Support NeoGAF

[hatchx]

I recently finished reading the classic Michael Crichton novel Jurassic Park for the first time, and wow, what a fantastic read! I couldn't put it down. This is coming from someone who barely reads.

Like anyone, I had seen the movie (and it's sequels) a bunch of times as early back as being a frightened little kid in the 90's and being blown away by the CG graphics. Having finished the book today, I decided to rewatch the first movie. I found it pretty interesting to see how it was adapted into a movie, especially being so fresh in my mind. If anyone hasn't read the book or still plans to (or god forbid, hasn't seen the movie - shame on you) then stop reading now because I'm not going to spoiler tag everything.


The movie definitely does a good job of following the pace and rhythm of the book. It covers the lead-up introductions, the biological tour, Nedry's attempt to steal the embryo's, the T-Rex action followed by Raptor action followed by the conclusion - it hits all the major beats and paces along almost the exact same way as book. At no point did I think 'wow the movie really changed that!' It seemed like they generally did a really great job choosing what material to edit in and out.

I am also pretty impressed that many of the themes and characters subtleties were brought over. Malcolm's chaos theory and arguments with Hammond, hints of Nedry being underpaid, the dinosaurs changing sex to procreate, John Arnold's smoking and over-the-hill tone. There are even very small nods I picked up on, like Lex grabbing the pin for the freezer door to lock the Raptor in, Lex sitting in the storm drain as she waits for Grant and Tim, the fact that Hammond and Ellie eat iced cream in the dining hall (in the book, Lex really wants iced cream and they don't get it). Certain bits feel like they were kept for the second movie, like the Compy's attack or even the scene behind the waterfall. Both in the book, but saved for The Lost World.

I really like the book and movie.

Now, let me get into the nitty gritty stuff that was changed, covering some of the stuff I'm not particularly fond of.




Donald Gennaro the Lawyer

In the Book, Gennaro is far more interesting. He is painted as a tall, well-dressed man, and he takes on quite a brave role. He helps Muldoon find the T-Rex, he follows Grant into the control room and saves the kids, and he goes with Grant and Ellie to the Raptor nest at the end. He is a lawyer, not an action hero, and I found he really rose to the occasion. I was often nervous he would be killed he is involved in so many of the hairy situations!

In the movie, Gennaro is a weezly one-dimension cliche lawyer who seems like he is only there to die. And honestly, when he dies it's pretty silly.

There is a great bit at the end of the book where Grant and Gennaro have a little square-off and Grant pins him agains the wall and scolds him. I didn't find Gennaro to be an asshole in the book really (not that Grant spends much time with him anyways), I read that more as Grant having a little temper flare-up/breakdown rather than making a point about Gennaro's greed or weakness.



Lex

In the book Lex is a little girl, and in the movie she is closer to a young teen.
I don't mind Lex being older in the movie, and I understand why filming such a movie with a really young girl would be challenging, but I will say I much prefer Lex in the book. She acts childish and is somewhat of a brat, always poking fun or teasing Tim or complaining about being hungry. I don't blame her based on her age and the horrific situation she is in. It just feels real, and adds a child-like perspective that isn't covered in the movie.

Tim is older than Lex in the book, and you really feel their bond. He is a smart kid, savvy and resourceful - and he protects her and tries to find her iced cream. Lex in the movie loses all of that, and her older sister role is never felt. We don't get a sense of her protecting Tim, we don't get any sense they are related at all. There is a little banter but if feels forced, and her being blonde and Timmy being a red-head is just adds to that disconnect.

She's also a little inconsistent in the movie. I get Spielberg needs to give her 'her moment' , but the way she shows sheer terror for Dinosaurs and later turns into a complete warrior in the kitchen scene is off - and let's face it, that fake-out-reflection trick in the movie is not only inaccurate, but it's also such an incredible risky long shot that I just don't believe her character would do it. How we should know the raptor would charge at her be knocked into dizziness. C'mon. I actually think the book did the kitchen scene better with the single raptor. Tim luring it into the freezer with steaks was simply smarter than the cat-and-mouse scene. I get it's a classic scene, but after reading the book, it's just feels a little over-the-top and cheesy.

