote. After it’s pointed out to her (by Michael Auseillo, of all people, and you know it’s got to be bad if he’s willing to criticize her) that the fans are really, really unhappy with her, she claims that she did it so that Lauren Graham could win awards. It disturbs me when people say that all of the awards that Mrs. Maisel won are retroactive awards for Gilmore Girls, because that is in effect rewarding ASP for this episode and telling her she was right. It’s also untrue (I don’t think the Emmy voters care about the WB dramedy the creator of their beloved Mad Men pastiche did ten years ago: they like what they like for a reason, and it’s got little to do with Gilmore Girls, and um, shouldn’t the people who actually worked on Maisel be allowed to enjoy the fruits of their specific labors?) and like it or not, by the time we got to the end of season six no one on this show should have been handed any awards. I don’t know who these characters were at the end of this wretched season, but they weren’t the people I knew and loved for years. Unless you are nominating Most Twisted and Soul Destroying Iteration of A Formerly Beloved Character, the acting nominations should have been way off limits.

The person at the end of Partings wasn’t Lorelai Gilmore. The Lorelai Gilmore I knew and loved for six years would not have done that to Luke. She would never have done that. The woman I respected would have remembered that she watched Luke throw himself in jail after another woman cheated on him because he was so upset he couldn’t handle it and told him to his face that he didn’t deserve it. She is in a relationship with him for two years, proposes to him, claims she loves him, and then runs away and sleeps with the person he hates and fears most in the world, fulfilling his worst nightmares and insecurities, all because he won’t put aside the other person he’s now responsible for and get married right that instant. 

The Lorelai I knew would never hurt Luke like that. She would know that it was the worst possible thing that she could do to him, that it would emotionally devastate him, that it would wreck him. She would not do that.

Any writer who puts that rot into print isn’t worthy of the name.

It wasn’t just Luke that Lorelai hurt, though.

She goes to Christopher, someone who still pines for her and who she claims to actually care for. He misinterprets their night together as an indication that she actually might be interested in him, only to later find out that she’s using him. I despise Christopher Hayden and he should have told her no, but I don’t think he deserved this.

She put Rory in the middle of this accursed latethirtysomething love triangle and forced her to choose teams. She inflicted a huge blow on Rory’s relationship with not just one but two father figures. What makes this worse is that Rory was actually becoming closer with her dad and starting to form a relationship she had wanted for her entire life. You’re telling me that Lorelai Gilmore, who has spent her entire life sacrificing for her only child, never once considered the effect her actions would have on Rory? She didn’t think of that once?

That’s not Lorelai Gilmore. More than anything else, that is not Lorelai. Any decent writer would know this, instead of twisting her lead character into someone she never was, in order to get the result she wanted.

There is absolutely no justification for what Lorelai did that night. The claim that she was emotional or that she needed to do this to end her relationship is not fucking acceptable. What kind of moral compass do you have, what kind of putrid excuse for a writer do you claim to be to make her hurt the people she loves most in the most damging way possible and expect us to cheer it on? No way. No fucking way. 

Screw you, ASP. You’re dead to me forever for this. I mean, it too: I will never, ever watch another one of her shows. I only watched the revival after reading spoilers to ensure that I what I feared would happen didn’t actually happen.

But let’s back up a minute and remember how exactly we got to this shitshow.

Luke turned into a complete pod person all season in order to prioritize his daughter. He keeps it a secret from Lorelai, initially claims he is not going to live up to any parenting responsibilities whatsoever (um WUTTTTT???), fumbles through caring for April for months despite the fact that he has already half-raised two teenagers already, seemingly forgets his engagement date, reassures Lorelai that they’ll get married but eventually reverts back to his bad behavior, claims he can’t let Lorelai meet April because he’s afraid she’ll like her more than him, lets Lorelai rescue April’s birthday party, and then goes back to keeping Lorelai away when his baby mama throws a tantrum.

