logo
Film of the Week: 'Jurassic World Rebirth' – A dino-mite reboot?

Film of the Week: 'Jurassic World Rebirth' – A dino-mite reboot?

Euronews6 hours ago
While the last few years have been characterised by movie lovers rightfully moaning about superhero fatigue, there is another cinematic ailment that has also taken hold: dino-fatigue.
Symptoms include dejected sighs triggered by recalling the lucrative but utterly pants 2015 – 2022 Jurassic World trilogy; the sudden urge to curse Colin Trevorrow's name; and wanting to punch Chris Pratt in his perfect face every time you remember scenes of him holding up the palm of his hand to somehow communicate with raptors.
It was high time for someone to step in and give the series the much-needed renaissance it deserved.
Enter: Gareth Edwards, whose arresting debut Monsters, ambitious 2014 reboot of the Godzilla franchise and excellent Star Wars prequel Rogue One proved the British filmmaker has the chops to orchestrate a tense thrill ride. More than that, he's not a director who bends under the weight of an existing IP and its accompanying high expectations.
Except, in the case of this seventh dinosaur instalment, he stumbles by only delivering everything you'd expect. And not a hell of a lot else.
Jurassic World Rebirth picks up after the events of 2022's Jurassic World Dominion. Humans have been forced to co-exist with dinosaurs, and after a few years, everyone's also experiencing dino-fatigue. We see this early on when a billboard depicting T-Rexes gets painted over – a plot point, but also an apt metaphor for the Jurassic franchise as a whole.
We meet Martin Krebs (Ruper Friend), a slimy Big Pharma bugger who enlists the services of Special Ops expert Zora Bennett (Scarlett Johansson), soldier of fortune Duncan Kincaid (Mahershala Ali) and palaeontologist Henry Loomis (Jonathan Bailey). They are tasked with retrieving biomaterial samples from the three largest remaining dinosaurs: the aquatic Mosasaurus, the avian Quetzalcoatlus, and the land-locked Titanosaurus.
Krebs believes that their DNA holds the key to the development of a medical drug capable of curing cardiac disease. How that works, we have no idea. Something about haemoglobin needing to be extracted from living dinos. Anyway, it's going to make him and his company millions.
The snag is that these creatures have struggled with the climate and now reside near the equator line, in remote locales reminiscent of the environments where they flourished during the Mesozoic era.
So it's off to the dangerous Ile Saint-Hubert they go – where they'll also rescue the shipwrecked Delgado family, whose boat came under attack from a pack of pesky Mosasaures.
Despite Gareth Edwards excellent direction, some nifty staging of CG set pieces and a handful of spectacular sequences – chiefly the riverbed encounter with a dozing T-Rex – Jurassic World Rebirth comes off as more of a nostalgic legacyquel than a rejuvenating fresh start.
There's nothing wrong with loving Steven Spielberg's 1993 original, but when your reboot feels like a greatest hits compilation rather than its own thing, something's gone wrong somewhere.
Worse, original Jurassic Park screenwriter David Koepp – who wowed us this year with Presence and Black Bag – returns to tick off all the staples expected from a dino romp (breathless chases, nail-biting close calls) but also lumbers his script with eye-rollingly poor exposition, ear-scraping dialogue, a lunatic focus on candy (don't ask), and some very generic characters that only serve as dinosaur fodder.
It's genuinely baffling how this feels like a first draft treatment rather than a fully formed ready-to-shoot script – one which should have relegated the Delgado family plotline to the cutting-room floor. Granted, the addition of audience surrogates makes sense, but the hapless family just slows down what should have been a down-to-basics three-part quest.
In Jurassic World Rebirth's defence, the obviously rushed production schedule probably didn't help. But much like our qualms with F1® The Movie, everything has to start with a decent script. Had the studio spent a bit more time polishing the screenplay instead of securing an admittedly impressive all-star cast and pushing for a Summer 2024 release slot, this could have been dino-mite.
As it stands, Jurassic World Rebirth honours the magic of Spielberg's gamechanging blockbuster but downgrades what could have been a daring revival to a passably entertaining regurgitation.
Jurassic World Rebirth is out in cinemas now.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Film of the Week: 'Jurassic World Rebirth' – A dino-mite reboot?
Film of the Week: 'Jurassic World Rebirth' – A dino-mite reboot?

Euronews

time6 hours ago

  • Euronews

Film of the Week: 'Jurassic World Rebirth' – A dino-mite reboot?

