Jurassic World

2015

Action / Adventure / Sci-Fi / Thriller

207
Rotten Tomatoes Critics - Certified Fresh 71%
Rotten Tomatoes Audience - Upright 80%
IMDb Rating 7 10 514139

Synopsis


Uploaded By: OTTO
Downloaded 716,390 times

Cast

Chris Pratt as Owen
Judy Greer as Karen
Vincent D'Onofrio as Hoskins
3D.BLU 720p.BLU 1080p.BLU
1.85 GB
1920*1080
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 4 min
P/S 2 / 55
870.52 MB
1280*720
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 4 min
P/S 9 / 86
1.85 GB
1920*1080
English
PG-13
23.976 fps
2hr 4 min
P/S 119 / 376

Movie Reviews

Reviewed by rkoch1 3 / 10

Unrealistic and a Horrible Mess

Let me just start by saying, I don't think this movie deserves a score of 1, but I had to rank it that low because currently the score is a gross misrepresentation of reality. This is not a movie which deserves to be compared with all of the great cinema masterpieces mankind has made.

I just watched the semi-new Jurassic Park movie and I must say, I thought it was very, very stupid. I hate the trend in modern movies where everything bad that happens is always caused by people being stupid and doing stupid things. Like literally people making 10-20 Darwin Award ideas every movie. Literally in this movie, there is a big "Super T-Rex" dinosaur which is running around, and someone thinks that the proper move is to release a bunch of smaller Raptors to go hunt it down... like... what the hell...? You MUST be kidding. Raptors are PREY for T-Rex. It is a smaller predator which presents ZERO threat to the T-Rex, but MAXIMUM threat to humans. No human being who doesn't have a permanent retard helmet strapped to their head would have ever made that "executive decision". That's as stupid as sending a bunch of hunting dogs to go kill a Lion which is on the loose. Or a bear or something. And we are all little furry bunnies or something, so the dogs could easily just kill us for fun anyways. It is obvious that Raptors are only effective at killing small, human-sized prey... it just makes no sense. It is nothing but FRUSTRATING for the viewer, we're sitting here frowning and saying to ourselves, "nobody would EVER do that!".

Anyways, MAJOR PLOT decision by the producing team... and it was a total disaster.. They should have gone back to the white board and came up with another plot idea.

Another thing I hate are those STUPID ANNOYING scenes where everyone is running and frantically screaming in fear all around you, but the main characters are just standing there talking to each other like nothing is going on, just having a little chit-chat while there's dinosaurs running around, and people dying. Or when the two boys were running away from the T-Rex and then they got to the edge of a waterfall, but instead of jumping without hesitation like any normal person who is about to die would have done, they turn to each other and say "Are you ready to jump? Let's do it together, OK? On the count of three, one... two... THREE, JUMP!" Seriously, F that scene. That sh*t pisses me off so much.

Stuff like that just makes a movie seem silly and stupid to me. I can't get "drawn in" where I feel the tension, and feel like I'm right there experiencing the adventure with the characters. Instead, I'm constantly reminded that I'm watching the product of mega-producers and corporations, who think the general population is only interested in special effects and explosions and beautiful people saying stupid lines. I remember watching the first movie, and as the final scene was closing and they were flying away from the island, I breathed a heavy sigh of relief, because I felt like I had JUST BARELY escaped the same dangers as the main characters had. I felt like I was there the whole time. But when I finished the newer, more "modern" JURASSIC WORLD, I felt zero emotion, absolutely nothing as the movie was ending. Instead, I just thought to myself "Well, those were some really cool special effects, the movie sure had a large budget!" In order for a movie to be captivating and really give the viewers a unique experience, you must mesmerize them and put them in a trance where they forget they are watching a movie. All those STUPID, HORRIBLY UNREALISTIC lines, actions, and mistakes made by the cast throughout the entire movie do nothing but slap me on the face each time it happens, only to remind me that I am, in fact, watching a movie.

I would watch the first original Jurassic Park movie 10 times before I watch Jurassic World again! >:[

Reviewed by j_a_newton 1 / 10

Megacraptor Rex

Two decades after the original Jurassic Park, the company behind it is overcome with greed and decides to capitalise on the dinos once again, but since everyone has seen Whatevertheirnameis-sauruses by now, they need to create new monsters to keep the "Wow" factor up.

So it decides to produce the movie Jurassic World, in which, two decades after the original Jurassic Park, the company behind it is overcome with greed and decides to capitalise on the dinos once again, but since everyone has seen Whatevertheirnameis-sauruses by now, they need to create new monsters to keep the "Wow" factor up.

It's either an irony of fate or a sly jab at the ever-fossilising motion picture industry that the storyline of the film and the narrative of its conception are so strikingly similar. And I'm afraid I'm not inclined to thinking it was intentional.

As ridiculous as the premise of the film is – fill Dino Island with people, let a number of scary ones loose, and then indulge in blood and screams and make sure the obligatory two lead kids get away in the end, where on Earth have we seen that before? – as poorly written the script is. Apparently, the first draft only took three weeks to throw together. I'm surprised it didn't happen in three hours. Loose ends are dangling all over the place like severed sinews from consumed tourists, the archetypal characters are nothing but a poor joke of the ones in the original trilogy (geeky and untidy computer nerd, lone hero scientist who understands that life doesn't follow spreadsheets, greedy business execs who want to make money from the monsters, and lo and behold, the Nasty Military Man who wants to weaponise them, et cetera ad nauseam), and when characters actually have to TELL each other to "RUUUUUUUN!" instead of standing still, waiting to become a quick snack, palm goes firmly on face, at least for this reviewer.

