Jurassic Park: Some Thoughts About the Franchise Part 1

There’s one particular scene in the first Jurassic Park movie, about twenty minutes in, when Dr. Alan Grant and Dr. Ellie Sattler see the dinosaurs walking wild in the open for the first time on Isla Nublar; that still chokes me up, every time almost bringing me to tears. Even on my fourth or fifth viewing of the film last week, that scene still moves me. The kid in me is still agog with wonder when I see that brachiosaurus… even though my knees tell me I’m long past that childhood.

As a lifelong dinosaur aficionado (who wanted to become a paleontologist for the first 15 or 16 years of my life but still reads books on evolution and dinosaurs) who never lost his affection for paleontological science, the entire concept behind Michael Crichton’s 1990 novel of the same name that launched the franchise — genetic editing, de-extincting species (yes, it’s a word now…), and creating live dinosaurs — was a delightful dream. Fiction, sure, but a remarkable and endearing idea based on actual (or nearly) science that spawned successful franchises of films and games. Both captured the public imagination, and they surely gave the creationist cultists conniptions (always a good thing).

In 2025, another film (the seventh) and game (third) in the franchise will be released for which I am excited. Not quite as many as the Godzilla franchise (38 films so far, of which I have seen 37 and eagerly await the most recent on Blu-ray), but damned good for a recent Hollywood series. It is one of my favourite film franchises, because of the dinosaurs. Is it still worth watching? An unqualified yes, but to be fair, the quality of the films is sometimes a rollercoaster.*

What moved me recently was seeing again just one sterling moment in the six films. Were there others worth relating? Of course. While none of the subsequent films have such emotionally moving moments for me (and nothing similar are in the games, although they have their own enjoyable moments), there are scenes and events worth re-watching and commenting on. I thought I’d watch all of the films in order (and play the games) again, and make some comments about them all before the new ones arrive.**

Upfront: the name of the franchise is misleading. Over the three-decade-long life of the films and games, species from a huge range of geological eras are recreated, jot just from the Jurassic: from the Early Permian to Late Cretaceous, a span of roughly 250 million years. The Dimetrodon, shown in Jurassic World: Dominion is from the former era, and was not even a dinosaur (it was extinct before dinosaurs even arrived), but rather a pelycosaur. Nor are the pterosaurs from Jurassic Park and later films, and the mosasaurs from Jurassic World dinos: you knew that, right? Every kid watching these movies sure did.

The franchise helped accelerate the development of computer graphics and CGI effects, the result of which not only affected movies but also gaming and home PCs. The results are visible in dozens of contemporary films and TV shows, made even more impressive by the development of AI in video making. More and better dinosaurs, better and more lifelike animations, more realism, and greater variety in styles, individuals, and appearances; every film in the franchise was better that way.

If you want deeper analysis, there’s more than a bit of Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein in the original two films; with park creator, InGen CEO John Hammond as the surrogate Dr. Victor Frankenstein creating life which turns against its creator. And there are many (many!) unanswered questions about the science, and about how the animals survive and interact (given the almost random mix of species from different eras). But let’s not spoil the fun. Movies are entertainment, not university lectures.

Jurassic Park (1993) (JP1). The first film, directed by Steven Spielberg, was based on Crichton’s original novel, and as such is the best in terms of pretty much everything: cast, dialogue, science, surprises, and plot. Most ranking reviews rate it as the best of the franchise, and I agree. It’s rated 8.2 out of 10 in IMDB, the highest rating of the franchise (92% on RottenTomatoes).***

Part of the film’s attraction is the exciting mix of science, espionage, subterfuge, adventure, dinosaurs, and scary action. Nothing like being chased by a Tyrannosaurus Rex to get the adrenaline flowing. Part of the attraction was that the film presented new ideas and new technology; the novelty of it made a huge splash. It was the first to present the ideas that make the franchise work. And let’s not forget the spectacular scenery (mostly Hawaii) that provides the eye candy.

The original film, following the book, didn’t hesitate to have main characters die in somewhat gruesome, albeit usually fitting, circumstances. Dinos mete out justice. The first film was very definitely an adult film, but later films catered more to families and even nudging toward the children who were in the audience thanks to the PG rating code. Kids and dinosaurs are a great mix for commercial success and marketing (the number of JP action figures still on sale at the local Walmart testifies to the popularity).

There’s a white-knuckle scene where the T. Rex attacks the tour cars… probably the best-known scene of them all… and the raptors in the kitchen… they would be even scarier if there weren’t kids involved. Basic Hollywood rule: kids can’t be killed. Scared, yes, chased, non-fatally hurt yes, but not eviscerated by a dinosaur; others in the cast suffer such fate. And while that makes the first film very dramatic and often gritty, the inclusion of children in subsequent films set the tone for increasingly family-oriented flicks, although it varied from film to film.

