clip प्ले करें3:05
How the Original 'Jurassic Park' Cast Fits Into the New 'Jurassic World' देखें
यह कहानी एक प्रसिद्ध जीवाश्म विज्ञानी डॉ एलन ग्रांट (सैम नील) की है, जो एक धनी साहसी (विलियम एच मैसी) और उसकी पत्नी (टेआ लियोनी) के साथ इस्ला सोरना, प्रागैतिहासिक जीव के लिए इनजेन के पूर्व प... सभी पढ़ेंयह कहानी एक प्रसिद्ध जीवाश्म विज्ञानी डॉ एलन ग्रांट (सैम नील) की है, जो एक धनी साहसी (विलियम एच मैसी) और उसकी पत्नी (टेआ लियोनी) के साथ इस्ला सोरना, प्रागैतिहासिक जीव के लिए इनजेन के पूर्व प्रजनन भूमि का हवाई दौरे पर जाते हैं।यह कहानी एक प्रसिद्ध जीवाश्म विज्ञानी डॉ एलन ग्रांट (सैम नील) की है, जो एक धनी साहसी (विलियम एच मैसी) और उसकी पत्नी (टेआ लियोनी) के साथ इस्ला सोरना, प्रागैतिहासिक जीव के लिए इनजेन के पूर्व प्रजनन भूमि का हवाई दौरे पर जाते हैं।
- पुरस्कार
- 5 जीत और कुल 16 नामांकन
Blake Michael Bryan
- Charlie
- (as Blake Bryan)
सारांश
Reviewers say 'Jurassic Park III' offers thrilling dinosaur action and a welcome return of Sam Neill as Dr. Alan Grant, though it lacks a compelling plot and deep character development. The absence of Steven Spielberg is noted, with some missing the original's magic. Special effects receive mixed reviews, and the film's pacing is debated. Overall, it's an enjoyable yet flawed installment.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
It's hard to really put this movie down cause despite it's problems and there is many, it has it's heart in the right place. The aim I guess that the people behind the scenes were aiming for was a family movie with a bit of suspends and while there is a family movie to be had here, it also tries to be a Jurassic Park film and unfortunately it fails as both to a degree.
It fails as a family movie cause the script is not strong enough to support the story. Despite the venom thrown at William H Macy and especially Tea Leoni, both are very appealing actors and they do work hard to make it all work but the script just handicap their efforts to make it possible. It fails as a Jurassic Park film cause it lacks the tension, suspense and the story points that made the first two films in the series ( Jurassic Park And The Lost World) so well made and memorable. Not to mention the fact that they felt like fully formed movies with a beginning, middle and end. Jurassic Park 3 just feels like a Saturday morning serial. Not bad but nothing like the other films in the series. There is one scene in the film that almost manages to bring a little tension which is the bird cage scene but even that ends up flat compared to any of the scenes in the other films of the series. The other major problem is the fact that While Sam Neill works his ass off to make this film watchable, the script does the most disservice to the character of Alan Grant, whose happy ending from the original Jurassic Park was not only ruined thanks to this movie but has his character dumb down in order to fall for the dumb stuff that happens in this film. Despite all of this, Sam Neill is working overtime to make you care. Too bad the script did not.
As I said before, it has a lot of heart thanks to it's actors but thanks to a bad script, Jurassic Park 3 is with out a doubt the weakest entry in the series.
It fails as a family movie cause the script is not strong enough to support the story. Despite the venom thrown at William H Macy and especially Tea Leoni, both are very appealing actors and they do work hard to make it all work but the script just handicap their efforts to make it possible. It fails as a Jurassic Park film cause it lacks the tension, suspense and the story points that made the first two films in the series ( Jurassic Park And The Lost World) so well made and memorable. Not to mention the fact that they felt like fully formed movies with a beginning, middle and end. Jurassic Park 3 just feels like a Saturday morning serial. Not bad but nothing like the other films in the series. There is one scene in the film that almost manages to bring a little tension which is the bird cage scene but even that ends up flat compared to any of the scenes in the other films of the series. The other major problem is the fact that While Sam Neill works his ass off to make this film watchable, the script does the most disservice to the character of Alan Grant, whose happy ending from the original Jurassic Park was not only ruined thanks to this movie but has his character dumb down in order to fall for the dumb stuff that happens in this film. Despite all of this, Sam Neill is working overtime to make you care. Too bad the script did not.
As I said before, it has a lot of heart thanks to it's actors but thanks to a bad script, Jurassic Park 3 is with out a doubt the weakest entry in the series.
