The studio should be ashamed of this movie. Delusions and nonsense. They ruined a fairly mature franchise. There is nothing to do to copy the original film. Apparently, his ideas are over for 2 hours. Very bad, and most importantly - I want to sleep with these movies. 3/ 10. Three only for Laura Dern and Jeff Goldblum.🤫
As we remember, in the previous part we are given to understand that dinosaurs have now become full-fledged inhabitants of our world, breaking out of the boundaries of parks or islands, and we will have to somehow coexist with them. Coexistence is difficult. I don’t understand why the world didn’t get the most dangerous. But here, perhaps, again about humanism and "we are responsible for those..." Let's say. However, of course, the evil people in the evil corporations are again trying to cash in on this story, which in turn, of course, will lead to terrible consequences.
In general, the plot is typical to the outrage, although the integration of dinosaurs into our world as an idea is quite interesting. But when you see that a man on a horse with a lasso is hunting a dinosaur that is three times bigger and stronger than this horse, and just catches it, it becomes clear that the creators took this integration idea as an idea, but what to do with this idea was not long thought. And here are cases like this, when what happens on the screen, it looks frankly stupid, this tape is full! And it's very depressing, actually. All films of the history of the Jurassic period have always been with elements of farce, but only he did not look as naive as in “Dominion”.
On the other hand, I can’t say that the film is infuriating. No, it looks good. And even with interest, although you constantly catch yourself thinking that the plot is developing somehow strangely, and the actions of the characters in places cause huge questions. The film is still spectacular. And to be honest, I was somewhat surprised by the feedback from some critics that the graphics aren't high. In this regard, I personally was satisfied. As well as the return of old acquaintances - Ellie Sattler, Alan Grant and Ian Malcolm, whom we all remember from the first original film. And, if the latter we briefly showed at the end of the second part of the “world”, the rest appear in this trilogy for the first time. It was great to see these heroes again.
I don’t know if this movie is going to be the end of the trilogy, or if the creators are going to keep making more films. I'd stop. Yes, this is not a brilliant conclusion, but quite worthy of itself. And most importantly, the topic for the development of the plot, I think, is already exhausted. In this film, it seemed to me, the emphasis shifted from dinosaurs to another, so to speak, object, which can not be named, as it will be a spoiler. But such shifts of attention can further lead to such stupidity that without tears it will be impossible to look.
The special effects are excellent, there is no script. The film has lost its main focus. In all previous installments, throughout each film, dinosaurs broke free. And here they are from the very beginning. And then what to look at them, where is the action with the escape of dinosaurs and the subsequent salvation from them? Here they live near people, not interesting. It's an ordinary blockbuster, with dinosaurs in the background. In addition, there is no sane script for the film. The characters are one-sided and unambiguous, as in children's cinema, they lack depth. The main antagonist is pathetic and helpless, does not attract the main villain at all. Against him, large guns are not needed, administrative measures of influence, such as anonymity to superiors and removal from office, are enough. But the special effects, graphics and tricks are very good, just the highest level. With the action even overdone, he is here to the place and not to the place. But without a good script, that’s not enough. A movie to watch and forget. While you're watching, you won't take your eyes off the screen. But at the end of the session, nothing will remain in memory. Cinema is purely for entertainment, a visual show.
Even before the publication of this novel, the largest studios and best directors, such as Tim Burton and Spielberg, began to fight for the right to film. Now it is more like a story about Stephen King, but then filmmakers drew attention to the book is not the most famous now in the literary field of Michael Crichton and his “Jurassic Park”. The film was eventually shot by Spielberg, making literally a technical revolution in cinema and raising huge money - the picture was the highest grossing before the Titanic.
The first trilogy of films ended, and in 2015 the series decided to continue, modernize and raise more money. Last year, "Jurassic World: Dominance" was released, which in the rating of its colleague - the author of "Cinema Amnesia" became the worst film of 2022. Recently I watched this attraction with dinosaurs, which I loved since childhood and read many different encyclopedias.
To be honest, it didn't work out very well. The plot is banal, confused, logic and motivation of the characters is extremely questionable. We tried to put pressure on nostalgia with references and an almost complete cast from the very first part, but all this looks strange and even comical.
The only thing to praise is the graphics and camera work. Footage with dinosaurs, chases, action - all this looks cheerful and convincing, maybe only in vain added animatronics, there is a contrast with the graphics. Perhaps this is a tribute to the original.
As a result, this is an average film that can be watched in the evening under a snack or in the background. A little nostalgia and dinosaurs, nothing else special.
Such emotions are caused by the third “Jurassic World”. The sequel, which for an hour and a half locked the viewer in a stuffy basement, not really showing any dinosaurs, or anything else interesting, was left behind, and the triquel promised to become incredibly large-scale, spectacular, and therefore by default should have been better than the second part. But in fact, the same eggs came out, only in a larger pan.
“Dominance” in theory actually gives you a walk – there are two big storylines, and a bunch of heroes, including old acquaintances from the original “Parks”, and an action shot, and all over the world rolled, and that’s kind of technically all it takes to become a good blockbuster. Nope. In fact, “The Dominance” turns out to be absolutely dull, overloaded, with lame dynamics, a film that is absolutely not entertaining. It does not entertain for the same reason as the second. Triquel is still not about dinosaurs.
Yes, we have human problems in the foreground again, some genetically modified locusts, some corporate conspiracies and a completely indistinct human antagonist. The human antagonist in the dinosaur blockbuster, Carl! To look at all this fuss is completely uninteresting.
Which is funny, given the number of things going on. However, to call these events other than “fool” simply does not work. Yes, someone runs somewhere, shoots, infiltrates, catches up, dinosaurs fight among themselves and attack people, but all this is still incredibly depressing. Whether the blockbusters in its core I am already tired, or “dominance” is doing something wrong, but the tape is just not captivating.
While probably the main reason for this is simple - the triquel, like the sequel, is a script very weak work with weak characters, motivations and everything else that fictional personalities should have. What's happening on the screen is not interesting to watch because you don't care about the main characters. I don’t care because they are still empty cards. And it feels like the main characters in the person of, by the way, Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard with each part are becoming more cardboard. You do not feel any empathy for them as individuals, and therefore you do not want to watch their adventures. You don’t believe in events or characters at the end, and Graphon artists can twist as much as they want, forcing dinosaurs to chase heroes – the emotional exhaust from this is zero.
Verdict: Dominance is a very lazy and poorly written blockbuster that evokes no emotion. He's too gray even to be disliked. It's just there.
In the first half, the film still remembers its purpose and shows the coexistence of humans and dinosaurs - very weak, small, sometimes cliched, but still he tries. The plot is to kidnap a girl and a baby raptor, why do they need them? Their DNA is valuable for science, medicine, and to fix mega locusts.
Kidnapping a girl awakens Cthulhu in the face of her adoptive parents, automatically raises a reasonable question - why not just take a bunch of biomaterial from her (you need DNA, not a girl). With a slight movement of the hand, one of the plot conflicts bursts, and at the same time, an unnecessary wooden character merges.
A bad evil corporation keeps all the animals in the reserve. And, not evil, but stupid, not a corporation, and ' antagonist' in the face of the manager. It is not clear how such a small person was entrusted with the object. He is poked in the face with the problem of locusts, but he first brushes off (and this is the second plot conflict built), and when he admits his mistake, he sets a fire.
Because ... locusts did not want to burn, climbed into the ventilation, flew out of the building, flew and only then lazily died, setting a fire. Excuse me -- what? Worse than the idea of this turn, can only be the construction of the building and its security system - how do you even have the entire park has not run through the ventilation?
Dinosaurs through the chips signal to leave the fire in the shelter, and then begins a wild absurdity that he even want to comment.
- All dinosaurs go to one point, without dividing into species, predators and herbivores, not into a shelter, but into some square in front of the building. The lack of space and a lot of conflicts between animals, apparently, were not provided.
- All employees are evacuated (why, the fire clearly does not threaten you), and when the heroes come to the remote, there is no energy. So, from a forest fire, have you switched off all the generators in the building? In any other film of the franchise, the security and logic of the system were many times higher.
The plot is on two crutches. And the sponsor of both is the stupidity of the manager. Had he acted a little smarter, there would have been no conflict (or plot).
And the main thing Park was accused of long ago was the behavior of dinosaurs. Rex's skirmish in the middle of the film was pretty good. These are primarily Animals, not killing machines, so when Rex was bitten a couple of times, he left shamefully. In the wild, animals don’t just fight to the death. However, in the final we and the dinosaurs disappeared from the shelter, and there were only three left & #39; combat & #39;. And they decided to fight without any reason.
