Are the Jurassic Park sequels worth watching?

[Dream]

I recently rewatched the first Jurassic Park on dvd after not seeing it for years. It's still a classic! I loved all the dinos and can't believe how real they still look after all these years. There was something magicial about seeing the dinos with the characters for the first time. The characters are still likeable, and I don't find the kids to be annoying.

I never saw the sequels.

I heard that they were pretty bad, but is there anything worth watching about them?

 

[Owain Taggart]

Jurassic Park did a lot right in terms of the look of dinosaurs. It's still far off, as they weren't perfect with their designs, but they were pretty good for what they were. These days, we know a lot more about dinosaurs, with a recent discovery of some popular dinosaurs like the T-Rex actually having feathers; at least as a juvenile. That discovery alone made paleontologists rethink how they think about dinosaurs, so I'm wondering if they'll take these discoveries into consideration when making a new movie. One of my favourite new species discovered within the last few years is the Gigantoraptor. It looks like a giant superchicken.

As for the sequels, my favourite is the second one. Didn't care too much for the 3rd. It seemed to be a bit off in tone, which isn't too surprising considering there never was a 3rd novel. I have an Uncle who's a paleontologist and was one of Crighton's sources when writing the sequel. I was talking to him recently and told him they did a good job with Robert Bakker. He told me, "Yeah, the actor that portrayed him did a great job of getting eaten."

 

[Scotty]

^^ I think that by real, the OP meant how realistic the CGI effects were in the original film. I absolutely adore Jurassic Park and still think it is a brilliant adventure-thriller. I agree that the special effects are brilliant and are actually better than most movies today.

The sequels aren't as good as the original but still worth seeing. I personally think though, that The Lost World is a great sequel. It's also directed by Spielberg so it's technically brilliant and very suspenseful. But it doesn't feature Sam Neill or Laura Dern, only Jeff Goldblum and Richard Attenborough from the original movie. The supporting cast is superb though, with some up and coming names at the time like Julianne Moore, Richard Schiff, Vince Vaughn(!) and Pete Postletwaithe. The scene where a T-Rex pushes a trailer from a cliff is IMO a classic.

Jurassic Park III didn't do a lot for me I'm afraid but t is by no means bad. Sam Neill returns, as does Laura Dern (briefly). The cast includes William H. Macy, Tea Leoni and the late Michael Jeter. But there's no music by John Williams and more importantly, no Spielberg. It's worth a look but it is the weakest of the sequels.

 

[trekkiebaggio]

I quite enjoyed The Lost World and it's worth watching to see the coolness of a T-Rex in a city. III is okay but I agree that it's the weakest of the three.

I think it's worth watching all of them to see the new dinosaurs they add.

 

[Python Trek]

I know it's blasphemous, but I'm only meh about the original, and I thought the sequels were largely a waste of time.

 

[Alidar Jarok]

The second one is mostly boring and has plenty of stupid moments, but it still has a certain wonder about dinosaurs that I liked (it added Ankylosarus, Pachycephalosaurus, Parasaurolophus, Stegasaurus). I think the stupid moments outweigh the good moments, but it's worth a look if you don't take it too seriously.

I know people who like the third one better. I think that's because, as a chase movie where people are hunted by Dinosaurs, it's better than the Lost World (but it's not as good as the original in this regard. Seriously, the scene with the Raptors is hard to beat). It also has some really stupid moments (without getting into too much detail, I didn't like what they did with Raptors and they literally ripped off Peter Pan at one point). It also doesn't have the same wonder as the first two. I think they only have one "Look at how beautiful dinosaurs are" moment towards the end and that's it. But it does have the one non-annoying kid in the entire series. That's a plus. I'd say watch with very low expectations as far as a Jurassic Park movie goes, but if you want to see Dr. Grant and a few thrilling scenes.

 

[Kirkman1987]

They're fun movies just to see the Dinosaurs and some good scenes here and there, but they don't come close to the first one.
I'd say they are worth watching.

