Universal will stop making Jurassic Park sequels when people stop paying money to see them.
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2025
466 points (99.8% liked)
General Memes & Private Chuckle
393 readers
523 users here now
Welcome to General Memes
Memes for the masses, chuckles for the chosen.
Rule 1: Be Civil, Not Cruel
We’re here for laughs, not fights.
- No harassment, dogpiling, or brigading
- No bigotry (transphobia, racism, sexism, etc.)
- Keep it light — argue in the comments, not with insults
Rule 2: No Forbidden Formats
Not every image deserves immortality on the memmlefield. That means:
- No spam or scams
- No porn or sexually explicit content
- No illegal content (seriously, don’t ruin the fun)
- NSFW memes must be properly tagged
If you see a post that breaks the rules, report it so the mods can take care of it.
Otherwise consider this your call to duty. Get posting or laughing. Up to you
founded 1 month ago
MODERATORS
They have been tending down with each release but they still make a lot of money.
Jurassic World was not the worst sequel at the time. I think most people would have then and still would rate it higher than 3
Nah, 3 is the second best movie in the franchise and I will die on that hill. All the World movies are straight trash.
I never thought I would die on a hill side by side with a PoopingCough
They need to revive the parody films.
Depends.
Give me more Airplane, Naked Gun, and Tropic Thunder.
Give me less anything made by Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer. I want parodies that know the source material.
Who would we need to bribe to get a Hot Shots! part 3 that's a parody of unnecessary sequels to decades-old franchises?
I think those things were mostly paid for with DVD sales. People barely go to summer blockbusters anymore. I would guess the modern equivalent is the straight to streaming movies but they only seem to make mediocre action movies that seem like they are written by LLM
My friend loves the new Jurassic Park movies.
She grew up never watching the original. So her first Jurassic Park was these movies. And when we watched the original, she was surprised how "different" it was.
That's when I learned she sees them as kid-friendly toy selling films like the later King Kong and Transformers. Which makes total sense who those movies are for.
The depressing bit about it is that people watch the absolute hell out of these movies. The last one made almost 900 million dollars. (Hefty profit for a flick estimated to cost under 250 million.)
We're getting dumber and demanding our entertainment gets dumber with us.
Aside from these movies, are there really any other big name, big budget dinosaur movies along the same lines? I really think that these movies end up making bank, despite being not so great, simply because there's pretty much no real competition. If there were some actual GOOD and kid appropriate dino movies, things might be a little less rosy for the JP/JW franchise or they might actually have some impetus to deliver something good.
Granted, the last movie was, in my opinion, a slight improvement over the previous chapters.
are there really any other big name, big budget dinosaur movies
Heck, there are almost no more big name, big budget movies that aren't already existing IP.
For a depressing read, scroll through box office mojo top movies for the last dozen years. It's almost all remakes, sequels etc.
So for a studio, why bother trying to make something new when people will watch the latest Jurrasic money making slop no matter what?
Wanted to love the last one, expected to. Watched my pirate copy once. Don't really remember what it was about, don't care.
There's a dramatic scene in the Quetzalcoatlus nest where the thing is trying to snatch them. I'm kinda dumb and easy to suspend disbelief, but damn that hurt my brain. It's be like a pelican struggling to snatch a baby mouse out it's nest.
That sounds pretty bad.
I even tried pirating a couple but it's like the last star wars, I made it maybe 5 minutes before I realized there are a hundred things I'd rather do with a couple of hours instead.
We're being made dumber by our sloppifying ux and sloppifying algorithms and sloppifying corporate media.
I'm convinced it's deliberate at this point.
The money men were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn't stop to think if they should.
I borrowed the most recent movie off the internet a couple of weeks ago, and sure it's got Mahershala Ali, who I rate, and Scarlett, who I don't hate, and sometimes all i want from a movie is to disengage the brainbox and let the action wash over me.
But that opening scene with the Snickers wrapper and the door mechanism‽ Quite possibly the silliest thing I've seen in a long time.
who I rate
For what it's worth, I rate all of you.
Isn't 3 better than 2 and World better than 2 and 3? (I didn't actually see 3, so I'm going with what I've been told.)
The bar for worst sequel ever made is quite high.
2 is more divisive. It seems like it was fairly well received when it first came out and then popular opinion cooled on it. A lot of people still like it or will at least defend it, but the people who hate it will go into agonizing detail about how bad it is.
3 is the one that nobody liked very much, but by the time it came out nobody expected much either. It feels closer to a straight to video sequel than a legitimate entry in the franchise. And while it made its budget back, it was by far the least successful movie in the franchise. There's a reason why this was the last one they made until the soft reboot a decade and a half later.
Oh... Looks like I'll continue not have seen 3 then.
I was starting to reevaluate that.
FWIW, I enjoy 3, watched it many times. Ranks behind 1 and World.
I feel like i could write an entire essay on why 3 is the second best in the franchise. For me its JP 1 > 3 > 2 and then none of the World movies are worth the time even if you can watch for free.
Having just watched them all for the first time recently, I put World and 3 on about equal footing, above 2, and the sequels to World below all of that. All of them pale to the original, but some (a lot?) of that has to do with how recognizable parts of that first movie were from cultural osmosis.
I think two was the best one. Maybe not the ending so much but the rest of it sure. Easily better than three though.
Is this like making ever more Tron movies even though they're (apparently, haven't watched any) all terrible?
The movie TRON is a cult classic, so I don't think of it as good or bad. The sequels are bad movies, but I'm convinced that they're actually great visual albums. The soundtracks to both Tron: Legacy and Tron: Ares rock. Daft Punk and NIN did great jobs respectfully. The movies are a visual telling of those albums, which almost always comes across as a bad movie. I didn't expect to see a good movie when I saw Tron: Ares but I did expect to get crazy high and enjoy the fuck out of it, which I did.
Trent Reznor's take on Tron definitely doesn't live up to Daft Punk's rendition of Tron, but that's just my personal taste. Also they're not responsible for the movies, that was a regular director and writers...
Tron is definitely more movie and less visual album the way Lemonade was but IMO both are valid.
The first Tron movie's special effects were new at the time very much like Jurassic Park (not as awesome of course). Also being a geek growing up with Tron it was a neat idea when things like cyberspace weren't really well known, plus video games heh
I view the modern movies as meta-parodies. Where they just make a movie and they patent it, they package it and they slap it on a lunchbox and BAM now they're selling it, they're just selling it.