Separately amusing the attention of dinosaurs to people. Not only do ALL dinosaurs immediately try to attack (they are not fed at all there?), big creatures run after people, who should not care about such a trifle at all (it is unlikely that a lion will hunt meerkats).
In the end, what do we have?
This is a computer graphics attraction (like 90% of new movies). The plot of the film is still trying in the first half, but in the second finally slides into clichés, extra pathos and self-repeats. Focus on the main topic 'man+dinosaurs=coexistence' practically no (we showed dinosaurs in fight clubs, how original), except for the final shots.
You can look out of boredom if all you need is a fun picture (half a point for this), some interesting scenes about ' People + Dino' (half a point) and just a little bit of plot.
6 out of 10
This is the last part about dinosaurs. Looking at the fees, we can say that people remain interested in this topic, and what can I say, I too. But with each film, the quality of what you see is limping more and more. The problem with the series is the same: the further away, the fewer ideas and the desire of the creators to do something creative. So, as with the third film of the original trilogy, I have a number of complaints. But I will not deceive, there is still a share of positive and emotional pleasure in the tape.
Plot. There is not much to say here, it was four years after the previous picture and what was behind the scenes is especially not disclosed. The story revolves around a girl, Maisie, and a newborn Rapter, who are stolen by poachers for their research. And in parallel, the problem with the developed locust will also be solved, which destroys the crop. It's a three as always, but it's still less complicated. I have more questions about the second line than the first. It's not that interesting, and it's about dinosaurs very indirectly. That is, including the works, I expect to see something different than the plot of the trivial story of the disaster. But there's one here for someone positive, and for someone there's not a moment that we can watch actors from the original 1993 film. I can say that it was nice to see them, but they were given too much screen time. But their presence added to their curiosity.
If questions arise regarding history, then visually everything is very qualitative. The budget of the film is not that big, for this kind of paintings, but the designers and people responsible for special effects did a great job. I really liked how dinosaurs looked, there were both individuals from the first parts and completely new ones. This does not leave the viewer dissatisfied. In addition, the locations are also pleasing, here, as well as forest nature and winter landscapes and warm rich colors. I have had a lot of aesthetic pleasure. But sometimes it was difficult because of the stupidity of what was happening on the screen. I can say that if dinosaurs are visually beautiful, then they are clearly deprived of intelligence. In this film, they are really stupid, especially when compared to the early parts. And there are moments during the viewing, where it manifests itself a lot. And the final battle is some sort of escape into fiction beyond reason. And what's strange to me is that little attention has been given to raptors when it's essentially the franchise's flagship.
Over. I can say that this is not the best end of the series and most of the claims to the tape are justified. However, despite this, if you like dinosaurs, then you can enjoy watching. For a number of shortcomings, I can not recommend the work for viewing, as it would be wrong. But, if you like early works and have a great desire to plunge back into the prehistoric world, then for the sake of individual scenes and emotions it can be done.
The universal love of dinosaurs is hard to deny. These creatures, inhabiting our planet many millions of years ago, are so beautiful and so unique that from a good blockbuster on this topic, hardly anyone will refuse.
But here's the bad luck. One dinotem for the film is not enough. It is necessary to somehow attach a good plot, meaningful dialogues and at least a little plausibility and logic to everything that is happening.
After all, dinosaurs are not fiction. This is a reality, albeit from the past, but still a reality.
For what reason the film tries to distance us from the likely scenarios of the return of ancient creatures and plunges us into the world of absolutely incredible, I do not understand.
We learn that in just 30 years, for an unreasonable and indistinctly interpreted reason, our pets began to live all over the planet, pushing back horses, monkeys, elephants and other animals of our time. A red book? I haven't heard. Genetic engineering will lift any species to its feet. Guarantee from Biosinc.
After watching the film, I learned for myself that deer are blind and deaf, that one of the coolest predators - the cycloceptor has a vision of minus five and is not able to catch up with a person, and his level of coordination in space is no higher than a drunken drug addict.
I also learned that if you reboot the server, you can bring the locust back to life.
In general, the events of this film is clearly not stingy. The action here is enough and not even without the crown final fight Triceratops with another “mega-uber-large” predator in the universe, as expected, in the rain.
The canonical cast brightens the whole picture a little, but in some episodes, the thought “What have I forgotten here?” slips on their faces.
I wouldn’t say the picture is really bad. It remains the popcorn movie that will brighten up your dull evening. The film came out not boring and I repeat that there are a lot of events in it, as well as characters, most of which will be allowed under the tooth. Which no one regrets.
This part is the most beautiful, socially and environmentally oriented. The series has evolved from children’s to educational in many ways. What's next?
The second ' World...' was very successful, earned more than a billion at the box office, and almost approached the first part in terms of fees. And its ending clearly hinted at a sequel, so naturally it happened.
And at first it seems to you that the creators took into account the mistakes of the predecessor: finally, dinosaurs are shown more often, this time even without a super rigid genetically modified Chelmedvedoswin, but this was not the case! As soon as you think that there will be cool scenes of interaction between prehistoric animals and people, the film shows the thumb. After all, one of the main storylines, attention, is devoted to the struggle of old characters with mutated locusts!
Yes, you heard right, Sattler, Grant and Malcolm returned to the plot only for the sake of them running around the labs and trying to stop the local Doctor Evil in the face of an aged Dodgson.
'Who?' - a person from ' Guardians of the Galaxy'. For those of you who don't know, Dodgson ordered the embryos to Dennis Nadry in the original. Does anyone even remember him? Okay, he was the main antagonist in The Lost World 39, but those who don’t follow the franchise will hardly remember who it is. And so it is in everything. It seems that the creators are trying to stuff fan service everywhere, but it does not work. They just repeat scene after scene from the original, and instead of joy you have a Spanish shame.
There are a lot of heroes this time. Half can be cut in peace. Pratt is no longer running for Dallas Howard, thank you. But there is another problem - the creators stupidly did not know what to do with their relationship, so they did not come up with anything more interesting than to push the love interest of Star-Lord to the third place. And most of the characters of the second part stupidly thrown out in the cold.
Old characters are only needed to lure fans to the movies (judging by the fees, it turned out), there are no interesting moments with them. And plus all this vinaigrette of heroes, the writers decided to add more and new! It makes no sense to even write about them separately, they turned out to be so gray that now I do not even remember them. . .
Well, maybe the dinosaurs were great. Nope. As I said, the main conflict here is built around locusts, and therefore prehistoric reptiles are not shown as often. But yes, there were a couple of really cool scenes. The Counton really ruins everything. In this part, he's worse than everyone else. Dinosaurs in a few moments really lay! And that's in a movie with a budget of almost $200 million! So at this point the picture succeeded fifty by fifty.
As a result, I want to say that the main problem of this tape is not that the accent was shifted to the side of no one interesting locusts, and not even in faded characters, but that to watch ' Jurassic World 3' banal boring. This is the most template blockbuster without any attempt at originality. So he'll be forgotten. Yes, the picture again collected a billion, but in a few years no one will remember it. The creators are likely to shoot a bunch of similar sequels and also raise money, but there is no sense in this. I'm sorry.
4 out of 10
After the greatly underrated "Falled Kingdom" in the director's chair again sat down Colin Trevorrow, who shot the most unsuccessful part - the first "Jurassic World". Despite the promises that “now everything will be different”, that the director has gained experience over the years, the third “World”, which was called “Domination”, disappointed literally everyone.
The seventh (including "Battle of Big Rock") tape based on the novels of Michael Crichton was a chic advertising campaign. What was uploaded to the Internet six months before the rolling premiere, caused delight, but ... in the film itself it is not! His sweetest highlight, although, to be more precise, even a few highlights, the director cut and left for the full version. Which, however, do not particularly want to watch, because there is one unpleasant moment with the oviraptor.
The advantage Trevorrow now emphasized is the variety of animals. This time, not only dinosaurs, but also pterosaurs appear more often. The film is worth thanking for the fact that after watching it, viewers will learn about such recently discovered animals as dreadnought and dreadnought - the first is a small relative of the Tyrannosaurus, and the second giant sauropod, which is also known for a fairly well-preserved skeleton. There is another creature in the film, which the audience dreamed of seeing, probably in the third Park. I won't name him, but I'll just say one word: claws. The first scene with his participation causes goosebumps, but the last one leaves much to be desired.
