Last year was when I watched all of the Jurassic Park movies for the first time, which was a bit unusual for me because I normally read the book first. However, I didn’t read it until last week. Part of me is kind of glad I didn’t read it before the movie because chances are I wouldn’t have enjoyed it as much (I’m one of those people who nitpicks about changes made from book to movie, in case you didn’t already know from my Hobbit and Les Miserables reviews).
There wasn’t a whole lot changed from the book, though; it’s the same basic premise of, “Hey, look, we cloned dinosaurs and put them in a park; isn’t it neat?” and three hours later everyone is on the carnivores’ menu. There were minor deviations that didn’t affect the overall plot; the most noticeable changes were that Lex and Tim’s ages were reversed, Grant and Sattler were most certainly not in a relationship, and both Hammond and Malcolm are dead by the end of the book. They kept them alive in the movie for the sequel, I suppose, although I think I remember reading that The Lost World was already a book before they adapted it, and they never fully explained how Malcolm was in that when he was supposed to be buried in the first one. Or maybe I’m thinking of something else entirely.
I liked the book’s pacing better than the movie’s–it was a nice, medium pace, not too fast and not too slow, and there was more time to flesh out details that didn’t get as much attention in the movie. Also–and this is probably a weird observation–but there was something about the book that felt more intellectual than what the movie was like. I’m not sure if that makes any sense or not, but that was the impression I received.
Overall, I think both the book and the movie were well done, and it’s not often you can find a movie that lives up to its book.