JURASSIC WORLD: DOMINION

[Carnoking]

Saw it a third time with a friend. I honestly can't understand it, every time I go back I expect to like it less and less but it remains consistently entertaining for me. There are plenty of things I'm missing or I think could have been handled much, much better (there are a few key points brought up in that twitter thread I agree with), but overall I still find it a fun popcorn flick.* Perhaps some of that comes from how much I disliked Fallen Kingdom in large part to its meandering story, tonal imbalance, and horrendous new characters. Although there may be some of that here, I didn't find any of it nearly as abrasive and that might have helped put it over the edge for me (although I did miss Bayona's directorial style).

*To address the elephant that comes attached with that last bit, yes, a fun popcorn flick is a far cry from where the series began as an intelligent, suspenseful scientific disaster flick with engaging themes, great characters, and some of the best special effects ever put to screen. Then again, the original was also the perfect storm, with a script based on the work of one of the best science-fiction authors of all time (who also contributed to the screenplay), legendary special effects maestros behind the animatronics and pioneering CGI techniques, and on top of that, one of the greatest living filmmakers of all time in the director's chair. That was always going to be a tough act to follow, and I'm not surprised in the least that none of the later films came close. With that mindset to manage my expectations, I think it's a little easier for me to enjoy these new films (although I do hope for another perfect storm someday).

[bone crusher]

Honestly Dominion didn't even have to remotely reach the highs of JP1, all it had to do is to show us a satisfying conclusion to the series with a centralized plot based on the DINOSAURS instead of the locusts! Also cut back on the introduction of new characters! They bring nothing new to the table, absolutely redundant and a waste of valuable screen time which could be devoted to the actual main characters. If you wanna use the Giga as the new baddie then at least try to focus on it, have it eat more people, flip a truck or bite the head off a T.rex if you must since you've pretty much made it look like a mini kaiju at this time, so why not go big and hard, at least it would have more screen time than the locusts. And lastly use more of the original JP score since your new score absolutely sucked!

Yeah no wonder the box office is tame compared to even TFK, all said and done it probably won't even reach 750m when TFK easily cracked a billy "1.3B to be eaxct". The good news is I think many fans have finally had enough of the dreadful directions of the latest entries, the franchise deserved something better, with more heart and its own identity, not treading on the tropes of Marvel superheroes or the latest Fast and Furious junks. Let it rest for a decade I say, enough damage has been done to the name and its beloved characters.

[Carnoking]

When it comes to the premise, as I've said before I felt the inclusion of the locusts was an interesting idea, one that harkens back to Crichton's original philosophies more so than anything we've seen in the franchise in a long time. I also appreciate that they did something unexpected with the material. That being said, after further reflection I do agree that it comes at the cost of the premise set up at the end of Fallen Kingdom. Dinosaurs in our world making massive changes and introducing new issues to deal with was completely fumbled here, with the opening, closing, and Malta sequences being the only noteworthy examples where we see how these creatures have taken to our world while the rest of them have been sidelined to the Dolomite Mountains. The movie hints at challenging ideas of our place in the world and history, and that's part of why I'm so fascinated with dinosaurs, they really put our fragile, young  existence into perspective. This film was the perfect opportunity to explore such ideas but that was unfortunately squandered. Disappointing to say the least, a much better balance between the two ideas (IMO) would be a suspicious proliferation of fast breeding dinosaurs that consume crops/livestock at an alarming rate.

Of course, I loved the original trio back but as far as the new protagonists go I actually enjoyed Kayla a good deal. Out of all three movies she was the only new addition to come close to being a three-dimensional character right out of the gate. Both Claire and Owen saw some development in Jurassic World (some), and Claire has had the benefit of two sequels to further evolve her character and relationships, but Kayla only had this film to impress, and I think she did. Ramsey was a little less inspired. I think he had presence, but his motives and values were a little less defined than with Kayla.

The antagonists, both human and dinosaur, were among my biggest grievances. On paper, it's cool to have Dodgson back, and to see him in the culmination of his desires from the first film no less, but he didn't really have a clear goal or motive. Controlling the world's food supply through bio-engineering could have been interesting, but it's treated more as an unintentional result of a side project? The "unbound Prometheus" angle could have been interesting if better developed, as even the first Jurassic has its own godly angle to it but we didn't quite get there with it here.
Not to mention his awkward portrayal didn't add to his villainous presence.

When it comes to the Giganotosaurus, this thing was completely unnecessary and over-sold. Out of all the dinosaur antagonists in the World trilogy, this thing was the most tame and perhaps treated the most like an animal. When we first see it, it's sleeping peacefully. It's first meaningful action is a brief scuffle with Rexy over a carcass (not over the top, not drawn out, a very minimal and believable confrontation between two predators over a kill). Sure, it chases our heroes into the outpost but nothing it does is more sadistic or unnatural than what the T. rex did in the first film (seeing as the stalking around the overturned vehicle was a direct homage). Then it just shows up at the end for a final battle where it "wins" then is unceremoniously dispatched. Although I like that final fight the more times I watch it (the choreography and cinematography were a bit too muddled for me to get the full effect the first time I saw it), it will never not feel hollow to me seeing as the Giganotosaurus wasn't a "bad" dinosaur deserving of its thorny demise. What made the final fight of Jurassic World so satisfying was the fact that the Indominus needed to be put down, as she had started taking pleasure in killing (the "it's killing for sport" line still gives me the creeps). Heck, you could even argue the Spinosaurus was more deserving of defeat seeing as it killed several people and the face of the franchise in such a callous manner (although I wouldn't want to see them bring that animal back just to kill it)

Then we have Wu, who stood as the face of hubris to this new franchise. After Jurassic World and Fallen Kingdom spared him, it really felt like they were waiting to put him in his place as part of the send off to this trilogy. But no, he's done a 180, recognizes the error of his ways, and is now willing to work with the heroes to "fix a terrible mistake", and all that development happened conveniently off screen because writing nuanced character arcs is harrrrrrdddd.

Of course, such things like Dodgson's motives, Wu's transformation, and the Giganotosaurus' more villainous tendencies may have been scrapped for time, but ultimately in a premise this large you need to pick your battles very well, and I'm not sure Trevorrow or Carmichael did that.

So yeah, I've got my fair share of qualms but dang it if I can't bring myself to actively dislike this movie (trust me, I've tried).

As far as the box office numbers go, it's actually not doing bad compared to Fallen Kingdom, which only beat out Dominion by 20 million dollars domestically at this point in its theatrical run. Sure, 20 million is nothing to sneeze at but the world of movie going is a lot different than it was in 2018. Not to mention it's contending with now two big releases; Top Gun: Maverick continues to do well, and even if Lightyear underperformed, it's still a franchise film from the leading animation studios, and I'll consider it a win that Jurassic managed to hold it off in its second weekend at the box office. Whether or not Dominion will reach the heights of Fallen Kingdom or even join the billion dollar club remains to be seen but I think it's doing fairly well in a weird market right now.

[CarnotaurusKing]

Well, at least they pronounced "Giganotosaurus" correctly. If I had a nickel for every time I heard it being pronounced "jieg-anotosaurus" or "jig-anotosaurus", I'd be swimming in my own Scrooge McDuck-style vault.
Anyway, not as bad as I expected, but still far from good. Good action, some cool shots, decent acting, and it was nice seeing the original trio again, definitely the best characters. Also quite nice seeing Allosaurus, Carnotaurus and Dimetrodon getting a decent amount of screentime. But there was a lot going on, and not all of it works. I'd say a 5 or 6 out of 10. Decent B-movie, but not one I'll ever rewatch (like a 1% chance I might). The best of the Jurassic World movies, but that's not saying much, and it's still miles behind the first two movies.

Spoiler

Not much is done with the premise of "dinosaurs in our world". Dodgson doesn't really do much. The Microceratus looks like a gremlin. Why are its eyes in its nasal openings? Also the whole Maisie subplot was contrived and dumb as all hell, and is yet another middle finger to science from the Jurassic World movies. If her DNA was replaced with monitor lizard DNA so she could replace parthenogenetically, wouldn't she also have a forked tongue and scaly skin? IIRC, they said she replaced most/all of her genes with monitor lizard DNA. I don't know much of anything about genetics, so I'd like to know if it is indeed as dumb as it sounds.
Still, as callous as the disregard for basic biology is, it's nothing compared to the way T.rex is treated (as per the trend with this franchise, from JP3 onward). Ignoring how sophisticated and strong the real animal is, and how a real Giganotosaurus wouldn't really stand much of a chance against it, it's still odd that the symbol of the whole franchise, the creature that appears on the logo, is still portrayed as being so weak. You could argue that it's for the sake of character development, but surely then it's supposed to take a beating before the final battle, not during it. I would have liked to see a T.rex win at least one fight, on its own, against a similarly sized opponent, somewhere in the franchise. From what was once the "most formidable fighting animal of which there is any record" (which it may well have been in life), to the whipping boy of fictionalized abominations. I wish Jack Horner could keep his seething hatred for Tyrannosaurus to himself, instead of sharing it with the public whose only exposure to dinosaurs is this franchise. Wait, what did I like about this movie? Honestly I think I was being generous with my rating.

[close]

Boy am I glad we got Prehistoric Planet.

[Gwangi]

Yeah no wonder the box office is tame compared to even TFK, all said and done it probably won't even reach 750m when TFK easily cracked a billy "1.3B to be eaxct". The good news is I think many fans have finally had enough of the dreadful directions of the latest entries, the franchise deserved something better, with more heart and its own identity, not treading on the tropes of Marvel superheroes or the latest Fast and Furious junks. Let it rest for a decade I say, enough damage has been done to the name and its beloved characters.

It's still the number one movie in the country (United States) for the second week in a row, made more than was projected, and beat the pants off of Lightyear during the opening weekend of that movie.  Dominion has the second best opening of the year after Doctor Strange. Dominion is a financial success, especially when you factor in the current environment we live in... inflation in a post-pandemic world. 

Anyway, I actually watched a positive review for Dominion and while it doesn't change my overall rating it did make some compelling points that makes me appreciate the movie a pinch more.

[HD-man]

Anyway, I actually watched a positive review for Dominion and while it doesn't change my overall rating it did make some compelling points that makes me appreciate the movie a pinch more.

I gave it a watch & I think I get what he's saying (I.e. Good ideas, bad execution). Nothing new to me, but I agree w/the general sentiment & think it does bear repeating. That said, his transitions (or lack thereof) make it hard to follow what he's saying. Plus, his "boom boom smash dinos" comments are very reductive compared to the actual criticisms.

2 more reviews I really like by Common Descent...:

...& Deep Time. I haven't watched the whole podcast yet, but this video is a good summation of JWD & its problems. I especially like the Star Wars analogy, which I had never thought of, but makes sense:

[CarnotaurusKing]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KwclrfekR3k

Cute clip, but at 0:16 Colin Trevorrow commits the cardinal sin of calling Dimetrodon a dinosaur. That's one of the first things you learn about dinosaurs, that Dimetrodon isn't one. Joker Giganotosaurus was awful, but it's facing some stiff competition. I'm sure he's a good filmmaker, but why in the world was he allowed to influence the role and design of the creatures in this movie (and the movies prior)?

[bone crusher]

I'm telling ya, if dude makes one more sequel we'll have the new Villain theropod as big as those Rampage monsters, or having Vin Diesel knocking out the T.rex with a punch. I used to look up to JP franchise for accurate dinosaurs back then, hooo boy what was I thinking lol.

[HD-man]

2 more reviews I really like by Common Descent...:

...& Deep Time. I haven't watched the whole podcast yet, but this video is a good summation of JWD & its problems. I especially like the Star Wars analogy, which I had never thought of, but makes sense:

IDK how the wrong videos got posted, but I fixed them.

[Fembrogon]

Mark Witton weighs in on the Jurassic franchise - specifically, one key aspect that can possibly make or break the films:

Mark P. Witton's Blog: Can dinosaur movies have too many dinosaurs?

So perhaps, as contradictory as it seems, the Jurassic film series makes a case that dinosaur films can work a lot better when they have fewer dinosaurs or, at least, when dinosaur action isn't prioritized over more fundamental and important components of filmmaking.

Ultimately the point made here is just a dinosaur-specific reminder that special effects and action alone do not make good films: it's memorable stories, characters and situations that resonate most with critics and audiences alike.

This isn't anything profound, of course, but I'm certainly inclined to agree with him. I still haven't seen Dominion, but it was obvious to me upon my first viewings of JW and FK that these films simply lacked the care and craftsmanship that the first JP film applied to its plot and characters.

[Faelrin]

@Fembrogon Thanks for sharing that article. Very interesting and I actually learned some stuff about the production of the first film (and a bit of the second). I fully agree with what that said as well.

After watching Dominion (and FK as well to a degree) I can definitely say that less is more. One of the biggest issues was that despite the long run time, there was too many new species (and nearly every prior species as well) introduced and barely any had viable and memorable screen time outside the Atrociraptor in the Malta chase scenes (granted the locust subplot took a ton of screen time, as well as the Maisie and Beta clone stuff). The only good side to that I can see is of course the countless figures, and as additions in JWE2 (though a good portion are still missing). Compare that with Jurassic Park's 7 (Brachiosaurus, Parasaurolophus, Triceratops, Tyrannosaurus, Dilophosaurus, Gallimimus, and Velociraptor). While there was still a small amount of screen time the animals were introduced in, those moments were certainly memorable, such as the Brachiosaurus and Parasaurolophus "moving in herds", the sick Triceratops, the Tyrannosaurus breakout, the Dilophosaurus killing the one who sabotaged the park, and end scenes with the raptors.

Anyways though, that brings me to another issue it had, which was the animatronics. There were loads of them in this film, but most of them felt pretty stiff and lifeless in their movement, despite having decent sculpts. Quantity over quantity for sure. Granted it could have also been from CGI being mixed right alongside it in many scenes which certainly didn't help, and caused them to feel jarring. Not sure if SWS still does animatronic work for films, but gosh I wish they got them involved. I guess the problem with that is they filmed over at Pinewood studios in the UK, and they are based in the US. They knew what they were doing, and they also had quite the repertoire with films anyways, having done work for many others outside the iconic JP films. I also feel like their creature designs felt more natural too, despite some anatomical issues, like wrist posture, and other creative liberties taken like the Dilophosaurus frill.

Also after reading Witton's piece it makes me appreciate Koepp's script work on the first 2 films that much more. There was none of that forced marvel-ization going on with action scene after action scene, forced "funny" dialogue, and other unnecessary plot issues (that also get introduced and then ignored for the rest of the film) that detract from the film, and waste (mine and valuable screen) time, which all three of the World film's suffer from with Trevorrow at the helm. The man (and Spielberg) really got it with sorting through the large roster Crichton had and dumping out the fluff (the river scene) for the substance (the breakout scene). Nostalgia aside, I actually really do enjoy the final film much more then the initial source material.

I think he also brings up a good point (indirectly) about how the film industry at large doesn't seem willing to take risks anymore, because it's all about profits, and why things rarely seem to deviate from things that are guaranteed to bring in the bank from catering to as many as possible (aka mainstream audiences). I mean surely it has been like this before, but I feel like its doubled down on this as of late, and why there's barely any originality for most films these days. I think it's why something like Top Gun Maverick was so refreshing. It was a much needed break from this excessive cgi action that clog up most films these days. It felt authentic, and it felt like there was actually high stakes. None of this plot armor that was in all the Jurassic World films, and so on. And honestly one could even use "less is more" for CGI these days too, like things once were (such as the original Jurassic film), that was used carefully and only if it was to contribute.

Um, rant done. This ended up longer then I thought it would, but turns out there's a lot more I have issues with, then just how the Jurassic World films have been handled. It's just a symptom of a bigger problem going on with films these days.

[Carnoking]

The first Jurassic film used the dinosaur action to further the characters' journeys. The T. rex breakout provided Grant with his first step towards understanding fatherly love, the kitchen sequence gave Lex a chance to overcome her fear and save her little brother, and the final battle between the rex and raptors shows Grant completing his journey when he puts himself between the people he cares about and the pouncing raptor. It's an absolute masterclass in how well action and character can be intertwined.

Whereas there's plenty of fun action to be had in the World trilogy (and even some similar examples of character development through action, i.e., Claire luring the T. rex to protect her family), much of it does wind up being inconsequential and (by extension) forgettable despite the best efforts of the artists involved.

Part of that may come from a filmmaker's lack of restraint, but I think another part of it is a result of the dilution of storytelling thanks in large part to the continued advancements of VFX. This allow writers and directors more freedom to do whatever they want without considering how it adds to the story (if at all). In the 90s when CGI was young and you had to rely on either very expensive (and at times unpredictable) practical effects or technology still in its infancy to achieve a certain shot, scene, or sequence, odds are you would be a little more selective in what all you include in your story. Nowadays, challenging scenes like the river raft sequence could be added at the drop of a hat, even if (as Koepp said) it felt repetitive and unnecessary. That, and the modern game of studios trying to one up each other in regards to their spectacle has lead to the watering down of creating unique and engaging stories that will stand the test of time.

[bone crusher]

So Box office is sitting at 824m as of now, with China extending the screening for one more month and Japan has yet to open theirs, I think it might just come close to a billy all said and done. Dinosaurs are truly critics proof aren't they? Yeah feels like Universal would definitely green lit a new trilogy soon enough at this rate, hopefully they have recognized and learned their mistakes from Dominion and pull a Maverick for the sequels.

[DinoToyForum]

So Box office is sitting at 824m as of now, with China extending the screening for one more month and Japan has yet to open theirs, I think it might just come close to a billy all said and done. Dinosaurs are truly critics proof aren't they? Yeah feels like Universal would definitely green lit a new trilogy soon enough at this rate, hopefully they have recognized and learned their mistakes from Dominion and pull a Maverick for the sequels.

If they can do a poor job and rake in the cash anyway, why expect them to change? At 1 billion per mistake expect many more 'mistakes' to come.

[Dusty Wren]

If they can do a poor job and rake in the cash anyway, why expect them to change? At 1 billion per mistake expect many more 'mistakes' to come.

Exactly.

Neil deGrasse Tyson has this story about how he ran into James Cameron at an awards dinner and was ribbing him about how the star field that Kate Winslet looks up at during that iconic scene at the end of Titanic is completely wrong for the location and time of the Titanic sinking. Cameron looked at him and deadpanned, "Titanic has grossed $1.3 billion. Imagine how much more it would have grossed if only I'd gotten the sky right." 

[Newt]

I'm doing my part by not watching the movie. Take that, Universal!  If you want my $20, you'll need to up your game!

[DinoToyForum]

I'm doing my part by not watching the movie. Take that, Universal!  If you want my $20, you'll need to up your game!

Same. So, that's at least $40 they're out of pocket. Go us. Obviously, it's the principle that matters more than the expectation it will change anything!

[stargatedalek]

I'm gonna be frank, I actually really liked it. Certainly I would say it was better than the previous two movies.

[Halichoeres]

I'm doing my part by not watching the movie. Take that, Universal!  If you want my $20, you'll need to up your game!

Same. So, that's at least $40 they're out of pocket. Go us. Obviously, it's the principle that matters more than the expectation it will change anything!

I also haven't seen it and don't plan to, and I can't help but notice, to my consternation, it was successful despite my refusal.

[Takama]

$20   for a film?      good thing my local theator charged only $5 for general admission

A film like this deserves no more.