When you think about it the second Jurassic Park movie is a hommage to the 1925 Lost World, especially since both movies end with a brought back dinosaur destroying a city.
The guy who did the stop motion for the 1925 film is actually Willis O'Brien, The same guy who would later do the stop motion for the original King Kong
It's funny to me that the remake, with all of its fancy modern CGI, is less spectacle-focused and overall seems to have more heart to it than the original. How often does _that_ happen?
I personally consider the 2001 adaptation to be a showcase of some of Bob Hoskins' BEST acting (right next to his role as Eddie Valiant in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit").
Most of the dinosaurs in the 1925 version of "The Lost World" were actually based on Charles R. Knights Dinosaur paintings including the elusive "Agathaumas".
I think what's really interesting from a film perspective here is how comparatively the remake is worse in many ways film critiques would judge a movie (as in they think about context and care much more about cinematic innovation and impact) and definitely had a lower budget and smaller audience but in a side by side comparison it comes out better just because of how much better we have gotten at making movies over this period. It really demonstrates how far the medium has come in that a minor thing like this can beat out an old giant, not to put the old movie down but like things like acting, film techniques and most importantly effects have gotten so much better over this period that we've just gotten really good at making movies.
After seeing the dinosaur designs in these two movies side-by-side makes me realizes that people complain so much about the old depictions, when in reality when dinosaurs like a T-Rex standing up straight or some herbivore dinosaurs with their front legs being more like lizards/reptiles came out as toys, no one cared because they were just dinosaurs. I wish dinosaur toys like those were still around today.
The Lost World gave Michael Crichton inspiration to right his novel " Michael Crichton's The Lost World " and the inspiration for Steven Spielberg to do " The Lost World: Jurassic Park "
The inspiration was definitely there though, even more so in the movie, whose segment of the T. rex rampaging through San Diego was clearly inspired by the 1925 The Lost World's segment of the Brontosaurus rampaging through London.
I never thought the 2001 film as remake, its more of another adaptation from the book to me. If it were a remake wouldn't you think there would be way more dinosaur action? I think the 2001 version is just a adaptation from the book rather than a remake.
3 things I must say: 1.I've seen both movies and I loved them. 2.You know BBC is the documentary equivalent of the marvel C.U. when a Entelodont makes a cameo. 3.You should review Primeval.
Always nice to see the 2001 mini-series getting some love and recognition. One of the best dinosaur films ever made in my opinion; unfortunate that so few people know about it.
I remember the 2001 The Lost World TV film from my childhood. My parents taped it off TV for me when I was very young along with the less know 1994 The Jungle Book film.
I feel like the 2001 film would become a cult classic if it was talked about by a huge youtuber, like Cinemassacre, talked about it. It's a great film, and not enough people have seen it
King Kong owes more than most to the original, as it was the movie that gave the legendary special effects guru Willis O'Brien the momentum he needed to get king Kong. The stop motion in that movie was literally a direct evolution of the lost world
The things i love the most from the 01 version were the allosaurus pair. It felt like an homage to the t rex pair in the jp one a few years earlier, similar colours and everything. I loved the constant wwd callbacks with the creature designs too
I specifically remember being a kid and seeing the scene of an apeman crushing a man’s head with a rock from this movie and it scared the fuck out of me
I'm sorry but im a gun nerd. Edward does know how to hold a gun. It was a double barrel elephant rifle, it has two triggers and he fired the first one just before, missing. He then moved to the other trigger, Roxton even says, "Not yet. (Bang) Not yet! I said not yet! Other barrel!" I'd say Roxton barely knows anything about guns since he decides, "Okay, big ass Allosaurus is killing people, and I need to take it down, I'm the only one who can. Now, let me take this Martini Henry, a rifle made for killing people in WW1, instead of the 700 Nitro Express I brought specifically saying earlier that it can kill a charging elephant and 1,000 yards!" This film is in my top 5 but that was dumb asf. The setup for that scene was good though, since Roxton says, "Tell me, have you ever been close enough to a really dangerous wild animal to stare into its eyes? You mind telling me what you see there? Your own death." "A rather uncomfortable experience i imagine." "On the contrary its profoundly stimulating, you might want to get that down." That scene is a good way to complete the transformation from the Virgin Edward to the Chad Mr Malone, but Roxton having access to the elephant gun but not using it is dumb.
