Read Mixed User Reviews for Jurassic World

6

DarkwingSchmuckJul 27, 2023

A dumb as bricks blockbuster that seems to embrace its dumbness. While not exactly the most groundbreaking work of cinema, Jurassic World does allow itself to have some fun with its concept. Add in some self-referential commentary on itselfA dumb as bricks blockbuster that seems to embrace its dumbness. While not exactly the most groundbreaking work of cinema, Jurassic World does allow itself to have some fun with its concept. Add in some self-referential commentary on itself and the nature of corporate mandated sequels, and what you have here is an admirable -- if not entirely successful -- piece of pop entertainment.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

alerikandersonApr 24, 2023

For me it's a bit overrated, but overall, it's dumb, entertaining, harmless fun to be had for a dinosaur movie.

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

Sosmooth1982Dec 31, 2022

They rebuild the theme park and claim its safe. You can't keep a bunch of Godzilla like dinosaurs contained.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

PseudocriticDec 5, 2022

Jurassic World es un pseudo-remake de Jurassic Park, pero que carece de la esencia de la película original, se nos introduce un nuevo concepto a la saga, al menos en las películas, que es los híbridos, el Indominus Rex cumple con su rol deJurassic World es un pseudo-remake de Jurassic Park, pero que carece de la esencia de la película original, se nos introduce un nuevo concepto a la saga, al menos en las películas, que es los híbridos, el Indominus Rex cumple con su rol de antagonista principal de manera eficiente, pero sin estar a la altura del T-Rex o el Spinosaurus… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

imthenoobJun 24, 2015

Jurassic World is a nostalgia kick that is good upon first viewing but it doesn't hold up as well when viewed multiple times. Pratt comes off too much as a cheesy action hero that it is hard to take him seriously. The rest of the cast left aJurassic World is a nostalgia kick that is good upon first viewing but it doesn't hold up as well when viewed multiple times. Pratt comes off too much as a cheesy action hero that it is hard to take him seriously. The rest of the cast left a lot more to be desired as well with no one really giving a good or memorable performance. And on top of this, We deal with a story that is cliched and predictable.

That being said, It succeeds in what it was trying to be. This is a dumb popcorn flick. It wasn't meant to be taken seriously or deep-dived into. It is fine even with its flaws. IMO, It's the best sequel in the franchise but that isn't saying much.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

geewahJul 22, 2022

A rather dull and cliche riddled popcorn blockbuster that is driven by it's CGI and very little else. Just a re-hash of the Jurassic Park movies in a new package.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

PerfectPortalJul 1, 2022

After a fourteen-year wait for another sequel, this was the biggest letdown of my entire life. Everything about it reeks of contempt for the original, and the arrogant belief that glossier equals better. It relies *far* too heavily on CGIAfter a fourteen-year wait for another sequel, this was the biggest letdown of my entire life. Everything about it reeks of contempt for the original, and the arrogant belief that glossier equals better. It relies *far* too heavily on CGI that’s so unconvincing it might as well be a cartoon.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

waywardlaserJun 28, 2022

The idea that dinosaurs would get boring within the span of a few years is hilarious to me. Ordinary zoos have existed for literal centuries.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

AV-Apr 28, 2022

this movie is alright. chris pratt is in this movie and is basically like ewan mcgregor in the prequels. he carries these films

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

HabibiehakimMar 10, 2022

Jurassic World is a real amusement park now, it looks great, it looks fun, but somehow someway it less exciting, why it less exciting? because Jurassic World fills with full of a boring people, boring story, sometimes cheesy dialogue, theJurassic World is a real amusement park now, it looks great, it looks fun, but somehow someway it less exciting, why it less exciting? because Jurassic World fills with full of a boring people, boring story, sometimes cheesy dialogue, the Dinosaur is mostly just too CGI for me, and of course nowadays film everything there have to be a romance, let's compare Jurassic World to the first Jurassic Park, in Jurassic Park we got Alan Grant and Ellie who is already a lovely couple yet they both adventurous and it works perfectly, in Jurassic World we got Owen and Claire still try to get their relationship and it just didn't work for me at all, also we got Ian in Jurassic Park which just the best, they don't have him or at least a character like him, the kids are both just boring, compare to the kids in Jurassic Park they are somehow someway fun and as exciting and as good as the other, the CGI in Jurassic Park feel more real than Jurassic World because at the time CGI are not look too animated so it still feel real, now? well you can see it from the movie and compare it to Jurassic Park, in the more positive way even though i'm not a big fan of all the character but i think they performance was not awful, not great too but they're all ok, the look of Jurassic World was great, the score was amazing, and the last battle scene was pretty darn cool, but still overall product i was unfortunately still have to say that for me Jurassic World is a dissapointing film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

twananNov 28, 2021

A pure popcorn-flick, the perfect summer blockbuster. That isn't what makes it bad, it's the fact that it's a sequel to Jurassic Park that leaves all the intriguing themes and moral questions in the ditch in favor of a fun monster movie.A pure popcorn-flick, the perfect summer blockbuster. That isn't what makes it bad, it's the fact that it's a sequel to Jurassic Park that leaves all the intriguing themes and moral questions in the ditch in favor of a fun monster movie.

PROS
- Production design (The park looks absolutely stunning, even though we see quite little of it)
- Michael Giacchino's score
- Some of the coolest dinosaur sequences in the franchise as of yet
- Indominus Rex design
- The "boyfriend" joke near the end of the film

CONS
- All the characters
- Stegosaurus design (lower tail)
- Realism is completely thrown out of the window
- Dumb and/or unnecessary plot elements
- Seems way too much like a kids movie

I was entertained, I guess.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

TropicalNayrMar 31, 2021

I would give this a 64%
The thing about this is they made the charters completely stupid at one part and then they made them the smartest person in the world it is not very realistic but it is thrilling and the acting is good.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

FilipeNetoMay 9, 2020

When I already considered the "Jurassic Park" franchise extinct, director Colin Trevorrow decided to bring it back in his first major feature film, that works as a sequel to existing films and was an audacious step for him.

The script isWhen I already considered the "Jurassic Park" franchise extinct, director Colin Trevorrow decided to bring it back in his first major feature film, that works as a sequel to existing films and was an audacious step for him.

The script is very easy to summarize and works as a sequel/reboot: the dubious legacy of John Hammond and InGen is acquired by Simon Masrani. He decides to rebuild the park, a short distance from the original facilities, renaming it Jurassic World. However, they used new dinosaurs in addition to the historical ones, created with genetic crossing. Of course, things get out of control again and everything ends up bad.

The worst of this film is extreme predictability. From the beginning, we know more or less what will happen and how it will end. It's just a matter of seeing the details. There are scenes that are truly copied from the previous films, with the addition of some make-up and effects to disguise a weak story and a recipe that has worn out a lot after three films. The lack of tension and sense of danger also disappoint. Even the worst sequels of "Jurassic Park" had moments where we felt that the characters could die there. Here, everything is artificial and controlled, like a video game.

The cast is, to say the least, irregular. I liked the performance of Bryce Dallas Howard and Chris Pratt, even though Howard appears in a character who takes a long time to gain our sympathy and who seems quite cold and disconnected from reality in the initial half. Irrfan Khan did a good job by giving life to Masrani, who looks like the mix of a utopian idealist and an unscrupulous capitalist. Less interesting, because totally empty of dramatic value, are the performances of Ty Simpkins and Nick Robinson, which only exist to be in danger and to be saved, by BD Wong and Vincent D'Onofrio, the cliché of cold individuals who only care about money, and Katie McGrath, who only exists to be eaten alive!

It is in the technical details and production values that we can guess how much money was actually invested in this film. The cinematography is very good, with good colors and some scenes and sequences impress by the visual beauty such as the landscapes of the new park, the scenes in the forest or even the walk between dinosaurs inside an electronic glass sphere. There are a lot of special effects and CGI involved, of very good quality. The sound effects, however, and particularly the roars, were recycled from previous films, as well as the soundtrack... but the soundtrack had to be present because it is one of the most iconic ever in cinema!

In conclusion ... the film is a production that probably would be excused, as it recycles a formula that has long lost interest in the expectation of making it attractive by throwing it money. It did not work well, with the irregular cast performance and the weak script, without life or emotion, being decisive for the failure. However, it was still able to entertain. You can see it once, but it's not a movie I'd like to revisit.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

NoahboyJul 13, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A mediocre movie that has terrible lighting and formulaic characters also has good performances, CGI, and action sequences.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Jaredc324May 15, 2019

It's cheesy, it's pointless and it's probably aiming at the wrong story points, but Jurassic World is a summer epic blockbuster that's simply embracing it's true colours of being just that, and savours in us re-engaged into the word ofIt's cheesy, it's pointless and it's probably aiming at the wrong story points, but Jurassic World is a summer epic blockbuster that's simply embracing it's true colours of being just that, and savours in us re-engaged into the word of dinosaurs once again.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

TyranianApr 11, 2019

Jurassic World is mostly a rehash of previous films in the series but done worse and is poorly written. Has some okay bits.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

evokingsMar 12, 2019

i wish more of the original cast was in it, I had mixed thoughts on this movie however kids might like it more, with that said, I'll give it a 5 out of 10.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

WhiskeyStoriesSep 20, 2018

This film grew on me a lot. At first I kinda hated it and felt like it was a dumb cash-grab, but after rewatching it I appreciated it a lot more. It's a much more self-aware and cynical sequel than I originally gave it credit for. I honestlyThis film grew on me a lot. At first I kinda hated it and felt like it was a dumb cash-grab, but after rewatching it I appreciated it a lot more. It's a much more self-aware and cynical sequel than I originally gave it credit for. I honestly think the first 20 minutes are great and the last 20 minutes are just pure dumb fun. Overall it's a very well made monster movie, with a dumb but enjoyable plot and kinda hollow, but fun characters. The main kid actor was kinda bad though.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

gzayas91Jul 21, 2018

This was okay, better than Lost World and JP3, but that's not saying much, this just a reboot cash grab, not my favorite.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

CTHReviewsJul 14, 2018

This is a decent science fiction flick, but its biggest problem (along with stupid plot devices like weaponizing raptors for the military) is that it doesn't feel like Jurassic Park. Everything from the holograms, to the gyrospheres, to theThis is a decent science fiction flick, but its biggest problem (along with stupid plot devices like weaponizing raptors for the military) is that it doesn't feel like Jurassic Park. Everything from the holograms, to the gyrospheres, to the very bright colors in this film make it feel more like a reboot of the franchise. And if you wanted to do a reboot, fine, but calling this a sequel to the original 1993 film is a bit hard for me to imagine.