None of this made any sense whatsoever. It wasn’t good writing. it was the opposite of good writing. You tell me you’re going to take Luke Danes, the most self-sacrificing, giving, quietly loyal person on this show and make him a deadbeat dad who can’t parent his kid? That he’s going to neglect Lorelai, who he practically worships? What the hell, Amy? WHAT THE FRIGGING HELLL???!!!???

Atrocious.

So Luke backs off because he’s terrified of his baby mama. Lorelai goes to see her to try to get her to change her mind, fails, and instead of doing the thing any sane, logical person would do in this circumstance, which would be to seek out her fiance and see if they can find a way to work this out because the situation is out of his hands, she runs away and convinces herself that it’s already over. She then encounters the most horrendously unprofessional therapist in all of recorded history, a woman she does not know and who does not know her and who is not qualified to be her therapist. I don’t know what kind of ethical guidelines exist that prohibit advising someone you’ve known for ten minutes about life-altering decisions, but I’m certain that all of them were broken during that backseat therapy session. That therapist didn’t know Lorelai, she didn’t know Luke, and she didn’t know what kind of reasons (and by this time there were some fairly significant real world reasons, and just because Lorelai was emotional doesn’t mean that those reasons don’t matter) Luke had for postponing the engagement. This woman was in no position to advise Lorelai of significant life decisions based on the little information that she had, and she certainly was in no position to advise Lorelai that her relationship was worth giving up on if she didn’t immediately get what she wanted.

You know, maybe I’m crazy and this thought just can’t be allowed to breathe in the advanced moral and intellectual universe that is Amy Sherman Palladino, but shouldn’t a therapist ideally advise a troubled couple to sit down and talk about their problems? Isn’t that the sort of thing that they encourage?

Isn’t that that what rational, sane people do when they have relationship problems? Sit down and figure out a way to solve them? There was no need to force Lorelai into this illogical decision so she could give Christopher a test drive. She loved Luke at that point and Luke only, and if she had only sat down and approached her problems like a grown-up, she could have found a way to solve them.

Running up to your fiance after you have been missing for days and insisting that you get married right that instant is not grown-up behavior. Luke kept trying to get Lorelai to sit down and talk to him because she had been missing for days and he was worried about her, but she wouldn’t have it. She insisted on screaming and ranting and having everything she wanted in life delivered right that minute. But there is no feasible way Luke could have given that to her right then. He had a daughter to take care of and he had to weigh his options carefully so that he wouldn’t lose all access to her.

Those were real things that Luke was concerned about, and he was right to be worried about them. Those things don’t immediately cease to exist because Lorelai is upset. He should be allowed to love April as much as he loves Lorelai, and the fact that he hadn’t been fair to Lorelai in the months ahead of time does not take that away.

It was horrendously cruel and savage for Lorelai to punish him in the exact way that she knew would hurt most. And for what? For not being able to pass this impossible test of proving how much he loved her by sacrificing the other things that were important to him. Luke didn’t deserve that. We didn’t deserve that. ASP twisted Luke and Lorelai into monstrous shapes so that they could do as much damage to each other as possible and expected us to applaud. This was nothing more than shitting on everything her audience loved and wanted. You don’t do that if you care about your characters or your audience. She didn’t fucking care, and she proved that by writing the worst possible outcome she could in the pre Shonda Rhimes era.

There is nothing about destroying the entire fabric of your show that is anything close to good writing.

So what was the reason for this disaster? My theories are well known on this website. It’s my own fault. I consumed too much press, and almost none of it is still around. But I’ll tell you why I believe what I believe.

Luke Danes was never supposed to be a main character. He was originally supposed to be a woman, and was only added to the cast because they needed an extra character. Jess was brought in as an obstacle to keep Luke and Lorelai apart. When ASP gave interviews about this, she would briefly talk about how she needed to keep Luke and Lorelai apart because she didn’t think she could write it properly, but she would go on and on about Christopher and Lorelai and how wonderful it would be if they could get their shit together and become a couple. David Sutcliffe (who plays Christopher) got another job, and ASP brought in Jason as added him to the main cast. The ratings went down. She was forced to break them up and get Luke and Lorelai together in order to save the show.

