User Score
8.6

Universal acclaim- based on 381 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 11 out of 381
Watch On

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. EricJ
    Jan 1, 2008
    0
    The most overrated movie of all time.
  2. BlancoA.
    Apr 7, 2003
    4
    I expected SO MUCH MORE from this movie, and just didn't get it. Everyone who had read the book was talking up the intellectual inquiry of the subject matter, the interesting characters and the like. The film was nothing more than a special effects showcase, and not a terribly good one, IMHO. VERY forgettable stuff.
  3. Jan 20, 2014
    4
    Jurassic Park is one of those films that you must have seen when first released (in theaters and home video) in order to really enjoy it. I just watched it for the first time and I just didn't care for it. It's took far to long to get the least bit interesting and even then it never really picks up.
  4. Mar 20, 2014
    4
    ( ALL ENTERTAINMENT)
    Here's the thing about the first Jurassic Park film. It's a very slow pace movie. Once the movie gets going then it's good. But for awhile it drags. The effects are extremely well done. The storyline is amazing. Everything was on key including the cinematography. I have to give it a score of 4 out of 10 though because the beginning is extremely slow. But other than
    ( ALL ENTERTAINMENT)
    Here's the thing about the first Jurassic Park film. It's a very slow pace movie. Once the movie gets going then it's good. But for awhile it drags. The effects are extremely well done. The storyline is amazing. Everything was on key including the cinematography. I have to give it a score of 4 out of 10 though because the beginning is extremely slow. But other than that, it was amazing.

    By: Bailey (A Film Critic/Entertainment journal writer)
    Expand
  5. J.RyanG.
    Jun 17, 2005
    3
    Before seeing it for the first time, you want to believe the hype. Then, you've seen it, and it ends up feeling more like an awkward social engagement that exhausts and discourages. A film that should instill great hope in its audience fails every time it tries too hard to please and not to push our buttons. For a real thrill, see Shyamalan's dread-inducing thrillfest "Signs."
  6. PatC.
    Jan 12, 2004
    3
    What is this? One of the greatest special effects tour de forces in movie history, but populated by B acting performances and a plot so uninspired that Spielberg doesn't care whether you notice or not, so long as yurassis parked for the show.
Metascore
68

Generally favorable reviews - based on 20 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 20
  2. Negative: 1 out of 20
  1. All the imagination and effort (including 18 months of pre-production) that went into making the dinosaurs state-of-the-art exciting apparently left no time to make the people similarly believable or involving. In fact, when the big guys leave the screen, you'll be tempted to leave the theater with them. [11 June 1993, Calendar, p.F-1]
  2. Reviewed by: Richard Corliss
    90
    For dinosaurs to rule the earth again, the monsters needed majesty as well as menace. And Spielberg got it all right. [14 June 1993, p.69]
  3. The results make poor old King Kong look like something from a Macy's Thanksgiving Day parade. Such is progress. [12 July 1993, p.26]