Rating: 
Summary: Good, But the Earlier Films of the Series are Better
Review: "Jurassic Park III" is a good continuation of the Jurassic Park Series. The film centers around a divorced couple played by William H. Macy and Tea Leoni. Their son has been lost on Ilsa Sorna, In Gen's site B. Their son was involved in a parasailing accident and landed on the island. Sam Neill reprises his role as palentologist Dr. Alan Grant. He believes that he will merely be serving as a guide for the couple while the fly over the island, but Macy and Leoni have other ideas. They portray themselves as rich adventurers while convincing Dr. Grant that they will make a large (and phony) donation to his archaeological society for his services.However, unknown to Dr. Grant, the couple plans to actually land on Ilsa Sorna. This is where the action and adventure begins. Almost immediately, the group encounters a huge dinosaur, the spinosaurus, who makes the T-Rex from the earlier films look like a mouse. In fact, spinosaurus enjoys eating the T-Rex for dinner. The group tries desperately to avoid the menacing dinosaurs, find the couple's son, and somehow escape from the island. The dinosaur scenes are eye-popping, especially the flying pteranodons. The airplane crash sequences are well-done, too. I was a little disappointed in the ending. It seemed to me that the producers of the film were just trying to hurry and finish the movie, so it was a little abrupt. Overall, I thought this was a good movie. The dinosaurs are bigger and scarier in this movie, and the action scenes are top notch. I still enjoyed the original Jurassic Park and The Lost World a little more, though, because they were longer (JP III was only 90 minutes), and the endings were not as rushed. I do recommend this movie. It flows well with the earlier films of the series.
Rating: 
Summary: where's speilberg?
Review: An attempt to continue one of the most original film-series of all time.with an iffy beginning, the movie never gets much better. however there are some great special effects (of course) and some quite admorable actors. but in all its a science project that had no spine, a bad mix of storylines, a lack of the jurassic park engineer in steven speilberg, and coaded with some named actors that had no material to work with all in a sour broth of humanitairian ideals. it goes off-track from the series and being a lover of the first film, i was utterly disapointed with its 3rd counterpart. 3 out of 5 which was generous.
Rating: 
Summary: BETTER THAN THE FIRST AND THE SECOND !
Review: This is a really hillarious movie.The combination of animatronics and CGI made the those dinosaurs like real and surround sound was terrificly mixed.DVD features were also adequate and gives the viewer and indepth view of how they actually done it.But the movie was a little bit shorter than you expect-a mere 81 min-.
Rating:
Summary: Dinosaurus Magnifico!
Review: The main reason I like the Jurassic Park movies is because I like dinosaurs. I don't expect much from the story line/plot because the whole purpose of the movies is to show how dangerous dinosaurs would be if they were alive today. So, leave your critical thoughts about plot/story line and watch this movie to see dinosaurs run, fight, chase people, eat people, try to out-think people, etc. Several new dinosaurs are introduced--one of which is bigger and "badder" than t-rex. An interesting addition is a prop that saves everyones' lives in a direct confrontation with a group of raptors. As the people run from one dinosaur feeding frenzy to another, one can't help but admire the single-minded ferocity of the dinosaurs even as one thinks how silly that some people just scream and scream and never do anything constructive when faced with death. The interest in this film is wondering which dinosaur is going to jump the group next, and the film doesn't disappoint as one dinosaur after another attempts to destroy the group of people invading the dinosaurs' habitat. If you wonder why anyone would return to such a dangerous locale, the film does provide strong motivation for these people to be on the island. If you like to see dinosaurs in action and don't mind everyone except the main characters getting eaten, then you will enjoy this dinosaur-celebrating movie.
Rating: 
Summary: The curse of sequels
Review: We are yet on another trip to Jurassic Park. This time, a couple is searching for a boy that is lost on the island. Allan Grant (Sam Neill) is hired as a dinosaur expert. On the island, there are new dinosaurs. Why can't they stop making Jurassic Park movies?
Rating:
Summary: this movie is cool
Review: this movie is awsome because it has cool new dinosaurs and also the sound effects are cool.
Rating:
Summary: "No force on Earth or Heaven could get me on that island..."
