• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Are the Jurassic Park sequels worth watching?

I like all three to varying degrees and for different reasons. They are almost better as unrelated "dinosaurs in modern times" movies but there's enough thread there to keep them all connected.
 
The third does have the one non-annoying kid in the entire series.
The fact that he survives, on his own, for several days or maybe even a week or two, utterly ruins the movie, which is decent enough until he shows up alive, and completely terrible thereafter.

I like the kid's resourcefulness. It was much better than the screaming, whiny kids from the other movies. Did you want it to turn out he was dead?
Hell yes, I did! I don't necessarily mind screaming when it's realistic - as in, you're a preteen and you're being attacked by a goddamn T-Rex. Scream away - you're helping sell the realistic integrity of the movie, and promoting the suspension of disbelief by not taxing it overmuch.

But an under-fifteen kid not only surviving on Isla Sorna alone, but rescuing Grant, too? That's just beyond the pale.

indyskulls07.jpg


Indy didn't like it, either.




.
 
Jurassic Park 2 lacks Alan Grant, and Jurassic Park 3 lacks Ian Malcolm. And somehow, the visual effect in Jurassic Park are WAY BETTER than the VFX in the sequels.


Have you ever even read the second book? The only thing the movie takes from the second book is the name.


Yes, I did. As I said, my Uncle the paleontologist was one of Micheal Crighton's sources. He's credited at the end. I do agree that movie's very different though. About the only scene they kept from the book was the trailer scene.

I'm just saying I find it funny you think JP3 is off in tone because there isn't a 3rd book, when the second movie and the second book are nothing alike.

I think the third one had a different tone because it was rushed and should have never have been made.

Tone has nothing to do with the books. Directors, composers, cinematographers, art directors changed. That's why Jurassic Park 3 feels pretty much out of place compared to the other two.
 
I thought the VFX in The Lost World were quite comparable to those seen in Jurassic Park, and took away a bit of the stilted motions that occurred occasionally in the first film.
 
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?

I guess it depends on what else you could be doing, but I think they are good for a rent and a watch,but to me no where near as good as the first.
 
If I happen to find one of them on TV while I'm putzing around in my workshop, I like them well enough to leave them on. I can watch Tea Leoni run around and sweat. :)
 
I would argue that while Stan Winston's animatronics improved throughout the sequels, the CGI got worse-possibly because in JP, most of the best Dinosaur FX was in darkness or shot with it's limitations in mind; however in both TLW and JP3 there was a lot more daytime FX.

There's also a lot of difference in the music scores for the tone of the films. TLW's score is somewhat darker and more primal compared to the wonder/adventure themes of the original film (Although those make appearences in the film, they're very minimal). Plus the Raptor theme from the original is not even in TLW (Possibly because the Raptors don't do that much and are dumbed down big time).


JP3-which is by Matrix composer Don Davis-brings back the original JP themes including the Raptor themes (Since they play a more prominent role in this than in TLW). However there's a new theme by Davis that's more of a 'family' theme that really doesn't fit the franchise.
 
Since we seem to be discussing spoilers for the movies here, I won't use the spoiler code. But the OP should not scroll down if he wants to remain surprised.





The Lost World has some great action but is very disappointing story wise.

Vince Vaughn and Julianne Moore should be up on multiple manslaughter charges for causing almost every death in the movie. Their stupidity got Toby Ziegler bit in half while trying to save them, and I will never forgive them for it.

Speaking of deaths, what was up with the phantom raptors that apparently attacked the crew of the ship? Are we to assume that there's now a raptor pack roaming the greater San Diego metropolitan area? T-Rex and baby were locked up, and either too big or too dumb to get through man-sized doors. Did the raptors chill and get some sun the entire way up from Costa Rica and then only decided to attack when their all expense paid cruise was within site of the pier? That was Michael Bay level lazy storytelling.

I was also bummed that the chameleon dinosaurs (Idonthinkhesaurus to borrow a joke from the first film) from the novel didn't make an appearance. I was really looking forward to seeing that realized through CGI, especially where they blended in in front of the fence.

Finally, someone (a nerd no less) learned something from Godzilla movies and ran to the side instead of directly in the T-Rex's path, and what did they do? Killed him off, gruesomely. This sends the wrong message to monster movie victims.

Props for eating the dog though. The trend of dogs jumping to safety in the nick of time as the wall of fire or lava approached was getting old.

The third movie had some good action but was kind if uninspired. I was glad they finally introduced the "birdcage" from the first novel though. I'd been waiting for that through the other two films. The Spinosaurus was a good "villain" dinosaur.

I was a bit disappointed that when the Marines arrived at the end we didn't get to see them blow the Spinosaurus to bits though. I know, it's not kosher to show extinct creatures fictionally reborn being given the Rambo treatment, but c'mon, just one.

On top of that, what's with them all sitting their grinning like idiots while the flock of Pteranodons flies off to the mainland? Especially after the attacks they just went though in the birdcage. What, since they're only going to viciously maul Costa Ricans and Hondurans it's a hilarious sight? They should have machine gunned the shit out of them from the helicopters. What's all this we can't shoot animals crap when lives are at stake?
 
Speaking of deaths, what was up with the phantom raptors that apparently attacked the crew of the ship? Are we to assume that there's now a raptor pack roaming the greater San Diego metropolitan area? T-Rex and baby were locked up, and either too big or too dumb to get through man-sized doors. Did the raptors chill and get some sun the entire way up from Costa Rica and then only decided to attack when their all expense paid cruise was within site of the pier? That was Michael Bay level lazy storytelling.
I grant that that's a WTF moment, but I love the sequence, so I can let it slide. Maybe the Ingen guys decided to bring some raptors too, and they woke up prematurely.
 
