Jurassic Park - What’s the Difference?
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 02. 2015
- Excited for Jurassic World? Of course you are! Jurassic Park was a #1 box office smash, and the book by Michael Crichton was a #1 New York Times Best Seller. We’ll take a look at the book and the movie side-by-side, and tell you: “What’s the Difference?” Subscribe: goo.gl/9AGRm
The road from page to screen wasn’t seamless. While the filmmakers weren’t pursued by velociraptors, a lot of elements of the story did get changed. From plot details and character changes, to a whole lot of dinosaurs getting ignored (or name-changed!), we’ll take you through every difference between the book and the movie. All sorts of fun facts you can share with your friends in line for Jurassic World!
Have you read Jurassic Park, or The Lost World? How long has it been since you’ve seen the original Jurassic Park movie? Are you now humming the Jurassic Park theme (we know you are!)? Did we inspire you to look more closely at the dinosaurs in Jurassic World this summer?
What other works would you like to see us explore on What’s The Difference?
Want to know what's going on with Cinefix in the future?
Follow us Twitter for updates: / cinefixnetwork
Oh, and we're on The Facebook: / cinefixnetwork
Welcome to What's The Difference, where CineFix takes you step-by-step and page-by-page through all the differences between your favorite movies & shows and their source material. Adaptations are a tricky game, something always gets changed, added, or omitted in the process. Come back every other Wednesday for more What's the Difference! - Krátké a kreslené filmy
In the novel, the reason for nobody noticing the dino's breeding is because the computer sensors are only counting if all expected dino's are accounted for; not how many there are in total. I always felt that was a brilliantly stupid computer design mistake that just might happen in real life.
Peter van Lubeek well the computer can only count chipped dinosaurs - meaning its meant to make sure dinosaurs aren't lost, not to see if new ones are born. Each dino is chipped at birth. Natural births, which aren't supposed to exist, obviously wont be chipped
Evan Andrews except that not how it worked in the book. They have cameras and sensors to check how many dinosaurs there are, there isn't anything about checking for chipped dinosaurs. It's just the computers saying "it says we should have 10 raptors so I'll check to make sure we have 10 raptors" and then at some point grant or someone says "hey lets just have it check to see if we have a 100 raptors" and then the computers is like "well looks like we have 50 raptors in the park" and that's how they get proof the dinosaurs are breeding.
@@Wolfmasterpixel the system worked through motion sensors and computerised visual identification counting the different species up to the expected limit, but no further.
@@CandiceGoddard
Let's see.
Computer in the book detects dinosaurs in a way that makes the mistake on the book not only possible vut very realistic.
Someone says, "wow that is a clever plot device."
A certain someone goes, "reeeeeeee WhY YoU CaLLiNg It StUpiD. Me No LiKe ThAt. YoUr StUpiD. YoUr No ReAd BoOk. Me ReAd BoOk, Me UnDeRsTaNd pLoT BeTtEr."
I think a certain someone may be a bit of an idiot. Pffft. Wasting computing power. What a joke.
I loved this part of the novel. In the tour, the JP team explains all these ways that the operation is air-tight and that they have complete control. So it seems a bit jarring when Malcolm immediately says that the animals will inevitably escape and breed. However, the perfectly bad combination of automation and human error allows for this all to fall apart.
Jurassic Park 3 is basically all the scene from the two books that didn't make the two films.
(The aviary, the river chase, the cloning facility, etc)
The river chase in the book is 10 kinds of epic.
All that, and a really unnecessary Spinosaurus. She was cool but totally not needed.
I will sit through JP3 just for the aviary scene (if nothing else). Not for the dumb parasale rescue, but the creepiness of the pterosaurs. I have some other moments, too, but it took 3 films to get all my favorite moments from the first book onto the screen. Though they still don't have a T-rex swimming like a crocodile like in the river raft scene in the book. Maybe the next J World movie.
@@MeredithMacArthur The river chase was my favorite part of the book. They did get the waterfall scene where Tim and lex where hiding and tim almost gets dragged out by the rex tongue and eaten in the lost world though
Even the Jurassic World movies tried to throw in some moments from the original book like characters repairing an old Jeep and driving back to the visitor center, a raptor getting blown up by a rocket launcher, a camoflauging dinosaur (a raptor in the novel, Indominus Rex in JW), and Isla Nublar being set ablaze (by bomber planes in the novel, volcano in JWFK).
The biggest difference to me is Nedry’s motivation. In the movie he’s just an opportunist who’s looking to make more money by selling out Hammond’s work. In the book he was hired by Hammond to do coding but was constantly overworked well beyond his capabilities, was forced to do work outside of his contracts that Hammond kept changing, and was blackballed in the IT industry by Hammond so his only option was to continue working for Jurassic Park or else he’d never have another job. It paints a much different picture of why Nedry did what he did and one can almost sympathize with his betrayal in the book compared to the movie.
Hear hear.
Also he wasn't planning on abandoning the park altogether when he disabled the system. He created a small window to get to the dock and get back(15 minutes? ) just got trolled by the storm. Wasn't obvious in the film.
Hammond deserved that though , in the book his death was more satisfying than Nedry's. I guess Spielberg wanted a clear cut bad guy so Denis had to take the fall. 🤔
Denis does make a reference to it in the movie but Hammond just goes on about them being his financial problems
It's kinda like they made Nedry the asshole instead of John.
@@NicoUnken totally agree. Just read the book and Hammond was one hell of a fool/asshole/liar/dick and it was great. Got me to think of the blood he has on his hands more clearly. Tbh now I wish the movies had followed the books as much as possible. Including the carnage/gore.
Nedry was the owner of a consulting firm, if I recall. It wasn't like he couldn't get another job; it was more a case of Hammond threatening litigation if Nedry tried to pull out of the project.
I loved that scene in the book when they discover that the surveillance system of JP has been counting the Dinosaurs on the island only up to the maximum limit that the park personnel predefined because they were dead certain there could be no more dinosaurs than those they had cloned. When they tell the surveillance system to search for up to 200 individual dinosaurs instead of the original, much smaller number, the computer ends up counting more and more previously undetected dinosaurs... and the most terrifying number on the screen ends up being the head count among velociraptors, which count in the dozens. That was a chilling scene that I would have loved to see on screen. The creeping horror as the realization dawns on the control room personnel what fatal mistake they have made... glorious!