Because of that value priced trilogy set ($15) I own the sequels, and I still pull them down every now and then.

 

[Quinton O'Connor]

The first is very strong, but I really need to see it again to formulate an opinion I can proudly tout; it was the first movie I ever saw in theaters, and the first book I ever read, both at the age of five. So I have a special place in my heart for it.

I enjoyed the second one a fair bit, but it does have its stupid moments. I particularly liked Malcolm's character, as I did in the first. I didn't miss Grant as much as I thought I would.

I didn't like the third movie much at all. Among other things, such as a rather silly climax if ever there were one, I hate to sound incredibly shallow but, bluntly put, not enough people died. I know that sounds like a typical horror film enthusiast's shlocky sort of statement, and I don't even like most horror films. But I stand by my analysis. Watch the third and you might feel a lot of the suspense draining when you realize that too few of these people are going to get taken out by the predatory dinosaurs' voracious tendencies.

 

[Lonemagpie]

I liked the second one better than the first (mainly cos of the annoying kid in the first one). The third isn't as good overall, but is a fun afternoon watch.

 

[marillion]

In looking back on them now, JP I only holds up so-so... I was wowed by the CGI and didn't really pay attention to the rest. It brushes over the book's look at how the dinos were done for the sake of not boring the audience.

JP II was just ok.. It was quickly cobbled together, in my mind, and of course, the whole thing about Malcolm coming back from the dead just left me "meh"...

JP III was fun to watch and Sam Neil always brings it. He's got such a good brooding thing going on.

 

[Whofan]

^Malcolm didn't die in the original movie. He's seen boarding the helicopter with the others, although he's injured. He was however quite dead in the first book and brought back for the second book. I think Crichton has said in some interviews that he modified the book continuity a bit to better appeal to the movie audience.

However one thing the follow-up comics did which was weird was bring Muldoon back to life....

 

[Greg Cox]

I actually prefered #3 to #2, mostly because of the pterodactyls.

 

[Whofan]

^Originally they were going to be in TLW, but were cut out apart from the cameo of one at the end. (They're also mentioned briefly in the original in the lunch conference scene in the background). In fact, the film's original ending was to have them attack the escape helicopters, and then, instead of having the T-rex attack and reveal the Dinosaur's existence to the world, the film would have had a relatively quiet funeral scene with Ian and co. attending Hammond's funeral.

 

[RandyS]

They were both good enough to see once, but the first one remains the best.

 

[exodus]

I liked the 3rd one way better than the 2nd.
The 3rd seemed like a better follow up story to the first.
2rd one just looses all credibility when they get to San Diego.

 

[RoJoHen]

I barely remember the second one. I think I've only seen it once. I thought the 3rd one was fun, except for the completely bullshit ending.

 

[Gojira]

I just watched the original last night! It is my favorite. The sequel, The Lost World, is alright but I actually enjoy the 3rd movie much better. The third movie has a lot of dinosaurs and chases and it is just pure fun.

 

[FPAlpha]

The first one had Spielbergs style all over it and it shows... to this day it is an awesome film full of woinderful moments.

The others are fine too.. Special effects are good, the stories are not disastrously bad and the characters are ok. They just don't have that certain spark of a Spielberg movie..

 

[RoJoHen]

Really, I think part of the magic of the first one was the whole idea of "Oooh, they brought dinosaurs back to life!" There was a sense of wonder about it.

The other two movies, while decent action flicks, we pretty much just that. It wasn't "Ooh, look at the awesome dinosaurs." It was, "Oh fuck, the dinosaurs are trying to eat me!"

 

[Forbin]

I have a 5 page review of things that I didn't like about the first movie somewhere .

I liked the second because it was a straight-forward monster-on-the-loose movie, and it didn't pretend to be anything else. They even homaged King Kong with the name of the boat.

I liked the third because it was a simple, old fashioned mosters-chasing-people popcorn movie.

Both sequels are enjoyable, taken for what they are.