Jurassic World (2015)

 Is Jurassic World (2015) simply a cash cow for fan service, with brazen product placement and an unstoppable budget? And can it compete critically without Spielberg directing?

After twenty-two years since we first came face to snarling-face with Spielberg's reanimated dinosaurs, we have arrived here: to a monolithic adventure park that finally sees John Hammond's (Sir Richard Attenborough) vision a reality. However, this thrill ride sees Spielberg offering his directorial chair to the indie wonder Colin Trevorrow; renowned for his wonderfully wholesome and fantastical Safety Not Guaranteed (2012). Instead he has opted, as he has done in recent years, to act as Executive Producer overseeing the production with creative integrity and dinosaur mayhem in check. The question we should then be asking is can Tevorrow deliver to the franchise? Can the spectacle revived from the original astonish us, and hopefully bury the atrocious Jurassic Park 3 which mortified our eyes with mere fan service and stretched narrative device. It has only taken a few glimpses of teeth, a handful of notes from John Williams' nostalgic score, and a sprinkling of references to Jurassic Park (1993), to reunite the fans for the biggest battle of prehistoric creatures in what seems like too long.

Since it was last in operation in 1993, the park has seen a massive overhaul in innovations, dinosaur genetics and viewing experience. Now under management, with Simon Masrani (Iffan Khan) acting as the main investor and 8th richest man in the world he has now continued to pursue Hammond's dream, by creating not just a park, but an infrastructure. A multitude of enclosures, paddocks and quasi-sea-world shows and you have Jurassic World. Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), the park operations manager and Auntie to Zach and Gray Mitchell (Nick Robinson & Ty Simpkins), has the misfortune of playing host to the boys while attempting to run a park and contending with a new park attraction - the aptly named Indominus Rex - a name met with immediate mockery by the characters. As can be expected operations don't run smoothly in Jurassic World, so Claire calls in dinosaur expertise, and resident eye-candy. Chris Pratt plays Owen Grady, an ex-Navy Seal turned park trainer, who sees past the scaly exterior of theses scientific experiments, and actually bonds with and raises several Velociraptors to take commands. Compared to everyone else, customers included, he appears to be the only one who realises these are still ruthless predators, regardless of genetic domestication. Therefore he treats them with a balance of fear and respect.

It all sounds like a dream come true. The dinosaurs have become genetically modified so they are born ostensibly domesticated; making them much easier to control. These once wild beasts that were highest on the food chain are now pets to be paraded around for human amusement, in a park that seems suggestive of the universal theme park in Orlando, Florida - a smart marketing move by Universal Pictures. Yet with all these improvements and advancements, we are reminded of Jeff Goldblum's words 'nature always finds a way', as Owen foreshadows to us the growing hostility that is apparent in animals who remain in captivity. Before long the intimidating Indominus learns of her own confinement, grows smarter, more volatile and devises an escape and tricks the park attendants into becoming dino-chow.  

Woven expertly into this overriding story about the dinosaur attraction, are two other carefully constructed stories in their own right. One perspective is seen through the children attending the park; one gawking at the magnificence, and the other at the girls, while the third narrative perspective takes us behind the scenes. Not so much as a derivation of the first film, which had deception, exploration, car chasing action sequences and humans falling prey to hungry dinosaurs, the latest installment offers practically the same; only this time the action is turned up to eleven. The cliché 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' should be applied fairly here. After all, the writers and produces tried all other variants of plot device in the sequels, and did that work? Well, you can find the answer in Sam Neil's soggy demeanour in Jurassic Park 3 (2001). 

Nevertheless, some comfort can be taken in the fresh faced actors who are happy to take on these archetypes with a gleeful enthusiasm and originality. Pratt and Howard are delightfully well fitted as an on screen couple, following the trail of her character's nephews with quips, in jokes and connectivity that fully rounds out their characters. This immediate backstory develops a romance plot early on that is somewhat unnecessary, but does however invest us in this group of characters. So much so, that we find ourselves transfixed on the acting, and multiply that by ten for the 100 foot talking points surrounding them.

While most viewers will have focused on the characters, and the awe-inspiring dinosaurs, the more astute will have been noticing, the overabundance of product placement for Coke, Mercedes and Samsung. Call it shameless marketing if you will, but Trevorrow has his own answer to this, which he explained to News.com that 'there's something in the film about our greed and desire for profit [...] the Indominus Rex, to me, is that desire.' Therefore it is contestable that Trevorrow's awareness of advertising, commercialism and capitalism is in itself flipped on its head. In one scene, the tech-savvy operator Lowery Cruthers (Jake Johnson) sports a Jurassic Park t-shirt, much to the dismay of Claire. He tells of his attire as a worthwhile purchase from Ebay for $150, before later praising Hammond's initial park concept, and ripping into the commercialisation of the park attraction now. In itself a commentary on Spielberg's simpler narrative of dinosaurs reborn in the age of mankind's dominion, compared to the Frankensteinian hybrid in Trevorrow's movie that is synonymous with the dangers of capitalism. Clearly Trevorrow knows his source material, he deeply adores the franchise and has had the guts to reinvigorate the franchise into something more than just the year's highest grossing film. If it takes selling the souls of the dinosaurs for brand marketing, just to expand the budget, then it may be a practical sacrifice. Especially when you're mocking the whole capitalist ideology in the first place.  

