Jurassic Park

Jurassic Park

An astonishing technique for recovering and cloning dinosaur DNA has been discovered. Now humankind’s most thrilling fantasies have come true. Creatures extinct for eons roam Jurassic Park with their awesome presence and profound mystery, and all the world can visit them—for a price. Until something goes wrong. . . ....

DownloadRead Online
Title:Jurassic Park
Author:Michael Crichton
Rating:
Edition Language:English

Jurassic Park Reviews

  • Alejandro

    I was way excited back then, 20 years ago, about the movie (minus the controversial scene portraiting San José, Costa Rica with a beach in the middle of it). Trust me. I am from Costa Rica and I live precisely in San José and we don't have a dang beach around.

    I am sure that Spielberg wouldn't do that kind of mistake if he'd need to portrait Paris, France, but a dang capital city in a third world country? Who cares?

    Well, I care, I am from that prec

    I was way excited back then, 20 years ago, about the movie (minus the controversial scene portraiting San José, Costa Rica with a beach in the middle of it). Trust me. I am from Costa Rica and I live precisely in San José and we don't have a dang beach around.

    I am sure that Spielberg wouldn't do that kind of mistake if he'd need to portrait Paris, France, but a dang capital city in a third world country? Who cares?

    Well, I care, I am from that precise third world country. When you would have your capital cities portraited in a wrong stereotypical way, you will understand me. (And don't get me wrong. I love the movie and I am fan of Spielberg's work, just pointing out my feeling about that scene that even in the book happens in another different place).

    I love the book, since the author, Michael Crichton, lived a lot of time in my country, Costa Rica, and he fell in love so much with our culture and geography that he wanted to use it as background for one of his novels.

    The novel became his most famous book. In the book, you can realize how well Crichton indeed knew about our places using specific real places like the Cabo Blanco Biologic Reserve and the Puntarenas' Hospital Monseñor Sanabria. You don't came out with places like that with your quick internet search. You need to live here to know things like that.

    Of course,

    is a made up place but hey, no problem there, it's like

    or

    , always there are space for another fictional island in literature.

    I was lucky to get my paperback copy of

    just when the movie was on its hype 20 years ago, since thanks to that it has the logo of the film (see? I don't hate the movie, just questioned that dang scene).

    I love my edition of the book since never they published ever again the book with that cover, so it's one my priceless posessions in my library.

  • Kelly (and the Book Boar)

    Find all of my reviews at:

    It all begins with a billionaire who has a big imagination and

    of spare money lying around. By dro

    Find all of my reviews at:

    It all begins with a billionaire who has a big imagination and

    of spare money lying around. By dropping a ton of dollars into the biotechnology field and

    thinking outside the box when it comes to the wheres and hows of DNA sample collection – John Hammond has figured out how to bring dinosaurs back from extinction and now dreams of creating a theme park unlike any other. What he didn’t plan on was the fact that science is often unpredictable . . .

    Now on to my super literary review:

    I honestly believed I had read this book back when the movie came out. It turns out my brain foiled me once again and I actually had not. Bottom line: senile brain = bad, reading

    = good.

    Man oh man I had

    what I had been missing. Spare me your “oh but it’s

    science-y and I got bored before the story really took off” or the “you

    know there is

    this could ever really happen, right????” talk. I don’t care. Yes, it is super science-y and yes, dinosaurs still aren’t free-ranging on an island off the shores of Costa Rica, but it doesn't change the fact that this book is phenomenal.

    I had given Spielberg so much credit (even knowing his film was based off of this book), but the credit is all owed to Michael Crichton. Not only are the characters/dialogue/etc. ripped right out of the book, but Crichton did it so much better. Sure, certain unforgettable scenes were created purely by Spielberg

    but there are literally

    of pages of action that were not included in the motion picture, additional plot twists, new dinosaurs and other surprises to prove to all that Crichton’s original was sheer genius. In fact, after reading

    I questioned why some parts of the original were ever changed for the film at all. Of course I realize that not every page of a book can be included in a movie adaptation, but the changes in Lex, Tim, Ellie and Grant’s characters were unnecessary and the changes to Hammond are almost unforgiveable. Hammond was never meant to be portrayed as a well-intended old fool, but rather a mad scientist much like Dr. Moreau. I’ll refrain from saying more as to not spoil the reading experience for all, but trust me when I say if you liked the movie, you’re going to

    the book.

    I know, Jeff. I know. It’s hard for me too.

    Here’s a bonus Dr. Malcolm gif for everyone who realizes he’s the sexiest mathematician to ever walk the Earth . . .

    He can chaos my theory anytime.

