News Sam Neill, Laura Dern, and Jeff Goldblum all return for Jurassic World 3!

[JD]

That was actually cooler than I expected to see the whole gang, or make that both gangs, together for the first time.

I never saw the 2nd (or 5th?) movie, but that wasn't a knock or a judgment against it, I just never saw it. But now I want to because I have to see the 3rd (6th?) one.

I think the next time this franchise is visited, and we all know it will be, it would probably be best for a straight-up franchise reboot rather than a continuation. I mean, where do you go from here? Dinosaurs in space?

I read on one of the entertainment sites recently that they said this is the end of this storyline, but not the end of the franchise.
I think having the dinos out in the wild opens of lots of possibilities for future movies. I could easily see them moving forward with another new cast.

By the way, for anyone who loves dinosaurs. You should check out the Dinosauria animated shorts on Youtube:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

They're gorgeous little vignettes of prehistoric life with some of the most accurate designs ever put to screen.

That looks pretty cool.
The trailer definitely got me excited, I actually liked the Fallen Kingdom, but this one already looks better.
They pretty much had me the moment we saw Pratt and co. on horseback rounding up dinos in the snow.
I'm really looking forward to seeing Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard, Jeff Goldblum, Sam Neil, and Laura Dern all onscreen together.
So many cool images in the trailer, like the dinos in the snow, the one attacking the crab pot, the T-Rex at the drive in, and the big winged dino attacking the plane.

 

[Awesome Possum]

It looks like they finally realized the appeal of these movies were majestic shots of dinosaurs and dinosaurs wrecking shit. I'm also guessing that Blue Jr will be the Baby Yoda of the movie. This is future of franchises, cute baby creatures getting into adorable hijinks.

 

[The Nth Doctor]

This is future of franchises, cute baby creatures getting into adorable hijinks.

I'm good with that.

 

[CaptainWacky]

So if this is a movie about dinosaurs over-running the Earth (I'm just going by the trailer) how will the human characters solve this crisis? Negotiate peace with the dinosaur leader?

 

[Trekker4747]

That was actually cooler than I expected to see the whole gang, or make that both gangs, together for the first time.

I never saw the 2nd (or 5th?) movie, but that wasn't a knock or a judgment against it, I just never saw it. But now I want to because I have to see the 3rd (6th?) one.

I think the next time this franchise is visited, and we all know it will be, it would probably be best for a straight-up franchise reboot rather than a continuation. I mean, where do you go from here? Dinosaurs in space?

You're probably better off skipping it, as a lot of it is a mess and characters make stupid decisions just so we can have the conclusion they wanted.

They knew where the movie began (Jurassic World is abandoned and then dinosaurs are still mostly restricted/kept to the island) and where they wanted it to end (Dinosaurs get to the mainland and run amuck) but they didn't know how to draw a coherent, straight, line. So you end up having to hate a little clone girl and smack your face at Bryce Dallas Howard and Chris Pratt.

Just know that the dinosaurs get to the mainland and are now running wild and don't worry about how.

I really enjoyed JW but FK was a mess that deflated my enthusiasm for this "new franchise." So I see this trailer and I'm skeptical and need some "assurances" from the theatrical trailer that I'm not being led on by a stuffed rabbit skin attached to a mechanism on the inner rail of the track.

I need to KNOW Dern, Goldblum and Neill are in this thing with significance and they're actually "trying" and matter to the story. And know that our characters are doing things that make sense.

But, really, I'm ready for a "gritty reboot." A more faithful adaptation of the original novel that incorporates more of what we know about dinosaurs with some good, solid, looking effects work.

The work in the JW movies looks good but also has a quality to it that just makes it looked like... "phoned in" CGI. It's hard to say that and not insult how time consuming and work goes in to any CGI for a major movie, but there's a clear difference between what you get in a movie where time, talent and effort goes into it ad opposed to just rushing some out to meet a deadline and schedule.

