Jurassic World: Hungry Franchise Feeds the Beast

June 12, 2015

New York, Jun 12: Clomp, clomp, clomp - here it comes, another new blockbuster ready for its shock-and-awe ch-ching close-up. With its global brand recognition, Jurassic World comes with more muscle than the average big-ticket behemoth, one that's been built on best-selling novels, three earlier flicks, theme-park attractions and the usual marketing tie-ins. Once again, dinosaurs are on the roam, an unpeaceable kingdom that is an index of the folly of man trying to play God. In reality, there's more flab than muscle packed on this galumphing franchise reboot, which, as it lumbers from scene to scene, reminds you of what a great action god Steven Spielberg is. Too bad he didn't take the reins on this.

jurassic-world2

Spielberg may not have directed Jurassic World, but his fingerprints - and anxiety over his influence - are all over it. He's one of its executive producers and gave his blessing to the director Colin Trevorrow, who has just one other feature on his résumé, the indie "Safety Not Guaranteed." As is the case with every filmmaker hired to lead an industrial brand to box-office domination, Trevorrow was principally tasked with delivering Jurassic World in salable shape, which he has done. Actors repeat their bad lines without smirking, and digital dinosaurs stomp, scatter and gulp amid product placements for Triumph motorcycles and Jimmy Buffett's Margaritaville chain. There are so many plugs for Mercedes that you may wonder if the targeted viewers are studio executives.

That would be par for the course in an entertainment that's as relentlessly reflexive as this one. Cinema is an insistently self-referential art (movies about movies being just one example), and filmmakers have long enjoyed drawing attention to the fact that, hey, you're watching the big screen. Given Spielberg's heavy shadow, it's no surprise that Jurassic World almost immediately if obliquely nods at antecedents, including the first two he directed, with a character in the new one stating that "every time we've unveiled a new attraction attendance has spiked." She's talking about the movie's dinosaur theme park, but she might as well be referring to all the special effects and other blockbuster add-ons that moviemakers use to try to blow the audience's collective mind.

Blowing minds rather than, you know, telling a good story is the driving imperative in Jurassic World, which takes place on an island turned luxury resort where thousands enjoy a very special kind of eco-tourism. There, the usual suspects convene, including a pair of bland young brothers (Nick Robinson, Ty Simpkins), avatars for the sought-after demographic; the usual odd-couple cuties (Bryce Dallas Howard and Chris Pratt); and some standard-issue villainy that exists to feed the dinosaurs and our bloodlust. It's a measure of how dumbed-down this movie is that while the three heroes in Jurassic Park were scientists, Pratt plays Owen, an indeterminate animal expert, and Howard plays Claire, a corporate stooge whose idiocy is partly telegraphed by her towering heels.

The heels come across as a joke, or at least that's how the filmmakers attempt to skew them, with Owen telling Claire that they're "ridiculous." That Claire can actually run from dinosaurs, over cement and through mud, without breaking a heel off or twisting her ankle like a film-noir dame, is played as a kind of triumph. Of course it's a hollow one and it's representative of how the filmmakers like to point out the very clichés (genre, gender, whatever) they embrace, as if merely acknowledging them were a critical move. By the time Claire is shooting a gun, still in heels, you may find yourself humming that old fake-feminist jingle: "I can bring home the bacon/ Fry it up in a pan/ And never let you forget you're a man." That Owen is the hero ensures that you'll never forget, either.

Dolling Claire up so preposterously is a glib tactic, although it's unclear if the filmmakers were trying to tweak politically correct sensibilities or thought they were being clever, or maybe both. Whatever the case, the heels are just silly and a distraction given that they're nowhere near as insulting as the rest of her. Owen may be a parody of a hunk, what with his greasy workingman hands, shirt-busting arm muscles and nicely coiffed chin hair, but at least he does cool stuff like wrangle raptors and, spoiler alert, Claire. She mostly just schemes and screams, before Owen melts her like an ice cube on a hot griddle, proving that, yes, she's every bit as bad as Joss Whedon thought when on Twitter he called out "Jurassic World" as sexist: "She's a stiff, he's a life-force - really? Still?" Yes, still.

Winking self-consciousness and movie love are Spielberg signatures and they suffuse Jurassic Park, which pivots on an entrepreneur-cum-carny, Hammond (Richard Attenborough, who directed Gandhi), who could be a stand-in for any Big Man of cinema. It's Hammond who's brought dinosaurs back to dangerous life, and while he has the vision thing down, he also likes to mention the money he's spent on his spectacle, cementing the Hollywood analogy. By the end, his hubris nearly does him in and his plans flop, a cautionary fictional failure that spawned a real-life smash. Oh, the irony or, as one of the writers, David Koepp, said, "I was really chasing my tail there for a while trying to find out what was virtuous in this whole scenario - and eventually gave up."

