Jurassic Park III

Jurassic Park III Image
Metascore
42

Mixed or average reviews - based on 30 Critics What's this?

User Score
6.1

Generally favorable reviews- based on 297 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0

Trailer

Please enter your birth date to continue:
You are not allowed to view this material at this time.
Autoplay: On | Off

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 30
  2. Negative: 7 out of 30
  1. Chicago Sun-Times
    Reviewed by: Roger Ebert
    75
    Not as awe-inspiring as the first film or as elaborate as the second, but in its own B-movie way, it's a nice little thrill machine.
  2. Anything, Steven, anything would be better than making us watch the same movie again.
  3. Another of many recent Hollywood plotless wonders.
  4. The screenplay is so stale that even fans of the previous "Jurassic" installments might think this is one clone too many.
  5. 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.
  6. With Joe Johnston directing instead of Spielberg, who executive-produces, and a scrum of screenwriters, none named Crichton, the franchise suffers some negligence.
  7. 20
    Stinks worse than dino dung. Sure, the creatures look good.

See all 30 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 44 out of 109
  2. Negative: 31 out of 109
  1. IzaakV
    Jan 22, 2009
    10
    I love this movie. The mere fact that they brought it out just for more 'jurassic park action' is good enough for me.
  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 moreA 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. Expand
  3. Jul 7, 2015
    7
    This is better than the second but does not live up to the fantastic first film in the franchise with the spinosauros stealing the show. TheThis is better than the second but does not live up to the fantastic first film in the franchise with the spinosauros stealing the show. The reason this only gets a 7 is because the over use of CGI. Expand
  4. Jul 27, 2015
    5
    It took me a long time to get through this one, but now I can finally share my thoughts on 'Jurassic Park III'.

    It's not directed by Steven
    It took me a long time to get through this one, but now I can finally share my thoughts on 'Jurassic Park III'.

    It's not directed by Steven Spielberg this time, Joe Johnston takes the director's chair and Spielberg remains as executive producer. I really liked "The Lost World", I understand why many didn't like it, but I enjoyed its dumb fun.

    Alan Grant (Sam Neill) is back and is sent to the island by the parents (Tea Leoni and William H. Macy) of a young boy who has been missing on the island for some eight weeks.

    The first thing I noticed about this film is how small-scale it is as opposed to the first two. The CGI is also questionable and the action is boring for the most part. There is very little excitement or joy in this sequel and it took me many attempts to watch it, but only now can I share my opinion.

    There are also some unintentionally funny moments in the film, and we all know what that is, when Alan Grant is having a dream and imagines a dinosaur saying his name. I can see why this would be effective, but it misfired terribly.

    'Jurassic Park III' is nowhere near as exciting as 'Jurassic Park' (1993), nor is it as "blockbuster driven" as 'The Lost World: Jurassic Park' (1997), it's just a failed, exhausting sequel where the franchise needed a break.
    Expand
  5. Jun 2, 2016
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The artistic medium of film is very subjective. Every audience member has a different set of criteria they use to measure their viewing experience. Not everyone shares the same set of criteria. If we did, what a bland and uninspired world this would be.

    What I Personally Liked About "Jurassic Park III":
    Right off the bat, the first thing I liked about this film was its premise. The idea of executing an illegal rescue operation on Isla Sorna is exciting and filled with promise. While this film doesn't live up to that promise, it was still a sound theme which deserved a better exploration. I really enjoyed seeing William H. Macy in this film. He seems to be the only cast member who's really enjoying being part of the production. The others feel like they are waiting around for their paycheck. Even Trevor Morgan seems to be phoning in his performance, particularly when compared to Ariana Richards and Joseph Mazzello in the first film. The action surrounding the dinosaurs is also decent. Much like the initial outing, there is a heightened sense of danger and this constant threat to our cinematic inhabitants is something the second movie was sorely missing. Of course, the large beasts don't seem to be as detailed or as lifelike as in the first two features, so that does hamper the carnage a bit.

    What I Personally Disliked About "Jurassic Park III":
    Where to begin, oh where to begin? I'm not a fan of the pacing of the film before they hit Isla Sorna. The build is drawn out considerably, especially when one takes into consideration that the film is only ninety minutes long. I'm also not a fan of the pacing when they arrive on Isla Sorna either. Seriously, ninety minutes are not long enough to capture the wonder and the tension of a story such as this. The convenient "quick save" ending with Ellie Satler as well as the final confrontation with the Velociraptors don't sit well at all. Most of the faults lie in the direction of Joe Johnston, whose biggest claim to fame prior was "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids." He should have stayed with the more buffoonish action/family pictures such as that and "Jumanji" instead of attempting to step into the summer blockbuster shoes of Steven Spielberg, which he was certainly not qualified to do. Some of that blame has to lie on the shoulders of the screenplay writers, too. Peter Buchman, Alexander Payne and Jim Taylor have fashioned something that resembles the cartoon equivalent of a "Jurassic Park" spectacular. It feels like it started off as a direct-to-DVD sequel with its characters that seem more like caricatures than anything else.

    My Overall Impression of "Jurassic Park III":
    For all of its impressive faults, if you turn off your brain function, this third entrant into the deadly dinosaur franchise is only slightly less enjoyable than its 1997 predecessor (though that's not saying much).
    Expand
  6. Mar 27, 2016
    3
    There’s more than a few spirals of DNA missing from the script of “Jurassic Park III,” an all-action, helter-skelter,There’s more than a few spirals of DNA missing from the script of “Jurassic Park III,” an all-action, helter-skelter, don’t-forget-to-buy-the-computer-game ride that makes the two previous installments look like models of classic filmmaking. Showing all the signs of having been stripped back at a late stage into a lean, 91-minute chase machine — and to hell with pacing and character development — pic has that unmistakable feeling of a franchise being severed from its creative roots with considerable confusion about what to put in its place.