Oh yea it was so god damn calmly said in the audiobook. I was lying in bed listening an just sat up right when it said "velociraptorsb: 37"
@@derzauberer8605 And how many were there originally? About between 8 and 12, I think... terrifyingly higher number of raptors, all unaccounted for and freely roaming the park!
The scene where they find the raptor egg is also pretty chilling too.
Yeah, that part of the book is really good
@@derzauberer8605 Damn, now I've got to check it out on audiobook! I was anything but calm reading that bit.
The most annoying difference to me is that in the book Grant figures out the dinosaurs can only see movement because they were mixed with frog DNA and that's a vision trait of certain frogs. The movie implies that it's a known trait of dinosaurs themselves, which is just straight up wrong and stupid.
RoboBoddicker Yeah, that always bothered me too. And since the movie Jurassic Park was so influnetial when it comes to how people view dinosaurs, there are now thanks to it a lot of people who genuinly believe that the T-Rex could only see things that moved.
RoboBoddicker Damned irresponsible too. How many people are going to end up getting eaten by T-rexes because they thought they would be safe as long as they stood still?
I think movies ditch a lot of the science in science fiction to save time and because movie goers don't necessarily have the same patience for it as people who enjoy reading long books. People expect movies to be mostly action.
RoboBoddicker The T-Rex didnt have frog dna. Otherwise it wouldve mated with the jr rex and bred.
Maya Arnold In the movie version though, they completely ruin any intention of that sort that the book might have had by having Grant mention that T-Rex eyes are "based on movement" in the opening scene when they're digging up a skeleton, as if it were something that paleontologists already "know".
RoboBoddicker It's been a little bit since I have read either of the books, but if I remember correctly, they address the T-Rex's vision in the second book. Mention was made that the previously thought information was due to faulty research and bad conclusions based on some scientists work. They attribute the confusion of the T-Rex to the rain and some other environmental factor: fog, or some distraction in the distance.
Nedrys death in the novel is horrifying. It describes him being being blinded and feeling his entrails being violently ripped from his body.
Not to mention realizing his head is in the jaws of a dilophosaurus and just hoping it ends quickly.
@@teksnotdead902 it’s so brutal right ?
If that death was kept in the film, it for sure would have been rated R
@@ryanstauffer119 but it would have been worth it. He deserved it...lol
I’ve seen worse. Compared to Delta’s death that’s shit. Burning is the worst known way to die
I would like to thank the talented but deceased Michael Crichton for bringing these amazing stories to life.
I miss him so much
65 million years in the making
I'd have loved to meet him
I'd love to have my copy of Jurassic Park signed by him.
@@1428elm 65.3 to be precise
It’s also mentioned in the novel that the velociraptor was a hybrid of the Denonicus to make them much larger for the tourists..
Yes. A piece of very important dialogue that was left out of the film for some reason.
Could this have been the inspiration for Indominus Rex in Jurassic World?
But the deinonychus is still not as big as the movie shows, it’s definitely much smaller. A real velociraptor would be really tiny though, almost like a mutated bird
@@juanjoyaborja.3054 at least the raptors werent called Eoraptor lol
@@jonasmejerpedersen4847 Yes
"Subscribe and like this video"
Ah Ah Ah, you didn't say the magic word!
Legend
Please?!? Dammit I hate this hacker crap!!!!
*+Marty McFly* Marty??
Please! Goddammit! I hate this hacker crap!
Lol
The novel for Jurassic Park and the Lost World are amazing. Michael Chrichton was a phenomenal writer. R.I.P.
I only wish he didn't deny climate change though.
Michael Crichton is dead? I could have sworn that he made a JP sequel book just recently. Was that someone else?
@@WhaleManMan He's been dead for 12 years, so it was someone else.
@@CosmoShidan
Ah okay, I was thinking of Dragon Teeth nvm.
@@WhaleManMan Dragon Teeth is indeed a crichton novel ! It was written in 1974 and released in 2017. Set in 1876, we follow real life paleontologists Othniel Charles Marsh and Edward Drinker Cope, during their rivalry
Book was a straight up scifi horror. It was amazing.
For me, a key book scene, was once the computer systems were back up, and running, they ran a dino census.
All expected dino counts were displayed...despite them knowing, some had been killed. So, they changed the program from expected dino counts, to ACTUAL dino counts... to reveal just how out of control, the park was as species counts climbed way past the earlier set parameters.
Loved that scene! One of those the penny has dropped moments
@@hankbelbinwriter5621
Steven Spielberg "Flubbed up", not adding that scene. It's a definite "Oh sh*t!!" moment.
They left out the best part of the book: drunk Muldoon yelling at raptors.
That really happened?
+psychokinrazalon Yeah, it was a good two whole pages I think, of him and Ellie trying to bait the raptors by making noise on a hate or something. Muldoon is drunk of his balls or something.
Bryan Ordonez-Santini Damn. I gotta get around to reading the book.
Its a good book. Definitely one of the top 3 books that I've read, but my favorite by Michael Crichton.
Wrong. The best part was Ellie on the roof, jumping into the pool!
Dude, the lawyer from the book sounds like a character they should have never cut off!
buckeyeinblack the park worker that's with the kids on the tour leaves them and later gets killed by a baby Rex
@@Power3DHD yeah he's the park PR guy. Gennaro the good guy is basically useless in the movie though.
PGM 3D Ed Regis
buckeyeinblack he was always try to hit on Elle in the book and he was in his thirty’s
Yeah, Gennaro in the book is a very likeable character. Besides being baddass as shit
Fun fact, the whole “dinosaurs can only see movement” in the novel is explained away with the inclusion of some amphibian DNA in the dinosaur specimens which is also where they get the ability to reproduce. In the movie they don’t explain this, convincing a whole generation that dinosaurs can’t see what isn’t moving, but in reality, dinosaurs probably could see you T-posing to assert your dominance.
The author actually retcons this though in the second book ( plus in the movie it was just the trex not all Dino’s)
Actually the author has a whole chapter in the sequel explaining through one of his characters how it was easy to misinterpret one paleontologists book as saying their eye sight was based on prey, he apologized by having the villains of the sequel believe this information and then be eaten because of it.