Let's also get into the stupid hacker trait they ham-fisted in the movie. It's just there to add some sort of weak emotional payoff late in the movie when she uses her previously mentioned 'hacking skills' to use the control-room computers to lock the doors. There is some really dumb, fake-looking CG computer "stuff", in what might be the most dated looking part of the movie. It's much more believable and compelling in the book where Timmy nervously figures it out himself as Lex annoys him.



Robert Muldoon

Muldoon is such a badass. The movie doesn't do him justice, and he gets killed! In the book he blows up a raptor and lives! He is also an acoholic in the book, which is totally ignored in the movie.



Malcolm

Now, this is where I'm a little torn because Malcolm is such a great character. I'm sad he died in the book, and it feels a little bit needless. He just succumbs to his injuries, and Muldoon informs Grant at the end that 'he didn't make it'.

Malcolm's death is made a little more interesting because his last words were kind of mysterious and poignant - mentioning seeing some kind of paradise. I really wanted him to survive and he very easily could have lived had Muldoon just said to Grant 'he was rushed off in the emergency chopper - but he'll be ok'.

As much as I like Goldblum, in the movie his attractive, suave, demeanor is amplified and it pushes some of his fascinating mathematical explanations to the back seat. Once the T-Rex attacks, he's just sort of on for the ride. In the book, his role is fantastic through-out, especially some of the discussions when in his room with the raptors tearing through the sun-roof. In short, he is far better in the book.

And let's get one thing out of the way, we all know the famous geographical issue with the initial T-Rex attack scene and the suddenly-appearing drop-off... but I also take issue with the sequence where Malcolm runs with the flare and in some weird edit - bam! the T-Rex is blowing through the bathroom walls and Malcolm just sort of falls injured. He wasn't even running in that direction, and it feels like bad action editing.

I never quite understood why Malcolm exits the car in the movie or the book. In the book he is simply trying to run away, but it still felt like an un-calculated risk for such a calculated man.



Hammond

Hammond is another fantastic character. In the movie, I was brought to admire him. In the book, you admire him at first, but by the end I really found him to be kind of an ass-hole.

There is a very specific moment for me which paint the difference to his character from book to movie. In the book, he expresses that people will pay anything to visit Jurassic Park. In the movie, when Gennaro suggests a high entrance price, Hammond shuts him down and tells him the park is for everyone. A clear difference in his mentality and morality.

In the movie, he also seems far more attached and worried about his grandkids - in the book it's about the park. I guess that's the Spielberg effect kicking in.

I'll also touch on an issue I had with the book : Hammond's death. It all feels a little weird and out-of-nowhere. Post climax, as Grant, Ellie, and Gennaro drive down to check the raptor nest, the kids stay behind in the control room and press a button signalling a loud T-Rex roar in the lodging area. This scares Hammond who runs into the brush, trips down a little hill and breaks his ankle, and then is attacked and killed by little Compy's on his crawl back up. It just seems like a needless scene where he dies without meaning, moral, or really any payoff or retribution. It just seems like he simply dies for no reason, post-climax, and because of his grandkids fooling around. If anyone has another opinion or thought on his death, I'd love to explore it.



Alan Grant

Grant is just a badass in both the book and movie. I really like him. I wish he was my dad. I always viewed him as the main character in both. I do have a couple of thoughts.

The movie really, really plays up the fact that Grant doesn't like kids, but eventually comes to like them through his experience with Tim and Lex. It's classic sentimental Speilberg, and I don't know if I like it. It kind of takes over as a main theme in the movie. In the book it's much more subtle, and Grant shows some straight-up apathy for Tim - but risks his life repeatedly to save them.

There's also an interesting addition to the movie that wasn't present in the book : Grant's relationship with Ellie. In the book, she is just his student and they have no romantic interest or tension at all (in fact, her character is engaged to someone else, another Doctor!)

Even though Ellie is described as being attractive, she nor Grant nor any character have any sort of love interest with each other. I'm okay with that, there's giant dinosaurs killing people, there is no need for love sometimes.

However, in the movie Grant and Ellie are dating, and their discussions about children, again, are the main context to their dialog together. From the very damn beginning.

Malcolm hits on Ellie a few times, and Grant doesn't seem to care. It's a very odd, unexplored little bit anti-tension that goes nowhere. If I remember correctly, in JP3, it is implied that Grant is single again, so maybe it just wasn't meant to be. I really think their relationship was added to the movie to emphasize the thing with Grant's disliking kids.