    Except for the visual effects, the movie has a hand-me-down feel. The first two installments used largely the same key talent behind the lens and two key actors (Jeff Goldblum, Richard Attenborough) in front of it, giving them a homogeneous feel. With “JP III,” however, the script’s not based on a Michael Crichton novel, and — aside from Stan Winston and a few others on the dino side of things — there’s an all new crew on the tech side. Even with Steven Spielberg in the coach’s chair, there’s an unmistakable sense that the reserve team has gone in to bat.

    Opening with an OK teaser sequence in which a young kid (Trevor Morgan) and an adult (Mark Harelik) are attacked by an unseen thing when parasailing over Isla Sorna, pic adopts a real-time stance. It’s eight years after the original debacle at John Hammond’s theme park on nearby Isla Nublar, and Hammond’s company, InGen, is a memory. One of his original invitees, Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill), is struggling to maintain funding for his paleontology research. Grant is keen to develop his theory of velociraptor intelligence, but auds at his fundraising lectures only want to hear more tales about Jurassic Park.

    Grant is approached by Paul Kirby (William H. Macy), and his wife, Amanda (Tea Leoni), to guide an aerial tour of Isla Sorna, the so-called Site B (and setting for “The Lost World”), where InGen secretly bred the dinos and where they’ve been on the loose for almost a decade. Presenting themselves as wealthy thrill-seekers who want to buzz the quarantined island, the couple asks the cash-strapped Grant to name his price.

    These establishing reels have a hasty feel that prefigures many of the film’s later problems. Laura Dern briefly reprises her role of Ellie from the first movie; other characters are clumsily introduced and thinly drawn. Result is that, when Kirby, against Grant’s wishes, tries to land the plane on the island, the viewer is plunged into immediate action with only the barest idea of who most of the characters are.

    Pic’s first major action sequence is a highly kinetic screamfest, with the plane crashing into some tree-tops and its occupants being attacked by a spinosaurus, the movie’s much-touted new villain. As the fuselage rolls this way and that, the sequence plays like a B-movie version of the dangling Winnebago sequence in “Lost World” — heavy on screams and visceral shocks but lacking in deep-seated, skin-crawling fear.

    The truth is that the lumbering spino, despite its larger size, longer jaw and fancy back fin, just doesn’t cut it as a substitute T-Rex. With none of the T-Rex’s extensive backgrounding, this new addition to Winston’s dino lineup looks more like an escapee from a Japanese monster movie.

    Following an attempted escape in another plane, pic settles into one long chase movie. The two previous installments had varied situations and cross-plots in which the humans and animals interacted, plus a larger story arc in which the action sequences were implanted. Here, the majority of the movie takes place in jungle settings with the cast running between them as predators arrive on the scene.

    Smidgen of a script cooked up by three credited (and two uncredited) writers soon reveals that Kirby and Amanda are in fact a divorced couple searching for their 14-year-old son, Eric, and Amanda’s boyfriend, Ben — the parasailing pair attacked in the opening teaser.

    “JP III” thus becomes a very different movie from the previous two pics, in which human hubris received its just deserts when protective technology proved inadequate. Here, the protagonists are never in control: They’re dino-dinner from the get-go. In essence, pic becomes a prehistoric variation on another genre: Americans under threat in a hostile, foreign environment. Unsurprisingly, the final line of dialogue is “Let’s go home.”

    Direction by Joe Johnston, who cut his teeth as a visual f/x designer before graduating to effects showpieces “Honey, I Shrunk the Kids” and “Jumanji,” keeps the action ticking but without the broader sweep he brought to adventure saga “The Rocketeer.” Blame that largely on the script; lame attempts at humor and characterization make even the few surviving moments of non-action dialogue painful to sit through.
    Expand
  7. ZacG.
    Jun 30, 2006
    0
    The movie absolutely, positvely sucked! Iam one of the biggest dinosaur enthusiasts in the world and have no idea why they used spinosaurus, The movie absolutely, positvely sucked! Iam one of the biggest dinosaur enthusiasts in the world and have no idea why they used spinosaurus, a dinosaur puny compared to the famous tyrannosaurus rex, to be the star. if they wanted to have a good movie, they would have stuck with t-rex, had spino as a side character, and killed spino when t-rex gets his mouth around spino's neck! also, they put the fight scene too early in the movie. Expand

See all 109 User Reviews

Trailers

Related Articles

  1. Film Friday (7/22): This Week's New Movie Trailers

    Film Friday (7/22): This Week's New Movie Trailers Image
    Published: July 22, 2016
    Watch all of this week's new film trailers, including new looks at The Magnificent Seven, Sausage Party, xXx: Return of Xander Cage, Snowden, The Girl on the Train, and more. Plus, get a quick update on the latest movie news and release date announcements.
  2. What Movie Should I See This Weekend?

    What Movie Should I See This Weekend? Image
    Published: July 20, 2016
    Preview all of this weekend's new theatrical releases (including Star Trek Beyond, Lights Out, Don't Think Twice, Ice Age: Collision Course, and more), with Metascores and trailers for each new film.
  3. What to Watch Now on Amazon Instant Video

    What to Watch Now on Amazon Instant Video Image
    Published: July 20, 2016
    Get a list of the best movie and TV titles recently added (and coming soon) to Amazon Instant Video and Prime Instant Video, updated frequently.
  4. 25 Can't-Miss Movies About Bad Guys, Ranked

    25 Can't-Miss Movies About Bad Guys, Ranked Image
    Published: July 15, 2016
    We rank over two dozen very good movies featuring very bad protagonists.