# Jurassic Park



## bluemouth12 (Jan 11, 2007)

We all know the movie (a personal favourite of mine) but what did you think of the book?

I thought it was poorly written in some areas, but certainly the last 100 pages or so were very entertaining. It was interesting to see how the movie cut many of the main characters completely. For example, I think Henry Wu had only one line in the movie, while Ed Regis was cut completely, and even Donald Gennaro featured only briefly.

And while we're on the book what did everyone think of the movie?


----------



## T.W. North (Jan 19, 2007)

In all truth I really liked the book. =P After reading you notice how badly the movie changed things, but I still like the movie.

Donald Gennaro was so much better in the book than the movie though, in the movie his character is that of Ed Regis, but his role is a mix of the two (ie his death is that of Ed's, but the rest is himself). Henry Wu...well, he wasn't in the movie because he was there to explain the complicated stuff so he wasn't really needed in the movie.

But the book is so much more bloody than the movie =P


----------



## Tundra Belle (Feb 7, 2007)

I LOVED the book! I almost jumped out of my skin when t-rex stuck his head behind the waterfall and tried to eat the kids! Yeah, in the book. I hadn't seen the movie at that point. It was darn good in the movie, too! 

Eh, just my type of thing. I'm into the entertainment aspect and Jurassic Park had it, both the novel and the movie. 

Lost Worlds lost me.

Cheers,


----------



## Scarecrow (Feb 10, 2007)

I must have read it about ten times. It's a staggeringly good piece of fiction, and easily makes my top 10 list.


----------



## avesjohn (Feb 10, 2007)

I don't read a lot of fiction anymore (surprising and/or ironic considering my aspiration: to be a novelist), but I have read both _Jurassic Park_ and _The Lost World_ multiple times - and of course have seen both movies, plus JP/// - and I _love_ them. I last read JP back towards last Thanksgiving, but didn't finish it that time. I got distracted by other things, I guess. Whatever. Still great books!


----------



## Feyness (Feb 10, 2007)

> I thought it was poorly written in some areas, but certainly the last 100 pages or so were very entertaining.



Yes, that's generally how Crichton writes. You don't read his book to learn about the deeper meaning of life, their just damn entertaining. Which, in my humble opinion, is just as well.


----------



## umbramaker (Feb 12, 2007)

The one big difference that jumped out at me when I read the book (after having seen the movie) was how radically different the professor's character was in each. In the movie he was a benign benefactor who wanted nothing more than to please everybody, whereas, if I remember correctly, he's actually a villian in the book. Actually, in the book he's downright nasty.


----------



## Scarecrow (Feb 12, 2007)

Not downright nasty, but certainly arrogant and pedantic. He eventually dies while contemplating beginning the park again somewhere else, despite all the mistakes and deaths that have occurred.


----------



## lilacstarflower (Jan 13, 2008)

Just finished reading jurassic park last week and i liked it overall. The only thing i didn't like was constantly being interupted by the little diagrams and the start was a bit boring - maybe just me being selfish because i loved Ian Malcolm in the movie and wanted to start reading about his character.

I thought that the book conveyed a message that still stands seventeen years after it was written about the moral dilemma concerning genetic engineering. 

I would have liked the movie to include the part when the T-Rex followed the raft in the water like a massive crocodile and if it had more of the Dilo-thingies  in it (the ones that spit poison).

I love the movies and this book - the fact that they were really different from each other, rather than the movie being a carbon copy, allowed the book to be exciting because i was reading about new events

Just about to start the lost world - cant wait


----------



## Dr. Malone (Jan 13, 2008)

I read this twice when it first came out and I was very young.  I enjoyed it then.  If I reread it now, it probably wouldn't hold up from a literary standpoint.  Crichton certainly does some great stuff story wise.


----------



## playstation60 (Jan 14, 2008)

Dilophosarus, is the dinosaur you're thinking of lilac.

I thought the book was better than the movie, but I loved the first two movies.  The third movie should NOT have been made.  The second book holds very little in common with the second movie.  A few characters (primarily in name only) and a couple of concepts, that's about where the similarities end.  Good read though.


----------



## Dr. Malone (Jan 14, 2008)

Yeah, the beginning of the second one when Hammond is dying and they're outfitting/customizing all the jeeps and equipment was badass.
I thought he did a pretty good job with a sequel, story wise.


----------



## lilacstarflower (Jan 16, 2008)

playstation60 said:


> Dilophosarus, is the dinosaur you're thinking of lilac.
> 
> I thought the book was better than the movie, but I loved the first two movies.  The third movie should NOT have been made.  The second book holds very little in common with the second movie.  A few characters (primarily in name only) and a couple of concepts, that's about where the similarities end.  Good read though.




Yup thats the one thanks - didnt have a copy of the book handy while posting. Raptors seem to have all the fun in the books


----------



## WriterDude (Feb 3, 2008)

I loved the first movie, enjoyed the second quite a bit and kinds wished they had stopped there. (but nope, they are making a fourth one).

As for the books, I read them after watching the first movie and kinda liked them, kinda hated them. I just don't think you can compare them to the movies that much, as they are different stories. The second book, for instance, is very, very different from the second movie, and even the first book has a lot of changes from the movie. Although it's been quite a while, isn't the girl the youngest in the books and her brother the nerd? I have no idea why they changed that.
And as for the waterfall scene, I really wish they had put it in. But at the same time, I can see why they didn't. Even today it would have been quite difficult to make it look believeable, so imagine doing something like that back then. If you compare JP1 to modern movies, you will start to notice how bad the CGI really is. It was awesome back then (and still is), but it's not exactly flawless.

All in all, I like Jurassic Park, but enough is enough. We don't need a fourth movie. Hear that, Spielberg?


----------



## Sam (Feb 11, 2008)

If you seen the movie before reading the book, I think the book might disappoint. But if, like me, you've read the book before seeing the movie, I don't think the movie ever really lived up to the book. But you can say that about every conversion of book-to-movie. The movie was still brilliant, but honestly, is there any one on here who thinks a movie can compare to the previous book version? I haven't seen one good book-to-movie film ever.


----------



## Damian_Rucci (Feb 13, 2008)

I started reading the book about a week ago, I got side tracked, but I'm gonna start again


----------



## Alex Kostin (Feb 13, 2008)

There is a JP book??????????????????????????????LOL


----------



## lilacstarflower (Mar 14, 2008)

just finished The Lost World and I'll share my critique:

*drum roll* (May contain spoilers)

I wanted to read this book because Ian Malcom was my favorite character in the movies and the first book. I was disappointed that for most of this story he was doped up and didn't contribute much to the plot apart from his rather long winded ramblings on different scientific theories. I found the theories seemed to overtake much of the story, especially the first two-thirds of it. I was unsure about the two kids being so involved and brainy. I preferred the film idea that a smart kid was Malcoms offspring which seemed more logical. The other thing I felt was lacking was Dino action. When it did happen it was great! Finally, I hated the way the characters were stopped mid-sentence. They always were in the middle of a really important sentence when this - Another thing: the t-rex in this book could see but in book one it couldn't. I had to use my own imagination here and pretend that they genetically made them that way in JP1.

Dont get me wrong - I actually really enjoyed the book. It was so different from the film and I felt an urge to turn the pages to find out what was going on next. The chameleon-type dinosaurs were imaginative (just not used enough). Sarah Harding was brilliant - what I like to see in a sci-fi: a woman who is scared of nothing and puts the male protagonists to shame! 

Sorry for being long-winded. I spend so much time on here now that I find myself critiquing writers who are best-sellers LOL


----------

