Dinosaur Island (2014) User Reviews (68)

Jurassic Park this ain't

[chrismackey1972 · 3/10 · 17 November 2014]

Lucas, a young boy, finds a crystal among his dad's belongings in an old house that neither of his parents want to take care of any longer. When the boy gets on a plane, the crystal begins to interact with the aircraft, causing it to disappear. The boy awakens on a beach far back in pre-history and shortly thereafter finds himself pursued by three raptors. A young girl - Kate - saves Lucas and takes him to her makeshift house, where she tells him that she is 16, and her birth year is 1940. Lucas informs her that she would actually be closer to 70 since the year is 2014. Throughout the movie, the two find themselves going through a few adventures.

This movie was geared up primarily for kids, as the two leads are teenagers. Be forewarned that the dinosaurs look like they fell in an Easter egg coloring kit. The raptors were interesting to look at, but the tyrannosaurus rex looked ridiculous with all those colors. I'm not sure if there was a color in the rainbow they didn't put on that dinosaur. Speaking of the dinosaurs, I think they spent the vast majority of the budget on the special effects for the dinos. They were pretty good. Mind you, Jurassic Park has nothing to worry about. In JP, those dinos looked real. In Dinosaur Island, they looked very CGI, but they were much better than anything the TV series Terra Nova ever offered.

I won't watch this movie again. This movie didn't appeal to me, but as I said, it was geared up for kids, and I'm 42 years old. The story was...childlike, as was the dialogue. If you have kids, and they really like dinosaurs, this might be the movie that will keep them out of trouble for about 1.5 hours. However, if you're an adult, and you're looking for a movie that will appeal to your level of maturity, this probably won't be for you, but we all like different things. I've seen Jurassic Park at least 30 times, and I'll watch that many more times. I saw Dinosaur Island once, and that will do for me.

A classic joke

[ushalg · 3/10 · 24 October 2014]

This is officially one of the funniest movies i have seen in a long while. What makes it even funnier is the fact that they are not aware of the great joke they have created. This could best pass as a kids movie but never the less it could have been better constructed. The actors were extremely disappointing even for kids, there was no substance in their acting. The main boy was so bland and fake i actually had to make sure i wasn't watching a very HD animation and he had the worst reactions and facial expressions for almost everything that happened in the movie. The dinosaurs were far from scary more like 2D paintings slapped on screen. Then the native tribe? LMMMMMAAAAAAOOOOOO the language sounded hilarious, like they got a bunch of African American kids to mutter gibberish( e.g Fasil loose when their team mate got lost), couldn't stop laughing. Would certainly recommend to anyone in search of something to make them laugh their head off.

Feathered reptiles

[Prismark10 · 3/10 · 2 May 2015]

Journey To Dinosaur Island is an unpretentious kids film with colourful and feathered dinosaurs but a clunky script and under par acting.

Its entertaining and undemanding if watched with an audience of kids as an Australian boy named Lucas who finds himself marooned in a mysterious island with very colourful dinosaurs and finds a girl called Kate who has been on the island seemingly since the 1950s. They try to find a means to escape the island.

This production values are OK, the Australian setting makes the film more novel and at least it has an interesting beginning as Lucas goes one up on his school teacher at class.

The CGI makes this look more like a B picture the special effects are still better than the low grade output from the SyFy channel but you do wonder if visual effects colourist was on acid at the time.

A missed opportunity

[gafmonger · 4 May 2015]

I'm reading a lot of reviews claiming that this is the "worst film ever". It's not. There are easily two or three worse films. The problem for this film is that it sells itself as a serious piece of dinosaur-themed sci-fi, as if going head-to-head with the JP franchise is something easily achieved. Unfortunately, we're now judging it against a tough set of criteria, and this film was never going to pull it off.

In short, the acting is poor, the story is dull and the daft sci-fi approach doesn't gel with the scientific approach. The CGI isn't utterly terrible, but they overstretch themselves. There has been some effort to update dinosaur and pterosaur portrayals, but overall, they're flippin' awful. The 'azhdarchid', or whatever it is, is unbelievably bad. Seriously. See if it's on Youtube so that you don't have to sit through the whole thing. The tyrannosaur stands around yelling at everything, and only when everything is already half a mile away does it give chase.

Your kids might like it, but just make sure you're not stuck watching it with them.

Awful on many levels

[monkey_bean10 · 2/10 · 30 October 2014]

I bought this on a whim from a local shop as my 4 year old son loves dinosaurs. The storyline in his film is abysmal and the acting is even worse. It's not remotely enjoyable, it feels like a chore. I'm aware this film is aimed at children, but there are plenty of kids films out there that can be enjoyed by adults too. This isn't one of them, and even my son gets bored during this film. The special effects are terrible too - the dinosaurs look more like brightly coloured fluffy chickens than anything else. I can only assume this film was a straight to did release as it's become very clear as to why I hadn't heard of it before!

A real stinker!

[childs_kate · 1/10 · 25 January 2015]

I live in Spain and bought this movie from Amazon UK for my eight year old. I'm really annoyed at the fake positive spin surrounding this movie. I watched about half of it with my daughter and had to turn it off because it was such rubbish. This is NOT Jurassic Park where the animation even some 20 years ago was brilliant! The dinosaurs looked like giant muppet canaries and floated along with no weight. The actors looked like they were in front of a blue screen staring un-focused at imagined objects - I've seen better acting in school plays. All of that aside, the director simply failed to get us to care about the characters, so I turned it off with simply no interest in how it ended. Don't waste your time and money on this film. (Is there a way to rate this movie less than 1?!)

One of the worst movies ever!

[rob-yolo · 1/10 · 16 November 2014]

OK this is by far one of the worst movies ever. Everything about this movie was bad that at some points it made me laugh. I know this was meant to be a movie for children but every aspect of it was un- enjoyable so not even little kids can enjoy it.

The acting by the main guy was cringe-worthy. His pretending and facial expressions were so unreal and forced upon that even serious/dramatic scenes were laugh worthy. And the main girl, everything she said was straight of the script and it just made her very annoying. Overall the acting was terrible, there are many better child actors that can at least act to some degree!! The actors weren't probably even paid, at least a gift card for their local shopping mall could have given them more motivation to give an enjoyable performance.

Another horrible thing about this movie was the CGI and just basic knowledge of dinosaurs. Like come on, feathered T-Rex is meant to be scary. When I first saw the T-Rex runs towards the main characters I thought it was a chicken piñata. Even though the budget wasn't very high the CGI was kind of OK, but in some scenes the graphics looked like from a year 2000 PS1 game

Oh and not to forget the plot, it had one of the most ridiculous stories ever. None of that can be scientifically proved. I wonder where the script writers and directors came up with such ideas.

So overall if you have kids under the age of 4 and that don't really understand what is going on you can turn on the TV and play this for them while you take a nap. If you don't have kids and just want to laugh your head off then watch this ridiculous movie.

Horrible acting but otherwise good for kids.

[Rob_Taylor · 5/10 · 22 October 2014]

I'm not really sure what to say about this movie. On the one hand, it is squarely aimed at small kids, and not very sophisticated small kids at that, so any criticism might seem churlish. On the other hand, it has faults which make it a little painful for adults to watch. Cringe-inducing, mostly, rather than truly horrible. So I'm going to dive in and just say it like it is.

Horrible acting. Terrible dialogue.

The two main leads - both kids - are not very good. The girl is tolerable and has potential, but the little boy is just teeth-grittingly bad. It's an odd state of affairs that the two main characters weren't given better direction and coaching, since they occupy so much of the film's running time.

In addition, the dialogue has some truly awful moments that defy belief. Who wrote some of this stuff? Combined with the bad acting, it just makes for some truly cringe-inducing moments.

This is by far the worst element of the movie, which is otherwise quite well done. The production values, whilst not huge, are generally pretty good and the CGI, though not entirely convincing at all, at least has the benefit of being imaginative. Some very talented people came up with some very nice and original images, monsters and scenes. That the CGI isn't up to the task of convincingly delivering these ideas is not their fault and they should be commended for their efforts.