I would be remiss not to point out the romantic relationship between Drs. Grant and Sattler, which is really only a focal point at the very beginning and end of the film. However, it does provide a motive for some of their actions in between.

Special effects — the animated dinosaurs — were excellent for the day, but 31 years later they come across as less realistic given the advances in computer technology and graphics since then, although not like watching a 1960s’ or ’70s scifi film (I’m looking at you, Showa-era Godzilla…). It remains my favourite of all the films and it stands up remarkably well despite its age.

JP1 also set the stage for its sequels, with the theme park idea, the genetic manipulation, the capitalist greed of outsiders, and the fragility of humans against the dinos, plus the ending that left the fate of the island and its population of dinosaurs unresolved. But at least the ‘good’ people survived…

Despite the success of JP1, it wasn’t until 1997 that The Lost World: Jurassic Park (JP2) was released (the name refers to the popular novel by Conan Doyle, also made into films). Michael Crichton had written the story in his 1995 book, The Lost World, and was one of the screenwriters. The film adaptation had been anticipated for several years, and with Crichton behind it and Spielberg directing, the result was well respected by fans if not all critics, rating third-highest at 6.6 on IMDB. It is also number three on RottenTomatoes, at a low 53% (few films have critics and fans agreeing).

JP2 brings the action to a second island; Isla Sorna, called ‘Site B,’ where dinos have been left to breed and populate the island without human intervention, and without any of the park infrastructure of the first film.

InGen, the corporation Hammond once ran (but has since lost control of), wants to monetize them. Dr. Malcolm and his crew want to save them. The good guys/bad guys division is pretty easy to identify here; InGen is almost comically evil. Hammond, in the films, is grandfatherly; less manipulative and greedy than he appears in the books.

One of the complaints fans mentioned about JP1 was the limited number of dinosaur species that were introduced, as well as the lack of the smaller species (in part a limitation set by the computer processing power of the day). Every dino in JP1 seemed big. But in the first three minutes of JP2, the tiny but threatening Procompsognathus triassicus was presented. Thanks to more computer muscle, several new species would be introduced: pachycephalosaurus, parasaurolophus, stegosaurus, and many others, all looking better than ever with improved CGI effects.

The film continues at the same adrenaline-fueled pace as the first, with plenty of action, good characters and plot. Immediately after the first dino attack, we got to see Jeff Goldblum again, reprising his role as the sardonic Dr. Ian Malcolm (the connecting character through most of the films). Richard Attenborough briefly reprises his role as millionaire park creator John Hammond, now merely an old man out of power, but still scheming.

Like in the first film, JP2 brings kids into the picture, this time the central child is Dr. Malcolm’s daughter. Even more than the children in the previous film, she proves resourceful, capable, inventive, and intelligent when in the path of danger. Plus there’s a romantic situation with Malcolm and Sarah Harding (Julianne Moore) his on-again-off-again partner to complicate the story.

Best moment is the tense scene with the T.Rex pair trying to push the trucks full of people off the cliff, but it’s just one of several nail-biters the film offers.

This film revives the cavalier corporate greed of the first film, but on steroids, and makes lack of both corporate ethics and morality more obvious (in case anyone missed it). This anti-corporate thread grows steadily through the rest of the films. A few of the corporate employees in the films turn out to be working for the good of the animals, so they rebel against the corporations.

There’s a three-way contest between corporate good, the researchers turned to rescuers, and dinos. Spoiler alert: the dinos usually win. And who could forget that cute little tip of the hat to the Godzilla films at 1:53:00…

This film also makes a statement about the immorality of ‘trophy hunters’ with which I heartily agree (trophy hunters are toxic stains on humanity). However, Roland Tembo, the supreme hunter (Peter Postlethwaite) is actually a well-crafted, almost sympathetic character; not the 2D toon he might have been written as. Still, I wouldn’t have minded seeing him eaten.

The end involves a T. Rex running rampant through San Diego, brought there by InGen to start a new theme park, but of course it escapes. This is great fun, sort of JP meets Godzilla, and foreshadows the Jurassic World films to come.

Crichton, who died in 2008, never returned to writing about the Jurassic Park theme, although he did write about genetic modification and editing in two subsequent novels (Next and Micro), and about paleontologists (Dragon Teeth).

Personally, I thought this film deserved a better rating. It had a good cast, a good, thrilling story, lots of action, much improved CGI, solid acting and dialogue. And the evil CEO gets eaten. It’s my second or third choice.

