Jurassic Park At 25 And The Marvel Of American Film-Making
They Spared No Expense
I had just turned 15 when the original Jurassic Park was released on June 11, 1993. While my older brother and his best friend sat at the back of the theater trying to act like they weren’t impressed, my best friend and I were completely blown away by it. If you ask me the most awe-inspiring theater experiences I’ve had in my life, this movie would be on the short list, competing with other sci-fi blockbusters like Back to the Future, Armageddon and Signs.
This, in spite of the fact that the acting performances are, for the most part, blah. Which is part of why this movie seems to be a small step behind others of its genre in my social circles. To be clear, Jeff Goldblum is delightful and outrageous (and as a person and actor, he has only gotten better with time). And I always enjoy watching Samuel L. Jackson and the man I’ll always known as Newman go to work on screen. But with no offense to Sam Neill and Laura Dern, the main roles hit me as pretty vanilla.
Hold On To Your Butts
Yet that doesn’t really matter. The stars of the movie and its subsequent sequels are clearly the dinosaurs and they are real (looking) and spectacular. And so, the original JP has aged extremely well in 25 years. Because it was so far ahead of its time. Seeing Spielberg’s dinosaurs interact with humans was an edge-of-your-seat thrill ride.
Two of their scenes caused me to grip the armrest of my theater seat so hard I almost blacked out: the first time the T-Rex shows up and the Velociraptor scene in the kitchen. Movie-making rarely gets that good to me.
Spielberg acknowledged a complaint (from his grandkids no less) that it took too long for the dinosaurs to appear in the first Jurassic Park, which he rectified in A Lost World. But in my opinion, the slow pace and calm for the first 30 minutes of the original only highlights the extreme terror of the T-Rex’s debut. The foreshadowing moment when Tim looks at the cup in the back of the vehicle and sees the drop of water every time the as yet unseen King of Dinosaurs takes a step rocks my soul every time I watch. I have goosebumps just thinking about it. Similarly, my heart can barely stand the face-off between the two kids and the Velociraptors. Especially after these extremely intelligent predators figure out how to open the kitchen door. It’s gloriously terrifying. I love it.
There are other aspects that make this movie exceptional to me. Like bits of dialogue, notably when Dr. Malcolm encounters the triceratops dung. And no doubt the main score, which is good enough to be a concert on its own. But this movie raked in the biggest opening weekend at the time and nearly dethroned E.T. for the biggest domestic run ever for one colossal reason: we had never seen dinosaurs look that legit before. We witnessed fantastic, unprecedented cinema.
“Later There’s Running…and Screaming…”
With a first installment like the one described above, Jurassic Park as a franchise entered a short list of movie series that get at least one view for every sequel from me, no matter how many there are or how awful they are. And admittedly I know all of the flaws for The Lost World and Jurassic Park III especially but I still enjoy them and have watched them repeatedly.
In The Lost World there are yet again uninspired performances (even the eventually entertaining Vince Vaughn) except for Jeff Goldblum and maybe the Hillbilly Jack dinosaur expert guy who comes in with the bad guys. But the new angle of having human villains along with dinosaur villains is an interesting twist. And the scene with the T-Rex attack on the crashed trailer, while not as good as the similar scene in the first one, is still riveting. Above all, I love the moment with the freighter carrying the T-Rex into San Diego crashes into the dock because it woke up and killed everyone on board. That’s fun cinema right there.
“You liked Dinosaurs back then.” “Back then they hadn’t tried to eat me yet.”
No doubt to me and many others, Jurassic Park III is the worst major film to ever have “Jurassic” in its name. As my nephew and mega Jurassic Park fan, Brett tells me, the dream sequence with Dr. Grant on the helicopter is “hilarious and terrible”. It’s like a 5-year old got to write one scene of the plot. But as stated, I still like this movie.
William H. Macy is great and as long as there are rampaging dinosaurs, I think I will find some of it redeeming. I particularly love the new species and the scene on the rickety old bridge in the fog. It’s heart-stopping and just a step below the similar scenes in the first one. And I really enjoy the running gag of the satellite phone ringing and how it eventually announces the presence of the enormous Spinosaurus (who had devoured it along with the person holding it) standing out in the open.
“Maybe you should include that in the brochure. Eventually one of these things will eat someone.”
Jurassic World should have been right up my alley and therefore I saw it opening weekend. The trailer promised a visually stunning thrill ride that would top its predecessors. And as I’ve written before, who doesn’t love Chris Pratt?
But it just didn’t deliver to me. It was visually stunning but it had more boring characters (Owen excepted), the weakest dinosaur terror scenes of the series and it was just a bit too over the top and chaotic at times. The original trilogy’s dinosaur attacks weren’t great because they were loud and untethered. But rather because they were they were thrilling, unpredictable and even at times humorous. Perhaps I have seen too many of these scenes by this point.
Even though it’s a better movie based on normal criteria, I think I’d rather watch the widely-panned third one. But I still want to watch this movie again. Why? Because it’s incredible cinematography.
“These creature were here before us. And if we’re not careful, they’ll be here after us.”
And that brings us to Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, released widely in the United States today. To be honest, the trailer for the most part looks like a tired mashup of plots from the previous four movies. And that worries me, since the last volume proves I may be getting a little bit of Jurassic Park fatigue. Yet some of it looks fresh and we do have the return of the inimitable Dr. Ian Malcom. And at the end of the day, it is Jurassic Park. So I will see it.
The original broke new ground and set a standard for movie-making that technology had to catch. And while the others have disappointed in general, I doubt I will ever turn down these cinematically perfected dinosaurs chasing humans on the big screen. Maybe this one will live up to the T-Rex sized expectations these movies create.
- Hamilton’s “It’s Quiet Uptown” and The Joy of Melancholy Music - May 9, 2022
- Gentle and Lowly: A Review Of The Most Celebrated New Christian Book - April 25, 2022
- For Math Nerds, On 3.14 Day: Why I Love Perfect Squares - March 14, 2022
2 thoughts on “Jurassic Park At 25 And The Marvel Of American Film-Making”
I love the first Jurassic Park. It still holds up today in every capacity. The effects were groundbreaking. Plus, it has tension, terror, humor, and heart. Just a nearly perfect film for the genre.
After that, things fell apart. Each of the subsequent “Jurassic” films has some redeeming qualities, but they are all very pale reflections of the first one.
I don’t disagree with that at all. I am going through them to prime myself to watch the new one while my wife is out of town later this week. And I watched Lost World yesterday and while the parts I noted above are still good, a lot of it – including the climax – is pretty yawn worthy. Part III I don’t think will strike me as any better this time either. I’ve seen it at least 5X and it is what it is. Although I just remembered that last phrase has been noted on REO before, and not for how eloquent it is. LOL.