I dunno. Said a lot more here than I planned. Could be good, but we will see. I'm not longer a theater-goer (for multiple reasons) so when it hits streaming I'll probably give it a shot.

 

[DonIago]

I agree that the plot of FK, especially the last half hour or so, was intensely aggravating from a story perspective. IIRC I was mostly enjoying the film until then.

 

[Markonian]

So if this is a movie about dinosaurs over-running the Earth (I'm just going by the trailer) how will the human characters solve this crisis? Negotiate peace with the dinosaur leader?

I think dinos have some sort of Tyrant King.

 

[XCV330]

Frankly, every iteration of this franchise has lost my interest a little more each time, since the original, which in itself, if I'm being honest, was even more of a fluff piece for Spielberg than usual. The development of bigger & more elaborate CGI FX has actually done more to make these films less engaging imho, in the sense that when they did the 1st film, & the limitations of it were something which was a major concern in how it was implemented, they actually used them more sparingly, & therefore smarter. It's a lesson Spielberg learned well from his time on Jaws. Less is more, when you don't have the tools

Because of that, the blown out FX of these new movies don't do much for me. What they need is better personality as an overall production, & yes, a lot of that came from the original cast, but somehow, as with other similar series, I have a less than optimistic feeling that they can recapture that, with the new production model. Lord knows, none of these 3 actors could save a lackluster film just with their presence, & Bryce Dallas Howard, who I normally don't mind all that much, has a knack for sucking the life right out of these pictures, imho, & she's certain to return, I assume

I'm not sure what they have in store, but recapturing the glory days, while not impossible, seems unlikely to me

I loved the original, always will. My family loves it. Enough that I rented out a movie theater during 2020/covid and when we ere given a choice of movies to watch in the empty cinema, it was Jurasic Park. But yeah, it has just been down hill after that.

Jp2 was interesting, but not great (honestly the Super Nintendo JP game that came out around the same time, had a better plot. And a better soundtrack) . JP3 seemed to find its footing. It wasn't as good as the original, but interesting enough that I didn't feel cheated out of.

I liked JW while I was sitting there watching it, but just like going to an amusement park and seeing a ride made about your favorite movie. I probably forgot half the details within a week of walking to my car. I didn't bother with JW2 and if it's not free on a steaming service, I can't see myself going to the trouble of watching this one, either. I'm not sure it was really a plot that had enough in it to create this kind of franchise. It seems to be one that's hanging in there by force of will and ticket returns, not by any logical reason for its existence.

 

[Reverend]

I'm one of those grumpy bastards that didn't really like 'Jurassic World' (and 'Fallen Kingdom' just bored me) so I'll probably wait until this one comes on TV . . . assuming I remember it exists.

Honestly only the first movie was any good (though I have a soft spot for 'Lost World', silliness and all) so I can't say as I'm massively invested in this as a franchise. So in that sense at least I feel it's like Highlander . . . but with CG dinosaurs.

 

[fireproof78]

The original is always good. JW was pretty good.

The rest are not enjoyable.

 

[Reverend]

'Jurassic World' kinda left me cold. It felt like it was made by people that liked the original movie, but didn't really understand what actually made it good in the first place. So kinda like the JJ Abrams Star Wars movies.

Where it really lost me was the way the PA/babysitter was killed. That was just plain mean.
Like it felt like they were quoting the same beat with the T-Rex and the lawyer, except with him it's meant to feel like comeuppance. Disproportionate sure, but still in accordance with basic movie logic since he 1) was a greedy self-serving arsehole, and 2) he abandoned a pair of kids in mortal peril to hide in the loo.
They seemed to try and replicate that by having the kids not like her, but at the same time; 1) she's not a bad person 2) they slipped away from her, and 3) she's a sodding PA, not an actual qualified childminder who's boss is taking the piss lumbering her with her kids (nephews? I forget) when it's 100% not her job to be doing that.

 

[UssGlenn]

Where it really lost me was the way the PA/babysitter was killed. That was just plain mean.

