Mark Kermode reviews Jurassic World 

"Fulfill its popcorn promises..." - You've got to admit, Kermode has a way with words.

"I don't think I've seen this [clip]." "...it's everywhere." "I haven't been there." "You've just been everywhere else?"

Mark struggling to recover from Simon's "I haven't been 'everywhere'" quip - Ice cold.

An example of where they fail in this movie is that they can make a man stroking a dinosaur's face seem believable, and yet make a man on a motorcycle (riding through a dense forest at 50mph) look ridiculous.

Who would have thought that Mad Max would be the movie to beat for the whole year.

Talking of "big leaps" for directors, i would love to see a Kermode Uncut that highlights the speed in which directors go from making a small indie debut to directing a huge studio blockbuster in literally one move. That's certainly not the way i remember it and it's happened more than enough times for it not to have been a one-off. Marc Webb IMMEDIATELY comes to mind.

Loved this review, because it hammers the nail right on the head: this film is TONE DEAF when it comes to characters. I literally couldn't have cared less about a single one of them. Any one of them (including either of the two boys) could have been eaten and I wouldn't have batted an eye.

When they thought the Indominus Rex was not in its cage, all they needed to do was call the control room to confirm its location via its tracker. Bryce Dallas Howard did not need to physically drive all the way to the control room herself. If they had just did that, then we wouldn't have had a movie.

Yes kermode gets it 100% right. I didn't think the characters were good enough. Chris Pratt didn't get enough good lines, nothing in this film that older fans haven't already in the older and better Jurassic films. Kids will love this but I was disappointed

Saw the film last night. Don't always agree with Kermode but this time he's pretty much spot on.

I don't know how he can say there is little to no character development when really it has around the same level of character development as the original Jurassic Park, perhaps even more. JP: Malcolm was an expert who predicted things would go wrong and is proven right. JW: Owen is an expert who also predicted things would go wrong and was proven right. JP: Dr Alan Grant was an expert in his field who wasn't particularly fond of kids, but by the end of the film he has come to like and even wants to protect Lex and Tim. JW: Claire is an expert in her own field, admittedly a different one, and obviously puts her career before her nephews and in a way that's actually worse than Dr Grant considering Lex and Tim were pretty much strangers whereas Zach and Gray were family relations of hers. She too though came to like and protect them. JP & JW: Both John Hammond and Simon Masrani were very enthusiastic about the park but then realised the error of their ways. JP: Lex and Tim while likeable didn't really develop at all throughout the film. JW: Gray showed obvious Asperger like tendencies (something that was in the original script but was later cut), and was slightly odd and immature for a 12 year old, he did become more useful as the film went on though and grew from strength to strength; he jumped off the waterfall despite being scared and helped his elder brother on numerous occasions and wasn't just a helpless kid in distress. JW: Zach started out as a moody teenager who likes girls and ogling his phone and being mean to his younger brother who he thought cramped his style. As the story progresses though, he comes to realise what's really important and begins to protect and care for his younger brother. Come on guys, help me out here because I'm struggling to see how JP had better character development.

I really didn't find the CGI in this film very impressive, quite apart from the unimaginative plot and poor characters. After seeing Mad Max Fury Road I'm really starting to appreciate practical special effects more!

The adverts were enough to put me off this film.

the best bit was at the start when the boy runs up to the doors and the themetune we all know and love plays

Very substantive review, Mark! This is ALL EXACTLY what I figured the film would be and more - all style, no substance. A bunch of action CGI spectacle with no character, no story, and no depth. It's really ridiculous that this movie apparently throws the second and third films out of its supposed continuity as if to have the hubris to proclaim that it will, by default alone, be a superior film to either one. Problem is, at least those movies had some characters you cared about, and had an attempt to forge a minimal emotional story. I didn't like Jurassic Park 3, but I do generally find The Lost World to be an okay film with a couple of stumbling blocks to it. Even the positive reviews I've heard still have stinging points that only intensify my disinterest in seeing this. The fact is, the original Jurassic Park is a beloved classic that still holds up just as well today because of the strength of its characters, acting talents, screenplay, and every skilled artist that worked behind the scenes on it. It strove to be smart, endearing, scary, exciting, and touchingly emotional in all the best ways. From what I've read from the director's comments on Jurassic World, he was fine with making this a dumb movie, and some fans' comments seem to resolve to the fact that they shouldn't even try to match the greatness of the original and just go ahead and make it as dumb as possible, which is the entire problem. Imagine if people had that attitude when they were making The Empire Strikes Back.

I noticed a quite subtle reference to Jurassic Park. When there's blood dripping on the soldier guys hand, one drop runs down one side of his hand, and the second down the other as a reference to the Jeff Goldblum chaos theory thing. Or it's just a coincidence.

