To watch or not to watch, that is the question. Whether it is nobler in the mind to suffer the plot shortcomings and underdeveloped characters while contributing to the hand that feeds the sequel industry or to step back and let the highest-grossing film of all times pass you by? The consensus seems to be to go and watch it, even if it urges you to complain about the state of film affairs afterwards. 

“Jurassic World” is exactly what one might expect – not more but not less either - from something to accompany your popcorn when escaping from the sun and the fresh air into the deep dark dusty confines of your local multiplex. The plot is neither here nor there, catering for the needs of a strict thrill plan rather than delving into the depths of the human psyche. The narrative shortcomings have been hidden under a thick façade of CGI dinosaurs and spine-chilling mass scenes. Chris Pratt as the contemporary dino-Indy delivers the kind of please-em-all performance which defies all criticism and creates rumors of him being the contemporary superhero supreme. Although delivered perfectly, his role lacks any kind of edge sharper than a leather vest which in the hipster-infested beard monopoly is more along the grain than against. However, good for him for breaking through to the crème de la crème of the mainstream, and raptor-whispering the film world into his oyster. It’s his choices from now on which will either make or break the way his name will be written in the annals of history.

The extraordinary success of “Jurassic World” in the cinema has been dissected and commented on to an extent that not much else can be added. Looking at the numbers, it is definitely a noteworthy achievement only shadowed by the fact that some of the revenue was accrued by selling plastic glasses rather than tickets. The implications of the film’s success have been mainly seen as a disappointment in artistic terms (for example, Eric Kohn at Indiewire). Regardless of the visions of the perfect world according to the cinephiles where every visual experience nourishes your soul and broadens your mind, the summer blockbuster, perspiring from gazing its own navel with a vacant stare, is here to stay. However, there’s no need to throw the baby out with the bath water just yet. The universality of the story of “Jurassic World” seems to be a fertile breeding ground for metaphors far larger than the story of an angry hybrid dinosaur and it exudes a sense of self which seldom exceeds one-liners in tentpole films. The over-exposed and over-saturated guests being underwhelmed by the magic of dinosaurs immediately draws parallels to the summer blockbuster situation in the film world. It is far from ideal and ruthless market capitalism always has the last say but “Jurassic World” knows what it is, where it comes from and what it’s doing. It is full-fledgedly embracing its blockbuster status with all its bells, whistles and issues. It is almost as if it is putting a mirror in front of the audience, saying, “Look what you have made, now you have to live with it”. Its peculiar sense of itself creates a space for introspection and analysis which is not too bad for a two-hour summer fling. 



Regardless of its relative oomph, Pratt’s wide-appeal charisma and refreshing sense of self, "Jurassic World" is still a spineless CGI monster. Without a plot worth mentioning and drenched in CGI, it falls into the very trap it references. Yes, dinosaurs are not enough, so (spoiler ahead) let's throw a few of them into the mix and make it all about pre-historic partnerships in battle. Afterwards, they are going to have cocktails at mosasaur’s place and watch TV together after a tiring day. The utterly absurdist notion of awfully conveniently timed partnerships was not convincing with completely fictional monsters as shown in “Godzilla” and just emphasises the deus ex machina-style lazy scriptwriting by requiring a leap of faith larger than is reasonable for suspending disbelief. Not to even mention the complete lack of feathers on the dinosaurs which signals an inability to think outside the rough-looking skin box, stagnancy and a complete disregard of the open-mindedness of audiences (check here, here and here). 

Hairy reduces the scary

“Jurassic World” is a large and cumbersome film despite its nifty CGI. It flows through the action sequences only to arrive and stumble into yet another plot hole. However, its air of self-awareness offers some redemption, as it is hard to poke holes in a sieve which knows it’s a sieve. Should we demand more from movies? Yes, definitely. Should we demand more from this movie, a sequel to a sequel of a sequel which had its heyday more than 10 years ago? Maybe not. After all, it's their uniqueness which makes you love the more peculiar and fascinating films you hold close to your heard. Let “Jurassic World” be the mass which makes the pearls shine even more brightly. In the end of the day, it was just too hot outside anyway.