Support NeoGAF

[FrankCanada97]

How is he writing new novels? Isn't he dead?

Probably the same way he "wrote" the last two. They were already written but he passed before they got published. I'm wondering if this was completely written by Crichton or if it had to be finished by another author like Micro was.

 

[gfxtwin]

Has anyone checked out Crichton's new novel yet?

I haven't, but I take it that's the novel about Marsh and Cope? Should be interesting. Speaking of hubris, those guys are up there with book Hammond. So many discoveries destroyed, many of which confirmed via surviving documents to have been complete enough to offer enough data to accurately visualize several animals that only fragments of bone exist of now. Ego, greed and competition FTL.

 

[jman2050]

I love both versions about the same, although I will say that the movie does kind of muddle the message of the story. In the movie there were some signs that a lack of planning and foresight led to the disaster being as bad as it was, but ultimately things only went south because of terrible luck and Nedry's meddling. The book is much more emphatic on the idea that the entire fundamental design of the park and the systems governing it were flawed from the start because of hubris and incompetence. Just off the top of my head you have the lack of restraint on the type of animals they created, slipshod security because of wanting to save money, complete reliance on automation to maintain the park without any sort of redundant control, everything involving the staff's complete failure to recognize that the dinosaurs were breeding, consulting Malcolm, a guy who knows what he's doing and does it well, about their plans for the park and balking when he correctly pointed out all the problems with their design, and probably a lot more I'm forgetting.

It's funny because Malcolm in the movie so eloquently summarizes this theme during the lunch scene and yet it doesn't apply nearly as well to the movie he's in as it does to the book it's adapted from.

Malcolm's long-winded speeches in the book are nonsense though, that's just Crichton navel-gazing in the worst way.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Probably the same way he "wrote" the last two. They were already written but he passed before they got published. I'm wondering if this was completely written by Crichton or if it had to be finished by another author like Micro was.

Dragon Teeth was complete. It was found by his wife sometime later, when she was digging through his archives. It should be the last Crichton novel unless something miraculously springs up or they start publishing stuff based off of even less complete material than Micro.

I love both versions about the same, although I will say that the movie does kind of muddle the message of the story. In the movie there were some signs that a lack of planning and foresight led to the disaster being as bad as it was, but ultimately things only went south because of terrible luck and Nedry's meddling. The book is much more emphatic on the idea that the entire fundamental design of the park and the systems governing it were flawed from the start because of hubris and incompetence. Just off the top of my head you have the lack of restraint on the type of animals they created, slipshod security because of wanting to save money, complete reliance on automation to maintain the park without any sort of redundant control, everything involving the staff's complete failure to recognize that the dinosaurs were breeding, consulting Malcolm, a guy who knows what he's doing and does it well, about their plans for the park and balking when he correctly pointed out all the problems with their design, and probably a lot more I'm forgetting.

It's funny because Malcolm in the movie so eloquently summarizes this theme during the lunch scene and yet it doesn't apply nearly as well to the movie he's in as it does to the book it's adapted from.

Malcolm's long-winded speeches in the book are nonsense though, that's just Crichton navel-gazing in the worst way.

Technically Nedry's meddling is a substantial part of their overreliance on automation. Movie Hammond even says "Hiring Nedry was a mistake, that's obvious. We're over-dependent on automation, I can see that now" to Ellie in the ice cream scene. A lot of it did get cut though, but I think the biggest reason for that is the huge sub-plot about the animals breeding getting truncated down to two scenes ("Life... uh... finds a way" and "Life found the way").

 

[LastNac]

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.

Koepp has historically been brought in just to punch up dialogue, nothing more or less. Crichton's SP is pretty much the final film.

 

[WhiteRabbitEXE]

Koepp has historically been brought in just to punch up dialogue, nothing more or less. Crichton's SP is pretty much the final film.

Eh, Crichton's draft is pretty different. More novel accurate in a lot of ways, like a condensed version (bigger emphasis on dinos breeding, novel-esque Gennaro, Grant poisoning the raptor, Hammond dies [though differently]). Marmo's rewrite brings it more inline with the final movie, but there's still notable differences beyond dialog and the stuff that got changed/cut/added in production.

 

[Jill Sandwich]

You can definitely tell in Micro where Crichton ends and Preston begins. A film version would be amazing though.

 

[shawnbuddy]

I read the book about the time the movie came out. I remember thinking both were about the same level, but that the book had a bit of a darker and grimmer tone, as evidenced by Hammond's character's motivations and some of the deaths. Because it's a visual spectacle the movie has some focus on the wonder of Jurassic Park, while the book is more of a horror story.

 

[teiresias]

I haven't read the JP novel for years so don't remember much about it, but I do remember thinking it is one of the quintessential examples of what makes for a good novel (and what can be done in a novel) vs what works and has time to be done in a film adaption. The novel has more characters, more science, and a less action oriented climax (if I remember correctly - something about Grant injecting eggs with something maybe?).

I always though the novel and movie "Contact" were the other great example of this. More science and more characters in the novel, making it more intellectual, whereas the movie really goes hard in on the emotional aspects of the story and focuses it down to just Ellie.

Spoiler

To the point where Ellie is the only one in the machine in the movie, but the novel has a whole group of scientists that go

.

 

[Fuchsdh]

I love both versions about the same, although I will say that the movie does kind of muddle the message of the story. In the movie there were some signs that a lack of planning and foresight led to the disaster being as bad as it was, but ultimately things only went south because of terrible luck and Nedry's meddling. The book is much more emphatic on the idea that the entire fundamental design of the park and the systems governing it were flawed from the start because of hubris and incompetence. Just off the top of my head you have the lack of restraint on the type of animals they created, slipshod security because of wanting to save money, complete reliance on automation to maintain the park without any sort of redundant control, everything involving the staff's complete failure to recognize that the dinosaurs were breeding, consulting Malcolm, a guy who knows what he's doing and does it well, about their plans for the park and balking when he correctly pointed out all the problems with their design, and probably a lot more I'm forgetting.

It's funny because Malcolm in the movie so eloquently summarizes this theme during the lunch scene and yet it doesn't apply nearly as well to the movie he's in as it does to the book it's adapted from.

Malcolm's long-winded speeches in the book are nonsense though, that's just Crichton navel-gazing in the worst way.

I get your opinion on that, but the book amped it up to ridiculous levels as well. If Jurassic Park were a real place, the actual difficulties involved with it would be the stuff Jackson mentions—you've got all the headaches of a theme park and a zoo combined. In the real world, zoos don't have to worry about people being murdered all the time, even with large and dangerous animals. I mean, the only reason the T. rex gets out of its paddock is that the moats are conveniently non-existent selectively to move things along. You'd be far more likely to have issues feeding that many large animals more than anything else.

 

[Kyleripman]

Great novel and a great movie. It's been several years since I read the original book, but I never read "The Lost World." Still, whenever the movies are on TV, I always watch them. I guess that comes from growing up a dinosaur fanatic. Silly movie cliches aside, I feel like the movies still hold up very well. I was always fascinated with how much of the effects were practical (not CGI). Someday I want to go on the Jurassic Park ride at Universal Studios, I've heard that the dinosaurs in that are on-par with the movie props.

Unfortunately, this is not the case - at least not in Florida. I would love to see the ride get a revamp.