However, the finale deserves a separate conversation. The feeling is that it is designed for young children who do not understand how animals behave and what food pyramids are. Contrary to Crichton’s original source, and contrary to all common sense, the third Jurassic World tells us almost literally that animals are good creatures and, unlike humans, they will surely live peacefully if they are revived. The very idea that the director should explain such an obvious mistake cannot help but be ridiculous. It’s a failure so bad that if it weren’t for a bunch of new dinosaurs and pterosaurs, the movie would be as bad as the first World. And then, as far as the boss is concerned... It was reconstructed very inaccurately. It looks more like a fantasy dragon than a theropod dinosaur.
In conclusion, I shake my head a little because of the underwater scene in which the cloned predator apparently got a jet engine, reproach the film for not enough murders (this is also in the thriller!), and put honest ones:
5 out of 10
In our time, there is a tendency to try to resurrect cult films, or to parasitize on the unprecedented success of days gone by in order to make money. Aged actors are attracted, "necromancy" in the big movie literally everywhere. Suffice it to recall a pretty old Sarah Conor with a cyborg T-800 CS 101 retired Arnold Schwarzenegger or some new parts of Disney's "Star Wars" with elderly Princess Leia, Han Solo, Luke Skywalker. But there are also “resurrection” films in which it was decided to do without the older cult actors with whom films are usually associated: for example, new parts of “Alien” and “Predator”. Actually, what I mean. Are movies worse than attracting new actors? In my opinion, no.
In the next part of the world of the Jurassic period decided not to reinvent the wheel and went on the beaten track ... or rather, they have long walked on it. Back in 1997, some five years after the success of the first part, the second part was released in which there was a character Ian Malcolm. In Jurassic World: Dominance, we will see Ian Malcolm again, and for a quarter of a century he has hardly changed, the actor looks great. Sam Neal, who played Alan Grant again (21 years later!) at 74, also looks cheerful, which can not be said about Laura Dern (Ellie Sattler). When the actors stood next to each other, it seemed like they were the same age (and Laura Dern was younger). Why did I spend so much time on attracting older actors? Because most of the time, that's all I thought about. Not the story itself. It shouldn't be like this. I believe that the attempt to leave only due to nostalgia failed.
Jurassic World: Dominance is the same naive and children's movie as the two previous parts of 2015 and 2018. The film has significant drawbacks. Theatrical and prophesy has become many times more. The plot is not even delusional (again written on the knee!). Characters are all too easy. In this film, as well as in the two previous Jurassic World, you do not care about the characters absolutely, because on a subconscious level you feel that everything will be fine, that good will defeat evil, because the film is a children’s one! Secondary characters are too altruistic (to put it mildly), and villains are not formidable enough, again without a guard armed to the teeth.
What I didn’t like was the overly explicit references to the first part of 1993, which seemed to stuff the viewer into his mouth. "Here, eat!" I counted at least four references! Four, Carl! This sinned the fifth failed part of the Terminator, and here again stepped on the same rake.
Of the positive aspects, it is worth noting that the action is more than in the previous parts of Jurassic World. Real cool shooting with fast raptors against the background of the Middle Eastern color of ancient ruins is like a breath of fresh air, but it did not last long.
Summarizing. The masterpiece of 1993 could not be repeated, I think such a task was not worth it. Just look at the old actors of childhood surrounded by dinosaurs? Well, that's weird. I liked the scenes of lizard fights among themselves, quite spectacular. Like a feature film, about nothing. The last nail in the coffin of the franchise?
3 out of 10
... Looking at how Sam Neil and Jeff Goldblum look in their 60s... Inadvertently and you want to come to this age as soon as possible and become not that "daddy", but even ... "daddy".
But! Let’s not talk about fun, albeit in a good sense of the word, the good of the fun in the film itself in general and not ... And it's for good luck! Being the world-famous mass adventure franchise World/Jurassic Park, in this part does not follow the path of such popular family projects and does not slide into idiotic jokes in the spirit of "Marvel" and other mass, with the same type of grindings and the same principle of humor, which has become obsolete. In general, for the lack of consumer stupid humor, but for a few small competent and neat humorous inserts - thank you! But I think I am distracted. .
... Collecting quite average reviews and ratings in the post-Soviet space, and, like, especially vociferously not exploding at the box office, the film itself is remarkable not only for the return of old cult heroes. But, in my opinion, the best spectacle of the entire modern trilogy of “the story” about dinosaurs! Moreover, the best that in the picture, what in the locations, what in the music, what in the drawing of dinosaurs, what in the selection of characters, what in references to the classics and interspersing it here under a different, modern and very tasty sauce. In a word, the movie was a success, and it’s really cool! And it’s cool at least because for the first time in many views of everything modern and fresh... I was sincerely interesting and boring, and the variety of locations and dinosaurs themselves, coupled with beautiful actors / heroes – well, just conquered!
There are no questions about the movie, you ask me, and you are right. It is a sincere surprise what the character of Jeff Goldblum turned into – on the one hand, the masterpiece image of a solid handsome styler in old age is admired, on the other hand – as if smoked-pumped with white powder (not washing) – through the electrodes released by his Jan. Quite surprisingly, his similar state and the resulting my characteristic, given how beautiful and adequate, consistent and harmonious look his on-screen colleagues and peers Laura Dern and Sam Neal and how beautiful and beautifully shown their history, their thoughts of desire, interests. How great and precise their characters got into this film and how nice they look there! No way home! The rest of the question... well... Of course, you can find fault with some logical actions and actions, for example, how a pterodactyl can reach and even exceed the speed of an aircraft, and about how it avoids air resistance at such a speed and such a height I generally keep silent. As striking is the joint coexistence of running horses and dinosaurs, a dinosaur and a little girl at the fountain, birds and pterodactyls... (To be honest, I can hardly believe in such an idealized perspective, to put it mildly!) I am sure that such conventions in the film are still enough – I personally did not count and do not plan to count – no matter how you turn it, and this film is fantastic, family, mass, fabulous... and to find fault with the logic of the characters and various inconsistencies, it is like demanding sensuality and compassion from the robot – it is better not to...
I really liked the number and variety of dinosaurs in the film – along with the six main characters – they are the epicenter of the plot of the whole film and appear with equal frequency, very often and in completely different locations! All six main characters are simply BEAUTIFUL, and in the literal sense of the word: both the actors are beautiful, regardless of the age difference (from a teenage girl to old people) and their actions are logical, pleasant and cute.
I really liked the camera and plot ideas: this is a scene with a swamp, and a mini-horror with the main antagonist, and quite rare locations for films, and the inclusion in the plot of the story with locusts, and the separation of pairs in one of the key moments on the principle of the character from “Park” and “World” – as an indissoluble and parallel connection with the past and the present.
There are a lot of repetitions, BUT! repetitions barely noticeable from Jurassic Park, and with the participation of both new and old heroes! These are similar jeeps, and shelter behind the car and much more!
Well, the fact that the hotly loved and familiar theme from the 94th does not itch here the whole film, but appears point-by-point and true only in separate, but logical for insertion moments. Once again confirms the fact that the creation of this tape approached wisely, with meaning, and with... LOVE!
8 out of 10
P.S. Thank you so much for the nostalgia, which turned out so well to be the old in a new form and in first class quality!!
In recent years, viewers around the world have been able to tirelessly watch how well-known stories are being modified, and it would seem that the fact that they are again trying to breathe life into them should only motivate the creation of unique quality products, but not all of them can be safely called successful and, as a result, we can get something very similar to Jurassic World: Dominance.
If we talk about this series of films in a comparative vein, then of course, that the original trilogy will prevail over the less successful sequels. At one time, Steven Spielberg created a real masterpiece, while increasing interest not only in this adventure film, but also in the eponymous science fiction novel Michael Crichton. Thanks to Spielberg, “Jurassic Park” will long linger in the title of reference movie about dinosaurs, as a franchise, the greatness of which is built on very real arguments and logic, as well as dizzying species of creatures that inhabited our planet millions of years ago, from the species of which the blood freezes in the veins.
"Jurassic World: Dominance" - the final film of the series "Jurassic Park", which is unable to put a final point in this story, it is rather a fat gap, which the creators of the picture are struggling to fill with an attractive visual. I believe that “dominance” is not something that is not without flaws, and of them it practically consists. Perhaps, everything that happens in this film is absolutely illogical and unrelated, as a result of which the overall picture looks slim, it significantly lacks integrity both in the plot and in the cast of the project. The plot of the film I would describe the word “contradictory”, because this feature is completely inconsistent with the ideas that were laid in the basis of this franchise. A rather indistinct impression develops after viewing, since Dominion does not feel a full-fledged film in view of the fact that there is no clear storyline and there is no real opportunity to assess who is the main character of the picture.