    And here’s a bonus Brundlefly gif for

    since he refuses to acknowledge the magic and wonder that is all things Goldblum . . .

    ["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>["br"]>

  • Luffy

    So, straight to it. Jurassic Park, the book, is inimitable, apart from a few clumsy attempts. One thing that differentiated it from its wannabes is that, unlike books about sharks, snakes or let's say, zombies, dinosaurs come in very varied shapes. This means that the way the casualties meet their end is just as variable.

    Michael Crichton props up his last act with inspired flair and experienced cunning. He knows that the action in this book will go only so far, just like last acts in an all out

    So, straight to it. Jurassic Park, the book, is inimitable, apart from a few clumsy attempts. One thing that differentiated it from its wannabes is that, unlike books about sharks, snakes or let's say, zombies, dinosaurs come in very varied shapes. This means that the way the casualties meet their end is just as variable.

    Michael Crichton props up his last act with inspired flair and experienced cunning. He knows that the action in this book will go only so far, just like last acts in an all out comedy movie WILL be lame, unless something rash and daring is undertook. The soliloquy (for us) of Ian Malcolm are just like the morphine that the doctor prescribed for him. Malcolm's rants about science are dishonest but it's all in good jest.

    The verisimilitude of Isla Nublar is out of this world. The landscape, the computers, the dinosaurs, the genetic restraints that shackles the dinosaurs, and lastly, the human protagonists in the book, are so well imagined, arranged spatially, manipulated to create tension and pacing, that I recognize the hand of a master entertainer at work. Spielberg, eat your heart out.

    The ultimate slap in the face of conventional science fiction is the fact, that Jurassic Park takes place in our timeline. How gutsier can you get? The book is now half forgotten, but that will change when the next wave of genetic manipulation arrives. Jurassic Park can have quite a few interpretations that pertain to civics, science, philosophy, and of course maths' sexy cousin, Chaos Theory! The only thing that matters though, is that the book makes good on its promise and gives us more than what it says on the tin; pure fun.

  • Miranda Reads

    has all the major problems of a theme park, a zoo...and genetically altered prehistoric animals.

    That's right - the dinosaurs are back from the dead and nothing -

    - could go wrong...right?

    As my favorite character, Ian Malcom would say,

    Though, considering so

    has all the major problems of a theme park, a zoo...and genetically altered prehistoric animals.

    That's right - the dinosaurs are back from the dead and nothing -

    - could go wrong...right?

    As my favorite character, Ian Malcom would say,

    Though, considering some of the problems they had with the park, I strongly believe that several of issues

    ...that is, if Mr. Hammond and his scientists would've taken the time to thoroughly consider

    of bringing back extinct species.

    Dr. Allen Grant, Ellie, Ian Malcom and a host of other professionals (along with Mr. Hammond's grandchildren) are invited to the island to give

    on this un-extinction.

    Of course, this visit comes at an excellent time - there is a huge storm rolling in,

    and there's some evidence that the smaller dinos have made it off the island.

    But don't mention any of this to Mr. Hammond or his staff -

    . As Ian Malcom said,

    Predictably, the storm rolls in,

    ...and soon even Mr. Hammond might have to admit that there may be an issue or two in his precious park.

    If I had to pick a

    from my childhood...this would be it. So, of course, I had to pick up the book to see how it compared.

    In this novel, Mr. Hammond wasn't quite the

    he is in the movie. And of his grandchildren, Lex is certainly younger than her movie-version (and young-Lex was more than a

    ).

    This is one of those rare cases where the movie is not being a true-to-book adaption, but they are both equally entertaining and delightful.

    And just like when I was a kid, I am comforted that if this dinosaur apocalypse ever happens,

    The reader (Scott Brick) was alright. It's just...this book is about DINOSAURS - surely this reader could've mustered

    enthusiasm??

  • Brad

    I always seem to forget how good

    is. I blast through it once every few years, throw it on my shelf and the distance slowly makes me derisive, and then something forces me to pick it up again when my brain needs a little peanut butter and jelly dipped in hot chocolate, and I am forced to admit that

    is a damn fine novel.

    Sure it's packed with

    's usual band of screenplay-adaptation-friendly archetypes, sure it derives much of its plot and thought from

    I always seem to forget how good

    is. I blast through it once every few years, throw it on my shelf and the distance slowly makes me derisive, and then something forces me to pick it up again when my brain needs a little peanut butter and jelly dipped in hot chocolate, and I am forced to admit that

    is a damn fine novel.

    Sure it's packed with

    's usual band of screenplay-adaptation-friendly archetypes, sure it derives much of its plot and thought from

    ,

    and

    , sure it's pulpy and quick to read, but those things aren't necessarily bad, and Crichton does enough to elevate or alter these elements to make

    a fine piece of popular Sci-Fi in its own right.

