Jurassic World Rebirth
Review
I watched Jurassic World rebirth last night, and I have to admit I was rather disappointed. I was looking forward to this film after the disaster that was Dominion, and I thought from the trailers that it would be a refreshing return to form. In some ways, that was true. It involves a cast of characters surviving dinosaurs on an island. However, the movie is so shallow and boring that it completely fails to utilize its premise in any meaningful way.
Putting the flat characters, bizarre pacing, anticlimactic ending, and myriad other flaws aside, I think my main gripe with this movie is its use of the mutant hybrids. This is not because I think the idea of mutant dinosaurs is bad, not even close. In fact, the reason I left the theater so disappointed is precisely because the idea of mutant dinosaurs is, in my opinion, an excellent concept to explore with this franchise.
Something that isn’t really talked about in the JP franchise is the fact that these creatures are not actually dinosaurs. They are imitation dinosaurs, just creatures that resemble them. They are fundamentally unnatural. I heard a fantastic description of this once; it went something like this: These aren’t dinosaurs, they’re monsters wearing dinosaur skin. I think that this idea, the idea that the dinosaurs of the JP franchise are just monsters masquerading as prehistoric animals really had some potential, specifically when you decide to shed some light on the inevitable failures that come with genetic experimentation. Before they could clone a perfect velociraptor, they had to have had several failed experiments. Creatures that were close, but not quite right.
I think this, the “not quite”-ness of mutant dinosaurs is something that was criminally underutilized in this film. Tapping into the uncanny valley would have really given this film some real legs to stand on in terms of horror and creativity. Take the Distortus Rex, for example. In the film, it is an attempt at making a hybrid Tyrannosaurus created by Ingen for Jurassic World, being one of their first forays into genetic hybridization. It has deformities such as a bulbous growth on its head and two additional limbs. Personally, I think the idea of a mutated T-Rex is fantastic. However, the design of the creature is disappointingly lackluster. It looks far too intentional, like it was designed (which makes sense). Instead of looking like a genetic monstrosity, it looks just like a generic movie monster. The design would have been greatly elevated if the creature was more misshapen and asymmetrical; the arms should not have been the same length, the muscles should have been malformed and spasming, its eyes should have been bulging and bloodshot. It should be apparent that this creature is a failure.
The D-Rex did not have to be the only example of the results of this imperfect experimentation, either. I think the movie would have been improved by having the other existing dinosaurs on the island be similarly unnatural-looking, albeit to a lesser extent. If all the dinosaurs present throughout the film were shown to be somehow “not quite right,” it would make the payoff of the D-Rex’s full reveal at the end that much more impactful. Maybe the dilophosaurus could have had misshapen frills, or the T-Rex could have had extra digits on its feet, or the Titanosaurus could have had extra eyes. Small details like that could have really helped instill a sense of uneasiness throughout the film. These animals are still here, but not quite how you remember them. Of course, this tonal shift would have to be supported by similar shifts in the character writing and pacing of the story, but I think if the film took a more horror-centric route (something fans have been wanting for a long time), this could have been one of the best JP films in a long time.
By tapping into the uncanny valley through mutant dinosaurs, this movie could have really been something special for the franchise. The D-Rex and the Mutadons could have been striking examples of the cost of scientific progress: animals that suffer under the weight of their own unnatural existence. The Indominus Rex was the first example of this, but these new mutants could have really tapped into the potential of that concept to a greater level.
Rewrite Concept
The film’s main thesis will be the overreliance on nostalgia bait and the drought of creativity in the modern media landscape and how it hurts creatives and the audience.
I think the existing premise that dinosaurs are going extinct again and that they need to go and retrieve DNA samples from dinosaurs from an island could still work, especially if there was some plot point about how Ingen’s original genetic blueprints for the dinosaurs were destroyed or lost or something, thereby making it necessary to visit the existing ones instead of just creating new ones. However, I think a major change would be that the island they visit was actually the testing facility for the original 1993 Jurassic Park. This would represent how modern films try to recapture the magic of the original by going back and literally retreading the old ground of the originals. However, the main point of the movie will be that when they go back and attempt to revisit old concepts (the original facility), the dinosaurs there have bred and further mutated in the several decades since their creation (key point: the mutants are not hybrids designed by Ingen at all, they are just failed experimental dinosaurs from the early days of Ingen’s testing that have reproduced and further mutated). In trying to do what made the original so special, the results only come out as malformed and uncanny, hollow recreations of a richer time. Some are clearly monstrous, while others are just ever so slightly “not quite right.” Some have extra features, some are missing parts, and all around the creatures just look off.
The film would culminate in the reveal of the Distortus Rex, the result of decades of reiteration and regurgitation, a bastardized version of the original poster child for the franchise. During its reveal, the creature attempts to roar, emulating the iconic pose of the original 1993 T-Rex in the visitor center, but it spams and seizes, falling to the ground, disoriented and in pain from its own attempt to assert itself. It is a threat only through sheer size and power; it has no nuance or forethought.
These mutated, distorted creatures are suffering due to their own existence, a commentary on how old ideas are drawn out, “kept alive,” in a sense, much longer than what they were meant for. These old ideas, the ones that were once so fresh and bold, are now tired and stale. The audience should feel bad for the D-Rex, as it is an icon of something so brilliant and powerful, now reduced to a shambling, suffering abomination, representing the Jurassic Park franchise as a whole; something once so bold and fresh, now a shallow mockery of what it once was, messily regurgitating old ideas with no direction or intentionality.
In addition to these changes regarding the mutants, there need to be several changes to the characters. I think something that could be really subversive is having characters that are clearly based off of characters from the original, in addition to a character or two that are refreshingly new. The reason why this has the potential to be subversive and thematically interesting is because you could choose to kill off the new character concepts, instead letting the old, rehashed concepts survive. For example, Dr. Loomis would be much more clearly based off of Dr. Malcolm, and Duncan Kinkade would be clearly inspired by Muldoon. By contrast, Zora Bennett could be more unique, perhaps someone who loved dinosaurs and is reluctant to exploit them, but feels she has an obligation to complete her job for some character backstory reason (potential representation of media creatives who are railroaded into producing shallow stories by studio executives?). I think having the D-Rex kill off Bennett before she has a chance to fulfill her character arc would make for a very interesting ending. It would symbolize the idea that reusing old concepts ends up suffocating new ones that don’t have a chance to shine. The rehashed T-Rex killing off the original character would not be satisfying for the audience at all, but that’s the point. You should feel upset that Bennett was killed off before she could complete her arc, you should feel disappointed that the D-Rex unceremoniously ended her potential. Whether or not this is some super cool and subversive writing choice, or just stupid, I’m not sure, but I think it’s definitely interesting.
Also, there need to be real stakes in the film. One of my biggest complaints was that Duncan somehow survived his encounter with the D-Rex, making his sacrifice completely void and meaningless. I think the characters should be significantly in danger, sustaining serious injuries along the way. The characters need to have real fear of their situation, not just screaming at seeing a scary monster. If the characters have genuine terror and a will to survive, the audience will feel that tension and suspense, they will become attached to these characters. For example, if Dr. Loomis’ glasses shattered somehow, that would render him effectively blind. If the terror of losing your vision in a situation like the one Loomis is in would be properly communicated, the audience would surely feel the fear that he does and become more attached and immersed. Perhaps a scene from Loomis’ perspective, showing blurry snippets of what appear to be creatures moving in the dark, silhouettes and flashes of white teeth as a human figure leads you by the hand to what you can only hope is safety. Something like this really has the potential to make a big difference on the audience experience. These real injuries and setbacks would really ground these characters in the world of the film, adding depth and stakes.