The book touches on how brilliant many dinosaur's vision is, especially Tyrannosaur (best of any land predator ever) and that the DNA sequences lost in time were mostly oriented in these large complicated areas. They used a frog to replace the lost DNA unwittingly, giving the dinosaurs the ability to reproduce on top of having fly-eating vision that only responds to sharp movement. Alan explains all the dinosaurs had essentially been bred to need glasses.
I don’t remember anything anout flies in the book, but I remember that the dinosaurs couldn’t produce a protein that needed and got through their food
@@majinkentssj4 Frog vision is based on movement to catch flies.
@@StudioMod haha ok then i get it 😅
@@majinkentssj4 yes but this protein was taken out by the cientists themselves to make dinosaurs dependent on the island, altrough it dont work of course.
Which is actually wrong.
The adult T.Rex in the book was already full, having eaten the goat. It basically had no interest in eating the humans. It was merely curious, and ended up taking it as a challenge to what it thought to be her territory (it didn't even kill Malcolm even though he was right between its jaws when it picked him up).
a raptor that can change its color to blend in.
oh shit, jurassic world was paying more homage than I thought.
Timingchameleon And in the Lost World novel, Carnotaurus could fully camouflage to it's background. It's kinda like Predator's cloak. Even more homage.
Tyrantlizardking105 yep, the 'Chameloen dinosaur' like the one used in the light gun arcades was actually a part of the book. correct sir.
Well Jurassic World probably wasn't paying homage, just trying to make the enemy be a super killer...
+Timingchameleon The more you know...
that's some good, *slaps knee* Timingchameleon!
I never forgave the movie for killing Muldoon. He was my favorite character.
John Tumahab Clever girl!
He didn't die in the book
@@KDX05 he said MOVIE
Me too!
Unfortunately, Muldoon's actor had cancer and knew that he wouldn't live to the sequels, prompting the filmmakers to kill off his character.
the imagery of the compy's sneaking into bedrooms to feed on unsuspecting babies in their cribs was horrifying
Yeah
That horrified the frick out of me when reading, especially when I saw art on the scene like fine a grown adult gets killed but a baby getting eaten by compies just got me.
What chapter was that?
@@MASTEROFEVIL
One of the earlier chapters. I’ll check and get back to you.
@@MetaFanWing Thanks
There's also the fact that the dilophosaurus was ten feet tall and had no frill on its neck. Nedry's death is comical in the movie, but much more horrifying in the book.
i recently bought both books and I have to say that the book gives vivid detail that you can imagine and feel. The death of Dennis Nedry left chills across my skin as his intestines spill onto his hands.. simply amazing
Yeah, Crichton held nothing back in the book with the graphic imagery. There's one scene I think where the compys are actually feeding on Nedry's corpse... apparently they used him as a creative consultant for the movie. I can imagine the conversations between him and screen writers "dude, wtf, that's messed up, what's wrong with you?" lol.
Wu's death was fucking brutal as well, the raptor jumping down, slashing his abdomen open and eating him while still alive, just savage
Yeah I remember that, and I think Wu had eaten something just before too. Crichton could have really gone overboard if you know what I mean...
Finally, someone else who knows about that!
Jazzmiin T yeah his death scene is definitely written a lot more graphic though for some reason it didn't seem as Vivid as I've always read people saying it was. My favorite part of the book so far since I'm only about halfway through is more the backstories on some of the characters and more of the science and Malcolm's math explained that's what I really wanted to get to the book for.
They should've mention the first raptor that was encountered was a baby, it had no teeth, and was friendly. Tim held the raptor, and the raptor just hissed at Grant.
Ryan Redinger cute
And then when they tried to use the baby raptor to distract the adults, they just ripped it apart and ate it...
@@jasonking7570 well that took a sudden dark turn
@@Ceares oh yeah
@@Ceares "How dare you befriend humans!!!You will now the ultimate price "
The book and movie were both clever in the storytelling. I liked the book more due to the more in depth story. I especially liked how Malcolm explains Chaos Theory in the book, it makes more sense and is a much more prominent key to Jurassic Parks undoing.
In The Lost World book, the entire beginning is so different and one of the main characters is left out of the movie; Richard Levine !
Luke Sp imo, thought the movie was better than the book until the 3rd act. Really knocks the movie down a peg. Or definitely 2
Richard Levine, Jack “Doc” Thorne, Lewis Dodgson, George Baselton, Howard King, there are so many characters from The Lost World book that don’t even get a passing mention in the movie. Furthermore, the plot is very different. The movie created many new characters (some of whom were definitely better): Roland Tembo, his buddy Ajay, Dieter Stark, Nick Van Owen, and even Hammond’s slimy nephew was not in the book.
Dodgson got a famous mention by Nedry in the film "DODGSON DODGSON WE GOT DODGSON HERE! See nobody cares."
The entire film is different
"Costa Rican airforce" I almost died laughing.
+Ana Lucrecia Lepiz Yes, it is pretty funny since Costa Rica is one of the very few states to have officially abolished its military. It does have some organizations which could be characterized as military and operates a small number of transport and utility aircraft, none of which are intended for combat: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Costa_Rica
Another hilarious gaffe, this one unique to the movie, was labeling a beach scene "San José, Costa Rica." I first saw the movie in a theater in San José and somebody had tried to cover that text with a marker, but it was still legible.
+Jonathan Rogers do you live here in Costa Rica?
Ana Lucrecia Lepiz No, but I did in 1993.
+Ana Lucrecia Lepiz Ohhhhhh burnnnnnn
C. J. Bailey Why burn?
funny Story. my mom did not let me watch the movie in Cinema cause it was to bloody.. soo instead she bought me the book.
and it was MUCH MUCH more bloody :) still one of my Favorit books
Zombiepull haha yeah, lots of death!
To this day, when people ask me for a book recommendation, I usually tell them that sci-fy doesn't get much better than Jurassic Park.
Yeah the book has some good gore
"I BUYED me a hooker."
"She BOUGHT me the book."
i hav no idea wat u wanna tall me
plese explan
I love the part in the novel, when Woo and Arnold finally realize the park has been running on auxiliary power instead of main power, it’s so filled with tension and the build up to the reveal that the raptors are free is amazing!
I would love to see a HBO mini series based on the novel. with all the science talk and the compy storyline that the book starts with. Although the brutality might be a shock to most fans of the Film.
