Review of The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997) by Zachary K — 19 Jun 2012

One of the most underrated sequels in recent years. Not nearly as good as the first, but a perfectly enjoyable ride if you happen to like old-fashioned dinosaur movie mayhem with an A-budget & cast- and don't mind the fact it took an A-novel and turned it into a B-movie.

What's Good:

The very rich cinematography by Janusz Kaminski is, to me, a constant highlight throughout. Filmed mostly in the Redwoods (with only the opening scene and some 2nd unit shots filmed in Kauai this time around), "Lost World" is even more prehistoric-feeling than JP1.

The Oscar-nominated visual effects are even more convincing than they were in JP1. Excellent scenes include the majestic Stegosaurus herd, the nippy Compy's, and the lethal T-Rex pair. The best scene with dinosaurs is the round-up scene, which includes a historic shot of a motorbike going through the giant legs of the huge Mamenchisaurus. The best scene *without* dinosaurs is easily the Rex attack on the trailer (two words: breaking glass). It's possibly one of the best Spielberg set pieces ever made.

Jeff Goldblum, while not quite hitting a 2nd homerun as Ian Malcolm, is still a refreshing and unconventional lead for the movie. The best human performance is from Pete Postlethwaite, who makes a perfect Great White Hunter as Roland Tembo. I wish one or both of these lovely character actors had been cast in the next sequel. Peter Stormare makes a great antagonist who meets a very fitting demise, and Arliss Howard plays corporate slime very well in the role of John Hammond's nephew. Richard Attenborough makes a welcome but brief return as Hammond.

JP2's Isla Sorna, shrouded in mists and covered with thick Redwood forests, provides a stark contrast to the mostly blue skies and squeaky-clean, brightly-colored tropical look of Isla Nublar in JP1. In the same vein, the story itself is considerably darker. The body count is far higher this time, and scenes take place mostly at night. While there are still a handful of herbivore dinosaurs this time, the carnivores get more screen-time- and even when the herbivores are onscreen they're usually pissed off. All this results in what is essentially an "Empire Strikes Back" for this series.

What's Bad:

Of course, "Lost World" dropped the ball in many areas. It could've been great, instead of merely good, and even its most ardent supporters generally don't call it an improvement over the original.

Most obvious of these issues is how much it changed Michael Crichton's book. I try giving adaptations a lot of slack- books and films are so bloody different... But in this case, Crichton's book was pretty damn good and deserved to be made into a movie- and it wasn't, period. All "Lost World" (and the later JP3) did was throw in a handful of scenes that were in both JP books. The fascinating extinction theories that Crichton explored so well in the LW book are totally abandoned in this movie, and that's sad, because that made the book thematically interesting. It was a blueprint for a very cinematic story that was not just another monster movie, which is basically really what the film is. Yes, a lot of effort is made in this film to illustrate these dinosaurs are doing what's natural. But no matter how you spin it, this movie has about 90 minutes of people running away from dinosaurs.

Many characters who are supposed to be smart do incredibly dumb things in this. The biggest blunder goes to Julianne Moore's Sarah Harding, an animal behavior specialist who wanders all around Isla Sorna with a shirt covered in the T-Rex baby blood, resulting in a massacre by the Rexes.

One of the biggest blunders in the movie could also be its best part, depending on your opinion. I'll always be in the middle about the Rex getting loose in San Diego. It's a very fun scene (and sometimes quite funny), but it lacks all the edge that made the end of the original so good.