             

Reminiscing back to Jurassic Park, it is noteworthy that the CGI has made vast improvements in the twenty year gap since we first saw those Brachiosaurus grazing on the hills. The opening shot takes care of any preconceptions we may have had for the forthcoming movie. The visuals feel crisper and refined, to the point where you can actually feel those baby dinosaurs clawing out their shells and up to your seat. Similarly, the sound quality and music composition is on top form. The absence of John Williams as musical director is upsetting, but Michael Giacchino fills his particularly large shoes, with a little wiggle room. After some playful homage to the great Williams, Giacchino keeps a consistently atmospheric and unnerving sound, that pierces every scene in all the right places.

Spielberg has pushed the scope for the franchise. When the first film was released, it was the dinosaurs that became the stars. Now, it is the island that is the most diverse character. Boasting viewing decks and rolling bubbles that allow one to immerse themselves in the whole Jurassic experience, then throw into the experience, lectures, archaeology digging and the return of Mr DNA. What we then have is a four dimensional world that is as real to the extras in the film, as the people behind the veil, sitting in their seats, eagerly stuffing popcorn into their mouths. 

It may not have the propulsion to get it any more critical acclaim than art direction and visual effects, but it is certainly a movie that innovates and captivates. Jurassic World will easily follow with sequel after sequel. Quite simply, Trevorrow has injected this franchise with the literal performance enhancer it needed, whilst focusing on the main points: characters, setting, homage and teeth. A roar-some spectacle that every member of the family will enjoy. 

Thor: The Dark World (Review)

Thor is back. It has been a year since he last journeyed to earth, but needless to say, we have all been anticipating his return. At least I was, until I strolled into the cinema to watch another Marvel action flick and instead, was bombarded by a Hollywood rehashing of its collective blockbuster successes. 

Where is the originality and substance that the first film brought? Granted, origin stories always garner much mass appeal; especially to the the American individualist audience. Yet that narrative potential can not seem to be emulated a second time around. Think back to Iron Man - a franchise which has all the material and potential to create a good sequel. And what were we given? A mediocre movie, with a poorly executed villain, and a slow banal plot. 

It would appear Hollywood is fresh out of new concepts. Somewhere between the enemy ship crashing into the impenetrable Asgard throne room, and then being used by our hero to escape Asgard, is where I realised I had seen this film before - Independence Day and Avatar. In one we see the destruction of an iconic landmark (The White House), and the latter we see the escapees hot-tail it out of headquarters, against their superiors wishes. It might not be an exact template, but the very idea of using the "alien" ship to fool the enemy into letting their defences down, is a concept we have seen time and time again. Thor 2 unashamedly utilises it.
     Asgard beaten down, falling like Mount Olympus, we see a blatant re-envisioning of the America in trouble plot. We do not need any more of these films. White House Down, Olympus has Fallen etc. In recent years we have seen an abundance of 'kingdom under attack' movies, so why employ this here? Why include this device? Because it is a safe story. Marvel knows it has worked before, and unfortunately they are not confident enough in their characters to let their stories (you know, the ones from the comics they originate), develop and breathe. There is plenty of material on our titular hero. Norse mythology, comic books and 80s film adaptations, that said, I would not rely too heavily on the cheesy 80s Hulk/Thor cross-over. But even that would be a better direction than this Asgardian history lesson. A cross-over with the Mark Ruffalo Hulk, would expand both superheroes stories, as well as being commercially accepted by the masses. Plus we wouldn’t have to suffer through another terrible Hulk movie.      
     

Apart from a very amusing cameo by Captain America (Chris Evans), the one saving grace has to be mentioned. Of course, I'm talking about Loki and Thor's banter. As an audience, we are left craving more screen time for the brotherly squabbles. Loki's sarcasm ripples off Thor's ever frustrated shoulders. As Thor's increasing disdain for his treasonous sibling continues, you can see Loki's longing for his previous position - a dynamic that should have been explored readily in this story. To be quite honest, an hour of them volleying jokes between one another would have been more enjoyable than the actual plot. Better still, Loki amassing another army and battling in Asgard, with Odin and Thor on one side, and Loki plus Malekith on the other; that would have scaled things up perfectly. Throw in the Hulk and you have your new Christmas Blockbuster.

     The only way I can ultimately define the film is as a segway to the Avengers sequel. I, like so many of us, have continually watched Marvel film after Marvel film, convincing myself that I am watching the film as its own entity. But the truth needs to be accepted. We now sit through these filler stories in expectation of an after credits teaser for the Avengers sequel.

    Thor: The Dark World is not a bad film, it lacks the action and freshness that Thor brought to the screen, but it is watchable. If you are a Thor or Avengers Assemble fan, go and see it; if you are going with no priory context, then avoid it. Thor 2 is a movie that needs to be watched directly after its predecessor.