I don’t think it would sitt well with the ending, it was just sad in my opinion
One of the biggest changes imo is how Tim is the most badass 11 year old of all time in the book, yet in the film he's useless largely.
Seriously. He out- braves many adults in the book.
Well, it is fine by me. At least he wasn't as annoying as the book version of Lex.
I would have let a raptor eat Lex in the book. She couldn't shut up or follow orders, constantly whining and putting Tim, Alan, and herself in danger because of it.
SpiritHawk7 yeah I'd like to throw the "she's just a kid" card, but she never has a cute moment where I'm like "protect her at all cost!" Even when she does cuter kid stuff, like when they're nearing the waterfall getting excited about how the water is moving faster, I'm like "shut up kid." She's just solidly annoying and bratty. She channels a lot of her grandfather, who I have a sort of soft hate for in the books. I like him in the sense that he had charisma, but yet I hate his attitude about the island. I mean, dozens of people are dead or dying and he STILL wanted to open the park. Until he died, which was a fitting death.
Yeah like why doesn't he grab the gun o Ellie
Book Tim > Movie Tim
Everyone really should read the book. I love the effects in the film. At that point in time, I had never seen dinosaurs portrayed so realistically, especially with humans in the same frame. But, I loved the way the book concentrated on Chaos Theory. Essentially, once things start going wrong, they will almost always go incredibly wrong. There will be a geometric increase that will lead to disaster. I think that is a more universal concept than man trying to control nature. I felt the movie paid more attention to the control theme and too little to the Chaos theme.
The dilophosaurus that kills nedry in the book is also ten feet tall, and he is actually totally blinded before being literally eviscerated alive and then having his head chomped on both sides, being picked up, still alive, blind and gutted, and that's the last we get of it. True horror
Read the book before the movie came out. All I can remember from it to this day is Hammond rolling down a hill and being eaten while grinning in a state of bliss. It was kind of creepy to me at the time.
TheDarxide23 : there was so much more in the books than in the movies (I have reread them several times), I can see why you forgot a bunch of stuff. Dr. Grant stayed with the two kids for a lot longer in the book, he was so dedicated to finding all three of them a way to safely.
Dang you basically just remember one key moment at the very end.
@@donovanchilton5817 I was like 13 or something when I first read it. It's been near to 30 years. I'm allowed to forget the rest of the book, lol.
8:18 Weird how in the second novel the fact that Tyrannosaurs actually *could* see movement was a major plot point.
Because they're second and third generations that are slowly weeding out all of their crappy frog traits for their true dinosaur traits.
I thought they explained that the T Rex had just chowed down, and just wasn't interested in Grant in the first novel, causing Grant to draw the wrong conclusion.
This has always been an issue for me in terms of consistency with the movies... The books were pretty spot on I believe in terms of as close to non-fictional accuracy to science as you could get... and the movies just gloss over it. I loved the throwaway comment by Levine in the second book that Grants theory was moronic!
Yeah, the make a point of saying in both books I believe that apex predators dont generally kill for no reason, and the rex was already full.
@@Ertwin123 Maybe, but as far as the movie goes, after reading the second book I attributed the Rex not seeing him as it was dark and raining, so it might have just had a hard time with normal vision. Just a thought.
You guys forgot to mention the differences between the dinosaurs themselves! The book dinosaurs were significantly more accurate in appearance ( the raptors of course didn't have feathers, but even that was explained that they weren't 'real' dinosaurs but mutants using the DNA of a lot of existing animals ), most importantly in the case of dilophosaurs, which were much more of a threat than the cutesy little dilo in the movie. The one that eats Nedry is an adult that's like ten feet tall and that part is one of the most violent in the book, as it describes the dinosaur eating him guts-first and he's just helplessly watching lol
Nedry himself is a major detour from the book. in the movie, he's a likeable jerk, sort of stock villain/comic relief of the 90s Hollywood. in the novel, he's just a big fat bastard with no redeeming values at all
InkBird I was surprised to learn the actual height of a dilophosaurus in the book, because I'd grown up with the film
Link Dolphin i don't know if the book was more accurate in terms of the dilophosaur. far as i know, while very long from head to tail, they were never taller than a human so 10 feet would be a pretty big stretch. the one in the movie might have been a cub so that would explain why it's rather small. also, the venom spitting idea is entirely fictious, although that's justified in the book
It'd be kinda cool if a dinosaur had venom.
Link Dolphin i figure it'd be nigh impossible to find out based only on fossils. remember that most of the iconic dinosaurs are known purely from a dozen specimens or so. to discover the remains of a venom bladder in any of them would be a tremendous task
I love both the books and the movies. They're different enough while still both being phenomenal. Instead of thinking of the movies as a "bastardization" of the books, I like to see it as a retelling. "If things were different, this is what could have happened"
I really hated lex in the book she was constantly being a brat and was always doing the opposite of what everyone said I have never been so angry at a character before
Cheshire Kitten...I agree she was always whining and making it difficult for everyone else to survive....especially when she sneezed in the raft scene.
Same!!! I wanted to slap her the whole time. Movie lex is dope tho !
I haven't read it since the early 90s, but I seem to recall Lex (thinking they were free and clear) yelling insults at the T. Rex and acting shocked and butt-hurt when it came into the lake after them. Lex: "I didn't know they could swim!" Tim: "Why WOULDN'T they be able to swim???" or something along those lines. She really was a dumb-ass...
Book Tim > Movie Tim
Agree. I hoped she would get eaten by Rexxy a few times... She was risking others lives again and again with her behavior!
If they had literally gone and made the movie practically line for line from the book, it could have been amazing. The movie is great as is, but the book was much darker, and scarier. One of my favorite scene is when they are in the visitor center towards the end of the book, and the raptors are attacking and gnawing through the barred windows, and all Malcolm can do is watch them above him. It was amazing. Also when the tyrannosaur hunts them along the river, attacking them behind the waterfall. The introduction to the book was also a lot better, adding a sense of mystery to the story. And let's not even start on the whole story line of the raptors getting off the island in the book
You sound like my English teacher
My mom told me that she was horrified when she first heard that the movie adaptation was being made and marketed towards kids
Honestly, no. It would have been a very long and very different movie. What they made stayed true to most of the important bits, improved some of the elements, and made for a pretty perfect blockbuster which many people still regard as among the best big budget movies ever made - it was a damn good adaptation!
