Why Does Jurassic Park III Think I'm Stupid?

[Dixon Carter Lee]

SPOILER ALERT

Don't read if you haven't seen the movie. It's not like I'm about to give away anything important (just the plot and story), but if you want to enter the Theatre "pure" look away. Look away now. I'll give you a moment.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
There. See. I'm nicer than Matt Drudge after all.

Okay, so I go to see "Jurassic Park III". I know walking in that the story will be pointless. I'm looking for CGI dinsosaurs and scary set pieces. So I'm not looking for great writing or marvellous plot twists. I have no other expectations.

But STILL, the damn movie manages to wrankle my nose with its constant insitence on replacing credibility with coincidence.

Example: We see an ENORMOUS island several times from the air. When the kid parasails down he could have landed almost anywhere on this vast expance of land. BUT. His parent's plane lands. They get out. They take a path through a dense jungle. They JUST HAPPEN TO COME UPON THE KID'S parasail. In the middle of this friggin island, with all the places they could have landed, with all the paths they could have taken..."Gee, looky what we found!" And not soon after, along the same fortune blessed trail, they find the kid! Yes, the parent's may have landed in an area that InGen had a facility in, but the kid was on a parasail -- he wasn't looking for the best place to land -- he could have landed ANYWHERE on that island. What are the odds of him crashing exactly where his parent's start looking for him? Answer: Very good if you want to keep your story "moving" and aren't willing to waste brain power coming up with things like scanners or pagers or heat seeking radar.

Another Example: They need the satellite phone the Spinosaurus has eaten. While they're on the boat they hear the phone beeping. Yup. The Spinowhatever has poopoed it out in a big dump RIGHT ON THE BANK OF THE RIVER THEY'RE TRAVELING DOWN. Wasn't that nice of Dino? How convenient. Like the biggest meat eater on the island doesn't have a billion other places to take a shit. "Hey! Where are those humans? They might need this phone. Hmm. Wonder if they'll take the river...?" Why does he dump by the river? Answer: Because the humans need the phone back.

Another Example: As the Raptors surround Grant he pulls out the Raptor resonating chamber Billy created in the States so he can "talk" to them. Why, why, why, why, why does Grant have that with him in the first place? He thought he was going on a flying tour of Jurassic Park. All you need is a toothbrush, some underwear and a book. Why does he bring this plaster Raptor resonating chamber with him? Why didn't he bring along any other palenotolgist stuff, like a chisel or a Staegasuarus tooth? Why the FUCK did he bring this along and waste his carry on bag overhead compartment space? Answer: Cause the screenwriter wrote a scene where he needs it, so he's gotta have it with him.

Another Example. Will Macy and Tea Leoni are very, very smart. They bamboozle Grant with a sophisticated act. They hire men who seems to know their way around trouble. They get a plane and figure out how to get to Costa Rica. They've been brilliant so far. So the first thing they do when they land is get out and start screaming for their kid through a bullhorn (not knowing, of course, how Godammned lucky they are for having landed YARDS away from where he did). Don't they find shelter? Don't they cary pistols? Don't they move a little more cautiously? Why are they SUDDENLY so stupid? Why are the Mercenary guys SUDDENLY so bad at their job? Answer: Cause somebody has be eaten.

Sorry. This sounds nit-picky. But when a movie uses incredible coincidence over and over again and allows smart people to suddenly become stupid just so some CGI events can take place it means the Director doesn't care how smart we are, and, in fact, thinks we're stupid. It's lazy, and not neccessary. All of the above could have been solved with very easy plot devices that would have taken up no extra screen time. We would have gotten to Dino scenes just as quickly, and enjoyed the ride a hell of a lot more.

The movie's plot is, essentially, the same as "Aliens" (expert is sent to rescue kid who has survived on his/her own against monsters), a very smart film that finds plenty of ways to get from plot point to plot point without sacrificing credibility (if lizard-men on another planet is in any way "credible" to you in the first place). I can watch that movie over and over again.

That being said, the dino scenes in JPIII are great, there's some humor and surprise in the film, and even a bit of melancholy about Grant's character. It's worth seeing.

But not more than once.

 

[Isolde]

ROFL

You know, I never watched Siskel and Ebert cause I always thought it was too boring to watch people pick apart a movie....

