Are Mutants Really What the Jurassic Franchise Needs?
Spoilers Ahead!!
Introduction
Being a mutant, the Distortus rex can change its size depending on how well it fits into the frame!
In July of 2025, the 7th installment of the franchise that should have probably gone extinct long ago stomped onto cinema screens worldwide. Jurassic World Rebirth, as its name implies, is intended to be a "rebirth" of the movie series, returning to its roots in classic tension-packed dinosaur chaos with a flair of anti-corporate messaging. Overall, its a decent film, and surpasses the previous two by a great margin, thought that isn't a very impressive feat.
Out of all the things this film did well, the dinosaur designs and cinematography were definitely up there. Even if the designs still have their general gnarly "Jurassic" feel that keeps them a good 10 to 15 years behind actual science, they are still vast improvements over the bland, crocodile-inspired dinosaurs we got from the previous 3 Jurassic World films. The most controversial thing about the dinosaurs in this film (other than the film insisting that Mosasaurus and Quetzalcoatlus are totally dinosaurs) is the introduction of mutants. These new "mutated" dinosaurs are the Mutadon and Distortus rex. Mutadon is apparently a mutated hybrid of Pteranodon and Velociraptor and Distorted rex is (presumably) a distorted T. rex.
Mandatory mutations or dispensable distortions?
While a somewhat novel concept on the surface, these new mutants just end up as an excuse to add in literal monsters into a movie franchise whose appeal came from the fact that the "monsters" were actual animals rather than cold-blooded killers. Furthermore, they add little to the already existing trope of hybrid dinosaurs, such as the Indominus rex, Indoraptor and Scorpius rex, the last of which filling basically an identical role to the mutants.
In the end, these mutants serve little additional purpose than to act as extra bloodthirsty dino-villains. The Distortus rex is intended to be a conflicting character, with the viewer supposedly feeling sorry for the love child of the Rancor and a Xenomorph due to the apparent pain its in. Although this is an interesting idea, it is barely even reflected in the film itself as the Distortus is perfectly capable of blowing up helicopters and chewing on bad guys and its design is far too symmetrical and blemish-free to reflect the fact its some mutant abomination.
While not the worst design out there, the Rancor and Xenomorph inspirations were definitely taken to heart.
Had the mutants embraced their deformed nature, both in physical appearance and literary roles, I feel they could be far more compelling additions and perhaps even the focus of the film that makes Jurassic World Rebirth the breath of fresh air it should be. As it is now, the mutants could easily be replaced by normal dinosaurs with little to no bearing on the overall story of Rebirth.
Does the public really not care about dinosaurs?
Even the start of the film itself reflects a sentiment that the public no longer cares about dinosaurs. The existence of zoos, wildlife conservations, whale watching, birdwatching and everything in-between make it paradoxical that people so interested in modern animals merely scoff at dinosaurs revived from millions of years of being extinct.
However, the actual intention of this introduction is apparently to reflect the public's attitude towards dinosaurs in movies. Jurassic World starts with a similar opening, with the hybrid Indominus rex being made to up the stakes from the normal dinosaurs that have now become stale. Despite how hard movie directors will use this trick to try and justify monsters in a dinosaur movie, when looking at the bigger picture, its hard to side with such a claim.
When you think of any Jurassic films, what first comes to mind? I'll be willing to bet its a scene involving some sort of dinosaur. Whether it be the T. rex and Velociraptor from the original Jurassic Park or the Therizinosaurus and Giganotosaurus from Dominion, the dinosaurs have always been some of the most memorable and integral part of these films. Even though Dominion is one of if not the worst reviewed Jurassic film, it still made 4 times its budget in the box office. People go to see these movies for the dinosaurs and as long as the plot stays interesting, and the characters likable, people will keep going for the dinosaurs. Substituting dinosaurs with new labels like hybrids and mutants can only take you so far.
Conclusion
Overall Jurassic World Rebirth is a solid film. Does it have its fair share of problems (in addition to the ones I mentioned in this analysis)? Definitely. Is it a decent film that's fun to watch? Yes! In a strange way, the biggest mistake of Jurassic World Rebirth is being a Jurassic film. If it went by a different name I feel much of the congruency issues would be resolved and it would open up a path for new sequels and future installments, one that is difficult with Rebirth's ties to the Jurassic lore .
Future installments should focus more on making a meaningful story with a memorable message. That's the reason why the original Jurassic Park is the one people still reference and quote, even if Jurassic World was the one who made the most in the box office. The inclusion of new concepts such as mutant dinosaurs should have a significant reason for their inclusion, rather than just introducing something new just for the sake of it being new. In this case it feels that the producers got so preoccupied with whether or not they could, that they didn't stop to think if they should.
Sources
https://cinemadailyus.com/interviews/jurassic-world-rebirth-director-gareth-edwards-interview/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jurassic_World_Rebirth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jan5CFWs9ic