---
title: "Jurassic Park: the reviews"
canonical: "https://film.one/film/jurassic-park/reviews"
title_page: "https://film.one/film/jurassic-park"
critics_score: 74
critics_reviews: 19
licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL."
---

# Jurassic Park (1993): what the critics said

Critics' score 74 from 19 reviews: 16 positive, 1 mixed, 2 negative.

Most critics like it, and nearly all of them, including the two who do not, agree on why: the dinosaurs. The effects are praised across the board, from the first reviews in 1993 to revisits two and three decades on, which mostly find they have aged better than the sets, the script and the acting around them. Spielberg’s handling of suspense draws the next most praise, with the T. rex and kitchen sequences named again and again, and John Williams’s score gets its share.

The reservations gather around the people. Several reviews find the characters thin and the story blunter than Crichton’s novel, and a few think the sentiment is laid on thick. The spread is wide. The Los Angeles Times rates everything but the dinosaurs flat, and The Times treats the film as a phenomenon of hype rather than a piece of cinema. The later reviews are noticeably warmer than the originals.

## The Hollywood Reporter — Duane Byrge

Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 11 June 1993. 

The film is a colossal, jaw-dropping entertainment that becomes the king of blockbusters through Spielberg's masterful orchestration of spectacle and human elements. The technical achievements in effects, score, and cinematography are singled out as the brightest stars.

[Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/general-news/jurassic-park-review-1993-movie-802289/)

## Total Film

Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 19 September 2011. 

The critic calls it a classic due to Spielberg's skill with peril and character moments rather than just the CGI, noting the intense set pieces that make it one of cinema's greatest thrill-rides.

[Read the review](https://www.gamesradar.com/jurassic-park-1-review/)

## Sight and Sound

Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 

The film is an almost infallible entertainment that converts Crichton's novel into a suspense machine while demonstrating the director's signature elements. It singles out the dinosaurs for praise, noting how seriously they are taken with advisers ensuring realistic behavior and highlighting an emotionally complex shot of unsaleable merchandise.

[Read the review](http://old.bfi.org.uk/features/ultimatefilm/chart/details.php?ranking=15)

## Empire — Caroline Westbrook

Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 1993. 

The review highlights Spielberg's transformation of Crichton's novel into an awe-inspiring blockbuster filled with memorable set pieces and groundbreaking dinosaur effects. It notes that while the script and performances are not Oscar-worthy, the dinosaurs are the real stars.

[Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/jurassic-park-review/)

## The Telegraph

Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 

The review notes that the effects have dated remarkably well compared to the sets, script and acting, giving the film an amusingly quaint quality on revisit. It remains one of Spielberg’s purest suspense rides: gimmicky, giddy and still great value.

[Read the review](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/filmreviews/8782687/Jurassic-Park-1993-review.html)

## RogerEbert.com — Roger Ebert

Rating 3/4. 11 June 1993. 

The critic praises the dinosaurs' special effects but criticizes the lack of awe, wonder, and strong human characters, turning it into a standard monster movie. He notes it delivers on excitement but could have been more.

[Read the review](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/jurassic-park-1993)

## The Guardian

Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 22 September 2011. 

The critic finds the restored re-release of Spielberg's dinosaur thriller eye-wateringly shiny on the big screen, though its clunkier first-hour elements stand out more with time. The second half delivers Spielberg at his best as a thrill ride, with Wayne Knight nearly stealing the show.

[Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/2011/sep/22/jurassic-park-rerelease-review)

## The Independent — Adam Mars-Jones

Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 15 July 1993. 

The critic praises the film's blend of fear and wonder, especially the convincing realization of dinosaurs through special effects and their own inherent qualities as creatures. He criticizes the tonal disruption caused by efforts to secure a PG certificate for what is essentially a horror film.

[Read the review](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/film-the-big-picture-spare-the-rod-spoil-the-child-adam-marsjones-reviews-steven-spielberg-s-jurassic-park-the-monster-of-all-movies-1485156.html)

## Variety — Variety Staff

Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 31 December 1992. 

The review finds the film one-dimensional and clunky in story and characterization but praises its delivery on excitement, suspense, and the stupendous realization of the giant reptiles.