@@aebhosor4835 if it fired both at the same time you'd fall flat on your ass and need a new arm and shoulder lmao. A majority of double barrel firearms have two triggers, it's more common than not. A lot of single barrel muzzle loaders and muskets ha e two triggers too. If you pull the trigger not connected to the firing pin it turns your firing trigger into a hair trigger, meaning there is VERY little resistance to your shot, which helps with recoil and makes your shot more accurate. Gun design is super interesting, check out Forgotten Weapons if you wanna learn more, he makes super informative content.
The 2001 ending is good in some ways but I am ambivalent about it. National parks and pleas to save rare creatures did exist in 1911 to 1925 though not to the extent that it does today, so I am not sure the explorers would have gone through with it. And such an ending begs for a sequel (as does Doyle's story, which he never did write, though in The Poison Belt he brings back the same characters), in which the future of the plateau and its inhabitants is left hanging. In the novel Roxton does say he'll return to the Lost World, and Malone says he'll go with him. Perhaps to steal more diamonds from the natives? Good thing the films left that part out. One wonders if, as the 2001 version suggests, that the plateau and its inhabitants would have been exploited to death by civilization. But I wonder about the fates of the explorers in the 2001 film. Challenger's and Summerlee's scientific careers are ruined. Ditto Malone's journalistic career. But I suppose his novel was a hit. I kind of wonder how they made it out of that presentation in the zoology hall alive. And could the audience really believe a Pteranodon could have been faked so realistically? What did they think it was? A shaved pelican with ornaments? Summerlee does allude to some kind of vulture but that creature did not look at all like a vulture.
I've got the 2001 version in a special limited packagein edition and... Oh men!!! Is the top of the top!!! I think is the best film with dinosaurs... With 2005 king kong and the first 2 films of Jurassic Park in my hands I am so happy!!! Bit this film, for me is so beautiful and amazing... Mix one part with actors like Bob Hoskins, Peter Falk, and James Fox with other two with the same dinosaurs and prehistoric animals by the WWD, WWP, WWM group of Tim Haines.... And an instant BBC classic is make!!!
hope next time they feature South American dinos instead in another remake, like highly evolved bigger carnotaurids or other abelisaurids, spinosaurids, feathered bird-like venators, sauropods
Great video, man! I have seen all your videos, but your reviews are the best for Prehistoric Life lovers like myself. Keep them up, as I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the Chased by series as well as Planet Dinosaur, if you choose to review these great docs. I love both Lost World movies, even though I havn't seen the one from 2001 in years. I first saw the 1925 one in 2003, and found it to be my second favorite dinosaur movie, after Jurassic Park. Today, it might be lower in the list, but I still love it. I really need to hunt down the 2001 version ASAP.
i loved this movie (2001 version) as a kid, probebly saw it dozens of times since i was seven. Now ten years later i rewatched it, and to my surprise i still like it. Actually, i am prety sure i can appreciate the movie better now that i can actually undersrand the plot. I was surprised by this video It learned me that i still misunderstood some of the plot. I thought the ape man turbed out not to be evil, but that they sensed the presence of the dinosaurs, and actually tried to warn the people by screaming and drawing dinosaurs on the ground. then they helped the news reporter by putting poop on him so he wouldn't get killed. The only reason that the ape man attacked the hunter later on is because he was mire agressive and connencted with the native tribe, which was the enemy of the ape man.
