Metascore
42

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

User Score
6.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 199 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 30
  2. Negative: 7 out of 30
  1. 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. 63
    Despite all its talk of genetic engineering and its deliberately stupid characters, the unintended message of Jurassic Park III is that when it comes to art and entertainment, you can't beat human DNA.
  3. Another of many recent Hollywood plotless wonders.
  4. At its best, Jurassic Park III is eerily similar to some of the more recent dinosaur-themed video games on the market.
  5. Reviewed by: John Leonard
    40
    With Joe Johnston directing instead of Spielberg, who executive-produces, and a scrum of screenwriters, none named Crichton, the franchise suffers some negligence.
  6. Reviewed by: Ed Epstein
    40
    Exemplifies Hollywood's standard practice of stomping a brilliant concept beyond recognition.
  7. A serious been-there-done-that number.

See all 30 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 44 out of 79
  2. Negative: 24 out of 79
  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. DestinyW.
    Nov 27, 2007
    10
    i am the biggest dinosaur fan in the world. the movie was great. the new dino spinisaurus was good. i would say it needed more dinosaurs more killing and the ending needs to be good and it can end in a fight. o yeah why do the people have to survive on an island full of meat eat, fast running, good swimming dinosaurs i just dont get it i would say nobody would make it for 2 min. i would though. ok the movie was good but not as good as the first 2 just know that. whatch it and rate it. the fourth one is coming out cant want to see that and it has my favorite actor in it i think it is going tobe good. do you i do. the effects in the movie were good the dinosaurs needed to be bigger and some of the actors were very good. Expand
  3. 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
    Expand
  4. 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
  5. SpencerK.
    Jul 11, 2007
    5
    Spinisaurus only eats fish says my friend Noah so it can not kill the T-Rex in three.
  6. 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
  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, 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 79 User Reviews

Trailers