Also, the scene at the end where Grant, Ellie, and Gennaro go to the raptor nest - I don't quite get it. It seems exceptionally dangerous and unwarranted. Grant says it is their responsibility to count the raptors, and they do some kind of a half-haphazard count in the dark of the eggs.... then the whole island is blown up anyways. None of this is in the movie at all, and it's post-climax so it's a little bit strange. Why only count the raptor eggs and not, say, the Compy's who have actually escaped?!

I don't get what it adds to the book and seems to only be there to make yet another point about the raptor behaviour. It just seems exceptionally, exceptionally careless and dangerous. They crawl into a dark raptor next practically unarmed (okay they had some toxic grenades), and what they get out of it doesn't seem worth it. I found the entire scene in the book very hard to believe.

One more thing that always bothered me about the movie. How did Grant know the T-Rex couldn't see when you didn't move? How did he know the raptor attack patterns? I'd really like to know, because it's incredibly stupid and beyond logic. In the book, he learns about being motionless around the T-Rex by accident, and the raptor flank just happens- and it's cool because Dr. Wu gets his guts ripped out.



Dr. Henry Wu

Dr. Henry Wu basically has no character in the movie. He is there for a brief bit of exposition, then he disappears. It's kind of lame, but I understand why it's like that. I did like his character a lot in the book, his achievement and contemplation and attempts to help. He also has the most gruesome death by far, which was pretty awesome and sad.



Dr. Harding

What is the point of this character? In the book he has a much more prominent role, although he is still very dry. At one point, he almost gets killed by raptors on the roof, but that's about it.

In the movie, he is only in one scene with the sick Triceratops, and even though he drives Ellie back to the visitor centre/control room, he somehow disappears. He would have been an easy and quick and justifiable character to kill off - much more acceptable than Muldoon who deserves his own spinoff trilogy, comics, video game, clothing line, jewelry line, and topless poster above my bed.



Ellie Sattler

I've already covered most of my thoughts about Ellie, but there are two things I want to point out.

In the book, there are a few examples that almost feel sexist. I don't remember them exactly, but one of them was when the marine in the helicopter asks who is in charge, and clearly does not ask Ellie. I wonder how intentional this was, as she's also kind of an awesome warrior survivor in the book. There is one scene in the movie where Hammond suggest he ought to go turn the power back on because he's a man (it's a weird scene) and Ellie kind of sternly tells Hammond they will 'debate the ethics of women's roles in serious situations' or something. It's a very deliberate bit of dialog, and I wonder if it was in there for a reason. She is a total badass in the book though, truly.

My other point is that I think Laura Dern did a pretty poor job playing Ellie. She just seems to overact, from her weird fake tears at the Triceratops scene, to her scene about 'our loved ones are what matters' with Hammond (where she then eats ice cream and says 'mmm this is good', which was weird, but might be a slight nod back to Lex and Tim's search for iced cream in the book). It feels especially forced when she says 'Alan you need to look at this' when Malcolm is dripping water on her hand. Um, Ellie, there's fucking dinosaurs out the window I don't think Grant cares about Malcolm's mathematical innuendo.

I guess I just picture Ellie in the book being far different. It's like the tried to make her stronger in the movie, but Laura Dern made her come across far more emotional and vulnerable.



Tim, Nedry, and Arnold

I didn't get too into these three characters because I felt like the movie almost perfectly represented them. I missed seeing Tim as the watchful older brother, but that's moreso about Lex's character.




Overall

I think the movie is a great adaptation, but having read the book now and seeing what was added to the film, I do have some qualms.

I think my biggest issue is Grant's not-wanting-kids theme being overplayed, and Lexie's entire one-dimensional character transformation and silly fake hacking skills (dates the movie, frankly).

Rather than some of the sentimental bits, I would have preferred another action scene to flesh out Muldoon or another argument in the control room to flesh out Dr. Wu and the morals of science instead. Or perhaps a scene of Dr. Harding getting maimed alive.

I'd be very interested to know everyone's thoughts on the book VS the movie, or what they think of my thoughts or if I've have missed anything.



NOTE - I have no read The Lost World yet, I plan to right away. I also havn't watched The Lost World or JP3 in quite a few years.

 

[Tizoc]

Thanks for the info OP, you got me interested in reading the book, so I'll aim to get it in August along witha few other books.

 

[Razgriz-Specter]

Honestly they feel so different yet both versions I consider pure perfection.