JURASSIC PARK 3 / (2001) *** (out of four)
By Blake French:
"Jurassic Park 3" is not as good as the first but a whole lot better than the second. It's also the first film in the series that is not based on a novel by Michael Crichton. That's basically "JP3" in a nutshell. It's not necessarily a great movie, nor does it break any new grounds of adventure or take many risks, but it does take advantage of all the creative ideas. You will not hear anyone in the audience complain that the movie isn't inventive, because these writers, Peter Buchman, Alexander Payne, and Jim Taylor, really have an imagination.
The story takes place eight years after the incident at Jurassic Park. Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) still works as a paleontologist on dinosaur dig sites in Montana with his young assistant Billy (Alessandro Nivola). He's offered a good sum of money by a wealthy couple (William H. Macy and Tea Leoni) who want Grant to guild them on a flight over Isla Sorna-also owned by the dinosaur cooperation. Sam agrees, but once over the island, something goes wrong and he's once again stuck on the dinosaur infested territory fighting for his life.
"Jurassic Park 3" is complied with stunning brevity. The dialogue is concise and doesn't wonder. The character's relationships are instantly obvious. It's very clear that this film is shorter, cheaper, and more simple than its predecessors. That is not such a bad thing. The second Jurassic Park was terrible-an all star cast placed in situation and situation where they run from big monstrous creatures. Although "Jurassic Park 3" is more or less the same formula, it gets sassy and fresh. Eye-popping special effects involve everything from a bird-dinosaur attempting to feed a human to its babies to a massive battle between a Tyrannosaurus Rex and a new breed of lizard called Spinosaurus. Some of these scenes do not really work. Amazingly, many succeed.
I have various complaints about the movie. There are not enough violent encounters to keep the audiences interested throughout. Unlike the first two films, the dinos in "JP3" only eat a handful of characters and they occur in the opening half hour. You can probably guess the characters who meet a graphic demise; anyone who is billed in the film's credits that you have heard of will probably live. I also think the movie needs more thrills. It seems as if the producers are more interested in proving to the audience that these dinosaurs are really smart rather than focusing on lean, clean terror.
Regardless of the pictures many problems, during a summer movie season jam-packed with special effects extravaganzas that don't work ("The Mummy Returns," "Pearl Harbor," "Planet of the Apes," "The Fast and he Furious," and "Swordfirsh" to name a few) finally comes one that does. I recommend "Jurassic Park 3" on the basis that you don't expect something remotely as fascinating as the original, but still hunger for a shallow 90 minute thrill ride.
By Blake French:
"Jurassic Park 3" is not as good as the first but a whole lot better than the second. It's also the first film in the series that is not based on a novel by Michael Crichton. That's basically "JP3" in a nutshell. It's not necessarily a great movie, nor does it break any new grounds of adventure or take many risks, but it does take advantage of all the creative ideas. You will not hear anyone in the audience complain that the movie isn't inventive, because these writers, Peter Buchman, Alexander Payne, and Jim Taylor, really have an imagination.
The story takes place eight years after the incident at Jurassic Park. Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill) still works as a paleontologist on dinosaur dig sites in Montana with his young assistant Billy (Alessandro Nivola). He's offered a good sum of money by a wealthy couple (William H. Macy and Tea Leoni) who want Grant to guild them on a flight over Isla Sorna-also owned by the dinosaur cooperation. Sam agrees, but once over the island, something goes wrong and he's once again stuck on the dinosaur infested territory fighting for his life.
"Jurassic Park 3" is complied with stunning brevity. The dialogue is concise and doesn't wonder. The character's relationships are instantly obvious. It's very clear that this film is shorter, cheaper, and more simple than its predecessors. That is not such a bad thing. The second Jurassic Park was terrible-an all star cast placed in situation and situation where they run from big monstrous creatures. Although "Jurassic Park 3" is more or less the same formula, it gets sassy and fresh. Eye-popping special effects involve everything from a bird-dinosaur attempting to feed a human to its babies to a massive battle between a Tyrannosaurus Rex and a new breed of lizard called Spinosaurus. Some of these scenes do not really work. Amazingly, many succeed.
I have various complaints about the movie. There are not enough violent encounters to keep the audiences interested throughout. Unlike the first two films, the dinos in "JP3" only eat a handful of characters and they occur in the opening half hour. You can probably guess the characters who meet a graphic demise; anyone who is billed in the film's credits that you have heard of will probably live. I also think the movie needs more thrills. It seems as if the producers are more interested in proving to the audience that these dinosaurs are really smart rather than focusing on lean, clean terror.
