A new theme park, built on the original site of Jurassic Park, creates a genetically modified hybrid dinosaur, the Indominus Rex, which escapes containment and goes on a killing spree.A new theme park, built on the original site of Jurassic Park, creates a genetically modified hybrid dinosaur, the Indominus Rex, which escapes containment and goes on a killing spree.A new theme park, built on the original site of Jurassic Park, creates a genetically modified hybrid dinosaur, the Indominus Rex, which escapes containment and goes on a killing spree.
A nod to the original and even more
As a young boy, dinosaurs were the greatest thing on earth (well, the greatest thing that once WAS on earth) for me. I knew most of their names (like Gray in JW) and had my plastic dinosaurs fighting themselves, evil, and sometimes also good. You can imagine my excitement when I first saw Jurassic Park and I was truly blown away by the idea. I still somehow wish that I could actually experience the events in the movie, although I understand the critic that the author of the novel, Michael Crichton, wanted to express. Much of that critic is lost in the third sequel to the original movie, 22 years after its original release, at least it's hidden very deep in the plot. The scientists have created a new super- species, filled the missing pieces of DNA up with genes of amphibians that all have certain survival-powers, and it all goes terribly wrong, much because the dinosaurs are being underestimated as they always were. So is it a reboot of the first movie? At least a bit. They are referring to the first movie all the time, examples: A control guy wearing an Jurassic Park shirt proudly says he got an original shirt (shown in part 1 several times) for $150 from eBay, they run through degenerated original buildings and one time the kids even drive an original van that they repaired competently. New park-owner Masrani says that John Hammond told him on his death bed to "spare no expense", which was one of the funniest scenes in the movie, yet Masrani doesn't want to commercialize the park too much. That's where the movie starts being perfectly self-ironic: one control guy (the one with the classic shirt) jokingly suggests, in order to please the investors, to name newly bred species after companies, "so how about Pepsi-Saurus"? The movie indeed is full of product placements, I counted at least 9 brands and logos that are shown or mentioned during the film. So what is the purpose of the movie? Mainly, I guess, it's meant as a nostalgic, yet up-to-date experience/excuse for all those fans who were bitterly disappointed by the Parts II&III. It's exciting, contains a little love story, it's got wit, social criticism and excellently animated dinosaurs. It shows that 22 years after Jurassic Park, movie heroes are still being chauvinist and women are still stronger and braver as they are pictured in most (other) movies. And, finally, it fulfills every fans biggest desire: man and dinosaur, at last fighting side by side. That's probably why I'd give it an even better rating than the original Jurassic Park movie, although of course classic scenes like the shaking water glass will probably never be outperformed. Résumé: Director Colin Trevorrow manages to create an enthralling and visually stunning homage to the original which at some points brilliantly steps out of the shadow of its role model and finally puts the conciliatory end to the dinosaur universe that we, the fans, truly deserved.
- Jun 12, 2015
50+ Movies in the Billion-Dollar Film Club
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content