Trigger warnings: violence, blood, death, gore, near drowning, gore, animal death, seriously you guys there's so much gore.

30/11/2022
Once again, November was dino-mayhem time. I regret nothing.

24/11/2021
Apparently I consistently get to November and decide it's time for dino-mayhem. I'm not mad about it.

5/11/2020
An oddly comforting read in 2020 because at least I'm not trapped on an island with raptors and T. rexes. And I'm bumping it up to 5 stars as a result, even though the pacing is kind of weird. Because, like, at least the female characters play crucial roles here (unlike Jurassic Park...).

11/11/2018
Sticking with 4.25 stars this time. I love this story a lot, and it's really interesting to see all the ways that Spielberg took a surprisingly solid story and turned it into a steaming turd of a film.

30/10/2017
On reread, I'm bumping this up to 4.25 stars. It's ten bazillion times better than the truly terrible movie of the same name. I love the two kids in the story - they're smart and brave and save the day a bunch of times. And Sarah Harding is a pretty great alternative to Ellie Sattler.

It's a little slower to get going than Jurassic Park, but it's still pretty damned fabulous.

24/9/2016
It takes a decent chunk of time for the story to get going in this one, but once it does, it's pretty damned fabulous. I mean, it's not Jurassic Park. But really, it was never going to be. And despite the big T.rexes-kicking-the-trailer-off-a-cliff scene, there seem to be less interactions with dinosaurs than there are in Jurassic Park?? Still, it's definitely worth a look.

Honestly, I think my favourite thing in this book is something that I only noticed on this reread: somewhere around the turn of the century, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle wrote a very silly but thoroughly enjoyable adventure novel called The Lost World in which a group of explorers travel to South America and discover a plateau on which dinosaurs still live. They've been largely domesticated by the lost tribes that live on the plateau, and the iguanodons hop around like kangaroos and it's terrible but also really great??

Anyway, while the exploration party is largely made up of scientists - and a newspaper reporter, who's telling the story - there's also a world-famous big game hunter named Lord John Roxton. And in THIS version of The Lost World? Crichton has his characters talk about a researcher named John Roxton, who wrote papers on something relevant to the story.

It's a really subtle little Easter egg for those who've read both books, and I had this total "OH MY GOD, DID YOU JUST?????" moment when I spotted it. A+, Crichton. A+.

1/7/2013
It's been years since I read this book, and it was SO much better than I remembered. First of all, don't base it on the movie. The movie was a trainwreck of epic proportions and basically the only thing that's the same is the baby T. rex ending up with a broken leg and the trailer being pushed off the cliff. Literally everything else is different, and it's different in a GOOD way.

There's far less of the science that Crichton got bogged down with in Jurassic Park, and what there is is sprinkled throughout the story. There are all the standard dinosaurs that you'd expect, but with the addition of some fun new species, including one with nifty camouflage abilities.

In short, it's a lot of fun with the usual "kill off half the characters" that Crichton does. And don't even remotely judge it by the movie. If they'd kept even remotely true to the book, the movie probably would have been a LOT more successful than it was!

Matematicamente, somos capazes de descrever duas coisas a interagir, como por exemplo, dois planetas no espaço. Três coisas a interagir, três planetas no espaço, bem... já se torna um problema. Quatro ou cinco coisas a interagir... não conseguimos mesmo. E no interior da célula, há a interacção de cem mil coisas. É de levar as mãos à cabeça! É tão complexo... como é possível que a vida chegue a acontecer?

O Mundo Perdido é outro daqueles livros que me leva a nadar contra a maré. Longe de me desiludir pela distância a que se encontra da versão cinematográfica (ao passo que o primeiro volume da duologia, Parque Jurássico, serviu de guião a Spielberg, com mínimas alterações), também não me chateou nada que este livro fosse uma cedência de Crichton à popularidade que o primeiro volume e filme tinham granjeado. Isto acontece por duas razões, primeiro porque estes dois filmes - e agora livros - fazem parte do meu imaginário infantil, e segundo porque Crichton me conseguiu vender muitíssimo bem estas suas novas personagens.

