Part
of the fun of watching films is taking the ones that you like with you from
childhood into adulthood and seeing how they hold up. You change all the time
but they never change and yet they can often seem different each time you go
back to them. For me, the film I watched through childhood and the one I have
the softest spot and the best memories for is Jurassic Park. Jurassic Park is
not, objectively speaking, a great film, but it is a very good one with
fantastic suspense sequences, special effects innovations that heighten rather
than remove the reality of the film, decent characters, a good story, good
performances and a nice little Herzogian strain about how nature is violent,
uncompromising and uncontrollable. It is fortunate that Jurassic Park has these qualities as childhood films cannot hold up
thanks to nostalgia alone. However, it is also worth noting that nostalgia has
nothing to do with why I despise Jurassic
World.
Jurassic
World has opened up and is a great money-spinner, getting thousands of visitors
a year and firmly implanting itself on the public consciousness. However,
market forces and visitor boredom forces Hammond replacement Claire (played by
Byrce Dallas Howard) to create a new dinosaur, the (bear with me while I look
it up) Indominus Rex (played by seriously unconvincing computer imagery), a hybrid
dinosaur that is entirely man-made. And, it turns out, uncontainable. The
monster escapes and starts eating anything it can find – which the Malcolm
replacement Owen (played by Chris Pratt) knew would happen all along. Thrown in
are the Lex and Tim replacements Zach and Gray (Nick Robinson and Ty Simpkins)
who will be in mortal peril for the majority of the film.
Jurassic World loses
credibility straight away and its methods of getting around even this immediate
problem is emblematic of why it doesn’t work at all. Jurassic World likes to forget about the second and third films
(one can sympathize as far as the third goes – though more of this later), but
even so, it is clear that a Jurassic World would never open given the amount of
disaster and deaths that have ensued since Hammond first had the idea. This
film’s carefully thought-out answer is this central inconsistency is to ignore
it. Granted that this is not a big problem – there are others infinitely worse
– but it shows the lack of thought and effort that went into this instalment.
For the rest of the film, when something doesn’t make any sense or if common
sense or comprehensibility are sacrificed for another big, unconvincing CGI
spectacle, the film plays ignorant. It is from the beginning a very smug film,
so smug in its success that it can point to previous instalments as lesser than
itself and also offer a satire of ADD audiences and market forces always
requiring a bigger bang, failing to notice that Jurassic World’s creation of
the Indominus Rex is directly mirrored by the fact that Jurassic World felt the need to create an Indominus Rex. This is a
film so badly thought-out that, in its opening thirty minutes will constantly
remind you that it shouldn’t exist, that it is uncreative, that it is made by
committee, that it is only here to fill pockets – and it doesn’t even seem to
realize that it is what it is doing it.
The
Indominus Rex escapes with such obvious inevitability that it seems almost
unimportant – it even largely occurs off-screen as director Colin Trevorrow’s
camera follows Owen underneath a jeep where he covers himself in oil. Compare
this to the scene in Jurassic Park (I
won’t bother comparing any other scenes in the rest of this review as it is not
particularly worthwhile or revealing) in which the Tyrannosaurus Rex escapes –
one is long, drawn-out, builds slow and is entirely suspenseful as well as
being physically convincing, while the other is quick, nasty and remarkably
stupid.
The
problem, I feel, with the majority of major Hollywood blockbusters these days
is not so much an extreme emphasis on CGI, but an equal lack of emphasis on
storytelling and character. Thanks to this lack of thought, the film stumbles
into some dodgy, stodgy sexual politics that has been written about elsewhere.
It also has so many holes and inconsistencies that the whole thing verges on
incomprehensibility. It is also unexpectedly rotten in its core. We have the
incredibly intelligent velociraptors (now here was a ridiculous feature of Jurassic Park III that I didn’t expect
to see again, much less expanded on) complete with a father complex straight
out of a Tom Cruise film from the 1980’s (the place they seem to have got the
sexual politics) and a shady secret donor who seems to think that velociraptors
could be useful on the War on Terror. It isn’t worth getting into the politics
of this utterly stupid film here – the film’s criticism of drone strikes as
being not effective enough (which to me sounds like approval for the fact of the drone strikes, if not the
suggestion that they are used too sparingly), the film’s tacit approval of
racist overarching terms like the ‘terrorists over there’, the frequent use of
the military to solve our problems (consider how many Hollywood blockbusters
now feature the military where they didn’t before), the fact that the idea of
releasing velociraptors into the Middle East (never mentioned by name, but
clearly inferred) is criticised for being mad or dangerous for US soldiers on
the ground or cruel to the velociraptors but is never criticised for the sheer
number of innocents that will surely be killed if such a thing where to happen
– suffice to say that this plot strand is somewhat worrying, as well as
laughably stupid, and Trevorrow and his writers don’t seem to have anticipated
this.
The
film climaxes then with the humans and the velociraptors and the Tyrannosaurus
Rex and the Mososaurus uniting against the insurrectionary Indominus Rex, which
could be interpreted as some sort of accidental triumphalism for racial purity
– the film doesn’t attempt to address such awkward unintended readings (see
also the gender politics and war politics above – I haven’t even found room for
the ugliness and tastelessness and cruelty of the death of Zara (Katie
McGrath), the one who is tasked with taking care of Zach and Gray). The battle
ends with a look of understanding between the winning combatants – particularly
a ludicrous ‘meaningful’ look shared between the velociraptor and the
Tyrannosaurus – and then a non-ending with the human characters. The film ends
with the Tyrannosauras standing over the ruins of Jurassic World, giving one
last roar, that famous sound effect that has been so often heard and copied
since 1993, cut short by an editor impatient to end the film.
As
for the characters, they are so one-note that even using the term ‘note’ would
exaggerate the amount of thought that went into such things as characterisation
and motivation. The Indominus Rex is the most complete character here, since it,
at least, makes sense – up until a fairly dumb twist.
I
didn’t feel any anticipation for Jurassic
World – even less after the trailer – but I was surprised by how poor it
was. There is nothing to the film that actually works – the characters don’t
make sense, the story is only there to poke fun at previous bad sequels and the
paying audience and then to stitch together big scenes of unconvincing pixels,
the direction is so poor that none of the dinosaurs have any sense of place,
weight, even noise – the final battle is filmed so tightly and in such a
blurred fashion, it is difficult to work out what is happening or get any kind
of thrill from it. It is awkward, humourless, unpleasant, socially and
politically conservative, stupid and wholly unconvincing and unexciting. It
seems as if there was little time or effort made during the production and that
the whole enterprise was an (admittedly successful) attempt to reopen yet
another tentpole franchise. A big gain for the filmmakers and a big loss for
the audience – and, no doubt, more of the same in two or three years’ time.
No comments:
Post a Comment