What do you say about a concept that has become iconic? Jurassic Park has grown beyond Crichton's novel, into a movie, into a theme park attraction, into a thousand types of paraphernalia... In fact, it has become so popular that we forget the original work this concept came from.

I saw the movie first. It is a marvel of special effects and unbearably suspenseful. The book is nothing like that.

This novel is a serious work of science fiction. As with Crichton's other novels, the research is so detailed and the setting so well wrought that we are sometimes conned into believing that we are reading truth and not fiction. But that does not take away from the excitement the story generates - this is by no means a dull, expository work.

But most importantly, it raises important questions about the existential import of man tampering with nature - something which is conspicuous by its absence in the film. Have we grown sufficiently as a species to do it safely? Or are we still the descendants of Dr. Frankenstein?

This book takes me back to when I was 10. My dad would ritualistically read this chonker of a book to me before bed because I was OBSESSED with the movie. It must have taken him three to four months to finally finish it because I’d be out like a light whenever Crichton would go into the scientific details of what it would take to resurrect dinosaurs. All of it went over my head, but I felt more immersed trusting that the science was sound and re-engineering fragmented Dino DNA extracted from Jurassic mosquitos trapped in amber with the genes of Amazon frogs was legitimately possible.

Now reading it for the first time 30 year later, it still holds up and I still believe that it’s entirely possible to resurrect these majestic creatures and deeply wish it upon this world despite the many warnings the book illustrates. I just really love dinosaurs.

RAWWWWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Imagine yourself a prey, being hunted by the one of the most deadliest predators that ever roamed the earth. The Tyrannosaurus Rex. About 30 feet of pure muscle with a massive head that contains the biggest set of teeth that could turn your flesh and bones into mush in one bite.

You are trapped. You have nowhere to go. Your entire body is shaking.

RAWWWWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

You might or might not have peed in your pants.

RAWWWWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Your life starts to flash before your eyes.


Then, out of nowhere, some asshole decides to babble on about the chaos theory, which at first seems interesting but then after a few pages you're just rooting that some dinosaur, any dinosaur would kill the smart-ass Ian Malcolm. The scientific explanation at the start was necessary and refreshing. The explanation on how they were able to clone and control the dinosaurs were also important. But that balding self-confessed rockstar who only wore black and grey really knows how to spoil some excitement. I found his endless babble about chaos and unpredictability to be quite a party-pooper, just when you're getting some inch of excitement he's gonna want to talk again. He's like a drunk preacher with an extreme fetish for grimness. There were some really nice bits of information, but I think it was a little too much. Shaved a star off because of that guy. Maybe Crichton was aiming for environmental moralism with him, I dunno. Didn't work for me, just managed to annoy me. Well, at least Jeff Goldblum managed to salvage the character in the movie. I liked him much better there. But that pretty much sums up my Jurassic Park experience. Excitement in some parts then annoyance with Malcolm, then excitement again, then there goes Malcolm again talking. You get the drift.

Anyway let me give you one last roar before I end.

RAWWWWWWWWWWWWRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

There, much better.

P.S. - I was really annoyed that they messed up Lex's character in the movie. She was my favorite character in the book, and the movie guys screwed her up. She turned up to be a stupid-vegetarian 11 y.o. when she was supposed to be a cute 7 y.o. sports bully. I would've been much happier if she'd had her scenes with Ralph the Triceratops and Clarence the Velociraptor.

“Life will find a way." to screw Jurassic Park up.

Like many, I loved the film, and indeed its sequels. Who doesn’t like dinosaurs and rip-roaring adventure? I hadn’t however read the book that started it all...

Going through the pages, I couldn’t help trying to find the scenes that I knew so well. Most are there, but indeed in a different form due to the medium, the same applying to the characters. What fun to hear Malcolm’s Chaos theories and witness Grant’s survival!

This is a compelling thriller with a brilliant theme but somehow, having been so immersed in the movies, it lessened the awe inspiring moments. I do wonder how it would have felt to read this knowing nothing - much more powerful for sure. Nonetheless, Crichton’s novels still shines and offers a lot more than the film.

Having said this, there is an element that shadowed my enjoyment: sexism. Was the world still so sexist in 1991? In my mind, it wasn’t that long ago and so I wasn’t expecting it, but perhaps yes indeed. It mostly took the shape of 'little digs’ but they were everywhere. Ellie thankfully is portrayed as a skilled scientist but Lex was truly horrible and annoying. I’m not saying that kids don’t behave in that fashion but the difference between her and Tim, who proved to be amazing, was too wide (one had all the weaknesses and the other all the advantages). At least in the film, they balanced that out!

To recap, great adventure with thrilling moments. This was my third Crichton, and although it was an entertaining read, I must admit that I preferred Timeline, but that is personal taste.

C’mon! It’s Jurassic Park, man! It’s a classic – both book and movie!

Crichton is one of the kings of speculative sci-fi and how nature and science are to be respected (not trifled with!) Jurassic Park embodies all of these things and if it doesn’t both terrify you and make you think, you have likely missed the point.



One issue I have had with a lot of Crichton books is a great story with what feels to me like a poorly executed and unsatisfying ending. With Jurassic Park, that was not the case – I loved every minute of it! I seem to remember that the sequel book felt more like he was dialing it in (the whole thing, not just the end) . . . maybe because he felt like he had to do a follow-up . . . or maybe Hollywood demanded it . . . either way, I don’t think you need to read the second one unless you REALLY want to.

This was an audio reread after first reading the paperback about 30 years ago – so glad I did the reread!

If you loved the movie, read the book!

If you loved the book, see the movie!

They are not the exactly the same, but both great. You will not regret it!

i haven't read this book in a long, long time, but i STILL managed a fine readalike list for it over on riffle, in what be my very last riffle list ever. ):

http://www.rifflebooks.com/list/25772...

ALL THE STARS!

Holy smokes y'all, I did not realize the amount of differences in the book vs the movie!

And yes, I love the book much more then the movie now.
I've seen the movie 10 million times but the book of Jurassic Park is more dark, gritty and so well done! Kudos Michael Crichton on writing a classic that will last forever.

I decided to do audio on Jurassic Park and Scott Brick was the narrator. I'm super picky on narrators for audio books and I felt he did a great job.

***SPOILER ALERT***

Here's the main differences from the book vs movie :


1. The love relationship between Dr. Alan Grant and Ellie Sattler in the movie. I prefer the "friendship" from the book. It was more realistic and less Hollywood like.

2. Oh my God, the kids!! I loved Tim Murphy in the book and Lex Murphy was the biggest pain in the ass. I was wishing and hoping for the T-Rex to eat her everytime she opened her mouth.
Also, Tim was the older of the two.

3. Oh my heart. Dr. Ian Malcolm dies in this!! It was like imagining Jeff Goldblum dying and my heart broke. Realistically, it made sense that Ian died in the book since he was so badly injured but I'm glad Steven Spielberg kept him alive in the movie. I mean, it's Jeff Goldblum.

4. John Hammond was bat shit crazy, egotistical and evil. I much prefered the book version!!
I loved hating him in this! He was a great villian. John Hammond in the movie was too teddy bear for my liking.

I could go on and on with all the differences. Such as the ending, the beginning and the kick ass Velociraptors' colony and nest but most of you have read this book.

And on that note, I'm so glad to finally read this. It was just fantastic!!

If you have not read Jurassic Park the book, go read it! Are you still here? Go!

With Crichton, it is always a gamble whether whatever strange and new idea has latched onto will overcome his overbearing personality. His assurance that science will always go wrong makes for easy potboiler plots, but you do get the feeling that if he were a caveman, he would mistrust a sharpened stick.

Crichton's sensationalism and misuse of scientific concepts has made him untrustworthy as a guide on any serious issue, but in the case of runaway dinosaurs, we do not need to heed his warnings about the 'dangers of cloning'; we can simply enjoy an idea that was ridiculous before Crichton ever touched it.

