Chaos Theory does not mean what Michael Crichton thinks it means. ( )

I have been wanting to read Jurassic Park for quite some time and I’m glad I finally got around to it. Of course I have always loved the movies, which is what mainly sparked my interest in reading the books. It was really neat to be able to read more about the science and theory of the time period and how these fields led to the dinosaur engineering. In particular, I really enjoyed the explanations from Ian Malcom (and kind of feel like his character was made in part to have this explanatory information given without it all having to come from the narrator). And I must say, Jeff Goldblum plays the part of this character perfectly. I mean, I could just see him as Malcom through the whole book.

Something else that was really different between the book and movie (of what I can remember of the movie anyways) is that the book is able to go a bit more into the “horror” aspect of the dinosaurs, which really drove home, more than I felt like the movie did, the ferocity and power of nature. And not just physical power, but the fact that even though science may have reached a point to recreate extinct animals in modern times, they have no real control— they are playing with things they don’t fully understand, they are playing Gods when they are only humans, and therefore their creations are not within their control and are well beyond their comprehension.

The book brings up a lot of good points of discussion (a great deal of these coming from Malcom). One of the best bits of commentary in the story in fact is about how the scientists’ got so caught up in all the new things they COULD do that they never stopped to ask if they SHOULD be doing them. Questions are posed about corporations, law, environmental protection, loss of habitats and species, morality, scientific and technological “progression,” and even relationships and parenting. I guess being very human in an environment humans were never meant to exist and being hunted by prehistoric, extinct animals is good for bringing up more existential considerations. ( )

My favorite book. I have always been a fan of dinosaurs and the Jurassic Park series. A lot of things were left out from the movie. The book has them all. I love it. ( )

one of the few books that I actually couldn't put down , even though I knew the basic premise having seen the movie. but after reading the novel I have a deep hatred of the film adaptation. my first complaint is how the film portrayes Ian Malcolm , in the book he was an amazing , almost prophetic , mathmetician , in the movie he is a childish, unimportant character whose largest contribution to the film is hitting on ellie sattler. he provided the thought provoking arguments that made the book , in the movie they cut these into nice , short, inconspicuaous sentences. I really enjoyed his discussion with hammond about the nature and limits of science and progress , these were barely in the movie. my second complaint against the film is the portyal of Hammond. one of my favourite scenes in the book is where hammond begins thinking about his next park, even though this one killed half of the people involved. he then stumbles down a hill and is promptly eaten by scavenger dinos , that was a "Ha take that!" moment if ever there was one. in the movie he repents and flies off into the sunset to a happy ending. so basically what universal studios did was strip the work of all its meaningfull dialogue and philosophical debates , and kind of lesson , and the darker side of human nature. what you are left with is a movie that became popular solely to it's then cutting edge technology , and numerous action sequences. so there you have it , read the novel , watch the film , despise the film. not much of a "book" review was it? ( )

I liked the movie better. ( )