 

[Tunesmith]

The fake looking "CGI" computer interface is a real interface.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

I want to write much more, but I seriously have to go to bed, but a couple quick notes:

I like Gennaro in the book, but I understand why he was changed significantly in the movie. There would have been too many "hero" characters, and thus the changes give the movie a larger range of characters (and fills in the gap left from changing up Hammond's character significantly) and provides the necessary audience-pleasing kill. Plus, people really hated lawyers in the 90s, so that likely played in as well.

Book Hammond is a good character, but also a bit of a well-worn one in a lot of ways. I think the changes in the film make for a more interesting and complex character.

Nah, film Lex and Tim are much better. I particularly liked Lex being the computer nerd, even if a lot of it is quite dated now, since it's always been a "boy" role, and her character is quite different from the handful of "hacker chick" tropey character molds. (Side note: the file explorer used by Lex in the film's climax is actually real, though was never intended to be used in serious work environments. It was more of a fun, experimental thing)

Fuck you, Laura Dern is perfect in JP.

Lost World the book is really, really different. The supporting cast and antagonists are entirely different, outside of Sarah Harding. The other characters were merged and split and reworked heavily for the film, and of course you have major changes due to the fact the novel Hammond is dead and novel InGen no longer exists. The basic structure is there, but at many points it's almost unrecognizable. Also, the entire climax from the film was made up for the film (and was a very late change). It's also kind of frustrating in that the main character is constantly on the verge of saying something but never quite getting to it. The novel does have two absolutely amazing sequences that aren't in the film though, and I keep hoping they'll happen, but Jurassic World kind of ruined the chances of them with similar, though fundamentally different moments.

Spoiler

A raptor chase scene involving motorcycles

and

Spoiler

a scene involving camouflaged dinos and the protagonists having to flash lights on and off to keep them visible

.

Also

Spoiler

Ian is very much alive

. Not really a spoiler, since you'd know it by opening the book, but yeah.

Edit: It's worth noting that, like the movie, it's definitely lesser than the original. Crichton actually didn't want to write it to begin with, but with the popularity of the first book and movie, along with personal requests from Spielberg himself, he felt forced into writing it. Still though, I enjoyed it.

 

[hatchx]

The fake looking "CGI" computer interface is a real interface.

....really?

 

[LastNac]

Any changes from the book never bothered me because Crichton wrote the film as well.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

....really?

Yes.

 

[hatchx]

Any changes from the book never bothered me because Crichton wrote the film as well.

I know, but I found this to almost make the examination more interesting.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Any changes from the book never bothered me because Crichton wrote the film as well.

Well, he wrote the first draft. The final rewrites were done by David Koepp, with Malia Scotch Marmo in between. Jurassic Outpost has them up for download.

I personally didn't mind the changes because they made for a better movie than the novel did, which made for a better book. So I think they're both perfect for what they are.

 

[hatchx]

Yes.

Well I'll be damned.

Thanks for your response by the way WhiteRabbitEXE. I really disagree with Lex though. I get she isn't the 'typical' hacker, but it just feels like such a spoon-fed moment. I feel like the younger child Lex raised the stakes. It made the raptor scene more terrifying and intense, and Grant's and Tim's taking care of her all the more endearing.

I also think Tim's ingenuity would have been amplified had he been allowed to be the big brother. Their parents situation is completely glossed over in the movie, but picturing him as the older brother to young Lex while their rich parents were divorcing so damn heart melting.

Lex in the movie just offered me nothing.

Well, he wrote the first draft. The final rewrites were done by David Koepp, with Malia Scotch Marmo in between. Jurassic Outpost has them up for download.

I personally didn't mind the changes because they made for a better movie than the novel did, which made for a better book. So I think they're both perfect for what they are.

Perfect other than the geography/continuity flaw of the T-Rex attack scene

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Perfect other than the geography/continuity flaw of the T-Rex attack scene

To be fair, it wasn't a flaw per se, since it was actually a deliberate inconsistency, to better suit the moment-to-moment and create a more intense sequence that what would have been possible.

Edit: Bed for real now though, lol. It's way too easy to rope me into talking about JP haha.

 

[Tizoc]

Well I'll be damned.

Thanks for your response by the way WhiteRabbitEXE. I really disagree with Lex though. I get she isn't the 'typical' hacker, but it just feels like such a spoon-fed moment. I feel like the younger child Lex raised the stakes. It made the raptor scene more terrifying and intense, and Grant's and Tim's taking care of her all the more endearing.