They cut out all the scenes that were supposed to make you not like her, but then left in the gratuitous death, which was a bad idea.

 

[Saul]

I like the trailer but I'm kinda expecting this will be The Rise of Skywalker levels of disappointment. I don't think the movie can deliver what the trailer gave us. But I hope it will.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

So if this is a movie about dinosaurs over-running the Earth (I'm just going by the trailer) how will the human characters solve this crisis? Negotiate peace with the dinosaur leader?

One can only hope.

Please let the dinosaur leader be a T-Rex in a tie.

 

[Reverend]

They cut out all the scenes that were supposed to make you not like her, but then left in the gratuitous death, which was a bad idea.

Honestly it wouldn't make any difference to me if there's a deleted scene of her headbutting the little gobshites. (Well, it might make me liker her a little more . . .) Their Aunt (?) brought them there to spend time with her, then immediately pawns them off to some unfortunate employee who can't exactly say no. Even if those kids fall down a manhole on her watch, that's still on the Aunt for being a terrible guardian. Especially since I doubt the PA was police cleared and thus leaving children in her care at a place of business was probably illegal.

 

[fireproof78]

They cut out all the scenes that were supposed to make you not like her, but then left in the gratuitous death, which was a bad idea.

I love a YT reviewer's response to her death:
"What in the holiest of fucks did that woman do to piss of the director?"

 

[Trekker4747]

Especially since I doubt the PA was police cleared and thus leaving children in her care at a place of business was probably illegal.

.... Generally you don't have to clear someone with the police to leave your child with a baby sitter.



But, yeah, what they did worth the assistant was over the top in the movie we got. Maybe they could have made you hate her with some of additional scenes but in the movie as is? What they did with her felt out of right field.

 

[crookeddy]

You're actually expecting them to risk an R-rating here?

You need an R rating to be a monster movies? I don't know of any R rated Godzilla movies.

 

[Reverend]

.... Generally you don't have to clear someone with the police to leave your child with a baby sitter.

If you're a licensed childminder, then yes (in this country at least) they do need to be police cleared, otherwise; no licence. (same for bus drivers, teachers, basically anyone allowed to be left alone with other people's kids.) If it's a family member or friend of the family, it's not a problem. But leaving them with an employee like that? Not a wise move.

 

[Trekker4747]

If you're a licensed childminder, then yes (in this country at least) they do need to be police cleared, otherwise; no licence. (same for bus drivers, teachers, basically anyone allowed to be left alone with other people's kids.) If it's a family member or friend of the family, it's not a problem. But leaving them with an employee like that? Not a wise move.

That just seems... Strange to me. I mean, here (the US) yeah if you're in/operating a daycare or bus driver, teacher or something like that you've got to meet qualifications and standards and have a clean criminal record but it wouldn't be illegal for someone to just leave their kids with a friend or co-worker they trusted. I would think that'd make emergent situations kind of a hassle. When I was a kid and my mom gave birth to my brother I remember my parents leaving me with a neighbor. Are you telling me that kind of stuff is kind of looked down on? Or how is that friend of a family any different than a secretary/co-worker or something?

Again, just seems strange to me. No argumentative stance intended.

And, well, we're talking about Jurassic Park/World when do we even know what country it belongs too? (In the original movie I think Hammond *both* says he "owns" the island and "leases" it from some nation. Which is it, John? Do you own it or lease it?)

And the child-care issue would then fall under whatever the laws of that country are. (Unless the island is somehow independent in which case all bets are off.)

Whatever the case, IMHO, leaving the kids with the secretary was kind of a dick move on BDH's part but only from the stand point of them being left with her by her sister and her being their aunt and not wanting to spend time with them but we can assume the secretary was capable of watching over a teenage and pre-teen kid. It's not like they were grade-schoolers or toddlers or something they were at a self-sufficient age. And it was just bizarre for the movie to give her that death scene where in the final edit of the movie it's unjustified.