This is a pretty good video actually. I wish someone would also do the various radio adaptations. I heard one with Leonard Nimoy, there’s another from 2011 and there’s another where Kenneth Branagh played Summerlee from 1997 but I haven’t been able to find that one. If someone has a link or a copy, let me know.
I think I saw the 97 one when I was younger, rented it at Blockbuster, I remember it was kind of OK but they definitely tried to take a more Jurassic Park route with it, with almost everyone dying save for one. I cant remember the details though, as its been the better part of 20 years since I have seen it.
The 2001 BBC adaptation isn't perfect, but y'know what, I will still thoroughly go to bat for it because it is still, by far, the best, most near-accurate, most thought-out, most loving and careful adaptation of the story that has been seen in decades.
I get the feeling that the 2001 version may have taken some influence from the Lost World pair of films starring John Rhys Davis as Prof. Challenger. In the end of the first film, the Lost World was somewhere in Africa and the baby pterosaur got put into the London Zoo, until the characters released it due to how scared and lonely it was. The second one picked up not long after in which an expedition from I think Belgium showed up and tried to add the region to their territory, prompting the original expedition to return and rescue the native population.
I've seen the original version loads of times, even got it on blu ray now and it's glorious. But I had no idea that the 2001 version existed, I knew about the 1960 version but never the 2001 version, it doesn't look bad at all but it honestly is a turn off to me when almost all of a movies special effects are CGI, but I will likely still check the 2001 version out sometime.
I watched it yesterday, wasn't bad at all. The cgi is a little dated obviously but it holds up better than a lot of stuff, just look at The Lost World tv series which came out around the same time for example.
I actually read that book in high school and it was a great read. Though I've seen both films before I've read the book, so I have an idea what it was like. Though this would be a movie I would like to see Hollywood remake/reboot, since this book and the film was a major impact on dinosaurs in pop culture. 5:10-5:29 That I will admit was well said.
HoopsAndDinoMan i don't know if you will see this but I just want you to know that you'r videos had a huge impact on my childhood. I remember back when you made the first Dinosaur story and i was blown away about how good it was. everyday I used to play with my dino toys and recreate the stories you made. I love your new content now and I wish you luck in the future. once again thanks for making all your videos they were a enormous impact on my life.
11:52 "That's actually pretty historically accurate . . ." Wait, what, now? The very first scientific description of a dinosaur ever published in an academic journal was written by a clergyman. His name was William Buckland. In fact, the church of England has produced more great paleontologists than any other organized religion--possibly more than any other institution. Geology itself started out as a branch of Natural Theology, and all of the founding fathers of this science, like Cuvier, Buckland, Mantell, Owen, Lyell, Conybeare, Agassiz, Murchison, Sedgwick, Anning, etc. were devout Christians themselves. Sometimes, as in the case of Buckland, their work was even done for theological reasons. It isn't at all the case that there was no interpretive framework for understanding fossils before Darwin came along.
11:30 while there was no religious figure in the book, there was a man who caused the characters to become stranded on the plateau. Yes, the clergyman trying to keep scientists from disproving God wasn't in the book. But the original featured a man with the same role, Gomez stranded the crew because Roxton killed his brother Lopez. Lord Roxton quickly shoots him in retaliation.
Loved both films. But 2001 is alot more watchable because the acting is better... also people speak. My main problem in 1925 is when the brontosaurus was sent to the main island not the Allosaurus. Yes I love the stop motion but 2001 is my favorite
I liked it too, though I would have preferred the story to stay in Africa. However, it does make more sense that ape-men, or Australopithecines, or Pithecanthropus, or whatever they were, would have survived in Africa, as there were no anthropoid apes for ape-men to evolve from in South America. Sometimes I theorize on my own that the ape-men in Doyle's story evolved convergently from capuchin or howler monkeys.
And John Rhys-Davies was the best Challenger. Though too tall he had otherwise the right physical appearance and belligerent imposing depiction of character.
