What’s the Worst ‘Jurassic Park’ Sequel?
I think we can all safely agree that the best "Jurassic Park" movie is "Jurassic Park." (If we can’t safely agree about that, I think we’re probably done here.)
But which "Jurassic Park" is the worst? Now that is a matter of some debate. Each sequel has something going for it; good performances, incredible special effects, ferocious dinosaurs. And most have problems, too; recycled storylines, dumb villains, subplots about clones. In 30 years of trying, there hasn’t been a great "Jurassic Park" sequel. Arguably, there hasn’t even been a good one.
You can find more of the good and the bad this series always seems to offer in "Jurassic World: Dominion," which combines the casts of "Jurassic Park" and "Jurassic World" in a story about a race to save humanity from total extinction. It features highlights such as Jeff Goldblum’s swaggering chaos theorist Ian Malcolm and a wild motorcycle raptor chase in Malta, but it also contains yet another trip to a faraway nature preserve filled with dinosaurs that goes terribly wrong. (Plus, you guessed it: More nonsense with clones.)
Now that the whole saga is complete, we’ve tried to decide how these movies compare once and for all. Again, there’s no point in including "Jurassic Park" among the rankings; it’s the obvious and only choice for the best. But the rest? After a rewatch of the entire franchise, here’s where we landed, starting from the sequel that’s maybe a little underrated to the one that is closest in experience to getting eaten by a dinosaur.