Again, it's a kid's film, so the budget probably wasn't there for anything more substantial. But, for what they did manage, it is pretty good.

The story is pretty imaginative too and, whilst it won't make you wonder what is going to happen next, neither will it make you go "Huh?" at any point.

As I say, the only thing which really let's the movie down is the acting, and the young leads can at least be forgiven for that. They are young, after all.

So is it worth watching? If you have kids, yes. But only young kids. Older ones will find it as badly acted as I did, I'm sure. If you don't have kids, then no, probably not. It is, however, a perfectly safe film to sit kids in front of at the weekend and drift off yourself.

SUMMARY: Poor acting in an otherwise imaginative film. Passable CGI and story. Really only for little kids, who won't mind the bad acting.

Don't Bother

[nataliedlasselle · 2/10 · 15 February 2015]

I'm guessing the two lead characters knew the director. Would have cost them less too. Disappointed to see these two in the job. It kinda feels like you're watching a school play. Sure they're fresh faced new kids on the block, but I'll have my $24 back thanks Hoyts.

The special effects were disappointing and lets be honest, it was clear the main part was Australian, so why was there an American flag at the end of the film? The blue-screen effects were too obvious & storyline parts (like the tribe) didn't seem to be explained well enough.

My 5 year old enjoyed it, and that's the main thing. I guess if it can be dubbed with American accents it may make it that much more bearable.

Strange

[forthcoming2012 · 4/10 · 9 June 2019]

Interesting premise, bad acting. The editing and yeah, the CGI could be better, but I'm thinking it wasn't made to be a blockbuster. But hey, my 4 year old sat and watched it, so I'm good.

A literal piece of garbage.

[diogo-alex260 · 1/10 · 30 June 2015]

As regt said the only reviews you see that have a number bigger than 2 are basically users that participated in the making of this movie and then made an account specifically for this movie, which brings this movie even to a greater shame than it was already. I'm not even gonna bother to detail the whole thing, the movies is simply just bad, plot-wise, visually a literal piece of human waste, the characters are boring and the acting is just plain bad, special effects are as lamer than a 80's movie.

Don't believe me? Well just check the reviews...all you see from the idiots who created their accounts are 8's and 10's and yet the rating is a solid 3,8 and it keeps going down.

My advice, don't even illegally download this movie, you'll just waste bandwidth.

Doesn't deserve 10

[trustrup-399-980069 · 10/10 · 3 September 2015]

But I have to give it 10, since it doesn't deserve 3.5 either.

This is not an all bad movie, thought it would be god awful #%%^, but the production value is quite high, and though the story isn't anything special. It's quite entertaining.

Plus they have actually tried to make the dinosaurs as we think they look like now.

Would probably rate it as 5 or 6, a good hangover movie.

And yes it looks like the production company has tried to fiddle wit the score, but the horrible reviews, what do you expect from a children/sci-fi/family movie?

At least there are no talking dogs.

Film is aimed at children

[dutchy-47536 · 7/10 · 29 April 2018]

This film was very good for children 7-9 Should not be compared to Jurassic park. It's not a high budget film but not a bad effort and it entertains children so a success in that regard. Acting won't win any accolades but hey it's a children's film.

A Total Waste of Sleep

[paul_tigger · 1/10 · 27 April 2019]

An insomniac would fall asleep to this lackluster movie. Everything about this movie makes as much sense as putting a bus stop in the middle of an ocean...

Could have been MUCH better with a little work.

[shaunfirth-201-169162 · 4/10 · 11 July 2015]

WARNING: SPOILERS Many have complained about the quality of the special effects and the acting. Others have defended these elements because the film is clearly for small children and clearly low budget. My problem is a belief that the movie could have been much better and more appropriate for a wider audience without adding much the the bill. This movie needed maybe 6 more 2 or 3 minute scenes. But none of these scenes would have required much if anything in the way of post production, because for the most part they would have been completely expository. First, whose house was that they visited at the beginning of the film, and why was there a crystal there? I think some questions could have been answered that would not have given away the ending, but could have made the ending a "Oh, I get it moment" instead of a "What the heck?" moment. Then a scene explaining the tribe. Have these people lived on the island forever? Or did there ship crash here? Why are they all children except the guy in the cage? Why the newspaper from the future? And would Lucas really show NO INTEREST in a newspaper from his future? It seems like Kate never tried to find a way off the island before. She should have been able to say to Lucas that she'd tried everything (in order to try and convince him to stay.) Why do these planes and ships not have people on them? Again, I don't necessarily need an answer, just some indication that somebody have GIVEN IT SOME THOUGHT! There are other little things that would have helped me too. Lucas was covered in man-eating-plant goo. Then suddenly he was clean and dry. How long had Kate been on the island? Yet her clothes were immaculate? And speaking of Kate, how did she even come to BE on the island? All this time she'd been studying flora and fauna but never once WONDERED about the island itself? I mean, it's an island UNTETHERED IN TIME. I would WONDER about that. Oh, I guess there is one place where I might have spent some money on CGI. Lucas had been on the island for one day. I think he would have been curious about the island. Yes, he would have wanted to get back home, but maybe the writer could have let him spend a couple of weeks there. If for no other reason than giving Kate and Lucas time to bond. To become friends instead of acquaintances. Then I would have put them in peril. Made it life or death that they get off this island. An earthquake could have destroyed their shelter? The natives could have found their shelter and threatened them? The volcano could have been about to explode? The exploding volcano could have probably helped with other problems too. I'm just saying this movie could have been SO MUCH BETTER without costing much more money. All it needed was another pass at the script. Even my eight year old niece was confused when it was over.

Kids Acting EPICLY AWEFUL, But Fun Film!

[rick-19130 · 4/10 · 24 April 2018]

Yep, I'm gonna be THAT mean Lol Seriously though, this whole film may indeed have been Shot in only 10 weeks, but surely the kids could have had more acting lessons in that time. It's painful to watch! Plus, being British myself, does the Girl really have to have such a strong, cliché British Accent? She sounds like a little Mary Poppins FFS!... and I mean the original Julie Andrews version.

Anyway, now that I've had my Rant, it's actually quite a fun film to watch. The Special Effects are quite impressive for such a Low Budget Film. It's probably best that you don't take it too seriously - it's a great film to chill out in front of & suitable for all ages, especially other kids who won't be so judgemental of the Kid's Acting Skills as adults who know what to look for! Bearable Fun.

With all the running these kids do they never sweat?

[javiergarcon · 1/10 · 19 April 2022]

How fake is this movie? So fake that they wardrobe change every five minuets. The Trex chase was so fake it made me want to turn this off or make a terrible meme against these kids because the dino was running and the kids where trying to climb a ladder, the T rex was running and the kids where still trying to to start climbing a ladder then the T rex was running and still the kids are still beginning to climb a ladder. The acting was so bad that when the kids fell off of the Pterodactyl, by the way you cant fly on the back of a gliding Bird they will drop like a rock! She stood up and started screaming his name "where are you" and he was 3 feet next to her... That is how bad this movie is. This story was written perfectly but was given to the wrong Director! That chose the wrong cast. This movie needs a redo With High Paying Actors.

Not as bad as some reviews would have you believe

[neil-476 · 5/10 · 18 September 2021]

Young Lucas finds himself marooned on a mysterious island populated with dinosaurs, wrecked ships and aircraft, and a self-possessed young girl from 50 years earlier.

This is a film for kids and, specifically, kids who love dinosaurs. Let's look at what's good about it. The story is fine. There are LOTS of dinosaurs and, while the CGI may not be up to blockbuster tentpole movie standards, it's not bad. It's certainly way better than what we've seen over the yezrs from Asylum and the Syfy Channel. The dinosaurs are (literally) colourful, not to mention feathered. The film is visual fun.

