A controversial take: “Jurassic World” is a garbage movie. It attempts to bait you, the audience, by evoking – no, pleading with – your sense of nostalgia. “Do you remember how totally awesome ‘Jurassic Park’ was?” it asks you, repeatedly bashing you over the head with references to the original (and vastly superior) film. “Jurassic World” has no actual characters, only caricatures. Its plot is lazy, recycled, and forced. I dare say it isn’t even a movie – it’s a product, an advertisement for itself and its sequels. You may call it a franchise, some may even call it a dynasty (and for those of you who do, I bite my thumb at thee), but I see it for the shallow, soulless, cash-grab sequel that it really is.

The idea of the cash-grab sequel is nothing new. They’ve been around almost as long as there have been movies; the 1933 masterpiece “King Kong” had a rushed sequel that same year. The Eighties, everyone’s favorite decade for some reason, turned low budget sequels into an art-form, producing (in that decade alone) five “Halloween” films, five “Nightmare on Elm Streets”, and eight Friday the 13th movies. Yet compared to “Jurassic World” and its subsequent follow-ups, these films are all high art. In fact, it is such a lazy attempt to make a quick buck, that it doesn’t just rip-off “Jurassic Park”, but it’s also derivative of a little film called “Jaws 3-D”.

“Jaws 3-D” is a 1983 movie from the fine folks at Universal Studios, in which a great white shark becomes trapped inside Sea World and proceeds to prove that old adage: “I’m not stuck in here with you, you’re stuck in here with me.” It stars Dennis Quaid as a park engineer, Bess Armstrong as a resident marine biologist, and Louis Gossett, Jr. as the park’s manager. “Jaws 3-D” is definitely a product of its time, cashing in on the box office success of its predecessors (the first “Jaws” was a box office smash – the original summer blockbuster – as well as the highest grossing film of its day until “Star Wars” came out two years later).  “Inspired” by the recent success of the budding slasher genre, specifically 1982’s “Friday the 13th III”, “Jaws 3-D” “borrows” some key elements, namely 3-D, as well as replacing the shark’s signature theme of duhn-duh duhn-duh with Jason Voorhees’ equally iconic ch-ch-ch-hah-hah-hah in the first attack scene.

“Jaws 3-D” and “Jurassic World” share a lot of similarities. They’re both about a theme park full of people who find themselves suddenly at odds with the parks’ attractions. They’re both second-rate sequels to highly successful Steven Spielberg movies. However, “Jaws 3-D” has something going for it that “Jurassic World” doesn’t: self-worth.

In the original “Jaws”, a great white shark terrorizes a summer beach town until the chief of police finally hires a local fisherman to help him hunt and kill it. Jaws 2 also exists. “Jaws 3-D” decides to go in an entirely different direction (well, for a killer shark movie), trading in the now tired town of Amity for the hustle and bustle of Sea World. The result is a fun little b-movie with a beginning, a middle, and an end. Only once does 3-D reference the first film, and even then, only in a throw-away line written expressly to connect the two. If I didn’t know any better, I could almost watch it as an entirely separate movie, and still get just as much enjoyment and satisfaction from it as I would knowing it was a sequel.

On the other hand, “Jurassic World” spent entirely too much of its time and energy trying to remind us of how great “Jurassic Park” was, to the point where one of its characters literally tells us this. “That first park was legit,” said a control room operator after bragging about getting “Jurassic Park” merch on eBay for only $150 (which come on buddy, I see that same tee shirt at Target all the time for like, ten bucks). “Jurassic World” rests on the laurels of its predecessor and tries to pass off callbacks to iconic moments and imagery as an original thought.

Another key difference is the characters. In “Jaws 3-D”, Quaid and Armstrong play well off of each other. Quaid is believable as a hard-working yet affable engineering supervisor, and Armstrong is equally endearing as a strong-willed yet compassionate biologist. Their chemistry is effective, and when they find themselves in danger, we as an audience care. I couldn’t say the same for Chris Pratt and Bryce Dallas Howard’s characters in “Jurassic World”. These caricatures of main characters are stiff and miserable. Pratt is an action man written so childishly that I wouldn’t be surprised if he wrote his character. Howard’s character is written in the classic 80’s Hollywood fashion: misogynisticly and lacking true character development. Her character arc is literally “learns to appreciate Chris Pratt’s creepy advances”.

“Jaws 3-D” isn’t the end-all be-all.  The special effects were laughable, even in 1983, and yes, it wasn’t purely innocent of trying to cash in on the trends of the day.  However, despite its less than honest intentions, it’s still a fun little movie that you could watch any time with friends, family, or on your own. I couldn’t say the same of “Jurassic World”, a movie that so desperately wants to be its progenitor. Now, speaking of big dumb dinosaur movies, I think it’s high time I check out this new movie, “65”, in which Adam Driver crash-lands a spaceship on prehistoric earth and battles with a bunch of cartoon dinosaurs.

If you’d like to watch “Jaws 3-D” it is available to rent on most movie rental sites. If you’d like to watch “Jurassic World”, don’t.