At least with the new Star Wars films, there's an aesthetic that feels like the originals.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Highlander372Jul 11, 2018

I wasn’t a huge fan of this movie but it was definitely better than JP3. Jurassic World is a good and fun reboot to the franchise with likable characters, a decent plot, and a lot of entertaining dinosaur scenes.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

BradleyJordanJul 8, 2018

This movie was silly, the guys I went with were either bored, laughing, or modestly entertained. I’m kinda tough on action movies, so others in our group of 8 might give it a 5 or possibly 6.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

SrPepeJul 6, 2018

Jurassic World es una película que avanza muy lento, carente de sentido y con pocos momentos en el que realmente sentís la epicidad y el entorno de la peli.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

jb1296Jun 26, 2018

Jurassic World is a film which tries to lean on the Nostalgia of Jurassic Park and this film doesn't have nearly the quality of the original. This film while has strong performances from a good cast, there are too many issues with this filmJurassic World is a film which tries to lean on the Nostalgia of Jurassic Park and this film doesn't have nearly the quality of the original. This film while has strong performances from a good cast, there are too many issues with this film which stop me from liking it. The first issue is that the script lacks detail for the characters and they lack any development. The direction feels flat and doesn't feel like the director has done anything to make this film unique in anyone. The final issue which I will discuss here is that the CGI is some of the worst put into a big Hollywood blockbuster. These are the three main issues which this film has, but there is more. The narrative is boring and by the time the finale came around, I was bored by this film and didn't care. The finale isn't even that strong, Jurassic World is a disappointment and something which I will not watch a second time.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

LivingTribunalJun 26, 2018

Nice Try! I want to give them a point because they started something new, but the storyline is too boring and predictable.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

JP32Jun 17, 2017

There are more than a few nice moments where you get to enjoy the park as it was "intended". It's a shame then that by the end of the film, any fleeting sense of wonder that you might have felt is replaced with Call of Duty-esque sensory bombardment.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

MilesschabelJun 7, 2018

Defiantly A Film Of 2015. When I say that Jurassic World is one of the most shockingly bland film experiences I've ever had. The worst part of is how Jurassic world doesn't do anything particularly interesting to mention. It's the boring filmDefiantly A Film Of 2015. When I say that Jurassic World is one of the most shockingly bland film experiences I've ever had. The worst part of is how Jurassic world doesn't do anything particularly interesting to mention. It's the boring film audience as a movie… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Hurricane16Feb 4, 2018

Predictable, but if you turn off your brain and ignore all the product placement, it can actually be really fun

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

DalekJun 13, 2015

I'll try and keep this as short as I can. Jurassic World is a fantastic film, but you should go in with arms wide open, and try not to think too much of it's previous films. It's as simple as that.

Jurassic World suffers a few clichés and aI'll try and keep this as short as I can. Jurassic World is a fantastic film, but you should go in with arms wide open, and try not to think too much of it's previous films. It's as simple as that.

Jurassic World suffers a few clichés and a couple of moments that you'll expect. But Jurassic World was still a great film despite those flaws. I would have rated this film an 8, but because of the fantastic soundtrack I've given this a sold 9.

If you're of course going in to see explosions, guns, people being eaten, ripped to shreds, that's what you're going to see. But if you're going into the cinema expecting a complex storyline and well developed characters. Then maybe you shouldn't go and watch it.

Anyway, I personally thought that Jurassic World was a fantastic film, Chris Pratt did a great job on his role, and so did Bryce Howard. Ty Simpkins and Nick Robinson, eh... Well, they did ok for the most part.

The overall film was very detailed and immersive, which is another thing that I liked a lot about the film as well. The storyline again, not really complex, you kind of know what's going to happen.

That's all there is to it. Just expect lots of action, and some thrill.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Miles_SDec 15, 2017

World can provide some cheap thrills and is generally well made, but Howard gives a weak performance with Pratt also being wasted. That said, they look like their doing way better work in the sequel, but don't watch this movie for the characters.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

JLuis_001Sep 6, 2017

Although I understand that Jurassic Park is considered a classic and an endearing film in the memory of many people, the favorite of many because of their childhood, personally for me was always a very bland film, because beyond the dinosaursAlthough I understand that Jurassic Park is considered a classic and an endearing film in the memory of many people, the favorite of many because of their childhood, personally for me was always a very bland film, because beyond the dinosaurs the film did not had something else to offer.
And what is happening with Jurassic World? The same.

Jurassic World is a blockbuster in all its forms but failed in its execution, weak in script and weak in its development, throughout the whole film the feeling of deja vú will be inevitable, because in spite of its visual achievements, Jurassic World is basically Jurassic Park updated.

I honestly recommend it because I know it will be fun for most people and I have always stressed that cinema is also about that, so I recommend it. On the other aspects, there is much to be done.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

Eagle16Aug 17, 2017

And this is the reason why I no longer watch movies. It's no longer magical like first Jurassic Park or even the second one. This movie offers annoying characters who played in 200 other movies and they simply don't fit their roles. They noAnd this is the reason why I no longer watch movies. It's no longer magical like first Jurassic Park or even the second one. This movie offers annoying characters who played in 200 other movies and they simply don't fit their roles. They no longer know what the movie should be about so they put raptors in the movie who are tameable... They put in the movie fully working park with dozens of kids who are not even a little bit scared by dinosaurs. They train dinosaurs for their watter shows like if they were some pets. I'm very familiar with the critics score of 59 because it doesn't deserve any more. It's a movie with dumb dialogues, annoying actors and actresses. This movie is like any other movies today, simply put fan favorite actors in, make great looking CGI, great effects, and additionally put everything crazy in the movie like new fictional dinosaurs and raptors who do as master orders... And the story and the point of the movie is somewhere thrown in the rubbish bin somewhere arround, nobody heard about it... This is what makes your box offcie today, just say everything is more in the trailer and bunch of dumbasses will love it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

SuperAquaLuigiMar 9, 2017

It's been almost 2 years since this came out and I last saw it. I don't remember much, and that's the problem. What I do remember wasn't anything special, either. The effects aren't groundbreaking anymore, the characters aren't interestingIt's been almost 2 years since this came out and I last saw it. I don't remember much, and that's the problem. What I do remember wasn't anything special, either. The effects aren't groundbreaking anymore, the characters aren't interesting (with the exception of Chris Pratt), and none of them get much development. The story is kind of dumb, too. Why did they finish the park after everything that happened before? Why did they think it would be a good idea to make the Indominus Rex (or whatever it's called)? Why were people losing interest in DINOSAURS?! The movie at least had a little good action, but not enough, and I didn't like much else in the movie. Seeing the original Jurassic Park for the first time recently only makes these flaws more glaring, since it's so much better.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

BITESCREENJun 22, 2017

Ein Hightech-Dino-Freizeitpark, ein ausgedachter Supersaurier und 22.000 Besucher als Freiwild – dass Jurassic World sich weit vom wegweisenden Erstling entfernt, überrascht nicht. Dass Colin Trevorrows aufgeblasenes Revival aber schlechterEin Hightech-Dino-Freizeitpark, ein ausgedachter Supersaurier und 22.000 Besucher als Freiwild – dass Jurassic World sich weit vom wegweisenden Erstling entfernt, überrascht nicht. Dass Colin Trevorrows aufgeblasenes Revival aber schlechter ist als der schon unspektakuläre Vorgänger, schon. Bereits ganz zu Anfang beweist Trevorrow sein fehlendes Fingerspitzengefühl: Michael Giacchinos supermarkanter John-Williams-Filmscore begleitet völlig banale Szenen, während der obligatorische Einführungsflug über Isla Nublar mit einem schlecht gemachten Helikopter die nicht immer gelungenen Spezialeffekte andeutet. Dann bricht der erste Dino aus – und mit ihm die starke Mitte des Films, in der Echsenneuling Indominus Rex mit Kindern Fußball spielt, Chris Pratt und Bryce Dallas Howard wie im klassischen Abenteuerfilm hitzig-witzig flirten und sogar der alte Jurassic Park mal vorbeischaut. Schlussendlich jedoch geht mit ironiefrei-dämlichen Dialogen, ideenloser Action und chaotisch geschnittenen Godzilla-Saurierkämpfen wieder alles zum Teufel. So taugt Jurassic World höchstens noch als weitgehend unterhaltsamer Blockbuster für Kinder, denen Steven Spielberg kein Begriff ist.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

akino3Jun 2, 2017

Let's see... The pros:
- Dinosaurs all looked and reacted great
- Chris Pratt and B.D. Howard nailed it - That one a**hole who makes everything worse was there, as usual - Everything happened too damn quickly! Like reading a good book, thisLet's see... The pros:
- Dinosaurs all looked and reacted great
- Chris Pratt and B.D. Howard nailed it
- That one a**hole who makes everything worse was there, as usual
- Everything happened too damn quickly! Like reading a good book, this movie ended in a heartbeat.

The cons:
- The children. Their script and their acting messed this up big time for me.
- Some bad attempt at kiss jokes and humor in a thriller
- Dinosaurs dying to protect our stars? No f***ing way! Writers get outta here!
- Everything happened too damn quickly! How thrilling it could have been if there were some hide and seek games, some "you are on your own, figure it out" moments, some holding breath... I'm saying a horror major could have been amazing here.

Bottom line: Why the hell aren't we entitled to have a bone-chilling horror movie with dinosaurs and why must we suffer this family crap?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

43in2014Aug 3, 2016

Background: I have watched the three previous Jurassic Park films, the first in the cinema, but I do not remember where I saw the other two. The first was great, the second, average and the third, good. This review is based on a TV viewing.Background: I have watched the three previous Jurassic Park films, the first in the cinema, but I do not remember where I saw the other two. The first was great, the second, average and the third, good. This review is based on a TV viewing.

Pros: None. (If you think I could at least have given a point for the dinosaurs, no. Go watch Jurassic Park. There's nothing new here!)

Cons:
(1) The whole film takes implausibility to the extreme, including the:
(a) Implausible dinosaur behaviour of a dino-cidal Indominous Rex and train-able raptors. Hah!;
(b) Implausible human behaviour of the dislikable female lead, the bumbling CEO, the lecherous brother and the cliched war-profiteer; and
(c) Implausibility of how a theme park like that could have been given the approval to operate, considering all the safety issues. You have a Mosasaurus in a giant pool/lake where people can fall into, fields with giant dinosaur where visitors are allowed to drive themselves around, etc.

