User Score
6.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 195 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 41 out of 195

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 21, 2012
    4
    JP3 clearly sets out to be a short, fun romp through the JP universe. Well, it's exactly like the "quickie" it tries to be... a short, noisy exertion that's kinda fun while it lasts but leaves you feeling unfulfilled. You don't care about the characters, the dinosaurs look more puppet-ish than in either of the original films and the feeling of danger is lacking throughout. On the plus side, the Spinosaurus is pretty neat and no mumbling, stammering Jeff Goldblum to deal with. Whew! Expand
  2. Aug 21, 2010
    9
    A bit shorter than I would have liked but still loads of dinosaurs and loads of actions.Making the film a bit longer and including a bit more story wouldn't hurt but still a fantastic film and one of my favourites.
  3. May 26, 2011
    1
    Growing up with the first two Jurassic Park movies, I was excited to see this movie when it came out. However, even as a ten year old boy, I was very disappointed watching this movie. Replacing Spielberg and John Williams was a big mistake, and everything that made the first two great was gone in this sequel. And so, my childhood was gone forever becuase of this stinker.
  4. Oct 20, 2010
    8
    it wasn't as good as the first movie, but it beats the second movie in just one shot and its an entertaining sequel in the series after the visuals were the great saving grace.

    rating: 8/10
  5. Feb 20, 2011
    7
    While it's not as good as the first movie it's still a blast to watch and brings back memories of the first one, I was really happy that they brought back Dr. Grant, if you like the first movie you may be a little disappointed with this one, but it's still an enjoyable movie.
  6. Apr 14, 2013
    6
    Jurassic Park III is nowhere near as good as the excellent original. But neither is it as bloated or unnecessarily kill-count heavy as it's immediate predecessor, The Lost World. Falling somewhere in-between, Jurassic Park III is a short, streamlined picture that delivers a fun dose of Dinosaur related mayhem. Nothing more, nothing less. Good, fun B-movie entertainment.
  7. Oct 3, 2011
    4
    The Lost World wasn't a terrible sequel, and neither is Jurassic Park III. It inherits the drawbacks of the series thus far - criminal under-development of characters and a script that leaves a lot to be desired. The effects are still fantastic of course,and there's enough action here to keep event the most ardent dinophiles entertained. My main problem with Jurassic Park III is that without Spielberg in the director's chair, the film lags behind it's predecessors in terms of quality. Clearly all the film's budget went on the admittedly fantastic looking Spinosaurus, but unfortunately this means a lot of the rest of the film looks a little cheap. There's no hiding where the money ran out, as there is a multitude of scenes in confined spaces, most which appear to be ill-disguised studio sets. Essentially, Joe Johnston has ripped away the Jurassic Park series' blockbuster crown and replaced it with the rather less regal B-Movie paper hat, which is rather tragic. Expand
  8. Sep 20, 2011
    3
    The idea of Jurassic Park III didn't seem like a good idea to me even if Spielberg directed as the first two were not his finest films with the first being a great piece of action but devoid of pretty much everything else with characters that make stupid people look clever. The 2nd film, The Lost World made some of the same mistakes but its main error was a laughable 30 minute chase around San Diego as a closing.
    The 3rd film makes all the mistakes both of these two makes and has very little redeeming features with Spielberg not even directing this installment. Joe Johnston took the helm for this one with William H Macy and Tea Leoni entering the Jurassic family. Despite the inherent flaws of the first two films the 3rd tries its very best at the beginning to avoid the same problems, devoting actual time to character development before getting into the action. However as soon as the action starts the characters revert to this two dimensional plot devices to the the film from one set piece to the other. Unfortunately thats just the 1st of many problems. The action as compared to the Spielberg's attempts is much less impressive but still enjoyable with is just about what makes the film watchable with improved graphics and new monsters to run away from. Finally the section in the birdcage, be it impressive visually, is just plain silly.
    Expand
  9. Jan 11, 2014
    3
    Severe lack of characterisation, predictable set-up from the start, majorly contrived plot devices, the dinosaurs almost pushed to the side with about the least annoying character being Dr. Alan Grant, a stock, pointless ending...it's like I didn't care any more. And it's a great insult to have one of the main female characters to be so poorly written that she was about one of the only ones to be found screaming for help. Expand
  10. Apr 8, 2012
    3
    Absolutely underdone and overdone on the same levels of everything in Jurassic Park. The actors, the script, and the story were all just underdone and the dinosaurs were overdone. Some action/terror sequences were overdone and some were underdone and didn't have the uplifting experience of the first. If only the story was extended to more science than just learning how velociraptors communicate, if the story was extended as an eco-thriller to be like Michael Crichton's The Lost World which it tried but failed on many levels, and if the plot had more detail and a better script, then it would of been a necessary sequel. They should of stopped at the first Jurassic Park unless The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park III were better than they are now though unfortunately, they could of been better but were not. Expand
  11. Jun 11, 2013
    10
    I love this movie! While not as good as the first and second movie, i still enjoy it. Also, i LOVE the Spinosaurus, but my favorite Dino is still the T-Rex.
  12. Dec 29, 2011
    6
    For all its cutting-edge special effects and compelling thrills, the third Jurassic Park film installment has the feel of a B-movie, minus the Michael Bay-esque explosions and scantily clad women. The movie makes the mistake that so many other dinosaur movies make - it fails to tell a human story as well as an adventure story, and the result can easily be called the world's longest chase scene. It was merely a series of climaxes with brief and generally meaningless pauses that don't advance or contribute anything, not to mention little to no character development. While I was glad to see the pterodactyls in action, the T. rex gets hardly any screentime at all before being abruptly killed off by some bigger, badder dinosaur called Spinosaurus. I kid you not - they basically took the beloved mascot of the franchise, the one who commanded such a powerful, memorable and screen-stealing presence, and they kicked him into the dust and spat in his face. I don't care if there's another, equally-scary dinosaur to take his place - Tyrannosaurus rex was everybody's favorite dinosaur in the films, and it's oddly hearbreaking to see him cast aside for something "better" that somehow unconvincingly evaded the humans all throughout the previous film. But the worst part was the raptors. They were even smarter than the humans, and they basically controlled the whole plot. Overall, the sequel to the two greatest dinosaur movies of all time (and two of the best movies of all time) ended up as something less than extraordinary. Expand
  13. Sep 2, 2012
    3
    What has happened to this franchise. It went from a classic, to a great movie to now a movie that flat out sucks. A few good moments but horrible on every other front.
  14. Jul 3, 2013
    6
    Not magical or creative enough as the others, but still thrilling enough to be likable. You get the feeling it is a high class Syfy movie. It is a good thing they have a chance to redeem themselves with the fourth one.
  15. Mar 8, 2014
    5
    The visuals are impressive, but it falls short compared to its predecessors. We have some intense action, and great use of CGI, but it all just feels like it's repeated.
  16. Jul 13, 2012
    6
    The exciting moments aren't as exciting despite the improved effects. However, it was great to see all the new dinosaurs in this one and it was nice to see Dr. Grant and Ellie again.
  17. Jan 23, 2013
    0
    What a terrible trilogy maker for Jurassic Park. It's always an overcast sky in this synthetic sound stage forest. There is about 20 seconds of awe and wonder like the first two movies then it's destroyed by the main characters wading through dinosaur droppings. The plot is basically "Go to Island to find kid. Crash. Run from Dinosaurs. Kill the mercenaries. Lots of Annoying Parents. Kill the poster boy quickly and with no honest effort at pretending it's for anything other then "KOOL, DINOSAURS!" ". All of which I assume was written onto a star buck's napkin by Joe Johnston and handed to Spielberg during a besotted event. The movie has no interesting cinematography either, no high quality you'd expect from a Spielberg movie such as the first two. It's always an overcast lighting and it's almost entirely in a sterile looking sound stage forest. There's no change of set pieces. It's all just running in the forest while "dinosaurs rip each others faces off! RawwRR" as Alan Grant put it. From a science stand point it's just dreadful. Even compared to the other films. Spinosaurus was a spindly fish eater, not a super predator nightmare monster that ate everything in sight like pretend paleo adviser Jack Horner would have you believe. Tyrannosaurus, the main antagonist and poster boy for the series the last 2 films, is killed off 5 minutes after showing up in a pitiful death sequence that you would expect only to befall a Star Trek Red shirt. The Raptors are the only semi-decent thing and even they under perform. The Pteranodons are just...weird. Especially with teeth. Only Jack Horner could give a Pteranodon teeth. Then there are the Ankylosaurus, Brachiosaurus, Corythosaurus, Parasaurolophus, Stegosaurus and Ceratosaurus that just show up in an attempt to try and give dinosaur fans something to look at and go "o0oooh pretty"