She later said that the only reason she got Luke and Lorelai together was because she knew that David’s show was canceled and he could mess things up for Luke and Lorelai.

That Holy Trilogy of Luke/Lorelai episodes in late season 4? ASP did them because she was forced to. She wasn’t willing to write Luke and Lorelai without Christopher as an obstacle. She never wanted them to be a stable couple. 

I do not recall Amy Sherman Palladino ever saying a positive thing about Luke Danes or Scott Patterson. Ever.

In her post AYITL interviews, the Luke/Lorelai wedding was something that the fans forced her to do but she freely cooed about how gorgeous David still was.

(You know that this sounds like? It sounds like a woman who is having an affair with one of her actors, and ends up promoting his character because of it. I have no proof that this happened, of course).

So did she do all of this because she has the attention span of a toddler or because she has an irrational obsession with Christopher Hayden? Who knows? I believe that she wrote Luke and Lorelai because the fans wanted it, but that her real passion was Christopher and Lorelai, and that she ended up obliterating everything that many of us loved about this show to make her beloved ship happen. She thought it was in their best possible interest for them to rip each other to shreds so that Lorelai could fuck Christopher. 

I even believe that ASP had Zach destroy Hep Alien’s musical career so that he could then propose and Christopher could escort Lorelai to Lane’s wedding. Think about how cruel this is for a moment. Even if you don’t believe that ASP ruined Lane’s hopes and dreams so she could set up a situation where she could sell Christopher as the better option, we had to endure an episode where Rory arranges Christopher to take Lorelai on a date to a wedding of someone Luke is close to while she is engaged to Luke so she can incorporate Christopher into a Stars Hollow event and Christopher can save from the indignity of sobbing over how upset she is over Luke. We had to witness all of that shit so Christopher could swoop in on his white horse with his bags full of money and save the day.

You know a good writer would do? She would know that if her side character is so impressive in his own right, he wouldn’t need that much help.

The more positive side of me believes that ASP only intended to have Christopher and Lorelai explore their relationship for a while, and then she would have Lorelai end up with Luke because she knew what the fans wanted. I view the speech Luke has in AYITL and Christopher’s comments to Rory and I suspect that those things were written a long, long time ago. However, in the end I know what happened before, and I know the history of Amy’s comments to the media, and part of me cant make myself believe that. I don’t think if ASP had started writing the Christopher/Lorelai relationship that she had dreamed of for years she would have been able to stop. 

I also suspect that she only got Luke and Lorelai together because the fans took the ending of season 6 harder than she thought they would, and she knew her reputation wouldn’t survive both a Christopher/Lorelai endgame and Rory’s wretched fate. She initially planned something very different.

When ASP views someone like Luke Danes who is a redneck stereotype in almost every way but the political, I think he is something of an exotic creature to her. This wasn’t who she originally envisioned Lorelai with: all of Lorelai’s other love interests except for Alex were refined, upper-class, and somewhat well-off. It doesn’t escape my attention that towards the end of season 6 the show pushes both Rory and Lorelai towards the monied love interests who can make up for their personal failings with wealth and charm. Humble guys like Luke, Jess, and Marty are left in the dust. It also doesn’t escape my attention that they start to engage in increasingly selfish and amoral behavior, culminating in Lorelai’s huge betrayal at the end of the season that ASP wants us to believe is justified and Rory’s aborted attempt to cheat on Logan with Jess. As always, our more humble love interests and their unglamourous moral codes are left behind. 

Those values of honesty, decency, integrity and respect for others that Lorelai attempted to raise Rory to cherish? They would eventually be abandoned for a richer, more cynical life, and so would Stars Hollow. I don’t believe that solid value systems are not endemic of any sort of lifestyle choice, but I do think that ASP possibly associated a small-town life with a coherent moral code in her mind, and found it insufficient. The life that Lorelai cherished in her humble small town would be found wanting, because ASP doesn’t really understand how it outweighs the appeal of a more cosseted life. If she could justify that ending, I don’t think she really values that moral code anyway, no matter who is practicing it.