The plot tells us about the real superiority of the dinosaurs who broke free after the fall of Isla Nublar and, as a result, now visitors to the cafe do not pay due attention to the prehistoric creatures flying over their heads, as well as fishermen have become accustomed to the idea that they are not alone in fishing. Perhaps, the direct description of the film no longer inspires confidence, because since the days of “Park” we clearly remember the warning that nothing good will come as a result of such a neighborhood. Moreover, the picture is like a sponge absorbs a kind of classic set of cinema-clichés from which it becomes not at all. The desire to justify genetic engineering in all possible scenarios makes the finale of the saga similar to “Excellence” or the movie “I, Robot”, and infinitely distances “Dominance” from the first part of “Jurassic World”. Our eyes open banal fantastic film, and not the best quality. The heroes of the film are able to almost fly and fall from incredible heights, while giving a head start not only to Ethan Hunt, and the entire cast of the Avengers, and scenes with aircraft maneuvering give the pilot much more talented than Han Solo himself. All this would look very organic, did not start the first film with a dinosaur park.
While watching, I still haven’t decided what the filmmakers were trying to achieve by inviting veterans of the original series, such as Sam Neal(Dr. Grant), Laura Dern(Dr. Settler) and Jeff Goldbum(Ian Malcolm). It would seem that the actors were supposed to be a great addition and dilute the film, making a note of nostalgia, but in fact what was happening more like a tasteless and cheap trick, because their characters are not worked out at all, and it is quite obvious that the actors were invited only to reach a larger audience, but this technique did not work, as well as the desire to pull the blanket of popularity on themselves. Behind all these nonsense in an unknown direction, Bryce Dallas Howard disappeared, but she was originally included in the list of the main characters of the story, like Chris Pratt. Acting, by the way, also fell sharply along with the ratings.
The desire to add the main musical composition from the original trilogy was not always appropriate. In pursuit of the desire to please everyone, even the soundtracks caused a certain hostility from the realization that no one was particularly tense even about this.
I think the lack of desire to create something colossally new and high-quality ruined Jurassic World: Dominance, and since this is the finale of the saga, it also destroyed the whole story. The slogan “everything new is the well-forgotten old” did not work and only proved the lack of imagination in the form of endless caricature repetitions, justified only by an acute desire for commercialization.
The main thing that never left me during the whole review was how amazingly helpless Hollywood teams are on major projects in recent years. It's so bad that it's almost good (no).
It's terrible. And I’m not even talking about this particular movie, but in general about the trend of the last many years with all the sequels, triquels, remakes and everything that Hollywood producers feed us.
There's just no censorship. Seriously. Not one. Censorship. Words.
Parade of self-repeats, fan service, cheap cranberries and good places, but again secondary (if not tertiary), with very rare exceptions of action.
I rarely write reviews. Especially for the obviously passing movie. But this film is so indicative in its symptoms of script, directorial and other impotence that hands reached for the keyboard.
It’s not the worst movie I’ve seen in my life. For the film scored even 3-4 action moments, which was something interesting. And the old men are pretty sweet, in their efforts to keep up with the pumped pratt, and his useless friend. In fact, they are even more useful than the main characters, which is good.
And dinosaurs are beautiful, fangish and frisky. What cannot be taken away, cannot be taken away.
But all these little things only emphasize the general oppressive incompetence.
Oh, yeah. There is also a transhumanist/conservation message. More clumsy and, at the same time, contradicting itself in the events of the film, 'deep thought' you will need to look for a...
And, of course, the snack question. The cry of the soul into the void. Why would you want to go to a dinosaur movie? Why, Karl, behind what fry??
3 out of 10 for the sake of objectivity. But I'd rather have a 1. At least it would be more interesting to watch.
The theme of dinosaurs was beaten, beyond recognition, almost like the T-Rex of all their rivals in the ring, sorry. . . reserve.
In general, the first 3 films about the park, after that 3 films about the world of the Jurassic period - does not look like something sky-high for the franchise world. The same Star Wars or Marvel Universe - it is already very difficult to count how many films in each of them.
But the secret to the success of these franchises is a new story in each film, a new twist or a couple of interesting characters.
Here, by the end of the film, I had terrible déjà vu from the first trilogy, I even saw familiar actors (I am about Laura Dern and Sam Neal). But nostalgia here does not smell, because it is difficult to pull nostalgia for a poorly worked out, already known to everyone to the painful plot. But let's be clear.
The first thing that is incredibly striking is the framing of the scenes. That is, even the most elementary dialogues of their pair of replicas, which could be shot in one frame or glued together from two neighboring cameras, manage to split into some small parts, and the use of this technique is everywhere, plus a complete lack of pressure and long, sustained scenes make the film slideshow. And half the frames of this slide show can be thrown out.
Second, that's just what you can throw away. The movie runs 2.5 hours. But judging by the feeling, you could put everything in 1.5. A lot of absolutely auxiliary scenes, especially with action, which go on a quick change of frames, changing locations and storylines. And at some point, I caught myself thinking: 'Wow, wow... and what about the villains, some of them are toothless'.
The third is the protagonists and antagonists. In general, with the main characters and their motivation is clear. But here are the villains. Well, they're not doing anything particularly sinister. It does not become clearer about the global plan of the villainous corporation, only the main characters mention that everything is for the sake of controlling the food market. But neither the villain nor any footage at all confirm this! That is, the main antagonist, the head of the corporation - well, just walks around, just upset that something did not work out, but that's all. In general, zero real interest in their beliefs and ideas.
In short and in the end.
It's banal to madness. I really wanted to turn off at any moment of the film because of toothless and stupid dialogue, because of the slurred admixture of nostalgia to a bad plot and constantly jumping shots.
But I looked, apparently, like all the other people who provided good box office fees. Don’t make a mistake if you haven’t seen it yet. Turn it off if you think you're being cheated, and instead of a good movie, they show this.
I divided this review into 2 parts: the prologue and the film itself.
Prologue.
Plot:
The event takes place about 65 million years ago, when the earth was inhabited by dinosaurs. Two large predators, Tyrannosaurus and Giganotosaurus, collide, as a result of the battle, the T-rex dies and a mosquito sits on it, drinking blood from it. Then in our time, Tyrannosaurus from the island of Nublar is pursued in the forests of the Sierra Nevada, but breaks into a car theater, they try to put her to sleep, but she runs back into the forest.
Strengths of the prologue:
- Of course, dinosaurs:
Here they look alive again. Their world looks very beautiful and diverse.
- New dinosaurs:
Here appear quetzalcoatl, dreadnought, oviraptor, drizzle, iguanodon and Giganotosaurus.
- Final scene:
The moment a T. rex runs in the forests of the Sierra Nevada and breaks into a car theater is incredibly cool.
Weaknesses of the prologue:
- Feathered Tyrannosaurus:
Why did T-rex add feathers when its design in previous parts was not changed due to recognition? But here probably the creators decided to make it more realistic.
-Shipped Giganotosaurus:
Instead of taking the finished design from Jurassic World Evolution, the creators began to come up with all sorts of spikes. Why make a dragon out of it so that people can distinguish it from a Tyrannosaurus?
Opinion from the prologue:
I really liked the prologue, for the beautiful world of dinosaurs, for the new dinosaurs and for the T-rex scene in the cinema.
9 out of 10
A movie.
Strengths of the film:
- Plot:
Many people scold the film for the plot, but I liked it. It deals with such topics as environmental catastrophe, monopoly on the world market, human greed and what man is capable of to achieve his goals.
- Characters:
First, characters from the old trilogy reappear here: Alan Grant, Ellie Sattler and Ian Malcolm. Two teams from two trilogies interact with each other. The third positive new characters are Kayla Watts and Ramsay Cole. Fourth, it’s an acting game and I liked Malcolm the most because he’s always joking, even when things happen.
- Scene action:
There are all sorts of action scenes, like the chase of the Atrociraptors after Owen on a motorcycle or the attack of quetzalcoatl.
Return of Carnotaurus and Dilophosaurus:
These are the dinosaurs that were supposed to be here. Carnotaurus appeared in the last film, and Dilophosaurus has not appeared since the first Jurassic Park.
References to previous parts:
For example, in the BioSyn reserve, in addition to Rexy, there are two more tyrannosaurs from Sorna Island from the second Jurassic Park.
- Maisie Lockwood disclosure:
It is said that Maisie did not create Benjamin Lockwood, but Charlotte Lockwood created the first human clone and Maisie has an interesting arch.