(2) The film has this comical scene where our characters had to move left and right to avoid being killed by dinosaurs as the latter go about attacking other dinosaurs and the humans. This is in the tradition of the three previous films. It was already stale by the second film and it it had definitely gone bad by now!

(3) If you hadn't gotten the drift by now, the writing is poor and lazy. The directing is not any better. What a missed opportunity to reboot the franchise.

(4) Have I mentioned, how I hate House Prices Dallas in this film?

Who would think the film is great? Children.
Who would think the film is only so-so? Young adults.
Who would think the film is lousy? Old adults.

Rating: 2/5 (no half scores). Do not bother to even watch it on TV. It felt tedious to watch it on TV.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

5

BerCJun 3, 2016

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The artistic medium of film is very subjective. Every audience member has a different set of criteria they use to measure their viewing experience. Not everyone shares the same set of criteria. If we did, what a bland and uninspired world this would be.

What I Personally Liked About "Jurassic World":
I really enjoyed the performance of Bryce Dallas Howard. She's a consummate professional who gives us a fairly well rounded character and her interactions with Irrfan Khan (as Masrani) are priceless. Nick Robinson and Ty Simpkins are also very good younger actors who involve themselves with their roles instead of allowing themselves to be dragged along for the ride. We also get a small sense of wonder at the scope of the theme park through their eyes which we haven't really felt since Sam Neill and Laura Dern first stepped foot in the original park back in 1993. Another thing I really like is the fact that the makers of the film more honestly own up to the genetic differences between their engineered dinosaurs and the real deal from millions of years ago. A lovely summation delivered by BD Wong's character sees to that.

What I Personally Disliked About "Jurassic World":
In the first half hour of this film, the writers seem to repeat themselves in their dialogue far too often. The same exposition feels like it's given on five or six different occasions and that is just a boring way to introduce your characters and set up your future angles. The first film let scenarios develop naturally and this fourth installment of the franchise would have done well to learn from its originator. Also, what is with Chris Pratt all of a sudden. It seems like the guy came out of nowhere and is now the manufactured flavor of the decade. The mass market audience might eat him up but those who crave real acting skills will be left with hunger pangs. When his inevitable crash and burn from pretty boy front man happens, it is going to be painful to watch (think Shia LaBeouf). Something else that really took me out of the film was the unnecessarily over-the-top death of Katie McGrath's character Zara. Seriously, a more innocent role has never had a less deserving death than hers. Next time do the cinematic world a favor and kill off Pratt instead. Sadly, there are a few other over-the-top moments as well, but there is very little sustainable tension for a two-hour movie. There should be a constant threat to our leading men and women instead of just sporadic bursts of dino danger. It really undermines the urgency of their situation on the island. Finally, the Indominus Rex itself takes center stage on my list of personal dislikes. This thing looks like a reject from the 1998 "Godzilla" atrocity when compared to the other beasts in this movie. All the build-up in the world couldn't stop the creature who was supposed to be the film's star attraction from being a hokey gimmick that limits the suspense value of key sequences. When it first attacked the team carrying the non-lethal weaponry, it felt like a joke. You're supposed to make your audience scream in terror at an attack such as that one, not pee their pants from laughing so hard. The long-awaited cameo appearance from the Tyrannosaurus Rex at the finale of the film is an all-too brief blessing.

My Overall Impression of "Jurassic World":
Between Chris Pratt and the Indominus Rex, there's just too much cheese on my burger. It makes it hard to taste the meat and really, the meat is what you're paying for. This sequel is the slightest of notches beneath "The Lost World: Jurassic Park" in terms of its level of enjoyment. The filmmakers should have been aiming much higher than that.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

Aaron_WassermanJun 1, 2016

To start, I am not a Jurassic Park person, I saw the first movie years ago and meh it was ok. I had no expectations going into this movie, and it was meh as well. Pratt and Howard give decent performances and the visuals are nice, but a veryTo start, I am not a Jurassic Park person, I saw the first movie years ago and meh it was ok. I had no expectations going into this movie, and it was meh as well. Pratt and Howard give decent performances and the visuals are nice, but a very redundant story that doesn't warrant its existance… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

McgillacuddyMay 19, 2016

It's hard to judge it fairly, but it is fair to say that the premise of Jurassic World is highly similar to previous releases, and that being dinosaur chaos and human survival. Still better than JP3, though.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

sicranoApr 8, 2016

...................................................................................................................................................vERY WEAK........ Blockbuster

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

FilmClubMar 27, 2016

Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard and Vincent D'Onofrio star in the franchise's first installment in 14 years.

Intensely self-conscious of its status as a cultural commodity even as it devotedly follows the requisite playbook forChris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard and Vincent D'Onofrio star in the franchise's first installment in 14 years.

Intensely self-conscious of its status as a cultural commodity even as it devotedly follows the requisite playbook for mass-audience blockbuster fare, Jurassic World can reasonably lay claim to the No. 2 position among the four series entries, as it goes down quite a bit easier than the previous two sequels. The 14-year layoff since the last one may well have helped, in that the new film's perspective on antiseptic, theme park-style tourism and relentless commercialization, while hardly radical, plainly announces its makers' sense of humor about their own project's multifaceted mercantile motives. Although not terribly scary, and closer to PG than R in its frights and gore, Universal's big summer action release is sufficiently toothsome to make audiences everywhere happy for a return visit to a once-wild world that superficially looks as safe and domesticated as a Universal Studios tour.

The latest unlikely suspects to make the jump from quirky niche low-budget fare to big studio extravaganza filmmaking, director Colin Trevorrow and his screenwriting partner Derek Connolly in 2012 made the disarmingly offbeat and fringe-dwelling Safety Not Guaranteed, which scarcely looked like the kind of thing that would punch anyone's ticket for the cinematic planet occupied and significantly owned by Steven Spielberg. For this outing, at least, Trevorrow has sidelined slow-burn drollery in favor of the requisite five-speed transmission and booming speaker system. But while the scale and generic nature of this sort of franchise endeavor almost inevitably homogenizes a variable amount of a personal filmmaker's imprint, Trevorrow would seem to suggest that he has not irrevocably gone over to the other side but, rather, is testing some different waters for fun and profit.

It can also have only helped that the other screenwriters, Rick Jaffa and Amanda Silver, had so smartly navigated a new approach to another recent sci-fi franchise about allegedly docile beasts gone wild with the new Planet of the Apes series. The first wise move was pretending that The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) and Jurassic Park III (2001) never existed and that the world depicted here descends directly from Spielberg's 1993 adaptation of Michael Crichton's novel.

Despite the story's formulaic structure and the predictable nature of its cautionary stance on playing God, the old-fashioned Saturday matinee-like pleasures stemming from resourceful derring-do in the face of mighty odds retain an appeal — if done reasonably well — which is the case here. The action only occasionally rises to rousing, and the romance, such as it is, between the watered-down Indiana Jones type appealingly played by Pratt and the corporate mouthpiece less engagingly embodied by Howard, never gets off the ground. What's more, the two brothers are thinly drawn, with the older one in particular remaining off-putting for far too long behind his ever-present earphones.

Still, there's a certain low-key affability about Trevorrow's approach that marks him a likeable humanist rather than a director determined to hammer the viewer into submission, which unfortunately is what you feel with too many giant franchise projects such as this. This is, after all, a story about humankind's fallibility, hubris and inclination to bring destruction upon itself, and one at least feels little tremors of this awareness leaking out between the creatures' deafening stomps and roars.

On the whole, the film successfully steers clear of a significant CGI look and Michael Giacchino's score skillfully takes certain cues from John Williams' prior series work but develops a pronounced character of its own.

A serviceable stab at Spielberg's franchise… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

AaronWasserman1Mar 26, 2016

To start, I am not a Jurassic Park person, I saw the first movie years ago and meh it was ok. I had no expectations going into this movie, and it was meh as well. Pratt and Howard give decent performances and the visuals are nice, but a veryTo start, I am not a Jurassic Park person, I saw the first movie years ago and meh it was ok. I had no expectations going into this movie, and it was meh as well. Pratt and Howard give decent performances and the visuals are nice, but a very redundant story that doesn't warrant its existance… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

6

damien_k98Feb 5, 2016

Nothing new here, the CGI looked like garbage, the characters are super cliched, the plot lacks any depth, too many unnecessary subplots, and tries to be something bigger than it needs to be. While I do give the film a 6/10 due to the epicNothing new here, the CGI looked like garbage, the characters are super cliched, the plot lacks any depth, too many unnecessary subplots, and tries to be something bigger than it needs to be. While I do give the film a 6/10 due to the epic action scenes, nostalgic moments, and that it is still better than the godawful Lost World and Jurassic Park 3.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

LEFTMAN67Feb 3, 2016

Jurassic World is a monster! it has a overall theme of "let's remember the old movies". Yes it does that, but also creates new moments only this series can give you with dinosaurs. The wow factor stays the same and Chris Pratt maybe a littleJurassic World is a monster! it has a overall theme of "let's remember the old movies". Yes it does that, but also creates new moments only this series can give you with dinosaurs. The wow factor stays the same and Chris Pratt maybe a little more serious than i wanted him to be at times ,but the story had him everywhere like he's some superhero. overall it had me sitting in my seat and wanting me not to leave it until the credits roll.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

FilmMasterEdJan 7, 2016

It has been 22 years since Jurassic Park ushered in the modern age of computer generated imagery, becoming the first motion picture to use the then-cutting edge special effects technology to astound and amaze us. Director Steven SpielbergIt has been 22 years since Jurassic Park ushered in the modern age of computer generated imagery, becoming the first motion picture to use the then-cutting edge special effects technology to astound and amaze us. Director Steven Spielberg allowed us to believe that dinosaurs were real. Repetition made the second Jurassic Park installment, 1997's The Lost World, a step down and Universal's decision to cut the budget for the third movie, 2001's Jurassic Park III, seemingly put an end to the saga. However, after a 14-year gap, the T-Rexes, velociraptors, and their ilk are back. With Spielberg executive producing and Colin Trevorrow behind the lens, it's time to again return to a universe where amber-encased prehistoric mosquitoes have made it possible for extinct creatures to roam.

