‘Carnosaurus’ (1993) | Remember the most ASHAMED (and trash) copy of ‘Jurassic Park’

Jurassic World – Dominionsixth film in the blockbuster dinosaur franchise of Steven Spielberg, continues to make noise at the worldwide box office. Having premiered on June 2 here in Brazil (and at the same time in much of the world), the super production already adds more than US$ 645 million worldwide to Universal Pictures’ coffers, thus becoming the fourth highest grossing of the year in the USA. (only behind – so far – of Top Gun: Maverick, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness and The Batman) and also worldwide, having recently surpassed Water Gate Bridge, Chinese war overproduction. We are sure, however, that by the end of its stay in movie theaters, this configuration will change radically, with the dinos blockbuster climbing some positions in the rankings.

Jurassic World – Dominion is the third of the derivative Jurassic Worldstarted in 2015 with The World of Dinosaursand continued with Jurassic World – Fallen Kingdomfrom 2018. But it is necessary to take into account that it all really started back there, in 1993 with Jurassic Park – The Dinosaur Park. And that was from it, and from its sequels Jurassic Park – The Lost World (1997) and Jurassic Park III (2001), that the derivative Jurassic World emerged to become a fever with the new generations. The phenomenon of Jurassic Park (1993), however, will never be equaled. His achievement in the history of the seventh art and the entertainment industry is unprecedented. We can say, among other things, that Jurassic Park was the epicenter of the dynomania that took over the world in the 90s (you can check out the article on the topic at the link below).

Read too: ‘Jurassic Park – The Dinosaur Park’ and the Dinomania that dominated the 90s

In the 1990s, everything about prehistoric reptiles was making a lot of money. And you can be sure that everything was made with dinosaurs in the period, from cartoons on TV, animated features in theaters, live-action series with impressive animatronics until today and, of course, movies of the most varied genres containing the lizards. One of the crudest and most shameless, however, was the attempt to “clone” Jurassic Parkbut with one sixtieth of its budget. Could it be good?

Enjoy watching:

To start talking about trash carnosaurus, it is necessary to return to its roots. It all started, believe me, in the form of a book written by the Australian author John Brosnan who, perhaps fearing the outcome of his product, used a pseudonym signing the novel as Harry Adam Knight. And worse, with the book carnosaurus being released in 1984, many consider that he was the author Michael Crichton who was inspired by him to write his Jurassic Park, released in 1990. Nothing proven, of course. In other words, when it comes to pioneering, this is a case where it didn’t help much. At least as far as their audiovisual counterparts are concerned.

carnosaurusthe film, also had its theatrical debut preceding that of the “rich cousin”, as it was released three weeks in advance of Jurassic Park and could if feed well before the competition came running over. carnosaurus (carnosaur1993) is a production of the legendary King of B movies, Roger Corman. The filmmaker is a true Hollywood icon, having served in his projects as the gateway to many seasoned people, from the Jack Nicholson, Martin Scorsese, Francis Ford Coppola and of himself Steven Spielbergall out of school Corman of cinema in his early career, having worked together with the director.

Roger Corman he is a true master, but what happens is that he has more will and talent than resources. Their productions are always extremely low-budget and when the story requires grandiose elements, such as, say, convincing living dinosaurs, this can become a big prank. Corman bought the rights to the book brosnan in 1991, one year after Crichton publish your Jurassic Park. Anticipating the backstage buzz in Hollywood, and the move by Universal Pictures, Amblin and Steven Spielberg towards the project of bringing dinosaurs back to life in style, Roger Corman would start production of his version of the dinos at the same time, to benefit from the hype generated by the blockbuster, in addition to the massive marketing campaign that the “competitor” would have – and that his could not afford.

Afraid of being considered even greater plagiarism and of eventually being sued, Roger Corman brought the director Adam Simon (who commands the work) to rewrite a significant portion of the book, creating new paths for the story in the film version. In fact, the author John Brosnan said he recognized very little of his text in the final product on screen, and said he didn’t like the film’s outcome very much. Despite this, she also confessed that the trash work served to boost sales of her novel at the time of its release. So while in the book we had a British journalist investigating savage attacks, taking casualties in England, the film eliminated the reporter element and brought the plot to the US. Other than that, in the original text who was behind the return of dinosaurs to our time was an eccentric millionaire (something like a twisted version of John Hammond). The rich man raised the creatures and kept them in captivity in a kind of personal zoo. However, as in Jurassic Parkthe creatures escaped and the bloodbath began.

carnosaurus, the film, tells about the analysis and approval of a large laboratory that, together with the government, initiates experiments for the creation of dinosaurs in our times, through genetics. Unbeknownst to them, Dr. Jane Tiptree, the mad scientist and villain of the film, is already well advanced in her work and even begins to give life to these animals on her own. It messes with the DNA of chickens and they give birth to prehistoric beings, laying gigantic eggs and bursting themselves in the process (no one said it would be easy). As if that weren’t enough, the insane doctor still infects several women with a virus, who end up impregnated and “stop” eggs with the dinos inside!? The scientist’s idea is to repopulate the Earth with lizards and let a new era of dinosaurs emerge.

As if the clueless and pointless plot wasn’t enough, carnosaurus it still makes use of real “special defects”; since as said, the budget of the feature was something around US$ 1 million (perhaps less), the value of the lunch of the team of Jurassic Park – which made use of $63 million in its production value. In this way, while the dinosaurs of Spielberg were created in a mix of animatronics and computerized effects revolutionary for the industry, those of carnosaurus they had to be “crank” – a mixture of stop-motion, animatronic puppets of different sizes, and even actors wearing (unconvincing even for the time) dinosaur clothes.

carnosaurus bet on an element in which Jurassic Park I had to take it easy: the gore! The gore is almost non-existent in the movie. Spielberg, which needed to appeal to all types of audiences, including teenagers, and even then it was considered too intense for the little ones. Already carnosaurus let rivers of blood flow, as good effects and enchantment with creatures would not have. In this way, the length of Roger Corman behaves more like a low-end horror slasher than a breathtaking adventure. But don’t think that the coincidences between the two productions end there. For Corman managed to cast a well-known face in the leading role of Dr. Tiptree: the veteran Diane Ladd – Actress’ real-life mother Laura Dernwhich was starring in Universal and Spielberg’s super production.

carnosaurus it made twice its budget at the box office, but was even favored due to video rental stores, where the film was able to thrive with the unsuspecting public or eager to consume more and more about dinosaurs. Such success ensured the production of two sequels, released direct to video (in 1995 and 1996) and two derivatives: raptor (2001) and The Eden Formula (2006). Besides that, carnosaurus turned into a cult production, joining the select list of the best bad movies ever made, those that go all the way around and become good again. Also known as guilty pleasures. To give you an idea, even critics of the size of Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel differed on their vision of the feature, with the first selecting it to occupy the position of worst film released in that respective year, while the second gave his approval approving it – and certainly getting more in the mood of the trash joke of the work and not taking it too far. for real.

Don’t forget to watch:

Leave a Comment