While the last few years have been characterised by movie lovers rightfully moaning about superhero fatigue, there is another cinematic ailment that has also taken hold: dino-fatigue. Symptoms include dejected sighs triggered by recalling the lucrative but utterly pants 2015 – 2022 Jurassic World trilogy; the sudden urge to curse Colin Trevorrow's name; and wanting to punch Chris Pratt in his perfect face every time you remember scenes of him holding up the palm of his hand to somehow communicate with raptors. It was high time for someone to step in and give the series the much-needed renaissance it deserved. Enter: Gareth Edwards, whose arresting debut Monsters, ambitious 2014 reboot of the Godzilla franchise and excellent Star Wars prequel Rogue One proved the British filmmaker has the chops to orchestrate a tense thrill ride. More than that, he's not a director who bends under the weight of an existing IP and its accompanying high expectations. Except, in the case of this seventh dinosaur instalment, he stumbles by only delivering everything you'd expect. And not a hell of a lot else. Jurassic World Rebirth picks up after the events of 2022's Jurassic World Dominion. Humans have been forced to co-exist with dinosaurs, and after a few years, everyone's also experiencing dino-fatigue. We see this early on when a billboard depicting T-Rexes gets painted over – a plot point, but also an apt metaphor for the Jurassic franchise as a whole. We meet Martin Krebs (Ruper Friend), a slimy Big Pharma bugger who enlists the services of Special Ops expert Zora Bennett (Scarlett Johansson), soldier of fortune Duncan Kincaid (Mahershala Ali) and palaeontologist Henry Loomis (Jonathan Bailey). They are tasked with retrieving biomaterial samples from the three largest remaining dinosaurs: the aquatic Mosasaurus, the avian Quetzalcoatlus, and the land-locked Titanosaurus. Krebs believes that their DNA holds the key to the development of a medical drug capable of curing cardiac disease. How that works, we have no idea. Something about haemoglobin needing to be extracted from living dinos. Anyway, it's going to make him and his company millions. The snag is that these creatures have struggled with the climate and now reside near the equator line, in remote locales reminiscent of the environments where they flourished during the Mesozoic era. So it's off to the dangerous Ile Saint-Hubert they go – where they'll also rescue the shipwrecked Delgado family, whose boat came under attack from a pack of pesky Mosasaures. Despite Gareth Edwards excellent direction, some nifty staging of CG set pieces and a handful of spectacular sequences – chiefly the riverbed encounter with a dozing T-Rex – Jurassic World Rebirth comes off as more of a nostalgic legacyquel than a rejuvenating fresh start. There's nothing wrong with loving Steven Spielberg's 1993 original, but when your reboot feels like a greatest hits compilation rather than its own thing, something's gone wrong somewhere. Worse, original Jurassic Park screenwriter David Koepp – who wowed us this year with Presence and Black Bag – returns to tick off all the staples expected from a dino romp (breathless chases, nail-biting close calls) but also lumbers his script with eye-rollingly poor exposition, ear-scraping dialogue, a lunatic focus on candy (don't ask), and some very generic characters that only serve as dinosaur fodder. It's genuinely baffling how this feels like a first draft treatment rather than a fully formed ready-to-shoot script – one which should have relegated the Delgado family plotline to the cutting-room floor. Granted, the addition of audience surrogates makes sense, but the hapless family just slows down what should have been a down-to-basics three-part quest. In Jurassic World Rebirth's defence, the obviously rushed production schedule probably didn't help. But much like our qualms with F1® The Movie, everything has to start with a decent script. Had the studio spent a bit more time polishing the screenplay instead of securing an admittedly impressive all-star cast and pushing for a Summer 2024 release slot, this could have been dino-mite. As it stands, Jurassic World Rebirth honours the magic of Spielberg's gamechanging blockbuster but downgrades what could have been a daring revival to a passably entertaining regurgitation. Jurassic World Rebirth is out in cinemas now.