At least we are spared the author's libelous personal attacks in this book. If you have a plane ride and a love for dinosaurs, pick it up. The movie's better, though.

I just realized that I hadn't rated or reviewed this book. I read it several years ago.

To be honest, I couldn't finish this book. The writing had an inescapable pattern to it: Introduce character, character gets killed or in some horrible way or eaten by a dinosaur. I hate collateral damage in books, movies, or tv. Big turn-off. Plus, I don't like the creation of sacrificial lambs to be killed, paper-thin to the point of having no personality practically.

The science part was a little too detailed (yes, even for a biological scientist). I think that if I want to read a textbook, I can easily do so. But, for fiction, I like the plot to have nicely-integrated factual information, and the focus to be on the characters and the unfolding storyline.

Between those two issues with this book, I gave up on it. It is a horrible, horrible thing for a bookworm to say, but I liked the movie better. :(

n

New week, New BookTube Video - all about the best (and worst) literary apocalypses to live through!

The Written Review

n  n  
n  
n  “Life breaks free. Life expands to new territories. Painfully, perhaps even dangerously. But life finds a way.” n

Jurassic Park has all the major problems of a theme park, a zoo...and genetically altered prehistoric animals.

That's right - the dinosaurs are back from the dead and nothing - I repeat nothing - could go wrong...right?

n  Ha. n

As my favorite character, Ian Malcom would say,

n  All major changes are like death. You can't see to the other side until you are there.n

Though, considering some of the problems they had with the park, I strongly believe that several of issues could've been predicted...that is, if Mr. Hammond and his scientists would've taken the time to thoroughly consider implications and consequences of bringing back extinct species.

Dr. Allen Grant, Ellie, Ian Malcom and a host of other professionals (along with Mr. Hammond's grandchildren) are invited to the island to give their expert opinion on this un-extinction.

Of course, this visit comes at an excellent time - there is a huge storm rolling in, the raptors are getting restless and there's some evidence that the smaller dinos have made it off the island. n  Perrrfectn

But don't mention any of this to Mr. Hammond or his staff - they won't listen to any negativity.. As Ian Malcom said,n  

“They don't have intelligence. They have what I call 'thintelligence.' They see the immediate situation. They think narrowly and they call it 'being focused.' They don't see the surround. They don't see the consequences.”

nPredictably, the storm rolls in, things go very, very wrong...and soon even Mr. Hammond might have to admit that there may be an issue or two in his precious park.

n  “You know, at times like this one feels, well, perhaps extinct animals should be left extinct.” n

If I had to pick a single, defining movie from my childhood...this would be it. So, of course, I had to pick up the book to see how it compared. It definitely delivered.

In this novel, Mr. Hammond wasn't quite the bumbling, grandfatherly figure he is in the movie. And of his grandchildren, Lex is certainly younger than her movie-version (and young-Lex was more than a little annoying).

This is one of those rare cases where the movie is not being a true-to-book adaption, but they are both equally entertaining and delightful. Highly recommended!

And just like when I was a kid, I am comforted that if this dinosaur apocalypse ever happens, things would play out like this:

n  “God created dinosaurs. God destroyed dinosaurs. God created Man. Man destroyed God. Man created dinosaurs."

"Dinosaurs eat man...Woman inherits the earth.” n

The Finer Books Club 2018 Reading Challenge - A book with a written inscription

Audiobook Comments
The reader (Scott Brick) was alright. It's just...this book is about DINOSAURS - surely this reader could've mustered some enthusiasm??

YouTube | Blog | Instagram | Twitter | Facebook | Snapchat @miranda_reads

I’ll say one thing, and one thing only…this was much better than the movie, and I loved the movie

Esta es la increíble novela en la que se basó Steven Spielberg para crear su más que exitosa película sobre dinosaurios donde la trama gira en torno a un parque temático en el que los animales del jurásico son la atracción estrella.

Es mucho mejor que el film.

100% Recomendado