Stream it now

The Lost World: Jurassic Park 1997

A research team is sent to the Jurassic Park Site B island to study the dinosaurs there while another team approaches with another agenda...

Your rating: 0

Solar rating: 9

17

Imdb rating: 6.4

201,415
 
 
Voting
Quality
Age
Show More...

Сomments

@Dejin
The original is almost always better than the sequel(s) or remakes
I like the first one better (:

what an awesome movie!

Sequel to a great movie.
Steven Spielberg helms this sequel to his box-office smash Jurassic Park, but his heart is not in this film and it feels like a cold, cynical cash-grab designed to exploit the success of the first movie even more. While the original Jurassic Park represented something of a wasted opportunity that didn't fully explore the implications of dinosaurs being brought back to life, The Lost World: Jurassic Park is an even darker, less imaginative movie than its predecessor. Once again, the movie is content to let the dinosaurs be the only spectacle while their victims are indistinguishable stock figures. At least the first film, while certainly guilty of one-dimensional characters, had the sense to have its characters be somewhat entertaining. In this film, we are left with only Jeff Goldblum as the lead, a poor concept from the get-go (his scientist was more stomachable as a wise-cracking sidekick), and a bland gallery of fellow scientists played by Julianne Moore and Vince Vaughn (among others). Only Pete Postlethwaite creates a person with any resonance as an Ahab-like hunter who dreams of capturing a Tyrannosaurus Rex. The movie, like most Spielberg escapist fare, has some memorable action setpieces...none better than an extended sequence involving a trailer that tips over the edge of a mountain. And, unlike many, I actually enjoyed the preposterous climax of the movie, which is simultaneously a humourous tribute to Godzilla and a fairly thrilling sequence in its own right. Despite these minor strengths, The Lost World: Jurassic Park is generally a dark, dank, cynical film that has no sense of wonder or curiosity. It is odd that the director who made a film about embracing the unknown (Close Encounters) could have become so conventional in his attempt to thrill the audience. If one is looking for an inoffensive thriller with a few minor scares, one could do a lot worse than this movie. But from a director capable of inspiring the imagination or creating genuinely frightening material (such as Duel or Jaws), this movie represents a sharp decline in quality.

(BASIC)
:fresh: I loved the first Jurassic Park. It was so cool for someone who loved dinosaurs since they were very little. Though the love for dinosaurs wore off, I still loved this movie! I liked the scene with the T-Rex and the jeep with the kids. That whole scene totally hooked me! And then the scenes with the velociraptors...it captivated me. I wish I would take the time to read the original novel, as it has been recommended to me many times. Oh yeah, I thought it was hilarious when the Dilophosaurus (the one with the umbrella-looking frills) eats the fat guy. I never liked him.:D haha! gotta love carnage!

:rotten: The Lost World just didn't cut it for me, a huge fan of the first movie. When I was really little (okay, I was 'really little' a few years ago) I liked it just because it was action and dinosaurs, but now I think it really stunk. As a matter of fact, everyone thought it stunk! For a book project in school, I decided to read it since I bought it on sale in a grocery store for two dollars.:cool: I was blown away by the sheer awesome-ness of the book. I couldn't believe that that stupid movie was based on that book! That's when I realized that it was a really pathetic movie. Hence, the 5 out of 10. And I recommend the book too!

:rotten: The kids at my school seemed to like Jurassic Park 3 when it was in theaters. I was ten when it came out. For some reason, I didn't like it that much even though it was popular. I thought, "Why is this rated PG-13? This is so kid-oriented! It was like a kid's show, definitely centered toward the younger population. The least they could do was make the series end with a bang for the adults. But I couldn't have expected much...Hollywood made it, not Michael Crichton. It wasn't even based off a book, therefore the plot and story is going to sound like fanfiction.

In conclusion, I like Jurassic Park, but the first movie was the ending point for me. The last two movies don't even compare, and the books blow them all away.:cool:
Sure, I've seen this one a few times before but there is nothing like watching an older movie with your younger kids to relive what it was like for you the first time. Of the three movies in this series, this one has the best humour, delivered with expert deadpan by Jeff Goldblum. The dinos have lost some of their "awe factor" since the first movie but this one is not without some cheap scare tactics to make you jump out of your seat. As always, the special effects are excellent and the dinosaurs look quite real. My 8 year old appreciated the few times someone got ripped in half. Watch #1 and #2 and skip #3 (it licks).
A huge letdown due to the fact of an awful story. Not even remotely like the book (I didn't even think the book is even that good.).

***/****
6.50/10



Well, whatever survived, the audience brain surely did NOT. This is surely one unneeded sequel or so it seemed to me. There is no story, these people go to the island where the Dinos surived.


Jeff Glodblum can do only one thing -- stare. Juliane Moore really looks pathetic and the rest of the actors' acting is so bad that it sometimes made me wonder whether Spielberg really did direct this movie.

I wonder how the third part is (should i risk it, should i not?)


MY Rating : 2/10 :rotten:
(a flick like this from Spielberg is unforgivable)
Report a problem