Why is it so difficult to make a good sequel to Jurassic Park? It's been 14 years
since Joe Johnston made a half-decent B-movie-ish III, and 18 since Spielberg himself brought us The Lost World, a collection of good images in an underwhelming
whole. Sure, the great original 1993 blockbuster benefited from one of those
perfect confluences of creative people at the height of their powers. It has Spielberg’s eye for beautifully shaped spectacle, an iconic John
Williams’ score, an appealing creature-feature structure of exquisite set-ups
and pay-offs, and a hugely likable cast able to turn stock characters into warm
and sympathetic people we want to see escape danger in one piece. But it’s not
like the core idea – theme park stocked with resurrected dinosaurs descends
into chaos – is unrepeatable. And yet here we are with Jurassic World, the third unsuccessful attempt to recapture the
magic.
World, directed
and co-written by the forgettable indie Safety
Not Guaranteed’s Colin Trevorrow in his first big-budget excursion, is the largest,
loudest, and fastest Jurassic movie
thus far. It’s also the emptiest. It tells the story of corporate greed
reopening the dinosaur island and creating Jurassic World, a larger theme park
with more creatures and better security. It’s a hit. The new park is swarming
with crowds delighted by the dinosaurs. But the owners want more profit,
forcing the geneticists to cook up brand new monsters to advertise. (Sort of
like injecting new filmmakers into an old franchise, no?) There’s an early
scene in which the icy head of operations (Bryce Dallas Howard) sells the
naming rights to their new “Indominus
Rex” and assures her boss (Irrfan Khan) the beast has “more teeth.” Most
Hollywood blockbusters engage in a little double think, but here it is rampant,
a corporate calculation scoffing at corporate calculations.
Jurassic World is
about nothing more than itself, attempting to preempt some criticism by
acknowledging its nature as a product. It creates a bland self-serving parody
theme park, realistically kitsch and poking fun at its own existence. It’s an
old idea resurrected for the sake of big profits. Get it? We’re to giggle at parallels
between the film and the park, laughing at business excesses dazzled by technology
while dazzled by the technology of a film made for business excess. The World
has a monorail and hamster-ball safari pods. It has a massive aquatic beast in
a big tank. It has a resort hotel, chain restaurants, holograms, flat screens,
and a raptor trainer (an unsmiling Chris Pratt). This film expects an audience
to enjoy a fake theme park as much as the original film wanted us to thrill at
dinosaurs. We even have two boys (Ty Simpkins and Nick Robinson), Howard’s character's nephews, to follow through the attractions as they stare mouths agape at CGI busyness.
I’m glad someone’s enjoying it.
This is how it always starts, with oohs and aahs. But then
there’s running and screaming as, inevitably, the big, bad “Indominus Rex” gets
loose. It’s predictable, and worse, witless. The crisis escalates, soon
enveloping the whole park, entirely due to bad decisions characters make. Every
effort to contain the mess goes stupidly wrong. It’s a collection of dino
attacks, spectacularly visualized in fine effects work, but hollow in impact. Countless
people are devoured and animals are gunned down or torn up. It’s sometimes
visceral and exciting, but where’s the care? There’s no impact when it’s only
there for a thrill without considering the weight of the moment. (Contrast that with Gareth Edwards' much better work with scale and staging in last year's great Godzilla.) Rampaging
dinosaurs and hundreds of imperiled tourists make for awfully small thinking
when there’s no sense of stakes. It’s full of competent visuals, but has
uninteresting characters and set-pieces without suspense because it doesn’t
take the time to matter.
Our characters, stereotypical and humorless, enter with
dopey stock plotlines both overfamiliar – the boys are worried about their
parents divorce – and vaguely offensive – the business woman, always clad in a
tight white suit and high heels, is repeatedly told to loosen up and let a man
save her. They mix with familiar types – an antagonist with secret commercial
goals (Vincent D’Onofrio), a comic relief computer guy (Jake Johnson) – but the
likable cast is given lifeless material. Where are the ripples-in-the-water
moments? There’s no time for awe, for sublime anticipation. We’re just racing
to the next tyrannosaur-sized brawl, the next cruel kill. They’re faced with
routine violence they can’t even begin to contain. It saps the urgency to know
a convenient contrived deus ex machina
is the only way out. They’re not racing to restore power or call for help.
They’re just bumbling through the jungle hoping not to get eaten by dinosaurs we barely get to know. And what
about the park’s guests? The movie doesn’t care. They’re just background
screams.
There’s never any sense of danger, just bright colors and
loud noises. There’s a moment when an anonymous woman is plucked out of the
crowd by a loose pterodactyl, then dropped into a pool, and dragged up and down
until an even bigger dino munches them both. It’s cruelly elaborate. And what
purpose does it serve? It’s not thrillingly shaped or given emotional weight.
It just exists because the filmmakers could do it, not because they should. There
is more tension and personality in one shot of Jurassic Park than all of Jurassic
World’s wide shots of impersonal computerized spectacle intercut with
dutiful reactions. It’s over-thought – self-amused, loaded with references to
its predecessor – and under-imagined.
No comments:
Post a Comment