Regardless of the pictures many problems, during a summer movie season jam-packed with special effects extravaganzas that don't work ("The Mummy Returns," "Pearl Harbor," "Planet of the Apes," "The Fast and he Furious," and "Swordfirsh" to name a few) finally comes one that does. I recommend "Jurassic Park 3" on the basis that you don't expect something remotely as fascinating as the original, but still hunger for a shallow 90 minute thrill ride.
I will say this about Jurassic Park III, I'm at least glad it didn't overstay its welcome. But just the fact that it had such a short run time already tells you what you need to know.
Unlike the previous movie where the characters were incredibly dumb and sometimes annoying, the characters here were dumb but also kinda bland. There's really not a character I was really rooting for to survive. Thank goodness for Sam Neil fortunately because he was really the only one I truly cared for and actually tried to make smart character decisions throughout.
And the action had its moments but overall, it was honestly kind of forgettable. The Lost World might've had terrible characters but at least they did a better job at tension building and using the dinosaurs the correct way.
Overall if I were to rank the Jurassic movies, I'd honestly put this in D tier. It's just so unnecessary.
Unlike the previous movie where the characters were incredibly dumb and sometimes annoying, the characters here were dumb but also kinda bland. There's really not a character I was really rooting for to survive. Thank goodness for Sam Neil fortunately because he was really the only one I truly cared for and actually tried to make smart character decisions throughout.
And the action had its moments but overall, it was honestly kind of forgettable. The Lost World might've had terrible characters but at least they did a better job at tension building and using the dinosaurs the correct way.
Overall if I were to rank the Jurassic movies, I'd honestly put this in D tier. It's just so unnecessary.
With the OG Park, I can't quite decide what the standout moment is, there are so many brilliant ones. I have the opposite problem here, there's some fun but there are a couple of Yikes moments that... Dream raptor saying Alan, the ninjasaur that can sneak up on people in dead silence until the phone gives it away, the random bird cage, the kid collecting dino-pee... There's a lot of cringe in III and up until recently, I thought it was the most forgettable JP out there.
Seriously, how does a gigantic dinosaur sneak up on these people, but then somehow the phone rings and it's loud enough, FROM ITS STOMACH, that everyone hears it? GAH!
Seriously, how does a gigantic dinosaur sneak up on these people, but then somehow the phone rings and it's loud enough, FROM ITS STOMACH, that everyone hears it? GAH!
Jurassic Park 3 was a shorter and less entertaining of the three. I thought this sequel might be good because JP2 was good but I was wrong! I have picked some notes while watching this movie. Usually Jurassic Park films are 2 hours long, this one is some 40 minutes less! and does not quite contain the same fun and horror it did on previous jp's. DR. Grant returns which is a suprise. It didn't have it's entertaining parts though i must admit. JP3 had amazing special effects, most probably the best out of the three. I have heard that Jurassic Park 4 will be released in 2004. Should I say this one will be a bad sequel as well?
All Jurassic Park Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
All Jurassic Park Movies Ranked by IMDb Rating
See how the Jurassic Park franchise films rank, according to IMDb user ratings. [Last updated June 16, 2025]
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाThe effects crew used two hundred fifty gallons of oatmeal to simulate Spinosaur droppings.
- गूफ़(at around 1h 2 mins) Although the depiction of the Pteranodon showcases several inaccuracies (such as having teeth, being able to grab things with their legs, and being excessively aggressive), which, being genetically engineered clones, can be explained, one detail still counts as an error. Namely, no matter how strong these creatures are, they could never lift up and carry a human boy the size of Eric. They would simply plummet towards the ground, since these animals needed to be extremely light-weight in order to stay aloft (a real-life Pteranodon would weigh less than preschool child). Thus the Pteranodon's anatomical inaccuracies notwithstanding, the sequence in question very nearly breaks the laws of physics.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटDuring the studio introductions, each logo is accompanied by the "ripple-in-the-water" effect and the sound of a heavy footstep.
- इसके अलावा अन्य वर्जनDon Davis, the music composer for the film, stated that roughly 20 seconds of footage was cut from the battle between the T-Rex and Spinosaurus. This was mostly made up of the two animals roaring at each other and sizing one another up.
- कनेक्शनEdited into Supergator (2007)
- साउंडट्रैकBig Hat, No Cattle
Written by Randy Newman
Performed by Randy Newman
Courtesy of Dreamworks Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is Jurassic Park III?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
- How did Eric manage to get the T-Rex pee?
- Is the Tyrannosaurus the one who was a baby in The Lost World grown up?
- What is 'Jurassic Park III' about?
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Jurassic Park III
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $9,30,00,000(अनुमानित)
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $18,11,71,875
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $5,07,71,645
- 22 जुल॰ 2001
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $36,87,80,809
- चलने की अवधि1 घंटा 32 मिनट
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें