IMDb > Jurassic Park III (2001) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Jurassic Park III
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Jurassic Park III More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 124:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 1240 reviews in total 

201 out of 334 people found the following review useful:

Much Better Than Its Reputation; Short & Fun

8/10
Author: ccthemovieman-1 from United States
15 May 2006

First of all, this final episode in the Jurassic series did not deserve all the bad reviews it got when it was released. In fact, it was a lot more enjoyable than the stupid second JP. Did it equal the first? No, of course not. The original story was easily the best of the three, but I found this an enjoyable movie and far better than what I had been led to believe.

The filmmakers were smart in making this a short film. People had seen plenty of the dinosaurs by now so let's no overdo it...and they didn't with an film just under an hour-and-a-half (not including the final credits.).

That made this short-and-sweet. We saw some new reptiles, had a few scares, enjoyed the beautiful jungle scenery (filmed in Hawaii) and - bang - it's over. The characters were fine, nobody totally annoying as in the second film. The lulls featured a family getting back together and finding their missing teen. Nothing wrong with that.

A good story unfairly maligned and nice, short evening of entertainment.

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 25 people found the following review useful:

Why not go all the way

Author: adam ferguson from Penrith
24 July 2001

I went to see JP3 last night to vet it before I take my 6 year old daughter. She is desperate to see it having seen JP and the Lost world and generally loving dinosaurs. I am a great movie fan so have my own opinions on the film but first I'll address the suitability of this movie for young viewers. The original film and Lost World are true 'family movies' containing elements for everyone - decent story, good acting, great (groundbreaking) effects and humour etc. There's nothing wrong with kids being scared periodically, being scared is part of the whole monster movie experience. All that said, JP3 is too 'full on' for one as young as 6 and I think I'll try to get her to wait for DVD, to tone down the whole experience. She saw the first two at home and wont be expecting the sheer sound and visuals of this movie at the cinema. I would advise other parents the same, at least with kids this young.

As for my opinion of the film - well, we've seen it all before. I've read many comments and agree with most. Its lame storyline is its down fall and this could've been so much better. In my opinion a far better film would have carried a 15 certificate at least. One they could have made for adults only, and really explored new territory and therefore could not be compared to the previous two. A huge audience loves scary films and monster movies so why not go for it with a proper modern day horror. Throw in a good conspiracy theory plot about INGEN and some realistic profanity and gut wrenching effects. In short give people what they really want. JP3 does niether for either age group.

For your children, I reccommend the BBC's series 'Walking with Dinosaurs' it's informative and has near the same quality of effects.

See for yourself.

Was the above review useful to you?

26 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Were the filmmakers high when they made this terrible film?

1/10
Author: samsamsontim from United States
20 July 2015

Awful follow up to the first two Steven Spielberg dinosaur epics finds Sam Neill anchoring a brainless, exploitative and almost unwatchable monster movie that lacks the intelligence, fun and brains that made the first two Spielberg films memorable. The special effects look like a major down grade from the last two films and the dinosaurs look more like mechanical puppets. Sam Neill is a very good actor but not even he could mask the contempt he has on his face for staring in this film. Sam did not look like he wanted to be there and his performance reflexes that in spades. The story makes no sense and the actions by the characters are so far out there that you are screaming in disbelieve on how stupid they are. William H Macy is a great actor and even he looks miserable being in this film. Macy in his credit is actually somewhat funny but not much else. Tea Leoni, who can be a very decent actor is just horrid here and Alessandro Nivola gives a useless performance and he's a good indie actor.

I don't know what made the filmmakers here to go low rent but its the worst sequel in the series.

Was the above review useful to you?

23 out of 29 people found the following review useful:

Jurassic Porn

4/10
Author: Eric Jorgenson
26 July 2005

This movie reminded me a lot like a basic porn movie. It was short when compared to the first two Jurassic Park movies; only 90 minutes long like most sex flicks. There was basically no plot, no character development, and no Jeff Goldblum. It really reminded me of a porno, because the characters would talk alittle bit, and then get chased by dinosaurs for a long extended period of time. Now, if you just replace the aspect of getting chased by dinosaurs with some hot guy/girl, girl/girl, guy/guy, guy/gerbil, or dino/dino sex action; then you basically have the same movie. This movie is terrible compared to the first JP, and bad when measured up to the sequel. Now JP2 was no masterpiece either, but I will take very cheesy T-Rex smashing through San Diego any day, before hearing that damn cell phone go off again. Am so glad that JP4 is currently titled "The Extinction", because after this installment this franchise needs a nice big fat Hailey's comet to smash right into it leaving every dinosaur/character dead expect Jeff Goldblum. Goldblum is the man!!!! Anyway, you will get some entertainment value from the dinosaurs, but don't except much. Just turn off your brain, and enjoy a semi fun ride which includes getting chase by dinosaurs, getting chased by flying dinosaurs, getting chased by more dinosaurs, and yea thats about it. I should have probably have given this movie at least a five, for its effort; but the ending was so stupid and abrupt that I had to dock it a point. Its worth one viewing, and one viewing only.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

i HOPE THIS SERIES IS EXTINCT...

3/10
Author: DrTsaks from Milwaukee, Wisconsin
15 July 2001

JP1 was pretty good, JP2 was decent, and JP3 continues the horrific trend, producing a large pile of t-rex fecies. This movie was incredibly boring, unrealisitc, and just all around terrible. There is no scientific angle to it whatsoever. It is just stupid people running from dinosaurs. The only good thing about it is that it is only 90 minutes long, and I am no longer scared of dinosaurs. In fact, I find them funny. If you have insomnia and are looking for something to put you to sleep, I highly recomend this movie. 3/10

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

If you ever want your childhood crushed then just watch this movie

1/10
Author: Connor Gunn from Canada
27 May 2010

I am just going to quote Devindra on the /filmcast and what he said about this movie "Seeing Jurassic Park 3 made me realize how dreams could be shattered"

This just sums up the whole movie. People exaggerate how bad the Phantom Menace is but this movie is impossible to exaggerate how horrible it was. The original Jurassic Park was pure gold, the second was not a good sequel but an OK movie but this movie will rape your childhood up the ass till you cry.

Please no matter how interested you are in returning to Jurassic park...DON'T. This film does not even take place in Jurassic Park and the only thing really connecting it to the original is Sam Neal and that is it.

Was the above review useful to you?

22 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

talking raptors??!!!

1/10
Author: (jean emmanuel frojo) from Montreal, Canada
25 July 2001

What was the point of doing another movie. You could also say what was the point of me seeing that movie, at least it was a cheapie night.

The plot itself is really ridiculous and the acting about the same, except maybe for Sam Neill who is not bad in his character. It would have made a nice tv movie but that's about it. There is no really original or exciting moments in the film, and not a lot a scary parts. The only time i jumped is when one of the character stepped on a staircase and almost fell.

The special fx are ok but nothing ground breaking. And what is this... talking raptors??!! Next thing we'll see is a movie about talking apes.... (oops!)

The movie may be fine for kids or teenagers( i'm sure McDonalds will sell a lot of happy meals), but if you want a minimum of a good time, avoid this one, go see shrek for a second time.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 27 people found the following review useful:

Unneeded

1/10
Author: veemee78 from colorado
16 July 2006

JPIII is very good at what it tries to do. That is, update the formula used in its prequels to create even more lifelike dinosaurs. Unfortunately, it didn't try to do much of anything else, leaving us with yet another big, dumb, summer action flick... hardly the caliber of the previous films.

Basically, the story goes like this: a rich kid is taken to Costa Rica by his parents to do some para-sailing... and, for some reason, he decides that an island famed for its man-eating dinosaurs would be the best place to do it. Surprise, surprise: Something Goes Wrong, and the kid is stranded on the island. Who do his parents go to for help? Dr. Grant, the paleontologist who happened to get himself involved with dinosaurs before. Rather than telling him the truth upfront, they con him into coming by giving him a big fake check and swearing that they will not touch down on the island. Dr. Grant agrees hesitantly to this condition. But when they get to the island, they touch down anyway, making their plane a prime target for a dinosaur attack. Something Goes Wrong again, and this time, Grant and the kid's parents are stuck as well.

The plot pretty much ends right there, and that's only the first thirty minutes of the movie. The rest of the movie involves people running from and/or getting eaten by dinosaurs. Like I said, it's a big, dumb, action flick. If you're looking for something that even remotely has an air of the old Michael Crichton magic, look to the first two films. Jurassic Park III is the beginning of what will become a reiteration of the Jaws fiasco... endless sequels until one of them sucks so bad, it finds its home in the infamous Bottom 100 list.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 27 people found the following review useful:

Eminently Forgettable

Author: Rick Blaine from London
15 June 2005

Why did Sam Neill return to the beasts? Why did Spielberg? Schindler's List: The Return would make more sense. Sly Stallone has nothing on this bazillionaire.

And perhaps worst of all is the totally unimportant score of Williams. Williams can write the occasional catchy tune, especially if it's supposed to be in the spirit of that great soul and blues man John Philip Sousa, but ask him to write incidental or a love theme and you go turkey. In fact it's a good guess that Star Wars I and II foundered as bad as they did because the score enhanced this empty stilted feeling.

If one thing remains - even subliminally - after JP3 it's the totally spiritless and uninspired score. Why the rest of that crew - Sam what were you thinking - would return to the big bugs is beyond comprehension.

Rent Rocky XXXIV instead.

Was the above review useful to you?

21 out of 27 people found the following review useful:

"Two's company, three's a crowd." J.P. 3 doesn't compare to the first two.

1/10
Author: Jacki-chan
28 July 2001

Jurassic park. The name alone strikes images of people, running and screaming--bleeding and sweating--from huge, ugly, fast, vicious DINOSAURS. Oh, joy. Now, don't get me wrong, I liked the first two movies alright, but I mean, come ON, people! It's like the old saying, "Two's company, three's a crowd." In my opinion, this has gone overboard. There are some good aspects, but the bad tend to overthrow the good, in this case. For example, the graphics were 'a little bit of alright', but they didn't show enough dinosaurs besides the T-rex and the Raptors, so what's the point? Or, that some parts were great, and made you jump out of your seat, but there was NO PLOT! "There they are. Run. Must get off island. There they are again. Run." Doesn't quite cut it in my book! And while the first two had the same underlying plot, they weren't nearly as predictable as this one. I don't understand how people can perfer a movie like this VS....Oh, let's say a masterpiece like "Final Fanatsy." People REALLY need to wake up, 'cause at this point, it's just sad

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 124:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history