Jurassic World features only one returning character from the original trilogy - BD Wong as Dr. Henry Wu - but that's not a drawback. All the necessary types are in place: Chris Pratt's Owen and Bryce Dallas Howard's Claire fill the heroic roles, Ty Simpkins' Gray and Nick Robinson's Zach are the annoying kids, Irrfan Khan is John Hammond's successor, and Vincent D'Onofrio is the unappealing military-type with his own agenda. Really, though, the Jurassic Park movies have never been about the human beings, be they Sam Neill's Alan Grant or Jeff Goldblum's Ian Malcom. They have been about the dinosaurs. Jurassic World features plenty of call-backs to Jurassic Park (including, I assume, the same T-Rex) but there are no cameos for Neill or Goldblum.

Despite having a slim resume (the quirky indie Safety Not Guaranteed), Trevorrow handles Jurassic World like a pro. He hits all the right notes, giving the two-dimensional characters as much heft as they deserve (which isn't much) and handling the action sequences like a seasoned veteran of Hollywood tent pole features. He references countless other monster movies, including obvious ones like King Kong and Godzilla and less evident choices like The Birds and (especially) Aliens. His style is part Spielberg/part Cameron.

Although this is essentially a big budget monster movie, the filmmakers aren't above a little social commentary/satire. They identify a vexing challenge faced by amusement parks: always having to amp up the thrill level of the attractions to lure back easily bored customers. This could also be seen as an observation about sequels in general and the Jurassic Park films in particular. One T-Rex was enough for the first film. Now, three movies later, we need the bigger, badder I-Rex. Jurassic World also takes some none-too-subtle jabs at corporate sponsorship and borrows from Aliens when reflecting on the military-industrial complex and how the soldier's mindset considers weaponizing dinosaurs.

Composer Michael Giacchino recognizes the importance of embracing John Williams' iconic themes rather than jettisoning them (as was done in Man of Steel). Guacchino gives us not only full orchestral renditions of the most noteworthy music but more subdued interpretations when those are appropriate. The dino-effects, both CGI and animatronic, are superior to those in the earlier Jurassic Park movies but that's not surprising considering how much things have advanced over the years. The 3-D is an utter and complete waste and is best avoided. It exists only because of the Hollywood mindset that all summer blockbusters must be released in 3-D to be considered legitimate.

Jurassic World leaves open the door for future installments but, while this is an enjoyable popcorn experience, it works best as a stand-alone follow-up. Trevorrow and his co-screenwriters deserve credit for milking two more worthwhile hours out of the Jurassic Park idea but there's nowhere else for the concept to go. It's played out. Another sequel would be folly. That's a future consideration, however (likely to be determined exclusively by $$). For now, there's only Jurassic World, which has taken the fossilized remains of a beloved franchise and given it a new life than many doubtlessly thought impossible.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

RatedRexJan 7, 2016

Entertaining popcorn escapism, That's what "Jurassic World" is. Nothing more, nothing less. If you expect to be blown away like you were when you first saw "Jurassic Park", forget it. This movie was made to take us away from the real worldEntertaining popcorn escapism, That's what "Jurassic World" is. Nothing more, nothing less. If you expect to be blown away like you were when you first saw "Jurassic Park", forget it. This movie was made to take us away from the real world for a couple of hours, and to enhance the pocketbooks of all the folks who were involved in its making. So check your brain at the door and enjoy.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

eagleeyevikingJan 5, 2016

Jurassic World doesn't match up to the original but is nevertheless a hugely entertaining slice of summer blockbuster filmmaking that is bound to bring the Jurassic franchise roaring back to life. 6.5/10

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

MoviebuffreviewDec 26, 2015

It starts off rough, and it lacks the sense of awe that the original had, and the characters start off as shallow and uninteresting. Once Jurassic World gets going, it manages to be a fun Blockbuster with cool action sequences and excitingIt starts off rough, and it lacks the sense of awe that the original had, and the characters start off as shallow and uninteresting. Once Jurassic World gets going, it manages to be a fun Blockbuster with cool action sequences and exciting moments, but ultimately, the entire experience feels shallow and disappointing.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

AWassermanDec 20, 2015

I am not a big fan of the Jurassic franchise so I had 0 expectations going into this movie. Maybe that's why the let down didn't bother me. The movie had it's moments of fun and had it's moments of boredom and rehash. There was not a singleI am not a big fan of the Jurassic franchise so I had 0 expectations going into this movie. Maybe that's why the let down didn't bother me. The movie had it's moments of fun and had it's moments of boredom and rehash. There was not a single likable character in this movie. I am sorry Chris Pratt fans, I didn't give a crap for his performance, it was fine but nothing special or notable. The plot and script could have used a ton of work, it was full of plot convinces just so the movie could happen. Count me out for the next Jurassic movie because we all know it's going to happen, but the next one, like this one, will be nothing more than a cash grab.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AnnatarYoungDec 2, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Jurassic World, though not even stand close to the giant shoulders of it's progenitor, Jurassic Park, delivered in a way I had not expected it to. It successfully acknowledged the impact of the original film and I feel Director Colin Trevorrow understood that he would never be able to recapture that feeling of awe and wonder the original instilled in our hearts (the scene where the Brachiosaurus stands on it's two hind legs and grabs food from the tree springs to mind) and so instead chose to create a more modern installment to the Jurassic Park franchise.

Though at first I thought the Indominous Rex was an unnecessary addition to the film, I did eventually come to understand what significant role it played as part of the franchise, adding a modern element to the Dinosaurs (having been utterly genetically engineered) by reckless science in tandem with the massive modernization (and even futurism) of the facility itself.

The Human characters themselves were utterly arbitrary additions and generally this film lacked in any kind of solid plot or good storytelling. This was a film built for spectacle and on that front, it certainly delivered.

All in all, this wasn't a bad film but I would recommend leaving your brain and your expectations at home if you're planning on watching it.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

DanielwWhiteNov 27, 2015

This movie is exactly what everyone thought it would be. Awesome graphics and animations of dinosaurs with huge explosions. Chris pratt does a great job but the story line has a lot of holes and is very vanilla.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AlmostearlyNov 19, 2015

As a fan of the first one and only the first one, I see this movie as an "let's just move on" type. The characters in 'Jurassic World' aren't anything new and I'm talking about the kids in particular. I found these two mysterious kids as aAs a fan of the first one and only the first one, I see this movie as an "let's just move on" type. The characters in 'Jurassic World' aren't anything new and I'm talking about the kids in particular. I found these two mysterious kids as a left over that I don't even think I'll remember them, although it's confirmed that there will be another one. Chris Pratt felt kinda flat and to me he was really boring character, which I don't consider him a badass in my awesome mind. And Bryce Dallas Howard gives nothing special throughout the whole film. Now let's just move on to the action sequences. It gives it all, and it's more violent than the last three films which it did a great job in that. And the last fight, it felt real and gives you the suspense face. I'm just going to leave this review here and hopefully it doesn't cause hate.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

sanyrubNov 15, 2015

Very basic entertainment. How can the original one, the real classic, almost look better than this one when it was created 20 years ago??? Too much CGI, too much of silly plot, too much of old-fashioned role for the woman character. ZeroVery basic entertainment. How can the original one, the real classic, almost look better than this one when it was created 20 years ago??? Too much CGI, too much of silly plot, too much of old-fashioned role for the woman character. Zero depth. And I don´t even think Chris Pratt is that charming (let alone a good actor, I have yet to see proof of that). Absolutely appalling that this movie ended being so successful at the box office, and like out of nowhere because nobody expected it. Transformers teas LOL Seriously, 2015 has ended being a way worse year for films than 2012, 2013 and 2015. When it comes to blockbusters, Mad Max has saved the year. Totally.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

4

Ataraxic89Nov 9, 2015

Its just so many hollywood cliches per minute. All the forced character development is really annoying.

Start of movie: two brothers who dont get along (young, kids, main characters), two sisters who dont get a long, one doesnt spend anyIts just so many hollywood cliches per minute. All the forced character development is really annoying.

Start of movie: two brothers who dont get along (young, kids, main characters), two sisters who dont get a long, one doesnt spend any time with family (the main character one), a marriage about to fall apart. Oh and two people (chris prat and main woman, who is also that sister who doesnt spend time with family) who went on one date and didnt like each other.

End of movie: Brothers are closer than ever, sisters are closer than ever, marriage crisis averted, and of course they fell in love somehow even though they pretty much hated each other the whole movie.

Nothing in the events of the movie actually moved any of these relationships along. they just got written to change with no explanation or reasonable on screen motive.

And just lots of really stupid "bad horror movie" stuff by people for no reasons. Its just hard to watch. I guess the dinosaur was cool.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

6

acaiberryNov 8, 2015

I'll be honest, Im a big Chris Pratt fan and although this movie put him more and more in the spotlight, the movie itself did not stand out.

Plot was solid. not going to argue it , a little predictable but what else can you do in a movieI'll be honest, Im a big Chris Pratt fan and although this movie put him more and more in the spotlight, the movie itself did not stand out.

Plot was solid. not going to argue it , a little predictable but what else can you do in a movie like this.
Acting was okay, the lead actress pissed me off a little and all the assumedly jokes of the movie didn't really was mediocre at best.
It gets a 6 though because it was worth watching the first time but Id never watch it again if I had the choice (unfortunately I did).

Movies have come a long way and it does its fair share of good action and use of CGI and other high tech media effects.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

BikerjamesNov 2, 2015

You really have to watch Jurassic World by putting all your sense of realism in your back pocket and not think too much about it. There are so many implausibilities you finally come to the conclusion the filmmakers were trying to make a goodYou really have to watch Jurassic World by putting all your sense of realism in your back pocket and not think too much about it. There are so many implausibilities you finally come to the conclusion the filmmakers were trying to make a good "B" film. At one point a boy jumps in a lake, then a few minutes later his brother asks him "do you still have those matches", and the boy takes out a matchbox, which would have gotten soaking wet and ruined, but they are somehow perfectly dry. Then these two young boys get a jeep started and running perfectly that has been sitting for 20 years. I don't know how they could put air in the tires, much less start the engine. Dinosaurs actually talk to each other in this film. I could go on and on as many people have done. In the end I was entertained enough to make it to the end, but because it is simply a rehash of the original I can't give it a very high rating.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

mazewaxieOct 29, 2015

Jurassic World is a good movie. It has got a good cast, good CGI, the story isn't bad at all, but it can't equal the magic of the first Jurassic Park.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

OzzieVikingOct 8, 2015

The movie does seem slightly crappy at first, but it climaxes to a better ending than the 3rd one. But the storyline seems recycled, some love-happy kid and his annoying brother go to a park, the kid rebels and gets them both into trouble,The movie does seem slightly crappy at first, but it climaxes to a better ending than the 3rd one. But the storyline seems recycled, some love-happy kid and his annoying brother go to a park, the kid rebels and gets them both into trouble, some official has to save them and gets killed in the process and some low life goes to save them and succeeds and gets with the relative of the two. Where have I seen that before? But the movie is decent and watchable.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

MeritCobaOct 1, 2015

'Just show some bleeding dinosaurs' someone must have shouted after the millionth rewrite of the script and so this movie is bucketful with cool looking cgi. I have no beef with cgi and the critters, small and large, look impressive for'Just show some bleeding dinosaurs' someone must have shouted after the millionth rewrite of the script and so this movie is bucketful with cool looking cgi. I have no beef with cgi and the critters, small and large, look impressive for this day and age. Give me some more.

