Go Back   Home > SciFlicks SQUAD! Forums > Sci-Fi Movies Galleria > Sci-Fi Movie Titles: [ F -- L ] > Jurassic Park (1993, 1997, 2001) [movie series]

Welcome to the SciFlicks SQUAD! Forums.

You are currently viewing our community boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free and open-minded sci-fi community you will be able to start and reply to forum discussions, write movie reviews, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or with your account please contact support here.

Jurassic Park (1993, 1997, 2001) [movie series]

An adventure 65 million years in the making. | JP1 guideJP2 guide

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 4, 2003, 05:25 PM   #1
xXx
Sector Marshall
xXx's Avatar
760 flights since Mar 2002
Location: Isla Clevelanda
Post Books vs. Movies

What I want to know is, what do you think was better about the books, or better about the movies. The books have an advantage because they just had more material. If the books were directly adapted to movies, they would have been around four hours long each. The first book had that great chase scene involving Grant and the kids in the raft, and hiding behind the waterfall. But the movie I think had a great idea in having Grant not like kids, and then getting saddled with them. Leaving out the scene where they were feeding the baby Triceratops was a good idea too, it didn't make sense to have kids fawning over a dinosaur when they almost killed by one the night before. They should be scared to death by them. The Grant/Ellie relationship is a draw for me, I liked how it was presented both ways. Though I didn't like that "Jurassic Park 3" had them split up. After surving what they did, they deserved the happy ending.

For "The Lost World", I prefered the books idea of having another company trying to get dino eggs rather than having Ingen trying to have another go at it. It was more rewarding in the book when the bad guys got eaten, than in the movie when Peter Ludlow was eaten. It was almost tragic given that John Hammond and the grandkids had to deal with that, even if the guy was a prick. I wasn't too crazy about the Levine character in the book though, especially when he said that Grant was wrong about the dinos vision. The use of kids in both the book and movie was ridiculous though. It had already been done, why do it again? I understand why Speilberg strayed from the novel, it was largely a rehash of the original, but he what he made wasn't really an improvement. I would like to have seen the two characters from the novel, Thorne and Eddie Carr, rather than just combining the two. Given what Malcolm had been through, you'd think he'd have wanted more people to go, with a lot of weapons at that.

As for "Jurassic Park 3", I think it was just a fun, extended chase scene. Without Crichton or Speilberg having a hand in it, I didn't have big expectations for it so I wasn't too disappointed. The best thing about it was that the kid in it wasn't annoying. Most movies make a huge mistake by writing in stupid kids. The girl in "The Lost World" is a prime example. She was just plain annoying.
xXx is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2003, 07:15 PM   #2
Phlub
The Head Hunter
Phlub's Avatar
2,285 flights since Mar 2001
Location: Wisconsin
Re: Books vs. Movies

Oh so true. I didn't expect anything from JP3. So I was pleased.

But as far as books vs. Movies. Tie. Jurassic Park was better then its literature cousin. But then The Lost World movie (mainly due to the San Diego part) was horrible. And all like I said, because of the ending. So with JP1 winning the movie prize and the Lost World winning the book prize and JP3 not counting, it was good.

Also wasn't Spielberg the Exec. Producer in JP3?
Phlub is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2003, 07:47 PM   #3
xXx
Sector Marshall
xXx's Avatar
760 flights since Mar 2002
Location: Isla Clevelanda
Re: Books vs. Movies

Yes, but given that he was busy with "A.I.", and "Minority Report", I doubt that he really had much input into the film. I remember reading that he only dropped by the set once or twice.
xXx is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 7, 2003, 09:30 PM   #4
cabalcomb
Knight of Honor
cabalcomb's Avatar
309 flights since Jan 2001
The Books are Great, the films are not

Personally I believe that Micheal Crichton's novels "Jurassic Park" and "The Lost World" are excellent. Unfortunately, the films are not. Excluding the great special effects the films are far at best. The script was weak and predictable. The acting was stiff and unimaginative. Jeff Goldblum gave the only good preformance. I was unimpressed with the film. Simply put Jurassic Park was great special effects and poor acting. If you want a great dinosaur adventure don't go to the video store visit your local library instead.
cabalcomb is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2003, 12:02 AM   #5
Phlub
The Head Hunter
Phlub's Avatar
2,285 flights since Mar 2001
Location: Wisconsin
Re: Books vs. Movies

Books are overrated.

But TLW was better as a book then movie.

But Jurassic Park was a better movie than book.
Phlub is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2003, 12:37 AM   #6
cabalcomb
Knight of Honor
cabalcomb's Avatar
309 flights since Jan 2001
Re: Books vs. Movies

Jurassic Park loved the book hated the movie
cabalcomb is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2003, 05:39 PM   #7
xXx
Sector Marshall
xXx's Avatar
760 flights since Mar 2002
Location: Isla Clevelanda
Re: Books vs. Movies

Well I loved both the book and movie of "Jurassic Park", the movie was as close to being a theme-park ride as any ever made. Both the book and movie of "The Lost World" were disappointments though.
xXx is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2003, 10:19 AM   #8
Phlub
The Head Hunter
Phlub's Avatar
2,285 flights since Mar 2001
Location: Wisconsin
Re: Books vs. Movies

How can you say you hated the Jurassic Park movie Cabalcomb?

It was one of the greatest sci-fi's ever made!

