Jaws 2 - Review

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water... or theater

Jurassic Park III Review - Sequels Revisited

In the words of Ian Malcolm... that is one big pile of shit.

Gremlins 2: The New Batch Review - Sequels Revisited

Come to think of it, that "Don't feed them after midnight" rule was kind of confusing wasn't it?

Jurassic Park - Review

Wow! Has it really been 20 years since Jurassic Park was first released in theaters? Maybe it's just me, but it doesn't seem like it's been that long... time sure flies doesn't it? This Sci-Fi/Adventure flick was a pretty huge deal at it's time to say the least. Not only did it have the Spielberg name attached to it, but also was based on a hugely popular Michael Crichton book, featured groundbreaking special effects, and had dinosaurs... that last part alone is awesome unto itself. It was praised by critics, broke box office records, and even today is remembered as a landmark summer blockbuster and endearing audience favorite. It was well received enough to warrant a 20th anniversary theatrical re-release... with new post-converted 3D effects. There was no doubt in my mind that seeing this on the big screen again would be awesome, but the 3D conversion made me curious. I had to wonder if the third dimension would add much to the film's overall quality or if it was just a cheap marketing ploy. I mean, I can't help but think the producers before they even knew what they had, patented it, packaged it, slapped it on a plastic lunch box, and now... they're selling it, they're selling it! Okay, I'm sorry, that last reference was a corny joke... but the question remains, 3D or otherwise, has the movie held up, is it worth seeing in theaters again, and is it worth the extra bucks for 3D? As Samuel L. Jackson would say... "Hold on to your butts!"

As mentioned, Jurassic Park is based on a best-selling novel by Michael Crichton, which is basically a science-gone-wrong meets prehistoric adventure story. Advancements in science and genetic research have resulted in the ability to bring dinosaurs back to life through means of genetic cloning. When the eccentric though well-meaning businessman John Hammond (Richard Attenborough) discovers this, he assembles a team of scientists and workers to construct Jurassic Park, a theme park of sorts located on a remote island housing the cloned dinosaurs. Still a year away from opening to the public, the development appears to be going smoothly, until tragedy strikes when a worker dies at the hands of a velociraptor after a transporting accident. Faced with a major lawsuit and concerns over the park's safety, Hammond invites a number of individuals to the island for a weekend to evaluate the park, provide an endorsement, and get back on schedule. The team includes renown paleontologist Alan Grant (Sam Neill), paleobotanist Ellie Satler (Laura Dern), mathematician Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum), and the "blood sucking lawyer" Donald Gennaro (Martin Ferrero). Also visiting are Hammond's grandchildren, Lex and Tim (played by Ariana Richards and Joseph Mazzello respectively). What starts as a relaxing getaway turns into a nightmare when the park's security systems fail, and the dinosaurs escape their electric fenced paddocks and start preying on the visitors. With escalating danger, the group must find their way off the island before it's too late.

You know what's the biggest problem with most summer blockbusters? It's not that they're all bad (though there are plenty), it's that most just exist in a bubble. Even though there are plenty of good ones, only a few have made any real lasting appeal. Why this is has no definitive answer, but typically it comes down to the substance over style debate. Most effects-driven summer blockbusters are often well-made and perfectly serviceable action flicks, but whether it's because of a lackluster concept, uninspired writing, or simply for being a cookie-cutter money-maker, they rarely leave much of an impression. In my opinion, the few summer blockbusters that are still fondly remembered, even decades later, like Star Wars, Jaws, Ghostbusters, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Terminator 1 & 2, and Jurassic Park, hold up mainly due to one thing... heart! I know that sounds schmaltzy, but it's true. Every time I watch Jurassic Park, and the other films I just mentioned, I can see the passion and effort that went into their productions. All had brilliant concepts, innovative filmmaking techniques, and the filmmakers with the ambition and skill to make their visions possible. Jurassic Park, for example, has a brilliant idea but not a particularly dynamic script. It could have easily become a forgettable effects-laden action piece with no real edge or bite (as example by the sequels, but that's another story), but because of Spielberg's (and others) dedication to the idea, the movie still resonates 20 years later.

As I mentioned already, Jurassic Park has a wicked premise... it's a concept so good, it makes me wish I had come up with it. There have been other man vs dinosaur movies before, but normally they involved time travel, alternate realities, distant worlds... etc. The idea to bring dinosaurs to the present day via genetic cloning may not be the most scientifically accurate, but the film sells the concept well enough to make you suspend your disbelief. This also gives the writers the opportunity to tell an interesting variation on the whole Frankenstein-like "Why man shouldn't play God" concept. It's more or less what you would expect, the character development is standard, and ends on a fairly predictable note, but there was never a point where I was bored or uninterested. The pacing is flawless, with just the right balance of plot and action, and it always manages to throw something engaging or exciting your way. The characters aren't the most unique or multi-dimensional, but they work. You've got your reliable every man, the tomboyish female/love interest (who for once was NOT a damsel in distress...nicely done), the likable but naive park owner , the slimy lawyer, the goofy comic relief, and the two kids-in-distress. They may not be deep, but they're all very likable (minus Gennaro the lawyer) characters whom you root for and want to see survive. The script doesn't break much from the typical formula, but dammit it just plain works! Can't ask for much more than that.

I think what's made these characters so endearing is less about their scripted qualities and more for the actors who play them. Sam Neil makes a convincing Alan Grant, selling the rugged and outdoorsy adventurous type with an extreme passion for dinosaurs. Laura Dern pulls off the tough-but-caring paleobotanist/love interest to Grant who gets in on the action many times and sells her role commendably. Richard Attenborough, in what was his first acting role in over a decade, is one of the stand-outs as John Hammond. When you first meet the guy, you get a strong sense of his passion and excitement for what he's created, and really feel for him when he comes to grip with his guilt and depression when all Hell breaks loose. Jeff Goldblum is at his "Jeff Goldblum-est" as the comic relief chaos enthusiast Ian Malcolm. Say what you will about Goldblum, but I usually enjoy the guy and get a kick out of his goofy mannerisms. The rest of the cast is across the board solid, including the two kid actors (can't remember their names) in roles that sometimes can ruin these kinds of movies (gotta appreciate that). I also have to give a special shout-out to Samuel L. Jackson for every film he's in... because he's Samuel L. Jackson and he's awesome. You know it's true.

Even though I had seen this movie many times, it had been a few years since I last saw it, and I was genuinely curious to see how well the effects held up on the big screen. In short... I'm amazed how great these once-novel effects still look after 20 years. The dinosaurs designs were realized through a combination of cgi and practical animatronics, both of which are damn good. The practical dinosaurs are especially incredible, with scale or life sized models of various species, each shot at the perfect angle to sell their effect. The cgi has a few dodgy spots, but the attention to detail is stunning, and even today, you typically forget that you're looking at a computer generated image instead of the real thing. In today's cg-bloated blockbusters, it makes me wish that movies would embrace this kind of style more often, blending cgi and practical effects (they just look so much better). In addition to the still-impressive effects is the equally stunning sound design, which is definitely some of the best I've ever heard. The sound effects are some of cinema's greatest, from the whale-like songs of the brachiosaurus, the ear-piercing screeches of the raptors, and the booming roar of the T-Rex (that roar is freaking awesome). These all work together to bring some of film's most thrilling and enjoyable action sequences. The first T-Rex attack in particular is one of my all time favorite action scenes. Also got to mention the finale with the main cast being chased by two vicious raptors, that's another favorite of mine. As for the 3D effects... I could take or leave them. They never hurt or ruined the experience in any way, but I can't think of that many shots that really looked better in 3D. If you're a fan of the technology, it might be fun to see a classic with the added dimension, but it's not essential. Still, 3D or otherwise, Jurassic Park is one hell of a ride that rarely lets up!

So yeah, that's Jurassic Park, and even 20 years later, it rules! If you're a fan of the series, if you've never seen it, or have never seen it on the big screen... it's more than worth the price of admission. Some theaters are just playing it in 3D while other's give you the option to choose, either way you can't go wrong. See it!

My Score: 4.5 out of 5!

Super 8 - Review

Super 8 is one of those movies that I can't help but chuckle at. It's not a bad movie, it's just that it tries so incredibly hard to strike at the nostalgia of those who grew up in the 80s and early 90s that it comes off as less of a movie and more of a laughably over passionate love letter to my generation's childhood. While one could make a reasonable argument that originality is overrated, or that the current generation probably wouldn't recognize most of Super 8's movie references, there is definitely something to say about why a credible filmmaker like J.J. Abrams would feel compelled to rip off nearly every Spielbergian trick and cliche in the book. Yeah, I know this was produced by Spielberg, but nonetheless I stand by my opinion. Still, I guess if you had to rip off a filmmaker, there are worse choices than Spielberg. Is the movie a new summer classic or a forgettable dud?

Super 8 centers around a group of kids living in a small Ohio town in 1979. One summer night, they sneak out to film a short movie by an old train station. In the midst of the filming, they witness a catastrophic train accident when a car drives onto the railroad tracks and causes it to derail. Soon afterward, they realize that the train belonged to the US Air Force and was carrying a creature unlike anything they've ever seen. Now, with a giant alien wrecking havoc around town, the kids are forced to take action and stop it.

Like I was saying, Super 8 tries... boy does it try hard. To me, it comes off as this movie that feels if it includes references to every Spielberg movie it can, that it will go on to be this timeless summer classic. To be fair though, many great movies are mainly homages. Star Wars, for instance, was basically a salute to sci-fi serials of the 50s. Then there's Indiana Jones... an homage to adventure serials of the 30s. Ridley Scott's Alien was essentially a big budget B-Movie from the 50s. The list goes on. The main difference between classics like that and Super 8 is this... Super 8 intentionally targets your nostalgia and goes out of it's way to remind you of the classics. Sure the other films mentioned may have been nostalgic, but they had their own unique touch to separate them from their inspirations. Super 8 has scenes that wholeheartedly rip off nearly every movie directed or produced by Spielberg. There are scenes taken from Jaws, War of the Worlds, Indiana Jones, Jurassic Park, Gremlins, The Goonies, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, even Schindler's List. Not mention there are small tributes to non-Spielberg filmmakers like John Carpenter and George Romero. Though hands down the most prevalent tribute is ET, going out of it's way to include a plot with an alien and even scenes that were almost completely remade from the classic. As a result, Super 8 comes off simply as a nostalgic piece with little originality and practically no lasting value.

Despite those criticisms, Super 8 does a lot of thing right. The first of which is the acting. Super 8 boasts one of the better child casts I've seen in quite a while. In fact, it's one of the rare occasions where the kids outshine the adults. Not so much because the adults are bad actors, but simply that the kids are more engaging characters. They have diverse personalities, fun characteristics, and some memorable comedic moments. I won't critique all of them, but I will say that Super 8 will likely be remembered as the star-making vehicle for actors' Elle Fanning and Joel Courtney.

Probably the most frustrating thing about Super 8, though, is the fact that the story doesn't take advantage of it's child characters as well as it could have. As I mentioned before, Super 8 has a promising script with an intriguing concept and fun characters, but unfortunately it also has a boatload of problems. It switches every so often between the main plot with the kids, and two subplots - one of which involves a government conspiracy involving the alien (a la ET) and another involving Joe's (the main character) neglectful father coming to grips with his recently deceased wife (a la... too many Spielberg movies to name).

The story has a great first act... with a solid setup, promising exposition, and one of the best train derailment scenes I've ever seen. The second act is when the movie starts feeling cluttered and overstuffed, struggling to balance it's multiple stories. By the time the third act rolls around, not much has changed. The finale is appropriately exciting, but it's also predictable as hell. Plus, when the alien's appearance is finally revealed... it's pretty ho-hum. Not awful but a minor letdown after the great buildup. Though I do have to mention the hilarious post-credit scene. That alone makes Super 8 worth seeing.

From a technical side, Super 8 works. The special effects are appropriately adequate, the cinematography is decent, and it had enough visual flair to keep me interested. As I mentioned, the train derailment scene is very cool, arguably the best train accident ever depicted on screen. You've also got some suspenseful and exciting scenes with the alien reigning chaos on the town. While the camerawork was overall decent, many of the shots had multiple lens flares that got really distracting. Plus, there's the less-than-stellar appearance of the alien, as I mentioned before. Overall, it works but aside from the train scene, I can't think of much that will be especially memorable.

What's frustrating about Super 8 is that it makes as many wrong choices as it does right choices. It's just when it work... it really works, but when it doesn't... it falls pretty hard. In the end, I think the pros outweigh the cons enough to see it once in theatres, but with all of the film's positive qualities, it should have been much better. It's too bad... this could have been a new classic. Still worth a watch though.

My Score: 3.5 out of 5!