Most geeks between 31 and 40 know where they were on the second weekend of June, 1993 (or relatively close after). Director Steven Spielberg released his most ambitious film yet about a theme park/zoo hybrid called Jurassic Park. With near unanimity, we rejoiced and declared our love for what we expected to be a glorious franchise to rival Star Wars and Indiana Jones. Two sequels later, most of us called it dead, an idea that didn’t have much staying power. As time does, newer generations stumbled across this film and fell in love as well. Many even stuck around for those sequels, too. I know, I was there. I introduced my son to John Hammond’s dream-turned-nightmare when he was old enough (right around the time he learned how to ride a bike. Just kidding. Sorta).

So when it became real that Jurassic World was being made, that it had legitimate stars and a fresh-faced director, the G1 fanboys weren’t having it. When it wrapped up filming, its main star Chris Pratt became minted as an action star, they still weren’t having it. The trailer released, a few broke from the ranks and showed interest, but not many and some even preemptively attacked it for an overreliance of computer generated effects. Then the film came out, made nearly half a billion dollars worldwide and the rest is history. Right?

Think again.

At the time Jurassic Park came out, the internet was just cutting the umbilical cord. It might even be said that the film was the last word-of-mouth film sensation that required people to use words coming from their mouths. Now, those same G1 teens and tweens are self-proclaimed film critics who have been through the best and worst of what Jurassic Park produced, namely massive CG creatures, epic world-building (as in creating vistas not possible before) and Jeff Goldblum as a summer blockbuster star.

Unlike their more seasoned film colleagues, these G1 critics take films that they have history more personally. Critic Roger Ebert trained the next generation to bring their experiences and feelings into their reviews. The problem was that in the age of the blogosphere, very few know how to express their feelings in a very constructive manner. More often than not, you get Doug Walker, a talented comedian yet someone who has a problem getting to the specifics of why he hates everything but the beginning and the ending (and the beginning is rather ambiguous as you listen to him). And don’t get me started with Filmspotting and Jeremy Jahns. I’m not bashing their opinions, they have every right not to like parts of this film if not the entire thing out right. I just find it curious that these individuals and others proclaim Jurassic Park to be significant to them in ways other critics aren’t. And yes, some of those other critics didn’t like the film that much either. And now look, I’m cross-eyed.

But back to my point. Prior to Jurassic Park, very few films fueled franchises nor have gotten the public exposure that this film had that didn’t have the word STAR in the title. The prior generation grew up on 60s and 70s cinema where filmmakers were allowed to push societal boundaries amidst an angry generation. Great images involved Jack Nicholson playing a piano on a moving truck, Watching two cowboys jump from a high cliff, or a pithy duel of words against staged foes. Very few had to worry about getting upstaged by a dinosaur and those who did shouldn’t because the effects of the time didn’t create tension (we’ll talk King Kong some day). G1 critics could be assured that if the movie did well, it will get a sequel. And because sequels were just becoming to be popular, there weren’t yet enough to show the downfalls of such merchandising of filmmaking. And the first big one for many of them was The Lost World.

Bear in mind that the filmmakers of Jurassic World also have a part to play in their disappointment as well, simply because quite honestly how could you ever possibly top that? But just like Warchowskis and Lucas alike, they tried. There are a tons of ways to create new themes, but the challenge now is that they’re trying to jumpstart a decade-plus dormant franchise, re-introduce concepts and themes without retreading too hard on what’s been done but not completely ignoring that those themes exist. This film also had to make it accessible to newcomers, those who haven’t seen any of the prior films. And let’s not forget that in order to make it profitable, it needs to be able to play to an international audience that craves spectacle over contemplation. As Godzilla and the Transformer movies have proven recently, the world loves big hulking beasts that love to demolish infrastructure. So the question should be, how could this have won the G1s over to begin with considering the expectations? And they responded; Too much.

So should this be filed under the backlash against the globalization of summer movies? Perhaps, but I think that’s being too broad. To many, Jurassic Park was their FIRST summer blockbuster, sitting in a cool theater on a hot day, possibly took their first date or used their first hard-earned dollar to buy that ticket. Jurassic Park has become a part of nostalgia that for all intents and purposes that was laid to rest a decade ago. And now it’s back from the dead and what has returned is subpar, but not just subpar, POPULAR and subpar. And we know how geeks react when angry.

*Once again, nothing against any critic I just described. Feel free to rip me a new one, I think the old one is clogged.