I love both. I wish I could've met Michael Criton and be all like
"I read your book"
Really good, but its a really long book
Hello Dr. Grant! Thanks for breaking that restraining order against me
How's Dr. Sattler
I'm sorry Alan. Hey I have to admit, dinosaurs do look like birds
Tim Murphy Hey fellas. What'd I miss?
Honestly, Dennis Nedry's death in the book took me by total surprise from the movie. It was more brutal, gory and you really feel for the guy even though he's stealing and selling dinosaur embryos.
If I could have 2 things from the book be in the movie, they would be:
- have the attacks/deaths be as grizzly as they are in the book
- Muldoon lives
Percy Jackson what's the difference? The video would be like 10 hours but still be worth it.
God those movies are horrible
+Raver Reviews Oh god that movie was terrible xD Would asolutly worth a 10 hour video!
Movies suck, but I love the books.
+Isaiah Perez yeah the books are great, I really enjoyed them.
+Raver Reviews oh GOD!!! my friends were big fans of that book series , the actors were not that bad IF given a proper script or directing.
You forgot about the part when Nedry dies, he dies a lot more gruesomely, " He felt a warm feeling on his hand, before realising he was handling his own intestines." Yeah.
I remember reading the book when I got older. The differences is...everything. They're such different novels and the deaths, OMG the change in deaths. Time to reread but the books are SO much better but that doesn't diminish how amazing the movie still is.
IMAGINE UNIVERSAL JUST SITTING ON SOME OF THE 1ST JURRASIC PARK DELETED SCENES...! LET THAT SINK IN!
The movie was a soft kid friendly version, compared to the hard R of the book. I would have enjoyed the movie more, if I had never read the book. The most disappointing exclusion, was the T Rex stalking Grant and the children along the river bank.
which was brought back in 3
The book was a harsh critic on the new development of genetic biology and experimentation and it set up an important question of when science goes to far and how it can get out of control easily. Plus, the book was apparently written by a scientist himself, because it contains a LOT of scientific descriptions that would bore the normal reader.
Well There's no T-Rex Eating Raptors and destroying Skeletons
The most disappointing exclusion for me was the stand off at the end between Dr. Grant and the three velociraptors. Almost everything in the movie got dumbed down into a disappointing mess.
I wonder if Spielberg made JP around same time as Jaws it would have been as similar or even more violent/scary?
Wow, the book sounds amazing! Not knocking the movie, which was a blast and very suspenseful, but the but sounds really interesting. Different stories for different mediums. I might need to really check out the book now!
***** they are both great in different ways (unlike some of the other books we've had to read for upcoming eps or some of the other movies lol) so definitely give it a shot if you have some time!
The book is definitely a lot better than the movie. The Lost World too, insanely better than the second movie. I highly recommend both books, they're a great read.
Jurassic Park will always be one of my most favorite movies. However, the books were way better and were downright terrifying in some sequences. Read both Jurassic Park and The Lost World. Michael Crichton always made the science in his books sound legitimate which made the world that much more engrossing. I love them!!
The book is so much better than the movie. NOT knocking the movie though, which was EPIC in a million ways.
The books are awesome. I have read them each more than ten times at least
Wow, that's a whole lot of differences in here, it's almost another story in general!
Ironically movie and book for the Lost World are two different stories and basically have nothing in common except for the T-Rexs attack on the trailers.
cntoon90skid You know I tried thinking of other similarities but other than some of the characters, you’re right. Basically no similarities lol
I disagree....
Both hold up so well
You just have to read it and keep your love for dinos and the movie :)
Its not almost another story, it is completely a different story :D
I mean the main idea of the park is the same, but nearly all details are completely wrong, and that is sad, because if you know the books, then you realize, that Universal fucked up the story completely.
The dinosaurs are pretty, but that is pretty much it.
"I'm hungry"
Also, take a shot every time something "ROARS" in the novel.
Well, what would you want dinos to do? Sing an opera number?
Interesting that in the novel I think Muldoon kills a raptor by blowing it up with a rocket launcher and in Jurassic World one of the Ingen soldiers does the same to of the four raptors. A lot of things in the novels happened in different films, like the waterfall sequence in the Lost World movie happens to Grant and the kids in the first novel too.
Lil tay did the jurassic world movies just happen or where they novels
Just movies
Even though Jurassic Park is one of my favorite movies of all time, the book has way more dept and better story.
Well obviously. It is in fact a movie! That has to be compact to fit a certain period.
Interesting
books are always better than the movies
Especially more manly characters did hear what the lawyer did in the book damn
Boomstick Butcher With The Chainsaw hand such As The Godfather or Gone with the Wind?
Anyone else lamenting the fact that we’ll never have Muldoon dragging Genaro on field trips around the park with Muldoon swigging whisky and firing rocket launchers at the Rex?
Yeah they should've had a different actor play Muldoon. Someone who met his description in the book.
I love the pterodactyl scene it's so good and the way Crichton described the intelligence of the Raptors and how terrifying it was when the power was and how they attacked in a pack and how grant stopped 3 of them it's amazing I love it so much it's a must read
Costa Rica does NOT have a military! Not had one since 1948! They have no offensive aircraft at all!
We know. But it's in the book. Sooooooo. Yeah.
studinthemaking That might have been why they were chosen. It doesn't make the US or another country's army look bad.
I am costarrican and find that offensive
Geekboy07 PURA VIDA!
Geekboy07 how is it offensive if its true?
I actually liked the book better. It did a better job portraying how messing with science can have horrible effects, and didn't limit it to just the Island.
Also, Malcolm's epic death speech about how vain it is to think we can destroy the planet, when the only thing we can destroy is ourselves, which he backed up with scientific facts to prove the world and life has survived far worse than what we've thrown at it by adapting, is brilliant, and I wish everyone were required to read it so I can stop hearing people whine about "Wahhh humanity is evil because the nature films told me so".
However, I don't think I'd be able to stomach the book's level of gore on the big screen.
....Like,. why didn't you mention the speech? It was one of the most epic parts of the book.
I agree
***** My high school had a honors biology class that read the book because of the science-stuff that was explained in the book.
Yah I liked that part too, but I believe that the movie got a similar point across.
That is what I like about Mr. Crichton's books. They are very entertaining and delve deep into the science aspects and moral conundrums that the limits of science provide. Each has a moral. Beyond Paradigm is one of the best chapters of the book when it comes to this. Awesome read.
It was easily the worst part of the book for me. Jurassic Park is one of my most favourite books but that speech is nothing more than a pseudo philosophical rant against climate change. Something Crichton would go on to show his bias and ignorance towards in State of Fear.
If your argument for pollution and environmental degredation is that you couldnt wipe out every life form well bravo...Im glad we feel like its ok to create man made extinction events comparable to the great mass extinctions of the past because cockroaches and bacteria will still be around.
Chricton could write a great story but he really shouldnt be your go to guy for serious scientific analysis.
The Novel is nothing short of amazing,
10:33 Could that be the inspiration of the camo abilities of the Indominus rex?
No, that would be something in the second book, which was only included because Michael Crichton wanted to see how they’d handle it in the movie version, which they didn’t do at all until after he died.
For all the differences between the first book and movie, the differences between their sequels are even bigger!
Also, the guy who was paying for the embryos did a crazy thing with rabies in the first book, and dies in the second.
I think that could have been the try to implement it, but they did not do it well. The IRex camo ability is completely in your face, it is like a second of a shock, then hell breaks loose.
In the books the situation is much more delicate. The characters are on the run and found shelter. In this shed they feel safe for the moment and plan their next steps. After they sit there for some time, one of them has the feeling, she saw something, it needs a moment until she realizes, what she is seeing. And then realizes.. Right now it is night, she grabs a flashlight and flashes it for a second and the flashed part changes its color for a moment, until it blends back in.
Then they play around with the effect, which irritates the dinosaurs, because naturally, they want to stay hidden and they pull back a bit.
That is the moment where they realize, that they are fucked, if the sun goes up, before they escape. The flashlight trick will no longer work and the dinosaurs will cloak themselfs, killing them one by one.
So an insanely intense situation starts to build up, they can't stay, they can't run. They need a car with fuel, which they don't have and send one out on the search for one, and a very intense fight against time starts.
I may have gotten some details wrong, because I do not remember sooo well, but it is not even close comparable to the Jurassic World scene.
Costa Rican Air Force??? Pfffftttt
we don't even have an army at all
+TOKAGERO1 If I remember correctly, it isn't the Air Force, it's the home guard that bombs the island with napalm.
well thats dissapointing
***** Sorry, my country is now spreding its cheeks towards China
*****
they gave us police cars and a dam. At least China's small dick didn't hurt that much
This is the sexiest roleplay I've ever read.
Basically put, the movie is idealistic and the book is cynical. Mostly because of Spielberg no doubt
Agreed, while I like most of his movies, Spielberg's movies do tend to be more idealistic than most.
I finally got around to reading the book. Finished it just now. Was very, VERY confused at certain deaths and certain major scenes in the movie completely missing. But all in all, the way they did the movie worked for a movie with good momentum and the book was good too. I was actually happy that the book almost read like a different story within the same fictional universe.
And now... on to reading The Lost World 😊
When I hadn't read the book, I never understood why she holds the black dude's arm (after it was chopped off) because it is explained in the book how he dies and not in the movie
I love how in the book the colors are blue and white instead of yellow and red like it was depicted in the original movie, it makes jurassic world better knowing they went with the book version's colors
Great video! Can you make an "After Credits" version where you mention the LYSINE method Dr. Wu used to control the dino population? The ending of the book was fantastic because everyone notices the unique behavior of the raptors in the nesting cave. The raptors all seemed to line-up in regimented formation - like army soldiers facing NorthEast or SouthWest. Dr. Grant deduced they were getting ready to migrate like birds, but they obviously couldn't because they're stuck on an island. Once everyone gets off the island to the Costa Rican mainline, Dr. Gutierrez tells Dr. Grant that 'strang attacks' are happening in a NorthEast/SouthWest direction whereby chickens and beans are going missing - two things that have lots of LYSINE.....(thus implying that raptors are on the mainland about to fuck shit up) :-D
In this case, the book really is better than the movie. WAY better.
Malcolm's Chaos Theory is awkwardly shoved into the movie with a quick throw away scene and it serves no purpose to the story. In the novel, it's continually explained and expanded upon as it forms the foundation of lesson the book is teaching.
The kids are annoying in the movie but in the novel, they're more believable and likable.
Also, I was really disappointed that Donald Genarro's badass character was wimpified and turned into a stereotype in the movie version.
The T Rex ending in the movie, however, RULES!!!
+degree7 I agree more with this. I read the book for the first time way back when I was in like fifth grade or something and a lot of the Malcolm monologues went way over my head. Looking back at them now as an adult, they just read as very very overworded and practically unnecessary. The first half is really exciting build up (especially as a kid, when I all but knew the whole DINOSAURS ARE GOING TO FUCK EVERYONE UP stuff was bound to happen) but after that, it surprisingly starts to get a little boring. All considered, I enjoy the novel more than the movie, but they're both excellent despite some of their flaws.
I guess lack of budget and time means they had to get rid of ed and fuse him with the lawyer
I love the book but the movie is a blockbuster classic
demoskunk I love this movie and the book, faults and all. And the Lost World book is much better than the movie, and even a clever way on how Ian died in the first book, but it was actually a fakeout!
Peasant In one version of the script, they removed Malcolm as a character, and I think fused him with Alan Grant...
I love the book and and first movie. I enjoyed many of the changes that they made in the film (especially with Ian's character and also with Lex being likeable). The one thing in the movie that I didn't like was the underuse of Muldoon. In the book he is freaking-fantastic, probably my favourite character. In the movie he's a good guy, but doesn't hold a candle to Muldoon in the book. I get that because of time constraints they could only feature a few characters in the movie, but still, I wish they could have developed his character a little more in the film. The scene in the book where the raptor is chasing him...it's one of the most suspenseful scenes I've ever read!
Isn't Nedry taken advantage of by Hammond more in the book.
Massively. Hammond is like the antichrist, or Hitler for Nedry.
He does not pay him on time, or fairly, he demands perfect sollutions for cryptical information and use cases, he completely kills his reputation in the IT world, to bind him onto the Jurassic world project, sets not doable project time scales and makes him work overtime for free, if he is not satisfied.
Literally the worst customer you could imagine.
