Reviews

So good! Much more interesting than the movie, and I like the movie. It can be gory at certain parts, but it didn't go into excessive detail. I will definitely be looking at more Michael Crichton books.

sladematt's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Character
Strong character development? It's complicated
Loveable characters? No
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

4.0

kimberly28's review against another edition

Go to review page

4.5

Perfect book if only they took Lex out. Even the characters know - 75% of the time when Lex says something the next line is another character saying “Shut up, Lex” and the other 25% is “they ignored her”

Tbf it’s also a perfect movie. If you love the movie, you’ll love the book because it IS the movie (backwards I know, but Im sure that’s how most people experience it)

erh31's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous fast-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

4.0

drhippo's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous informative tense medium-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? Yes

3.5

random_spider's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous challenging dark informative mysterious tense slow-paced

Plot- or character-driven? Plot
Strong character development? No
Loveable characters? It's complicated
Diverse cast of characters? No
Flaws of characters a main focus? No

3.0

In my opinion, the movie by Steven Spielberg was better.

"... Because the history of evolution is that life escapes all barriers. Life breaks free. Life expands to new territories. Painfully, perhaps even dangerously. But life finds a way."

Synopsis and/or Premise:
John Hammond invited Dr. Grant, Dr. Sattler, Dr. Malcolm, and Mr. Donald Gennaro to his private island. He is constructing the most ambitious park in the world, and he needs their professional opinions as consultations. But disaster struck where they didn't expect, and now they're trapped in an island full of genetic monsters.

The Good and The Bad:
Jurassic Park was a book that's fundamentally a philosophical argument of on the ethics of genetic manipulation 🧬. It digs a deep topic on what level of responsibility does humanity needs to uphold when playing 'GOD'. From chaos theory to realist vs visionary debates, it ultimately revealed the full extent of humanity's idealistic ambitions. Now, does giving extinct species a second chance in the course of history the right move? The answer was never stated, though inclination against was obvious (but then it's just the author's proclivity.)

What I appreciate from the books was that some characters were portrayed better than their movie versions. What sets them more appealing (for me, at least) was their expressive demeanor 🎭. Examples like the eccentric, villainous visionary John Hammond, and the nerdy and warm Dr. Grant. From the children, Tim was older and such a badass. But my favorite character, by far, was Dr. Malcolm. He exuded this confident yet inauspicious/pessimistic standpoint, whether it may be from his actions/reactions or from his beliefs/theories, which I found charismatic.

The horror, though not groundbreaking, was still expressed competently. There were at least three categories of the genre present within: Gore, Uncanny Valley, and Powerlessness. Let's start with gore 🩸. Vivid imagery was the key, utilizing all sensory stimuli to deliver some convincing macabre scenes. Next was the utilization of uncanny valley 😟. The root, of course, was faulty genetic engineering. Grotesque descriptions and eerie/strange movements were carrying the sense of unease. How poetic it was that the revival of almost-real dinosaurs had resulted into disturbing monsters instead. Lastly, powerlessness 🫥. This was more of an intellectual kind of fear emanating from the main characters losing control of the things around them. Fear of the unknown and a disaster-genre narrative was already enough, but the frequent usage of sensory deprivation was also an appreciated compliment. It's suffocating. It's dismaying. IT'S BRILLIANT.

This book was a one of the most prominent 'love letter' to Paleontology (study of fossils). It highlighted the necessity of the study without over-glorifying it. Readers were told how beautifully important our fossils to determine the past, but it also pointed out its inherent limitations. For example, fossils give humanity the gross physiology of ancient creatures, perhaps even giving clues to its general diet and nesting patterns, but it couldn't pinpoint the intricacies/nuances on their everyday behavior. Also, I appreciate how in the acknowledgement the author drawn his ideas from the most prominent paleontologists of the time as well as updated depictions of the dinosaurs 🦖, yet despite all of that he insisted that this was still a work of fiction and should not be used as legitimate scientific reference. A right move for the author that lost to pop culture.

Here were its blemishes:

1. Off start and end - Both of them drags on and on and on.... like it's trying to lose the readers' interest 🥱. Each of them had their own problem as well. There was no central character at first, so I am forced to read dozens of world-building pages without a significant narrative. And the ending was just awkward. It felt like the plot should've already finished at certain points, but it kept going.

2. Hit or miss characters - When I said that some characters were a glow up, I made sure to use the word 'SOME' instead of 'ALL'. Yeah, several were inferior to their movie counterparts 👎. Lex (now the younger kid) was the most insufferable character and should have been fed to the carnivores. Mr. Donald Gennaro, whom I initially thought had a decent character arc, completely fumbled towards the end. Dr. Sattler's character was a failure of the author, devoid of any subtlety and care for her feminism themes. Also, I think a few characters doesn't stand out as much as they should be.

3. Info-dumps - I mean...if you've read the book, you'll immediately agree with this. It had tendencies of delving into technical aspects 📃. Paragraphs of expositions were consistent all throughout, cutting the flow of the plot abruptly.

4. Repetitive - This trait was annoying. Even though I love Dr. Malcolm, his rebukes do get old soon enough for readers who caught his point early on. He gave such 'mansplaining'. He gave such 'mansplaining' energy. On a larger aspect, the plot itself was just a cycle ♻️ of repeating events during the latter half of the story.

Final Thoughts:
This book by Michael Crichton is a Sci-fi, Disaster, and Horror novel that criticizes humanity's abuse via genetic engineering. Of course, the scientific relevance was now outdated since there have been major development in the field of paleontology during the 21st century, but I'm pleasantly surprised how accurate it was during its era. Although, in a storytelling perspective, the movie was the better (because it had cut a lot from the source material), there's still some unique merit in the novel that would potentially make your read worthwhile. It's just funny how Steven Spielberg convinced Michael Crichton to write a sequel because of the movie's success...yet he just loosely interpreted the The Lost World.

Rating: Thankfully, my dinosaur bias didn't go in the way of my evaluation. High 6/10

--------------------
Links to my ratings and reviews:
Goodreads reviews
The StoryGraph

katrinaas's review against another edition

Go to review page

adventurous tense fast-paced

5.0

More...