Disney and Universal sue AI firm Midjourney for copyright infringement
Disney and Universal sue AI firm Midjourney for copyright infringement

Euronews

time12-06-2025

  • Euronews

Disney and Universal sue AI firm Midjourney for copyright infringement

Disney and Universal sued popular artificial intelligence image-generator Midjourney on Wednesday. This is the first time major Hollywood companies have taken legal action against a maker of generative AI technology that could upend the entertainment industry. The copyright lawsuit in a Los Angeles federal court claims Midjourney pirated the libraries of the two Hollywood studios to generate and distribute 'endless unauthorized copies' of their famed characters, such as Darth Vader from the Star Wars franchise and the Minions from 'Despicable Me'. 'Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism. Piracy is piracy, and whether an infringing image or video is made with AI or another technology does not make it any less infringing," the companies state in the complaint. The studios also say the San Francisco-based AI company ignored their requests to stop infringing on their copyrighted works and to take technological measures to halt such image generation. Midjourney didn't respond to a request for comment but its CEO David Holz addressed the lawsuit in a weekly conference call with users on Wednesday after someone asked if it would endanger the tiny startup's future. 'I can't really discuss any ongoing legal things because the world isn't cool like that, but I think Midjourney is going to be around for a very long time,' Holz said. "I think everybody wants us to be around.' In a 2022 interview with The Associated Press, Holz described his image-making service as 'kind of like a search engine' pulling in a wide swath of images from across the internet. He presented the process as a form of creative inspiration, rather than plagiarism. 'Can a person look at somebody else's picture and learn from it and make a similar picture?' Holz said. 'Obviously, it's allowed for people and if it wasn't, then it would destroy the whole professional art industry, probably the nonprofessional industry too. To the extent that AIs are learning like people, it's sort of the same thing and if the images come out differently then it seems like it's fine.' The lawsuit against Midjourney comes as a number of other AI companies have sought to make inroads into Hollywood and the video game industry, providing AI tools that can aid filmmakers and game developers generate new videos, synthesise voices and edit footage. A movie industry group, the Motion Picture Association, said in a statement on Wednesday that 'strong copyright protection is the backbone of our industry' and it supports a 'balanced approach to AI that both protects intellectual property and embraces responsible, human-centred innovation'. The Recording Industry Association of America, a music publishing group fighting its own legal battles against firms that make AI-generated music, endorsed the lawsuit as a 'critical stand for human creativity and responsible innovation'. Major AI developers don't typically disclose their data sources but have argued that taking troves of publicly accessible online text, images and other media to train their AI systems is protected by the 'fair use' doctrine of American copyright law. At the same time, many big tech companies are increasingly looking to make licensing deals to pay for the content their AI systems need. The studios' case joins a growing number of lawsuits filed against developers of AI platforms in San Francisco and New York. Meanwhile, the first major copyright trial of the generative AI industry is underway in London, pitting Getty Images against Stability AI, maker of an image-generating tool that competes with Midjourney.

Disney, Universal launch first major studio lawsuit against AI company
Disney, Universal launch first major studio lawsuit against AI company

France 24

time11-06-2025

  • France 24

Disney, Universal launch first major studio lawsuit against AI company

The lawsuit is the first major legal battle between Hollywood studios and an AI firm, and follows other suits by independent artists who have sued Midjourney and other generative artificial intelligence makers for using their creative work. The entertainment giants accused San Francisco-based Midjourney of pirating their libraries and making "innumerable" copies of beloved characters including Darth Vader from "Star Wars," Elsa from "Frozen," and the Minions from "Despicable Me" without permission. The suit, filed in federal district court in Los Angeles, alleges Midjourney used the studios' works to train its image service and generate high-quality reproductions featuring the companies' iconic characters. "By helping itself to Plaintiffs' copyrighted works, and then distributing images (and soon videos) that blatantly incorporate and copy Disney's and Universal's famous characters — without investing a penny in their creation -- Midjourney is the quintessential copyright free-rider and a bottomless pit of plagiarism," the lawsuit states. The studios said they approached Midjourney about their copyright concerns before filing the suit, requesting the company implement measures to prevent infringement that other AI companies have adopted. But Midjourney "ignored" their concerns and is "strictly focused on its own bottom line," according to the filing. Instead of stopping its infringement, the studios argued, Midjourney continued to release new and better versions of its AI image service. The complaint noted the company generated $300 million in revenue last year through paid subscriptions. The lawsuit provides ample visual evidence of alleged infringement, showing AI-generated images of characters including Yoda wielding a lightsaber, Bart Simpson riding a skateboard, Disney's Groot from "Guardians of the Galaxy," and Universal's Shrek. Disney and Universal are seeking unspecified monetary damages and a preliminary injunction to prevent Midjourney from copying their works or offering its services without copyright protections. Last year a California federal judge found that artists behind a copyright infringement suit against Midjourney, Stability AI and other companies had plausibly argued these AI companies had copied and stored their work on company servers, allowing the litigation to continue.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store