Jurassic Park: All First Trilogy Films personally ranked

It was on this day a year ago I started writing Mesozoic Mind, everybody. Its means a lot to me, helping me give meaning in the Age of COVID.

What better way to celebrate this blog about so much that's Mesozoic (and build up to Jurassic World: Dominion) then the daddy of all Palaeo-Media, the Jurassic Park franchise! While I'm saving the Jurassic World films for later (spoilers they're bad), lets for now look at the OG trilogy from the 1990's and early 2000's, which practically redefined dinosaurs and palaeo-media for every generation that followed. All of which I loved, especially on VHS, and naturally it fed my love of all things prehistoric and mesozoic and eating up every JP-related thing on the internet. I even had a JP3 Tapejara toy for a while.

Okay, enough nostalgically waxing, let's get to what we came for: ranking all of the films to see how they stack up after 25 years and counting.

(Note: Originally I was gonna do the VHS short Dinosaurs: Fun Fact, and Fantasy, the namesake of the blog, but I decide against it. Maybe next year then, or the fifth.)

Jurassic Park III (2001)

So Jurassic Park III has had a curious view over the last twenty-two years. When it came out after years of a troubled production (which you can read about here) and Joe Johnston being brought in, it was immediately savaged and regarded as a big step down from the last two, and I myself have once compared the entirety of Jurassic Park III to a Direct to Video Syfy Original movie. One can see why with the following reasons: 

• The plot feels like an underdeveloped step down from the rest and contains little in the way of the corporate hubris which makes the franchise go. Granted, they try to mix it up by focusing on personal hubris, but it just doesn't fit.
• By extension, its 90 minute running time feels way too short and the plot reflects that. JP3's distribution of quality feels more like several short films stitched together with connective tissue.
• The infamous Spinosaurus vs. Rex fight happened too early in the film and so made it seem T. rex went out the franchise like a wimp, tainting the view of Spinosaurus among the public to this day.
• The new characters of Amanda and Paul Kirby are incredibly annoying and unbearable to watch, and make boneheaded decisions after one another. Then again, their what would happen if entitled suburbanites got stuck on an island of deadly creatures. so there's that.
• The Pteranodon are horrendously inaccurate, right down to having teeth in their beaks when their named literally means Toothless Wing.
• Some of the new species, Corythosaurus and Ankylosaurus, are pretty superfluous and don't get to do anything, and could be cut out with nothing lost.

However, that's not to say that there are no good things in it. The visuals for the film are some the best and most detailed in the entire franchise, and the cinematography is still quite good. If I'm being honest, the new characters, the Kirby family and Alan Grant's student Billy (and even Alan himself for that matter), do feel like they have some character growth from being on the island. There are plenty of scenes that are quite well-shot, from an abandoned lab scene to one in the Pteranodon aviary. Even the infamous Rex Vs. Spino fight is fun, if a bit short.

Let's face it: the dinosaurs are always the high point of Jurassic Park, and this film is no exception. Dare I say it, JP3 has the best raptors in the entire franchise; they have distinctive colours, and unlike the more aggressive ones seen in previous ones, these raptors are fairly in control and nonviolent without humans to bother them, only pursuing out of desire to take back what was stolen (if admittedly to an exaggerated degree). Really, most of the dinosaurs act fairly well (with the exception of the Spino, but its not as bad as you'd remember) and naturalistic. I previously wrote in my Stratigraphy post that this film and the last fits more into what I call the Beebian period of more naturalistic, nuanced dinosaurs in media, and a good chunk of it is present here.

Overall, while still the weakest of the trilogy, there is enough to like and enjoy in Jurassic Park III, enough to make it worth rewatching, as I did as a kid at my uncle's house on VHS.