Heck, CDL, if you ever go into that business, I will watch your movie critic show faithfully.

It will be better than some of today's sitcoms for sure.

 

[rambling man]

No matter what the rating, the film is aimed at 12 year old boys, who will still point out the coincidences but don't care that their intelligence has been insulted

 

[MissTaken]

Shoot down the story from the beginning.....

CDL,
You might have thought that Allen would have checked out the couple claiming to have reserved seats on the first tourist trip to the moon? Didn't that strike you as oddly written as well?

And the ending.....the pteridactyls flying off , a blatant message that we can anxiously await Jurassic Park IV.

And yes, the movie is geared towards a young audience and is rated PG 13, I think. It might have been in good taste to gear some of the plot in a somewhat more adult direction so as not to insult the adults who have to sit through the movie with their children.

Oh Well. I am glad I saw it just the same.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Thank you. I'll tell Carl Day Lewis when I see him. LOL

 

[Mistress]

you got to remember this IS the third movie......nothing any more will meet anyone standards

 

[nasty]

Fun movie, nonetheless. I hink the whole speil about him, "Never in a million years will I get back on that island. OH, except for a HUGE paycheck, that is."

 

[cymbidia]

Woof. Woof. It's a dog.

I completely agree with all your criticisms, CDL, and have this to offer as well: this is the most outrageously sexist movie i've seen in years.

What did the movie tell us these guys did for a living?
Sam Neill - famous archeologist
William H. Macy - (after he finally told the truth) - tile/paint store owner
Alessandro Nivola - the hunky archeology student (too good looking to end up dead, i knew it the first time i saw him when he was oh-so kindly helping some poor blonde girl to tell the difference between rock and bone - something EVERYONE invited to work on an important dig would already know before they got that invite, btw - another example of sexism in this movie.)
Trevor Morgan - the missing son, a kid very good at survival and attitude, apparently.
Michael Jeter - the survivalist-type who isn't what he seems, nor is his business, nor are his employees. All three of these guys were destined to be Dino-sushi and we all knew it immediately, right?
don't know his name - Laura Dern's husband, the man who works with the state department and the one, it's implicated, who actually called out the Army and the Navy, and the FBI (apparently) to save the Stupids from the terrors Dino Island.

Tea Leoni - Lead character, in basically every single scene - well, umm, well... hmmm... she's a mom, right?

Laura Dern - responsible for actually saving them all from certain death - well, umm, well... hmmm... she's a mom, right?

I saw this with my almost-13 year old daughter. We talked about the movie on the drive home. (Isn't it, we thought, just a tiny bit *too* pat that, at the ending, they came out of the jungle **EXACTLY** where the mysterious Man In Black, backed by the Army and Navy, was waiting for them?) We mused and wondered why we never got to know what the women did for a living, why we barely got their names, why none of them *did* anything.

There were three women in the movie.
One, an archeologist-in-the-making, didn't know bone from rock and didn't have a name.
The second was a main character but didn't seem to do anything but scream for her son through a bullhorn, and shake and shudder when faced with a corpse. (Oh Tia. I expect better roles from you...)
The third was active in the previous JP's but has now settled down into dull domesticity and also doesn't *do* anything anymore, despite insisting wistfully at the beginning of the movie that she'd like to.

This thing barked badly, besides being a REALLY poor ride.
I'm not going to any more of them.

 

[Guest]

I would like to say, having not seen the fluck(intentional), that upon viewing the trailer, I thought......

"Nice, No whiney, bitchy kids in this one. I might actually go see this one in the theater."

They didn't show a single kid in the entire trailer!

Was that to try to con adults into thinking that this movie was geared for them, unlike the last two?


I feel raped.

God, I am glad you posted this DCL. Thank you.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Just cause I'm being nit-picky: they were paleontologists, not archaeologists. An archaeologist only studies human history.

I'm not sure what Laura Dern's character had become -- if she had actually given up her studies. You're right, it certainly wasn't clear that she was doing anything besides being a mom (a career I HIGHLY respect, by the way).

And the bit where the Navy appears on the right beach was another coincidence that just bit my ass. You're dead on about that.

 

[Starfish]

uh, Sorry, that was me.

