Jurassic Park

4/4

Rated PG-13 for Intense Science Fiction Terror

Starring: Sam Neill, Laura Dern, Jeff Goldblum, Richard Attenborough, Joseph Mazzello, Ariana Richards

For four years, Steven Spielberg’s science-fiction thriller “Jurassic Park” was the most successful movie of all time.  It’s not hard to see why; the plot is built upon ideas, not special effects (although there are plenty of those), the film never talks down to the audience, the special effects are revolutionary (in my opinion, unsurpassed to this day) and it’s guaranteed to get anyone’s adrenaline pumping.

Billionaire entrepreneur John Hammond (Attenborough) has done the impossible: he has found a way to bring dinosaurs back to life.  On a small island off the coast of Costa Rica, he has built a “biological preserve” where the public can view the long-extinct animals up close.  Unfortunately, an accident has caused his investors to grow nervous shortly before the park opens up.  He invites three scientists, Dr. Alan Grant (Neill), a paleontologist, Dr. Ellie Sattler (Dern), a paleobotanist, and a rockstar chaotician, Dr. Ian Malcolm (Goldblum) to take the tour and sign off on the park.  Also tagging along are Hammond’s two grandchildren, Lex (Richards) and Tim (Mazzello).  But something goes wrong, and now the dinosaurs are running amok.

Without a doubt, the special effects are the best thing in the movie.  The mixture of animatronics and CGI is flawless; no other movie, even those with budgets four times as big, has had such realistic monsters.  It’s almost impossible to believe that these are not real dinosaurs, but models and computer graphics.

Although well-received by critics, almost everyone complained about the lack of characterizations.  Such criticisms are not only untrue, but also unfair.  True, none of these characters is what one would call three-dimensional, but there is no place for deep or complex characterizations in a movie like “Jurassic Park.”  Not only are they unnecessary, but trying to flesh the characters out that much would needlessly bog down the running time for no apparent purpose.  If you really think about it, these characters are just as developed as Rick and Ilsa in “Casablanca.”  What they do have is personality, which is the most important part of a character, particularly in a movie where there’s no time for much else.  Although we don’t know anything about their pasts or their “buried secrets” (if they have any), we do understand what kind of people they are, and we are able to sympathize with them.  That is the only thing that matters for an action movie character.

The performances are strong across the board.  Sam Neill is very good as the aloof and antisocial scientist.  He despises kids, much to the chagrin of his girlfriend Ellie.  Circumstances cause him to grow a heart and realize that kids are not nearly as bad as he thought.  As Ellie, Laura Dern is wonderful, playing the character with spunk and heart.  Dern actually wasn’t the first choice; Juliette Binoche was Spielberg’s first pick, but the French actress turned down the role to act in Krzysztof Kieslowski’s “Troi Couleurs: Bleu.”  Jeff Goldblum is on hand for comic relief and foreshadowing as the arrogant and eccentric Ian Malcolm.  Richard Attenborough gives the best performance in the film as John Hammond, whose imagination and hubris has caused his whole world to come crashing down around him.  Joseph Mazzello and Ariana Richards are also very good as young Tim and Lex; they’re sympathetic without becoming too cute and irritating.

One thing that I appreciated about the film is that it raises the ethical questions that arise when dealing with both cloning and reintroducing extinct wildlife into the modern day.  Is it right to bring back animals after they’ve been gone for so long?  If we are able to do something, does it mean that we should do it?  Spielberg doesn’t fully examine these issues (there isn’t time), but he pays more than lip service to them.  Some of the best scenes are when the characters discuss not only the dangerous situation they find themselves in, but the morality of the choices that got them there.

1993 was a huge year for Spielberg; he created two of the most beloved films in cinema history (this and his masterpiece, “Schindler’s List”).  Not only did it present him as a force to be reckoned with in the film industry, but taken together, they represent both his skill as a filmmaker and his versatility.  The two films couldn’t be less similar; in fact, “Jurassic Park” is substantially different from his usual movies.  Although there is sentiment in this film (the scene where we see the Jurassic Park merchandise is quite poignant), this is a much darker and scarier journey than anything Spielberg had produced up to that point.

“Jurassic Park” is unquestionably a classic.  Not only is it one of the best films of its genre, it is one of the best films period.  This is a movie that deserves its spot alongside other “classics,” like “Casablanca,” “Psycho,” and the aforementioned “Schindler’s List.”  Don’t believe me?  Watch the movie again and you’ll see my point.