Blogs

  • News
  • |
  • Art
  • |
  • History
  • |
  • Food and Travel
  • |
  • Science
Dinosaur Tracking

Where paleontology meets pop culture

Hominid Hunting

Meet the members of the tangled human family tree

Innovations

How human ingenuity is changing the way we live

Surprising Science

Ideas, news and discoveries from the world of science


August 7, 2012

Should We Go Back to Jurassic Park?

Almost 20 years after the first film debuted, rumor has it that we’ll soon see a fourth Jurassic Park film.

It’s finally happening. After years of rumors, including speculation and consternation about Black Ops raptors, it seems that Jurassic Park 4 is actually going to happen. According to the latest news, writers Amanda Silver and Rick Jaffa are working on the script, and producer Frank Marshall has said that he’d like to see the film hit screens by the summer of 2014. That’s awfully soon, so I can only imagine that we’re going to be hearing a lot more about the fourth film in the dinosaur-filled franchise soon. The only thing we know for sure? Despite rumors that have been circulating for years, the sequel will not feature “weaponized dinosaurs.”

I’m of two minds about the news. I saw the first Jurassic Park film when I was ten, and it only concentrated my love of dinosaurs. I had never seen anything like it before, and I was shocked by how realistic the dinosaurs looked (especially compared to the stop-motion creatures that perpetually stampeded across basic cable monster movie marathons). I was young enough to enjoy the adventurous spirit of the second movie without thinking too much, and, like many others, I was let down by the third installment. Given the franchise left us on a sour note, and it has been almost a decade since Jurassic Park III came out, I have to wonder if we really should go back to those dinosaur-infested islands. Or, to paraphrase Ian Malcolm’s admonition from the first movie, perhaps the filmmakers should stop thinking about whether they could make another Jurassic Park and start thinking about whether they should.

Don’t get me wrong. If and when Jurassic Park 4 hits theaters, I’ll see it. I can’t stay away from silver screen dinosaurs. The question is whether the sequel is going to revive the franchise, or whether I’ll be sitting there in the dim auditorium, facepalming the whole time. The difference isn’t going to be in how much screentime the dinosaurs get, or how well-rendered they are, but how the filmmakers employ the dinosaurs.

Monsters only work if they mean something. There has to be something more to them than just their ability to eat you. Godzilla is iconic because he embodied the nuclear atrocities unleashed on Japan by the United States; Frankenstein was a tragic creature that reflected our fear of the unknown and the power of science; and the dinosaurs of the original Jurassic Park made us question whether the world is really ours, or was just ceded to us by a stroke a cosmic luck that wiped out Tyrannosaurus and friends. The second and third Jurassic Park films faltered because they forgot the symbolic power monsters hold–the dinosaurs simply became sharp-toothed aberrations that had to be escaped, and that’s all. The dinosaurs didn’t lead us to question or reexamine anything about how we interact with the world. If Jurassic Park 4 is going to outshine the other installments, its creators have to think of what dinosaurs mean, not just the devastation dinosaurs can cause.

Unless the writers, director and producers of the next installment have something truly original planned, maybe we should just let sleeping Velociraptor lie. The watered-down “don’t mess with nature” storyline of the first movie was standard moralistic claptrap, but that didn’t matter because audiences had never seen dinosaurs like that before. I was blown away when I saw the movie during opening weekend–Stan Winston and the assembled team of special effects artists had made the closest thing to living Tyrannosaurus and Velociraptor that I had ever seen. You can only pull that trick once. The franchise tried to spice things up with a second island, a scientific expedition, dueling egos and more imperiled children–Steven Spielberg’s favorite kind–in the following two movies, but, by the end, the series just felt tired. Despite all the effort put into envisioning and recreating the dinosaurs, the filmmakers seemingly had no idea what to do with them, and so we reverted to a big-budget version of the yarns I used to create with dinosaur toys in my sandbox as a child. If the dinosaurs don’t have a purpose–some lesson that they can teach us–then perhaps we should just leave them alone on their island.