- Dinosaurs:
The main plus of the film, and here they are a huge number, including both old and new. Among the new ones are: Giganotosaurus, Theresinosaurus, Atrociraptors, Pyroraptor, Dimetrodons, Dreadnought, Dimetrodon, Moros and many others, and many of them are scientifically reliable.
Weaknesses:
Absence of some old and new dinosaurs
I wrote that there is a Carnotaurus and a Dilophosaurus, but I expected Spinosaurus, Ceratosaurus, Mamenchisaurus, Pachycepholosaurus and Coritosaurus to come back, but as you can see, they are not here, and what would be the cool moments with them. I also wrote that there is a Giganotosaurus and dreadnought, but I expected that there would be a Pachyrinosaurus, Zuchomim and microceratops, but they did not appear here either.
Rate of narrative:
The film lasts 147 minutes and the characters are constantly in Malta, then in the BioSyn laboratory.
- The main villain:
The villain here is Lewis Dodgson, who first appeared in the first Jurassic Park and is played here by another actor. Lewis Dodgson is the most boring villain in the franchise because he is pathetic, boring, not self-sufficient. His death from dilophosaurus was expected and not very interesting.
- Locusts:
One of the main problems of the film is the locust and there is a lot of it. But they promised to show the coexistence of dinosaurs with humans, but instead the main threat was the locust. Henry Wu corrected his mistakes and pasted Maisie's DNA into modified locusts and this locust was able to change all locusts at once. I don't understand how it's possible.
- No guards:
There must be people guarding the labs. If anyone gets in there, there's no one who can stop them.
- Final battle:
The final battle of Tyrannosaurus and Giganotosaurus, joined by Theresinosaurus, is terrible. It's not because the fights are weird, it's terrible for one simple reason, it happened at night because I could barely see it. This is not forgivable, even remembering the final battles of the previous two parts here looks bad.
Ignoring Isla-Sorna:
I have a particular interest in this island and I have not seen it since the Third Jurassic Park. I would like to once again plunge into the atmosphere of this island and see it again, for the last time.
-Small scale:
I mean, there are no dinosaurs in town. Show at least one scene of a dinosaur wandering through a city, a forest, a meter, it would be a great scene. a Tyrannosaurus or a Giganotosaurus could show how powerful and dangerous it is, and what was shown in the film is a Giganotosaurus-boring carnivorous, died of a Ty-rex is nothing compared to the Indominus. It is a hybrid, but indomine developed throughout the first part, and here the Giganotosaurus appeared and died immediately. He was shown only to be bigger and stronger than Tyrannosaurus, but he still loses because Rexy will beat anyone.
Opinion:
I really liked this movie. This is a good ending to the cult franchise.
I do not understand those who hate the film, it is certainly not perfect, but even the first Jurassic Park is not perfect, but you can get used to Domination.
Let us forgive all dinosaurs, let them live among us, we will create enclosures for dangerous dinosaurs (for predators), because they would attack everyone. At the end of the film, a little dinosaur eats from the hand of a little girl like a pigeon. All characters are reunited, including Blue and Beta.
The first question is, where is the nearly one billion green rustling unbacked dollars at the box office? Who does this in the United States and in the world? I would honestly not give a ruble for this parody of dinosaurs, it is just a mockery of the viewer.
Second question - did Spielberg sue for this misery?
The third question is, what the hell did the actors of the original 90s movie get out of the closet? How do they even agree to act in bad taste, that the money for a life has run out? A couple of houses to sell and you can continue to live, but though the aura will be clean, and just fell in my eyes.
Now about the dinosaurs themselves - everything is built on the fact that the viewer sat until the final battle of the T-rex against another miracle-jude fish-kit. Dinosaurs are no longer frightening, it's not Spielberg's Tyrannosaurus, which, if I'm not mistaken, was a mechanical rather than a computer misunderstanding. He was really scary, especially when the water in the glass was shaking before his first appearance, and the final scene of Spielberg, the battle of raptors with him is simply delightful.
A few spoilers, still do not advise to watch the World of the Jurassic period, in general the entire franchise, if the Russian viewer has a sense of self-esteem and a little respect their logic. The girl cuts wood with one blow, even an adult man like Schwartz is unlikely to cut wood with one stroke of an axe, why even inserted this stupid scene. Dinosaurs - reptiles run through the snow, but they would freeze or fall asleep forever, the streets of Malta running dinosaurs - people sit in cafes calmly, it's like walking with a stroller in Africa in the wild or in the forest near bears. The plane crashes into a frozen lake, and these men and women come out without a single scratch, concussion or fracture. Continue to endlessly list blunders per billion collection of the cash register.
Bottom line: modern movies are made for morons, and they like it, and they'll stuff comics in their stomachs for everyone's fuss. Hollywood is long gone. Watch better travel series and movies for development. Do you want dinosaurs? - Watch Spielberg and National Geographic. This film would not even be appreciated. 1 in 10, and the entire franchise is 3 out of 10, just a point for each.
The screens released a new film franchise Jurassic period called: Jurassic world: domination. In terms of the number of films, this universe has not yet gone as far as Star Wars or afterburner, but the quality of recent films definitely has the right to stand with them in the same row. From the new trilogy of the world of the Jurassic period, I personally liked only the first film. It was quite fresh, had beautiful locations, an interesting interaction of the main character with velociraptors, a good antagonist in the face, or rather the muzzle of Indominus Rex, the spectacular final battle also left a good impression of the film. The sequel lost its location, the characters did not get any new development, the story became boring, and the plot was secondary and stupid. The film ended with dinosaurs hitting the mainland, and gave a lot of space for the development of the plot.
However, the writers decided to score on it, and cost a short insert at the beginning of the film, showing a pterodactyl flying over skyscrapers, etc. All. The rest of the story is divided into two stories.
In the first and more boring story, Owen and Claire search for a missing girl. It looks extremely uninteresting, and pleases only the appearance of Omar Si.
In the second story, Spielberg’s characters investigate an evil company that they suspect has created an army of giant locusts to increase profits. The locust is the main line leading the narrative. Locusts, not dinosaurs. It looks alive at the expense of old heroes, but the story itself is full of stupidities and conventions.
Stories come together horribly. Apparently, the screenwriter was lazy to bring them together somehow beautifully and logically, and he simply wrote: a meeting.
The film indicates some deep ideas about civilization, the place of man in the world, technological development, but they are so conditional that it was simply impossible to make them more conventionally.
Heroes about nothing. The return of old characters is not conditional. They were just returned. Replacing them with others will not change. Owen and Claire are the same as before. The new characters have characters left behind, and the motivations are too superficial. Motivation, though? At the end of the movie, I asked myself, why does this dinosaur even help? A clichéd villain. No principles, no goals. He's a weak-willed bag of potatoes. Towards the end of the film, there are so many characters that the screen simply overloads them, and it is uncomfortable to watch. You don't empathize with heroes. They crash, chase, fight dinosaurs, but remain unharmed.
The big problem with the movie is that there's no need for dinosaurs. In most action scenes, dinosaurs can easily be swapped for any other mobs, and the meaning will not change. It wasn't without another park. It feels like the creator has played minecraft, throwing all the dinosaurs in one place without division into any zones.
The movie clearly lacks blood. Dinosaurs are shown as human lovers, but each of their meals is so neat that you are amazed. In my opinion, the presence of greater cruelty is simply necessary to emphasize the nature of predators.
Action scenes are extremely boring. You will not see anything new and interesting here. All that was a little interesting was the scene of the battle of Tyrannosaurus, but it was already so many times and according to the same scenario that even such a battle would seem to cause nothing at all.
I want to praise the work of the cameraman. It is really done perfectly, and at least somehow keeps the viewer watching this creation.
In total, we have a weak conclusion to the trilogy of the Jurassic world. But is it a completion? Big question. The film grossed a billion at the box office, which means the new project will not be long in coming. I think in the future there will be residents of other periods, because Jurassic pumped out everything possible. Maybe even a mammoth will come. I do not recommend watching the film, since such a movie cools the love and interest in real cinema. Revisit the original Spielberg films and enjoy them again.
The question of the compatibility of the past and the present is traditionally one of the most multifaceted topics for research, in particular by filmmakers. A common method of studying it can be called writing stories about a trip to the past or the future, or about aliens from there in the present. In any case, this approach is a clash of what was and what is. The classical picture of the appearance of dinosaurs in the modern world is also a method of studying the same question, only now we are talking about literally bringing history to life in order to observe it in the present conditions. However, these are only some of the complex problems that films like Jurassic World can address, and the key one may not be the danger of artificially reverting to the past, but the applicability of ethical norms to science as a whole, the definition of what comes first: scientific progress or morality and morality. Anyway, for all the breadth of possibilities of analysis and reasoning, the third "Jurassic World" did not use any of them, turned out to be a film-vacuum, just entertainment, and, in short, a film-disappointment.
