Jurassic Park
A wealthy entrepreneur secretly creates a theme park featuring living dinosaurs drawn from prehistoric DNA. Before opening day, he invites a team of experts and his two eager grandchildren to experience the park and help calm anxious investors. However, the park is anything but amusing as the security systems go off-line and the dinosaurs escape.
- Released: 1993-06-11
- Runtime: 127 minutes
- Genre: Adventure
- Stars: Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, Richard Attenborough, Bob Peck, Martin Ferrero, BD Wong, Joseph Mazzello, Ariana Richards, Samuel L. Jackson, Wayne Knight, Gerald R. Molen, Miguel Sandoval, Cameron Thor, Christopher John Fields, Whit Hertford, Dean Cundey, Jophery C. Brown, Tom Mishler, Greg Burson, Adrian Escober, Richard Kiley, Brad M. Bucklin, Laura Burnett, Michael Lantieri, Gary Rodriguez, Lata Ryan, Brian Smrz, Rip Lee Walker, Robert 'Bobby Z' Zajonc
- Director: Steven Spielberg
Comments
- Maxyger756 - 12 June 2024
A delightful adventure
Let's all agree that Jurassic Park should have been just a stand-alone film. The sequels do have much better CGI and more thrilling action but no one of them has the brilliance and thematic richness the first has
Jurassic Park is a rare example where it not just only works as an exciting dinosaur movie, but also as a dark, serious toned film. The characters were pretty well-written. The plot had clever twists and writing in general. The casting options were just right as well.
I was actually surprised that the CGI wasn't terrible. I was actually preparing to see some really dated looking CGI since this is a feature film from 30 years ago. Although, it does still look a bit dated, but it still looked fine and surprisingly had better CGI than some 2000's films. So due to that, none of the action scenes have aged. They're all exciting in their own way and gave us some variety. (Such as Raptors and T-rexes)
But unfortunately, Jurassic Park also fell short on a few aspects. It's a little inconsistent because Timmy and Lex both had bad bruises from the T-rex but suddenly healed overnight. One of the Raptors searched for the kids but when it saw them, the raptor just stood there so I theorized it could be the baby raptor from earlier that grew up. But then in the next scene, it is going all out. I also felt like it took a bit too long for the whole dinosaur shtick to begin.
In conclusion, a really fun dinosaur film that can also work as a family-oriented dark movie, although having some minor issues with consistency
Rating: 8.6/10. - Coventry - 7 April 2024
30+ years later, still breathtaking...
There's nothing - absolutely nothing - that I can write down in a review for "Jurassic Park" that hasn't been said or printed thousands of times before. Spielberg's (and Crichton's) landmark is three decades old already, but still one of the most influential and inspirational movie-adventures ever made. This wonderful website alone holds nearly 1.500 praising reviews, it launched an incredibly popular franchise and countless of rip-offs, and since 1993 every kid in the world plays with dinosaur toys thanks to this film. "Jurassic Park" remains fantastic Sci-Fi/action entertainment, even after the 20th viewing.
Oh wait, maybe there is something useful I can add! About the timelessness of "Jurassic Park". Yours truly is one of those annoying film-freaks who imposes his childhood favorites onto his own children, and I deeply desire that my offspring loves my favorites as much as I do. But with practically every film that I show to my children (aged 8 and 14), I always get the same comments: "Dad, this movie is so old". "Those special effects look so fake". "This is boring". Well, there was none of that during "Jurassic Park". More than 30 years after the special effects and dino-designs astounded 12-year-old me at the cinema, they still astound my demanding kids via the TV-screen. "Jurassic Park" is a classic that defies several generations, and there certainly aren't movies that can do that.