I also think Tim's ingenuity would have been amplified had he been allowed to be the big brother. Their parents situation is completely glossed over in the movie, but picturing him as the older brother to young Lex while their rich parents were divorcing so damn heart melting.

Lex in the movie just offered me nothing.





Perfect other than the geography/continuity flaw of the T-Rex attack scene

Just to add, UNIX is a real system-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRIX
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fsn_(file_manager)

 

[Neff]

The movie is often described as the cartoon version of the book. One could argue that the movie suffers Spielbergification, and it does to a point, but that would overlook the intentional meta-movie aspect of an incredibly well-made commercial theme park movie about commercial theme parks.

Both are fantastic at what they do.

Spoiler

But overall I probably prefer the book.

Now, this is where I'm a little torn because Malcolm is such a great character. I'm sad he died in the book

Guess what?

Spoiler

He didn't.

 

[hatchx]

To be fair, it wasn't a flaw per se, since it was actually a deliberate inconsistency, to better suit the moment-to-moment and create a more intense sequence that what would have been possible.

Edit: Bed for real now though, lol. It's way too easy to rope me into talking about JP haha.

Lol I was being pedantic about the T-Rex scene but I agree.

Would love your thoughts or response to what I said about the end raptor nest scene. Maybe tomorrow. I need to sleep too.

 

[psyfi]

movie is wayyyy y better

and especially Lex and Tim! u crazy

 

[Spades]

Great read, OP! Have never read the book myself but the movie is one of my all-time faves.

 

[spekkeh]

Jurassic Park is a classic hubris story (and a bit of warning). Hammond dying is definitely moral because he was convinced he could play God as well as put profit above everything and got punished for it. Malcolm dying was ironic. He was the only one that foresaw the inevitable chaos yet still got consumed by it.

I really like the film but it neutered much of the underlying message and edge by turning it into a monster movie.

 

[HotHamBoy]

OP, Malcom isn't dead.

He's the main character of the sequel novel.

I think, as film adaptations go, Jurassic Park is pretty fucking solid.

The Lost World, though... the book shits all over it. Awful movie. Read the book, OP.

BTW, did you guys know that Ariana Richards, the actress who played Lex, is a professional painter now?

She was only 16 when she painted this in '95:

Here's her modern work:

 

[Odoul]

I think a straight adaptation of the novel would have been an R-rated film.

It just has the little touches that make it a scifi horror rather than the adventure with elements of horror in the movie.

The 12 inch tall suicidal wooly mammoth.

The raptors are so smart that not having grownups to learn from have made them sociopaths who eat their own kids.

Great movie and great book though.

It isn't until the sequel that the novel absolutely shits on the film.

 

[nkarafo]

I knew about the actress being a painter. Her paintings are amazing.

 

[HotHamBoy]

Great movie and great book though.

It isn't until the sequel that the novel absolutely shits on the film.

I always thought it was a very odd choice to repurpose the compy scene with the little girl from the JP novel in the Lost World movie.

It doesn't even make sense.

 

[BumRush]

Malcolm didn't die though...


I love both the movie and the book, but I did feel they were significantly different on a scene by scene basis. Also, character portrayals were (mostly) tweaked as well. You're definitely right about the big story beats being similar.

 

[crisdecuba]

Great write up - it was fun to read your thoughts.

I don't think the part in the movie where the raptor lunges into the reflection was an intentional set up by Lex. The way it played for me is that she really was trying to hide in there.

 

[HotHamBoy]

Malcolm didn't die though...


I love both the movie and the book, but I did feel they were significantly different on a scene by scene basis. Also, character portrayals were (mostly) tweaked as well. You're definitely right about the big story beats being similar.

Characters are either much more sympathetic or cartoonishly simple in the movie.

I wonder what compelled Spielberg to cast Santa Claus as Hammond.

I think a modern casting of Dr. Grant would have kept the beard, too.

 

[crisdecuba]

Characters are either much more sympathetic or cartoonishly simple in the movie.

I wonder what compelled Spielberg to cast Santa Claus as Hammond.

I think a modern casting of Dr. Grant would have kept the beard, too.

Except for Gennaro...

 

[MarkMclovin]

Which book starts off with a little girl getting attacked on a beach?