Aqui, ou noutra ilha, em segredo, longe da vista do público, Hammond achava-se livre para desenvolver as suas investigações, para enfrentar a verdade desagradável por detrás do seu lindo parquezinho. O zoozinho genético de Hammond era apenas uma montra, uma coisa para exibir. Mas esta ilha era a realidade. Aqui é que os dinossauros eram feitos.

Então, o ano é 1995 e após sobrevivermos à visita temática mais louca de sempre, depois do malfadado Parque Jurássico ser desmantelado e um batalhão de gente servir de petisco para dinossauro, estamos agora na fábrica dos ditos bichos. Boa. Isto tem tudo para correr bem.
Mas, novamente, não são tanto o enredo, a ação ou o suspense que me cativam nesta saga. Desta vez, a aposta de Crichton na caracterização de personagens é mais inteligente e o autor já não opta por apresentar ao leitor as típicas crianças negligenciadas que acabam vítimas de familiares transtornados, antes nos apresenta um par de miúdos inteligentes, cheios de genica e vontade própria; consegue, além disso, recuperar o seu anti-herói Ian Malcolm com certa graciosidade, permitindo-lhe continuar a insuflar vida à história; descarta personagens irrelevantes; e cria uma heroína fantástica, uma mulher inteligente, destemida e prática responsável por fazer avançar a ação e salvar o dia. Mas o que, acredito, verdadeiramente atrai a este livro é o que se encontra nas entrelinhas. Dentro da tradição a que habituou os leitores, Crichton continua crítico da postura indiferente das massas às grandes questões...

O que o leva a pensar que os seres humanos são sensíveis e conscientes? Não há nada que o prove. Os seres humanos nunca pensam por si próprios, acham que isso é demasiado incómodo. Na sua maioria, os membros da nossa espécie limitam-se a repetir o que lhes dizem, e ficam perturbados quando são expostos a qualquer opinião diferente. O traço característico da humanidade não é a consciência, mas o conformismo.

... continua crítico da alarmante procura da rentabilidade dos recursos naturais...

(...)agora, tudo o que existe na biosfera é potencialmente valioso. Ninguém sabe de onde virá o próximo medicamento e, por isso, as companhias farmacêuticas financiam todo o tipo de investigações.
[...]
As pessoas já não andam a estudar o mundo natural, andam a miná-lo. É a mentalidade do saqueador. Qualquer coisa nova ou desconhecida tem automaticamente interesse porque pode ser valiosa. Pode valer uma fortuna.

...e, sobretudo, continua crítico da progressiva deterioração da ética industrial e científica:

A cada ano que passa, sofremos mais pressões para não usarmos animais nem nas investigações nem nas experiências. Todos os anos há mais manifestações, mais intrusões, mas publicidade negativa. Ao princípio eram só os pobres de espírito dos fanátions e das celebridades de Hollywood. Mas agora é uma multidão: até os filósofos das universidades estão a começar a argumentar que não é ético submeter os macacos, os cães e até mesmo os ratos às indignidades da investigação laboratorial. Até já recebemos alguns protestos sobre a exploração das lulas, apesar de as servirem à mesa em todo o mundo. É o que te digo, Jeff, esta moda não vai acabar. E ainda nos hão-de dizer que não podemos explorar as bactérias para fazermos produtos genéticos(...) a não ser que tenhamos um animal genuinamente criado. Ora pensa bem: um animal que está extinto e que é devolvido à vida não é, para todos os efeitos práticos, um animal. Não pode ter direitos. Já está extinto. Por isso, se existe, só pode ser uma coisa que nós fizemos. Fazemo-lo, patenteamo-lo e é propriedade nossa. E é perfeito para a experimentação. (...) No futuro iremos poder testar os novos medicamentos nos pequenos dinossauros com tão bons resultados como acontece agora com os cães e os ratos... e correndo muito menos riscos legais.