I loved Jurassic World. A whole of fun. You don't go and see this kind of film for deep characterisation. You go to see the dinosaurs.

"House Prices Dallas" haha

I must say I didn't expect Abraham Lincoln to make an apperance

5:35 Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull dropped the ball.....er, understatement of the year.

Wait Godzilla had good characters? Honestly they bored the hell out of me.

i saw it today.... IT WAS AWESOME!!! huge fan of the franchise... Maybe that's it.

Big, loud, shouty monsters. Put it on the poster!! Brilliant!

I have to say that i massively enjoyed this movie. It's a bit cheesy and a bit predictabe but incredibly good fun and i thought the story was actually quite clever and well thought out

It was one of those films where I went in anticipating something like the same experience as Jurassic Park, but left the theatre unsatisfied though not really knowing why. I remember thinking that the story was a sized up version of the story of Jurassic Park, but if you asked me to refer to the characters in this film I couldn't even tell you their names. Whereas with Jurassic Park (having seen it only once) I could name Ian Malcolm, Alan Grant and John Hammond. Undeveloped characters - now I get what was so unsatisfying about it.

Seen it today, giving it the benefit of the doubt. It may be my nostalgia for the original having seen it at the cinema, but it wasn't great. Mark has, as usual, reviewed it very well and is right. I can't critique to his standard but I agree with his opinion. Yes, there are effects/noise/music etc but lacked substance without intensity. I think it's aimed at a young, impressionable demographic who may ask 'what was the fuss about' in the original which broke new ground. As often happens, the original is the best. Wait for the DVD if you saw Jurassic Park or are curious.

You're kind of right about the Spiel' nods but the truth is I found this a bit old school 'blockbuster' goodness. I really liked the relationship between the two leads, especially the bit when Chris rams his lips into dallas' mouth...it did have that 'Romancing the stone' vibe. It's not so mis - coherent compared to many modern attempts at the same thing.

Totally agree with you on this one Mark, while I really enjoyed the spectacle, I often couldn't get past its many, many inconsistencies.

First "Jurassic Park" movie is my personal Citizen Kane. Simply because it works as a movie. It is beautifully crafted and has everything I love so dearly about movies. Every little gear of this clockwork turns smoothely and seemlessly. Seeing it as a 7-year-old, I remember it being immersive to a point that is almost scary in retrospect :). I was terrorized and engaged and enthused in a way I never were before and never have been since. Also I loved the characters, particularly Laura Dern. Jaws may be a better movie according to critics, it will never touch me the way JP did :)

Saw this at the BFI IMAX this morning; Granted it's no JP but certainly second best in the franchise for me. Yes character development is....scarce...with a little hint of too much cheese between the two kid brothers but there are some truly excellent set pieces, some lovely nods to the original in the music score and the old visitors centre etc. which work well for me. I felt myself rooting for the more friendly raptors and TRex and not wanting them to be killed more than for the humans. There are some excellent lines though for Pratt and as a summer blockbuster it works well. And clearly 2nd best of the 4 for me.

Ack, why does kermode have to turn reviews like this into a thesis? I think the nods that mark talks about to spielbergs' back-catalogue is forced to link into his argument about character development. Also, it's no Jurassic Park, but I cared WAY more about the characters in this than in Godzilla.

I'd really like to hear Marks critique of one of Simons favourite songs. Charidee maybe ?

Tranquilizer darts seem to be extinct in this movie. Makes you wonder how they were planning on transporting the Indominus rex to the actual park paddock.

I literally saw every single thing in this film coming. The end was just appalling. Still mildly entertaining.

Jurassic World- the most polarizing film of the year. I really enjoyed it. No, Mark, the characters in Godzilla were really dull and didn't have any personality and lacked any character in my eyes. Jurassic World actually had fun and somewhat interesting characters and that's mostly due to the fact that the characters played it straight but still were aware that they were in a ridiculous blockbuster with CGI monsters while Godzilla 2014 tried so hard to be dark, deep, and philosophical that it kind of forgot on when to have fun and to have charismatic characters. Jurassic World is a better executed monster movie than Godzilla 2014.

Jurassic World and The Force Awakens have a lot in common. They were probably made as soulless repackaged films for a new generation and to start off a new money-making trilogy. Even the short clip they showed here with Chris Pratt and Bryce was boring to sit through. I'll never watch JW again but will gladly rewatch JP and even Lost World multiple times.

Ignore the second two films? No you don't.. It exists after those two films have taken place.. JW doesn't render them pointless in any way shape or form.. 2 and 3 take place on the surrounding islands near Isla Nubar thats all..

Don't think anyone expected anything other than the result Kermode described. Don't mind though we've had Mad Max and soon to be Star Wars, I'm happy watching the original Jurassic Park in all its glory and leave it at that.