Started that years ago but couldn't carry on.

 

[RipperGrim]

I actually kinda regret reading the book because it made the movie a bit less good to me because I thought the books was so much better.

It also answers the question of what the dinosaurs don't look like they supposedly did in real life, they specifically make the dinosaurs more fit for public consumption, basically a plot point in Jurassic world.

 

[Mindwipe]

Yeah, Jurassic Park is a legitimately good book, and I'd recommend it to anyone. It's pretty different from the film in a lot of interesting ways.

 

[Branduil]

Which book starts off with a little girl getting attacked on a beach?

Started that years ago but couldn't carry on.

That's the first book. There's actually an entire prologue section involving compies which snuck on boats and are attacking people in Costa Rica.

 

[SolidChamp]

The fake looking "CGI" computer interface is a real interface.

It's a Unix system. I know this...

 

[petran79]

I think a straight adaptation of the novel would have been an R-rated film.

It just has the little touches that make it a scifi horror rather than the adventure with elements of horror in the movie.

I remember another scifi movie of the 80s where a group of astronauts landed on a planet of Harryhausen dinosaurs.Some deaths were very brutal. Impressive stop motion animation though.

 

[biggersmaller]

Look, Malcolm did die in the book. Crichton simply resurrected him without explanation for the next novel because they brought Goldblum back for The Lost World movie.

While very different, both the sequel book and movie are crap.

 

[Retro]

I remember going to see the movie on a Saturday morning and being completely blown away. Being 9 years old, that's like the prime age for being into dinosaurs anyway, but Jurassic Park just threw fuel on the fire. I immediately got the book from the library and loved every bit of it (well, the parts that I could understand, the chaos theory stuff was a bit over my head). I remember Nedry's death freaked me out enough I couldn't sleep after reading it (mostly the vivid details, being blind and holding his own intestines, etc.)

I picked up a paperback copy a few years later and I've read it more times than I can recall (it's one of my default "I need something to read for 20 minutes, let me grab that and jump in at a random spot" books). I remember reading it in the back seat of the family station wagon on our vacation to the western US (where yes, we stopped at Dinosaur National Monument, at my insistence), and it's second only to my paperback of The Hobbit in terms of millage and wear and tear.

As an adult, it's not the best book I've read, but it's a smart little thriller with some interesting characters, and it tends to move along at a good clip. Crichton's stuff can be a little dry but Jurassic Park tends to stay fairly breezy by comparison. I'm glad they were able to work some of the missing pieces like the Aviary into the later movies.

Alright, let's dig into yer post, OP...

In the movie, Gennaro is a weezly one-dimension cliche lawyer who seems like he is only there to die. And honestly, when he dies it's pretty silly.

Film-Gennaro gets all the story beats of the book-only Ed Regis character with a dash of "It's the 90s, look how much we hate lawyers" peppered in... except he gets offed by the adult Rex instead of toyed with and eventually killed by the juvenile.

In the book Lex is a little girl, and in the movie she is closer to a young teen.

Yeah, they basically swapped the children in the book; Lex is younger and a tom boy, Tim is older and into computers and dinosaurs. I prefer the film version because book Lex just comes across as kind of obnoxious at points, and screaming / whining baggage at others, while Tim gets to know and do things.

The movie really, really plays up the fact that Grant doesn't like kids, but eventually comes to like them through his experience with Tim and Lex. It's classic sentimental Speilberg, and I don't know if I like it. It kind of takes over as a main theme in the movie. In the book it's much more subtle, and Grant shows some straight-up apathy for Tim - but risks his life repeatedly to save them.

The book actually says point blank that Grant loves kids, and even admires how quickly they learn about dinosaurs and how fascinated they are by them. That's definitely Spielberg-brand "gotta learn a touching lesson" in action.

Also, the scene at the end where Grant, Ellie, and Gennaro go to the raptor nest - I don't quite get it. It seems exceptionally dangerous and unwarranted. Grant says it is their responsibility to count the raptors, and they do some kind of a half-haphazard count in the dark of the eggs.... then the whole island is blown up anyways. None of this is in the movie at all, and it's post-climax so it's a little bit strange. Why only count the raptor eggs and not, say, the Compy's who have actually escaped?!

