I know many, many people hate this movie. I get it. The gymnastic part is awful. The fact that they don’t kill the T-Rex at the end is disappointing. The dinosaurs are just movie monsters and not animals and as such the film lacks the awe and wonder of the first. I know. I know. If you hate The Lost World, make no mistake, I understand. There is plenty to hate. But I still totally dig it.

For me, there’s so much that works. I love Goldblum as the lead. I think he is an unlikely hero who proves charismatic throughout the whole film. Pete Postlethwaite is awesome as the game hunter leading the merc’s who are trying to capture the dinos. Julianne Moore is a fine female lead; and other than Vince Vaughn who just does nothing for me, I was pleased with the other choices–even the little girl didn’t bug me (I actually loved the gymnastics part the first time I saw the film in high school).

Beyond the actors, however, I also love the sequences with the dinos. The scene wherein the moving command center is destroyed is fantastic. The scene with the Raptors in the tall grass was terrifying, and I even loved that the T-Rex comes to San Diego. I mean, if one is looking at JP: The Lost World as more of a top-notch monster horror than the dramatic sci-fi film the first was, Lost World really knocks the ball out of the park. There’s carnage and tension and monsters and thrills and spills. It just works (for me anyway). Plus, the two teams each with their own cool missions coming together just to survive also was a story structure that worked for me and kept me interested from the build-up through the pay-off. So, yeah, I dig it.

Jurassic Park: The Lost World fulfills all I expect and want from a genre monster movie. Sure, it is not the same type of movie as its predecessor; but for what it actually is, I dig it, and I am going to go out on a limb and give it a 6 (out of 7). Not one of my all time favorites, but I can’t think of another monster movie I enjoy more (unless you consider Predator and Aliens monster movies; they are both much better).

Jaws 2 has more shark than its predecessor but not nearly as much bite. Trading up fantastic characters for archetypical characterizations, Jaws 2 has a great deal more to follow but much less to actually care about. Yes, you “care” in part about a handful of people, but I’ll be honest, the amount of care and concern I had for 3 main characters in the first movie was exponentially greater than my concern for the dozen or so characters in the second. The only central player from the first movie to return is Martin Brody, the town sheriff; and he’s great; but other than that, the characters in peril are uninteresting teenagers.

This new dynamic really works against the movie. Yes, there are some cool shark attacks, and, yes, the way that “jaws” gets it in the end is crazy good; but that’s really all the movie offers. It’s not as engaging or interesting; it’s just kinda, well, called-in, which is the sad norm for sequels. The story is the same as the first, only Sheriff Brody is fired over his reaction to the possible shark problem, and the big showdown with the shark happens during an attack on a group of teens on catamarans.

So, that’s that. Look, I’ll be honest. I didn’t hate this movie, not in the least, but it is a B-rate movie with an A-list budget. Given how good the original Jaws is, I see no need for this movie (of course it was for money, and that’s fine); and I see no need to re-watch it. Frankly, if you haven’t seen it, but you want to. I would recommend just watching the original again.

Jaws 2 gets a 3 from me!

Jaws is the definitive “Shark” movie. Many have come since it, but it’s really the best in its class. Why? It’s human characters. Not the shark, but the characters. Yeah, the mechanical behemoth that is “Jaws” is cool, and the live shark footage from Australia is awesome. But these things aside, it’s Martin Brody, Matt Hooper, and Quint the dirty shark hunter that make Jaws worth watching.

These characters carry this film in a very real way, and what I mean by that is this: The story of Jaws could easily be remade on a B-list budget with different actors and less developed characters and be unbearable. UN-bearable. The performances in this movie, primarily from Robert Shaw and Richard Dreyfuss are uncannily good. I mean, it’s like they are not even acting, it’s like Spielberg actually found these Shark specialist and this old man of the sea. If nothing else, Jaws is an exceptional case study on the importance of characters and actors in film.

But Jaws is more than that. It IS a well-shot, well-told figure. This is one of Speilberg’s earlier projects, and I think it’s one of his best. For what he had to work with, he did something spectacular and, I would argue, endearing despite the dated clothing, haircuts, and effects. I didn’t really summarize the plot before, so I’ll do it quickly here: A shark terrorizes an island town dependant on the summer vacationers for its livelihood. This being the case, the town sheriff, Martin Brody, enlists an old fisherman and shark specialist to hunt the beast.

I am giving Jaws a 6. It’s great. It’s really, really great, not one ofmy favorite movies ever but great none the less. BIG 6 for Jaws

Jurassic Park was one of the most anticipate movies of my life. Because of the toys. When I first discovered the Young T-Rex Dino with battle damage removable flesh in the aisle of Toys R’ Us back in 1993, I knew JP was a place I would want to go, and when I went for the first time in 1993, I was terrified and awed. I thought Dinosaurs were real, and I loved it.

Needless to say, Dino’s aren’t living today, and this was later made abundantly clear to me, which is sad. But I still have an affinity for the movie that was, to me, the greatest special effects summer blockbuster to date. Even now, re-visiting the film as an adult, I am awed and amazed—not at the idea that dinosaurs are real and living today but at the marvel of technology to create them. The dinosaurs in this movie are unlike any type of onscreen beast I have ever seen. They could very well still be real, and the government is forcing the filmmakers to say they’re CG. Yes, I think the Dino’s are that good in this movie.