It's funny that Mark mentioned Godzilla as a comparison, because i did the same connection, only i put the character work on Jurassic world over the super over the top flat characters in Godzilla.

High heels in the jungle - is this a joke?

kermode is right about the nods back to previous spielberg movies and jurassic park, as they life of pi actor and hammond say, spared no expense!

People keep saying "it's so unrealistic! Who would keep trying to make this park work?" Don't understand how insane it is that almost any theme park is open lmao

Whilst the film maybe unfocused & undirected in parts, the film’s still an exciting, stylish, greatly acted & well written reentry into the cult favourite series. (73%) (3.5/5 stars) (positive)

Referencing Godzilla as a positive example? No way!

Correct...

I walked out when Kermit showed up with a machete

Don't fully agree. Not as good as the first one but pretty good nonethless. I thought all the characters were secondary to the spectacle, but dinosaurs are hard to share the screen with. But the nods back to the first film were very effective.

I was 5 when the original jp came out and its one of my first memories of the cinema. Jp is one if mall time favourite movies because its one that made me fall in love with film and cinema. I have absolutely no interest in seeing this, it looks like the worst of the three.

Let's be honest, this is the sort of movie you watch for the dinosaurs. And if you go in with that attitude, it's a blast. But yes, the film is less than the sum of its parts. And the years it spent in development purgatory don't entirely excuse that. Surely a director would watch through the film as post-production wound down and realise that, for example, Gray mentions to Zach in one scene that their parents are planning to get divorced (not exactly a trivial detail), but that is never mentioned again. Why, then, would you not cut that vestigial scene out of the movie?

I have to agree. I really enjoyed Godzilla, but not so much Jurassic World. Both are though worth to see at a movie theatre! The latter just had too much convenient coincidences, that I just couldn't suspend my disbelief and that's when a film watching experience falls apart.

Loved the film. No heart in the characters thou especially the two boys. I didn't even get bored of it thou. The action was 10 out of 10

This review makes me want to see Jaws, way more than the film it actually reviews :)

Jaws would kick its ass!

Oh Mark lighten up! Not every film has to be Citizen Kane. Jurassic World was great fun and had lots of Dino action which is what people really want to see. If it had run 30 more mins to get all the plot and character development you wanted, you would then complain it was too long, too slow and not enough dinosaurs. While this isn't work of genius, it is a really exciting action blockbuster, and doesn't pretend to be anything else.

It was cheesy and loud and brash and bold and funny...and a film about dinosaurs in a theme park who run wild. I went into this completely aware that it wouldn't be Jurassic Park and that it would be just fun. FUN! Remember that word if you go see it. Go see it and have FUN, don't pick holes in A FILM ABOUT DINOSAURS IN A THEME PARK, just laugh at the ridiculousness and switch off your brain instead and try not to be a film critic, I know it's Kermodes job to do this and I massively respect his opinion, I just think this time the audience needs to decide for itself. If you don't like it then fair enough but please don't get all high and mighty about 'eeerrrrrrmagawwwwwd they trained velociraptors, that's so ridiculous'.

nothing can compare to the first movie....🤘

I will say this: Chris Pratt gets those sweet sugar walls at the end!

He gives 'Monsters' as an example of a film with good characters? Really?

I actually enjoyed the movie, great fun, yes it was quite cheesy and stupid in parts, especially Bryce Dallas Howard running the entire movie in high heels, and the raptors "connection" at the end with Pratt's character, and the annoying kids dragged the movie down, basically the only enjoyable character was Chris Pratt's, but the movie had exactly the same problems as the first Jurassic Park movie, and I enjoyed both of them, although the original had Jeff Goldblum!

It was never going to be as good as the first JP movie and its the fault of the film trying to remind us of the first one but I found myself loving it. Yes there are things that don't make sense but I don't care because it was a good attempt and no one can say that JP2 is better than this. Sorry but Mark is wrong (sort of)

To be honest this is exactly what I expected from this movie

It's a flat, jumbled mess that is oddly watchable. Not terrible but you'll forget it by the end of the day.

Godzilla huffed donkey farts

Could it be that Michael Crichton writing the characters just aren't there?

Not often I agree with Mark these days, however after seeing Jurassic World last night I must agree the characters were extremely 2D.... The plot with aspects of using Raptors as War weaponry was not a believable concept in context with the movie and detracted from the actual main plot of the Island descending into chaos... Was hoping more from Chris Pratt as I thought he was great in Guardians of the Galaxy, but don't feel he got enough dialogue to cement a firm stamp in the movie. The CGI was quite poor and compared to the other 3 movies, it looked a hell of alot worse visually.... I think it was just a case of a pretty entertaining film for the action, but was underwhelmed by the dialogue! I wasn't expecting "Game of Thrones" scriptwriting by any means, but was hoping that with the amount of money pumped into the movie, they could hire better screen writers than that....