Apesar de não se desvincular da época em que é escrito - tal como acontece com Parque Jurássico - O Mundo Perdido é um livro que envelhece resguardando a sua relevância, sobretudo porque apela a questões essenciais e existenciais. Não é por acaso que o anti-herói desta história é "ressuscitado" do anterior volume. Ian Malcolm funciona aqui como uma espécie de bastião sofista (sem qualquer conotação negativa - apesar de toda a validade do questionamento dos supostos ensinamentos da personagem), oferecendo uma via filosófica que procura humanizar as ciências exatas de que, grosso modo, o autor se procura servir, permitindo-lhe avançar com reflexões que, não fora isso, não teriam grande cabimento num thriller.
Este recurso dá azo a questões muito pertinentes, sejam elas relacionadas com com o papel da humanidade numa escala macro - que não podemos evitar...

(...)a extinção tem sido sempre um grande mistério. Já se deram cinco importantes neste planeta e não foram todas causadas por um asteróide. Toda a gente se interessa pela extinção que ocorreu no Cretáceo e que matou os dinossauros, mas também houve extinções no Jurássico e no Triássico. E, apesar de terem sido muito graves, não foram nada comparadas com a que ocorreu no período Pérmico e que matou noventa por cento de toda a vida do planeta, tanto no mar como em terra. Ninguém sabe como é que essa catástrofe se deu. Mas pergunto a mim próprio se nós não seremos a causa da próxima.(...)
Os seres humanos são tão destrutivos(...) Às vezes penso que somos uma espécie de praga que vai deixar o planeta nu. Destruímos tudo com tanta perfeição que às vezes chego a pensar que deve ser essa a nossa função. Se calhar, de tantos em tantos milhões de anos, aparece um animal que destrói o resto do mundo, limpando tudo e deixando que a evolução prossiga para a fase seguinte.

...ou relacionadas com o papel da humanidade numa escala micro - que tendemos a ignorar:

(...)toda a gente neste mundo sabe que a inovação só se dá em pequenos grupos. Ponham três pessoas num comité e é possível que elas consigam fazer qualquer coisa. Se forem dez, torna-se mais difícil. Com trinta pessoas, nada acontece. Com trinta milhões, torna-se impossível. É esse o efeito dos meios de comunicação de massa: impedem que aconteça seja o que for. Os meios de comunicação de massa afogam a diversidade. Uniformizam todos os lugares. Banguecoque, Tóquio ou Londres: há um restaurante McDonald's numa esquina, uma loja Benneton noutra, uma loja Gap do outro lado da rua. Desvanecem-se as diferenças regionais. Desaparecem todas as diferenças. Num mundo dominado pelos meios de comunicação de massa, há menos de tudo excepto as listas dos dez melhores livros, discos, filmes e ideias. As pessoas preocupam-se com a perda de diversidade das espécies na floresta de chuva, mas como reagem em relação à diversidade intelectual, que é o nosso recurso mais valioso? Está a desaparecer mais depressa do que as árvores.

Em tudo semelhante ao seu antecessor, O Mundo Perdido é um livro que se apresenta com diversas camadas interpretativas. Pode ser devorado num dia com a sofreguidão dos que procuram uma aventura, ou degostado numa semana por aqueles outros que procuram refletir sobre questões não tão ficcionais assim.

Desembocando numa espécie de estoicismo como forma de superação, Crichton termina num tom de certo modo otimista, ou pelo menos contemplativo da dádiva que é a existência terrena, como que apelando a uma visão mais humilde do lugar que ocupamos numa escala que ainda nos escapa na sua totalidade:

Daqui a cem anos as pessoas vão olhar para trás, para nós, e vão rir. Vão dizer: Sabem no que é que as pessoas dantes acreditavam? Acreditavam em fotões e em electrões. São capazes de imaginar uma coisa tão estúpida?» E depois riem a bandeiras despregadas porque nessa altura já existem fantasias mais recentes e melhores.(...) E entretanto sentes como o barco se move? Isso é o mar. Isso é real. Sentes o sal no ar? Sentes o sol na tua pele? Isso é real. Estás a ver-nos aqui todos juntos? Isso é real. A vida é maravilhosa. Estar-se vivo, ver o sol e respirar o ar é uma dádiva. E a verdade é que não há mais do que isso.

This one was just "meh". This is one of the rare instances where I will say that I prefer the movie over the book. Ugh, and the scientific babbling that went on...yikes, it was brutal for me. Would've liked more action and gore. Still love Crichton though.

I can't get enough of the Chaos Theory. One of my favorite characters is Ian Malcom. Yes this is a lot different than the movie. Ian Malcolm discusses scientific theories in a way I understand them and his sidebars are part of my favorite parts of the book. The action is non-stop with some similarities to the movie. But be ready for a different ending. I wish Crichton had written more since he did considerable research in each of his books and he has a way of making complex issues understandable.

The pacing and plot were markedly different from the first book; much slower and without any real conviction.

The head hopping and multiple perspectives were a little jarring in this one too, as many of the characters were in the same place, and a different voice wasn’t really necessary.

And what was the go with bringing Malcom back? Such a cheap plot device that really undermined the first story! Grant was available, why not him?
Also, I really wish Levine had died.

Disappointing, but still occupied my time.

5⭐️

“All your life, other people will try to take your accomplishments away from you. Don’t you take it away from yourself.” pg.385

Another wonderful Crichton book. May have enjoyed this more than the first Jurassic.



“Human beings never think for themselves, they find it too uncomfortable. For the most part, members of our species simply repeat what they are told—and become upset if they are exposed to any different views. The characteristic human trait is not awareness, but conformity… other animals fight for territory or food; but uniquely in the animal kingdom, human beings fight for their ‘beliefs.’” pg.8

“All your life people will tell you things. And most of the time, probably ninety-five percent of the time, what they’ll tell you will be wrong…it’s a fact of life… human beings are just stuffed full of misinformation. So it’s hard to know who to believe.” pg.233

“Once things go bad, they tend to stay bad. Like the old folk saying that bad things come in threes. Complexity theory tells us that folk wisdom is right. Bad things cluster. Things go to hell together. That’s the real world.” pg.250

“You smell the salt in the air? You feel the sunlight on your skin? That’s real. Life is wonderful. It’s a gift to be alive, to see the sun and breathe the air.” pg.393

Very exciting and outstanding book. I enjoyed those moments with dinosaurs walking in the jungles. A little scary and science makes it interesting. I’m fan of dinosaurs and films also.

Michael Crichton's The Lost World is an interesting piece of work. On the one hand, it is an exciting, page-gripping, edge of the seat thriller reminiscent of the first Jurassic Park novel. On the other hand, it is exactly that: reminiscent of the first Jurassic Park novel. In many ways, it is merely a rehash of the original. Ian Malcolm returns, as does Dodgson, there are other dinosaur and mammalian experts involved (of course, they are all considered the best in the world), and the story could not be complete without two out-of-place brilliant children with knowledge and skills well above their actual level - particularly in the field of computers.[return][return]But that must be taken with a grain of salt, and Crichton forgiven, as he never planned on writing a sequel. It was only after many, many people, ranging from film producers to fans of both the novel and the movie pressured him into it.[return][return]Although many aspects are similar, that does not make the book any less appealing. With dinosaurs running amok, creating chaos, how can it be a bad read? This time, Ian Malcolm makes another appearance by wanting to visit the island and see the dinosaurs again. In that regard, his personality is very different than readers are accustomed - that, and he is alive, which he wasn't at the end of the first novel. One of his colleagues finds Site B, another island where dinosaurs were being produced for the park. Naturally, said colleague visits it alone, and Ian and several other colleagues must rescue him.[return][return]Of note are the reasons for the velociraptor's unseemly lifestyle - because as recreated animals they are missing a very important part of evolution: the social aspect. Also interesting are Malcolm's discussions on evolution and Darwins theory. Crichton was no slouch when researching what he wrote about, and this is no exception. Of course, Crichton has an agenda in writing such a book, and that is to beware human existence and technological advancement. As Malcolm said,[return][return]Human beings are so destructive, I sometimes think we're a kind of plague, that will scrub the earth clean. We destroy things so well that I sometimes think, maybe that's our function. Maybe every few eons, some animal comes along that kills off the rest of the world, clears the deck, and lets evolution proceed to its next stage.[return][return]The Lost World is a thrilling adventure that should not be missed by any reader who enjoys dinosaurs, thrillers, excitement or adventure. And since nearly everyone likes dinosaurs, it should be a required read...for most. For those that dislike the character Dodgson from both the original and the beginning of The Lost World, it is worth finishing merely to see Dodgson's comeuppance.

Def not as good as the first one but nice to see that he dives deeper into Dinosaur behavior and their habitats. I would love to see more of these books but don't really expect it to happen. Watching the movies I always wondered, what if they really did find real, surviving dinosaurs in the amazon forest. What if they mated with the ones created?

I'd love to see someone dig into that idea.

The dinosaur genre is to unexplored in my opinion! Would love to read a lot more if them. Liked this second and final (? I think) in the series. Was very intrigued by the plot and characters. Liked the way Michael Crichton handled giving info about the dinosaurs without feeling info dumpy in any way

The Lost World was a book that I read at the end of the 90s. It was a phenomenal read, by my standards back then, when I was a student and in my latest teens. It made me feel smart. It made me feel good. When I read it, Michael Crichton, the author, was still alive. Now, there have been two things that I realise. First, it is a real pity that Crichton died. It was cruel that he was taken off the face of the Earth so quickly. Second, this book and Jurassic Park are for me, by far the best books that Crichton has written.

My mind was blown when I took up this reread in this year 2022. The book held up incredibly well. There were a few details that sadly were past sell by date. One of them was that it was stated the human race arose about 35,000 years ago, when now science tells us that it was so 250,000 years ago. Crichton also sadly got the innovation of the Internet as a doom mongering warning. This was I suspect not a really personal crusade to the author. He was perhaps merely playing us along.

The internet is one of the best inventive revolutions to have happened to the human race. Unlike other breakthroughs, like writing, or fire, its good use far outstrips any bad use. IQ levels are skyrocketing around the world. Atheists movements, climate change movements, feminist movements and others are making the rounds round our planet at the speed of light. This is not the atomic age, as 50s scientists have tried to label us. This is the digital age.

The book was both light and strong, just like the vehicles and equipment that in the book, Doc Thorne had to custom make for the rich bratty Levine. The book deserves a lot of success. The only reason why it was not such an influence on Sci Fi writers is that it is inimitable, and, unlike Fantasy successes, couldn't be replicated and imitated by lesser or even writers of equal talent as Crichton.

The science monologues that are mostly the dominion of Ian Malcolm in the book are brilliant! The thoughts behind these hugely entertaining talks seem Socratic in nature. And they are intaglioed on the book in a way that is perfectly believable. This Sci Fi discourse is not info dump. This is a way of entertaining the masses, and perhaps even, opening them to the possibilities of science.

I was less pleased with the way both the baddies and the good guys got messed up by the dinosaurs. It was as if each of the future dead carried a death wish. It was very unbelievable how Dodgson, Baselton (his death was funny as hell though), and the poor Howard King hopped, skipped, and jumped their way into the jaws of death. The jaws of creatures coming back from extinction. The lord of the planet falling into the maws of his predecessor.

The two kids too had to be included, yet no responsible adult would have agreed to bring them along, so they must help themselves. Arby and Kelly were terrific characters with motives, creativity, and moments of pathos and heroism of their own. Sarah Harding, the African plateaus connoisseur, was also a problem. Nobody knows why her career was viable or interesting or worth funding. She kept observing hyenas and lions hunt and her raw data was not bringing anything new. But those are mere trifles.

