movie film review | chris tookey
 
     
     
 

Jurassic World

 (PG)
© Universal Pictures - all rights reserved
     
  Jurassic World Review
Tookey's Rating
3 /10
 
Average Rating
5.47 /10
 
Starring
Chris Pratt , Bryce Dallas Howard, Vincent D'Onofrio
Full Cast >
 

Directed by: Colin Trevorrow
Written by: Derek Connolly, Colin Trevorrow, Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver, from a story by Jaffa and Silver

 
 
 
Released: 2015
   
Genre: ACTION
DISASTER
ADVENTURE
MONSTER
SERIES
SCIENCE FICTION
SEQUEL
FAMILY
   
Origin: US
   
Colour: C
   
Length: 124
 
 


 
A velociraptor-trainer (Chris Pratt) saves the day when a dinosaur theme park suffers a series of disasters.
Reviewed by Chris Tookey

Bookmark and Share

The fourth in the Jurassic Park franchise was hugely successful at the box office, generating 1.6 billion dollars and becoming the fourth highest-grossing movie of all time - which isn’t bad for a dud that systematically dumbs down what once was a superior franchise.

Ironically for a Hollywood movie that is blatantly commercial in its aspirations, this is intended to be a parable moralising about rapacious capitalism and consumerist excess, both symbolised in the film by Indominus Rex, a synthetic hybrid dinosaur that has no emotional empathy.

Unfortunately, lack of emotional empathy and a dearth of character development are two of the main faults of the movie, which is little more than an indifferently linked, puzzlingly soulless sequence of action set-pieces.

This may have gone down well with undiscerning members of the public in 2015, but it’s nowhere near the quality of the original Jurassic Park.

Parts of it are suspiciously similar to a jolly, if trashy, popcorn movie called Deep Blue Sea (1999), which I much prefer. In that, a bickering couple played by Saffron Burrows and Thomas Jane battled some incredibly brainy sharks. Jurassic World is the same but with a much more annoying central couple in Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard, cleverer dinosaurs and even more stupid dialogue.

Feminists and, indeed, anyone with a feeling that too many Hollywood movies are sexist and dumb will notice that the “heroine” is deliberately made out to be helpless and impractical (even though she’s a successful career-woman) so that the more than usually charisma-free hero, charmlessly played by the aptly named Chris Pratt, can first patronise her and then - yawn - rescue her. Even in the 1930s, there’d have been executives piping up in protest at this kind of male chauvinism. Why weren’t there any voices of protest in the second decade of the twenty-first century? Or were they simply ignored?


Key to Symbols