Jurassic World was never going to top Jurassic Park; no sequel to the classic 1993 film can live up to the magic of seeing those dinosaurs for the first time. I knew this going in, and I think that helped avoid some unnecessary disappointment. But it's hard not to think about Jurassic Park sequels without a certain hesitation, as the second and third films both had various issues that kept them from reaching the greatness of the original.

The good news, though, is that this film holds its ground much more firmly than The Lost World or Jurassic Park III.

Polygon's Ben Kuchera wrote an opinion piece last week titled, "Why Jurassic Park is one of the best action films ever (and how the sequel seems to flub it)." You can read it here. Kuchera provides a really interesting summation of why the original Jurassic Park works so well, but I think he may be missing the obvious in assessing what we know about Jurassic World. He argues that the sequel is so far off of the original that there's essentially little-to-no hope that it will regain any of the franchise's former glory. I'd argue that it might be much closer to the mark than he gives it credit.