10 Opening Movie Scenes That Do More Than You Realise

First impressions count for so much, and so there's arguably no more important scene in a movie than the opening one, which will typically introduce audiences to the central characters, kick the story off, and establish the overall tone.

Yet sometimes filmmakers use an early scene to do a little more than that, to dig deeper and start trailing clues for the narrative's eventual direction, perhaps even foreshadowing later scenes in ways that will only be caught upon repeat viewings.

If each of these 10 movie scenes are certainly memorable in their own way, it's easy to miss this more subtle, low-key thing they're also doing.

You certainly shouldn't feel bad for missing anything and these details are in no way vital for understanding the film - obviously - and yet, they all demonstrate the clear thought that went into the scene and movie as a whole regardless.

Some are certainly more apparent than others, but each of these scenes has a lot more going on than is immediately clear on an initial viewing. Once you know, though, you'll never watch these openings quite the same way again...

Jurassic Park just might have one of the tightest, most brilliantly efficient scripts in the history of Hollywood blockbusters.

Not a single line feels wasted or extraneous, as evidenced by one telling yet oft-ignored sliver of dialogue in the movie's opening five minutes, which was recently pointed out by Redditor u/Dlph_311.

When lawyer Donald Gennaro (Martin Ferrero) turns up at the amber mine in the Dominican Republic at the start of the film, he tells the supervisor that he needs to perform an inspection of the park following the death of a dinosaur handler, to which the supervisor says, "Hammond hates inspections. They slow everything down."

While it's often rightly said that the primary reason for Jurassic Park failing is John Hammond's (Richard Attenborough) decision to spare expense - despite his claims to the contrary - this line is crucial in its own way, confirming that Hammond sees basic safety protocols as impediments to progress rather than something that needs to happen.

And so, is it any surprise at all that a park founded by someone with such a cavalier attitude to safety implodes in abject disaster? The line may seem plainly spoken and obvious to some, but it's easy to gloss over its full context regardless.