If that sounds like a betrayal of what the show was about, so were the last 4 words, and we got them anyway.

All of this is to say that my cynical view of ASP’s worldview is not something I want to associate with personally, and much of it has to do with the horrid way in which this season ended. I don’t value a worldview that prizes characters treating each other this way, and there is nothing logical or coherent or emotionally purposeful about anything that was thrust at us with this plot twist. I know people hate season 7, but the reason I excuse that season for its shortcomings is that even after this major gulf has been opened up between Luke and Lorelai, they become responsible, compassionate people who are able to takes responsibility for their actions and eventually care for each other again. They aren’t twisted into shapes I don’t recognize. 

I know some people don’t really see this the way that I do. There’s a deep split in the fanfiction community between those who view Lorelai’s actions as justified (or think that Luke saying yes to the elopement plot would have magically solved everything) and those that see them as the huge betrayal that I believe that they are. I’ve gotten eviscerated by a popular fic writer for Luke taking Lorelai to task for her part in it, and I’ve watched fic writers whose work I’ve loved defend what I believe is indefensible. I do believe there is a generational split here, and it’s not insignificant, but I think most of us are in agreement on one thing:

This bullshit should never have fucking happened, and there was nothing positive about the writing that delivered it.

[takerfoxx]

Why do you have such a fervent hatred for Jurassic World? It wasn't horrendous, just middling

Oh, sure, sure. I’ll be the first to admit that myhatred for Jurassic World is mostly personal, and don’t hold it against anyoneif they enjoyed it. But hey, if you want me to explain in detail why I hatethat movie so much, then my friend, I will be more than happy to do just that!Ranty essay below.

Okay, let’s get this out of the way: when judgedpurely on its own merits, Jurassic World is…okay. It’s a perfectly serviceableB-movie, no more, no less. You know, something to spend a mindless afternoon watchingwith your buds to enjoy some fun action and then later forget all about. Andhad it been just that, I would have probably had the same reaction to it that Idid to Pacific Rim: decent fun, but not much more than that.

But I can’t judge it on its own merits, because itisn’t a standalone movie. It’s the fourth Jurassic Park movie, which means Ihave to hold it to a higher standard, and I have to take the franchise’shistory, both objective and personal, into account.

So, for starters, let’s begin with Jurassic Parkitself. Now, I’ll be the first to admit that, once again, putting all personalfeelings and overall cultural impact of this movie aside, it’s not a flawlessmasterpiece. There are a number of logical problems and let’s face it, not awhole lot goes on in the second act. It’s not even Spielberg’s best monstermovie. Jaws is. But damn it, it is still the quintessential dinosaur movie andone of the all-time great monster movies and still holds up today. And damn it,it’s still my favorite movie of all time. Sure, there are movies that I’d enjoymore if I watched them right now, simply because of how many times I’ve seenJurassic Park. And sure, films like the LoTR trilogy and Serenity also havestrong claims to my top spot, but when it comes to overall long-term impact, JPis king.

So yes, I am definitely going to come down harder onthis just because it bears the Jurassic Park name. I am going to nitpick thehell out of it and be the most obnoxious fanboy, because Jurassic Park doesmean that much to me and I feel that it deserves better. However, even withoutthe nitpicking, Jurassic World just fails so hard when it didn’t have to. Andits failure comes down to three intrinsic problems.

First and foremost is its unforgiveable sin: how ittreats the dinosaurs. This is the movie’s biggest and most important failing,because the dinosaurs are the stars. They are what people came to see, so howyou handle the dinosaurs is key. Don’t believe me? Just look at Jurassic Park.Now, JP treated it’s dinosaurs like goddamned rockstars. This was actuallymostly because of the technical limitations of the time. Hell, they had toinvent most of the CG effects that we now take for granted. But regardless,just having the dinosaurs on screen was so expensive that they were forced toreally limit their use. But just like the mechanical issues they had with Jaws,this turned out to be for their benefit. With only so much dinosaur footagethey could afford to shoot (fourteen minute to be exact, in an over two hour movie!),they worked their asses off to squeeze every bit of wonder, terror, awe,majesty, and dread that they could out of those scant few moments. And say whatyou will about Spielberg, but the man is the unquestioned master at this sortof thing. He could build a terrifying suspense scene in his sleep. Just look atthe T-rex escape scene. I’ve seen this scene so many times and it still scaresthe crap out of me, even when I’m watching it on my phone in broad daylight!