David Koepp, the screenwriter, was the guy who gets eaten. Many critics called it 'fitting punishment'.

Jurassic Park III of course famously had lots of production problems, involving mainly the script and prompting William H. Macy to call the movie "a ship without a rudder".
 
Speaking of deaths, what was up with the phantom raptors that apparently attacked the crew of the ship? Are we to assume that there's now a raptor pack roaming the greater San Diego metropolitan area? T-Rex and baby were locked up, and either too big or too dumb to get through man-sized doors. Did the raptors chill and get some sun the entire way up from Costa Rica and then only decided to attack when their all expense paid cruise was within site of the pier? That was Michael Bay level lazy storytelling.
I grant that that's a WTF moment, but I love the sequence, so I can let it slide. Maybe the Ingen guys decided to bring some raptors too, and they woke up prematurely.

The raptors were only two and eaten by the T-Rex. But I don't know where I got that from. Possibly from the DVD commentary.
 
I love the series, but I hope someone does a more faithful version of the novel someday. The movie is perfect for what it is, but my life won't be complete until I see Muldoon blow up a raptor with a grenade launcher.
 
In some ways, I actually prefer The Lost World over the original Jurassic Park. It's darker, scarier, & more intense. If you got rid of the San Diego finale, it would be perfect. (I would have ended it on a cliffhanger. The last shot of the film would be that shot of the T-Rex roaring with the San Diego skyline in the background.)

On top of that, what's with them all sitting their grinning like idiots while the flock of Pteranodons flies off to the mainland? Especially after the attacks they just went though in the birdcage. What, since they're only going to viciously maul Costa Ricans and Hondurans it's a hilarious sight? They should have machine gunned the shit out of them from the helicopters. What's all this we can't shoot animals crap when lives are at stake?

Ohhhh, you do NOT want to fuck with the PETA people where the Endangered Species Act is concerned! (And what's more endangered than a species that was recently extinct?):p

Jurassic Park III of course famously had lots of production problems, involving mainly the script and prompting William H. Macy to call the movie "a ship without a rudder".

And yet Macy was one of the most enthusiastic shills for the film on the talk show circuit during its initial release. (Maybe he overdid it as a mea culpa to the studio for some earlier offense.)

The movie is perfect for what it is, but my life won't be complete until I see Muldoon blow up a raptor with a grenade launcher.

I miss Bob Peck. :(
 
If you want a "more of the same" type experience then yes, definitely worth it. The first one is the best of course but the other two were entertaining as well.
 
Jurassic Park III of course famously had lots of production problems, involving mainly the script and prompting William H. Macy to call the movie "a ship without a rudder".

Exactly. I attribute that to the fact that the 3rd had no book to be based on. It doesn't matter if the TLW was vastly different from the book. Fact is, at least they had some guidance from the book to know where they were going with it. Crichton (spelled it right this time)couldn't even come up with an idea they could all agree on and walked away from it. Then you have the different directors and screenwriters and art directors as mentioned above, and no wonder it felt so different.
 
I like the kid's resourcefulness. It was much better than the screaming, whiny kids from the other movies. Did you want it to turn out he was dead?
I figured that maybe he had learned some survival skills from his mom's BF. But yeah thats stretching it. Still he was the best of the kids. The worst was the girl from TLW, with her BS anti-raptor gymnastics. :vulcan:

I like all 3 but the original is still the best of course. I like the 2d one for the action scenes & Pete P's badass hunter(who is amazingly not killed off) & the 3rd one for the awesome pteranodons.
 
Thanks for the replies.

I guess I'll check out The Lost World. I'll post my review a little later.:techman:
 
I love the series, but I hope someone does a more faithful version of the novel someday. The movie is perfect for what it is, but my life won't be complete until I see Muldoon blow up a raptor with a grenade launcher.

Oh wow, this. I've never thought about that before, but I would love to see a more faithful adaptation.

Whoever they'd cast as Muldoon wouldn't have to worry about dying this time, either, would they?
 
retrolostworld2.jpg


I finally saw The Lost World.

I thought it was very average compared to the first movie. It loses much of the magic of the first movie. The villain of the first movie was nature, while the second movie has the big evil company.

What I noticed right away was that almost all of the main cast is gone. Malcolm is back, but I thought he was better in the first movie. Here he has to babysit his daughter and girlfriend. Right away I realized how annoying they would be. I usually like Julianne Moore, but the character she plays here has to be one of the stupidest scientists ever. Why did she bring the baby dino into the truck? Why did she keep wearing the bloodstained jacket? I think it would have been better to get an entirely new cast if they couldn't use everyone. I kept wondering where Grant was the entire movie. It was so distracting.

The only character that I thought was cool was Roland, the hunter. That was mainly because of the actor.

Also the T-Rex in the city idea? Stupid. I don't know what the hell Spielberg was thinking. It felt way too much like Godzilla. The dinos should only be kept on the island. Once they brought it to the city it became another movie entirely. It was so obvious that the evil CEO guy would get eaten in the end.

The visual effects and the action scenes were very good. I don't have any complaints about that. The hunters chasing the dinosaur stampede and the scene with the two T-Rex parents pushing the truck over the cliff were amazing.

I don't regret watching it, but it was a big step down from the first movie. The first movie is endlessly rewatchable. I feel like once was enough for TLW.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top