The MacGuffin is a mini Godzilla, a human created predator broken loose and on the prowl. Godzilla is a very smart cookie and possessed with the mentality of a rabid dingo on a blood drive, always an ideal combination for a predator the size of a small hill. It wants braaaiins..eh blood.. lots and lots and mostly human at that.

Godzilla is also blessed with various other advantages, such as being bullet proof and being provided with a 10000 mega whack density field, which makes living things increasingly more dense the closer they get to the big meat eater. Humans tend to behave in remarkably stupid ways when near the monster. Like there is this guy handling a gatling machinegun who fails to make proper use of it even though it should not be too hard to hit a thirty feet tall creature with it.. Also whenever anyone has a gun that he or she might shoot the big creature with, he or she forgets to use it or just misses the giant monstrosity.. and even whey they finally manage to hit it by firing lots and lots of bullets, they just bounce off the armored hide..

During the movie Godzilla realizes how pathetic the screaming hairless monkeys really are and tasks itself to end their suffering by biting their heads off. Make the pain go away! It must have thought, after it consulted the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) IV. It also manages to convince a bunch of raptors to assist it in its noble goal. And they even get assistance of a flock of flying dinosaurs who dutifully lift some of the hairless monkeys and toss them into a big basin where a huge whale like dinosaur has just finished eating a large white shark and appreciates the humans for afters.

Meanwhile there is a red haired profit oriented control freak, who is the female lead, who convinces the free spirited motor bike enthusiast dinosaur whisperer male lead to forgo a potential shag in his rickety-rackety outhouse so as to help her save some kids from being eaten by the nasty big thunder lizard. We can then witness the embarrassing trite acting of these two as the stuck up biatch mellows into pools filled with tear eyed admiration when the biker drives into the jungle accompanied by his raptor buddies to stop that big brute.

When the raptors betray his trust he has to high tail it out of there, but somewhat later the lizard whisperer convinces the raptors to become suicidal and attack Godzilla again. Which works as expected: killing the little buggers, until biatch incites a T-rex to stop Godzilla from eating the last one. Everyone tries to follow this big fight on their handhelds and mobiles, only to discover that at random moments they fail. What a bummer, they must have thought, but they can always buy the movie and watch this all over again.(And they are welcome to it).

Things get eaten and things get smashed to tiny bits as part of product placements. If you didn't already know it.: that car the biatch drives is a Mercedes and gets flattened in scene 3! And the shop that raptor Delta wrecks in scene 76 is Starbucks. And the undies lizard boy is stripping out of during the intimate scene with the red head, has a male name on the front, but that one is edited out because this movie is PG-13. The male lead does shag the female lead, but that is reserved for the producer's cut or the redux version that will hit Amazon in 2017. And the computer network that hampers communications is called SkyNet..oh wait.. that is from another movie.

The story thus far:
-something makes sense.. but let us call you when we find the right version of the script.
- there are some actors in there doing something, but they might have walked in from another movie and we call you when we figured this one out..
- we lost the very big lizard because it camouflaged itself, doesn't show up on our infrared sensors and it removed the transmitter from it's body so we can't pinpoint its exact position, but we inform you once we located it.
- that our phones don't work really, so we just drop by to talk to you about having a shag in the deprecated bungalow at a beach in Costa Rica..

And you don't think that is silly?… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

ScienceAdvisorSep 29, 2015

Top notched CG cannot save this total re-hash of Jurassic Park. Some many immersion-breaking scenes along with rediculous development points towards the end of the movie, show what a large budget that skimps on the writing will get you. "WeTop notched CG cannot save this total re-hash of Jurassic Park. Some many immersion-breaking scenes along with rediculous development points towards the end of the movie, show what a large budget that skimps on the writing will get you. "We spared no expense, except for the script".… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

4

SquintyReviewsSep 18, 2015

Other then an epic boss battle and an earlier eating of park goers, this film was lackluster at best with one dimensional characters, and a "meh" on the special effects score.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

mikemacAug 25, 2015

the kids acting was the worst not even decent actors could save this movie, every time the boys were on the screen i kept waiting for any actor to reaper, the special effect were good but its time to stop doing these remakes, but if you mustthe kids acting was the worst not even decent actors could save this movie, every time the boys were on the screen i kept waiting for any actor to reaper, the special effect were good but its time to stop doing these remakes, but if you must find kids with some kind of acting experience… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

grandpajoe6191Aug 25, 2015

"Jurassic World" is a great action blockbuster to watch with its amazing visuals dominating the screen. However, it's original predecessor's excellence in its character development and storyline highly underwhelms this one.

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

4

BlackFox81Aug 5, 2015

While the movie plot has plenty of holes and the movie is over all just a meh . Super killing dinosaur raptor-Rex hybrid that can cloak and talk, plus some trained raptors cuz Duh we need to weaponize Raptors for the military cuz that makesWhile the movie plot has plenty of holes and the movie is over all just a meh . Super killing dinosaur raptor-Rex hybrid that can cloak and talk, plus some trained raptors cuz Duh we need to weaponize Raptors for the military cuz that makes sense.
If you think this mOvie is great you may be retarded however if you are bored and it's on tv for free probably could kill some time.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

5

mcwalshJul 28, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The park is open, and with it comes a great and entertaining adventure, with Chris Pratt as the charismatic Owen, a velociraptor trainer, and Bryce Dallas-Howard as the always-busy Claire. Along with two child actors, Chris and Bryce face a huge danger, and it isn't the not-inspired Indominus Rex, who broke free from his cage and unleashed chaos on Jurassic World. The real danger here are the plot holes, the stupid moments and the visual effects, who seems incredibly dated when compared to the original Jurassic Park (yes, from '93).

With all that said, Jurassic World succeeds at being a good monster movie, and better than the horrible Jurassic Park III, while also paying an homage to the T-Rex. With nothing more to it, make a popcorn, drink your beverage and turn your brain off to enjoy the movie.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

KillaRikuJul 24, 2015

I have read many and many User Reviews about Jurassic World, that say, that if you are a Jurassic World Fan, you should see this movie. I actually agree about this one, but only because then you can see with your own eyes how bad this movieI have read many and many User Reviews about Jurassic World, that say, that if you are a Jurassic World Fan, you should see this movie. I actually agree about this one, but only because then you can see with your own eyes how bad this movie actually is.
It may look pretty and in 3D it is even better. but looks ain't everything. If you wanna see a real Jurassic Park movie again, then you have to wait. It may be better than the last movie, but it only is a step into the right direction. And I don't wanna say, that it is a bad movie. It's just a bad Jurassic Park Sequel (yet again).
The movie has it's moments but the whole time, I was sitting in the cinema, seeing this movie, I thought: "Something does'nt feel right". And soon I got it: It was the atmosphere. All in all the movie is full packed with action and less calm, darker scenes, which were used in the first Jurassic Park to build tension. It was used to give the consumer of the movie the right amount of fear, which let the Dinosaurs look more threatening. They completely (except for one scene) removed this kind of tension and put in lots and lots of boring senseless dialogues and shooting-scenes. But as I said before: The movie has it's moments and you could say it is kinda worth it, to see the movie because they have lots and lots of "eastereggs" in it, which lets you fall into nostalgia and lets you see some scenes from the first Jurassic Park but years later, which I actually found pretty cool.
The soundtrack is awesome, too. They've reused melodies from the first Jurassic Park. But I think, that's okay, because the Soundtrack was, and still is awesome.
I am not going to write a quick story review in here, because I wanted to make this review spoilerfree. But I can tell you this: I have found some "mistakes" in the logic of the people who wrote the script for this movie. One of it is known in the internet pretty well: "The whole High-Heels Story."
And the other one is, that we all know raptors don't hunt or fight alone. They normally stay in a pack. Which they even thought about in the first Jurassic Parks. I don't think, that this alone makes the movie worse than it is. But all in all, this is more of a mediocre movie.
That is, why I only give it 4/10 (if they would've changed the title, so it doesn't mess up the Jurassic Park Series more, I would've given 5/10)… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

Patrick94Jul 23, 2015

It was pretty cool, but didn't really "wow" me the way I thought it would. I'm a huge Jurassic Park fan, and honestly I was expecting a bit more. Still, definitely worth a watch. And I can not remember one single character's name from theIt was pretty cool, but didn't really "wow" me the way I thought it would. I'm a huge Jurassic Park fan, and honestly I was expecting a bit more. Still, definitely worth a watch. And I can not remember one single character's name from the movie lol. After the movie my one friend was like "Can anyone here remember any of the character's names?" And out of the 4 people that watched it with me, pretty much no one could remember any of them. The Dinosaurs on the other hand....… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

Tss5078Jul 19, 2015

It's setting records at the box office and is the most talked about film in years, Jurassic World, the thrilling true sequel to Jurassic Park. I loved Jurassic Park and felt that both sequels didn't do justice to the original, so when theyIt's setting records at the box office and is the most talked about film in years, Jurassic World, the thrilling true sequel to Jurassic Park. I loved Jurassic Park and felt that both sequels didn't do justice to the original, so when they announced that this film would go on the premise that the two sequels never happened, I was extremely excited. Like everyone else, I rushed to the theaters to see, the exact same film I saw twenty years earlier. The tech is better, the effects are better, but the story is almost identical, to the point where each character has an equivalent in the original film. In Jurassic Park, the T-Rex escapes while the kids are in a car, touring the park. In Jurassic World, the Adominus-Rex escapes while the kids are in a sphere, touring the park. This is just one example of literally dozens of parallels to the original film. The only real difference is Chris Pratt, as he is a hell of a lot more believable than Sam Neill was, and his infectious personality makes him the type of guy that everyone wants to be friends with. From his simple start on the WB's Everwood to becoming a Guardian of The Galaxy, Chris Pratt has established himself as one of Hollywood's brightest future stars, but aside from his performance, this is the same film! The Jurassic franchise has the benefit of being created by one of the greatest science fiction writers of all time. It is produced by perhaps the greatest Director of all time, and once again it introduces moviegoers to some amazing new special effects, but none of it matters when the story just isn't there. With this film people were hoping for something new and exciting from the franchise, a turn in a whole other direction, instead they got a film that is little more than a remake of the original, and a disappointing one at that.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

