Remember how Claire, the incomprehensibly robotic and morally barren protagonist of Jurassic World, spent an entire two hours on the run from an escaped maniacosaurus and never once removed her heels? Of course you do.
Let me say this now: I enjoyed Jurassic World. It looked great, had some solid performances, featured BD Wong rocking his best Bond villain turtleneck, and frequently veered so wildly into camp that it was actually surprising when nobody broke the fourth wall.
But it should also be said that almost every single creature in this movie, with the possible exception of a few prehistoric carnivores, behaves like a complete moron. The plot hinges on allegedly intelligent people making face-meltingly idiotic decisions. When one character decides to up and leave her post at the end of her shift instead of staying behind with her good-hearted but low-IQ'd colleague to try and sort out the mess, you feel the overwhelming urge to cheer.
Simultaneously, the best and worst aspect of Jurassic World is that it can't seem to decide if it's in on the joke or not. Perhaps it's some kind of post-modern satirical masterpiece whose true genius will only be revealed in years to come. But before then, we'll have a sequel on our hands, which begs the question:
Could 'Jurassic World 2' possibly be any dumber than 'Jurassic World'?
A brief disclaimer: Although I've put some real thought into this — less thought than I've put into what's for dinner tonight, I'll concede, but arguably more than the writers put into Jurassic World — you may dispute some of the logic in this article, much as one may question the wisdom of a corporate predator not evacuating 20,000 people from her park when a murderous, lab-birthed dinosaur demonstrates clear cunning and intellect to escape its handlers and embark on a potentially deadly rampage.
(*It's lasagne tonight. I know you were wondering.)
Let's examine the evidence on a case-by-case basis, beginning with the film's primary villain, Vic Hoskins, played by the usually excellent Vincent D'Onofrio.
No, Vic. You don't have enough brains.
Hoskins is dumb. Dumber than dumb. He wants to recruit Indominus Rex as a weapon for the US military on the basis that dinosaurs can do things drones can't, a train of thought presumably intended to show off the film's 21st century relevance, but in fact derailed by an astounding lack of logic. How, for instance, would the military be able to covertly transport a dinosaur far bigger than any chinook across an ocean and into a war zone? Like I said: dumb.
Could The Next Villain's Big, Bad Scheme Get Any Stupider?
No. Even the writers of Jurassic World can barely commit to the idea of Hoskins as a serious threat. He's simply too stupid to function, much less to weaponize a dinosaur. Wilson Fisk did not die for this. Whoever the villain of Jurassic World 2, whatever his plan, he or she will not out-dumb Hoskins.
So, we've got the bad guy covered.
What about the hero?
In the interest of playing devil's advocate — and because he's literally one of two human beings in this movie who reacts as you or I might, had we been brainless enough to ever step foot in Jurassic World in the first place — I will take Owen, rather than Claire, as the hero of this movie.
Without Owen's quick thinking, everybody in the park would be dead. It's only at his insistence that the crowds are even partially evacuated (Claire makes the call to close off the north of the park, because apparently an enormous dinosaur couldn't possibly make the trek a whole four miles to the southern section).
He's also a master dino-tamer who understands that, while these creatures were bred in a lab, they don't know they were created by a man whose magical turtleneck allows him to age backwards. They still feel, which is far more than can be said for Claire.
In fact, at the risk of going back on what I just said, we have to talk about Claire. The men who wrote this movie apparently believe that a woman can only be successful if she wraps her heart in a tampon. It's a hilarious and bizarrely backward attitude for a film which is constructed almost completely from very contemporary CGI trickery.
She also dresses head to toe in white, like some kind of evil corporate virgin bride, which is really just asking for trouble when you work in the outdoors, but whatever.
So, could the hero of 'Jurassic World 2' be any dumber than this pair?
Well, yeah, actually, purely on the basis that Owen is somewhat smart. In fact, his only really idiotic move is running off into the sunset with Claire (quite literally, because nobody involved in making this movie can even spell the word "subtle"). She may be dressed for a wedding, but this pair are not destined to be.
That leaves us tied with one vote in each column. To decide this one, we're going to have to turn to the dinosaurs themselves. Although I could talk about Indominus Rex, or T-Rex, I'd like to instead turn my cynical eye on the whale-a-saur, that weird-ass water dinosaur that performs dolphin tricks like munching on smaller dinosaurs (assuming it does this once a day for the crowds, Blofeld Wong must be super busy in that lab of his, but let's not dwell on the details).
Whale-a-saur eats Zara, Claire's intensely annoying, hyper-British personal assistant, a woman too preoccupied with her phone (because she's educated, and all educated women have phone-glue on their hands!) to keep two young boys in her sight. Whale-a-saur did good. Because of whale-a-saur, Jurassic World has one idiot fewer to deal with.
Whatever dinosaur is called upon to perform tricks for the braindead masses in the next movie might not have the smarts to eat an irritating British lady, and for that reason alone we have to conclude that Jurassic World 2 does indeed have the potential to be a dumber movie than the first.
Now, I'm off to check my bank balance in the hope that I can afford to spend thousands of dollars visiting a park where everybody gets eaten once every few years, just in time for Jurassic World 2 in 2018.