The Jurassic Showdown

Adam and I have had a long standing disagreement over the last two Jurassic Park movies.  I'm not exactly sure where it stems from, or when it was first brought up.  All I know is I can't stand Jurassic Park 3, and he detests Jurassic Park 2.  So what better place to start the inaugural entry in our (hopefully) long-running yet-to-be-named point/counterpoint series?  A quick warning, some spoilers follow.


Adam:  Ok, before we begin I'd like to clear the air. I do not think JP3 is a good movie. It is a mindless, clichéd monster movie with few redeeming qualities. And yet it is still better for a few reasons. First of all Alan Grant is the superior leading man to Ian Malcolm. I suppose that’s a good a place to start as any. Grant is a more intelligent, better acted, and better written character (not to mention more believable) than Malcolm's over the top mathematician.

Ben:  I agree that Grant is the better leading man; however I do not that think that makes JP3 a better movie.  Malcolm does a fine job leading JP2, and he has a great supporting cast helping him out, including Julianne Moore, Vince Vaughn, and Richard Schiff.  JP3 has William H. Macy and Tea Leoni in poorly written roles and with nowhere to go with them, and a few other no-name actors that are easily forgotten.

Adam:  Ok, we come to our first point of disagreement. The supporting cast in JP2 stunk. Malcolm is admittedly fine, but Julianne Moore and Vince Vaughn's characters are moronic. They go through every bad cliché in the book. While supposedly being experienced about wild animals, they still manage to piss off dinosaurs at every possible turn, which leads to the death of the only other sympathetic character in the film in Schiff's Eddie. JP3, on the other hand, had William H. Macy (with a ridiculous mustache) put in a solid turn as a dad looking for his kid. No awards deserved to be sure, but his character was at least on the level.

Ben:  You raise a good point about Julianne Moore.  I agree that her character was stupid, that whole business with the baby T-Rex was absurd.  However, I believe her general charisma as an actress overpowers the scenes where she comes off as moronic.  As for Vince Vaughn, I remember him as a generally smart character, even if he wasn't played for anything more than some light comic relief.  While I generally enjoyed William H. Macy, I just couldn't take him as the incompetent father searching for his son.  Too many stupid moves between him and Tea lead me to hate their characters, along with dumbass Billy and the shaggy haired kid.  Grant was the only likable one, and it made me wonder why he would hang out with a crowd of such nitwits.

Adam:  I like Julianne Moore but I really feel like she fell flat. And Malcolm's daughter in JP2 is at least as annoying as the kid in JP3. But let’s move on here before we start repeating ourselves. JP3 is a more original film than JP2. Yup, you heard me. JP3 is not an original movie, but they came up with a new (albeit mediocre) story and added new characters and even some new dinosaurs to the mix. JP2 not only slaughtered the excellent Crichton book of the same name, it copied King Kong almost point for point. Adventurous crew heads to an exotic island, come across a mythical giant awe inspiring beasty (T-Rex), capture it and bring it back to civilization, it escapes and rampages all over a metropolitan area before being put down. I half expected him to climb up the tallest building in the area and start swatting planes.

Ben:  I'll take entertainment over originality any day.  Top of the list of things I wanted to see before I die?  A T-Rex rampaging through San Diego, killing innocent people trying to rent a movie at Blockbuster.  I can remember nearly every plot point in JP2, no matter how rehashed it all is, and I enjoyed almost all of it.  The raptors in the high grass?  Awesome and tense as all get-out.  Two Rexes battering the trailers off a cliff?  Yes please.  I can barely even remember JP3, and I've seen it multiple times.  Something about a Spinosaurus, a pterodactyl stealing poor ol' Billy, and an annoying ringing phone?  Ugh.  I'll watch the T-Rex bowling with 76 ball, thanks.

Adam:  I will grant you two scenes. The high grass and T-Rexes vs. Trailers were really entertaining scenes. Two scenes does not a good movie make. The scene in San Diego is atrocious. It’s campy and feels completely out of place (besides making very little sense). And if you are looking for set pieces, JP3 has a couple of good ones featuring some brand new (and very impressive looking) dinosaurs. The Spinosaurus is much cooler looking than anything in JP2. The scene on the boat floating down the river during the Spinosaurus attack comes immediately to mind.

Ben:  I think we have a fundamental difference here that will never be resolved.  I find the whole San Diego sequence entertaining mostly BECAUSE of its camp.  There are too many jokes in it for it to be taken seriously.  While tonally it is a little out of sync with the rest of the film, I enjoyed the turn, and almost think of the beginning and end of JP2 as two separate movies (which I enjoy equally).  JP3 is just one big crapfest.

Adam:  OK, conclusion time. JP3 is one cohesive movie that knows exactly what it’s trying to do. It is trying to show off some darn cool dinos. It succeeds and provides just enough plot and character development to keep it interesting. It’s exciting, well paced and simple. JP2, on the other hand, cannot figure out what it wants to be. At times it tries to match the pathos of the original while staying true to the book, sometimes its simple action-adventure like the sequel, and at times is almost a comedy steeped in camp. I like all three options in three different movies. JP2 suffers from an acute case of identity crisis and along with its lack of originality it proves fatal. JP3 pounds JP2 almost as hard as I pounded Ben in this debate. Game, set, match.

Ben:  I disagree with you so much.  A movie doesn't need to "decide" what to be.  As long as all the pieces work well together it can do whatever it damn well pleases.  JP2 has two "parts" that both work equally well as popcorn entertainment.  JP3 has a bunch of generic crap that doesn't work as anything.  It is full of boring characters that are interchangeable and disposable, set pieces that aren't nearly iconic as those in JP2, and forgettable action.  JP2 was fun the whole way through.  Watching the two movies, it is obvious which is made by Steven Spielberg and which is made by Joe Johnston.

Adam’s Ratings: JP2: 15/30     JP3: 18/30

Ben’s Ratings: JP2: 19/30     JP3 12/30

Jurassic Park Chat

What follows is the transcript of a chat the Routinely Average bloggers had about Jurassic Park, a movie we both love.

Some quick facts.

• Directed by Steven Spielberg
• Made in 1993
• Won 3 Oscars
• Stars Sam Neil, Jeff Goldblum, Laura Dern, Richard Attenborough, and Dinosaurs

Beware! Raw and only somewhat-edited emotion follows! Also some spoilers if you've never seen the movie.

Adam: First things first. I love Sam Neil as Dr. Alan Grant. I know everybody prefers Malcolm but Dr. Grant is the shit.

Ben: Grant is great. I don't know who I prefer between Grant and Malcolm, but Grant is a great protagonist. I like his calm demeanor.

Adam: He kind of keeps the film sane. He brings a sense of wonder and science to the film. When Grant looks at the dinosaurs you feel his awe. I love that scene when they first see the dinos mostly because of Grant and Sattler's reaction.

Ben: I love his amazement that these things he's been studying for years are alive.

Adam: The whole film, even though Grant is being chased and almost killed and eaten, he never loses that amazement. When Grant watches the T-Rex munch on some other dino, he talks about how incredible the T-Rex is. Everyone else is either too scared (kids), conceited (Hammond), or uninterested (Malcolm, Muldoon) to ever recognize the dinosaurs for the wonder they create. I feel like that’s the thing that keeps this above a common monster movie – the dinosaurs aren’t demonized.

Ben: I especially like how movie ends with the whole "look at the dinosaurs ruling the island, isn't it beautiful?" which I think is great. It's such a good ending, and so much better than the book.

Adam: Perfect moment. Exactly what I am talking about.

Ben: Another thing that sets it apart is it that, as an action/thriller film, it performs flawlessly. It is just extremely well made. There is nothing extraneous, but they also make sure you care about everyone in the movie. The kids are actually good characters, and not too annoying. And yet the whole time you're almost rooting for the dinosaurs too.

Adam: I agree about all the characters being great, but the little boy kind of annoyed me actually. I disliked how scene with the electric fence was handled. I don't buy that a small boy could have 10,000 volts of electricity course through his body, and come out none the worse for wear. Everything about the movie is at least somewhat plausible and based in science except for that scene.

Ben: I disagree about that scene. I think it's pretty intense. Although there are some logical problems with how they go about the scene, it's very tense the whole way though. Usually a scene like that would annoy me too, but it's so entertaining that I don't care. If it's good enough I can ignore logical problems. I mean, there are dinosaurs walking around after all.

Adam: But each movie sets its own standard of reality. This one decided to abide by the laws of science (even if they took a couple of liberties). They have such a great explanation for the science behind the dinosaurs in both the book and the movie. I guess I'm nitpicking, but I love the science of this movie so much that to see it busted a little was frustrating.

Ben: How great is the scene outside the T-Rex paddock?

Adam: One of my all time favorite action scenes. That scene and the scene in the kitchen are just unbelievably exciting.

Ben: Yeah. Perfect set pieces. Or how about the scene in the Jeep with the T-Rex chasing them? It’s incredible.

Adam: "Objects in mirror..." I love that.

Ben: Spielberg is great at putting little jokes into his movies.

Adam: I like when Malcolm is sitting hurt in the jeep talking to himself and the impact tremors start. "I'm fairly alarmed here."

Ben: Yeah, that part is perfect.

Adam: Any thoughts on the science vs. nature aspect of the movie?

Ben: Well, I like the theme. It's very subtly done, which is nice. And I think it just lends something to think about other than the cool monster effects.

Adam: So do you think the real life version of JP could work... or are you a subscriber to chaos theory?

Ben: I don't think a real life JP would work. I don't think I'd even want to see it built. I don't mind scientists experimenting and trying to make our lives better, but I don't want tickets being sold over it.

Adam: Messing around under carefully controlled circumstances, I don't have too much of a problem with. Commercializing may be a mistake; I’ll grant you that.

Ben: Any closing thoughts?

Adam: This movie really introduced me to epic large scale films. I will always remember my childhood love of dinos and the awe on Dr. Grant's face in that scene mirrored my own the first time I saw it. Its smart, well acted, paced, and directed. One of my favorites. How about you?

Ben: Well, it was the first PG-13 film I ever saw, and it scared me for weeks afterwards. I loved dinosaurs as a kid too, but the raptors were too much for me.

Adam: The scene in the woods got to me too, but the T-Rex eating the lawyer scared me more than anything else actually.

Ben: Remember the big controversy about him taking a crap? I remember having those debates in school.

Adam: I do, vaguely.

Ben: No matter what you want to say about Spielberg's movies, technically they're always amazing. He really knows how to make a movie like nobody's business. But I've never really looked at JP technically because it was always such a big part of my childhood.

But I think as far as history goes, it'll always be a movie that studios will try to duplicate.

Adam: It spawned a generation of monster movies. A classic.

Tune in sometime next week for.... BLUG FEST! ... We need a better name for that.

26/30

Jaws

This 1975 film by Steven Spielberg is well known for being the original summer blockbuster. It is based of the wildly popular novel "Jaws" by Peter Benchley, who also co-wrote the script (and has a small cameo in the film as a TV reporter). "Jaws" was nominated for 4 Oscars including Best Picture. It lost Best Picture (to the terrific "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest"), but won in the other three categories, including the 2nd Oscar win for composer John Williams. It stars Roy Scheider as skittish, civic-minded police Chief Martin Brody in one of the great "average guy" performances. Richard Dreyfuss provides much of the film's humor as a wealthy shark expert named Hooper, and Robert Shaw, in one of his last appearances, as the incomparable Quint.

The plot is simple. A giant killer shark shows up out of nowhere to terrorize a New England town during the tourist season. After some scares that might keep you out of the water for a while and some political wrangling with the mayor of the town, the chief of police, a shark expert, and a local fisherman set out to try to kill the shark.

The film is fast-paced, technically challenging and innovative, and knows its purpose is simply to entertain. For the film nerds out there, this movie has tons of film trivia hidden inside (not to mention other movies referencing it). For instance, the technique of using the camera as the shark was a desperate solution to the film crew's inability to get the mechanical shark (or as the crew called it, "Bruce") working. Spielberg was forced to shoot from the shark's point of view, providing some of the more chilling moments of the movie.

The real strength of Jaws however, is the chemistry between the three leads. Brody, Hooper, and Quint evolve and play off of each other, the more isolated they become. Much of the animus between Shaw and Dreyfuss was rumored to be more than acting. While that may be true, it lead to some wonderful moments between the two. A night scene in the cabin of Quint's boat is outstanding as all three actors run through a variety of topics and emotions, playing off each other with ease. Robert Shaw in this scene alone is worth the price of admission.

All in all, an excellent film. There are no deep themes or symbolism, and there are some minor editing flaws, but it is a relentlessly entertaining reminder that movies are first and foremost a way to tell a darn good yarn. One of my favorites.

28/30