Jurassic Park (the movie) vs Jurassic Park (the book)

[Guestx]

So I read Jurassic Park a little while back, right around the time Jurassic World came out. It was a very interesting experience, having seen the movie several times. Apparently Crichton himself wrote the first draft of the film's screenplay, which was then further developed by other writers.

I was surprised by just how different the book is from the film. Obviously I am used to there being differences--sometimes even substantial ones--but in this case it seemed more like the movie was an entirely different story that just happened to be based upon the same general idea and characters that the book was. It was a vast gulf of separation between the two.

And while I enjoyed both, I have to say that I enjoyed the movie more. Obviously there's the nostalgia element and attachment to the movie that had been developed over the years, but I also thought that the movie simply had a heart and warmth that the book lacked. The book was colder . . . more clinical.

Who here has read the book and what thoughts would you like to give?

 

[livingdeadmoose]

I've read both Jurassic Park and Lost World. Both amazing books. The movies are fun but nothing like the books. This always happens to adaptations of Chrichtons works. I really wish somebody would remake 13th Warrior. It's my favorite book by him.

 

[Thrawn33]

If the movie was strictly based off the book it would be rated R with all the killing and eating a dude alive after he was disemboweled by a raptor.

This would've not allowed all the kids to see it and it wouldn't have made so much money.

I loved the book and was a little disappointed with the movie adaptation.

 

[ThinkGreen]

Haven't read Jurassic Park - I really need to get on that. I want them to make Prey into a movie.

 

[Yoel Bromero]

LIked them both, but the movie is very different from the book.

Lost world was one of my favourite books. When the movie came out I was super hyped. Then I saw it and was like 'wtf was that about?' Apart from the name of the island and the t-rex attack there really isnt much from the book in that movie.

 

[Scerpi]

Enjoyed the more in depth chaos theory discussions of the book, instead of the cringe worthy sugar coating from the movie.

Was it Jurassic Park that went into the Conway's Game of Life models? Maybe it was another Crighton book. I remember getting sucked into that for awhile. It was pretty cool.

Also, the Movie was well done. Not too much CGI and it still holds after well after 20+ years.

 

[lapollarecords]

both the movie and the book are excellent. the movie was way less gory and had a happier ending, obviously to make it more kid friendly. but still, the movie was great too, one of my childhood favourites and a science fiction classic. I rewatched it yesterday in german, as part of my learning process.

 

[Bob Gray]

Love em both but the book is better imo. Darker, more tense. I feel like I should read it again.

The movie is a classic though. Nobody fucks with The Beard and his blockbusters.

 

[Tyrannosaurus rex]

I liked them both. They are very different, but I like both versions. I must admit it's been a while since I read the book, so it's hard for me to pick exactly which one I like better.

The movie is more kid friendly though, which made it more succesful. But I want to see a rated R JP movie (or JP quality about dinosaurs). It would like it if it would be scarier.

 

[Jesus Freak]

So I read Jurassic Park a little while back, right around the time Jurassic World came out. It was a very interesting experience, having seen the movie several times. Apparently Crichton himself wrote the first draft of the film's screenplay, which was then further developed by other writers.

I was surprised by just how different the book is from the film. Obviously I am used to there being differences--sometimes even substantial ones--but in this case it seemed more like the movie was an entirely different story that just happened to be based upon the same general idea and characters that the book was. It was a vast gulf of separation between the two.

And while I enjoyed both, I have to say that I enjoyed the movie more. Obviously there's the nostalgia element and attachment to the movie that had been developed over the years, but I also thought that the movie simply had a heart and warmth that the book lacked. The book was colder . . . more clinical.

Who here has read the book and what thoughts would you like to give?

There's a Jurassic Park book???

 

[Guestx]

There's a Jurassic Park book???

Ha.

 

[RedFoxOne]

Crichton's Jurassic Park is so rich in detail, science, philosophy and horror that the book is most certainly re-readable and enjoyable on its own merits.

Spielberg's Jurassic Park is rich in adventure, wonder and awe, and a cinematic cornerstone and experience only few movies ever reach.

The Lost World on the other hand......

 

[Guestx]

Crichton's Jurassic Park is so rich in detail, science, philosophy and horror that the book is most certainly re-readable and enjoyable on its own merits.

Spielberg's Jurassic Park is rich in adventure, wonder and awe, and a cinematic cornerstone and experience only few movies ever reach.

The Lost World on the other hand......

I remember going to see The Lost World with my brother. The only good part of the movie is when Rexy is fucking up San Diego.

After the awesomeness of the first film, it really was a big letdown. In fact, I don't know that I've ever re-watched it since seeing it in the theater, whereas I watched Jurassic Park just a few months ago.

 

[Prime Ang]

I remember going to see The Lost World with my brother. The only good part of the movie is when Rexy is fucking up San Diego.

After the awesomeness of the first film, it really was a big letdown. In fact, I don't know that I've ever re-watched it since seeing it in the theater, whereas I watched Jurassic Park just a few months ago.

I use to think this as well until I gave the Lost World a second watch recently, it was a lot better years later, (Lost World came out when I was 6).

 

[RedFoxOne]

I remember going to see The Lost World with my brother. The only good part of the movie is when Rexy is fucking up San Diego.

After the awesomeness of the first film, it really was a big letdown. In fact, I don't know that I've ever re-watched it since seeing it in the theater, whereas I watched Jurassic Park just a few months ago.

For someone with such a great imaginative instinct, Spielberg's sequel is a bore. Everything about it is old hat. Think about that for a second, how hard you would have to try to make a bad sequel to Jurassic Park....

 

[Guestx]

I use to think this as well until I gave the Lost World a second watch recently, it was a lot better years later, (Lost World came out when I was 6).

I remember catching a few minutes of it on TV not too long ago. There was a girl doing gymnastics to get away from dinosaurs. That was enough for me to change the channel.

 

[Prime Ang]

I remember catching a few minutes of it on TV not too long ago. There was a girl doing gymnastics to get away from dinosaurs. That was enough for me to change the channel.

Give it another go man. I liked it better than JP 3, but not as much as JP or JPLW, but I loved both of those. I'd give LW a solid 7/10.

 

[Guestx]

Give it another go man. I liked it better than JP 3, but not as much as JP or JPLW, but I loved both of those. I'd give LW a solid 7/10.

Maybe I'll check it out.

Though as you kind of indicate, being better than JP3 is not much of a feat.

 

[Jkaylor]

Buncha nerds up in here with your books and your readin

 

[RollSonnenRoll]

I've read both Jurassic Park and Lost World. Both amazing books. The movies are fun but nothing like the books. This always happens to adaptations of Chrichtons works. I really wish somebody would remake 13th Warrior. It's my favorite book by him.

It's a shame that Time Line was such a damn good book that got turned into a Paul Walker summer popcorn flick.