Jurassic World Screen 15 articles

Jurassic World


Jurassic World Poster
  • Add to that the fact that none of these characters have any impact, Chris Pratt doing serious still only reminds me of Bert Macklin, and the heroic introduction of the T-Rex at the end, ready to team up with the raptors and kill the new evil monster as the ultimate bid for nostalgia cred, definitively proves how much this movie hates itself and us. The final battle confirms the sinking to Godzilla-sequel depths of unimaginative creature bashing.

  • [In Jurassic World,] dinosaurs are set loose in a theme park, and the visitors must fend for their lives against prehistoric beasts. The question on all our lips should be, How could they let this happen again? In that spirit, we should also ask, How could we let this movie happen again? More broadly, why do we, the audience of contemporary Hollywood, find ourselves confronted with the same movies being made over and over again, fending for our lives against these hungry, postmodern beasts?

  • The movie is indefensible from any position other than “It’s only a movie!” vapidity. A cynical reunion-tour cash-in of a film ostensibly directed by a pliable, Sundance-sanctioned nonentity called Colin Trevorrow, Jurassic World exhibits invention only in the curiously elaborate dispatching of a relatively minor character, and timing only in appearing right on schedule, as the nostalgia cycle had completed its 20-odd-year loop.

  • We want that elusive sweet spot where big-budget spectacle is employed in the service of characters who’ve charmed their way into our affections, and that sense of being pleasantly manipulated when an adrenaline rush gives way to something unexpectedly funny or poignant. For about an hour, Jurassic World fills that complex need, reclaiming the monster movie after last year’s ditchwater-dull Godzilla. There are moments of smart, giddy joy here, even if they don’t quite gel overall.

  • Jurassic World is part sequel, part reboot, and Trevorrow and company have no interest in reconciling the inherent contradictions. What they’ve done, quite cannily, is create a genetically modified blockbuster, composed of bits and pieces of mythology, past hits, character types, and tried-and-true cinematic techniques.

  • The movie is produced by Steven Spielberg’s Amblin Entertainment and has been made in small but enjoyably slavish deference to his and its catalogue. That should feel unseemly, but there’s something satisfying about how the allusions just keep pinballing off each other, slapped into motion by killer dinosaurs. Director Colin Trevorrow and the three other credited writers are stealing used parts to make a newish car.

  • “Jurassic World” isn’t in dialogue with its cinematic reference points; it’s fossilized by them. From the first shot of a dinosaur hatching (signaling new beginnings, etc.) to one of a massive aquatic creature chowing down on a great white shark (get it?), it is clear that the only colossus that’s making the ground shake here is Steven Spielberg.

  • It’s not a matter of if the shit will hit the fan, but when. That Jurassic World constructs genuinely thrilling chase sequences out of Spielberg’s spare parts is refreshing. Putting body cams on distrusting raptors turns one violent onslaught into a horrific bloodbath seen from multiple first-person vantage points. Even more visceral is the brutal winged assault by pterodactyls on thousands of park residents.

  • I didn’t buy the Old Testament tenet that “the iniquity of fathers will be visited upon children unto the third and fourth generations” until I started following Jurassic Park. The franchise started out compromised. Each new movie gets worse and/or more confused than its predecessor. The latest, Jurassic World (#4), is a distressing fiasco—dumb non-fun—but its failure is thoroughly predictable and rooted in the first film 22 years ago.

  • Another theme park, another bunch of knuckleheaded scientists cloned from the same strand of foresight-impaired DNA. Jurassic World has absolutely no reason for being (except for the obvious one), but at least it chomps your time painlessly. Much like the fully functioning tourist attraction that’s now flourishing on the haunted grounds of Isla Nublar some 22 years after the first film, the movie exists against logic.

  • Never-ending corporate expansion is very much the bailiwick of Jurassic World, whose screenplay is attributed to two separate teams of writers. It's a detail worth remembering each and every time Trevorrow's film betrays its own conglomerated-product anxiety.

  • Jurassic World is pretty good fun. Especially for a here-today, gone-tomorrow summer blockbuster, the picture is better-crafted than it needs to be: If you ignore some extraneous plot threads, and the stop-the-presses revelation that, in the end, “what really matters is family,” Jurassic World hangs together surprisingly well.

  • The best aspects of the sequel "Jurassic World" are so very good that they transport you that exhilarating mental space where the series' original director, Steven Spielberg, raised a tentpole way back in 1993. The worst aspects are bad indeed: thin characterizations, a blase attitude toward human-on-animal violence and a weird male-supremacist streak that comes close to sneering at unmarried career women who don't have kids.

  • Hollywood can’t just put photorealistic dinosaurs in cinemas and expect audiences to be wowed any more. Jurassic World acknowledges that shift in expectations... It must be the first $150 million monster movie to question whether bigger is always better. Even more than its intensely likeable central performances and convincingly solid visual effects, it’s this supple self-reflexiveness that makes Colin Trevorrow’s film a worthy sequel to Spielberg’s industry-changing original.

  • Trevorrow gives the movie a warmer, brighter touch, closer in feel to the original film, especially in its central sibling rivalry and the portrait of a childless adult (Howard here, Neill there) whose parental instincts are awakened by dino-trauma. But he’s far less adept at staging big action (which tends to be more frantic than thrilling), and some of the movie’s best ideas remain oddly underdeveloped, like unhatched eggs.

More Links