I found her death very disturbing and unsettling to watch, but obviously amazing and really great that it evoked such a response.
I saw an article saying it's a really terrible decision by a film maker to have such a horrific death shot so close up to a character that didn't deserve to die in such a horrendous way.
Anyone agree / disagree with me or the article?
EDIT: article is here http://birthmoviesdeath.com/2015/06/15/the-strangely-cruel-and-unusual-death-in-jurassic-world
Wow, are people oversensitive! The point was to establish how out of control the park! It was gruesome but we barely saw anything. Nobody in these movies deserves to get eaten and ripped apart. Its just to show that nature is not in our control.
shareThen why not kill a character you think is going to live?
share[deleted]
#1 - While Jurassic Park has horror elements, it is not a true horror movie. Its primary purpose is not to upset and disturb viewers. It aims to entertain and ensure its audience had a fun time. That's why the leads and children never die, when those character do die in horror films. The original Jurassic Park understood how to handle the deaths of non-villainous characters without disgusting the audience. Jophrey's death was partially off-screen, Arnold's death was completely off-screen, and Muldoon was putting himself at risk before he died.
#2 - At its core, Jurassic World is a blockbuster and we watch blockbusters to escape from reality. We don't want to be reminded that it's not just bad people who die horribly. It's the bad people we want to see die, hence why more attention is normally given to their deaths. Plus, it's not like Jurassic World went against other blockbuster conventions. The leads survived, the children survived, and most of the good guys survived. Those who died were the main human antagonist, the wealthy industrialist, the bad dino, and a bunch of minor, expendable characters. So this one attempt at being edgy stands out like a sore thumb.
#3 - Attention towards a certain part of a movie isn't always a good thing. Like I said above, Jurassic World wasn't trying to be edgy and shocking throughout. When people believe a scene is tonally inconsistent with the rest of the movie, that's bad. Zara's death being as detailed as it was is tonally inconsistent in a movie that's supposed to make you feel like a kid again. She was a throwaway character to begin with; would it have made a huge difference if she died more in the background? People came to the movie to see dinosaurs on the big screen again and Chris Pratt, not a young woman be brutally killed.
Eddie Carr's death in The Lost World continues to face backlash from viewers and he certainly wasn't an attractive female, or even an attractive male for that matter. But viewers still hated the way he died. That demonstrates the backlash is more related to the manner this character died in, not the fact that she was an attractive female.
Get a grip!
This is not real life it's a film about dinosaurs! people are bound to get killed in this situation regardless of whether they are male/female or good/bad.
So you're mad because you thought her death scene was too mean-spirited?
Get a grip...
When the stars are the only things we share
Will you be there?
-Benjamin Francis Leftwich
How I can I be made? As far as I know, I'm not in the mob.
If you meant mad, the problem was the death didn't fit with the rest of the movie, just like Eddie's and Udesky's deaths. That's a valid complaint; it's a tonal inconsistency, making you feel uncomfortable in a movie you're supposed to enjoy as lighthearted fun.
She must not have made an impact cuz I sure do not remember her death!! How exactly did she die? Is there a screen shot somewhere? Thanks.
shareShe gets grabbed by a pteranodon, then dropped into the Mosasaur's pool, then grabbed by another pteranodon, then fought of by two pteranodons and then the pteranodon currently carrying her and she get chomped on by the Mosasaur.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! These are the IMDB Boards!"
There's seriously 70 of these. No one takes two minutes to open up an old one. I can't believe people are so butt hurt over this. Good people die sometimes. Great scene.
shareher death was one of the very few really thrilling moments in the otherwise very unexciting rehash, it had some horror trash movie quality to it and for those whining about how "brutal" it was, well, if the dinosaurs had ripped her apart slowly piece by piece. I would have understood the whining but she died within 30 seconds after having had the most breathtaking helluva ride of a lifetime;
the entire "controversy" seems ridiculous to me considering that the point of the whole movie is dinosaurs killing people and wrecking havoc,
and they cannot pause for a moment of silence every time a hot, arrogant chick who blabbers on the phone instead of watching over the kids, gets devoured by a gigantic sea monster, can they?
Maybe, the main character was supposed to say in the end: "I'm glad that all of the main characters survived this uncalled-for event, this is not Game of Thrones after all, however, -" (looking very whiningly into the camera) "some unimportant good-looking side characters were not likewise fortunate, oh God why!? Why Zara!?" (bursts in tears)
"Some people are immune to good advice."
-Saul Goodman
Having one unexpected moment in a formulaic movie isn't always a good thing; it can clash with the tone of the rest of the picture. "The most breathtaking helluva ride of a lifetime"? What? She was falling and being drowned. She was not having fun. She was made to suffer before she died.
The point of this movie was to make you feel like a kid again. You're supposed to enjoy yourself and it's hard to enjoy a sadistic and unwarranted death scene. If this was more about dinosaurs causing havoc, then at least one character who always survives in blockbusters should have died.
Honestly, Zara's death seemed more suited to Game of Thrones than this move.