• Accuracy - 5/10
• Aging - 5/10
• Presentation - 7/10
• Visuals - 8/10
• Music - 6/10
• Storytelling - 6/10
• Rewatchability - 7/10

The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)

With The Lost World, Steven Spielberg was clearly going bigger in every way: bigger setpieces and bigger number of dinosaurs, both in new species and numbers of returning ones, and a bigger running time. Sometimes it works, with the stampede sequence being an impressive highlight, and a whole family of T. rex family also gets plenty of time to shine, displaying more nuanced behaviour then just hunting and chasing people around.

As a sequel, there is definitely attempts at building upon the previous film's story and themes, whether its the entire premise of Site B and how pretty much no dinosaur was born on Nublar, or INGEN scrambling to get every cent of profit out of the dinosaurs even if it means exploitation and abuse. Spielberg's directing really gives us some fun, action-packed, and tense scenes, especially a cliffside one with the Rexes.

The visuals and dinosaur designs are also quite excellent too, building upon the previous ones. I especially like the Parasaurolophus here.

I also like how more naturalistic the dinosaurs act here instead of awesomebro crap, which started those in the third film. Even when they do act awesomebro, they're at least justified.

However, the film was never going to top the original, and there are still some glaring flaws with it abound. 

• Many of the dinosaurs (with the possible exception of the Rex family) often feel more like physical set dressing or props rather then fleshed-out characters, let alone animals, even with the better behaviour. Even the raptors only show up at the end and don't feel naturally organised into the greater story,
• The editing feels off at times, such as cuts from scene to scene that feel like they come out of nowhere.
• The climactic Bull Rex rampage on the mainland in particular feels very disconnected to the rest of the film. Hell, it wasn't even supposed to be in the final film and could have been cut, but the crew just had to get the inevitable "Dinos on mainland and in our cities" plot in there, didn't they?
• The characters feel a little underdeveloped and one-note, even more so then even JP3's. None of the characters change all that much if at all by the end. This means they come off as unmemorable
• Ian's daughter Kelly stands out, as she could be cut out of the film and next to nothing would change, even if her kicking a raptor was cool.
• Some of the characters also make some boneheaded decisions, like the supposedly expert zoologist Sarah Harding approaching a baby stegosaurus and not taking that much precautions, and nearly gets skewered by the adults for her troubles.

Nevertheless, The Lost World is definitely a worthy successor to the first film by any rate. 

• Accuracy - 5/10
• Aging - 5/10
• Presentation - 8/10
• Visuals - 8/10
• Music - 8/10
• Storytelling - 9/10
• Rewatchability - 9/10

Speaking of....

#1: Jurassic Park (1993)

Could it have been anything else?

Everything about Jurassic Park is top notch: the story is a well-fleshed out science fiction epic which plenty of commentary on corporation's and man's relation to nature, the acting is very good, and so is the character development as just about every character leaves the island changed, and the cinematography is excellent, and overall Spielberg's direction is excellent. Literally everything about Jurassic Park is done excellently, is what I'm saying.

And what hasn't been said about the dinosaurs? They're designed as good as they can be, make every second of their screentime count, and act pretty well. They're the ones that introduced the lithe and active Paulian style of dinosaurs to the public and brought dromeaosaurs and Dilophosaurus into the public eye... if not very accurate ones.

Admittedly on that note, the film hasn't aged scientifically all that well - there's a reason why people often point the finger at this film for perpetrating scaly raptors, and Parasaurolophus was practically set dressing. Ian Malcolm can also be annoyingly insufferable at times.  Otherwise, I can't really name any flaws with it. The OG Jurassic Park is a classic for a reason.

• Accuracy - 5/10
• Aging - 5/10
• Presentation - 9/10
• Visuals - 8/10
• Music - 9/10
• Storytelling - 10/10
• Rewatchability - 9/10

So with all that out of the way, I will say that the Jurassic Park trilogy is still a beloved classic of mine, not just for its dinosaurs, but for how good it is.

I don't know what we'll do next time. Perhaps it will be a Palaeo-Redo of this series, but that's no guarantee.

Farewell for now, happy anniversary to mesozoic Mind, and stay safe!