I have my reserves about the book, one of which is self inflicted. I skipped some pages to reach the end. When I first read the book, decades ago, I didn't understand the ending. I didn't understand why the dinosaurs were in such queer patterns on Isla Sorna. I didn't understand about the prions and what they spelled out. This mystery stayed with me, though I had forgotten about it. But once the book was in my hands yet again, I immediately remembered this gap in my knowledge and hurried to find out and was rewarded by the answer the book provided. It is strange how old eyes sometimes see better than juvenile ones.

This book was not perfect. Its current rating is the dubious result of the revival of the Jurassic franchise. The big studios will never let a series die, even if there is no new Crichton on the horizon to lead the way. I loved Lost World. Its science is in itself a Lost World of ideas, because when the sequel to Jurassic Park was scripted, the producers went for action oriented stuff. Good. Only the people who read the book, instead of watching the movie, know how precious this book was. It was a book that was not only scientific, but also philosophical. But they have little to do with practical life sadly. I mean imagine a world where the dinosaurs never got extinct. We would never be there to inherit the Earth from these mighty monsters. So be it; we are here, until the next change in chaos.

Wow, this book was kind of the pits. I read it through my tablet, and I'm going back through little notes I made as I read it, and this is what I got:
Malcolm talks about how simpler societies have children that are "born into a network of adults responsible for helping to raise the child." I actually really liked this because it reminded me of how my dad always says it takes a village to raise a child.
When Dodgson and co. are trying to steal the tyrannosaurus' eggs and try standing completely still to avoid being seen, Malcolm says they are misinformed that this will work. When I was reading this, I became really annoyed because inconsistencies in stories is one of my biggest pet peeves. In the first book, Grant has this whole thought process about how if he stays completely still, the tyrannosaur will not see him, and the Tyrannosaur even tries getting Grant to move so that it can see him by growling and stomping and stuff. Knowing little to nothing about dinosaurs, I have no idea if this is actually true or not, but it just bothers me that Crichton wasn't consistent. Furthermore, it really annoyed me when Levine went on to say that Grant introduced a theory that a tyrannosaur could be confused by a rainstorm, and that theory is rubbish. I'M PRETTY SURE GRANT WOULD KNOW, AS HE'S THE ONE WHO HAD TO DEAL WITH A TYRANNOSAUR IN THE RAIN. It pisses me off to no end that Malcolm never once mentions his previous encounters with Grant or Isla Nublar. UGH.
Also Sarah punching a raptor in the head? Seriously?
And the car having circuit breakers?! That and the boathouse was such a cheap way out. To me, it was just lazy writing. Both of those things were entirely too convenient and weren't known to the audience until the last possible second. This goes the same for the prions. I mean, it's a good explanation, but it seems like it was just thrown in so that the last couple pages could hastily wrap up the story.

I think a big problem that I had with this book was that I didn't like any of the characters. Don't get me wrong . . . last book, I hated Hammond. But he was a GOOD villain, and I liked hating him. Everyone in this story just got on my nerves. I didn't like Malcolm because he went from being a math wiz to suddenly becoming an expert on anthropology, and he never told anyone about his first encounter with dinosaurs. I mean, really. Think of the trouble that could have saved. Sarah was supposed to be this badass female heroine, but it seemed too over the top for me. I thought Crichton was trying too hard with that. Levine reminded me of Malcolm in the first book - arrogant and refusing to listen to anyone else (so I'm still not sure why Malcolm hated him at first and then drastically changed to being "very worried" about him). Thorne and Eddie were okay, but they seemed like glorified mechanics, so it's not like the contributed a lot to a story about dinosaurs. It just didn't fit. The children seemed forced, as well, like Crichton was trying to repeat what he had with Lex and Tim.
There seemed to be a lot of tangent plots that were mentioned but never really explored, e.g. the Harding-Malcolm love affair, the Kelly/Arby parent problems, Levine being a rich dick . . . It just seemed like a lot of fluff was added to the story, and I don't think any of it was worth mentioning since none of it was elaborated.
Also, why did the island have a convenience store with souvenirs if it was just for cloning dinosaurs? The damned inconsistencies are what get me the most. And I didn't even mention how Malcolm is supposed to be dead!!