When humans try to play the Creator it becomes a mess. And even a bigger mess if we try to control prehistoric beasts of the size of an average tsunami at the Indian Ocean and weighting about as much as an average tank. The worst scenario is when these beasts become “assets”, numbers and profit. However, this shady moral makes a decent story.
Things have evolved since the original Jurassic Park trilogy (1993, 1997, 2001). In the first film, the Steven Spielberg’s classic, the dinosaurs were created from fossils. In Jurassic World, the today’s version by Colin Trevorrow, they are created in a tube by mixing different genes of the species, even snakes and frogs.
The story is set on a theme park carrying the same name as the film, built on Isla Nublar, a fictional islet off Central America’s Pacific Coast. Each year, people want bigger, cooler and more monstrous dinosaurs, according to the Jurassic World CEO Simon Masrani (Irrfan Khan).
Two brothers, Zach (Nick Robinson) and Gray Mitchell (Ty Simpkins) are to visit the park with their aunt Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), the park operations manager, who hasn’t seen her sibligs in almost a decade. They are supposed to meet at the park for a family powwow, but Claire has more important work to attend to, like observing the terrifying Indominus rex, which has been bred in isolation and is unpredictable and dangerous.
Claire leaves Zach, who is in his early teens and his few years younger brother Gray in the hands of her assistant Zara (Katie McGrath). But the boys escape for a journey of their own and get into serious trouble when an “asset turns loose”. Claire seeks help from Owen Grady (Chris Pratt), a Velociraptor expert and an ex-Marine and the adventure is set to start.
The minute you put on the 3D glasses you are driven into a fantasy world. The colour grading counts on teal and orange, the opposite colours of the colour wheel, a naturally pleasing combination for the eyes. This is a somewhat modern trend used in films such as The Hunger Games and Transformers. In this aspect there is a big difference compared with the original Jurassic Park from ’93, which relies on natural earth-like colours.
This doesn’t bother me, a believer of that look through the lens can be more surrealistic, a dream-like and more dramatic version of the reality because of a simple fact: colours and contrasts create emotion. However, I can see this as a problem for purists and those who want to believe that humans and these large reptiles from roughly 245 million years ago could actually coexist.
Naturally, Jurassic World relies on the most recent computer-generated imagery CGI whereas the first Jurassic Park trusted more in the use of robots, maybe because of the simple fact that the computers lacked the horsepower. There’s a lot more money involved in the 2015 version as the budget is about 150 million US dollars, whereas its 90s sibling cost about 63 million.
Again, the coin has two sides: robots can look more real, they are present at the scene which can add to the feeling of immediacy. With CGI, the actors have to rely on their imagination and Indominus rex can be added later from a computer located 2000 kilometres from the setting.
When I was a kid and saw the first film in the cinema, I was excited and sweaty; the dinosaurs looked like nothing I had seen before. Since then, I have seen enough, learned to appreciate the robots and pixels in films like these without giving a damn about how real-life the surroundings look. In Jurassic World, behind the 3D glasses, on the silver screen, the dinosaurs look magnificent and stunning and thanks to the 3D you can almost feel the dinosaur’s breath in your face.
What more can you ask for when joining a ride in the Jurassic World?
Jurassic World premieres in cinemas across Finland on June 12.