It is the absence of any idea, theme, thought that is the main problem of Jurassic World. The creators of the picture “blood from the nose” had to shoot the third part of the successful franchise, but they so obviously did not want that they did not find (and did not look for) what to talk to their audience. This happened even though the end of the second part clearly laid the groundwork for the third scenario: free dinosaurs in a modern, unadapted to the wild dangers of the world were bound to bring chaos into it and change it. But no: the world of the film in the third part is practically no different from the ordinary, normal world, and the role of dinosaurs is hardly different from the role of predatory animals in the zoo. Concocted on the knee, simple as three pennies, horribly template plot does not help in creating a concept and formulating complex questions: it is straightforward and primitively understandable, devoid of any double bottom and any moral dilemmas.
The only thing that, at least in the distance, could claim any reasoning about the appropriateness and unnaturalness of elements of the Jurassic period in the third millennium is the ecological storyline of locusts destroying crops. But the screenwriters managed to spoil this: the locust, if it is even three times prehistoric, remains a locust – a pest insect, and, therefore, any sympathy with it as a paleontological rarity is excluded, any reasoning about its right to life is impossible. Those certain features of origin that the film reveals closer to the middle completely destroy any ground for reasoning of this kind, reducing everything to elementary human greed and making the solution of this question, if it was, quite obvious.
If the motives of the main characters, taking into account all the elementary nature of the plot, are clear and do not cause special questions, then it is impossible to say so with regard to the main villain. I don't mean the ecological line -- it's primitive here, too -- but the basic one, which is related to the teenage heroine. For all her exclusivity, she can be of some value only to positive heroes with bright thoughts, but why is she a villain? Perhaps it is worth recalling the previous parts, which I, for my own trouble, do not remember at all, but if so, this is not a plus for the third "World" - it should be more or less self-sufficient in explaining its causes and meanings. Anyway, why the whole fuss was started, except to entertain the viewer, I did not understand until the end of the film. Problems with the motive, however, are observed not only in the villain-antagonist, but also in the secondary heroine-pilot. Of course, she can be anything, but for her obviously risky decision to become a heroine, not an antiheroine, there must be at least partially explainable and logical reasons. The one and a half minutes of its history that the viewer is allowed to hear are in no way such and do not convince her why she needed all this, except for fulfilling the much-needed scenario of the function of transport for the heroes.
Surprisingly, for all its inability to talk about anything important, "The World" clumsily tries to talk about things like parenthood and motherhood. Predictably, the film does not work, and those half hints on the topic that sound in the picture, do not develop it. Yes, the main characters are repeatedly called parents, yes, the teenage heroine in the first minutes of the film declares to the heroine that she is not her mother, but that is all. There is no turning, upheaval, rethinking as a phenomenon, something else is not happening here. If the film begins with a teenage protest caused by growing up, then it should end with an intermediate result of growing up and obvious reconciliation, and all tenderness from the side of the hitherto shabby girl. Is this happening? Nope! As it was, it remains. The attempt to somehow parallel this family theme with the female dinosaur and her baby is also implemented clumsy, and the image used does not work at all, turning out to be poorly associated with the human original.
Watching Jurassic World: Dominance turned into a disappointment, maybe not too deep, because I didn’t expect anything, but still. A movie with famous actors should not be so empty! You can not use the graceful idea of dinosaurs in the modern world at all! Why didn’t we develop the finale of the second film, why put dinosaurs back on reservations when everything from psychological drama to apocalypse could be done from the third movie? It does not leave the feeling that this is not the third part of “The World”, that should be removed, that this is not a story at all, but the practice of “homework”. Boring, boring, what could be worse? .
There is a steady trend of reducing the quality of produced paintings in the series “Jurassic World”.
If the first part was still possible to see and enjoy what you saw, then in the third there is absolutely nothing to look at. Not save even the attracted actor pleiad in the face of Sam Neal, Jeff Goldblum and Laura Dern, who represented the classic trilogy “Jurassic Park”.
The plot is crumpled, precipitous, boring, there is no clearly prescribed sequence of events, the actions of the characters are often devoid of logic or simply stupid, the acting work of the whole team is nowhere worse (especially disappointed the main antagonist - "neither fish nor meat"), unreal ' smartened' computer dinosaurs and animatronics look much worse than the prehistoric reptiles in the original film of 1993.
After the credits, there are a lot of questions that have not been answered in the entire timekeeping. Not only that, not to bother to write an exciting and innovative script, “pulled” from all the previous paintings different fragments and ideas, from which by analogy and made this project.
We managed from an adventure movie, where dinosaurs should remain the main characters, to make stupid, mediocre, with a claim to exclusivity, read (I will do without spoilers). Anyone who looks will understand. It seems that they “considered” everything running and running, in a very short time, as long as the viewer untied.
I don’t know why this new movie has had so much negativity. The film has exactly the same advantages and disadvantages as the previous two, but unlike them adds more new elements to the franchise. Another question is how well they fit.
Let's talk about the pros. Colin Trevorrow returned to the director's chair and, I never would have thought I would say this, given who was the director ' Fallen Kingdom' but it went to the film's benefit. The director himself wrote the script with Emily Carmichael and, as they say, was able to pick up a suit for the size. There are no stylistic and tonal scatters in the film, unlike the previous one. In the film, despite the scope, sometimes felt ' indie' the past of the Director. There are beautiful shots of characters captured with a handheld camera that highlight their various states, shot intimately and soulfully. Dinosaurs look beautiful, the action with them is mostly smooth, and the variety of locations and biomes does not let you get bored. In addition, we will definitely record how the characters of the original trilogy were implemented. Of course, their appearances sometimes lack emotionality, but from a plot point of view, their participation in what is happening feels justified, and the dialogues are written in such a way that there is no doubt that we have Dr. Grant, Dr. Sattler and Dr. Malcolm. The first two even get the development of their own arches from previous films. Unlike 'Star Wars' here old characters feel themselves and do not commit uncharacteristic actions for themselves. The action with dinosaurs here is for every taste, and if the chase in Malta, although it looks dashing, feels excessive ' Fast and Furious' then everything that happens in the second half is quite in the spirit of the franchise and can cause warm nostalgia. The plot itself is not a tracing of any of the previous parts, although it often refers to familiar tropes, and it also develops the storylines of the previous part well. For example, the seemingly most clumsy line with a clone girl here receives quite competent development and culmination. Dinosaurs in the film are for every taste and several newcomers will definitely be able to enter the gold fund of the franchise. Michael Giacino’s music clearly adorns the scenes, and gives emotions where they can not give the writers. There are many science fiction concepts in the film, some of which are borrowed from other novels by Michael Crichton. For example, from 'Roy' or 'Next' They expand the initially very capacious lore and give a new context to already released films.
As for the minuses, the most important, central and important thing is that this film is not really about dinosaurs. Yes, the authors did add a lot of interesting concepts, but weakly linked them with the main core - dinosaurs. This is a film about giant locusts, self-serving corporations, the thirst for profit, the inept use of scientific discoveries, the problem of cloning. Anything but dinosaurs. There are many of them in the film, they are involved in the action, but not the plot. The story itself could have done without them. There are almost no scenes where the world of man and dinosaur directly conflict, because dinosaurs behind the scenes managed to catch and plant in a closed reserve. Yes, it looks more realistic than the apocalyptic scenario of ancient reptiles taking over our planet, but in this approach, the film misses the main element of the original trilogy - the incompatibility of two species on the same planet. There is no fight for survival and, as a result, the authors have to figure out how to get the characters to run away from the dinosaurs again. And the solution comes the most banal - the heroes again fall into a closed zone with dinosaurs. The plot itself isn't that bad, but it's weak on details and sprinkles from small but painful questions to it. Why would heroes go to get samples of ancient locust DNA if they already have a captured individual in a cage? Why would Dr. Woo catch baby Blue when the key to what he's looking for is already in Maisie? Obviously, the dinosaurs and specifically Blue at least somehow needed the plot. Why even a segment on the black market, if there is almost no need for a story? These are things that can be written or specified, but the authors are in a hurry. Because 'Jurassic World: Dominance' a typical modern blockbuster, where the dynamics and saturation, including the plot and characters, goes against the depth of elaboration and thoughtful focused script. Despite the fact that the film tries to respect the classic characters, the film does not generate any really strong scenes with them. The characters of the new trilogy have not been able to grow beyond the limits ' action heroes' without clear arches, but now they have at least a normal motivation to go on an adventure. The film exploits nostalgia tolerably, but the stick sometimes flexes and slides to unnecessary quotes. The graphics are mostly decent, but there are also shameful shots, and the animatronics are as still as possible and, perhaps, the worst in the series. The final fight, although beautiful, looks completely unnecessary and even unnecessary. It does not feel like a climax and there is no plot meaning in it. There are problems with editing. The film for a long time can not feel the point of support, rushing from one line to another, and when he still succeeds, the timing exceeds 45 minutes. Some scenes could easily be replaced or shuffled, such as one of the character's deaths occurring 30 minutes before the finale, although it is essentially the culmination of a local story.
