What happens when a director takes a sequel in a new direction compared to its original film?
There have been countless sequels over the years that are just cheap carbon copies of the original. The Hangover Part II is a prime example of that. But what a sequel should do is shake things up and offer something that builds off the original instead. For many franchises, it takes getting a different director behind the camera. James Cameroon took over Aliens which he took in a new direction making it more action-oriented and on a bigger scale. Martin Scorsese took on The Color of Money and offered up his own style to this long-gestating follow-up. There could even be a stylistic shift with something like Blade II which finds Guillermo del Toro taking his stab at the vampire hunter franchise. But sometimes a director themselves realizes that the story must be shaken up and taken into new directions and styles. Case in point…The Lost World: Jurassic Park.
Before we dive into the second film in this franchise, what is the state of Jurassic Park/World?
Not great now. The rebooted franchise has done a lot to undermine the fantastic legacy of Jurassic Park. The characters are shallow and the over-reliance on CGI has taken much of the magic away. But the worst part of it all is that the logic and sharpness present in the original have long since passed. But before the reboot, we had two direct sequels. Obviously, we will spend plenty of time on The Lost World but there was a third film in the form of Jurassic Park III. This film took things in a single-minded direction which was to make a 90-minute monster movie with dinosaurs in it. That film succeeded in that, but it really fell flat for many (especially with the lack of Spielberg).
Why is The Lost World: Jurassic Park so different from Jurassic Park?
The most obvious and important reason is that Spielberg himself shifted the tone of the film. One of the most defining features of the original film was the build-up and care to make sure that this felt like a wondrous and moving experience. There was so much wonder to behold in this story. We were seeing dinosaurs for the first time on screen (in all their animatronic glory). But four years later, the novelty is gone. This would not be the first-time moviegoers saw them. Spielberg knew to move past the shock and wonder and move into the realization that the danger is serious. The tone nails that well. This is a darker and grittier film that honestly captures a bit more of the spirit that Michael Crichton brought to his original novel.
Visually, why has the film shifted so much?
A change in cinematographer can make such a drastic difference. With Schindler’s List, the dawn of one of the most significant modern director/DP pairings began. Janus Kaminski became the orchestrator of Spielberg’s new visual palette. Gone were the bright and rich colors of the original Jurassic Park. Kaminski’s visuals are much more focused on a grayer scale and bright, sharper lighting. You can tell from the opening scene with the young girl that there are no moments of sharp bright colors. This matches the darker tone so much better as well. There is a scene where Ian Malcolm is summoned by John Hammond and this scene alone screams Kaminski’s work (the brightness of the window from the lights and the gradient of the colors is quite noticeable. This is no longer a bright and vibrant world of wonder. This is a stark and stoic look at the consequences of human arrogance.
Do we have one more?
The genre is a bit of a shift for this film as well. Of course, we still deal with the noticeable science fiction elements (recreating dead animals) as well as the sci-fi themes (the folly of humankind amongst others). Where The Lost World shifts are that there is a ton more action. This is much more of a big-budget thrill ride than the original film. The original has its iconic moments of action but the need for the biggest action set pieces this time around also shifts the needs on the special effects end. There are a lot more CGI dinosaurs this time around (which does affect the feel) because that is a lot more asked of them. There are multiple stampedes, including the thrilling introduction to the InGen crew on the island as they hunt for various dinosaurs. We have the surprisingly long set piece of Malcolm and his crew hanging for their lives as a pair of T-Rex parents search for their child. The craziest set piece of course is San Diego as The Lost World is the first in the franchise to bring the dinosaurs to our front door. This was such a bold choice and reframed the experience in the franchise.
Most of these elements are bold and exciting choices but where does The Lost World come up short?
Characters. There is a lot more depth for Malcolm at least. He was more of a performance wrapped around a lot of ideas in the original. There was one small allusion to his children but this time around, we get to spend time with one of them. She is fun and intelligent and works as a good way to deepen Malcolm as a character. For a child in a film like this, she is not annoying or gets in the way (even if using her gymnastic skills is silly and completely out of place in an overall weak slapstick-heavy sequence). Malcolm’s partner, Sarah Harding, is a resourceful if not too interesting addition. But kudos to Julianne Moore who brings all the personality she can into the character. A young Vince Vaughn and Richard Schiff are solid pieces but generally are not memorable. The challenge? Everyone in the original film was interesting in their own way. That is a hard place to deliver at. The antagonists (in general) are flat and stereotypical…except Roland Tembo.
Tembo is a big game hunter who has a distinct moral code, some genuine humanity, and sharp resourcefulness which makes for a character who could have been an intriguing antihero in his own film. But here he adds some complexity to an overall black and white narrative (which is disappointing since the film itself leans so much into the gray).
Pete Postlethwaite brings so much to this role that is already interesting.
This is one of the most underappreciated actors of all time and he soars in this film. Too bad he disappears after only two acts.
Does the screenplay match up?
Not quite. There are more illogical moments sprinkled throughout this film and some downright silly moments. Those sillier moments stick out like a sore thumb for a film going for a darker and more serious tone. Along with the flat characters, many human tensions are unmined by underwritten motivations. InGen is a lot less interesting this time around. Their plan to open a “Sea World” type park in San Diego is inspired but their motivations are considerably more surface level. Money. That’s it. John Hammond had more to his motivations. The ambitious. The drive. The imagination that drives his dreams. His nephew is paper thin and super basic. There is a lot less depth in the screenplay when it comes to the philosophical aspects of the film. Jurassic Park is rich in so many themes and ideas to chew on in between all the dinosaur wonder. This time around, it is all about the action and danger. This is much more of a monster movie than the original and unfortunately, that does not do right by the film.
Is The Lost World: Jurassic Park a worthy sequel to the original?
This is certainly the second best in this famous franchise and deserves a rewatch from many who might not have given it a fair shake.
Tweet
There is probably a bit of disappointment for many as it does not deliver on the level of Spielberg’s first outing. But Jurassic Park is a near-perfect masterpiece of genre filmmaking. It is an unfair comparison in many ways. A lot should be said about what works in The Lost World. The action is exciting, and Malcolm’s journey is something we can attach to. There is still heart and soul in this film which is unfortunately absent from all the Jurassic World films.
