In Defense Of: “The Lost World: Jurassic Park” (1997)

Of course, I would be remiss to not mention John Williams’ contributions here as well. As I’ve hammered home by this point, The Lost World is a much darker, more dangerous, and different film than its predecessor, and as such, Williams abandons almost all of his work from Jurassic Park, with the indisputably iconic series theme only being sparingly used throughout until a triumphant return in its closing moments. Half of The Lost World‘s personality comes from what Williams delivers here, the film getting its own theme that’s incredibly hummable and just so right for the sequel, and sequences like Eddie’s effort to save the trailer, the raptors’ appearance at the abandoned complex, and the rex’s arrival in San Diego are all empowered by some great, under-appreciated work from the legendary composer.

Lastly, I can’t start wrapping this up without addressing the fact that the movie is an adaptation of Michael Crichton’s novel. It’s hard to deny that anyone who went in looking for a direct – or even close – adaptation didn’t get it. The Lost World abandons many things from the book, whether it’s entire characters like Jack Thorne, Richard Levine, or Arby, plot threads like the return of Lewis Dodgson and BioSyn, unique elements like the camouflaging Carnotaurs, or entire sequences like the motorbike chase. Instead, the film only borrows bits and pieces from its source material, like the idea of Site B, or modifies them, like merging Thorne and Eddie Carr into one character or giving Ludlow a version of Dodgson’s death.

In fact, it even takes pieces of the original book that never made it into Jurassic Park, reconfiguring them to fit here like the opening scene involving the Bowmans, Dieter getting a variation of John Hammond’s death, or the waterfall sequence with the T-Rex. Jurassic Park III and Jurassic World, both without source material of their own, obviously, continued this trend of cherry-picking leftover elements from both books to assemble something new, and while it would have been great to see characters like Dodgson and Thorne turn up in the flesh, The Lost World still manages to do a pretty good job of standing on its own regardless of its “failure” as a true adaptation.

And that’s really what makes the movie work: The fact it stands as its own thing, even as a sequel to – at the time – the highest-grossing film in history. It’s unconcerned with giving you the same Jurassic Park experience again, and while that didn’t (and doesn’t) work for everybody, that’s part of why it deserves more credit than it gets in an age where it’s easier for a sequel to just go through the motions than dare to be unique. It’s leaner, meaner, and swings for the fences in keeping things moving along, fresh, and engaging.

Again, it’s not without its sins, but they’re not so bad as to destroy what’s an otherwise solid foundation of a movie upon which is built two hours of solid effects work, great scenes, and a narrative that pairs really well with its predecessor. I personally continue to enjoy The Lost World: Jurassic Park as much as I did back in 1997, and look forward to keep taking the trip back to Site B for years and years to come.