Review: Jurassic World Rebirth

Rating: 0.5 out of 5.

Back in 1993, the original Jurassic Park, taken from Michael Crichton’s masterpiece novel, came to the big screen, albeit in a family-friendly version. The film captivated audiences, and we were right there along with Alan Grant when he looked upon real dinosaurs for the first time. I was even on board for the sequel, which Chrichton very much didn’t want to write, but gave in to financial benefits. It made no sense that there was a second island that was never mentioned in the first, but it was still directed by Spielberg and worked overall.

And then came everything after it. The third was lazy, and having to listen to Téa Leoni’s shrill screaming was torture. Then came the Jurassic World movies, promising that “The Park Is Open,” and I had hope. Granted, it wasn’t open for long and run by incompetent morons, and everything that went wrong was only because they were stupid.

So here we are. The fourth Jurassic World film. Whose opening unleashes the most monstrous dinosaur yet (JP Rule #301: Introduce another unnecessary new Dinosaur), the mutant D-Rex (short for Derp Rex), because of a candy wrapper. The entire facility was destroyed due to a candy wrapper. Really working hard this one was to up that complete and utter incompetence level.

So beyond that, we’re joined by Zora Bennet (played by Scarlett Johansson from Home Alone 3), an “elite” operator hired by Stock Badguy #123 who, for sure, won’t betray them at some point. Tagging along, of course, is JP Rule #534: Always bring an expert with Dr. Henry Loomis (played by Johnathan Bailey from Best Birthday Ever) who is there to spout exposition and little else. They head to YET ANOTHER island of Dinosaurs to find the film’s McGuffins. 

Oh, there’s the boat family. I don’t remember their names and don’t care enough to look them up. If you thought they were going to violate JP Rule #293: Every movie must unnecessarily have children and put them in danger, well, prepare to be disappointed. They don’t matter. You could remove their entire distracting elements from the primary plot, and it would change zero about any event, or any part of the outcome. Sorry, one last thing, the father was supposed to be an expert navigator and didn’t even realize he was close to extremely restricted waters? 

Humanity also wouldn’t have just let these animals be. We would have captured and diced them all up for various reasons because that’s what people do. That’s humanity.

NO ONE in the movie is particularly likable. There is zero chemistry between anyone at any point. It’s so poorly written that when people try to sacrifice themselves or get into peril, it just means the movie is a few minutes closer to ending.

Lastly, this has been a criticism of all the Jurassic World movies. Why did the special effects in 1993 look 50x better than anything here? There is so much awful green screen or creatures chasing them that look like they’re just projected on a flat screen behind them. Nothing looks real; everything looks like a sound stage.

Like with a lot of franchises lately, I’m just going to skip anything further; it’s just not worth it, it ends up utterly failing before they possibly come up with something decent again.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Internet Janitorial

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading