PDA

View Full Version : Question for those who read "Jurassic Park"



Tog
2010-Sep-03, 11:58 AM
This doesn't apply to the movie at all.

In the book the character Ian Malcolm talked a lot about Chaos Theory and the morality of what was being done on the island. In an article I read around the time the movie came out, author Michael Crichton said that he loved that character a great deal and that whenever he started writing Malcolm's dialog, it just kept going.

I'm curious as to the number of people that found Malcolm's little speeches interesting vs those who found them tedious.

Did you skip over what he had to say?
Was it a welcome rest from the tension in the rest of the story?
Would the book have been better without it?

I'm asking because the thing I'm writing right now seems to be having a lot of similar discussions among the characters.

chrissy
2010-Sep-03, 12:21 PM
I found it an interesting break from what was going on but I also found it filled in a lot of gaps.

A shame the book was compact (short) as I could have read more. The film on the other hand was more of a welcome relief as it stretched the entire book into a trilogy, but missed a lot of the book out.

baric
2010-Sep-03, 05:30 PM
I loved JP when it came out and read the book over a weekend. I don't remember everything about it now but I didn't skip anything.

At the time, chaos theory was still a relatively fresh concept so I enjoyed seeing it incorporated into the storyline.

I remember thinking, "wow, this book would make a great movie. Too bad it's impossible". Well, it turn out to be possible, but it wasn't a great movie :/

swampyankee
2010-Sep-03, 06:27 PM
I found them annoyingly preachy, especially since all the engineers really do know about non-linear behavior of things like, say, bridges.

Of course, some people think Crichton also discovered aircraft fatigue in his book Airframe.

Gillianren
2010-Sep-03, 06:42 PM
You know, it's been so long since I've read it that I don't remember? And we were just talking about the book/movie differences yesterday, too. I may well have just skipped them the last few times I read it. I just don't really read it anymore.

Fazor
2010-Sep-03, 07:33 PM
You know, it's been so long since I've read it that I don't remember?
Ditto. I read it in the span of a single car trip tp Michigan and one night's stay in a hotel, but that was ages ago. Crichton was my favorite author, but I tended to skip his long, sciencey rambles in all his books, so it is likely I skipped these too.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Sep-03, 10:08 PM
A shame the book was compact (short) as I could have read more. The film on the other hand was more of a welcome relief as it stretched the entire book into a trilogy, but missed a lot of the book out.
Not really, the second film was loosely based on the second book, not on the first, the third I'm sure was based on the recommendations of their accountants.

And I got the strong impression that Ian is the mouthpiece for Crichton's loathing for technology.

Van Rijn
2010-Sep-03, 11:05 PM
You know, it's been so long since I've read it that I don't remember? And we were just talking about the book/movie differences yesterday, too. I may well have just skipped them the last few times I read it. I just don't really read it anymore.

It's funny - when I first went to see the movie, I had forgotten I had read the book. I rarely forget reading books, but this one had left little impression. I remembered it later, though. I liked the movie much more than the book. What I mainly remember in the book was a long buildup for the later catastrophe, and I just wanted them to get on with it already.

Krel
2010-Sep-04, 12:29 AM
I was disappointed in the second book (although I did like it), as it wasn't really a sequel to the first. The end of the first book was a setup to them having to hunt the Dinos that had escaped to the South American mainland, but that storyline was dropped for some reason.

Does anyone know why Michael Crichton quit directing movies? I have never been able to find out why.

David.

SkepticJ
2010-Sep-04, 12:53 AM
He spends his time railing against Global Warming and writing crappy novels. That doesn't leave a lot of time for anything else.

chrissy
2010-Sep-04, 01:17 AM
Not really, the second film was loosely based on the second book, not on the first, the third I'm sure was based on the recommendations of their accountants.

And I got the strong impression that Ian is the mouthpiece for Crichton's loathing for technology.

I read the book years ago and have slept since then. :p

ggremlin
2010-Sep-04, 02:57 AM
i read the book, but all I remember from it was the ending was different from the movie. However, I read "Andromeda Strain" years ago and can still remember whole dialogs from it. Like any writer, you get good ones and bad.

Gillianren
2010-Sep-04, 03:39 AM
He spends his time railing against Global Warming and writing crappy novels. That doesn't leave a lot of time for anything else.

Spent; he's a bit busy being dead these days.

Nick Theodorakis
2010-Sep-04, 03:59 AM
Not really, the second film was loosely based on the second book, ...

The first half of the second film was loosely based on the second book; the second half of the film was loosely based on King Kong.

Nick

Gillianren
2010-Sep-04, 06:53 PM
When we went to go see a sneak preview of the second movie, one of the people in our group hadn't read the first book. He'd seen the first movie. He'd read the second book. He could not be made to understand that a major ending event in the first book had actually happened, because the movie and the second book had both pretty much pretended it hadn't. That was really irritating.

baric
2010-Sep-04, 10:57 PM
The first half of the second film was loosely based on the second book; the second half of the film was loosely based on King Kong.

Nick

There were also scenes in the 2nd movie that were pulled directly from the 1st book. Well, I remember the T-Rex/waterfall scene.

Romanus
2010-Sep-05, 12:25 AM
Though I haven't read JP in a while, I do love the original book, and read it several times in my youth. I'm not surprised about Crichton's feelings for Malcolm, as he's really the only interesting character in the book (both books, I might add). spoiler The fact that he retconned Malcolm back to life in the sequel spoiler certainly speaks volumes.

Gillianren
2010-Sep-05, 12:44 AM
Yeah--he wasn't expecting anyone else to like him and realized he could make more money if he put Malcolm in front and center.

Moose
2010-Sep-05, 12:48 AM
Spent; he's a bit busy being dead these days.

The slacker.

AndreasJ
2010-Sep-05, 08:18 AM
I read the book around when the first movie was released. I remember a fair lot of it but not much of Malcolm's monologues. I was fairly young (twelvish) at the time so they may largely have gone over my head (I certainly had a very vague idea of chaos theory at that point).

jokergirl
2010-Sep-07, 12:01 PM
I read all of his dialogue, but I found him pretentious even so...
"Chaos theory says your cloned dinosaurs will use the frog dna in them to change their gender," indeed.

;)