Subject: REVIEW: THE LOST WORLD: JURASSIC PARK (1997)

From: [email-masked] (Shane R. Burridge)
Date: 29 May 1997 21:24:40 GMT

THE LOST WORLD: JURASSIC PARK
                       A film review by Shane R. Burridge
                        Copyright 1997 Shane R. Burridge

130 min

A few years ago I saw a festival release of Orson Welles' 1948
MACBETH, one of a number of Welles films screening during that week. 
Before it was halfway through the audience began to leave, until only
half were left seated for the final credits.  My viewing of the film
was distracted twofold: firstly by the slow exodus of patrons, and
secondly by the question that kept going through my mind: What Were
They Expecting?  You go to see Welles playing Macbeth....surely you
expect to see just that - Welles playing Macbeth.

I have never responded the same to film criticism since.  In the case
of THE LOST WORLD, this argument would translate thusly: You go to see
a movie about dinosaurs on the rampage, and what do you expect to see?
 Dinosaurs on the rampage.  Your expectations are satisfied.  If you
go in expecting to see insights of any interpersonal, religious,
philosophical, scientific, or religious nature; if you go in looking
for subtexts , or representations of the human condition, or the
growth and/or learning of individuals within group dynamics, then, my
friend, it is time for you to start reassessing your critical acumen,
or go see a different movie.

Having attended a preview of THE LOST WORLD I was in the fortunate
position of not having heard or read a single word about it (I confess
this took some effort of ignorance on my part - and thank goodness I
had no inkling about the final twenty minutes), yet I had a foreboding
about Spielberg's new film well before I saw it.  It may not be
fashionable to like Spielberg this year, and the critics may sneer at
his dinosaur movie.  Why?  That question could easily be answered with
another: What  Were They Expecting?  Or, more simply, it could be that
some people just don't like to see anybody else having a good time.

As for my own reaction?  As far as adventure movies go, THE LOST WORLD
is a peach.  It may be an even better ride than JURASSIC PARK, which
it reworks unabashedly.  The first forty-five minutes lack
involvement, but once Spielberg hits his stride (in a boffo set-piece
inside a trailer) the film never lets up.  The dinosaur attacks are
relentless - and the assorted dinos get far more screen time than in
the original - but even though THE LOST WORLD turns out to be a
wholesale human slaughter, we're never made to feel the dinosaurs are
villains.  Spielberg restrains sentimentality and doesn't get us
feeling they are the good guys either - they're simply enormous
animals, and there is no need to portray them as enraged monsters
(although there is a humorous reference to GODZILLA at one point). 
The dinosaurs work: not because they have been meticulously and
stunningly recreated by ILM, but because, as in JURASSIC PARK, their
behaviors and reactions are entirely believable.

Fans of Crichton's book JURASSIC PARK will be pleased to see some
moments from the original story make their way into the movie sequel -
notably the opening scene on a beach, and a sequence with a T-Rex at a
waterfall.  And it's great to see the raptors utilising one of their
scarier talents in the book by really leaping about everywhere. 
Screenwriter David Koepp, who worked with Crichton on the first film,
goes solo this time and eliminates most of the unnecessary
fussing-about -between-locations of the novel in favour of a more
linear narrative.  Spielberg choreographs his stunts and twists with
relish - his only misjudged moment involves a youngster and some
unlikely acrobatics - but there is a peculiar, distancing tone to his
work.  JURASSIC PARK's underlying philosophy was optimistic: the dream
of an enthusiast which turns out badly.  THE LOST WORLD is darker,
unsympathetic, and far from noble, in which the innocent as well as
the guilty pay the price.  This, ultimately, may be what prevents it
from being enjoyable to some viewers - while others may feel it 
plainly isn't dark enough.

Will there be a third?  If so, Spielberg does not feel, at this stage,
that he needs to helm it.  With THE LOST WORLD he has revisited
JURASSIC PARK and expanded on every set piece of that predecessor (the
knockabout scene with the raptors is a highlight) as well as adding
new surprises.  It's about as good as any dinosaur movie could be (Oh
yeah, there were human actors in it too - Jeff Goldblum, Julianne
Moore, Pete Postlethwaite - they're all fine) and if it winds up being
wearily dismissed by the ever-growing number of critics that seem to
have forgotten what it was like to go to the movies as a kid, well
then, one can only wonder if Spielberg might not do it all again after
all.  JURASSIC PARK 3: An island, a pack of raptors, half-a-dozen
Tyrannosaurs, and a hand-picked selection of  film critics.  I'd pay
to see that.