[Read the review](https://variety.com/1992/film/reviews/jurassic-park-1200431301/)

## Vulture — David Denby

Fi1m's normalised score 70/100 (inferred from the text). 21 June 1993. 

Jurassic Park delivers thrilling effects and comes close to Jaws in excitement, wit, and fear, with dinosaurs that are convincingly hungry and real. The calculation in Spielberg's big-machine approach and conventional thrills are noted as drawbacks.

[Read the review](https://www.vulture.com/article/jurassic-park-1993-new-york-magazine-review.html)

## The New York Times — Janet Maslin

Fi1m's normalised score 65/100 (inferred from the text). 11 June 1993. 

The critic calls the film a true movie milestone for its awe-inspiring, lifelike dinosaurs created with groundbreaking effects that set a new standard. However, the human characters are sweetened and simplified, the story loses bite from the novel, and it becomes more of a roller-coaster ride than a sharp thriller.

[Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/1993/06/11/movies/screen-stars-with-teeth-to-spare.html)

## Los Angeles Times — Kenneth Turan

Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 11 June 1993. 

The dinosaurs are wondrously realistic and state-of-the-art, the film's strongest element. Everything else falls short, with bland human characters, simplistic acting, flat directing, and excessive sentimentality that turns the film into an amusement-park ride rather than a fully realized movie.

[Read the review](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1993-06-11-ca-1933-story.html)

## The Times — Geoff Brown

Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 15 July 1993. 

The film is a blunderbuss strong on surface thrills but weak on everything else, with dinosaurs raging via technical finesse from multiple effects units. It is frightening as a phenomenon of aggressive promotion and hype more than as cinema.

[Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/article/review-jurassic-park-pg-rj92kmwnkzg)

## Collider — Rae Torres

Rating A. 5 October 2022. 

The critic calls Jurassic Park a masterpiece whose practical effects and visuals remain unmatched, praising the restrained use of CGI and the iconic T-Rex sequence as highlights that make it a cultural milestone beyond a mere summer blockbuster.

[Read the review](https://collider.com/jurassic-park-review-steven-spielberg-summer-blockbuster-better-than-sequels/)

## Digital Spy — Emma Dibdin

Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 25 August 2013. 

The critic praises the film's immersive wonder, terror, efficient script, and enduring effects, calling it pure, efficient, big-hearted entertainment. They single out the expressive dinosaurs and Spielberg's mastery of wonder and terror, while noting a minor issue with the lack of a strong human antagonist.

[Read the review](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/re-viewed/a509402/re-viewed-steven-spielbergs-dinosaur-classic-jurassic-park/)

## HeyUGuys — Steven Neish

Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 26 June 2013. Festival review. 

The critic finds the 3D re-release of the 1993 film still highly entertaining and effective, with its character focus and technical achievements holding up remarkably well two decades later. They single out the blend of practical effects, CGI, and John Williams' score for particular praise.

[Read the review](https://www.heyuguys.com/jurassic-park-3d-review/)

## Polygon — Sean T. Collins

Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 12 August 2020. 

The critic highlights the film's critique of greed and unchecked capitalism as its most chilling element, noting how the story's warnings about prioritizing profit over safety resonate anew while still delivering thrilling dinosaur spectacle.

[Read the review](https://www.polygon.com/2020/8/12/21362915/jurassic-park-review-where-to-watch-characters-covid-pandemic-parallels/)

## The Ringer — Adam Nayman

Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 13 June 2018. 

The critic positions Jurassic Park as the victor in its 1993 box-office clash, praising its groundbreaking CGI, relentless suspense in key sequences, and lasting influence on blockbusters while noting some dated character elements. Singles out the T. rex and kitchen scenes as masterful.

[Read the review](https://www.theringer.com/2018/06/13/movies/jurassic-park-last-action-hero-steven-spielberg-arnold-schwarzenegger)

## /Film — Dana Moran

Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 28 March 2018. 

The critic revisits the film 25 years on and concludes it largely holds up as a technological trailblazer and expertly paced thrill ride, though the finale feels like a letdown after the stronger set pieces. Singles out the opening sequences, dinosaur effects, and suspenseful action for praise.

[Read the review](https://www.slashfilm.com/557167/jurassic-park-revisited/)

---
© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/jurassic-park.md