Review: Except for maybe another fat paycheck, right? That's about all I can figure for why a fine actor like Sam Neill returned to this fast-dying franchise for another go-around. Now the 'Jurassic Park' movies in general require you to take on an enormous amount of disbelief, but even knowing this, this is an ugly, and pretty bad movie. The original 'Jurassic Park' was a bona fide popcorn classic that I saw upwards of five or six times in the theater. When the sequel 'The Lost World - Jurassic Park Part II' rolled around it was already starting to feel like the thrills were cheap and the cheese was being laid on a little thick, especially the ridiculous final quarter when it went stateside. However, when I saw the trailer for this one, I was admittedly somewhat looking forward to it. Now I and every other film buff should know by now that when a franchise is going on for a third chance, that you can't expect much from it, especially a thriller like this, that is, in some sense of the phrase, a natural disaster movie. I mean how many times can these humans go back to this island, watch their friends get mauled and eaten, just BARELY escape themselves, and still, STILL have an inkling to go back. Of course, you can't really blame Dr. Grant in this one, because he was kind of forced into the situation here, and William H. Macy and Tea Leoni just wanted their son back, but all the rest of 'em, good God, what're they thinking? You can always tell who's going to become dinosaur food in these movies, because there's always a few characters thrown into the mix that don't seem to have any purpose at all, or that are as weakly-developed as you can possibly imagine, but in this one, it seemed everyone was expendable really. I mean, I didn't care about any of them, except for Dr. Grant, and I almost wished he would die just to put him out of his misery. Even the special effects in this one, handled once again by ILM, are weak and so obviously phony that the thrills are more laughable than anything. To break it down for you, there was just too much cheese in this movie for me to stomach. I'd say it definitely supports dairy. I give 'Jurassic Park III' two stars for Sam Neill's performance, and for the sequence in the bird's nest, where the pterodactyls were pecking at the kid. Pretty sad, huh? One good thing I can say is that the movie was only about 89 minutes long compared to the two hours-plus that the others were. The producers and screen writers must know that the material is getting stale. I hope they don't make any more of these movies.
Rating: 
Summary: WHAT HAPPENED?!!
Review: Okay, I admit that the very first "Jurassic Park" film was thrilling and exciting at the same time. "Jurrasic Park 2: The Lost World" was even better, and the special FX were TIGHT
at some scenes.(check out the scene where the guy gets ripped in half by the T-rex's). Both movies were creative and action-packed, with a storyline that almost seemed convincing as if dinosaurs actually could be ressurected! Now, the 3rd-installment to the series starts to go downhill from the first two. For one, the story got a bit weak here which made it seem kinda dull and boring. (a kid who get's stranded on an island? Been done already.)Second, there's barely as much action as part 1 & 2, making this one possibly the shortest in the whole series?? MAYBE. I myself personally, enjoyed "Lost World" the most. (although the first is VERY good). But when they were going to continue with "Jurassic Park III" I was honestly excited for it's release. (not as much as "Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within" though, which was also a failure.) However, when I finally had the chance to see the film in theatres, MAN WAS I DISSAPOINTED. Sorry to say, but the plot to this sequel has got to be the weakest out of the
JP-trilogy. They could have made it longer too. Take my advice and skip this one. See "The Lost World" and/or "Jurassic Park" (the original) which is twice as better than this disgrace to the saga.
Rating:
Summary: Special Effects were wonderful, story a little far-fetched.
Review: The special effects in this movie were excellent considering Spielberg opted out on this one. The first movie made you think that it could really happen. The second was still believable to an extent. The third movie's storyline had a lot of holes in it. It was really hard for me to believe that even an extremely intelligent pre-teen boy would be able to survive on an island of dinosaurs for several weeks on his own. However, the movie did offer some pretty good action scenes and the special effects were pretty cool.
Rating:
Summary: Following the same pattern as the Jaws movies.
Review: The comparisons are right there. Every Jaws film was worse than the other, and The Jurassic Park series is going through the same pattern. Here is an example: 1 A) The Original Jaws: Landmark Film That set the bar in suspends, and sheer thrills. Directed By Steven Spielberg. B) The Original Jurassic Park: Landmark Film That revolutionizes special effects, and combined them superbly with suspends, thrills, and heart. Also Directed By Steven Spielberg.
2 A) Jaws 2: A sequel That does not equal the original but manages to keep up the suspends and thrills. This was directed by Jeannot Szwarc, who does not have the flare of Steven Spielberg but manages to keep up the pace set forth by the original. B) The Lost World, Jurassic Park: A sequel that does not equal the original but manages to surpass it in the special effects department. Steven Spielberg directed this, and this is the first time he directed a sequel to one of his original movies. Although It does not come close to the magic of the original, it does retain the superb combination of Suspends, thrills, and heart. 3 A) Jaws 3 (also known as Jaws 3D): A bad cash in that is more of a gimmick that an actual movie. The gimmick in question is the rendering of 3D images over bad shark effects that tries to cover up the fact that the story is preposterous, and the acting is outrageously bad. This was Directed by Joe Alves, who proves with out a doubt that anyone with a camera can be a director, but talent is giving to a few. B) Jurassic Park 3: A bad cash In that is more of a gimmick that an actual movie. The gimmicks in question are the discovery of a new dinosaur called the Spinosauris that was hiding from the other films of the series and the evolution of talking raptors. All this and a very short running was clear attempt to cover up the fact that there was really no story to be told, and the fact that acting is so glaringly bad gives a real indication of actors just trying to collect a check. Not even The special effects are up to expectation, and that shocking because it came from the same man who did the others movies in the series. This was directed By Joe Johnson Who previous outings includes Honey I Shrunk the kids and Jumangi were mediocre at best. (Word Of advice, Never Give over a franchise To a man name Joe) I don't know about Jurassic Park 4 but if the pattern holds we will all see another Jaws The Revenge. If that happens then The Jurassic Park series is truly dead.
| 