I love the original trilogy. Was really disappointed by this one though. A lot if reviewers saying this is the best one since the original. It really isn't.

Dat acting.... *facepalm*

He's right about the characters. I just wanted to see those kids get eaten. It's also a shame how they've lost the "what if" possibility, and plausibility, of Jurassic Park by implying that reptiles can be trained like pets. The animals didn't feel like anything that had existed on earth, more like big mad monsters.

Film of the year..Mad Max. Only film that can potentially top it is Star Wars!

Very good review. The plot was laughably thin and the acting was flat. I was rooting for the dinosaurs all the way,

SPONSORED BY MERCEDES.

Agree with Kermode, except when he draws back to Godzilla as a better example of how to do character development in a monster movie. Spending a long time on characters that are boring =/= good character development. Just like lots of special effects do not equal a good action movie.

This film is the most 90s B-movie-like thing I've sat through since the last time I watched a 90s B-movie. Really poor dialogue and character development. Noteworthy too that, In the original, there was never a moment where you thought "Yuck.. that's very obviously CGI." - whereas in Jurassic World there is some blatant, unbelievable use of CGI within the first 20 mins or so.

They went to great pains to make you believe that what you were seeing in Jurassic Park was real; not only the dinosaurs but the characters too. Jurassic World was entertaining but I didn't believe a minute of it.

I just found out Mark Kermode (which can be pronounced to sound like a potty), his original surname is Fairey. He must have got a bit of gyp at school. Regardless of that he's an interesting and engaging fella.

The real problem is trying to make a franchise out of a one book story in the first place. I can already guess the next one. They fix up the park and stupid people go back and get chased and eaten again.

Sorry completely disagree with you on this one, I loved this movie.

Jurrassic park

mega flappy hands around 1:46

What is MCU?

my god he talks fast

Hello

At least he watched the film before criticising it, unlike some morons (Joss Whedon) who criticise it based on clips of the thing.

its a good movie but i thought bryce was jessica chastain until the end credits!!

I haven't seen this movie yet... Mark describes everything I was hoping this wouldn't be. And yet, it's making an absolute ton of money.. So I am torn. It can't be all that crap, surely.. will see. Maybe I'll rent this one.

What was the film he was talking about on the show with a guy coming out of a tent with a rope tied to him and on the other end is Satan?

The best one in the franchise since the original. I loved it

Samosasaurus

I don't know what kermode is talking about, I thought it was entertaining enough and to tell the truth I liked it much better than the original which I thought was overall pretty stale aside from the dinosaurs.

Mark talks about lack of character development, .. bollocks to that, we want to see dinosaurs chasing and eating the characters :-)

wow far too many people treating this film with a cynical adult mind set.

‘ 8 yr ago ‘ is extremely depressing

he's so right, Jurassic Park 2 is way better, and i would go as far as even JP 3 is better than this new trilogy we got .

That woman sounds like Lisa Simpson .. or is it Bart? One of the Simpsons anyway

Jurassic World is what is too much the norm today in Hollywood: Lazy-take-the-audience-for-granted-with-yet-another-sequel filmmaking. I was suckered into seeing that hot mess. I was a little angry walking out of the theater. I should have went with my instinct and stayed away after seeing the initial trailers in late 2014, which were exactly like some of the scenes in Jurassic Park.

Great review. I think the movie was enjoyable, but far from being a great memorable movie like the first JP.

I've seen it and had a great deal of fun with it, it wipes the floor with the other Jurassic sequels in terms of plot, pacing and spectacle. While some characters are quite poorly drawn you get Chris Pratt as the lead who is a joy to watch and feels like a hybrid of Alan Grant, Ian Malcom and the game warden from the first film in that he has dino knowledge, is funny and knows how to hunt dinos. Its a real crowd pleaser and is a decent second to Mad Max for best summer film so far.

haha, dialogue in that clip was woeful...

Sorry to be pernikity but a Mosasour isn't technically a Dinosaur I believe

Lost World had characters who had at least an arc. This movie has nothing. "Family issues used as gimmickry to evoke the illusion of character." Sorry Hollywood, this is NOT how you create compelling characters. This is why Jurassic Park 1 was so great. Alan Grant didn't liked kids, at the end of the movie he changed his mind. Why? Because every scene where he was in it, he was forced to work with kids and learned more about them. It was a simple human thing. Setup and payoff people. In Jurassic World, there were only a lot of payoffs, but mostly no setups, trying to give you the illusion that scenes are meaningful but are empty as the deep void of space. It's like revealing the punchline of a joke without setting it up. Meaningless.