Malik Ridhwan Zaihan

Is Jurassic World better than Jurassic Park?

By Malik Ridhwan Zaihan

 

IT seems to be the only question on people’s mind about director Colin Trevorrow’s reboot of the highly anticipated franchise film. Since the last installment 22 years ago when Tyrannosaurus Rex wreaked havoc the original theme park, Trevorrow’s latest movie Jurassic World brings us into a new fully functioning dinosaur theme park at Isla Nublar.

 

If you think that Jurassic Park is too sacred for sequels, well you are definitely facing extinction. When a movie hits success in the box office and is adored worldwide, studios would definitely want to continue the pace of producing sequels to the original film. 2013’s re-release of Jurassic Park into 3D proved that it still has legs! Like bringing dinosaurs back to life using DNA found in blood from mosquitoes that were themselves found in petrified amber, you can only hope for the best.

 

Jurassic World is the first entry worthy of being a Jurassic Park sequel. Surprisingly, Jurassic World leans heavily into the plot of Jurassic Park. (Whereas, if it leaned into the plot of Lost World — dinosaurs living in the wild on another unknown island — it would've caved in on itself.)

 

Jurassic World really shines in the moments of action. The pieces of the set are reminiscent of the big moments of the original film but without feeling like they are just trying to recapture the same beats. I would love to talk more about the set pieces but I would not want to give you spoilers but rather let you experience yourself.

 

From a personal perspective, Jurassic World is the best Jurassic Park movie since Steven Spielberg‘s original 1993 film. You might say that it is easy because the sequels were not that great, but remember Spielberg himself directed one of those movies.  A modern day classic, Jurassic World can’t compete with the original, but it is definitely a fun ride perfect for the summer blockbuster season. Forget about those sequels, this movie certainly does.