What critics are saying about ‘Jurassic World Rebirth’

Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways

“Jurassic World Rebirth” is bringing the world of dinosaurs back to the big screen on Wednesday.

Taking place five years after the events of “Jurassic World Dominion” (which was released in 2022), the new film centers around a group of mercenaries who are traveling to the island that is home to the research facility for the original Jurassic Park. The group plans to retrieve DNA from the biggest dinosaurs in the air, sea and land, all in the name of science.

With a Rotten Tomatoes score of 54% and a 53/100 on Metacritic, “Jurassic World Rebirth” left some critics feeling that it was the best sequel of the franchise while others thought it was the worst.

AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R24ekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R44ekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe

So is “Jurassic World Rebirth” a worthy addition to the dinosaur franchise? Here’s what critics have to say.

The good

Let’s start with the good stuff.

The majority of critics begin with attributing the successes of the film to the performances of Scarlett Johansson, Mahershala Ali and Jonathan Bailey as Zora Bennett, Duncan Kincaid and Dr. Henry Loomis, respectively.

With compliments to the leading lady, ScreenRant stated that it’s been “long past time” for a “Jurassic” film to have a female hero anchoring the film and that Johansson is quite convincing during her stunts and action scenes.

Additionally, The Hollywood Reporter said that Johansson and Bailey bring plenty of “charm” to their opposing characters.

AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R2bekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R4bekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe

Variety applauded the latest installment of the franchise for going back to the basics of what made the original film so great.

“‘Jurassic World Rebirth’ serves as a reset of sorts,” stated Variety. “Bringing back not a single one of its former cast members, but instead allowing screenwriter David Koepp to restore what worked so well about the original film.”

The Hollywood Reporter also praised the film for director Gareth Edwards’ homage to the original film while also pointing out that the big scares, propulsive narrative and the blend of physical locations and digital imagery all helped the movie greatly.

“‘Jurassic World Rebirth’ is unlikely to top anyone’s ranked franchise list. But longtime fans (count me among them) should have a blast,” said The Hollywood Reporter.

This image released by Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment shows Luna Blaise in a scene from " Jurassic World Rebirth." | Universal Pictures and Amblin Entertainment

The bad

With that being said, there are some pitfalls of the new film.

AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R2kekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R4kekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe

Some critics had complaints about the new film’s originality. Variety said that “Jurassic World Rebirth” doesn’t feel like an essential part of the series, and the The Hollywood Reporter stated that it is “primarily an assembly of recycled story beats.” While IGN felt that the film started off well, it said that it quickly started “heading in the same old direction.”

From another new island of dinosaurs to its group of heroes and villains that find themselves in a fight to survive, IGN stated that the film was less of Edwards’ “Rogue One” and more like “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” following the same “blueprint” as the original film.

Additionally, “Jurassic World Rebirth” felt as though it was trying to add a little bit of everything from all the previous movies, making it feel like too much, according to IGN.

“It’s a bit of the ‘should we do this?’ with a dash of corporate greed, a pinch of coexisting with dinosaurs with a gene sequence gap filled in by questions about to whom scientific discovery actually belongs while every character with a speaking role gets a hyper specific emotional journey to go on that also has to get paid off," said IGN. “There’s so much on the table that I really couldn’t care about any of it.”

AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R2pekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe AdvertisementAdvertisement#«R4pekkr8lb2m7nfddbH1» iframe

And while Johansson gives a strong performance in her action sequences, ScreenRant stated that the “Avengers” actress’ performance in emotional scenes “feels thin.”

One critic from Vulture stated that the film shows that those making the “Jurassic World” films “sure are out of ideas.”

How does it compare to previous films?

When it comes to numbers, the “Jurassic” sequels have struggled to meet the great expectations of the original film.

In a post on X, Culture Crave shared the Rotten Tomatoes scores of each of the films in the franchise, which showed “Jurassic Park” (1993) coming in first with a remarkable 91%, followed by “Jurassic World” (2015) with a 72%. “Jurassic World Rebirth” comes in as third on the list.

When it comes to the original film, the critics consensus on Rotten Tomatoes said that it was a “spectacle of special effects and life-like animatronics, with some of Spielberg’s best sequences of sustained awe and sheer terror since Jaws.”

While filmmakers may wonder if they could add to the dinosaur franchise, “Jurassic World Rebirth” left some critics feeling that filmmakers should ask themselves instead if they should.