Subscribe To Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom Ending - What It Means For Jurassic World 3 Updates
Spoilers for Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom are in full effect. If you haven't seen the film yet, bookmark this story and come back later to enjoy this breakdown of the film's ending.
After a three year wait, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom has arrived in theaters, and with it comes one hell of a cliffhanger ending. The big decision made at the end of this film has delivered the franchise to a point that seems to have always be in the cards since Jurassic Park left fans and Universal executives excited for a sequel. That's right, we now have a bevy of dinosaurs running free in mainland America, and nothing will ever be the same. It's a decision that will definitely have people talking, and it should, as the issue of dinosaurs' rights is a nice, big target for discussion right after seeing Fallen Kingdom set up that issue for some serious payoff.
More importantly, the ending to the Jurassic World follow-up takes the series in a fantastic direction that Jurassic World 3, the presumed finale of the series, could use to close out the loop of God complex politics the series started with Jurassic Park so long ago. Now's your last chance to avoid big time spoilers, as we discuss the ending to Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, and what this means for Jurassic World 3.
How We Got To This Ending
During the climactic finale at the Lockwood Estate, the Indoraptor is killed in spectacular fashion, but a greater problem lingers: poison gas is filling the hidden lab holding all of the dinosaurs smuggled off of Isla Nublar during Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom's first act. This poses an ethical dilemma that rests on the push of a button -- the button that will release all of the dinos into the wild, should it be pressed.
Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), the Dinosaur Protection Group leader that she is, thinks about releasing them into the wild. She hovers her hand over that button, but as she seems ready to push it, Owen (Chris Pratt) tells her not to do it, ultimately back her off of the idea. However, Maisie, Lockwood's "granddaughter," hit the button out of nowhere, and with good reason. As she's been revealed to be a clone of her mother, she hits the button with the justification that the dinosaurs deserve to live, just like she does. The dinosaurs make it into the wild, with others previously sold at auction heading to their new homes.
As a montage of dinosaurs being scattered to the winds unfolds, Dr. Ian Malcolm's grim testimony to a Senate sub-committee welcomes us to Jurassic World, with two massive final images left to hammer the point home: Blue stumbling upon a pre-fab Spielbergian picture of a suburban housing development, and a post-credit scene showing Pterodactyls landing in Las Vegas. With such bold moves executed, what could this mean for Jurassic World 3's thematic prospects?
What This Means For Jurassic World 3
The decision to release the dinosaurs of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom into the wild means that there's a good potential for dinosaur-fueled terror, huge-scale set pieces, and an ultimate resolution to the Jurassic World trilogy - as well as fully realize the proper endgame of the Jurassic Park series as well. With the debate over dinosaur rights bound to heat up, there's even the possibility that more characters from Jurassic Park's trilogy could return to put the finishing touches on the films inspired by Michael Crichton's legendary best-seller.
When all is said and done, setting Rexy and her friends free was probably the best, most logical move for the Jurassic World franchise. Jurassic World 3's story can now potentially bring the 25 year old franchise to a full circle close out, as Jurassic World reintroduced the ethical dilemmas of Jurassic Park, and Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom takes themes from The Lost World: Jurassic Park and reworks it into a middle installment with a cliffhanger leading into at least one final film. Should this pattern hold up, Jurassic World 3 can resolve the "god complex" story started with John Hammond and Benjamin Lockwood's act of creation to a full resolution. But was the decision at the heart of this film's narrative the best choice, taking its necessity to spawn Jurassic World 3's narrative out of the equation? Let's talk both sides of that issue out in detail.
Yes, The Dinosaurs Should Have Been Released
Thinking back to when we first saw these titans of our creation on Isla Nublar in Jurassic Park, it's easy to remember that, like it or not, we created these creatures. Whether it was out of altruistic means, or for our own personal gain, they're out there, and they're living, breathing beings. Since we brought them back, it'd be just as unethical to kill the dinosaurs as it was to create them in the first place. Life has found a way to bring prehistory's finest creatures back to us, and we need to quarantine them so we can let nature take its course. Whether they survive or not, that's not our call, but it is our call to isolate these creatures, and observe how nature provides for them in the wild. At the same time though, let's not make any more dinosaurs. Draft comprehensive legislation against de-extinction of creatures, and let it all go to the wind.
No, The Dinosaurs Should Have Died
On the other side of this argument, there is the gigantic issue of these creatures not belonging on this earth. The world has evolved past the presence of dinosaurs, and letting dinosaurs live was one of the biggest mistakes we could have ever made. Herbivores will consume resources that modern creatures require to live, and at greater rates of consumption; not to mention Carnivores will have the human race, and various animal species, as an open air buffet. Right in the center of this moral panic is the Omnivores, who'll take from column A and B, and fight with both sides of the food chain. Of course, this doesn't even take into account the property damage and military efforts that'll be needed to corral and/or eliminate these animals, but bringing those factors into play, the decision should be clear: the dinosaurs should have died in the lab they were trapped in. Both sides are compelling, but only one can prevail.
Where We Stand
The die was cast the moment we as a species decided it was ok to create dinosaurs from thin air, and prehistoric DNA. These poor dinos didn't ask for this, and save for the sociopathic hybrids we've created in the name of control, they aren't malicious beings. Dinosaurs are only doing what they were programmed to do, and ultimately they are sentient life that deserves to live out whatever its newly created lifespan may be.
When the dust clears, and Jurassic World War (or whatever title Jurassic World 3 will take) has been waged, capturing and quarantining the dinosaurs for rehoming in Costa Rica would be the best option. There's five islands in the same chain that Isla Nublar and Isla Sorna exist in, so one of / all three of those untouched islands would be perfect ground for a new adventure. Seeing as there's no new hybrids, tons of dinosaurs on the run, and the possibility of pro / anti dinosaur factions coming to blows in this third, and possibly final, installment, there's plenty of exciting possibilities that can go down as the Jurassic World continues to turn.
What did you think about the ending?