The Message For Politicians In 'Jurassic World's' Shift Against Big Business

When the original “Jurassic Park” blockbuster hit screens nearly a quarter-century ago, Americans had just booted George H.W. Bush from office in favor of Bill Clinton. All was right with the United States and the world.

Now another Clinton and another Bush are vying for the White House, and a new Jurassic Park flick — “Jurassic World” — shows how much has changed since then. Politicians should pay attention.

The 1993 “Jurassic Park” was innocent, optimistic — and pro-capitalist.

John Hammond, who comes up with the idea to clone dinosaurs for fun and profit, is a foreign billionaire, sure. But he's a nice billionaire.

He wants to make people happy. “We made living biological attractions so astonishing, they'll capture the imagination of the entire planet!” he says.

He's so confident in the security measures on his island and so enthralled by the animals themselves — the “fascinating” dinosaurs “trust him,” he says — that he has his own grandkids visit to share the joy.

But it's a good thing capitalism has some checks and balances. Hammond's outside investors want to make sure the park is safe before it opens to tens of thousands of children.

Hammond cheerfully notes his hatred of lawyers and insurers, but he hires scientists to certify the park.

The park isn't safe — stomp, stomp, crunch, crunch — and can never open. And so it turns out that capitalism has saved thousands of children.

Hammond's sin was not being evil, but being naive. “I wanted to show them something real,” he says, after it all falls apart. Hammond is so naive, in fact, that one of his employees took advantage of him, setting in motion the dino havoc.

The obligatory sexy lady in the story, Ellie Sattler, is a doctor who can do real things like fix people and dinosaurs. She's also psychologically astute in that she understands Hammond's limitations.

Fast-forward to 2015's “Jurassic World.” The park is open — and people are about to become mass casualties.

But the villain isn't hubris or a conniving rogue employee. It's faceless multinational capitalism.

This movie's foreign billionaire, Simon Masrani, isn't a nice guy. He's pushed his scientists to create a hybrid dinosaur not because he's innovative and curious, as Hammond was, but because he needs corporate growth.

He's more interested in his playboy hobby — piloting a helicopter, and not very well — than in people. Whenever he has the chance to save his workers or customers, he doesn't.

Claire Dearing, this movie's sexy lady, manages the park. But unlike Ellie, she has no useful skills, besides driving a big car, and fast.

Ellie cares about saving lives; Claire cares about her appearance. She runs around in porny heels, because being sexy is more important than relating to people.

And when the hybrid dinosaur escapes, she abandons her workers and customers to save her nephews. This isn't heroism; it's crony capitalism. Unless you know the boss, you can just die — or wait in a Katrina-style refugee pen for help that doesn't come.

What about the animals? In the first movie, Hammond cared for them. In this version, Claire cares for the animals as mere “assets.”

“Jurassic World” borrows from the real-life controversy over how SeaWorld treats large mammals. A few nice park employees care, but nobody with power does — and badly managed animals put conscientious employees in danger.

Faith in any large institution is missing. In a previous Jurassic Park sequel, the US military and State Department helped to save the day.

But this time, heavily armed veterans of our recent wars are mistreated, even killed, by their new private employer.

They are gruesomely outmatched by their dinosaur foes.

Aspiring presidents should watch what everyone else in the country is watching — and heed the lesson.

Americans are exhausted after two inconclusive wars and the deepest recession they've ever seen. The issue isn't whether they trust government or big business. They trust neither.

They say the more optimistic candidate always wins. But that's a tricky one, because the more out-of-touch candidate never wins.

This piece originally appeared in New York Post