7

If the new park is on the same plot of land as the old one, when they recovered the island, why didn't they save themselves a ton of money and repair the old park?

I thought maybe it was a safety hazard but then I realized that if it was, it would be because of the roaming dinos, but if that was the case then they wouldn't build a park at all!

Also, in my personal opinion, I think that the original park's security was 10 times as good as the new one. In the original park, the only reason that the breach happened was because Nedry disabled it it. Without his sabotage, the park would have been flawless. Meanwhile Jurassic World was not infiltrated, they just decided to build a flimsy wall and it broke through; in Jurassic Park, the dino would be fried. Combine that with the infantry equipment of the new one, and nothing could get out.

  • 4
    I'm guessing that no one knew that Nerdy disabled the systems (outside of the original crew) and so they thought that since the "old park" didn't work, they should avoid duplicating/reusing its systems. This is speculation of course, there is no in-movie explanation. – DustinDavis Dec 10 '17 at 17:01
  • but Wu, who ends up surviving, works for ingen, so wouldn't he report what happened? – ALEXZANDER NORONHA-HYDE - STUD Dec 11 '17 at 18:36
  • 3
    The most obvious answer is that it's easier to attract tourists/employees to a brand new park with no negative history than it would be to attract them to the park where the previous visitors/workers were all killed and eaten. It's the same reason that houses where a murder has happened lose a bunch of resale value - it doesn't necessarily mean murders will happen there again in the future, but people make that negative association in their brains and it puts them off. – delinear Dec 12 '17 at 12:32
  • but then again, this is INgen, and if memory serves, INgen had not yet even made the parks existence known at the time of the incident, so then only INgen would know what happened, and INgen wants money based on their actions, so they would not care about what previously happened if no one knows it happened – ALEXZANDER NORONHA-HYDE - STUD Dec 13 '17 at 17:01
7

I had the impression that the management team of the company running Jurassic World is different from the one that was managing Jurassic Park, although some members might be related if I recall correctly members from the first episode even appear, only to be shown leaving the company in reaction to the way it is currently managed.

Now my answer will not be a rational explanation, but one based on behaviors I have seen in real life.

Sometimes when a new team arrives to do a job that was judged to have been done poorly by the previous team; it decides to dump all the work that had previously been done and to start from scratch again, even though some of the work of the old team could be salvaged.

This is of course counter-productive in the long term, but some people might behave like this for various reasons: pressure from higher management to which they respond by trying to pretend they are more "in charge" than the previous team (and berating that old team's achievements helps toward this goal); lack of experience; overconfidence; ego...

According to this point of view, it is easy to see that the new team thinks it can do better than the old one, and does not want to re-use any of the previous attractions.

Another reason could be that this new management team does not want the public to remember what happened to the previous Park (people died horribly!), which would be bad for their business. They want to erase these events from public memory.

This attitude is adressed in the film too, in the scene where we're first introduced to the control center crew and one of them wears a T-shirt with the old Jurassic Park logo, much to Claire's dismay:

Claire: Where did you get that?
Lowery: This? I got it on eBay...
Claire: Didn't occur to you maybe that's in poor taste?
Lowery: The shirt? Yeah, no, it did. I understand people died. It was terrible, but that first park was legit.
Claire: Okay, please don't wear it again.

If you thing this is exaggerated, let me remind you of the example of real life company WWE that removed all occurrences of the name of their former wrestler Chris Benoit from the content they offer, after it was found he was involved in a family murder and suicide case...

Sorry for an answer that might not be as satisfying as one based on "hard science"; but I think it fits well the spirit of the franchise, whose one aspect is to warn against the dangers of letting private companies - with all the inefficiencies and dishonesties they bring along - handle such important things as Nature, Life, Evolution, ..., without any sort of external control.

  • 1
    I took the liberty of adding some relevant dialogue to your answer. I really think this emphasises how the management wants to eradicate any memory to the old park, but I wouldn't really have added anything to your already exhaustive answer if I made it into a new one. – Napoleon Wilson Jun 7 '18 at 15:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .