TF Views

Recently rewatched The Lost World - Jurassic Park, and have come to the conclusion that it's my least favorite of all the Jurassic Films. There are two main reasons:

- the whole moral point of view that the movie takes, that it's somehow wrong to take these genetically recreated dinosaurs off an island and put them in a zoo on the mainland, is not one that I can agree with. No good case is ever really made for it, other than that the dinosaurs are thriving when they shouldn't and John Hammond wants to study them and learn why. And when our main characters sabotage the efforts to capture and remove some dinosaurs, we're supposed to side with them? Vince Vaughn's character of Nick Van Owen in particular is responsible for just about every death on the island through his acts of sabotage, but is never once held accountable for it. The narrative doesn't blame him, and none of the other characters hold him responsible. The film tries to make us root for some less than admirable characters and root against characters who really aren't doing anything other than wanting to build an exotic zoo.

- That leads me to point two, the sheer stupidity of several characters. Van Owen is one, but Julianne Moore's Sarah Harding is supposed to be this wildlife expert, who spouts fact after fact about animal behavior in multiple scenes. But she's dumb enough to take the baby tyrannosaur back to the expedition trailer and not expect the parents to come looking, and then she continues to wear a jacket with the baby's blood on it, despite telling everyone how good the tyrannosaur's sense of smell is. She preaches about leaving no trace, but does the exact opposite. She almost gets herself trampled by some Stegosauruses in her very first scene. I came to the conclusion this time watching it that I really can't stand her. She's one of the worst characters in the movie.

Now, do I still like The Lost World overall? Sure, it's well made, has some great dinosaur action sequences in it, and it's great to see Jeff Goldblum playing Ian Malcolm again. Pete Postlewaithe's big game hunter is the best character in the movie, and I'm glad to see him live through it. Hammond's nephew Peter Ludlow gets the fate of Dodson in the book, eaten by the baby Tyrannosaur, which is a bit harsh. The movie paints him as the villain, but his actions seem more than reasonable up until he has to be stupid in the last five minutes so he can get killed. I like Malcolm's daughter Kelly (step daughter presumably) and poor Nick dies heroically but in one of the more violent deaths in the movie, torn apart by the parent Tyrannosaurs. I like that the movie goes in a very different direction from the original Jurassic Park, so it's not a sequel that repeats the plot of the first movie, it takes the situation and characters to tell a different story.

andersonh1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 16, 2025 9:54 amWhat was it about Fallen Kingdom that he hated that much?

It mostly had to do with the internal logic of the film as I recall. I remember him describing a particular scene where they used the dinosaurs as a weapon... So there's this guy that points a gun at someone so that the dinosaur can follow the laser sight, and then they triggered an ultrasonic sound to signal the dinosaur to attack. And he was like 'why wouldn't you just shoot? What's the point of using a dinosaur instead of a bullet?' as well as limitations of an animal.

Sparky Prime wrote: ↑Wed Jul 16, 2025 6:14 pm

andersonh1 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 16, 2025 9:54 amWhat was it about Fallen Kingdom that he hated that much?

It mostly had to do with the internal logic of the film as I recall. I remember him describing a particular scene where they used the dinosaurs as a weapon... So there's this guy that points a gun at someone so that the dinosaur can follow the laser sight, and then they triggered an ultrasonic sound to signal the dinosaur to attack. And he was like 'why wouldn't you just shoot? What's the point of using a dinosaur instead of a bullet?' as well as limitations of an animal.

One of the themes of the three JW movies is people wanting to use the dinosaurs as weapons and why that's a bad idea. The scene with the Indoraptor fits in thematically with the very first film where Hammond thinks they can control the uncontrollable and finds out the hard way that they can't. That's how I read it anyway. Every Jurassic movie has people finding out the hard way that dinosaurs ultimately can't be contained or controlled indefinitely.

There is a sequence in Dominion where someone uses a laser pointer to mark people as targets for raptors rather than using a gun. That might have been the end goal, since the Indoraptor in Fallen Kingdom was stated to be a "prototype".

andersonh1 wrote: ↑Thu Jul 17, 2025 8:16 amOne of the themes of the three JW movies is people wanting to use the dinosaurs as weapons and why that's a bad idea. The scene with the Indoraptor fits in thematically with the very first film where Hammond thinks they can control the uncontrollable and finds out the hard way that they can't. That's how I read it anyway. Every Jurassic movie has people finding out the hard way that dinosaurs ultimately can't be contained or controlled indefinitely.

There is a sequence in Dominion where someone uses a laser pointer to mark people as targets for raptors rather than using a gun. That might have been the end goal, since the Indoraptor in Fallen Kingdom was stated to be a "prototype".

Like I say, I haven't seen the film for myself, so I don't know the full context the film may or may not address. While it may fit thematically, there's more to consider as far as the in-story implications are concerned that it sounds like the writers didn't think about. Who ever buys the dinosaur would also have to be able to transport it, feed it, clean up after it, make sure it stays healthy, etc... It would be a nightmare logistically to maintain, much haul it around for nefarious purposes. It wouldn't be practical. I think that's what my friend was talking about and why it took him out of the story.