SpangleJul 18, 2015

Jurassic World is the definition of a popcorn flick. Placed under any level of scrutiny, its quality as a film deteriorates rapidly. The plot is questionable and it does nothing not already seen in the original Jurassic Park. However, itJurassic World is the definition of a popcorn flick. Placed under any level of scrutiny, its quality as a film deteriorates rapidly. The plot is questionable and it does nothing not already seen in the original Jurassic Park. However, it really, really delivers in the entertainment category. Ultimately, film is supposed to be entertainment and this film entertains. It is a ton of fun for the whole family, provides numerous thrills and a ton of nervous excitement as the situation down in Costa Rica takes a turn for the worse due to the humans being stupid and selfish. The human drama placed into the film is idiotic and never really works on any level, but damn, there are a bunch of really cool dinosaurs that attack and eat people. The special effects are impeccable, Chris Pratt makes a case for being one of the strongest leading men right now with a decent acting performance that was best in the one category that matters, charisma. Jake Johnson was also great and a showstealer at times. The characters were pretty dumb, sure, but I don't know, I kinda dug Jurassic World. I feel dirty and hypocritical, but watching dinosaurs eat people is a ton of fun.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

Donkey-KongJul 18, 2015

Jurassic World is a very, very boring. Chris Pratt is a good actor but this film is very pretty mediocre, like many others films based on "monsters". I still prefer the original film.

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

4

ROK1992Jul 12, 2015

Not much good to say about this movie.

Corny, mediocre, predictable and most of all terrible characters. Let's be honest, the plot was never a strong suit for the jurassic series, but wow this one will make the classics look likeNot much good to say about this movie.

Corny, mediocre, predictable and most of all terrible characters.

Let's be honest, the plot was never a strong suit for the jurassic series, but wow this one will make the classics look like Shakespeare wrote it.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

Costs1129Jul 10, 2015

It took me a while to finally sum up my feelings about Jurassic World: SILLY.

On almost a dozen instances I found myself in the theater with hands out and palms up in confusion, wondering: why is this in here? The movie has so many oldIt took me a while to finally sum up my feelings about Jurassic World: SILLY.

On almost a dozen instances I found myself in the theater with hands out and palms up in confusion, wondering: why is this in here? The movie has so many old tropes. You will find yourself rolling your eyes, or shifting in discomfort over the dialogue.

All and all, 2/10 for horrible scripting/plot. 8/10 for plenty of CGI action.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

MoguuJul 9, 2015

Yes, the plot devices used are both inane and absurd. Yes the presence of the 2 boys are seemingly unneccesary (I feel like they were there to heighten the feeling of vulnerability and danger, but their screen time seemed to be uneeded andYes, the plot devices used are both inane and absurd. Yes the presence of the 2 boys are seemingly unneccesary (I feel like they were there to heighten the feeling of vulnerability and danger, but their screen time seemed to be uneeded and probably only included as a throwback the prequals). Yes the character of Claire was slightly offensively and predictably that of a "helpless woman". But there were some enjoyable moments, mostly Chris Pratt' s performance, the sci-fi elements.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

5

MC_KJul 8, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. 的確，這次的回歸的確吸引了大量的觀眾
為了避開人潮我選擇到現在才觀看
本片劇情並沒有特別突出，雖然加了點"科技"，但感覺老梗重重
全劇還是重於特效，至於其他部分和前作相比還是感覺差不多… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

5

AingxJul 6, 2015

Action packed and made me jump more than a couple of times.

But I CANNOT get over the girl in high-heels running from a T-Rex. I get that this is movie about dinosaurs, but c'mon. What made it even worse is the fact the she blantanlyAction packed and made me jump more than a couple of times.

But I CANNOT get over the girl in high-heels running from a T-Rex. I get that this is movie about dinosaurs, but c'mon. What made it even worse is the fact the she blantanly defied the director and wore them even though he told her it was ridiculous.

But I guess that's what you get when you have a fledgling director instead of Speilburg...… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

NikolaJul 5, 2015

Ko voli ovakve filmove, verovatno će mu se i ovo dopasti.
Lično nisam ništa bolje ni očekivao od ovog filma.
Tako da nisam ni razočaran.
Što se mene tiče dosadnjikav film.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

oDjentoJul 3, 2015

Jurassic World is not a failure, but it is an overall disappointment. The films writing is pretty poor with it trying to create interesting characters but failing on the majority of them making them unlikable and one dimensional. Praise forJurassic World is not a failure, but it is an overall disappointment. The films writing is pretty poor with it trying to create interesting characters but failing on the majority of them making them unlikable and one dimensional. Praise for Chris Pratt’s character though, he’s a lot of fun. The main (unlikable) characters come forth like this; Gray being the annoying kid that is constantly running around spouting out his dinosaur facts, Zach being simply a bit of a dick of a character where we find out at the start he has a girlfriend but preys on every other girl he sees while also having his little brother to make him admirable even though there seems like a serious lack of chemistry between them, Claire being played rather well at times by Bryce Dallas Howard but coming across as an idiotic, emotionless person who just seems rather clueless and makes decisions that shouldn’t be redeemed by saving her nephews and kissing Pratt, and then finally there is Hoskins. Hoskins is the one dimensional villain of (you guessed it) ingen that is constantly showing why he is a bad person. Plain plain plain.
Now however to the film. The film has its moments of interesting action sequences and dialogue (one instance talking about the psychology of deprivation) but they do not amount to even probably about half the running time. Pratt’s character Owen Grady does have the best parts and he plays his character well in the scenes he’s in making the film enjoyable for just his screen time. However, the film never fully builds up appropriately, rushing straight into Jurassic World and then delivering the news of the genetically modified hybrid. The idea for why they were doing it was interesting but the choices of what they made it of just seems idiotic.
The film later slides down into a bundle of events that the Indominus Rex causes without really making the most of what the scenes could be, and then the film takes an odd change it direction for the end by changing the ending of the film into a monster brawl flick, like a Godzilla movie. It seemed like a pretty ridiculous ending.
Then, with not only the writing of some dialogue but the direction and acting of some scenes, you can’t help but notice this film is ridiculously cheesy at moments. Some scenes I thought were cringe worthy and just forced, which obviously shows a lack of thought when writing the script and just trying to get all the classic Hollywood blockbuster tropes in without originality.
Now not all was bad about the film. Like I say, Chris Pratt was awesome - and this film acts as stellar evidence and test footage for why he should be the new Indiana Jones – and there our also plenty of nice little call backs to the original films, but some scenes were thought out in what they represent. Trevorrow did a nice job of colour scheming certain scenes, which was a nice subtle touch, with the warmer and darker colours (Red and Black) representing the old, and the colder and lighter colours (blue and white) representing the new. It was a small thing, but it was quite nice to witness if you noticed it.
Overall, the film is maybe worth the money for a film to buy on dvd once it gets cheaper, but not full admission ticket price. It’s not bad, but definitely not good. You will get enjoyment out of this, and it is better than Jurassic Park 3 so no worries there.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

hemmo1986Jul 3, 2015

Jurassic World proves to be a stronger film than the previous two entries, however this movie being the fourth movie in the franchise is where its weakness lies. Before the movie begins any person can ensure they already know what to expect.Jurassic World proves to be a stronger film than the previous two entries, however this movie being the fourth movie in the franchise is where its weakness lies. Before the movie begins any person can ensure they already know what to expect. Dinosaurs will escape, people will get hurt and eventually it will lead to a predictable ending.

While the movie is good for nostalgia it unfortunately fails to deliver anything we haven't already seen. The original movie is still holds the crown even twenty two years later.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

GoombaJMRJul 3, 2015

Not the best acting, not the best story, and not the best scripting, but the movie still does a pretty good job with everything else. It's obviously made to be one of those action-insane movies, without much depth at all. The actors weren'tNot the best acting, not the best story, and not the best scripting, but the movie still does a pretty good job with everything else. It's obviously made to be one of those action-insane movies, without much depth at all. The actors weren't really that good (except for a few, like Pratt). I'll have to say that it was a decent watch though!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

BradySmithJul 1, 2015

Functional as light entertainment, with some scary scenes and a few interesting new twists, but not anywhere near as exhilarating or intelligently put together as the original Jurassic Park, this has to be seen as a disappointment. TheFunctional as light entertainment, with some scary scenes and a few interesting new twists, but not anywhere near as exhilarating or intelligently put together as the original Jurassic Park, this has to be seen as a disappointment. The indominus rex is probably the best thing about this movie and is the cause of almost all the scenes that work. So much of the script however feels like it was written by ten year olds that you're consistently taken out of the experience. (The raptors for the military sub-plot is absolutely ridiculous.) There's no sort of dramatic depth to be found anywhere and the actors are all playing pretty flat characters. This movie has the assembly line produced feel to its core. The original Jurassic Park felt like something that craft went into, a movie designed to leave an impression. It also seemed to take place in a more realistic, less goofy cinematic universe. Here you're kept entertained enough but you never really get the sense that there's any more reason to this movie than to grab people's cash. And half of the special effects aren't even very impressive. It's an average, generic blockbuster through and through.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

MetalsandJul 1, 2015

Awesome visuals, but honestly that's one of the only good points about the movie. I'll list spoilers separate from the rest of this review at the bottom, clearly marked. The effects are beautiful, but the plot devices are some of the mostAwesome visuals, but honestly that's one of the only good points about the movie. I'll list spoilers separate from the rest of this review at the bottom, clearly marked. The effects are beautiful, but the plot devices are some of the most atrocious I've ever seen. It feels like they spent 5 minutes brainstorming ideas and 50 days working on effects work. Jurassic Park 2 and 3 may have also had similarly bad plot premises, but nowhere near as bad as this one.

Then there's the acting. Chris Pratt is one of my favorite actors, I loved him in Guardians of the Galaxy and Parks&Rec. He's good at what he does best: humor and comedy with a hint of serious. Jurassic Park is...not a comedy, and while he's an excellent actor and overall person, he does NOT do 100% serious well. A lot of the dialogue seems corny at best, which further underscores the production as a whole. I'll briefly go into the most atrocious movie sins in the spoilers.