I just don't get it.
Phlub is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 9, 2003, 09:20 PM   #9
cabalcomb
Knight of Honor
cabalcomb's Avatar
309 flights since Jan 2001
Thumbs down Great Special Effects, mediocre film

I disagree Oogaphlub. Excluding the special effects it is Not a great film. I saw the movie when it first came out in theaters. I have never had a desire to see it again. However, I have read both the novels twice. The novels are excellent. It is unfortunate that the script and acting were not half as good as the novels were. I thought the characters in the movie, excluding Malcomb the mathametican, were uninteresting. About halfway throught the film I was hoping the dinosaurs would eat everyone so the film would be over. Jeff Goldblum gave the only good performance in the film. The other actors were mediocre at best.

Last edited by cabalcomb : Jan 9, 2003 at 09:25 PM.
cabalcomb is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 10, 2003, 12:04 AM   #10
Phlub
The Head Hunter
Phlub's Avatar
2,285 flights since Mar 2001
Location: Wisconsin
Re: Books vs. Movies

Well you are very much entitled to your opinion Cabalcomb.

But I mean come on man, the script and FX were excellent. I agree Malcom is the best character in the series. But the other actors did a fine job also.

8/10
Phlub is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2003, 01:38 PM   #11
Drone
Sector Marshall
584 flights since Jun 2002
Re: Books vs. Movies

I don't really care for the books/films.

Last edited by Drone : Apr 23, 2004 at 07:30 PM.
Drone is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 13, 2003, 10:18 PM   #12
cabalcomb
Knight of Honor
cabalcomb's Avatar
309 flights since Jan 2001
Re: Books vs. Movies

Sorry Oogaphlub, but I disagree. The special effects were great. I do agree with that. However, I hated the movie. When I left the theater after seeing it I swore Never to see it again. I haven't watched it again since. I have loved dinosaurs since I was five years old. I have seen exhibits of dinosaurs in museums in Chicago, New York and even the 1965 NY World's Fair. So, I wanted to see this film when it came out. Unfortunately, I didn't like it. I thought the acting was poor and that the script was predictable. The books are So Much Better. Too bad the film was not even a fraction as good as the novel. On a scale of 1 to 10 I give this film a 3, 2 points for special effects and 1 point for Jeff Goldblum.
cabalcomb is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 17, 2003, 11:47 PM   #13
Phlub
The Head Hunter
Phlub's Avatar
2,285 flights since Mar 2001
Location: Wisconsin
Re: Books vs. Movies

Moderator's Note: To the 2 "unregistereds" were mouthing off to Cabalcomb, a moderator of all people, that talk is NOT TOLERATED. To ANYONE here. In particular a respected member like a moderator.

Anyways I just dont get what you thought was so wrong with the movie Cabalcomb. I mean come on, the plot was fast paced and kept you thinking and on the edge of your seat.
Phlub is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2003, 02:01 PM   #14
xXx
Sector Marshall
xXx's Avatar
760 flights since Mar 2002
Location: Isla Clevelanda
Re: Books vs. Movies

Give up phlub. You can't change a person's opinions by saying "but c'mon, it was good!". He thinks what he thinks, just accept it and respect his decision. I personally don't see what every says is so great about the "Godfather" movies, and nobody will be able to change my mind about it.
xXx is offline Reply With Quote
Old Jan 18, 2003, 04:14 PM   #15
cabalcomb
Knight of Honor
cabalcomb's Avatar
309 flights since Jan 2001
Re: Books vs. Movies

Well said xXx. We all have different opinions. There any many so called classic films I don't like or think are so great. There are other movies that few people have heard of or are not considered classics that I do think are great. The same is probably true for everyone on the forum. If we all agreed it would be very boring.

Actually, I would like to hear more in depth discussions of films than just ranking them, listing favorites, 10 top, ect. I would like to discuss more of the details and different viewpoints of the films. I believe it is more interesting to discuss why we like these films instead of constantly rating them.
cabalcomb is offline Reply With Quote
Reply

← Previous Thread | Next Thread → Home > SciFlicks SQUAD! Forums > Sci-Fi Movies Galleria > Sci-Fi Movie Titles: [ F -- L ] > Jurassic Park (1993, 1997, 2001) [movie series]

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Similar Threads
Top 10 Most IMPORTANT Sci-Fi Movies of All-Time
Ok nex, my thread was of the Top 10 BEST Sci-Fi movies of all-time. Jacker's thread was of the Top 10 FAVORITE Sci-Fi movies of all-time. This...
11
replies
My fan fiction all done and a thread for any of you to post fan fiction
I have written allot. I have a thread for you users if you have any fan fiction that you'd like to write. I am not profiting from the un originals. I...
85
replies
Good Movies, bad U.S.A...
ok, this is beggining to worry me: I keep seeing you guys talking about horror or action movies, and everyone (apart from the americans) keeps saying...
21
replies
This pretty much says it all
http://archive.gamespy.com/comics/dorktower/images/comics/dorktower332.jpg That and that travesty of a film called "King Arthur" are the two films...
11
replies
Demolition Man reviews (the good only and only for people that liked the movie)
The Many Good Reviews of Demolition Man These are reviews by various people all over the world. Those are all the good Demolition Man reviews. I...
18
replies
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
 

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 AM.
SciFlicks cannot be held liable for the opinions expressed in these public forums.
SciFlicks Copyright 1998-2011, Popcorn Studios.
vBulletin Copyright © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.