And surprisingly, they are not the best part. The story, the concept, is the best part. It’s fascinating, moving, and truly engaging from start to finish. The idea of cloning dinosaurs is great. The capitalistic result of that, making them attractions, is fascinating; and the resulting horror is terrifying. Taking these elements and uniting them cohesively could have resulted in B-moive cheese, but Jurassic Park unites them perfectly. Frankly, this may be one of the greatest screenplays I’ve seen on-the-screen. What I mean by that is that I, as a pseudo-writer wannabe, believe the structure, timing cues, and development of the plot and characters is about as perfect as a script gets. Even very minor characters get us emotionally vested, either for or against them.

All that being said, Jurassic Park gets an easy 7 from me. It’s one of my all-time favorite films, plain and simple.

Jackie Brown is to Tarantino what Unbreakable is to Shamaylan. It’s that initial follow-up to that definitive, name-making hit that is constantly the standard for the director despite anything he attempts following it. For many, when comparing the hit Pulp Fiction to theJackie Brown, many find the latter to be slow, overly talky and mundane in every sense of the word. For those people, I feel great sadness. For, I actually find that Jackie Brown is not only a better film than Pulp Fiction but also a more enjoyable one.

Jackie Brown follows the story of a woman of the same name, down on her luck and in her 40s, who transports money for a gun-runner via her job as a stewardess on a crappy airline that goes only from the US to Mexico. When she is discovered by the ATF Administration gency (Alcohol, Tobacco, & Firearms),however, she is forced to cooperate with them so that they can catch the gun-runner. Meanwhile, the gun-runner is attempting the biggest move of his life, a half-million dollars from Cabo San lucas to L.A. In a Bind, Jackie decides to steal the money for herself, playing both the ATF and the gun-runner. She does this with the aid of Bail-bondsman Max Cherry.

So, that’s a pretty cool premise for a crime caper. it features a sympathetic hero, antagonists on both sides of the law and some colorful supporting characters. Should be a great flic, right? YES, and IT IS. In fact, I would say that Tarantino’s Jackie Brown is one of the few perfect movies to have ever been made. There is nothing in this movie that could have been done better, nothing that could ahve been added or subtracted in order to make it better. As far as I can tell during my viewings, Jackie Brown is perfect. The chaaracters, the dialogue, the plotting, the pacing, the music, the shot selection. I would not change a thing in this movie (maybe remove the singular sex scene, but it’s a joke more than an erotic encounter).

I just connect with this flic from top-to-bottom. I dig the characters, from ex-con Lewis played by Robert DeNiro to the ATF Agent played by Michael Keaton. The movie is chock full of entertaining conversations and questions. And the music—OHHHHHHH the music. Bar none, this is my favorite soundtrack from Tarantino’s flics–whcih is saying something. On top of this, the movie also asks good questions about what a person can, should, or shouldn’t do when they have the opportunity to do it. There’s alot here, adn I dig it all. Oh, and this is by leaps and bounds the best Chris Tucker you’ll ever watch outside of the first Friday.

I know not everyone will agree with me, but as far as I can tell Jackie Brown is a perfect movie. I can thnk of nothing I would alter or change to imporve it. I love it from the opening credits to the closing, making it by far my favorite Tarantino movie, and one of my favorite flics of all time. Jackie Brown is rated R for constant profanity, violence, pervasic thematic elements, and brief sexual content.

UPDATE: UNDER THE NEW RATING SCALE DELEVOPED 2/16/07, Jumanji retains a 4.
Grace, Peace, and Thanks to each and every one of you. I present to you each a piece of stone which I claim is from a distant and beautiful land. In actuality, the rocks are from a drainage ditch near my home. I am ashamed I deceived you and understand if you no longer want to be friends.

The story of Jumanji is really, really interesting. It begins in 1869 when two young boys bury a boardgame that has apparently created great horror for them. Fast forward to 1969, when a young, bullied rich boy, Allen Parish, finds the game and begins to play it with a young female friend. After two roles of the dice, the young boy is sucked into the game, and the girl runs away screaming while being attacked by bats. Fast Forward again, 26 years later. Now, two new kids have found the game, and when they play Allen appears out of the game!!! The two new kids now realize they are interrupting the game from 1969; and now, the three of them realize they need to get the fourth player and finish the game together in order to reset all the horror the game has brought to lives for the last 26 years.

Given this premise and story, the movie has written itself a license to do all manner of fun, special effects laden scenarios. The film features crazy squirrel mokeys destroying a kitchen, a stampede down a small town mainstreet, A giant man-eating plant, and a monsoon inside of a house. These events, while featuring fairly dated special effects, are incredibly fun–especially since we in the audience are so excited about the next role of the dice and calamity to follow. A few sequences run a bit long, but that is why this roll-and-watch dynamic is really admirable in the film–it is able to rekindle our interest after each sequence, since another, perhaps better, one is coming soon. This is a great way to pace the film, as it gets you interested in not only each succcessive action sequences but also the moments in between them. I am unsure if there was a theme or lesson in there, but that’s okay. The movie also has adequate acting and direction, with both children giving believeable solid performances. There are subplots that are introduced and never fulfilled, but the overall story arc is good.

Jumanji gets a 4 out of 7, which I think is admirable for a flic about people playing a boardgame. It’s good but not great, with a very interesting premise that I think was moderately fulfilled for a 120-minute, PG feature. The effects are dated and, at times, the movie drags. Nonetheless, it is a watchable and entertaining. I recommend it, particularly for viewing with kids who will believe the special effects and really get wrapped into the story.

SONG OF THE POST: “Welcome to the Jungle” by Guns N Roses, from the album, Appetite for Destruction.