You're-a-sick World indeed. Could someone please apply a suitably large nuclear bomb onto Isla Nublar, so that we won't have to endure a Jurassic 5.

Reviewed by jaredpahl 7 / 10

Spielberg Magic, This Is Not. Still, a Visit to Jurassic World Is Worth the Price of Admission.

You may have heard some critics champion Jurassic World as "The best Jurassic Park sequel", some fans declare that it "brought them back to their childhood", and others who may have made the absurd claim, "It's better than the original". Don't believe the hype. Jurassic World is nowhere close to the best Jurassic Park sequel (Spielberg's own, The Lost World: Jurassic Park, will always have that title). It is not going to bring you back to your childhood, and it doesn't hold a candle to what Steven Spielberg and crew accomplished with the original Jurassic Park. In a time of dark, self-serious, and pretentious blockbusters such as last year's Dawn of the Planet of the Apes or Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight films, Jurassic World is a refreshingly light adventure flick, but let's not pretend this is anything groundbreaking. The fourth Jurassic Park movie remembers to have fun with its premise, but Spielberg's magic touch is still sorely missed.

Jurassic World is the latest film in the Jurassic Park franchise in name only. Call it a sequel, reboot, or re-quel, the fact remains, this is not the same world created by author Michael Crichton and made real by Spielberg and company in 1993. All the major characters from the first three films are gone. Alan Grant, Ellie Satler, Ian Malcolm, and the rest of the interesting, likable, and developed characters of the earlier movies are replaced with broad archetypes and superfluous supporting characters. With respect to our new kid characters and Vincent D'Onofrio's bone-headed military grunt, the only two characters worth noting in Jurassic World are Owen, a rugged dino-expert played by bona fide movie star Chris Pratt, and Claire, an uptight scientist played by Bryce Dallas-Howard. They are both likable in doses, and the script doesn't subject us to too much of their dopey bantering. Still, Jurassic World is a movie less concerned with characters than it is with celebrity personalities. Owen and Claire are not interesting, but Pratt and Dallas-Howard bring a lot of star power. For JW's brand of disposable summer adventuring, that may be enough.

There's a neat little hook to the story of Jurassic World. After a re-branding of sorts, John Hammond's dream is finally realized and Jurassic Park is somehow opened and fully operating. However, the public begins to lose interest in seeing the same old dinosaurs, prompting the scientists of Jurassic World to create an all-new hybrid dinosaur called the Indominus Rex. Well, you guessed it, that dinosaur escapes. Okay, so that's a clever solution to the classic Jurassic Park sequel dilemma, "How does this stuff keep happening?", but that plot line takes all of twenty minutes to peter out. The rest of the film is a chase picture, and a simple one at that. The few subplots are banal. Be it, two brothers who come to Jurassic World to spend time with their aunt, or a ridiculous thing about a plan to weaponize velociraptors (The latter of those subplots is one of the most embarrassingly stupid ideas I've seen in a movie in years), Jurassic World doesn't have much to get invested in besides big scary monsters running after people.

I do enjoy certain aspects of the film. The care that went into designing the look of the theme park is a great deal higher than the care that went into the story or the filmmaking. Jurassic World is a living, breathing place, and its filled with all kinds of minor details that help sell the illusion. The triceratops petting zoo, the hamster ball ride, the souvenir shops, and scores of other theme park related details are touches that I was grateful made it into the film. There are more than a few nice moments where you get to enjoy the park as it was "intended". It's a shame then that by the end of the film, any fleeting sense of wonder that you might have felt is replaced with Call of Duty-esque sensory bombardment.

Once the Indominus Rex gets out, and all Hell breaks loose, director Colin Trevorrow's filmmaking falls apart. Jurassic World is an impressive technical feat. The action is staged well, and the special effects and production designs are incredibly polished. It all looks like a million bucks (or 150 million to be exact), and it's all very fun, but when it comes to the meat of the movie, it's foolish to think that Jurassic World is anything more than Transformers with dinosaurs. In Jurassic Park and The Lost World, Steven Spielberg infused his action scenes with tension and drama. There was a certain kind of visual poetry to the way he filmed the T-Rex attack in the first movie or the raptors in the grass scene from the Lost World. The action scenes of the first two movies were exhilarating without showing everything. They were subtle and scary and they exploded at just the right moments. Jurassic World's action scenes are loud, chaotic and devoid of any technique. Trevorrow throws the kitchen sink into every shot. The Indominus Rex chomps up machine gun toting mercenaries left and right, pterodactyls dart all over the screen pecking and biting everything in sight. and big, lumbering CGI beasts fight each other and destroy every last peanut brittle building around them. Sound familiar? It's the kind of mind-numbing chaos that can be loads of fun to watch while you're there but leaves no lasting impact.

Such is the problem with the movie as a whole. Jurassic World is big, bright, and fun, with lots of action and good special effects. It pleases crowds. But as with most big budget crowd pleasers, it comes with dull characters, brain dead plotting and booming CGI overload. Jurassic World left me with the same empty feeling I got after seeing Jurassic Park 3. Both movies are serviceable summer romps, full of dino-action and great visual effects, but there is simply a noticeable dip in the quality of the production. Jurassic World successfully mines from the franchise name a good B-caliber FX spectacular. For dumb summer fun, it works just fine. But there was a time when Jurassic Park aspired to more than dumb summer fun. Steven Spielberg's first two movies had class. They grappled with ideas, they were intelligent, they showcased real filmmaking, and they were genuinely thrilling. Jurassic World is colorful and fun, but let's be clear, when it's all said and done, nothing beats Spielberg.

72/100

Read more IMDb reviews

27 Comments

Be the first to leave a comment