‘Jurassic World: Rebirth’ was ABSOLUTE SHIT

If it's so bad it's good I may have to spend $$$ at the theatre for the full experience.

Did you expect "Hamlet"?

I’ve not seen it yet but I’ve read two fan reviews that say it’s pretty good.

Has a mediocre to poor rating on RT from the critics but much higher approval from fans.

Crap, I just bought tickets to watch it tonight

I got tired of the Jurassic movies after #3 and when the commercials for this one started airing, I rolled my eyes. My 2nd thought was "Scarjo? Really!?!" I guess she is playing a hybrid of Black Widow mixed with Lara Croft. No thanks - I didn't watch either of those movies.

An ad ran the other day and it was some really crappy looking prehistoric orca looking thing breaching from the ocean. How any times can anyone care to see CGI dinosaurs chase somebody through a forest? Zzzzzzz.

They need to got R on these movies. They have giant monsters rampaging for 2 hours and there's no blood or guts. Ridiculous.

Jonathan Bailey can get into and attack my guts anyday!

These movies are all the same-man creates dinosaurs for an amusement park, they get out of control, then the survivors narrowly escape and say "gee, making dinosaurs was a bad idea."

Then rinse and repeat for the next sequel.

I don't know what people expect from this kind of movie, but I'm definitely planning to see it. Just not at a theater. It will stream soon enough.

R5 she’s no action hero in this one.

She plays a broke scientist (of some sort) in NYC who is offered $10 million dollars by the head of a medical organization to go into the restricted jungle (dinosaurs are now dying off and interest in them is wearing off and those who are still around are left on an island alone and Humans aren’t Allowed to go there) with some others recruited and capture the blood and dna of 5 of the different dinosaurs there to create a cure for all heart diseases. They found that there is something in LIVING dinosaurs that can help humans. The movie is two movies in one, with the first being this group who goes into the jungle and waters where these dinosaurs are living to capture their blood for dna and the second movie is this family boating near the restricted waters and trying to survive.

R3 yes I’ve seen the same. On Reddit someone even admitted it’s not particularly a good movie but Dinosaurs + John Williams iconic and nostalgic Jurassic Park theme makes it loved by straight men immediately. And that’s true.

R4 see it and give your own opinion on here. I’d love to read it. I see a lot of people liked it but I didn’t.

I don't want to spoil my record. I've seen all the Alien movies, all the Predator movies, and all the Jurassic Park movies, and I intend to watch this no matter how shit it is.

I agree with this comment 100%

Phew glad I’m not the only one who felt the performances were SO BAD. I was shocked by how bad the acting was. Like who approved this?!

OP you WRITE like a TWELVE-year old

Gee OP, only the good looking guys survived your wrath!

OP, shut your DIRTY WHORE mouth, you rancid TWAT!!!

I hate that the kills are so predictable in these movies. It takes the scare out of them completely. I also hate that in every one there are a couple of protagonists (usually the stars of the movie) trying to save the fucking monsters even after they've devoured half of the extras. I mean, take a fucking machine gun and blow the fuckers away like it would be in real life, ok?

I just watched it tonight. It’s just absurd. Why do they keep making making Jurassic Park movies?? Stop already.

It’s a kids movie—the script, the music, the acting all fits for a terror movie for kids

I kinda doubt it's worse than the last movie, but I'm not surprised it's bad.

The first Jurassic Park film was a masterpiece. Truly one of the best in the genre. But we are never getting anything close to that again despite how desperately we want it. The studio simply doesn't care enough about quality.

I'm glad I decided to wait until it's on streaming. Anybody planning on seeing Superman?

Nothing could be worse than smug Chris Pratt and Ron Howard's daughter running around in heels screeching.

I'll wait for that as well r22.

Letterboxed users ranked Rebirth as #3 in ranking the Jurassic pictures.

I've seen lots of other users on Twitter rank the Jurassic films, and most of them rank this latest film in the middle (3 or 4).

A few Twitter uses do say that this latest film was the worst, but it's as if they forget "Jurassic World Dominion" happened.

Saw it this afternoon, enjoyed it, perfectly good summer fun and a decent entry in the “Jurrasic Park” genre, we all know what we’re getting.

Thought the dinosaur sequences were effective, especially the aquatic ones, the action scenes are all well-directed, pretty and exotic locations.

Special to OP: That Dad in this is indeed a hot number, good legs and ass, with a warm, relaxed masculinity. He is Manuel Garcia-Rulfo, the star of “The Lincoln Lawyer,” one of Netflix’s most popular recent series, headed to a fourth season. He’s hot in a suit too.

It was terrible

I gave up after Jurassic Park 3, which I felt was an improvement on Lost World but they took things about as far as they needed to go. Jurassic World was just terrible, so I was completely done with anything else beyond that.

Jurassic World was a blast.

I'll watch it with the sound off, no biggie.

Superman is next on the box office duds. Wait for it. Fem Superman and Masculine Lois aren't going to fill seats.

How many fucking dinosaur movies do we need? At a certain point it's just a money grab.

It’s certified rotten on Rotten Tomatoes. It’s sitting at 51% based on critic reviews.

[quote] Letterboxed users ranked Rebirth as #3 in ranking the Jurassic pictures.

Pictures? What century is this?

It hit all the tropes, included a dinosaur destined to hit toy store shelves (good luck with those tariffs, parents) and had the worst lighting during all its effects shots, you could tell they were on a set most of the time like it was the 70's Land Of The Lost. The moment they stopped for night, I knew we'd get some forced character development and, yeah, it was as bad as I thought it would be. I also am worn out wiith the whole 'billionaires are bad' bullshit they regurgitate on the hoi polloi when they are making their CEO's just that. The filmmakers also discovered Bailey's worst angles and used them liberally. Some people in the theater I went to applauded, one rather lumpy person called it a '10'.

I'm glad Weapons is coming out next month. I didn't want to see this dreck but my partner did. I'd have rather sia through Bring Her Back again...jfc..

51% by the critics on Rotten Tomatoes places the new movie 4th in the franchise rankings, within 5% of #3, and not all the overseas reviews will be out yet. It is very early days for the popular vote, but currently it stands at 72%, which is bettered only by the first two Jurassic Parks.

I saw the original Jurassic Park for the very first time a month ago, and the new one this week. They seemed to me pretty equivalent. Obviously you have to give the first one extra points for its originality, including its famous score, and for having the amazing level of CGI effects it did in the 1990s. But on face value, the depth of character was similar, the charisma and pluck of the lead actors similar, the cinematography and special effects similar, the science equally stupid, the consideration of scientific ethics similar, and if anything the action was more unrelenting in the new one. It went by very fast. Both movies divided their characters up into smaller groups for almost the entire length of the film so as to double or triple the opportunities for dinosaur attack.

I think the real difference, other than those I've listed, is that millennials saw the original when they were kids and it lives in Enchanted World in their heads. That's really sweet, but it doesn't make them reliable critics. The teens in my audience this week did spontaneous applause and some hooting at the end of Rebirth.

P.S. Question applying to all JP movies: Can anyone explain to me why a sole dinosaur in the wild would relentlessly pursue, for up to 15 minutes, a human being who hadn't tried to harm it and was running away? Especially when this necessitated it coming inside a building or a tunnel? We'd have about the dietary value of a gummy-bear, and there are smaller dinosaurs wandering all over the place like sheep just waiting to be dinner. Are dinosaurs inherently vengeful, and if so how did this evolutionary trait help them to survive for so long?

Jonathan Bailey’s collapse is complete.

Scarlett should have done the movie topless as her superpower are her titsies

The studio doesn't give a shit about the RT score. It's all about the BO numbers and so far those are pretty good. We'll see if it has legs.

I have tickets for Monday. Immersive Experience.

I expect to enjoy it greatly.

r36, you are literally clueless about film if you think the original movie and this are anything similar. Or you're an autistic Gen Zer and can't tell the difference between good and bad writing, which is possible. The original's writing is miles better. It combines serious concepts with moments of horror and comedy. There are so many famous lines from that movie. This was back when Hollywood knew how to write lines. Today it's all Marvel-level slop. Throw away lines that will get a reaction in the moment, but are completely forgettable.

Spielberg's direction was masterful. CGI was carefully used and the result is that all of the scenes with one exception still hold up effects wise today. The dinosaurs are not on screen very often either.

And yes, originality is important. WTF is that nonsense? John Williams created a beautiful, thoughtful score from beginning to end. If later movies use bits of the same themes here and there, that does not make them or their overall music equally good.

This has nothing to do with nostalgia. There are lots of things I liked when I was young that I find impossible to watch now. Jurassic Park is not one. It holds up. And it's sad that you can't tell the difference.

r36, and before you go, oh, they brought back the original screenwriter, there is a lot more studio intervention these days and Koepp's writing has taken a notable nosedive since his peak days. Koepp also had a strong book to base the original on.

But in every aspect, not just the writing, the first is vastly superior.

Wake me when they're eaten.

Miss r41 has stated her boundaries. Take THAT, r36!!!

Koepp is a hack and he always has been. Any good plot ideas in JP are from the book.

I was a huge dinosaur nerd as a kid in the 60s-70s so of course I was obsessed with the movie when it came out in the 90s. And yes it’s fun, but a masterpiece? Are you fucking kidding me? It’s extremely polished junk. It’s a fun popcorn action movie with good special effects. Nothing more.

The praise for the movies “big ideas” is such a good indicator of how trashy our culture has become. Crichton raised some interesting points in the book, but lowbrow Koepp turned them into bumper sticker wisdom, mostly uttered by dialing-it-in Goldblum, and everyone ooohs and aaahs about the films big ideas. Major facepalm energy. “We could do it but does that mean we SHOULD?” “Life finds a way.” How PROFOUND. My 14 year old niece could raise better questions.

The effects are great, the action scenes are a bit preposterous (especially in the end) but still thrilling. Writing is trash.

Can we stop fooling ourselves that the first movie is Citizen Kane and the sequels are all Kindergarten Cop?

[quote]extremely polished junk

Pics please.

^^^ not-so-stealth scat troll

I saw this yesterday. I hadn’t seen ANY of these sequels, only the original when it was in theaters 30+ years ago, which I thought was great. I thought this was ok. The plot was basic, filled with tropes and had WAY too many “convenient” twists.

That said, it was at least enjoyable. The dinosaurs were fun and it hummed along. Most of the criticisms I saw related to franchise fatigue, but since that didn’t apply to me it kind of makes sense.

R32 all of these movies are money grabs. What a stupid comment

[quote] The studio doesn't give a shit about the RT score

Yes, they do.

How is Scarlet still getting work? She’s so outdated.

Going for Jonathan Bailey's close-ups. I don't need any dinosaurs.

Nothing against ScarJo but if I saw this it would only be for Mahershala and Jonathan. Hot men are always a draw.

I'm waiting for Jurassic World: Afterbirth

I wonder if Bailey is still "feeling the weight of history" by being one of stars of this drek.

"Question applying to all JP movies: Can anyone explain to me why a sole dinosaur in the wild would relentlessly pursue, for up to 15 minutes, a human being who hadn't tried to harm it and was running away? Especially when this necessitated it coming inside a building or a tunnel? We'd have about the dietary value of a gummy-bear, and there are smaller dinosaurs wandering all over the place like sheep just waiting to be dinner. Are dinosaurs inherently vengeful, and if so how did this evolutionary trait help them to survive for so long?"

You're overthinking it. Debating the "realism" is pointless. It was never realistic, so you have to just accept the built world where THESE dinosaurs definitely would pursue a human for 15 minutes.

You don’t think a meat eating dinosaur would keep pursuing you? That’s like you thinking a lion in the wild wouldn’t pursue you simply because you’re not bothering it.

R56 Exactly. And have you ever seen a cat go after a house fly?

Some of these franchises are catching up Friday the 13th.

I know DL hates him but much of the success of the first Jurassic is due to Spielberg's directing. And he doesn't do sequels (smartly), so all the movies that have followed are crap.

A prime reason Jurassic Park works (I couldn’t disagree with R45 more, apart from his trashing of Koepp’s career) is that Spielberg is, as the cliché goes, an actor’s director who understands how to ground spectacle in psychological reality. Many of the aphoristic, now‑memefied lines emerge organically from largely improvised scenes, lending them an authenticity no amount of rigid scripting could match. By casting inherently charismatic performers like Goldblum, Dern, Neill and Attenborough--actors who can riff in the moment (many actors aren't capable or are seldom allowed to)--the film expresses its themes with elegance and understatement. Those are qualities sorely absent in most contemporary prestige blockbusters, especially anything from a certain subtext‑allergic filmmaker named somebody Nolan.

[quote]And he doesn't do sequels

Except he did do the first sequel The Lost World which was terrible. Saw it once and have never been able to make it through a second time. Julianne Moore seriously sucks in it

Thanks you Rs 45 & 56 for providing necessary correctives. You pissy queens are over- thinking this.

I also had not seen a “Jurrasic Park” movie since the first when I attended this new one. I thought the first one was fine and fun, and I thought this one was perfectly good summer entertainment.

As a research project, I watched the second and third on Peacock, and found them predictable but with excellent dinosaur effects sequences. What struck me reading about them in Wikipedia is that virtually ALL the JP sequels have been trashed by the critics and they all complain about the same things — ludicrous plots and two-dimensional characters. And this included the second one which Spielberg (very professionally) directed.

This series has been around for so long that people who saw and loved an entry when they caught it at an impressionable age think all the later ones sucked. Whereas plenty of people thought the one they liked sucked too.

This whole series was merely a way to revive the Dinosaurs-On-The-Rampage movies from the ‘50s, with special effects done by Ray Harryhausen. “The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms” was a surprise success in 1953, and nothing since has topped the combination of majesty and pity the death of the Allosaurus suffers at the end of that movie. This whole series has been old wine in a slightly newer bottles nothing more or less.

And this latest entry is not significantly worse than at least some of the sequels. Summer movies by their very definition exist to allow willing audiences to retire their critical faculties for two hours. And this summer more han usual, we could all use the escapism.

R62 my mistake, I thought he only produced it. And yeah, it's a piece of shit.

The most jarring thing about “Rebirth” was that the product placement of candies/mints were so brazenly shoehorned into the plot development (Snickers, Altoids, some off-brand licorice) that they deserved third or fourth billing.

And the obvious cash grab of having a Grogu-esque baby dinosaur sidekick was a bit much.

Agree that Manuel Garcia-Rulfo was the movie’s best asset, especially considering how annoyingly his scene partners were written and directed.

They keep cloning these fucking dinosaurs and it always turns into a catastrophic shitshow. You'd think by now they would be like "you know, this dinosaur thing is always a real disaster. Perhaps we should stop bringing them back to life."

The the American electorate can vote for Trump, not once, but twice - people are stupid enough to clone dinos 5+ times. The former is way stupider.

[Quote] Except he did do the first sequel The Lost World which was terrible. Saw it once and have never been able to make it through a second time. Julianne Moore seriously sucks in it.

R62 Was it the character she was playing or Julianne's acting performance that you disliked so much? I didn't like the character of Sarah Harding and the poor choices she made but didn't find fault in the portrayal.

Perhaps it was Julianne Moore?

Jonathan was about to bust out of that harness.

Y'all go ahead and let the dinosaurs chase people and eat them until someone stops them. There. That's the plot, right? But we saw the very lovely Brad Pitt and the extremely hot Damson Idris in Formula 1 movie and we loved it! I have a crush on Lewis Hamilton. The movie was The Natural/ Top Gun Maverick mixed together and put in the world of Formula 1 race circuit. They went all over the world, and shot the movie during the actual races. It had just enough plot, and Javier Bardem was in it for gravitas. He was delightful. The movie was fun and had just enough tension. I had no idea how exhausting it is to be a driver or to be part of the pit crew. Jeez.

The reason this one ranked #3 or #4 is that, after the first, ALL the sequels sucked, even the one that tried to copy the first one.

There’s no sense of wonder any more. The plot is the same thing recycled over and over. People go where they shouldn’t and the dinos kill then

[quote]I don't know what people expect from this kind of movie, but I'm definitely planning to see it. Just not at a theater. It will stream soon enough.

Same.

R73 This is the kind of movie I ONLY want to see in a theater. That is the only appeal. Seeing this in my living room is a recipe for distraction and boredom.

Anyone who wastes their money on a movie ticket for this obvious steaming pile of shit - especially after seeing one of the unavoidable trailers - deserves to hate life for the 2+ hours that their ass is sitting in the theater.

LOL at R70, defining the moments where DLers are most likely to react with awe and wonder while humming the John Williams theme to themselves.