Jurassic World: El renacer

PROS: -The Cinematography is Spectacular!!!

-The T-Rex sequence is TERRIFYING!!!

-Heavy "Jaws" influence during the Mosasaur sequence.

-The Dinosaur effects are great.

CONS: -I'm really tired of mutants/hybrids in my Dinosaur Movies.

-Script tries to undo the fallout of "Fallen Kingdom/Dominion".

-All the characters feel like caricatures.

-The inclusion of an annoying family and a baby dino.

This was a frustrating experience. For every positive in the film, there was a corresponding negative. Gareth Edwards is always on point with cinematography and shot composition. The fact that this was shot on film was noticeable in a positive way. The visuals looked bright during the day, avoiding that blue-tinted filter most blockbusters use these days.

The Mosasaur and T-Rex sequences are actually thrilling, with the T-Rex being legitimately terrifying for the first time since "The Lost World". The effects for the dinosaurs were great, though I do miss the use of practical effects. What I don't miss is the inclusion of mutants and hybrids. I go to these movies to see dinosaurs, not monsters. There are plenty of other franchises for that. The Mutadons and D-Rex serve the same narrative purpose as the raptors (who got completely sidelined here) and the T-Rex. If they had simply swapped them out for those two in the third act, I'd have been much happier.

Also not helping were the characters. The family subplot could-and should-have been removed entirely. They add nothing to the story and waste screentime. The expedition team are all stereotypes, but Mahershala Ali at least stands out. Honestly, I think he would've been fantastic as the lead here instead of Scarlett Johansson.

All that said, I went in with no expectations and still found myself mildly entertained. I can't help but smile when the John Williams "Jurassic Park" score plays and it made a few welcome appearances here. This is definitely a 'paint-by-numbers' Jurassic movie, but I wouldn't be upset if Gareth Edwards got another chance to direct one. 7/10.

Honestly, the first half felt all over the place - too much talking, too many introductions, and pacing that dragged. But once they hit the island, it got better: dinosaur action scenes were intense and visual effects impressive, especially that river chase and cliff sequence.

Scarlett Johansson and Jonathan Bailey were solid, with Bailey bringing unexpected charm despite some forced emotional lines. The movie leans heavily on spectacle and nostalgia, yet the human characters felt shallow and underwritten - I never truly cared about them.

It's entertaining as a summer blockbuster if you just want dinosaur chaos, but it lacks depth. Still, worth the watch for the action and visuals.

Let's face it, this franchise always triumphs despite the criticism.

I think that since the original "Jurassic Park," none of the films have received good reviews, but they always have incredible box office returns.

After the disastrous previous trilogy, where the first part lived off nostalgia and reliving moments, and "Fallen Kingdom" and "Dominion" were complete narrative disasters, it was obvious we were getting a new film.

On the one hand, there are successes: the casting is excellent, with S. Johansson, M. Ali, and J. Bailey as the main trio. There's great chemistry, and it works well. On the other hand, G. Edwards' direction knows how to work well with blockbusters.

But on the other hand, there are major omissions, a somewhat absurd script that closely mimics "Jurassic Park 3." A family, if not, that we know will survive. Few deaths, which I think would have favored the narrative and improved the atmosphere. The CGI, while good, is far from the animatronics we fell in love with. Many sequences are homages/rip-offs that many will enjoy, while others won't.

Overall, I found the film entertaining. I think they're still exaggerating the hybrids and that the trailers had shown everything, including 100% of the dinosaurs that would appear.

Unfortunately, I think the franchise is closer to "Fast and Furious" than to Michael Crichton's books, and that's a shame.

It's rare I see films on their opening day, opening weekend is relatively common but - as I'm otherwise engaged this weekend, I decided to see "Jurassic World Rebirth" on a Wednesday evening. I wish I could say it was because of enthusiasm for the series, but that has largely been beaten out of me at this point. I wish I could say that Rebirth was a film that reignited my love of the franchise but, whilst it's fine, it's largely another retread.

Dinosaurs have proven ill adjusted to the climate of most modern countries, with those that have survived clustering around the equator. Martin Krebs (Rupert Friend) representative of ParkerGenix believes that genetic material from three live dinosaurs will help with the research into heart disease that his company are planning. He hires Zora Bennett (Scarlett Johannson) and Henry Loomis (Jonathan Bailey) as lead and scientific expert of his expedition, and they head to the island of Ile Saint-Hubert. But the island was InGen's genetics experiment hub, abandoned following an incident years earlier.

To stress, I didn't think that "Rebirth" was a bad film. I thought the central performances were good and I liked the chemistry between Johansson and Bailey and the endless charisma of Mahershala Ali. I thought the film looked really good Gareth Edwards is a great visual film maker and has plenty of experience with large scale creatures.

The problem is that it's essentially 'another' Jurassic movie and feels like its plot is cribbed almost entirely from existing elements of the series. The stranded family from "Jurassic World 3", the experts from "Lost World", the really dangerous 'final boss' creature from "World" - with a nod towards the jails underneath Jabba's palace.

Without any sort of new angle the word I kept coming back to when thinking about the film was 'inessential' and, once again whilst this was fine, I do feel like the whole franchise could benefit from a lengthy break.

I wish I could take a previous review for a Jurassic park clone and insert it here to get across the effort the studio is putting into these now. It's just a cheap cash in for some money. Very boring and predictable. The CGI actually looked worse than the 1993 movie. How is that even possible you ask? By just having gratuitous CGI constantly. It just looks bad and I'm actually depressed after watching this. Something about it all just felt cynical and like it somehow ruined my love of the original a little bit. With that said, this is the last ride for me on this franchise. It hasn't been good for decades as I look back and think about these films.