And there's a lot of roughness in the movie. They greatly smear the impression of a generally good summer blockbuster. He can entertain and ask a couple of interesting topics. It is unlikely that he will settle in his head much for a long time, but he is unlikely to cause some acute attack of negativity. Many of these flaws are typical of most modern blockbusters, even those that are favorites of the audience, such as the recent Doctor Strange 2', so it was amazing for me to receive such a cold reception by the press and the public of the film. This is a normal one-off modern blockbuster that only occasionally tries to reach the artistic heights of the original film, but quite copes with its entertainment function. It's a 6-7 ball movie that wants to throw another half for its beautiful finale. If the franchise ends on the sixth film, then it is better than what at one time befell the original trilogy with the third 'Park'.
7.5 out of 10
Not the worst part of the franchise. There are always the third and fifth films in the series. But from now on, please build a story around dinosaurs.
A herd of herbivorous dinosaurs from the hadrosaur family weighing 2 to 4 tons escape from a group of horsemen led by Chris Pratt. Men want to latch prehistoric animals.
- Good luck, guys!
And you can imagine! It didn't take a group of people or horses under them. It turned out that it was enough one Chris, who with his bare hands held such a giant carcass! After seeing it, I found it strange to have gloves on his hands. Why them? Since he has the strength of his Terminator father-in-law (Schwarzenegger), his skin must be thick. However, no, a drop of plausibility, apparently, is still necessary to keep the viewer at the screen of so ' amazing' film and collect a large box office.
The main villain of the film was an oligarch who started a cunning adventure. He bred a breed of giant locusts, brought it to a huge number and let devour the crops of private individuals who do not use seeds from BioSyn, which is owned by our villain. However, for unknown reasons, the antagonist does not like how his pets hurricane and he decides to kidnap a girl with a rare DNA, which allegedly will help stop the invasion of terrible insects.
In short, the fickle businessman and his 'genius' business plan is worth the movie.
The main characters from the very first film were recruited into the picture. Good. We walked, ran, lay down, talked. The fans are happy!
Not without the signature communication of a person with a velociraptor with the help of an outstretched arm and a close look into the eyes. The secret is "mutual respect." We should take a note. Maybe I’ll meet a bear one day. I'm practicing, but something tells me, the method is so bad.
In fact, this science film has everything but the story. Two plus hours of science! It's hard to watch without caffeine. Not because you want to sleep, no, the brain is hard to process so much ' necessary and valuable' information!
5 out of 10
The chase scene in Malta is very well done. Animals in “reality” fit better with each new series. Everything else is like in all the other episodes. Something is not going according to plan, someone was eaten, everyone is running away from someone.
At the time ' Kong vs. Godzilla' very pleasantly surprised after mildly stilted second part. On ' Dominance' I had similar hopes, which broke down miserably. Why?
Fanservice. We were delighted in the trailer with Dr. Grant and K. What do we got? Yes, a whole line was written under them, which runs parallel to the adventures of the main protagonists. But if you remove them, nothing really changes. But the extra time will be cleaned up.
This is actually the second big problem - two and a half hours here turned out to be too inappropriate. In the same ' Kong' clear and justified every minute, and here I almost fell asleep by the 40th minute. Well, somehow it is not appropriate for a monstrous blockbuster to be stuffed with dialogue and empty scenes.
And the apotheosis of the script primitive is an antagonist remotely similar to Tim Cook (especially?) with an extremely childish motivation and a reference to the comics villains. Primitive turned out and new unknown animals and attempts to play Easter eggs for the original film.
So Universal instead of learning from mistakes and thinking about how Worners learn nothing. I'll be countered by a billion dollars. I will not deny this, but I remember the famous phrase of Comrade Titomir. If people are satisfied with such low-quality, it is regrettable.
It's a shame that not all summer blockbusters are like Jurassic Parks. The new third "The World" is good, as are the first two films, which unfortunately didn't get understood. At the box office, these tapes are collected, so they are well watched: producers do not spare money, and actors do not leave with scandals. “Dominance” has a unique distinctive feature that is not inherent in many modern paintings – it does not stuff its beliefs down the throat of the viewer, does not show moments that are usually stamped out at everyone, and most importantly – will retain the ability to walk on the edge and not to slide into idiocy.
Despite the fact that several meanings that are hidden in the plot, still catch the eye enough, they still do not annoy and do not try to convince you of their rightness. For example, the diversity in this film of the dinosaurs themselves – there are a huge number of them, they live everywhere – in the ice, in the tropics, and in the deserts, they are all different, sometimes very different from what we saw in childhood in encyclopedias, which we did not think about. This is a subtle metaphor for the people themselves – they are all different, they are not divided into groups, you can not predict exactly how this or that will act. Yes, this is sometimes done clumsy, but in general, the world does not suffer from this, because all dinosaurs from all three parts are genetically modified monsters that will not always behave like real ones. It is cleverly woven into the plot, conveniently arranged, and most importantly - does not interfere. Except for paleontologists in the room.
I highlighted several central themes: the food crisis and hunger, attitudes towards animals, xenophobia, climate change. In addition, on the border with xenophobia against dinosaurs, that is, segregation for profit, there is xenophobia between people. This arch with the girl in the center - also can be understood in different ways - teenagers in it will see a similar "different" and adults will read between the lines the philosophical question of whether the clone can be a separate person. This is a topic in science fiction like 2006's The Island, but it's also interesting here, because it's new to the masses. He should think more often.
There were also references of various kinds. In addition to the soulful to the original trilogy, there is a tribute to Cameron’s “Avatar” and a little bit to the Bible. These are still the unchildish things that adults will add to the issue of segregation and the global food crisis and get more than just a blockbuster.
In general, the third world of the Jurassic period is again about interaction with dinosaurs. This time not in similar scenery of the original and not even in the laboratories of greedy pussies, but all over the world. We are shown how people treat them differently; here we can see allusions to our younger brothers. In one part of the world, they are peacefully distracted with a hot stick and a siren and simply taken away, in another part of the world they are tied by the neck to arrange gladiatorial fights, and the losers are grilled nearby. Look, people, what you look like when you torture the weak. And animals and other people. This is the nature of man, which even at the end for those who did not look with their eyes, talk.
It's a bit like Dynotopia, except dinosaurs don't talk here. But the idea of just seeing how such dissimilar species would get along is interesting. And now it's not just an amusement park, it's forced on a person who wasn't preparing for that kind of change. He is literally shown a mirror.
Now for the minuses. The movie is very, very long. You could have thrown out of the middle everything related to Macy's abduction, because we already saw the antagonist and his intentions, and the timing would have saved 50 minutes. This creates a few unnecessary branches that mix, creating the film’s second problem: confusion. Even with the assumptions of fiction and film, the film itself does not know what it is about. He tries to sit in all the chairs and gets better, but it’s still better to focus on one topic or two. Sumburity like a snowball spits out the third problem associated with it - ragged installation. It makes it hard to watch. Some moments are made long and from this it cuts, and somewhere just this length of the frame is cut off. You can see that the actors played longer, it’s just for some reason broke. Probably not to make this movie any longer.
In general, making a discount on the fact that the film wanted to reveal more, but it turned out as always, I can say that my assessment of this film is high, just for trying to make the audience think about philosophy. For the third attempt he makes and the third, unfortunately, unsuccessfully.
This year, so many projects have left me disappointed, and the new Jurassic World is no exception. The first thing that catches the eye during viewing, boredom reigns on the screen. The finale of the previous part opened such a space for the director and screenwriters, but they preferred to tell the story of another evil corporation, because (*sarcasm) never happened.
In the girl who plays a clone, the character from the previous tape is completely unrecognised, throughout the entire viewing she only does that she plays a cool child and it almost does not even backfire.