Part of the pleasure of Jurassic Park is how seamlessly Spielberg's deep love of movies worked with what was, back in 1993, bleeding-edge computer-generated imagery: the dinosaurs were cool, and the filmmaking fluid and vigorous. It's a resolutely old-fashioned Hollywood adventure movie in many ways, but one that felt (feels) paradoxically alive because of Spielberg's filmmaking talents and his absolute faith in movies. Jurassic World, by contrast, isn't in dialogue with its cinematic reference points; it's fossilized by them. From the first shot of a dinosaur hatching (signaling new beginnings, etc.) to one of a massive aquatic creature chowing down on a great white shark (get it?), it is clear that the only colossus that's making the ground shake here is Steven Spielberg.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
January 5,2020

Los Angeles: Kevin Feige may have confirmed that the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) will be getting its first transgender superhero but the Marvel Studios has said there is no definite timeline for that.

During a Q&A at the New York Film Academy, a fan had asked Feige about whether the studio plans to introduce LGBTQ characters into the MCU, "specifically the trans characters".

To this, the Marvel Studios president had replied, "Yes, absolutely, yes... And very soon. In a movie that we're shooting right now."

But sources in the company clarified to Variety that Feige only confirmed the first part of the comments that a trans character will appear in the MCU in future but he did not give a time period.

Though Feige did not reveal the name of the project that will introduce a LGBTQ character, fans speculate that he may have been referring to "The Eternals".

The film, which will feature an ensemble cast of Richard Madden, Angelina Jolie, Salma Hayek, Kit Harington and others, is set to unveil a gay superhero in the MCU.

Marvel Studios has been making efforts to incorporate more diversity in its films after the success of "Black Panther", which featured a virtually all-black cast, and its first woman-fronted superhero movie "Captain Marvel".

"Avengers: Endgame", which became the highest grossing movie of all-time, had featured the MCU's first gay character, a cameo by director Joe Russo.

In 2020, the studio has two releases -- Scarlett Johansson-starrer "Black Widow" and "The Eternals" -- which have been helmed by women directors.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 18,2020

Mumbai, Jul 18: Actor Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and daughter Aaradhya Bachchan on Friday were shifted to a city hospital, almost a week after they were tested positive for COVID-19. Aishwarya, 46 and eight-year-old Aaradhya were diagnosed with coronavirus on Sunday, a day after the actor’s father-in-law, megastar Amitabh Bachchan, and husband Abhishek Bachchan tested positive for the COVID-19.

The mother-daughter duo was self-quarantining at home till now.

“Both Aishwarya and Aaradhya were admitted to Nanavati hospital today. They are fine,” hospital source said.

Aishwarya needed medical attention, another insider said.

Amitabh, 77, and Abhishek, 44, both are already in the isolation ward of Nanavati hospital.

Since his diagnosis, Amitabh has been regularly updating his admires about his health on social media.

“In happy times, in times of illness, you our near and dear, our well wishers, our fans have ever given us unstinting love , affection care and prayer .. we express our bountiful gracious gratitude to you all .. in these circumstances hospital protocol, restrictive,” the screen icon tweeted on Friday evening.

According to Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), coronavirus cases in Mumbai rose to 98,979 with 1,228 new patients being reported on Friday.

Death toll due to the pandemic rose to 5,582 with 62 new fatalities being recorded.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 20,2020

Washington, Jun 20: American actor Angelina Jolie has now opened up about her 2016 divorce announcement with Brad Pitt, which shocked fans.

Fox News said the 45-year-old Jolie opened up about leaving the father of her six kids,18-year-old Maddox, 16-year-old Pax, 15-year-old Zahara, 12-year-old, Shiloh, and 11-year-old twins Knox and Vivienne.

"I separated for the well-being of my family. It was the right decision. I continue to focus on their healing," the Oscar-winning star told Vogue India magazine.

The 'Maleficent' star added, "Some have taken advantage of my silence, and the children see lies about themselves in the media, but I remind them that they know their own truth and their own minds. In fact, they are six very brave, very strong young people."

Since 2004, Pitt and Jolie were together but only married in August 2014 at their estate in France.

The 'Mr and Mrs Smith' star previously told Harper's Bazaar magazine how the last few years have been physically, emotionally and mentally turbulent for her.

"My body has been through a lot over the past decade, particularly the past four years, and I have both the visible and invisible scars to show for it," Jolie said.

"The invisible ones are harder to wrestle with. Life takes many turns. Sometimes you get hurt, you see those you love in pain, and you can't be as free and open as your spirit desires. It's not new or old, but I do feel the blood returning to my body," she added.

Besides her marriage ending on the public stage, Jolie underwent a preventative double mastectomy in 2013 followed by breast reconstruction after testing positive for the BRCA gene. In 2015, the actor 'Girl, Interrupted' star also had her ovaries and fallopian tubes removed.

She admitted it has taken a while for her to feel like her old self. She said, "The part of us that is free, wild, open, curious can get shut down by life. By pain or by harm."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.