I Still Want to See the Original Version of Jurassic Park III

One of the biggest sci-fi franchises ever, historically groundbreaking and reshaping cinema, Jurassic Park is still loved and talked about by fans to this day. And that’s also thanks to Jurassic World, especially the latest film, Jurassic World Rebirth, which tried to bring back the vibe that made the franchise succeed back in the ’90s. But one thing is undeniable: its sequels were never exactly great, and that’s why they tend to be discussed mostly by the hardcore fans. The truth is simple: they couldn’t match the original’s impact. And you know why? A lack of narrative originality and strong writing. And no, I’m not saying the second and third movies are bad, but it’s impossible to pretend they reach the same level.

The Lost World: Jurassic Park and Jurassic Park III fell deep into cliché territory, with simpler, more predictable plots and far less interest in building that sense of fear, awe, and wonder that defined the first film. One of them leaned into “more of the same” with little creativity, frustrating everyone who expected a surprising sequel. The other took a more straightforward survival-adventure route with dinosaurs, but it ended up feeling like a B-movie with limited ambition and, naturally, limited impact. And the worst part? The original version of Jurassic Park III had way more potential to be something big than what we actually got.

The Original Idea for Jurassic Park III Was Much Bolder

I’ve always felt that the third film is the kind of movie that works fine as quick entertainment, but that’s all it is. And exactly because of that, it leaves the sense that something’s missing. Come on, it’s Jurassic Park — the impact of the first movie still echoes today. Even after so much time, this is the kind of franchise that, if a new film is announced, audiences naturally get excited. It’s a series that changed the industry; you expect something big. And Jurassic Park III absolutely had the potential to be excellent, but then the whole script was changed, and the result is what we saw in 2001.

The original version has been floating around online for a long time now, and fans have been speculating about what could’ve been if the studio had stuck to it. But for those who don’t know, here’s the short version: the initial concept was far more interesting. Basically, we only watched the weakest half of it, while the good half got thrown out.

The Jurassic Park III we got went for the safest route possible: Alan Grant (Sam Neill) gets tricked by a desperate couple and ends up back on Isla Sorna on a rescue mission he didn’t even know he was accepting. The plane crashes, the group improvises their way through survival, and the movie relies on scattered dinosaur encounters until the big final escape. It’s straightforward, functional, and even fun in a few moments — but, as I said, it doesn’t go beyond that.

Now, the original script had a much heavier premise: two tourists disappear off the coast of Costa Rica, creating rising international tension. From there, dinosaurs would attack ships and appear on the coasts of nearby countries, governments would enter into conflict, there would be an international trial in Costa Rica, and Grant would be called in, not out of convenience, but because his scientific expertise was officially needed in the situation. It makes way more sense, right? Plus, it completely changes the game, giving the character a real purpose and putting the film on much more compelling ground.

And obviously, in a world where dinosaurs exist, they wouldn’t stay quietly on an island forever. Of course, there would be diplomatic, economic, and environmental consequences — and the original script was prepared to explore all of that, turning the third movie into something that actually expanded the franchise instead of shrinking into a smaller adventure (Jurassic Park 4 was even discussed at the time, by the way). I’ve always believed this saga works better when it truly embraces the scale of its own premise, and that early draft did exactly that, especially because it treated dinosaurs as a global problem, not just theme-park obstacles. We eventually saw this in Jurassic World, but the execution was completely off since they treated it as a late-game twist instead of the foundation of the story.

Another thing that makes me infinitely prefer the original plan is how Grant would’ve been portrayed, because in the final movie, he’s basically a reluctant volunteer and an accidental passenger in a mess he didn’t ask for. In the original idea, he was part of something much bigger: a crucial witness in an international case, stuck in a moral dilemma, and even more obsessed with his research (to the point of actually living on InGen Island, for instance). He would have been a far more complex and interesting protagonist, showing exactly why he became such a fan favorite. And as someone who loved how he represented the ethical core of the franchise, I really miss that dramatic weight in the final version.

And of course, there were plenty of other changes that, even if they seem small individually, would’ve made a huge difference overall: a much longer T-Rex vs. Spinosaurus fight; the Spino being killed by Velociraptors; and Billy (Alessandro Nivola) actually dying, for example.

Not to mention the horror tone, because Jurassic Park III tries, but most of the time it feels restrained. The original script aimed for something much harsher — the Pteranodon sequence wasn’t meant to be a quick scare, but a genuinely dangerous moment with real consequences. The embryo lab also had a bigger spotlight, with fetuses, tubes, abandoned equipment, and that grim, unsettling atmosphere that reminds you dinosaurs aren’t “natural wonders,” they’re irresponsible corporate experiments. That’s exactly the kind of thing that gives this franchise personality. In the final film, it became background decoration.

The Original Idea Didn’t Happen for Many Reasons

And okay, I know a lot of this was sacrificed out of necessity. The entire production of the third film was chaotic, with last-minute rewrites and scenes changing while they were being shot. For context, Michael Crichton, the author behind the franchise, was involved, but he left after only a few days because he couldn’t find a strong or coherent concept for another movie. That’s when other writers stepped in under Steven Spielberg and Joe Johnston’s supervision. Then, different scripts were officially in play, and the version that I wanted was rejected about five weeks before filming because they felt the story was too complicated and wouldn’t convincingly justify Grant returning to the island (I don’t get this one).

Besides, I also understand the studio’s commercial concerns. A heavy plot with multiple subplots, big threats, political tension, and a darker tone would’ve required more budget, more effects, a more complex narrative — and it risked appealing to a smaller audience, which wasn’t the goal. So the studio picked the simpler rescue mission with a survival twist. It was cheaper, faster, and easier to sell.

Well, Universal wanted an easy-to-deliver movie, and they got it. They just didn’t get a memorable one, which was the whole point. The result is a movie that, honestly, runs on autopilot but could’ve been so much more. And that’s why I’m still obsessed with the idea of seeing the original version of Jurassic Park III. Not out of nostalgia or nitpicking, but because it expanded the universe in a way that made sense, gave new momentum to the characters, took risks with the tone, and treated dinosaurs as the threat they were introduced to be, not as a two-hour adventure that ends with military rescue and a friendly wave. The original script seemed to have a stronger voice, while the final cut feels trimmed down out of a lack of confidence.

And in the end, yes, maybe my insistence is stubborn — but it’s sincere. The version that dealt with consequences worthy of a truly large-scale story, allowed the franchise to grow, and aligned better with the original film’s cultural impact and less with the logic of “just make something so we don’t delay the schedule,” was, in my opinion, the one worth risking. I get why the changes happened, but the more I think about it, the more convinced I am that the studio let a massive opportunity slip away. The decision to rework Jurassic Park III still leaves the nagging feeling that we all missed out on the most interesting chapter of this iconic saga.

What do you think? Leave a comment below and join the conversation now in the ComicBook Forum!

This Is Still the Best Jurassic Park Sequel (And It’s Not Even Close)