    It's just terrible. I feel robbed of 2 hours of my life some how.
    Expand
  18. Jun 20, 2013
    5
    My least favorite of the series. Sam Neill is definitely a welcomed return, but the film itself lacks in the excitement and the magic that the first two had.
  19. Mar 29, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie pulled Jurassic Park into a hole for me. Johnston directed Jumanji, and that was a great movie. Why he couldn't do the same here, I don't know. Maybe more realistic situations instead of a kid falling onto an island that is supposed to be heavily protected? Or later having that kid almost being picked to death by a bunch of baby pterosaurs? Oh no, not baby pterosaurs. I'll plus the score for the slight suspense at some parts. I hope Jurassic Park IV brings the series back for me, but I think the Lost World and this one here messed it up enough for me. Expand
  20. Jul 18, 2013
    7
    It has thrills, sure, but it just does not have the same feel of fear and style as the first two films did. This film also touches on cliche stuff and a corny plot ending. I hope Jurassic Park 4 does better than this one, even though this film isn't terrible.
  21. May 10, 2014
    5
    I am pretty mixed about this film, because while it had some good Dinosaur action, it just felt like more of the same from past Jurassic Park films. I really don't think this film needed to be made. I kind of hope that when Jurassic World comes out in 2015, it will try to do something new and creative and not do something like this where it's just more of the same.
Metascore
42

Mixed or average reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 30
  2. Negative: 7 out of 30
  1. 40
    The story's tired, as are the main characters.
  2. Reviewed by: Cody Clark
    60
    The ending is so absurd, in fact, that it feels like it was improvised by a committee of 6-year-olds. If the raptors truly were intelligent, they'd have eaten the final reel.
  3. When a cell-phone gag is the most exciting or inventive thing in a big summer dinosaur movie, you have to wonder if the species might not be ready for extinction.