I must admit, straight away, that Jurassic Park is one of my favorite movie franchises of all-time. I have a special place in my heart for Steven Spielberg's one-two punch of Jurassic Park and The Lost World. Both films represent, to me, the absolute zenith of blockbuster filmmaking. More than just the game-changing special effects, it was smart writing, endearing characters, and a savory buffet of craftsmanship that made those films stand out from the crowd. For the third Jurassic Park movie, the directorial torch was passed to Joe Johnston, and predictably, the result is a film that seems like it comes from another universe. Jurassic Park 3 is nowhere near the level of the first two Jurassic Park movies, and I suppose for those less enthusiastic about the series, that may be a dealbreaker. For me? Well, I was able to get past it. The clear step down in quality may take some getting used to (maybe even a couple of viewings), but I found that once I made peace with the fact that JP3 isn't an A-caliber blockbuster, what I was left with was a good B-caliber blockbuster; A breezy little summertime thrill ride with some fun dinosaur action. And come on, who doesn't love dinosaurs?
Was Jurassic Park 3 really a necessary sequel? Was there some story waiting to be told? Some unanswered questions or themes to explore? Of course not. You can smell the studio's fingerprints all over Jurassic Park 3's script. The story is best described as a question, "How do we get Alan Grant back to a dinosaur-infested island?" The writers, Peter Buchman, Alexander Payne, and Jim Taylor, answer this question, but after that, they've got nothing. After Grant is duped by a divorced couple into visiting Site B in order to find their missing son, the film is just a chase picture, or maybe you could call it a wander picture, because there really is no urgency to the group's plan. Just get off the island, is about the extent of it. Tea Leoni and William H. Macy play the divorced couple, and they are good as typical Midwestern, suburban parents. Sam Neil's return as paleontologist Alan Grant is one of the few welcome sights in the character department. Neil does some classy work, and it is nice to see him back after he sat The Lost World out. The other characters, with the exception of the kid, are basically dino food from the beginning, and I do mean the beginning.
Jurassic Park 3 wastes little time getting to what we all paid to see, dinosaurs eating, chasing, and just downright harassing humans. From the very start of the film, with a cartoony title card that shows a raptor claw slashing "///" through the Jurassic Park logo, it's apparent that this Jurassic Park does not take itself near as seriously as the first two do. There is not much effort given to building tension, which was at least half the appeal of Spielberg's movies. No time spent preparing us for the eventual running... and screaming. No, it's just all-out action from the very moment Grant arrives on the island. The dinosaurs themselves have taken the leap from lifelike animals to movie monsters. They chase and eat and roar. Why? Because they're dinosaurs, that's why. You won't hear any talk of maternal instincts here. Jurassic Park 3 aims for the basic visceral thrills of the series, and Johnston hits that target. Watching people run from dinosaurs is a lot of fun, no matter the context, but Johnston and company do construct some truly rousing set-pieces. The Spinosaurus vs T-Rex fight is a neat little 'Why Not?' moment, and the trip into the Pterodactyl cage is bigger in scale than anything from the previous two films. You don't get much in the way of tension in JP 3's action scenes, but they move along nicely, and they're well mounted for sure. The special effects, while not quite on the same level as its predecessor's (despite coming out four years after), are still effective. When it comes to realizing extinct creatures in three dimensions, ILM and Stan Winston are still a quantum leap in front of everybody else.
Jurassic Park 3 is a textbook definition of 'disappointment'. It's a sequel that lacks the passion, spark, and creative talent of its predecessors. I hated it the first time I saw it, but as time goes by, I find it harder and harder to dislike. It works like a thrill ride at Disney World or Universal Studios. A quick pre-ride set up, and then it's time to strap in for non-stop dinosaur action. Jurassic Park 3 doesn't claim to offer more than those basic thrill ride pleasures, but those pleasures are enough for me. For summer matinée fare, you could do much worse.
72/100
Was Jurassic Park 3 really a necessary sequel? Was there some story waiting to be told? Some unanswered questions or themes to explore? Of course not. You can smell the studio's fingerprints all over Jurassic Park 3's script. The story is best described as a question, "How do we get Alan Grant back to a dinosaur-infested island?" The writers, Peter Buchman, Alexander Payne, and Jim Taylor, answer this question, but after that, they've got nothing. After Grant is duped by a divorced couple into visiting Site B in order to find their missing son, the film is just a chase picture, or maybe you could call it a wander picture, because there really is no urgency to the group's plan. Just get off the island, is about the extent of it. Tea Leoni and William H. Macy play the divorced couple, and they are good as typical Midwestern, suburban parents. Sam Neil's return as paleontologist Alan Grant is one of the few welcome sights in the character department. Neil does some classy work, and it is nice to see him back after he sat The Lost World out. The other characters, with the exception of the kid, are basically dino food from the beginning, and I do mean the beginning.
Jurassic Park 3 wastes little time getting to what we all paid to see, dinosaurs eating, chasing, and just downright harassing humans. From the very start of the film, with a cartoony title card that shows a raptor claw slashing "///" through the Jurassic Park logo, it's apparent that this Jurassic Park does not take itself near as seriously as the first two do. There is not much effort given to building tension, which was at least half the appeal of Spielberg's movies. No time spent preparing us for the eventual running... and screaming. No, it's just all-out action from the very moment Grant arrives on the island. The dinosaurs themselves have taken the leap from lifelike animals to movie monsters. They chase and eat and roar. Why? Because they're dinosaurs, that's why. You won't hear any talk of maternal instincts here. Jurassic Park 3 aims for the basic visceral thrills of the series, and Johnston hits that target. Watching people run from dinosaurs is a lot of fun, no matter the context, but Johnston and company do construct some truly rousing set-pieces. The Spinosaurus vs T-Rex fight is a neat little 'Why Not?' moment, and the trip into the Pterodactyl cage is bigger in scale than anything from the previous two films. You don't get much in the way of tension in JP 3's action scenes, but they move along nicely, and they're well mounted for sure. The special effects, while not quite on the same level as its predecessor's (despite coming out four years after), are still effective. When it comes to realizing extinct creatures in three dimensions, ILM and Stan Winston are still a quantum leap in front of everybody else.
Jurassic Park 3 is a textbook definition of 'disappointment'. It's a sequel that lacks the passion, spark, and creative talent of its predecessors. I hated it the first time I saw it, but as time goes by, I find it harder and harder to dislike. It works like a thrill ride at Disney World or Universal Studios. A quick pre-ride set up, and then it's time to strap in for non-stop dinosaur action. Jurassic Park 3 doesn't claim to offer more than those basic thrill ride pleasures, but those pleasures are enough for me. For summer matinée fare, you could do much worse.
72/100