**SPOILERS**
**YOU'VE BEEN WARNED**

So, there were numerous plot devices that were absolutely horrible. This isn't nit-picking, but rather a statement of fact, given that the connections were not hard to make. For one, the entire premise of the movie is built around a Jurassic park. Cool, cool...but then, there are a NUMBER of horrible decisions and illogical conclusions made. So, the "military industrial complex" has a weapons contractor who is fascinated with raptors, and for some odd reason believes that animals = better machines...except for the fact that even without combat robots no one uses trained animals for combat anymore and NEVER used exotic animals such as tigers or lions...and especially NOT NOT NOT smart trained animals like Raptors. Even if you could theoretically get a Raptor to listen to your commands, and remove the barrier between handling, the costs would be exponentially higher especially given that Dinosaurs were brought back from EXTINCTION. There aren't even nearly enough to breed in a significant quantity even when you ignore the fact that maintenance and initial cost of animals is exponentially higher than machines in the first place.

Then you've got Jurassic World, which DESPITE knowing that Jurassic Park 1 failed because of an implanted frog gene allowing dinosaurs to change gender to breed, somehow decides "oh yeah sure, not knowing about the genes despite barely understanding how they work in the first place? No, that will be fine, just make us an entirely new dinosaur so we can create a pen for it with absolutely no way to know if it will be contained". And apparently, the "INDUSTRIAL MILITARY COMPLEX" that movies like to blame in the form of a weapons contractor has ZERO military oversight given that he was able to do all of this without a single questioning from the actual military...yeah no. In the real world, contractors might be able to get away with exponentially rising costs but no way in hell could one fund such a massive project without letting others know details. Government might hand out money, but they don't do so without knowing the details.

Then you've got laughable moments like when Chris Pratt apparently "mind controls" raptors...with food? And then apparently imprinting on him is enough to get them to attack their own kind to save Chris?

Honestly, the lack of any dialogue or character design, and the hundreds of plot holes are just atrocious. I could go on and on, going far past the metacritic 5000 character limit, but I won't. Jurassic World is somewhat entertaining, sure, but it's nothing worth the price of a movie ticket. While it's not a movie that you expect a wonderful plot out of....you have to draw a line somewhere.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

NikolayGJun 29, 2015

Jurassic World is not a good movie. Don't read the next sentence unless you want the most general very general, premise of the movie. I wouldn't even call it a spoiler.

This is a story about two young boys who get lost in Jurassic WorldJurassic World is not a good movie. Don't read the next sentence unless you want the most general very general, premise of the movie. I wouldn't even call it a spoiler.

This is a story about two young boys who get lost in Jurassic World while a dino is on the loose.

It is a movie quite literally for kids from about 12 to 15. The effects are great, but 22 years after Jurassic Park you would expect that. Perfect effects are a given at this point, and they did not save the ho-hum predicable plot. There was one small surprise in the story; everything else was substandard from a storytelling perspective. Jurassic Park, the original, was graced with the quirkiness of Jeff Goldblum and Laura Dern. No such quirkiness in Jurassic World. You've got a cookie cutter strong chinned ex-military guy who saves the day, and an attractive woman who of course does her share of saving him, even though it makes little sense given her profession because that is required by modern formula, and this is all formula. Neither of them have an ounce of anything that makes them stand out as individuals. They are generic. The best part of the movie is the big dino fight at the end. So wait until it's available to rent for $5 then watch it until you get bored, at which point you should fast forward to the final 20 minutes to watch the big finish dino fight. But really, these days, going to the movies, paying all that money, and taking 4 hours out of your day (which is what it requires when you consider the traveling to and from the theater and sitting through nearly a half hour of trailers), is just not worth it unless the film is amazing. And this wasn't amazing. For any film less than amazing we can just wait a few months and watch it for next to nothing on TV. This is one of those. Wait for it to be available on demand, through iTunes, or whatever. Don't waste your hard earned cash and precious free time seeing it in a theater, unless you are taking your 12 year old son to see it.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

VonLudewigJun 29, 2015

Hey this movie has CGI dinosaurs. It has Chris Pratt on a studio stage motorcycle with CGI dinosaurs
on a hunting party. It has Bryce Dallas Howard booking it full speed in high-heals. And it has the worst ending to an epic dino fightHey this movie has CGI dinosaurs. It has Chris Pratt on a studio stage motorcycle with CGI dinosaurs
on a hunting party. It has Bryce Dallas Howard booking it full speed in high-heals. And it has the worst ending to an epic dino fight ever! Seriously I want to see a movie about the big water dino!
Yeah I thought it was meh.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

McGillotineJun 29, 2015

Lack of character arks check, family issues check, despicable child actors check but its okay we have dinosaurs. Loud more than anything, Jurassic park strikes out with the third sequel in the the Jurassic park franchise serving as more of aLack of character arks check, family issues check, despicable child actors check but its okay we have dinosaurs. Loud more than anything, Jurassic park strikes out with the third sequel in the the Jurassic park franchise serving as more of a satire of the original rather than a respectful follow up. Movie goers will suddenly find the lost world didn't seem as bad as you look in shame upon the big screen, but hey what else can you expect from a "summer blockbuster" or in my geographical location "winter blockbuster" other than load noises and expensive CGI, surely not interesting characters or a plot pulled out of someones ass, of course not. With the little things to look forward to being the occasional nod to the original film and the great performance of Chris Prat. There is no better way then to describe this film than in the words of Shakespeare as a film full of "sound and fury signifying nothing"… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

5

BayshyaburtnwudJun 29, 2015

A perfect example of lazy film making hoping that a slick trailer and the weight of 'Jurassic Park' franchise will pull the audience into theater. The wait for a good Jurassic Park sequel continues. Chris Patt has screen presence andA perfect example of lazy film making hoping that a slick trailer and the weight of 'Jurassic Park' franchise will pull the audience into theater. The wait for a good Jurassic Park sequel continues. Chris Patt has screen presence and everybody else in the movie is not worth remembering...Deep Blue Sea set on the land with genetically mutated dinos. but with less gore and less fun...at least that film had no airs about being just a B grade monster flick… Expand

5 of 9 users found this helpful54

All this user's reviews

6

Dat_One_CriticJun 27, 2015

Not as i had expected. Acting is well done and funny at moments. The visuals and CGI is well done. But the story concluded made me feel like it was Godzilla 2014. The first Jurassic park is no doubt the best and the two others were bad. ThisNot as i had expected. Acting is well done and funny at moments. The visuals and CGI is well done. But the story concluded made me feel like it was Godzilla 2014. The first Jurassic park is no doubt the best and the two others were bad. This one finds itself in the middle. If you were a fan on the original you will be pleased and if you were not a fan then might not like it. References are the best especially if they are not canon. Bringing back things no matter how small make you look back on your childhood after watching this. But in every now and then action movie there has to be a child actor for the kids. But for once make a movie without kids and just make the badassery with Chris Pratt and stop luring away from the action to something we don't care about. What we want in a dinosaur movie is dinosaurs.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

6

AaronDWassermanJun 26, 2015

To be fair, this movie exceeded my expectations. I was expecting a bad movie. Was it bad? no. was it good? no. I'd say it was Okay. Chris Pratt and Ty Simpkins carries this movie. Those two are fantastic and are the spotlight of this film.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

LegoTardisJun 26, 2015

A great use of jaw-dropping special effects, yet the entire film was lacking in plot, character development and individuality. I was quite surprised at how short the film lasted, and a bit disappointed at how weak it was in comparison to theA great use of jaw-dropping special effects, yet the entire film was lacking in plot, character development and individuality. I was quite surprised at how short the film lasted, and a bit disappointed at how weak it was in comparison to the other Jurassic Park movies.
I had really hoped that Jurassic World would be unique, however, without the several layers of amazing cgi action, there isn't much content otherwise.
In summary, a perfect 'popcorn' blockbuster, bursting with scenes of truly brilliant animations and effects, which I've got to say, are stunning. Sadly, the depth of the storyline was less than amusing, and I will be looking optimistically forward to a better film in the future.
Nonetheless, a proper summer hit!… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

5

MrPouletJun 25, 2015

The story is pretty cheap : having unnecessary and uninteresting characters and plots.
The ''magic'' from the first movie is not here and makes it a poor follow up to the serie : lacking creativity.
Though, as a stand alone film, it isThe story is pretty cheap : having unnecessary and uninteresting characters and plots.
The ''magic'' from the first movie is not here and makes it a poor follow up to the serie : lacking creativity.
Though, as a stand alone film, it is entertaining at time and the acting is nice : especially from the lead actor.
Not a bad movie because it is quite fun, but as a ''Jurassic movie'' is it mediocre.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

The-HawkJun 25, 2015

The biggest sin Jurassic World commits is that it just isn't that entertaining. The mindlessness of it completely removes all the tension from the film. Any time the film gets you close to the edge of the seat, it firmly pushes you back intoThe biggest sin Jurassic World commits is that it just isn't that entertaining. The mindlessness of it completely removes all the tension from the film. Any time the film gets you close to the edge of the seat, it firmly pushes you back into it by terrible plot turns or cheesy dialogue.

The original movie applied it's pseudo-science, its laughs and its sentiment with deft hands. This one slathers it on with complete disdain for the intelligence of its audience.

