Rebirth

by

Throughout most of my professional life, I’ve been focusing on two main subjects: films and dinosaurs. As a child, I shared the dream of many kids worldwide to become a paleontologist. In the years prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, I had the unique opportunity to come close to that dream with a degree in creative writing. I worked at a natural history museum where my role was to transform the groundbreaking research of talented paleontologists into engaging and educational content for the public. Interestingly enough, this task shared some similarities with the work of popular dinosaur-themed blockbusters, conceptually speaking.

As a passionate film enthusiast, I can’t hide my excitement about the upcoming “Jurassic World Rebirth“. Despite some doubts about the future of this franchise, following the rather tame “Jurassic World Dominion” in 2022 that seemed to have put a dent on the genre, I’m still eagerly anticipating its release. This seventh installment might be like an Edmontosaurus among dinosaur movies – it’s alright, but it may not be everyone’s favorite. Nonetheless, during a sweltering holiday weekend, ‘alright’ is enough to rake in nine figures at the box office and ensure the Jurassic brand’s longevity. It’s fascinating to ponder why these movies consistently fall short of their true potential.

‘Jurassic World Rebirth’ Isn’t a Disaster, Just Another Disappointment

Among many people on Earth, my top choice for prehistoric creatures is portrayed in the movie “Jurassic Park,” particularly the 1993 original. This film, much like an asteroid impacting the Yucatan Peninsula, could have potentially ended dinosaur films forever. Despite this, the industry has persisted in its attempts to recreate the magic. However, producing exceptional dinosaur movies is as challenging as creating genetically engineered Velociraptors, and three decades of failed efforts serve as proof.

The six Jurassic sequels range from acceptable to intentionally cheesy to really poor. Disney’s Dinosaur was visually stunning for its era, but it failed to make a lasting impression. Pixar’s The Good Dinosaur flopped, marking the studio’s first commercial failure. 65 missed an opportunity with its intriguing concept and Adam Driver. Only The Land Before Time series has left a cultural footprint, with each subsequent installment losing its appeal compared to the original.

The Jurassic sequels are hit or miss, some are okay, some are cheesy, and some are just bad. Disney’s Dinosaur was cool for its time but forgettable. Pixar’s The Good Dinosaur didn’t do well at the box office. 65 had a great idea but wasted it. Only The Land Before Time series has been remembered.

The first one in The Land Before Time series is a classic kids’ movie; the rest weren’t as popular as the original.

What’s the reason behind this? Let’s analyze it systematically. The “Jurassic” series consistently incorporates a common genetic structure. This includes characters like selfless scientists, business-oriented individuals with limited vision, children from broken homes, recurring danger, and themes that subtly lean towards green tones. Even the 65th installment and some animated films have elements derived from this blueprint. However, it’s intriguing to understand why it initially worked well despite yielding mixed outcomes later on.

Jurassic World: Reborn makes for an intriguing analysis. Despite being significantly different, the first Jurassic Park seems its closest relative due to the numerous references it constantly makes. There are numerous direct tributes to memorable moments and appearances of beloved creatures. Similar to Star Wars: The Force Awakens, the reboot-like aspect of Reborn can be viewed as a strength or a drawback.

In comparison to its predecessors, this new addition boasts stronger foundations, particularly due to a script by David Koepp, who wrote the initial two Jurassic Park films. The director, Gareth Edwards, is skilled at crafting action sequences heavy on CGI. The main cast – Scarlett Johansson, Mahershala Ali, and Jonathan Bailey – are talented actors capable of breathing life into underdeveloped characters. Visually, this seventh installment surpasses the standard for dinosaur movies. While some viewers might place it among the top two or three in the series, it remains a flawed imitation of Jurassic Park and could never aspire to be anything more or superior.

Hollywood Learned the Wrong Lessons From ‘Jurassic Park’

It’s often believed that the success of “Jurassic Park” can be attributed to its author Michael Crichton being a Harvard med school student at the time of writing, as well as the iconic direction by Steven Spielberg. Additionally, the trio of Sam Neill, Laura Dern, and Jeff Goldblum played significant roles in the film’s success. The 1993 classic owes much to its compelling narrative, awe-inspiring practical effects, and an unparalleled cast chemistry. However, neither Crichton nor Spielberg nor any of the actors were the key factor that made “Jurassic Park” a hit – they all contributed to the sequels as well.

Taking a detailed look at the strengths and weaknesses of “Jurassic World Rebirth” provides further insight into the film. One particularly poignant scene stands out, where Dr. Loomis, played by Bailey, pauses from near-death encounters to tenderly stroke a Titanosaur’s ankle and shed tears of happiness. This emotional moment is as close as “Jurassic World Rebirth” comes to the excellence of “Jurassic Park, which remains unmatched due to its authentic portrayal of dinosaurs. It isn’t so much about the science, such as T. rex having feathers or Dilophosaurus lacking a frill. Many who went through a dinosaur phase know these differences. Instead, it’s about understanding them and, more importantly, our emotional bond with them. Paleontologists don’t have “Jurassic Park” memorabilia in their offices for its accuracy. They are captivated by how it made them feel.

Absolutely! To put it another way, while the T. rex and raptors from the original fossil record were indeed formidable creatures, they weren’t inherently evil like fictional villains. However, some modern interpretations, inspired by movies like Jurassic Park, have misconstrued this, opting to portray dinosaurs as Kaiju-like beasts lurking in ambush. The issue lies in the fact that dinosaurs are not mythical monsters; they are real animals. Although discovering an Allosaurus in its natural habitat would undoubtedly strike fear into our hearts, the general public, particularly children, aren’t afraid of dinosaurs. Instead, they are captivated by and fond of them.

Jurassic Park shared a passion for dinosaurs just like everyone else. It managed to revive these ancient creatures and convey both the fear and awe they evoke perfectly. Moreover, it was the first to do so and had the skill to do it exceptionally well. Over the years, however, Hollywood has struggled to match up. They seem to believe that bigger is always better and that ordinary dinosaurs are dull. As a result, the Jurassic World films have been repeating the same basic narrative but with increasingly implausible genetically enhanced (and digitally created) monsters – Indominus rex, Indoraptor, and now Mutadon and Distortus rex – which do not actually exist. Instead of rehashing old tales with fake dinosaurs, we should be creating new stories featuring real dinosaurs.

I was exhilarated as the Spinosaurus sailed through the water, for I have always had a fondness for Spinosaurus, despite knowing that its primary role in the initial stages of “Jurassic World: Rebirth” would be to eliminate secondary characters. The film’s climax either showcases the franchise’s most problematic tendencies or, with some leniency, serves as a critique. Unfortunately, it seems the movie leans towards condoning the misuse of these magnificent creatures for entertainment rather than education. Until we can find a way to harness these incredible reptiles to both entertain and educate us once more, I doubt we’ll see another dinosaur film that truly makes an impact.

Read More

2025-07-05 23:02