Let’s be optimistic, though. I truly hope that the scribes behind the new story have something novel in mind. And I’m sure Universal knows all too well what can happen if sequels aren’t carefully planned. Look what happened to another blockbuster monster franchise spawned by Spielberg–JAWS. The first film is a classic, the second is acceptable popcorn fun, the third is a moronic gimmick film that’s still worth riffing on after a drink or two and the fourth is an abomination that will forever stain the career of Michael Caine. Spielberg was wise to duck out early. What else can you really do with a giant, human-chomping shark who relies on the stupidity of people to feed? I feel we’re approaching the same point with the Jurassic Park series, if we’re not there already. I adore dinosaurs–there’s no question of that–but I’d hate to see them brought back to life simply to be mindless Hollywood contrivances whose only role is to virtually menace our protagonists.

Provided that Marshall’s ambitious timeline is on the mark, we’ll see Jurassic Park 4 in a few years. All the same, I’d hate to see one franchise with a relatively narrowed set of storytelling options monopolize silver screen dinosaurs. The time is ripe for new ideas, or a more nuanced take on classic plots like the ever-useful “lost world” storyline. Why not give Ray Bradbury’s classic “A Sound of Thunder” another try (with some real effort this time, please) or, even better, expand S.N. Dyer’s “The Last Thunder Horse West of the Mississippi”, about what happens when 19th-century paleontologists E.D. Cope and O.C. Marsh race to capture the world’s last-surviving sauropod. There’s a vast literature out there, ready to be mined, not to mention whatever original ideas screenwriters might concoct. The point is this–rather than holding our breaths for another Jurassic Park, perhaps filmmakers should start exploring dinosaur tales that reflect our collective hopes and fears.

Dinosaurs will continue to roar and stomp across the screen for many years to come. Whether it’s in a Jurassic Park sequel, a comic book adaptation, a remake or something else, dinosaurs are too popular and bizarre to rest for long. They’re perfect monsters. What we should remember, though, is that the most wonderful and terrible monsters are the ones that help us put our world in context. In one way or another, they change the way we perceive our relationship with the world around us. Teeth and claws are their weapons, but, to be truly effective, those weapons have to be given a reason to inflict the awful damage they evolved to do.



***

Sign up for our free email newsletter and receive the best stories from Smithsonian.com each week.

15 Comments »

  1. HP says:

    Instead of Jurassic Park IV, considering all we’ve learned about dinosaurs in the intervening decades, why not a reboot?

    Do you know L. Sprague de Camp’s “A Gun for Dinosaur”? It’s classic 1950s SF about time-traveling big-game hunters (shades of “Thunder”), but de Camp takes it in a different direction, a sort of Men’s Adventure pulp story with a twist. AFAIK, it’s never been brought to the screen.

  2. Decimus says:

    As much as I love Jurassic Park, after the last movie I have trouble having much hope for a fourth.

    There’s plenty of other books or even fresh ideas out there to be had.

    ‘Raptor Red’ had been tossed around as a movie idea a while ago, which I expect could work if taken seriously and made by the right set of people, sort of a Mesozoic equivalent of ‘Quest For Fire’.

    A lesser known book I rather enjoyed was ‘Cretaceous Dawn’. The creative license the authors use on some of the Dinosaurs in the book aside, it’s a fun book about time travel and could make a good movie.

    Similarly, ‘Bones of the Earth’ is an interesting book also involving time travel.

  3. Cody Burkett says:

    I seem to remember a short story somewhere about cowboys (or maybe just buffalo hunters) trying to hunt a Triceratops which was living in a herd of Bison in the American West as well; that would be a nice homage to “The Valley of Gwangi” if someone produced that.

    Wish I could remember the author and the title of the story, though. Was 10 when I read it.

  4. Herman Diaz says:

    “What we should remember, though, is that the most wonderful and terrible monsters are the ones that help us put our world in context. In one way or another, they change the way we perceive our relationship with the world around us. Teeth and claws are their weapons, but, to be truly effective, those weapons have to be given a reason to inflict the awful damage they evolved to do.”

    That’s partly why Raptor Red should be made into a movie (E.g. See the following quote).

    Quoting Noe ( http://www.ctraces.com/Circuit_Traces/CT2_1/raptor.html ): “It is never erotica since “the act” was a perfunctory once-a-year matter of seconds. Both male and female Utahraptors focused on relationships rather than sex. Perhaps “Raptor Family Values” (the title of a final chapter) possesses a quaint special appeal in today’s social climate.”

  5. Walter says:

    As much as I hate Hollywood’s current obsession with remakes, I’ve always wanted to see a Jurassic Park film that was faithful to the novel. Plus CGI has advanced considerably since 1993–today you can create a film that is visually much greater in scope.

    That said, an original dinosaur film would be a welcome change from another remake. Greg Bear’s “Dinosaur Summer” is a good candidate. While far from his best work, there is a nice framework there for building an enjoyable movie. The comic “Xenozoic Tales” (aka “Cadillacs and Dinosaurs”) has plenty of great material for a series of movies, even if its premise is a little on the wild side. (But no more than most comic book movies.)

    Or how about a “time travelers hunt dinosaurs” movie? I didn’t care much for David Gerrold’s “Deathbeast” — a book filled with stupid, unlikable characters — but the basic plot about a hunt for a T. rex going horribly wrong would be a fun one to explore. L. Sprague de Camp and David Drake also penned some decent dinosaur hunting stories.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Should we go back to Jurassic Park? No. Will we go back to Jurassic Park? Yes. For one simple reason, money. Simply put, Jurassic Park has instant recognition, which will always put it before other dinosaur-based movies.

    Another reason is Jurassic Park was essentially the easiest way to get humans and dinosaurs together and still remain relatively realistic. Lost worlds have generally fallen out of favor now that we know the location of nearly every landmass on the planet, and time travel tends to not only be “soft” science, but tends to get tied up in ontological paradoxes (case in point, Ray Bradbury’s “A Sound of Thunder”). But now that we know more about cloning and genetics, Jurassic Park would be a lot harder to pull off.

    As for Raptor Red and the “Rivers of Time” series (a.k.a. A Gun For a Dinosaur), oh man, don’t get me excited about adapting such awesome series. Someone actually tried to adapt A Gun For a Dinosaur once, though they changed the setting from Turonian Missouri (which would have been a lot different than de Camp portrayed it), and moved it to the middle Cretaceous fauna with Giganotosaurus (well, the form that’s now Mapusaurus) and Argentinosaurus.

  7. Dan says:

    Well, over the years, several Jurassic Park comic series have been hitting comic book stores and these stories are rather recent. They have good plots and actually portray feathered dinos, best of both worlds! Perhaps some of the writers for the 4th film can look to those for examples. Also, Telltale’s game, Jurassic Park, did a great job going back to that first film and adding to it! It was a true sequel! (Or more like a behind the scenes). I wouldn’t be upset if that became the fourth film. A prequel/behind the scenes film. But, I definitely this is true this time. Ever since 2001, I’ve had my face glued to my computer screen looking for the slightest news about the future sequel. Alas, here we are. 11 years later and I pray that this time is the real deal! And with all the video games and comic books I see…I think Jurassic Park is coming back! Hopefully for that brand new trilogy Joe Johnston promised early last year. All I want to see…are some marine dinos and have them explain how that’s possible. Be creative!

  8. Mark Robinson says:

    @Cody – you’re prob thinking of “Flesh” or a rip-off, sorry “homage”, of it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesh_(comics)

  9. Babbletrish says:

    Hoo, I got a LOT to say about this subject. XD

    Yeah, at this age, I don’t even know if I really even want a fourth “Jurassic Park”. (A) There’s a lot of good dinosaur-involving fiction (yay “Dinosaur Summer”!) yet to be adapted and (B) isn’t it about time we show some other geological periods some love?

    There are only two scenarios a fourth “Jurassic Park” could do that would be at all interesting:

    1) My “dream” JP sequel: BBC Earth goes to the island to film a documentary and (here’s the twist) because they are professionals, NOTHING goes wrong. Nobody does anything stupid and the humans and dinosaurs essentially leave each-other alone. The documentary team leaves the island in peace and the rest of the movie is their documentary.

    2) Prequel! I’m serious. This may be one of the few franchises where the story of how they got where they are in the original movie might work. What story did John Hammond tell the Costa Rican government? What was it like raising the dinosaurs to adulthood? Just how did they learn the velociraptors and pterosaurs were so dangerous? WHY did they settle on frog DNA when they had all those emu and ostrich eggs lying around? There’s a lot of fascinating stuff to be mined from the original books too.

    I would love, I would love love love a good book-accurate animated Raptor Red adaptation. If Luis Rey was brought on as visual consultant and Dr. Bakker had the last word on every decision the studio makes? Hell and yes.

    Unfortunately, the only studios I can ever see pulling such a crazy, barely marketable, uncommercial thing off are the team who did “Watership Down”, the team who did “The Last Unicorn”, and *maybe* Don Bluth or DreamWorks in their respective early “Doing it for the ART” stage. As it stands, we’d probably just get an even more painful version of “Disney’s Dinosaur”, so why bother?

    As an aside, there’s also a story in the anthology, _The Ultimate Dinosaur_ entitled “The Green Buffalo” with the general plot Cody’s describing.

  10. Aaron says:

    We know one thing… Pixar is working on a dinosaur movie. Could it be “Raptor Red”?

    Babbletrish’s Prequel idea sounds great to me. I’d love to see that. People need to remember though… part of the reason Jurassic Park was so good, was because of our age at the time.

    Supposedly the writers of 4 say it’s going to be nothing like the others which at least gives us hope of something enjoyable. Let’s imagine JP movies like Batman movies or the James Bond series :)

    Lastly, let me throw my dinosaur movie idea into the mix…

    Many comments have been made here about how much better the CG is today versus ’93. I also saw some great dinosaur artwork on this website…looked REAL. At what point can society not discern between real and man made illusions?

    We currently rely on our 5 senses, maybe a 6th, to ground us in reality, to live in this world and experience it in a way that we know is real, that keeps us sane. These senses go back to the beginning of man. Are they close to being obsolete? What happens when we create a world where the senses don’t keep us safe any longer? Can I trust anything on the internet? Did that politician REALLY commit a crime? I see proof, but can I believe my own eyes? Every generation relies on the previous generation to get a first hand account of the truth. How precious is that?

    How about a movie where a company convinces an entire future generation that dinosaurs DO actually exist and that they always have. Think of the monetary potential for the company to control a story line like that.

    Create from that an adventure movie where a group of children set out for “dinosaur island,” only to find there are no dinosaurs, and I think it makes for a great dinosaur movie. At what point are they certain the dinosaurs don’t exist? Were they better off to have believed in something false? So many great societal questions to consider.

    What does everyone think?

    I said this in an earlier post. I’m a small time director, but if any millionaires want to team up, let’s make a dino movie together :D

  11. Jordan says:

    Um…am I the only one who enjoyed JP3? Then again I am as fanboy as they get…I say keep them coming…even if they only have the same plot. I just love it. I think people are WAY to critical of everything in life…it is meant for entertainment purposes, not every film has to give us meaning. I think people (like who wrote this story) forget there are other people (let’s say 50/50) who enjoy senseless, no real story, choming dinosaurs! When I see an indie film or a serious one, I expect a brilliant plot, but this is JP not Erin Brockovich

  12. I am so sad that we won’t get to see John Sayles’ weaponized raptors draft get made. It sounded insanely entertaining.

  13. Gee. I always enjoyed the Cretaceous, myself. Oh wait.. why, there IS a book about how InGen got started… but I can’t find a literary agent who is interested!
    In the meantime, come visit us at Cretaceousland!

  14. Don Druid says:

    Why not another theater-release shot at Doyle’s “The Lost World”? Clean up some of the outdated science and portrayals, and you have a winner that rides the coattails of the current Sherlock Holmes craze.

  15. Craig says:

    As for the dig at “Michael Caine” I think the author meant Michel Crichton, or did I miss the sometimes ubiquitous Mr. C in J III ?

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until Smithsonian.com has approved them. Smithsonian reserves the right not to post any comments that are unlawful, threatening, offensive, defamatory, invasive of a person's privacy, inappropriate, confidential or proprietary, political messages, product endorsements, or other content that might otherwise violate any laws or policies.

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free

Advertisement



Follow Us

Travel with Smithsonian






Advertisement