Fellow moviegoers, many of your casual film critiques have
gone far enough! Yeah you with your
nonchalant praise of undeserving pictures.
Your behavior borders on reckless and insulting, much like my
alliteration. It is imperative that you,
not as an amateur movie reviewer but as an adult having no excuse not to have
mastered the English language, be more precise with your choice of words when
referencing film. Film, you see, like
music and sculptures and dance and even food, is an art form. And because it is art it must be treated as
such. There are specific elements that
go into making a film. The quality of
these elements and how they come together and function as a whole will directly
affect the quality of the film as a finished project. Consider what makes good food: fresh
ingredients, preparation of ingredients, execution in the kitchen, whether the
food is prepared with love, or if it has soul.
It's the same concept with movies.
Which brings me to Jurassic
World. So those "elements"
I was just talking about? Pretty poor
quality. As I write this, I'm trying to
remember a single redeeming performance.
As it stands, we need look no further than the lead performance as
representation of the movie's less than stellar acting. It's not that Chris Pratt was awful, but the
role pales when compared to that of his in the 2014 hit Guardians of the Galaxy. In Galaxy, Pratt is much more
relatable. We as audience members easily
identify with everything from his sarcasm and quick wit to the more complex
emotions he experiences when remembering a lost loved one. Whereas in Jurassic, he seems as fabricated as the dinosaurs, engineered and
insincere. It's an almost cartoonish
role. Many would argue that a
performance can only be as good as the writing will allow, and it would be hard
to refute that, especially in this case.
It's not just Pratt.
All the characters are two-dimensional, so the consistency certainly
speaks to shortcomings in the script.
The dialogue can be downright cringe-inducing at times, the military
angle feels completely contrived and rushed, and there are several scenes that
seem simply unnecessary (So your parents are getting divorced. What does that have to do with the price of
souvenir dino eggs in Central America?).
Then there's the inevitable retort, "We're only going
for the dinosaur action anyway, so what's the big deal?" I hear you.
But even that was unimpressive. I
mean, your best dinosaur lives in the water and is relegated to a couple of
good, perhaps one really good scene.
***SLIGHT SPOILER AHEAD*** I
couldn't even enjoy that weak finale for suppressing my laughter at the heroic,
slow-motion shot of the raptor, complete with the cliché' crescendo of the
triumphant score in the background. ***END SLIGHT SPOILER ALERT*** A lady behind me gasped and began clapping
right around the time I was finishing my eye-roll. Ironically our contrasting reactions kind of
serve as a nice metaphor for my initial point: precision of language.
After all my ranting you'd probably be surprised that I gave
Jurassic World three stars. I liked it, at least a little more than I
didn't. I was somewhat entertained
partly because of nostalgia (the original was such a memorable experience) and
partly because of the concept. A dinosaur
park is a fascinating notion. That's
pretty much the extent of my affection for this movie. And while I did LIKE it (I guess) it should
in no way be considered a GOOD movie.
See? Precision of language. Let's revisit the food analogy from the first
paragraph. Jurassic World is like the white cheddar bites from Zaxby's to my
wife. She loves that crap. It fulfills some sort of guilty pleasure for
her. And though she loves them she would
never refer to them as good food. The
ingredients aren't fresh, the preparation not meticulous, the presentation not
a priority. But she still likes them,
and that's okay. Surely you can
relate. Did you love the movie? Fine.
Say you loved it. If you thought
it was entertaining then by all means say so.
But please be careful when choosing your words. Be respectful to the art.