Not so much fun are a) the script and b) the two main youngsters. The script is full of lines which ring false, and the kids overact and deliver some unconvincing line readings of linex which weren't very convincing to start off with. And the girl who plays Kate is required to speak in a clipped British accent, for no reason that I could see, which stretches her just a bit too far.

Credit and blame must go to story / scriptwriter / producer / director / special effects supremo Scott Drummond (suggestion, Scott - don't plaster your name all over the rather attractive title sequence before the film starts, leave it to the end). On the one hand, it's no mean feat putting a feature film together: on the other hand, Ed Wood. This is quite a bit better than Mr Wood's offerings!

Actually quite impressive

[whiteandblackdesigns · 1/10 · 18 October 2016]

I have waited a while, and seen a lot of movies but this is on a par with some old time worst ever movies like the creeping terror or Eegah! and has none of the charm of them.

The main character is so badly acted and obnoxious that I am surprised the posh girl doesn't kill him and eat him on sight. I would have willed one of the monsters to kill the vile little s**t if they had looked in any way realistic (which they don't)

For kids? I wouldn't be so cruel. I can give you a list of hundreds of films better for them then this, both old and new. Frankly it's an insult to anyone old enough to focus their eyes and see in colour.

Positives? It ended. The girl is quite pretty. I never have to see it again

My 10 yo would have given this only 1/2 a star

[tflock-21859 · 1/10 · 11 November 2019]

With movies like Jurassic World already out there, this looks very lame, even to kids.

Only worth watching for the dinosaurs

[tobiwalker · 3/10 · 30 June 2019]

I'm an adult (somewhat) and a dino fanatic, so actually forced myself to watch this entire movie. Folks who complain about the fluffy dinosaurs are behind in their paleontology -- these dinos are some of the most potentially realistic I've seen. Unfortunately the child actors were some of the least interesting I've ever seen, horrible, annoying children, and I'd hold the director responsible. There's not much of a story, and for kids, there needn't have been, but the creatures were wasted on this sadly lacking production.

Don't listen to the haters.

[jessica_amos · 10/10 · 20 June 2019]

Fantastic kids movie. Don't listen to all the negative haters.

Decent for what it is

[kdunlap24 · 7/10 · 3 May 2020]

Acting was decent and definitely a unique take on dinosaurs. While the dinos were obviously CGI, they were done quite well. Doesn't deserve an Oscar, nor does it deserve the 3s and below all the amateur critics are giving it. This is a kids movie, not Jurrasic Park 7

The mental equivalent of an amoeba.

[wingthwong · 1/10 · 20 July 2019]

I looked this up to see if it would be a good children's show. It was directed by Emmy Winner Matt Drummond, and was nominated for animation for some obscure award. Who is Matt Drummond, and how do you get a movie nominated for animation when no animation was involved? Well, I watched this with my 9 year old (my other two walked off), and she immediately became annoyed with the theme, special effects (the poor cgi that received the animation nomination), and plot. Truly a ripoff of so many other films that even SciFi's Asylum wouldn't touch. The icing on the fecal cake is the pet dinosaur called Mimos that mimics the sounds it hears. Well, apparently R2D2 and Bubo, the golden owl from Clash of the Titans (1981), factored in so.ewhere in this time traveling schlock... I can't even call it Fest... because there is nothing festive about it... A dinosaur that can do the digital sounds of R2D2, exactly, and the whistling mechanical sounds of Bubo as it's other main communication process. Too much money was spent on this to be this bad. So sad. Wanted this to be something my children would like. Australian filmmaking gone horribly wrong.

Bad in most way.

[moshroomf · 2/10 · 23 August 2015]

The script was awful, The acting was bad, The VFX is OK, could have been better.

there were awkward moments/acting all through out the movie, unrealistic situations/reactions, and

I guess the director is not yet ready for this kind of ambitious project, I'm just sad that the line " A kid's Film" being used into an alibi for making a bad movie.and not to mention it a full-feature film and been shown if Theaters with a production budget.

The Theatrical Poster was good though, it fooled me thinking it was a good movie.