The best thing about the film is the visuals, particularly the dinosaurs which look and sound great.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

4

Donnie_QuixoticJun 24, 2015

I started looking at my watch pretty early on. I thought the point of movies like this was to give the audience the feeling of "What if?" -- In this case what if humans recreated dinosaurs and opened a theme park and the dinosaurs escapedI started looking at my watch pretty early on. I thought the point of movies like this was to give the audience the feeling of "What if?" -- In this case what if humans recreated dinosaurs and opened a theme park and the dinosaurs escaped their enclosure? How would you feel? How would you react? What could go wrong?
The first Jurassic Park did a great job of painting how different individuals would react in that situation. Remember the genuine terror those kids felt? -- screaming and exhausted and frightened. The fear in Sam Neil's eyes. The lawyer who leaves the kids to fend for themselves. Anyway, I could go on. The point is all the characters showed a range of emotions that the audience could relate to. They are the emotions we believe we would feel in such a terrifying situation. The Lawyer represented our baser urges of wanting to run, in spite of those we leave behind. Sam Neil represents responsibility of those he's been entrusted with. Laura Dern, represents a woman's maternal instincts. Wayne Knight's feeling of ingratitude and greed. So we live vicariously for two hours through those characters because we understand the way they feel... even the baser emotions of the bad characters.
In sharp contrast, Jurassic World treats every character like the two dimensional page it was written on. There's no genuine fear displayed. There's no feeling of "Oh that's how I would react". I mean when Chris Pratt is under the car when the I-Rex escapes and he just looks at that guy for a moment before the guy is eaten, I couldn't help but feel if that guy was Bryce Dallas Howard's character, then Pratt's character would have tried to distract the dinosaur, or at least do something... anything. Instead he just watches as the I-Rex finally eats him. Not much of a hero, but the character that was eaten was only a bit player, so his death means nothing. And that's the problem: every death in this movie means nothing. It's barely acknowledged when people start being killed. You would think even one death should have some effect on Bryce Dallas Howard's character but she remains unaffected. Oh wait a second, she did cry when she came across that dying dinosaur. An emotion that had no development whatsoever -- it just suddenly appeared. Nice to see she can cry at the death of a dinosaur but not an ounce of evident remorse when people started being killed.
We as the audience don't just go to observe the unraveling of the plot, we go to experience every scene vicariously through the characters. For that vicarious feeling to work we need to relate to the characters emotionally. The same way we get emotional when watching our team play a game of football or basketball etc. We're emotionally invested in our team, so it means something to us. Watching a game without our team playing doesn't have the same effect on us. On top of that we usually have a favorite player who we're even more emotionally invested in. He or she is usually the player that does the things we believe we would do if we had the opportunity and ability. We get even more emotionally invested in the player if he or she is a great person off the field -- especially if they're funny and charismatic. Again we're feeling "I want to be like him or her". Same goes for characters in a movie. The hero has to be a person who does the right thing, no matter what the cost. Pratt's character made no effort to save that poor guy. And the fact is he didn't even have to save him, but he had to try to save him. Anyway this is just one example.
Bryce Dallas Howard's character has no redeeming qualities until near the end of the film. She's given the same aloofness that Sam Neil's character had in the first film when it comes to kids, but Sam Neil was given the opportunity early on to show that he has a heart of gold.
The moping teenager was a chore to watch -- what was the point of having a moping teenager who does practically nothing in the film other than mope? Oh he fixes a car, so teenagers are useful after all was the message I guess. Is the point to have a character for each age and gender demographic? When I was a kid I watched mainly characters in their 30s and 40s -- I didn't need a character my own age to vicariously experience the events of the movie through. Nor did I need a male representative when I was watching Ellen Ripley outsmart and slaughter aliens. I was happy to experience the film vicariously through her, despite the fact she is a woman and I'm a man. I'm not saying don't have them in the movie, I'm saying do have them in there, but represent them accurately and entertainingly.
It seems, it's not about having a great story anymore; it's about trying to represent every possible demographic, but only to a point that couldn't possibly be offensive to any individual in those demographics.
Is it at least fun? Fun is watching an entertaining movie. It's not fun feeling bored because the movie was emotionless, uninvolving and just so poorly written.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

DobianJun 22, 2015

Let me start with the good. There are some very nice nods to the original Jurassic Park in this film. The statue of Hammond, the return of B.D. Wong as the geneticist behind these creations, and most notably the two boys in the filmLet me start with the good. There are some very nice nods to the original Jurassic Park in this film. The statue of Hammond, the return of B.D. Wong as the geneticist behind these creations, and most notably the two boys in the film discovering the original visitor center from Jurassic Park now covered in jungle growth. They even find the original jeeps in the garage. There's also a moment where Claire uses a flair just like Alan and Ian do in the first movie. The park itself looks really cool and is obviously modeled after Disneyland with Main Street leading up to the pyramid-shaped main center. The dinosaurs look great and there is plenty of good dino action in the movie to keep you entertained.

Now for the bad. First, a big missed opportunity I thought in that when I first saw Claire in the film I thought she might just be Lex from the original, all grown up and now running the park her grandfather dreamed of building. Since I had temporarily forgotten Lex's name, I thought Claire might be her, and was disappointed when it wasn't. That would have been a great tie-in, even with her being played by a different actress. The character would then have been very aware of the dangers and pitfalls associated with this park based on her own childhood experience, which would have led to some much more intelligent dialogue and story development. Instead we get a park manager who is a corporate cliche and spends much of the movie being totally clueless to the growing threat to the visitors, when she isn't engaged in her preteen-level flirting with Chris Pratt's character.

I'll refrain from giving spoilers other than to say that the story and plot developments are preposterously stupid. When you look at the timeline for this park, we know that as of 2001 (Jurassic Park III) both islands were still off-limits. Factor in the several years it would have taken to get this park fully realized and it couldn't be more than five years old at the start of this movie. Yet one of the major premises is that the public has already gotten bored with dinosaurs so they need to start making super dino monstrosities to keep them entertained and coming back to the park. Really? Toss in a lunatic military contractor who I am assuming wants to drop lots of velociraptors on the Middle East, animal behavior that defies belief, outrunning a T-Rex while in high heels, and a final dinosaur battle that resembles a Godzilla movie (I was expecting Mothra to drop into the melee), and you have a big pile of dino droppings.

The movie is fun enough as an amusement park thrill ride, just don't expect the character depth, narrative excellence, or sense of wonder and adventure of the original.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

6

gunnyartJun 22, 2015

Congratulations on setting records. It just goes to show that family friendly entertainment is where the money is. I found it incredibly formulaic and predictable. With several laugh out loud moments for it's sheer stupidity. (I'd have toCongratulations on setting records. It just goes to show that family friendly entertainment is where the money is. I found it incredibly formulaic and predictable. With several laugh out loud moments for it's sheer stupidity. (I'd have to admit I was the only one in the theater laughing however)
Take the kids. They'll love it.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

Critic101Jun 21, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Probably the worst movie of the Jurassic Park franchise, Jurassic World cannot lay claim to the magic the original films brought about.An abject opening ten minutes immediately casts a dampener on what lies ahead with Bryce Dallas Howard as the disappointingly robotic Claire Dearing. Seeing Claire's sister unnecessarily burst in to tears for Claire not personally giving her nephews a tour of Isla Nublar which has ,by the way,became a fully functional Dinosaur zoo and theme park(man,isn't this exactly what each of the other three movies professed people NOT TO DO) seemed artificial and downright pathetic. The first movie scored big with the two kids that irritated and ultimately won over Dr.Grant,but the Director's mission to win over the audience with the same formula falls flat this time around. Chris Pratt as the raptor trainer(ya, believe it, Velociraptors have accepted him as their alpha - gosh!!!!) brings some solace to an otherwise mediocre and horribly miscast movie which feature a clueless theme park owner and a pot bellied head of security,to name a few. Even though the story about a genetically modified 'Indominus Rex' (cool fake name) terrorizing the visitors and the other dinosaurs had a great appeal, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. The best chance for the movie to salvage something was in its climax where an inter dinosaur battle ensues between the mutated beast, the raptors and the park's resident super hero,the T-Rex. Even though die hard fans of the franchise might distinguish a T-Rex from other big carnivorous dinosaurs,most of the audience aren't paleontology experts and not mentioning that the beast attacking the villainous I-Rex(??) was indeed the Tyrannosaur seems a bit lazy on the director's part and adds to the lack of attention to detail displayed throughout the film. The Mosasaurus' spot at the end could have been the perfect finale to the film,if it had a competent director at the helm.
The visuals are probably the only positive thing about the film and the movie ends in a not so surprisingly confused state with nothing definitive about whether the park will continue to operate or get taken over by the dinosaurs,the latter being the conventional and not so bad outcome in all the previous movies. Perfect ending to a disappointing movie.

And by the way - The T-Rex, all of a sudden, develops a conscience and spares the good guys at the end - Come on!!!!!!!… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

chugheadJun 21, 2015

A whole lot of hype and hot air. It may be good for a younger generation of Jurassic fans but this was all about fluff to monopolize of a remake. Chris Pratt was held back from cutting loose as a freestyle performer. They gave him a makeover,A whole lot of hype and hot air. It may be good for a younger generation of Jurassic fans but this was all about fluff to monopolize of a remake. Chris Pratt was held back from cutting loose as a freestyle performer. They gave him a makeover, turning him away from goofball into mild hilarity. The dinosaurs were extras.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

4

TheKavehJJun 20, 2015

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Jurassic World is too much like the original. The movie is too long. The ending is exactly like the first one, one dinosaur taking down another, and the whole movie was way too predictable.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

4

DemoraseJun 20, 2015

I enjoyed the first part of the movie a lot, the kids were cute and their perspective was great at translating that same sense of wonderment the original Jurassic Park had.

I enjoyed much less how the movie become a dumb monster movieI enjoyed the first part of the movie a lot, the kids were cute and their perspective was great at translating that same sense of wonderment the original Jurassic Park had.

I enjoyed much less how the movie become a dumb monster movie along with a case of "too many cooks" with too many plot lines and too many characters competing for attention in the second half. They also could have done a much better job with Chris Pratt's and Bryce Dallas Howard's characters who are basically dumb caricatures, and I hated that cliched military bad guy.

Last complaint : too much CG, everything looked fake, especially the Dinos, everything on screen was too clean, too bright, too crisp. The last action scenes was particularly ludicrous, defying all sense of realism.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

vikesh2206Jun 20, 2015

Despite thin characters and a familiar plot, Jurassic World delivers plenty of escapist summer blockbuster entertainment with it's dinosaur mayhem and tense action scenes.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

ReubenIsAGodJun 20, 2015

Yea it was pretty good. Although did anybody just sit there, space out, and was like HOW THE **** DO YOU SURVIVE ALL THIS **** IN HIGH HEELS. Holy **** it irritated me, and that goddamn white dress, JESUS CHRIST how did you not ****ing die.

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

6

FranzHcriticJun 20, 2015

A formidable action film, with a well thought out script for its respected genre. Despite some human performances and stunning visual effects, the imagination of Crichton's original novel has lost its vigor, the originality that gave theA formidable action film, with a well thought out script for its respected genre. Despite some human performances and stunning visual effects, the imagination of Crichton's original novel has lost its vigor, the originality that gave the original novel and film its drive to become an thought-provoking story on how bringing back life can create death, and whether or not bringing back life is as good as we intend it to be. I still think this was more or less an action-thriller, and in that respect, it got it right on all marks.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews