Reviews of The Lost World: Jurassic Park 1997
-
a big improvement in all non-wayne knight areas
-
5.0/10
Steven Spielberg's sequel to his timeless adventure classic Jurassic Park is not boring and once again it is quite impressive on a visual level, but I couldn't help to notice how inferior it was in comparison to the first film. It is more or less a rehash of its predecessor and there isn't anything new or innovative in it that makes it stand out or be something worth of remembrance.
-
A huge disappointment after terrific original Jurassic Park. It's well directed, I can't deny that, but the 'wow' factor and feeling of an adventure are completely lost here. The dinosaurs simply aren't overwhelming and dazzling as much. Characters, while they serve a purpose, are nowhere near as good as original ones. Even Jeff Goldblum's awesomeness isn't as good as it used to be. John Williams left out some pretty important parts of his beautiful score. I could go on, but…
-
I really love Spielberg's first Jurassic film, and so I was looking forward to this, especially since it was described as darker.
"Darker" did not mean better. While there was more violence, there was also less tension and suspense. No, the first film did not have a ton of character development, but it had more than Lost World. I enjoy Julianne Moore in most films, but she was replaceable here, as were most of the actors. Ian Malcolm was my…
-
Take Jurassic Park and remove all originality, sense of majesty and wonder, and restraint in over-the-top action and so-carefully-constructed-suspense that it fails to be suspenseful… and you have The Lost World.
I understand why Spielberg was interested in the idea of a sequel and this story specifically- the two major sections of the movie both present seemingly fertile ground. The premise of the second section, a T-Rex loose in an American city, mostly works, but is not given the time… -
such a remarkable sequel, even its exuberantly wild fourth act.
-
Very underrated and under-appreciated. Not quite on the level of the original, but this is a seriously entertaining, well-made movie. Two of the action sequences are better than the sequences in the original, with Spielberg creating some truly suspenseful moments (awesome use of glass). The story and some scenes do get a little cheesy and over-the-top at times, especially at the end, but it didn't really detract from the overall movie much. Also, while I love John Williams main Jurassic…
-
This is better than I remembered it being; Steven Spielberg's strong directing and the still amazing special effects for the dinosaurs (as well as a strong cast) keep it from being a total disaster. Unfortunately, it's completely let down by a horrible script, one that makes little sense, and some bad editing which leaves parts of the movie feeling somewhat choppy.
The basic premise of the movie is flawed right from the very beginning. The presence of Jeff Goldblum's character…
-
The sequel to Jurassic Park lacks any sort of majesty or awe that made the first one of my favorite films. They briskly hand-wave away any build up in going to the island in favor of dinosaurs terrorizing characters who lack any sort of backstory in order to become fodder. Some of the best moments of the first film are before shit goes sideways, and even before we get to the island, establishing some narrative. Here, you get 2 seconds…
-
A couple of things:
Jeff Goldblum is the weirdest fit as a Spielberg leading man since, well, ever.
The RV-hanging-off-the-edge-of-the-cliff sequence is really good.
Dinosaurs wrecking havoc on an urban area like San Diego is so much more interesting in theory than in practice here.
It's still way better than Hook.
-
-
My favorite in the trilogy. Fuckin' RAPTORS, MAN.