After witnessing the brilliant creativity, action-packed first movie, the considerably worse second movie, and now this movie, I now realize why everyone despises sequels and their follow-ups. The third volume of the dinosaur thriller really is quite disappointing. Even though I wasn't expecting much out of it, as I've heard the second and third movies are usually really bad compared to their predecessor, I still came out saying, "That doesn't deserve to be a movie."
One factor which I think played a part for why I didn't like it as much as the first two was the switch in direction. Steven Spielburg gave the reins to his production cohort, Joe Johnston. Now, while Johnston did a fairly good job for someone who was taking over a large movie franchise empire, there was too much riding on this movie that even Spielburg could fix to make "perfect". But, I think the final outcome would have been considerably better than Johnston's version. No offense to Joe Johnston.
Another fact was the lack of plot. Not only was there no creative genius theory as there was in the first one, this movie had no real plot. Unless you call two divorced people looking for their son on Isla Sorna and getting involved with dinosaurs a plot. The movie was just non-stop action. Which is ok if you like that kind of stuff. But for me, I need a "method behind the madness" type of influence. I can't just see lots of running around, lots of dinosaur chases, and lots of worried faces and expect to walk out of the theater with a satisfied grin. Perfect example: The Matrix. There is a lot of heavy metal warfare, lots of chase scenes and action, but the movie really has great theoretical support from Andy and Larry (Wachowski), who came up with the mind behind it. I think they could have expanded upon the fact that the dinosaurs can talk to each other, thus drawing out the creative genius portion of the movie.
I was very disappointed with this movie. Minimal action, practically no deaths, and a thin plot line. Hopefully Jurassic Park IV will be better. <rolleyes>
One factor which I think played a part for why I didn't like it as much as the first two was the switch in direction. Steven Spielburg gave the reins to his production cohort, Joe Johnston. Now, while Johnston did a fairly good job for someone who was taking over a large movie franchise empire, there was too much riding on this movie that even Spielburg could fix to make "perfect". But, I think the final outcome would have been considerably better than Johnston's version. No offense to Joe Johnston.
Another fact was the lack of plot. Not only was there no creative genius theory as there was in the first one, this movie had no real plot. Unless you call two divorced people looking for their son on Isla Sorna and getting involved with dinosaurs a plot. The movie was just non-stop action. Which is ok if you like that kind of stuff. But for me, I need a "method behind the madness" type of influence. I can't just see lots of running around, lots of dinosaur chases, and lots of worried faces and expect to walk out of the theater with a satisfied grin. Perfect example: The Matrix. There is a lot of heavy metal warfare, lots of chase scenes and action, but the movie really has great theoretical support from Andy and Larry (Wachowski), who came up with the mind behind it. I think they could have expanded upon the fact that the dinosaurs can talk to each other, thus drawing out the creative genius portion of the movie.
I was very disappointed with this movie. Minimal action, practically no deaths, and a thin plot line. Hopefully Jurassic Park IV will be better. <rolleyes>