Jurassic Park III arrived in 2001, rating 5.9 on IMBD, the second-lowest rating (no. 4 on RottenTomatoes at 49%). Although it’s not a copycat plot, it’s not original. JP3 didn’t really bring anything new to the screen; in fact pretty much copied a lot of what the previous two films had done, just with different people and dinos. At least it’s the shortest of the films, at 92 mins.

It starts out with a kid stranded on Isla Nubar, thanks to a failed tourist stunt; the island is still full of dinosaurs (keep in mind my previous comment about Hollywood’s kid rule.), of course, so off limits. The film is about the rescue attempt to find this kid — and who gets eaten in the process.

It briefly re-unites Drs. Grant (Neill) and Sattler (Hunt) at the start, but the latter is married to another man, retired from the field to deal with her hubby and kids. Not very romantic, but after leaving her to her bucolic bliss, Grant becomes the reluctant hero (without being aided by Jeff Goldblum this time, though)

Failed romance aside, it’s certainly full of action and tension. And dinos eating a lot of people in gruesome ways (a trademark of the franchise). It has a fairly good cast: aside from Sam Neill returning to the franchise, we get William H. Macy and Téa Leoni (a bit too histrionic, though). Although Crichton was a listed as co-writer, other writers say he was not involved. Instead of Spielberg, we have Joe Johnston directing.

Aside: An important part of the franchise here and in later films is how Grant talks about raptors as intelligent, equal to chimpanzees. That sets up a lot of the subsequent raptor scenes and mythology in the following films. As has been pointed out by many others before me, the raptors in the film are not really Velocipraptors, but rather a larger version, like Utahraptor. Were they really as intelligent in real life? More likely as smart as crows, ravens, or even parrots. But where’s the drama in that? Many of the predatory dinos in the later films exhibit increased intelligence and cunning, and therefore increased threat, including the magnificent albeit scary Indominus rex of Jurassic World. But I digress…

Unlike the previous two films, InGen is only indirectly involved in this one, so the evil corporate drones are not present. The cast is small and as it progresses and we meet more carnivorous dinos, it gets smaller (down to four by 1:05:00, although a fifth survives). The best part for me was the reveal of the giant pteranodon at 1:01:14, although the pteranodons are shown with teeth (they were likely piscivores, without toothed bills). or maybe the brachiosaurs at 1:09:30.

My big plot disappointment was that Ellie Sattler and Alan Grant had not hooked up in the interim (“She was the one person I could always count on,” said Grant). Call me an old romantic, but with those two out of the picture, I was moved by the unlikely re-connection of Macy’s and Leoni’s characters in the finale (but why weren’t they arrested for trespassing at the end?).

JPIII simply wasn’t the film fans wanted. It’s a reasonably good film for its action with lots of jump scares and close calls, not stellar, but exciting enough through its 92 minutes. Still, it wasn’t anything special and the franchise felt like it wasn’t going anywhere.We had to wait another 14 years for the film that would take it to the next level. And it sure did…

To keep this post somewhat manageable (yes, I know I tend to ramble on…), I’ll finish this review and provide comments on the subsequent three films in the next post: Jurassic World, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, and Jurassic World Dominion, and make a few comments on the Jurassic World Evolution PC games. And coming in 2025 is Jurassic World 4: Rebirth. Stay tuned… part two is next. ANd maybe I’ll save the game comments for a third post. Who knows? Press play and watch the film…

Notes:

* Jurassic World 4: Rebirth and Jurassic World Evolution 3, respectively. The final name of the game has not been confirmed, but it is the sequel to Jurassic World Evolution and Jurassic World Evolution 2, so JWE3 seems appropriate. To be clear: the JWE games are simulations (sims) about park design, layout, and management based on the book and movies, not meant as replays of the films, although there are disasters like dinos getting loose that are similar to some movie scenes. I have been a sim/city builder game fan ever since I started gaming in 1977.

** I cannot comment on the animated series, Jurassic Park Chaos Theory or Camp Cretaceous because I don’t subscribe to Netflix, and based on the trailers I’ve seen, frankly, I am not interested in the animated content. Nor can I comment on any comics, graphic novels, or fan fiction. These are all part of the corpus, but not necessarily the canon. There are other video games (95 titles listed on the Fandom wiki), many of them on consoles (I play on PC only), including Lego and browser games, but the JWE two are the only ones I’ve played. There is also the entertaining, short spinoff film Battle at Big Rock that takes place one year after the events of the last Jurassic World, and a wealth of fan fiction and film online.

*** These are the critic scores, but the audience scores are usually much higher, as explained in this podcast about the films. I have read many of the critic’s reviews, but do not base my own views on them. Sometimes methinks critics forget that movies are mostly meant to entertain.

Words: 2,776