Yes it was like that episode of family guy when Peter went for a prostate exam
Lex
Movie: it's an interactive cd-rom!
Book: there's aminals out there
Wyatt Allen lol I remember that.
It wasn't lysine that Grant injected into the eggs, it was a chemical cocktail. If it had been lysine, then the raptors would've been fine.
It's a bit like saying that you poisoned someone by giving them Calcium.
In the novel, Gennaro was basically a Phoenix Wright-tier lawyer. Right down to the hand-to-hand (or in this case, hand-to-Velociraptor) combat skills.
In the film, he was just a reskinned Ed Regis.
I think the changes that were made to specific characters was very fitting, if it were adapted exactly to how Crichton's novel, this more closer version of JP wouldnt have had the huge impact it had on audiences. I think it would have become a more cult movie having a purely R-rating.
I whould like to see the differences between the Jaws book and film
Comic Taco Productions okay :)
CineFix cool
Great vid by the way
The jaws book is great! I hope to see that video in the future.
Oh shit, they did do the video!
CineFix, your production quality is fantastic and I'm pleasantly surprised by your attention to fan feedback. Instant sub. Can't wait to see where you guys go a few years down the road! :)
EnviousGreen I disagree....the Movie is superior to the book...a rare occurrence
So are you guys implying that Elie ISNT sexy in the movie?
yes, yes they are
+CeleryProductions i guess that depends what you're into. i think she was plenty sexy
She isn't. She has a derp face.
CeleryProductions I guess because it's not AS emphasized in the movie
Elie is supersexy in the movie, like a female Indiana Jones. But it's the "experienced badass" kind of sexy and not the "youthful" kind, so maybe that's what people are alluding to?
Book Muldoon WASN'T heavily armed... even more so in the film. The book emphasizes that Muldoon wanted far, far more firepower than he was allowed to have. That was actually part of what made Hammond such a total asshole in the book - every time he declared "spared no expense!" he was lying through his teeth.
That was the real moral of the book. It wasn't "science has gone too far! Science is BAAAAAD!" It was "respect the science. Respect the power you wield." The reason Jurassic Park fell apart in the book is because Hammond was a two bit flimflam man who was treating the awesome power of biotech as one more thing to make money off of.
You know, as much as I love Spielberg's Jurassic Park, I really wouldn't mind seeing a more faithful reboot. I think they could make a 3 hour movie out of it, if they flesh out all the ideas in the novel. I've always wanted to see that T-Rex river sequence.
Agreed . I'd love a hard R rating as well.
Maybe, but Malcolm was a full fledge SOB in the book. He was so arrogant that he didn't believe anyone will ever prove him wrong. Also his character didn't start out a cynic.
During first chapters in the book, he thought Hammond might have a shot at this. It was Muldoon' and the doctor who changed his mind.
No even before Malcom came to the park he told Hammond it was going to fail. You should read the book again. Malcom never supported Hammond or Jurassic Park.
Malcom also didn’t die. He was brought back in the book’s sequel
"a bearded and barrel chested man of 40" so basically Dr. Robert Bakker
"WTF is 'El Raptor'?" 😂😂😂👏👏👏
It's Spanish for "The kidnapper". They even say as much when they look up the definition. The character who says it however wasn't talking aboutna kidnapper, but instead she had actually seen a velociraptor eat a baby.... IN COSTA RICA no less. Yeah, there are dinosaurs in the mainland during the events of the novels.
Before Jurassic Park, the term "Raptor" for a particular variety of dinosaurs was not very commonly known.
Raptor means Kidnapper in Spanish, but in English it means Bird of Prey. This leads to some confusion early in the book, as the young park worker who dies from velociraptor slashes is Spanish, but he evidently knew enough English to apply the term. He is trying to tell the doctor that he was attacked by an animal, not injured in a construction accident as his fellow employees were saying. The dinosaur Velociraptor was given the name Raptor because like an eagle or an owl, they strike their victim with incredible speed and ferocity.
He is talking about the google search in the video. Btw that was funny 😄
Guasi Acosta
Thank you for clarifying that up despite after 2 years! I wasn’t asking for the definition. I even put it in quotation marks
What about the part in the novel where some Compys attack and feast on a newborn baby? You left that part out.
No
@@jessieqk12 Lol
I still remember it xD
Reading the book a few years back changed the way I looked at my lifelong favorite movie forever
The movie may be shorter but I think the movie is better. The characters are more likable, the dilo has a cool design. The tyrannosaurus ending is awesome.
The visuals are amazing. There’s a happy ending. And it has Jeff Goldblum which is always a win
Ian Malcolm dies before the end of the book. It's why the sequel novel stats completely new chars.
Elie didn't find the color-changing raptor, that was Lex and technically Grant in the bunker with the electric car. Also, you left out the entire auxiliary power plotline.
I loved how Muldoon had a bazooka in the book. the action figure of him had it as well
XD "wtf does el raptor mean?"
TheDinopug "The Raptor" in spanish
The Smiley One he was saying what the guy in the video says
SuperGoombaSmasherYT
Looks like the quotation marks passed over my head, LOL
Also, hr doesn't says it, it's just shown and it says "WTF is el raptor?"
The Smiley One aight
the book was SOOOOO good. The gas station scene was intense. I would love to see a movie done from the first book that followed the plot of the first book just for fun. The river scene would have been cool too.
They did. It's called jurassic Park 3 lol
3:30 Oh boy, Hammond wasn’t just planning another Jurassic Park; he was planning a whole CHAIN of parks. He told Henry Wu after they’d worked out the kinks, they’d open “Jurassic Park: Japan” and “Jurassic Park: Europe.” He was planning on franchising that crap.
It really speaks to what a piece of human garbage he was. That, and right before his death he wanders around outside pondering how everything that happened was everyone else’s fault. Including Arnold, who died trying to get the power restored; and Henry Wu, who was disemboweled and eaten alive while trying to help Ellie. The same guy who, funnily enough, had argued that they needed to alter the dinos’ DNA to make them less dangerous the day before his untimely demise.
I like how Jurassic World uses a line of dialogue from the book when BD Wong's character explains how the dinosaurs seen in the park are not necessarily how real dinosaurs looked due to the frog dna. Its cool how it leaves the feathers v no feathers thing open.
The novel loses major points for not having a raptor-eating T-Rex.
