Jurassic World (Probably Contains Spoilers)

[Scott]

I went and saw this last week. I was expecting to be disappointed, and maybe that's why I wasn't. It wasn't a great movie, but it was entertaining. I was a big fan of Michael Crichton, and Jurassic Park was an excellent novel. The original movie captured a lot of the depth of the novel. It was very good science fiction. Jurassic World is more like a toned down Godzilla movie. A very expensive ('spared no expense'), well directed (for the most part) Godzilla movie.The main human antagonist is super cliche. As is the plot device where the kids' guardian/aunt is so driven work obsessed she's negligent blah, blah, blah. Some of the humanizing of the dinosaurs could cause eye rolls too.
I saw the 3D version and it was excellent.

[GRWelsh]

If it is better than 2 and 3 but not as good as the original, that will be good enough for me. I also loved the original Crichton book, and thought the original movie did it justice, for the most part -- especially capturing the overall theme of "just because you can do something doesn't mean you should." The sequels merely seem to have the theme of "I want to see dinosaurs eat people."

[Scott]

That was my opinion. Not as good as JP, but much better than the other sequels. Just remove any Crichton expectations and go see it as a rampaging dinosaur movie.