They check out the nest to get an idea how many generations have reproduced to get a more exact count of how many raptors there actually were. They nested underground and the computer tracking had trouble on the south side of the island due to all the volcanic activity so there was no way to be sure how many raptors there really were, and therefore no way to know how many had potentially gotten off the island (remember, the book has a "race against time" component via the cargo ship with raptors on it).

As far as going for the raptor nest specifically, that was because they had the juvenile to lead them to the nest, Grant was familiar with their nesting habits (I may be wrong, but I think he was actually excavating a raptor nest at the start of the book), knew there was likely to be a single communal nesting ground, and they wanted to check the raptors because they knew they were potentially getting off the island too (in fact, I've always thought the epilogue was about raptors rather than compys).

Dr. Harding

What is the point of this character? In the book he has a much more prominent role, although he is still very dry. At one point, he almost gets killed by raptors on the roof, but that's about it.

He finds Nedry's jeep, provides information about the animals' health, and tends to Malcolm after he's injured. Definitely not a vital character but it's a bigger role than in the movie. Remember that Crichton was a medical doctor himself, that sort of role always pops up in his books (and, you know... ER...)

Which book starts off with a little girl getting attacked on a beach?

Started that years ago but couldn't carry on.

That's the first book. That scene opened the second film though.

 

[IntelliHeath]

Hatchx, you forget to mention Ed Regis. Honestly, I think Ed Regis should be mentioned since he was his own character in the book. He mostly existed as other character which is Donald Gennaro which inherited personalities and actions from Ed Regis. Unfortunately, it was more of Ed Regis, and less of Gennaro.

Actually I'm open to someone making a brand new movie based on the movie accurately.

 

[Mathieran]

Laura Dern was probably my first crush. I was probably like in 3rd or 4th grade so I didn't understand it. I just really liked her.

I don't know how many times I watched JP when I was a kid, it's a great movie that is still enjoyable as an adult. I read the books when I was pretty young too, and I really enjoyed them as well. I should reread them, I'd probably understand a lot more.

 

[Musha_Soturi]

It's been a really long time since I read the book, I should read it again, thanks OP.

It's one of my favourite films, I was obsessed with dinosaurs as a kid before it came out, and I remember going to see it at the cinema and being blown away. Still holds up today 24 years later.

 

[Shadybiz]

Excellent book. I liked the second one, too.

Several other Crichton books that are definitely worth a read:

Sphere
Next
Timeline
Congo

(Last two were WAAAAYYYYY better than the movies that came after them, by the way. Don't remember enough about the Sphere movie to comment on that comparison).

 

[Kor of Memory]

IIRC, Hammond is a complete asshole in the book.

I want to say he intentially brought his grandkids there to prove that the park was safe for children. As in, he was just using them as an emotional tool for his own gain. Like, the book even flat out acknowledges this.

It makes you really see that Hammond will do whatever it takes to accomplish his dream.

I also liked how the book explained that Nedry was like a liaison to an entire company of programmers, and he didn't do all the work himself, but was sort of the guy who oversaw all the work. This makes that a lot more believable that he could have that much control over the park. He mentions in the movie very briefly that he's gotta send some code over to his guys, but it's not clear what that means. Apparently it meant an actual internet connection sending lines of code back and forth.

 

[Schlorgan]

I want a miniseries that follows the book directly. TV-MA.

 

[Kyleripman]

Also, the scene at the end where Grant, Ellie, and Gennaro go to the raptor nest - I don't quite get it. It seems exceptionally dangerous and unwarranted. Grant says it is their responsibility to count the raptors, and they do some kind of a half-haphazard count in the dark of the eggs.... then the whole island is blown up anyways. None of this is in the movie at all, and it's post-climax so it's a little bit strange. Why only count the raptor eggs and not, say, the Compy's who have actually escaped?!

I don't get what it adds to the book and seems to only be there to make yet another point about the raptor behaviour. It just seems exceptionally, exceptionally careless and dangerous. They crawl into a dark raptor next practically unarmed (okay they had some toxic grenades), and what they get out of it doesn't seem worth it. I found the entire scene in the book very hard to believe.

This scene has always bugged me. Specifically how they threaten to use a cattle prod on Gennaro if he won't go down into the raptor hole. I understand that they wanted him to take responsibility for his contributions to the park and to make him deal with the consequences of what happened...but yeah. Never sat well with me.

 

[Ridley327]

Characters are either much more sympathetic or cartoonishly simple in the movie.

I wonder what compelled Spielberg to cast Santa Claus as Hammond.

I think a modern casting of Dr. Grant would have kept the beard, too.

As strange as it may seem, the remake of Miracle on 34th Street came after Jurassic Park. Attenborough being in JP was actually a pretty big deal at the time, since he had retired from acting to pursue his directing career and had to be talked into taking the role.

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but movie Lex wasn't trying to do a fake out in the kitchen. I thought she was legit trying to hide hence desperately trying to shut the door, especially when she realized it reflected her.

 

[HotHamBoy]

As strange as it may seem, the remake of Miracle on 34th Street came after Jurassic Park. Attenborough being in JP was actually a pretty big deal at the time, since he had retired from acting to pursue his directing career and had to be talked into taking the role.

Lol it was a joke, brah.

Look, Malcolm did die in the book. Crichton simply resurrected him without explanation for the next novel because they brought Goldblum back for The Lost World movie.

While very different, both the sequel book and movie are crap.

It's a retcon, I think they even say something in The Lost World novel about how he had been presumed dead and spent a long time in a hospital before correcting anyone? Something like that. He has a permanent limp in the book, too.

As far as the book being crap, I disagree. I read both books again last year and while TLW is definitely inferior, even mediocre, it's not bad like the film is. The film is a straight up Speilberg-by-numbers cash grab garbage heap.

 

[Tobor]

I'm old enough that I read the book before the movie was released.

My biggest takeaway is that I pictured Alan Grant as Harrison Ford while reading the book. No offense to Sam Neil, but he always felt like a huge downgrade to me as the part just screamed Harrison Ford to me.

EDIT: yes, I know Ford turned the part down. But that's my point really, he was Spielbergs first choice as well.


Also, it bothered me that the compy scene and the closing shot of the pteranodon flying over the ocean was missing from the movie.

 

[HotHamBoy]

I'm old enough that I read the book before the movie was released.

My biggest takeaway is that I pictured Alan Grant as Harrison Ford while reading the book. No offense to Sam Neil, but he always felt like a huge downgrade to me as the part just screamed Harrison Ford to me.

EDIT: yes, I know Ford turned the part down. But that's my point really, he was Spielbergs first choice as well.

Crichton's Dr. Grant was based on Jack Horner.

 

[facelike]

Great book. My biggest takeway is that the first book really became all the action scenes from the first three movies. The Avation part I remember being insane in the book. When I saw it in movie #3, I kept thinking "this should have been in the first movie".

 

[Leatherface]

I've never read the first Jurassic Park but I will say this, The Lost World was a fantastic book that would have translated great to film but for some reason the film adaptation took far too many "creative liberties" and some of the best parts of the book weren't even in the damn movie! Also, it fucking sucked. I was so pissed. Still bothers me. :'(

 

[Skiptastic]

I read the book before seeing the movie (what was my dad thinking, I was only 10!) and the one part I remember from the book was the velociraptor eating some dudes intestines. That was pretty crazy for a ten year old.

 

[Fuchsdh]

I think the movie is the purest example of the adapted work being better than the original. Jurassic Park is fine, but it suffers from some weird pacing (The park is saved! No it isn't! Yes it is! There's a threat to the mainland! We stopped it! Let's go check out some nests! Oh wait we didn't stop the threat to the mainland!) and the usual Crichton problems (Hey, let's have Malcolm talk endlessly about the themes of the book!)

Thematically, I find the movie's depiction of Hammond far more interesting. Greedy asshole characters are a dime a dozen in media. Making Hammond ultimately a showman who desperately wants to create something lasting, making him blind to the problems in front of him, is a much more interesting tack to take. Sattler laying it on thick is a weak point of the movie, but like with Blue Velvet Laura Dern can wring some solid performances out of some terrible lines.

I also appreciate that the kids are... well, they're kids, but they're far less insufferable in the movie, especially Lex, who gets to actually do things besides endanger everyone. This is another change that's funny considering the recent thread we had about Spielberg hating women.

Gennaro is definitely a character I loved in the books, as is Muldoon's adventures, but turning him into a composite of Gennaro and the publicist in the movie was a necessary streamlining.

Really, I think part of the reason I prefer Jurassic Park the film is the Spielbergian outlook. Everything about the characters in the novel is wrapped up in cynicism and greed. In the movie, there's a reverential awe about the dinosaurs and actual human bonding with Grant and the kids.