The moral is not confusing its simply far more realistic message that doesn’t dumb down the dilemma to a simple a moral vs moral message. Not every moral choice results in that choice being repaid with the same good will
Its sad that modern hollywood has a habit of teaching that flawed message of 'if ur intentions r moral, ur actions can NEVER backfire' which is simply a dilutional assumption
If not for the lost world novel Michael Crichton May have not made his book and we would not movie Jurassic-park the movie. Also They’ll find the plateau eventually as nations grow and expanded on South America.
Actually if you were to completely hold the trigger of a gun at all times its way more dangerous. Hes doing the right thing of waiting till hes ceatian about what he shoots
Gee, what did the original feature that the new one on A&E didn’t? I know, 6:15 It’s the T.Rex AKA the Tyrannosaurus Rex. Bob Hoskins encountered some Allosaurus instead of a single T.Rex as a guest appearance.
No, in the 1925 film it was also an Allosaurus, though it did fight the Cretaceous era Triceratops. But what the heck, it's dinos surviving into modern times so you can have a mix of them surviving from various eras.
Why does it look like they use some of the models from walking with dinosaurs? I know they look very familiar especially the allosaurus from the lost world 2001
@@mastermindcow6210 It's definitely a modified version of the WWD Diplodocus. They removed the spines on the back, but otherwise it's completely identical, the Apatosaurus in Big Al had a shorter neck and different colouration..
in the novel, gomez was the brother of a slave trader. as much as i enjoyed the novel, i think the bbc could have kept that plot line, rather than introduce a controvercy over religion, and one which would cause the girl for whom the priest was a guardian, to shoot, either accidentally or not.
I've only seen clips of the original with the animation of the dinosaurs . But I have the remake on DVD , when it came out on Tele I thought it was brilliant. I'm also a fan of Walking with Dinosaurs, so this film really resonated with me. I love the fact that both films use the Allosaurus (my favourite dinosaur, I just love WWD the Ballad of Big Al) .... over all I they're both brilliant movies in their own right. Especially the original , like you said the animation fir it's time is well timeless even if it is a bit dated. Atleast in the remake they made the dinosaurs appear as realistic as possible without over doing it, like on some other movies we see these days .... Well I guess we all hot to move in with the progress of CGI. But in some intances you can't beat the old fashion stop go motion and the use of life like animatronic creatures. It gives it that extra realism. ☺
Yes, the 2001 version is definitely the best and most faithful in my eyes. The special effects team from the Walking with Series is one of the reasons I love it so much. I’m going to see the silent film when I get the chance. I love the inside joke of the outdated Iguanodon. The remake is out of print and must be released on Blu-Ray someday. If it doesn’t, I’m going to hate BBC for the rest of my life.
a lot of people think that movies like this and the release of King Kong made people think that something normal is something supernatural in fact for the people that made the first few sightings they were confirmed to have seen King Kong prior to the sightings
I am going to film school soon and one film I want to 'remake' if The Valley of Gwangi. What do you guys think? Yay or leave the original alone? I despise remakes in this day & age, unless the original is decades removed.
My only gripe with the 2001 version, is that even though the actor that plays Malone is very handsome, the book and 1925 movie both state clearly that he is a notable young athlete with a body to match, he plays rugby notoriously. We see Malone in the 2001 version going for a swim, and he just has a typical dude's body. Maybe they didn't condition the actor because they wanted him to be a realistic prospect for Agnes and have Roxton as the romantic lead, I have no idea.
As child, I had the Ladybird Books abridged version of the story. I'm pretty sure they based their illustrations of Professor Challenger on Brian Blessed.
ive seen an old dino movie when i was very young, all i can remember is some old dude lying in bed talking to someone else while holding either a big egg or a big glass container in his hands. he dies in his bed and drops the egg/glass on the floor where it breaks and in there is a pteranodon baby ( i believe). does anyone happen to know which movie im talking about?
