 |
| "Stay Back! You must obey for I wear the mighty vest." |
The problem with Jurassic World isn’t just the awful
dialogue or its nauseating predictability, it’s Chris Pratt’s vest. Allow me to
explain.
In the beginning of the movie, the camera pans high above Jurassic
World Park. It’s an aerial camera shot that reveals twenty thousand visitors
buying tickets and exiting gift shops in a theme park that makes Disney World
look like a Hobbit’s back yard. The scene is set just the way the audience
desires it- on a new and grandiose scale.
Then comes a look at the inner operations of the park: the
rides, the attractions, and of course, the lab where all dino-life begins. The
God-like persona of John Hammond now replaced with morally detached scientists
with their own agendas. The tech is cutting edge and the computers and visuals
are impressive; again, the scene is set just the way the audience desires
it.
Just enough time has passed in the movie that something exciting
needs to happen. And it’s at this point that we are introduced to Pratt,
standing above four velociraptors, barking out orders like a trainer in a scuba
outfit taunting orcas with dead mackerels.
Replace the scuba outfit with a leather vest and the mackerel with dead
rats and, once again, the scene is set just the way the audience desires it.
Some action has now taken place. Our hero has proved himself
worthy by facing off against some menacing dinosaurs and saving someone’s life.
Our hero is brave and confident and it’s all because of the vest. The vest gives
Pratt superpowers. It tells the audience that he’s a hunter-gather, an Alpha to
the power of infinite testosterone. The vest is a garment of strength: it tells
us that he can track the footprints of an ant across muddy plains, and give a
crocodile a beating yet become friends with it after the fight. Pratt’s ‘Coat
Of Many Colors’ is black and made of leather, because, as we all know, black is
a man’s color and leather is best at keeping oestrogen out. Our hero looks the
part, and again, it’s how the audience desires it.
Now the vest begets more clichés. Pratt, in accordance with
his vest, lives in an old aluminum bus converted into a mobile home. It’s next
to a river (of course) and, it has a wooden tool shed addendum (of course),
which he needs in order to restore his vintage motorcycles (of course!) Nothing
rides the muddy paths of a Costa Rican, rainforest jungle quite like a 1956
Triumph. There can be no better dwelling
for a vest-wearing hero. He lives alone—Solitary and yet surrounded by nature. Pratt
and his vest live the life of an outdoorsman, despite the fact that the
hundreds of other park employees probably live in a dormitory-like building.
But Pratt isn’t just another employee; he’s an ex-Navy seal, leather vest
wearing badass.
Now that we’re midway through the movie, Pratt’s vest needs
to see some action. The rest of the movie unfolds like this: The biggest and
meanest dinosaur escapes from his enclosure (it kills for sport), some kids get
lost in the dino-infested jungle, (Who in God’s name is watching over all these
children!), and Pratt, his vest, and the movie’s heroine, played by Bryce
Dallas Howard, (She’s wearing high heels throughout the whole movie) save
absolutely everyone.
There are other characters within all these scenes but who
cares about them.
The visual image of the man-vest has its place in cinema. Bob
Peck, in a similar, albeit better role as Robert Muldoon, wore a beige vest in
Spielberg’s Jurassic Park. Other notable vests wearers include Harrison Ford,
as both Hans Solo and Indiana Jones; Brendon Fraser wore one in The Mummy
Franchise; Paul Hogan’s vest as Crocodile Dundee is geographically iconic. All
of the above-mentioned vests, however, look good on their respective actors. So
the question is, why doesn’t the vest figuratively look good on Pratt?
The hero’s vest symbolizes many virtues. Courage and bravery
yes, but a hero that wears a vest must also be sensitive and caring. The vest,
as all movie costumes do, demand of the hero that he ‘fit the part’. And that’s
where Jurassic World falls short: The director and writer of this movie fail
the vest. They betrayed a sacred garment. They fall short of giving Pratt what
he needs to look better in his costume.
Had the storytellers given the hero of this movie all the necessary
attributes he needed vis-a vis character development, subtext, and a properly developed
love-arc with co-star, Bryce Dallas Howard, Pratt’s vest might have looked
better on him. (Another option would have been to omit any allusion of romance
all together: if the subtext of romance is to exist, it needs to be developed
properly.)
Many people like Jurassic World. Why? Maybe it’s because
Universal Pictures had a dino-sized PR budget. A great ad campaign can change
our perception of a movie. Or, maybe Jurassic World is a good movie if only I
could just see past all the bad acting, putrid dialogue, and lack of proper
build up; in other words, maybe it would be a good movie if only I could see
past all of what makes it bad.
So many omission and inclusions are supposed intents upon
the director’s behalf, but let’s be clear: what’s lacking (character
development, story arc) or in abundance of (clichés, computer generated action
etc.) in a film like Jurassic World wasn’t done as a clever and sly device on
the part of the director, it’s exists because Hollywood knows it needn’t put
any effort into catering to our expectations apart from giving the computer
generated dinosaurs more teeth and giving the idiot hero a leather vest.