Furthermore, whenever the dinosaurs are not on screen,what’s going on? What are the characters doing? Well, they’re talking about thedinosaurs. Hyping the dinosaurs. Debating the dinosaurs. Explaining why thedinosaurs are so dangerous, sometimes even in the style of a campfire horrorstory. Pretty much every possible reaction to the dinosaurs is represented byone of the characters, whether it be that the dinosaurs are these wonderfulcreatures that we owe to ourselves to bring back, dinosaurs are thesehorrifying monsters that we cannot ever hope to control, dinosaurs are thebiggest goddamn attraction in the history of entertainment, dinosaurs arerelics from another time and bringing them back is horribly irresponsible, etc.But no matter where the individual characters fell in that debate, everyoneagree on one thing: the dinosaurs are a big, fucking deal. As such, when theydo appear onscreen, it feels like a big deal.

Now, let’s take things to Jurassic World. UnlikeJurassic Park, Jurassic World treats its dinosaurs more like a troupe of paidperformers, like you might hire to keep the guests entertained during an awardsceremony or a company picnic or something down those lines. Yeah, it’s fun, it’sentertaining, and you have a good time, but let’s face it: when all is said anddone, did it really do anything for you? Without the technical and monetarylimitations that Jurassic Park had, they were free to put as much dinosaurs inthere as they want, but as is often the case whenever that happens, quality issacrificed for quantity. The dinosaurs are not given the same amount of hype,presentation, or respect that the original afforded them. Sure, there was someeffort to make them cool at least, but it was standard giant CG monster moviefare, a far cry from the expert eye for detail that Spielberg brought to thetable. It was too much dinosaur, all in your face with too much CG even whenthey didn’t need it (CG’ing over the raptor puppets in the closeups? Really?),and even their much hype iRex (good God) just wasn’t all that scary. In fact,it was sort of silly given the stupid amounts of abilities they gave it.

And then there’s how the characters treated thedinosaurs, constantly going on and on about how dinosaurs were boring,dinosaurs were commonplace, people weren’t excited about them anymore, yaddayadda yadda. Pretty much the exact opposite of how Jurassic Park treated them.And sure, okay, nice meta-commentary there, but if you’re going to have yourcharacters verbally run the dinosaurs down, then yes, they’re going to feelcommonplace, they’re going to feel ordinary, they’re going to feel like theyaren’t special. This is like elementary level rules of showmanship here, onethat even the WWE understands. Whenever an aged veteran comes back for anovelty match, do the wrestlers, announcers, commentators, and video packagespoint out how old, run down, and far past their prime they are? Well, maybesometimes their opponent will to get heat, and even then it’s rare. But overallthe presentation will instead hype them up as great legends, highlighting theirexploits, ignoring the bad times, and they’re usually paired with workhorsesfor opponents, ones that can cover their weaknesses and still get an excitingmatch out of them. Because they understand that if you don’t treat yourattraction like a big deal, it won’t feel like a big deal.

Which brings us to our second point.

There’s an interesting little story about how theJurassic Park movie came to be. Both Steven Spielberg and Michael Crightonhappened to be doing work for the same tv show at one point, and they met onthe set. And during their conversation, Steven Spielberg idly asked MichaelCrighton what he was working on, and Crighton told him. Spielberg immediatelywent back to his studio and demanded that they secure the movie rights forCrighton’s unfinished book right the fuck now, because he would be damnedbefore he let anyone else make that movie.

And God, does it show. Touching back to what I saidabout presentation, Spielberg’s love for the movie shines through every scene,from the lighting to cinematography to the music to the direction to…well,everything. Jurassic Park is a movie that knows that it’s a big deal andcarries itself as such. Is it flawless? No. But it does what it does so welland with such confidence that it doesn’t matter. It knew that it was going tobe the biggest and best dinosaur movie of all time, and it was right.

But poor, poor Jurassic World. Man, imagine having tolive in that shadow, knowing that no matter how hard you try, you just won’t beJurassic Park. Imagine being Colin Trevorrow, having been given the reins tosuch a monumental task, all the while knowing that no matter what, you willnever be Steven Spielberg. You can’t match the sort of things he does in hissleep, no one can! You could slave for years, going over every detail, makingit the biggest and best Jurassic Park sequel you possibly could, and it justwould never be good enough, because nothing ever will.

Well, you could still give it the good ol’ collegetry, throw your best shot, and even when you disappoint everybody, at least youdid your best. Or you could do what Jurassic World did and not even bother, allthe while whining about how so much better the first movie was and how what you’redoing could never hope to live up. Hey, at least you’ll be ironic and metaabout it, right? Can never have too many lampshades, right? And while you’rebitching about how boring dinosaurs have become so all you really can do iscreate an even bigger dinosaur that you know will end up disappointing, why notcreate an entire character that parades around in an authentic Jurassic Parkt-shirt and goes on and on about how much more legit the original park was andhow far short of its glory your product falls? At least then you’ll get pointsfor being fucking self-aware.

Well, no. Fuck that cute hipster bullshit. Fuck beingironic, fuck being meta, fuck all that! You know, I wish I had seen this moviebefore writing Imperfect Metamorphosis, because honestly, some of its worstparts came from me making the same mistake. And I don’t mean Yuuka breaking thefourth wall and all that, I mean lampshading the criticisms I was getting andwasting time answering them in the text instead of just improving andsoldiering on. If you want your movie to succeed, then you have to be genuineabout it, you have to love your movie, you have to revel in what you can doinstead of bitching about what you can’t. And I have never, ever seen a moviethat hates itself as much as Jurassic World does. So yeah, I guess some of thatself-loathing rubbed off on me. You know something, Jurassic World? You’reright. You do suck, and you don’t get points for pointing it out!

But what really rankles me most of all is that it didn’thave to be that way. Jurassic World is the fourth movie in this franchise.There were two other sequels before it, and both were considereddisappointments. The Lost World was a very poor adaptation and definitely oneof Spielberg’s weakest films. Hell, even he admits it, saying that he, like Trevorrow,was overcome by the stress of having to live up to the first film and phoned itin as a result. It still has its moments, sure, and it’s definitely the best ofthe sequels, for what that’s worth. But between the sloppy presentation; vanishingconnection to the book; and obnoxious, self-righteous “heroes” that wereresponsible for everything that went wrong, it was a major step down. And asfor the third, well, I guess it’s inoffensive enough, but it was also lazy,pointless, disposable, forgettable, and centered around a really, really stupidgimmick. Talking raptors? Really?

So, with the tremendous gap between JP3 and JurassicWorld, after all of that fan backlash, two mediocre movies full of mistakes andone great film full of innovation to study and learn from, what does JurassicWorld decide to do? Combine the adaption decay and annoying characterizationfrom the second movie with the empty calories from the third and use none ofwhat made the first movie great, except to keep telling us that it’s great. Youhad one job, Colin! One job! And you had all the tools you needed to succeed!Why didn’t you learn from your predecessors? Why did you get sloppy?

So, overall, is Jurassic World really the worst thingout there? Hell no. Am I being nitpicky because of my love for the first movie?Hell yeah. But a McDonalds hamburger might serve if ordered at a fuckingMcDonalds, but if you try to pass that shit off in a five-star restaurant, nomatter how good it might actually taste compared to other McDonalds hamburgers,heads will fucking roll.

So I guess that’s that. I hate Jurassic World fortaking the dinosaurs I love and making them feel common. I hate it because ithates itself. And I hate it because it didn’t have it be this way, but it is.Fuck Jurassic World.

Sigh.

…

…

…

Okay, that trained raptor pack was pretty damn coolthough.