Jurassic Park III (2001) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

Great dinosaurs.

Irrelevant plot and characterization. 


 I have seen this twice, if you can believe it. The first time, in the theaters, I was impressed by the sheer realism of the dinos. The second time, on my computer screen, with the dinos reduced to a height of six inches, there wasn't much left except the usual clichéd monster movie, and it won't really entertain you if you are older than 12. 

DVD info from Amazon.

  • Widescreen anamorphic, 1.85:1

  • lots and lots of technical features

It's a shame, too, because the original concept of the first movie was thought-provoking, and was discussed in an intelligent pseudo-scientific way. Now it's the American version of the Godzilla series.

My advice - a waste of time if you watch it at home, lots of scary, realistic fun on a big screen. It is still playing in some second-run theaters, and that would be a better bet if you want to see it.

There is only one reason that I can see to rent the DVD. The special features concentrate on special effects, the search for dinosaur information, and the genius of Industrial Light and Magic. So if you are curious about how they bring this to life, here's your opportunity to find out.

The Critics Vote

  • General consensus: two and a half stars. Ebert 3/4, Berardinelli 2/4, Apollo 71.

  • Rotten Tomatoes summary. 51% positive reviews

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 6.1 , Apollo users 51/100
  • With their dollars ... it was yet another smash for the series. The $93 million budget produced $181 million domestic gross, on a blockbuster-lever 3400 screens, $160 million overseas.
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, this film is a C. Technical brilliance, human irrelevance.

Return to the Movie House home page