[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 105 KB, 470x662, Jurassicpark.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7091762 No.7091762 [Reply] [Original]

The >genre fiction meme aside, is this worth reading? And recommend more dinosaur books.

>> No.7091774

I wasn't too enthused with the novel when I read it as a kid. I remember hearing good things about Raptor Red.

>> No.7091782

>>7091774
>I wasn't too enthused with the novel when I read it as a kid.
Same. I felt it wasn't very dinosaur, either.

>> No.7091812

I remember my parents raving about it when it came out so I read it when they were done. I thought it was alright but it was pretty much the first time I doubted my parent's intellect. They tried to act like it was too asvanced for me, I was 13. It isn't hard to read at all. Better than the movie.

>> No.7091826

>>7091812
Parents are fucking retarded LOL. Never trust their opinions on literature

>> No.7091831

>>7091826
le edge xd

>> No.7091837

>>7091762

I wasn't a big fan either. Worth reading at least once to see what everybody is ranting and raving about.

Also The Dinosaur Lords is one of the few I can think of off the top of my head.

>> No.7091838

>>7091826
They also liked the Ann Rice vampire novels... But everyone did in the 90's i guess. But come on!

>> No.7091842
File: 569 KB, 650x988, The Dinosaur Lords.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7091842

>>7091837

>> No.7091851

>>7091837
>>7091842
This looks like the Sharknado of literature.

>> No.7091854

>>7091842
I tried to read it and I almost puked.

>> No.7091898

It's okay, but gets blown the fuck out by the movie which is better in nearly every way.

>> No.7091941

>>7091898
The movie is great too, but the book does a lot of things the movie doesn't and vice versa.

Crichton's books are a lot better for mindcandy and all the infodumping and speculation he makes about genetic research is fascinating. Malcolms ramblings on chaos theory stuff are part of that, and barely in the movie at all.

Crichton is good at setting up a lot of scenes with professionals and jargon to make you feel like a smarty. The set-up with the dino attacks on the Costa Rican mainland is pretty good scifi horror/suspense and entirely absent from the movie, although parts of that made it into The Lost World movie.

>> No.7092004

I loved that book as a kid. It was the first really big doorstop type novel I ever read. Little did I know i is apart of a specific type of novels called "airport novels" for their size and easily read sections/chapters.

It was way better than the movie. Maybe the first time as a kid I was aware that movies are different from books. It made a big impression on me and even now I hold Crichton up as one of my favorites.

>> No.7092017

>>7091941
>Crichton is good at setting up a lot of scenes with professionals and jargon to make you feel like a smarty. The set-up with the dino attacks on the Costa Rican mainland is pretty good scifi horror/suspense and entirely absent from the movie, although parts of that made it into The Lost World movie.

This is why I loved the book as a kid.

>> No.7092029

>>7091842
I was thinking about reading this but I guess I can spend my time on something else.

>> No.7092034

>>7092029
Go down the Rabbit Hole Anon.

>> No.7092035

Re-read the first third amidst the Jurassic World hype and I love how foreboding it is compared to the movie. The buildup and the mystery in the first several chapters is some awesome shit.

>> No.7092156

Jurassic Park was very meh. Congo is far better. Still kinda pleb at points, but good for what it is.

>> No.7092185

>>7092156
I used to eat up Crichton as a kid, but when I picked up "Micro" out of curiosity, it was hilariously bad. Is it just because it was published postmortem or have I just grown out of these type of books?

>> No.7092200

>>7092185
No, Crichton just jumped the shark later in his career. I reread his early stuff recently and it was still great.

>> No.7092214

>>7092200
Yeah, from what I had covered in the first third of Jurassic Park since I last read it as a kid, it still held up. Good to know.

Koontz, on the other hand...

>> No.7092219

It was enjoyable, if you were looking for a fun action novel.
Literary-wise, of course, it's not special. It's normal fiction that runs on a normal plot pyramid course.

>> No.7093461

>>7092200
I don't think you know what "jumped the shark" means.

>> No.7093500

>>7091762
yeah man
big fan of the first one. read the book a year ago and expected it to just be the screenplay. but i was so wrong. most of the direction is the same but there are extra scenes and interactions with dinosaurs. more interesting character development.
the movie and the book are incredible each in their own respective ways