Yeah but there's a scene of tim tossing a baby raptor to the chasing adult to distract it. The adult eats the baby! Also, there's 36 raptors on the island!
Sorry, still not as awesome as a T-rex bursting out of f'ing nowhere to eat some tasty chicken.
They have a Microceratops-eating T-rex. Actually, TWO microceratops-eating T-rexes
And in the novel they had a graph that showed how much of each Dino there was
BlueCape it does something similar in the book, except for the juvenile T Rex down the river while grant and the kids are on an inflatable raft
Such a good book. Like most Crichton. T-rex sitting down sleeping off a cow snack whilst snoring, then swimming down the river like a crocodile were my saddest missing parts from the film
Gotta be honest, there's a few parts I do prefer about the novel, most notably for one the selection of people to survive the whole ordeal (because Muldoon and Genarro are genuinely interesting and somewhat sympathic characters) and also the overall message. Like, in the movie Hammond is kind of a good guy. In the novel he's greedy and cynical (at one point he rants about why a Genetics company like his own is much better off making entertainment. He mentions that if they instead just worked for the benefit for humanity, there would be interferences from the governments, like if they invented a cure for cancer they wouldn't be allowed to charge how much ever they want for it, whereas noone would care if they demanded 500$ a day for his park).
Another interesting difference is that in the novels, Dennis Nedry actually isn't merely a greedy fat cunt, but rather he's annoyed at InGen because after they originally made a deal over him to design the Parks computer systems, they kept adding on demands and features whilst refusing to renegotiate his pay. At the same time they put some effort into ruining is reputation to make sure that he actually needed the assignment and couldn't just drop it. So whilst it of course was still utterly irresponsible of him to just shut down the parks security, we can't even blame him for taking a bribe from another genetics company in exchange for stealing a bunch of dinosaur embryos.
Pterosaurs are not dinosaurs.
But still... fossils that got recreated for the Park from those mosquitoes.
Neither are mososaurus.
Now that I think of it... How on Earth did they got that mosasaurus DNA on that universe? Supposedly that those DNA of Jurassic World are still being extracted from ancient mosquitoes.
You have a point there. Maybe it's a plot hole UNLESS they explain it somehow.
+BigRed Kronos mosaurus could be like whales and get beached and then the mosquitos suck their blood
I look forward to the day when a film adaptation's are commonly as close to the book as possible.
silence of the lambs was pretty close to the book. But the same can't be said for lots of other books that are turned into movies
Best book to movie adaptation :: No Country for Old Men. It's almost word for word identical, the only change I can think of is the bad guy's description but in the scheme of things that isn't important lol
+Jerseybytes2 The Exorcist was also very close.
I heard that "Ender's Game" film is pretty close to its book.
Khristos D Amon
Disagree, the movie was trash and totally changed the message at the end. Honestly I don't know why people liked the movie.. both me and my dad, who I went with, felt very much as if we had not read the book we wouldn't have the slightest idea what was going on.
I liked the book better than the movie
I saw the movie before reading the book, and I'd say that made me enjoy the book even more. I remember reading the book and have my mind visualize the text into a movie, with the cast from the movie... Wish we had the technology to record that!
3:44 The book description of Alan Grant matches somewhat the real life palaeontologist Robert Bakker (of warm blooded dinosaurs fame).
The explanation is that because they knew Hammond would want Jurassic World (he hints it in the book) that they had to kill him off early. They could also retcon it with a comic showing, no he didn't die, harding got him out and he died shortly after Lost World occurs
Also, wasn’t Nedry’s death a lot more graphic in the book? I haven’t read the book, but I’ve heard different things about it, and I’m pretty sure Nedry’s death scene was a lot more graphic in the book. They could only show so much in the movie, due to the PG-13 rating, but you’d be surprised what filmmakers could get away with in a PG-13 movie.
I just finished the book last night. It graphically describes his guts spilling out
During the kitchen scene in the book, it's still pitch dark but Tim still has the night vision goggles from the car. They introduced the goggles in the movie but left them out afterwards.
Isn't there a scene in the book where Lex and Tim hide behind a waterfall while the T-Rex sticks its tongue through the water trying to find them? (that part was vaguely re-used in the second movie iirc)
Yep, that was right after the river part while Muldoon and Gennaro tried to put the T-rex to sleep.
In Jurassic Park special edition, they could have Sam Neil, Laura Dern, and a few of the others in CGI shots that show the river chase with the T-Rex. He going in and out, with Arliss Howard shooting the T-Rex, and maybe even Muldoon(Arliss) indeed survives. That would be easy to do and would be cool to see a special edition of Jurassic Park that adds those in.
The awesome thing about the novel and the movie is that they're so different, you get two new dinosaur experiences in one brand
Malcom doesn't die, there is one line in book one that suggest he didn't survive. But in the second book this been reverted to him surviving.
Did you not make it to the end of the video?
iirc the book says they weren't allowed to bury Dr Malcom which heavily implies he's dead, but they might not have been allowed because burying live people is frowned upon in most societies.
@@grumpyoldman3458 thinking back on it, their reason could be that Ian is on life support and has a slim chance of survival. They might just be trying to plan ahead
@@cooperminion825 Good point.
There’s actually 2. When they get in the helicopter grant asks Muldoon if Malcolm made it in which Muldoon shook his head. And then again when they say they are not allowed to bury Hammond or Malcolm.
i enjoyed the book more than i enjoyed the movie even if i saw the movie earlier than the book and also is still one of my favorite movies, the book is also my favorite Stand Alone Science Fiction novel. the book was more discriptive and way better scenes but both the book and adaptation were good.
novel - 5/5 -- 10/10 -- A+
movie - 4,8/5 -- 9,5 /10 -- A
Neta Bolt
I like both the first book and the movie quite a lot. When it comes to the sequel, The Lost World, I thought the book was very much better than the film version though.
For The Lost World I'm a little mixed. I didn't like the prion stuff in the book, but I did like BioSyn's involvement. My prefered version would probably take the movie version, replace Ludlow and InGen with Dodson and BioSyn, incorporate the raptors attacking the high hide somehow, and stay on the island for the duration of the movie instead of going to San Diego.
Neta Bolt Tgwy weren't horribly wrong. They're based on Deinonychus, which was oft called velociraptor in the 1980s
There's two books