Originally Posted by
DemonGeminiX
Jurassic Park was unbelievable, but it was a good, entertaining flick. The trick with these movies is to distract you enough from the believability aspect just enough for you to get sufficiently entertained so that when all is said and done, you find yourself looking past the believability aspect in spite of the utter walking all over reality. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull failed horribly at this. Jurassic Park was fantastic at it. It brought you back to your childhood love of dinosaurs, and you were in awe when you first saw them on the screen. You forgot that it was all cgi and animatronics. This one almost made it. Almost.
Chris Pratt is a very likable guy. He's an everyman's guy. A guy's guy. I get what you mean when you say you can't see him as a leading man, but he's done it twice and I'm telling you, I believe that in Guardians, he held his own quite well. But that's how the StarLord/Peter Quill character was written. Another issue I had with Jurassic World's writing: Pratt's part was completely serious. It's like he was completely tense all the time. There was no break in his serious demeanor. Pratt has got comedic chops. He's good at being goofy. Not Carrey goofy, but you know, one of those guys that makes you smile and they don't overdo it. It goes to his likability. He's got great timing in that respect. He should be in parts that play up to that aspect of his acting ability. Or they should rewrite the parts slightly to play up to that aspect. The writers dropped the ball in that respect here. Even Sam Neill had some zingers here and there in the first one to break up the seriousness every once in a while. And that's what this movie needed, a little break in the tension here and there. A leading man who was written a little more human and showed a tad bit of humor here and there when appropriate.