 

[nasty]

I agree with ALL your complaints, but I still found it a bit entertaining. HOWEVER, I didn't really like it enough to give it a recommendation. I liked the comment about the kid surviving on the island,(what was it for, 8 wks,?) without a scratch. HOWEVER, the "smart" scientists can't survive 90 minuts without getting bruised, or KILLED!!!!!!!! "OH NO, dino's can set traps and communicate with each other. They must have the DNA of Albert Einstein.

 

[MunchinMark]

Well, I am a palaeontology student. So the dinosaurs and pterosaurs irked me. But realistic dinosaurs would be boring. (spinosaurus a really stupid fish/carrion eater and only two thirds that size? Resonating chambers being a sign of intelligence? Pteranodon was too lightly built to seriously risk a scrap with a human, and so on ad nauseum).

But it was a good film for those who don't care about realism and just want lots of special effects and nothing really gory. The scenes in which people died were a lot less horrific than either of it's predecessors.

And Dr. Grant didn't pack the model resonator. It was his student's lucky bag. No idea why he packed it though.

And why didn't these mercenaries check if their client was who he said he was? And that he was rich enough to pay?

And if he could pay, how many hardware store owners use hired guns? Can we expect turf wars over tile sales?

 

[sexy-girl]

i hated it too ... first off this island full of dinosuars everyone is banned from going anywhere near it ... however some guy and a kid can just speed up to it in a boat ... no one seems to be acting as security to stop people going to this island ? ... yet no other people are there no news people or would be tourists


also the start confused me where they land on the island at first and all hell breaks loose it seems to happen in such a unrealistic comedian style manner i actually started to think the film was an comedy spoof ... like scary movie but with dinosaurs

 

[Ree]

Even though I haven't seen the movie I got almost a word for word recitation from my 6 year old. His dad took him while I nursed our 4 year old who was suffering from chicken pox. I will go and see it for myself just to go but I agree that movies are not always aimed for the intelligent. Now, my budding paleantologist, and yes he knows what he has wanted to be since he was 2 and could use the word even though I am sure I can't spell it, is already wanting to buy it on video. Sometimes in life we just have to sit back and veg during a movie. I am pretty sure I didn't see the trailers claiming it to be historical or factual in content. LOL

 

[gleam]

I have a policy about never nit picking the movies I see. If you're gonna start knit picking Jurassic Park, you might as well start with the main idea; cloning dinosaurs is much more difficult than they make out. If you can accept that, the rest is easy.

My usual strategy is to just sit back and enjoy what I can. It's fiction, for pete's sake. Real life is not as interesting.

This is why I was able to enjoy movies like "Frequency" and "The Matrix" and "Dark City". They all have holes big enough to drive a truck through, but if I just ignore that and let the movie entertain me, I'm happier.

 

[Young Knave]

Good review, DCL. It annoys me when a film has so many imposssible coincidences and ridiculous events. Even if a movie is a fantasy like JP, it ruines it when a little kid defeats a velociraptor. Its just lazy writing. There's no reason a film can't have incredible special effects and tell a good story.

I'll probably go see JP3 anyway though, cause I like the dinosaurs.

 

[Never]

.. Your expectations were too high.
You should have read my review and watched FF:The Spirits Within instead.

 

[Weird Harold]

I'll probably go see JP3 anyway though, cause I like the dinosaurs.

What's liking dinosaurs got to do with JP3?

Now if you liked computer animated creations from the special effects imaginations, then going might make sense. From the special on the discovery chanell the week JP3 opened I got the distinct impression that the movie is not the most accurate depiction of dinosaurs. For example: Velocoraptors were very smart -- for dinosaurs. Compared to almost any mammal, they were imbeciles -- based on brain to body ratio.

