Monde Jurassique: La Renaissance

As someone who's watched every entry in the Jurassic Park and Jurassic World franchises, I have to say, this latest installment is the most disappointing of them all. But should you skip it entirely? Absolutely not. It still works as a decent popcorn flick if you're just in the mood for some dino-action without expecting much else.

When Scarlett Johansson was announced as part of the cast, I had high hopes for a standout performance, especially given her strong track record and the charisma Chris Pratt brought to the previous Jurassic World films. Unfortunately, the film doesn't give her much to work with, and her potential feels underutilized.

What really lets this movie down is its tone. The signature humor that helped balance the tension in earlier films is noticeably absent. Even worse, the horror and suspense hallmarks of any good dinosaur movie are dialed way down, leaving the action feeling flat.

The story itself is a mess. It stumbles at the start, never quite finds its rhythm, and ends without impact. The plot feels disjointed, and the characters are poorly developed, you never feel emotionally invested in what's happening.

And then there's the CGI. For a franchise known for groundbreaking visual effects, this entry is shockingly subpar. The effects are shabby and unconvincing, which really takes you out of the experience.

Bottom line: it's a missed opportunity in almost every way. Still, if you're a fan of the series or just want to see dinosaurs on screen, it's worth a one-time watch, just lower your expectations.

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.

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.

Holy cow! This is more abysmal than i thought would be. None of the actors give good performance. The plot is pathetic. No twists, surprise, addition of a 'family' as if we should care about a bunch of no-name actors with nothing to add to the plot. Hard to believe this is written by David koepp, a master in his own craft. The first flop of this franchise. Universal deserves every piece of criticism it is getting. Horrendous CGI is an added disaster for this slop. I had high expectations after the previous two garbage entries in this franchise but i never felt any excitement in the trailer so naturally the movie is even pathetic i thought it would be.

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.