Chris Pratt doesn’t seem to understand what he’s doing here, which is completely out of step with his role in the previous two films. Dinosaurs that understand human speech, rather than instinct, evoke Spanish shame. And when I see for the millionth time a gesture from How to Train Your Dragon, I only want one of the main characters to finally untie their hand.
By the way, there is almost no emphasis on dinosaurs, and for the most part we see people, and their interaction is not the most interesting. We also saw a dinosaur graphon seeping in places, but we brought you characters from the Park, of course not for the plot, but only for nostalgia.
The world of the Jurassic period: Lord...dee, what for game
Here is another sequel to the famous story about resurrected dinosaurs. Not to say that I had high hopes for him, but still was curious.
Time for the release on the screens was selected very well: just enough time has passed for people who watched the previous part, had time to forget how bad it was. 4 years is a long time. At least that’s how I see it.
I managed to forget that 'Jurassic World' is no longer 'Jurassic Park' Everything that has been filmed since 1997 is a graphic illustration of the greed of Hollywood cinema. More clearly - only 'Star Wars'.
Why? Because long ago it was time to finish this story. It's just been said that this film is 'final' but I don't believe it. In a couple of years they will cook some more ' the return of heroes', haha.
The endless sucking out of the finger of the dragged plot leads to comic scenes:
'A majesticly slow lizard looks endlessly stupidly at people shaking with fear, and then cannot catch up. People stumble and fall, but the lizard roars powerlessly and clatters its jaws. Happy rescue! Hugs!'
[Repeat the same thing with other characters]
[Repeat again]
Are you serious?
Well, if someone suddenly finds it boring, then add a motorcycle chase. In the car! On the truck! On the plane!
Still boring? Let's add some nostalgia! The good old Jeff Goldblum, Sam Neal and Laura Dorn are from the first installments of the franchise. Isn't that nice? Sam Neil will look like Indiana Jones.
And of course, the agenda should not be forgotten. Be sure to add a brave black girl pilot (spoiler: unconventional orientation).
The teenage audience should not be forgotten either. A pretty girl, stupidly clapping her eyes, with whom everyone is running around like a written torch... and without whom, strictly speaking, the plot could do.
But the plot cannot do without a sufficiently adequate and convincing antagonist (antihero). Who's not here! That is, he formally exists, but completely inadequate and cardboard character.
I don't care. In this surrogate of Jurassic Park, a lot is good: special effects, sound, computer graphics, actors were recruited, but ...
There is no normal plot. There is the SIGN of a plot that, in fact, repeats the situations from the previous parts, only in an even more idiotic way. A fairy tale about a white bull, which is performed by good, in general, actors. It's a miserable sight.
And I wonder who this is focused on 'movie'? Dementia? I don't like being mistaken for a fool.
An ordinary, lifeless adventure film that accidentally has dinosaurs
If I listed everything this film focuses on, dinosaurs would be fifth or sixth, behind a slew of storylines that range from bland to useless. I'm baffled by how little attention is paid to dinosaurs. And I don't just mean they barely appear on screen. In the original 'Jurassic Park' there were almost none during the first hour. But all that led up to this, the story, the dialogue and the themes, was focused on the dinosaurs.
That doesn't apply to Part 3. Most of the storylines are at best tangential and at worst completely unrelated. Imagine you’re watching 'Taken' but Liam Neeson has to beware of dinosaurs... that’s one storyline. You could replace dinosaurs with any scary creatures, and that wouldn’t change the plot.
On top of that, they did a bad job of balancing so many storylines with different characters. Or maybe it’s because they’re not interesting. And the moment when different characters come together is completely unsuitable. I compare it to 'Stranger Things' when the stories come together and the team finally get together, those moments are so impressive and exciting. They feel deserved and elevate everything afterward. In the Dominion you do not feel any magic.
Some parts were so bad they made me cringe or roll my eyes. But that was not the case for most of the film. So why such a harsh bill? Because this movie, which is the definition of a popcorn movie that's here to entertain us, is incredibly boring. Last night I slept 8 hours and drank 'Red Bull' but still struggled to stay awake. I had to sit back.
All action scenes are easily forgotten. Literally. It's only been a few hours and I can remember maybe a couple of cool moments. And one thing I couldn't believe: the climactic sequence of actions is completely copied from one of the previous films. I won't say which one, but I'm confused that they went that way. It's even sadder when you realize it's worse than what's been copied in every way.
As for the effects of dinosaurs, sometimes animatronic dinosaurs look like toys. And CGI dinosaurs look a little different. I don’t think it’s a bad CGI, but something is wrong.
I'm so disappointed that this is what they've given us for their self-proclaimed #39; epic end to the Jurassic era'. Especially after Jurassic World 2 left us with such a spectacular cliff, the chaos that awaits people all over the world when dinosaurs collapse on them. That's not what we get at all.
I really liked the first 'Jurassic World'. And although the second part is very spoiled, it is still interesting and filled with tension and uncertainty. I didn’t feel anything like the Lord.
It is no secret that the creation of sequels and remakes of once successful franchises has always been commonplace in the world of cinema. However, in recent years, this has acquired a previously unprecedented scope. In almost all cases, it is only the desire to cut down money on the parasitization of a once successful franchise, rather than the desire to create a new, original and interesting product. In this regard, really worthy restarts and sequels of former franchises can be counted on the fingers of one hand and "Jurassic World" is definitely one of those. This movie was directed by Colin Trevorrow.
The events of this tape develop a few years after the events of the previous part. After the destruction of Nublar Island, dinosaurs broke free and flooded the planet. People manage to maintain fragile balance and coexistence. However, every day it becomes more and more difficult. Meanwhile, the powerful corporation BioSyn Genetics conducts experiments on dinosaurs and hunts for the baby velociraptor Blue and a clone of Macy Lockwood.
I think everyone will agree that when creating the first film, the filmmakers simply retold the script of the original Jurassic Park with cosmetic changes. The same can be said about the sequel, which took a lot from the Lost World. Therefore, it is impossible not to give credit to the authors of this tape, who in some century decided not to repeat their predecessors, but told an absolutely original and in my opinion interesting story. In fact, two story branches develop throughout the screen time. In the first, the heroes of the original Park investigate the case of an abnormally large and aggressive locust grown by genetic engineering. In the second, the heroes of the “World” are trying to resist a powerful corporation.
Similarly, the authors of this tape managed to create a very dense and eventful story, which in addition to everything – logically continues the development of the characters and events of both “Park” and “The World” and in the final act very subtly brings together. Creating an impression close to the latest Ghostbusters, Spider-Man: There is no way home" and other films worthy of playing on the nostalgia of the audience. Except that, unlike the more dynamic first two acts, the final was slightly delayed. But it doesn't spoil the impression much.
It should be noted and very thinly disguised in the leitmotif morality of the picture. Using the example of a locust-eating corporation holding on to this disaster, the authors of the picture raise the important topic of depletion of natural resources, as well as the growing topic of water and food. When, as against the background of attempts of coexistence of people, animals and dinosaurs, the authors of this film willingly call for tolerance and coexistence of representatives of different nationalities, races, religious beliefs and sexual orientations.
The return of Colin Trevorrow to the post of director definitely went to the picture for good. In contrast to the more thriller and chamber sequel, "Dominance" again stood on the rails of a fascinating and spectacular adventure movie. Willingly delighting with the frenzied dynamics of the narrative, the abundance of rich action and, in my opinion, a very creative and exciting staging of action scenes. In this regard, it is impossible not to pay respect to the authors of visual effects and animatronics, who managed to create living dinosaurs like never before. In fact, turning them into much more realistic and interesting characters of the tape than the people themselves.
World stars Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard and Isabella Sermore played as well as ever. Happily pleased with the return of franchise veterans and Park stars Sam Neal, Laura Dern and Jeff Goldblum. I especially liked how Neil and Dern were able to give impetus to the relationship of their heroes, which was served by half-hints and uncertainty in the first Park. It is impossible not to mention Campbell Scott, who managed to create a very interesting and not characteristic image, giving more to Steve Jobs than classic by the standards of the franchise villain. The only weak link in the cast can only be called DeWanda Wise, who walked around with the same facial expression throughout the film. Not to mention the fact that she got a character like a certain “Mary Sue”, which should help the characters without any apparent reason and proper motivation.
8 out of 10
Jurassic World: Dominance is more than a worthy continuation of the iconic franchise that ties together the legacy of the original Park trilogy and the World itself. Creating the impression of a dynamic, rich and generous with an abundance of events and action film with a century of original story, creative action scenes, stunning dinosaurs and the return of franchise veterans in the person of Sam Neal, Laura Dern and Jeff Goldblum.