 

[poohlive]

Actually, one thing I always thought was missing in the stories were more dinosaurs. I mean, come on, how many raptor chases and T-rex vehicle demolishing can one movie squeeze out.
I came to the third one specifically wanting to be blown away with new dinosaurs. The problem was, there were only two new ones (that were of any importance to the plot) That Spiny thing and a Ptaeridactyl (yeah, I spelled it wrong).
Actually, to tell you the truth. At the end of Jp 1 When Grant looked out and saw those birds I actually expected Ptaeridactyls to come out and start flying too. I shrugged, knowing there would be another one on the way soon enough.
One thing that bothered me was than a 12 year old boy had spent 8 weeks on the island, and one of the first thing he talks about with Grant was how bad Malcom's book sucked. That blew me away, how many semi inteligent books do 12 year olds read anyway? When I was twelve I was reading Goosebumps, and Christopher Pike. Not autobiographical occurances, or even theoritical views on Dinsoaur evolution (Grant's first book).
I suppose a 12 year old who had a great interest in dinsaurs might read it, but I'd doubt he'd understand it enough to know that Malcom was "to full of himself" as they say.
Oh, another thing that dissapointed me. I thought they were going back to Isla Nubar. The orginal island, where I thought would make a great sequel. A little depressing when the keep going back to that Sorna island.
Some parts were really funny though. I have to admit. When I saw those huge piles of crap, I thought gross. Then I watch ed as they all ran over to it, digging into the piles. That was comedy.
Or Macy's speel when he tells everyone he's a tile and bathroom guy.
Well, this just goes to show you. The sequel is the best idea Hollywood has ever come up with, unfortunately it turns into the worst pile of crap ever.
Leprachaun 4... in space? What in the hell were they thinking?
I'm going to bed.

 

[captainb]

I had the same feelings that Dixon had when I left the theater. I'd been expecting to be entertained, not to see a great movie, but just to have some goofy big-screen fun. But the inconsistencies just got in the way of real satisfaction,.

I've heard (unconfirmed) that they made an eleventh-hour change in the ending after viewing audience reactions. My feeling is that it dealt with the pterodactyls (sp) flying off at the end. Heck, if Laura Dern can mobilize a Navy and Marine task force in just a few hours based upon a garbled phone call (and guessing right about which island), those boys with guns would be prepared to do some serious dino-duking. You really think they'd let any of those critters leave the island? I'm betting the original version had the three flying dinos being blasted out of the sky by the destroyers, but the audience boo'd it so the producers opted instead for a carefree dino-on-the-breeze ending, with no one concerned at all who they would eat once they completed the longest, most appetite-building flight of their lives.

But I'd still go see JP4. Yeah, I'm a sucker.

 

[Nathon_88]

Speak of the pterodactyls

They'll catch kids and carry them off to feed their little oh-so-friggin-cute babies, and then LEAVE THEM TO GO FLYING OFF INTO THE SUNSET?!?!?!?!

PLU-FRICKING-EAAAAASE!

Other than that, DCL has it right. The movie had a plot? I didn't notice.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

I have a policy about never nit picking the movies I see.

I'm not nit-picking the movie for showing me improbably events in a situation that's improbable to begin with, I'm nit-picking the lazy story-telling. There's a difference. "Aliens" is WAY more improbable than "JP3", but the story-telling is solid.

And Ree (I know I'm gonna get it for this one, but) a six year old should not have been taken to this movie. No way, no how. But that's a another thread...

 

[cymbidia]

Thanks, DCL, for the "archeologist" vs. "paleontologist" correction. When i posted that, i'd *just* returned from taking the GRE (Graduate Record Examination, a really brutal three hour test designed to weed one into or out of grad school) and all my intellectual circuits were crispy critters.

That said, i love what i call "dollar movies" (when i was in college and on a tight budget, there was one theater that offered cheap movies - dollar movies - and that's where i saw most my movies for a couple years), love to snuggle into the seat (yeh, i'm one who puts her feet up on the seat in front of me so no one will sit there - it's self defense - i'm *short*) and willingly suspend all insistence on logic or real life corollaries in order to be amused/entertained by a movie. If i didn't how could i have enjoyed something like "Chicken Run" so much?

However, JPIII just asks too much. As DCL said, it's lazy writing, not good story-telling, that prompts this movie to ask of the viewer the leaps in suspended-belief it asks.

Lazy writing, despite the really good job the actors did, dulls the entire movie and makes it very difficult for most (except the 12 year old boys at whom it was so obviously aimed, otherwise, why that boy-in-trouble protagonist?) to walk out of this movie thinking it was time and money spent on an movie experience of value.

 

[Markov Cain]

Because of the T-shirt my wife wears when we go out together.