    Yes, the characters are there to serve the plot. Each has an important skill or skill-set -- Muldoon is the "Great White Hunter," Malcolm is the chaos theoretician, Grant and Saddler are the paleontologists, Tim and Lex are the kids in peril, etc., etc. -- and who they are and the how their stories unfold are easily altered or even cut entirely in the shift from book to screen because

    are less important than their skills, yet Crichton still manages to make them likable enough that we care about what happens to them. None of the characters are dynamic or round, but their static flatness makes them no less interesting than a character like

    's James Bond. They may not be as memorable as Bond (although Ian Malcolm has some pretty impressive popularity for a supporting character), but they don't really have to be. We can forget them after the book is over, then enjoy them anew when we go back to the book later. They aren't Hamlet, but they work.

    And yes Crichton borrows liberally, but he borrows from the stars. He uses Shelley's classic creation-gone-mad trope, and he blatantly thieves from Doyle's

    and Wells'

    , but he does it with style. Granted it's a pulpy style, but that pulpiness is an asset. It takes those pieces he's combined and lets the reader catch mere glimpses of them outside the roller coaster car as he takes us into drops and curves and spins and loop-de-loops. The speed and pace nearly makes us forget from whom he's borrowing. And that is by design. Crichton's pulpiness is pacing, conscious pacing, and as literary action-oriented plotters go, Crichton is a master of speedy obfuscation.

    Add to all that some memorable tirades about science and reason and the environment, some kick ass Velociraptors and T-rexes, an excellent scene with toxic eggs, and some rather insightful criticism of "great men," and

    is a book that I predict will stand the test of time. We may not see its future today, but fifty to a hundred years from now it will be taught in schools and remembered, while other, more literary books will be forgotten.

    It just struck me that if I forget the quality of this book between readings, and I do, then my prophecy concerning

    's staying power is probably flawed. I think I may be more Nostradumbass than Nostradamus.

  • Anne
  • Wendy Darling

    Rereading for obvious reasons. :D :D :D :D

  • Sr3yas

    I remember back when I was a kid, my dad rented a VHS

    cassette of an English movie. I think I

    I remember back when I was a kid, my dad rented a VHS

    cassette of an English movie. I think I was seven years old and my favorite pastimes were collecting gravel, screaming and making my sister's life hell. Watching movie was not one of them.

    And that movie changed it all. And no, It wasn't Citizen Kane. It was the legendary Jurassic Park!

    But it took me almost fifteen years to pick up the original novel.

    And surprisingly, it was not what I expected.

    When advanced genetic engineering breaks the very basic laws of nature by creating an extinct life form, billionaire John Hammond decides to turn that discovery into the best damn attraction the world has ever witnessed:

    But the investors of this ambitious project gets spooked because of some recent events and seeks a second opinion. They invite Paleontologist,

    paleobotanist graduate student,

    famous mathematician and chaos theorist,

    and a lawyer representing the investors,

    for a guided tour of the park.

    The unique voice in this story belongs to Ian Malcolm who spends most of the time warning others about the park.

    So everyone went ahead with the tour and...

    Well, let's just say things didn't go as planned.

    Stop right there. The book is so very different from the movie. The movie is a visual spectacular that tells an adventurous science fiction story. While watching the movie, you will be shouting

    The novel (almost) paints the same story, but its focus is on something else entirely:

    The very idea of creating life out of nothing, the dangers of unchecked development and the proof that you can not control the uncontrollable. Also, there is a healthy dose of chaos theory, Dragon curves, Dinosaur's evolution and survival! Throughout the story, you'll be like

    Overall, Jurassic Park is one helluva a ride. It might not be as thrilling as the movie, but it is a hell more meaningful and informative!

  • Zora

    At the risk of offending what looks to be all my male goodreads friends who loved this (none of my female friends have read it, which is remarkable but probably not random), I couldn't finish it. It wasn't the multiple viewpoints or so-so prose, it was the science. I worked for awhile as an assistant paleontologist--field, prep, and curating--and I promise you, pretty much everything in the first 50 pages on this topic is wrong. I wasn't loving the book anyway, and kept finding random factual er

    At the risk of offending what looks to be all my male goodreads friends who loved this (none of my female friends have read it, which is remarkable but probably not random), I couldn't finish it. It wasn't the multiple viewpoints or so-so prose, it was the science. I worked for awhile as an assistant paleontologist--field, prep, and curating--and I promise you, pretty much everything in the first 50 pages on this topic is wrong. I wasn't loving the book anyway, and kept finding random factual errors (passports not needed for international travel? You can't possibly fake a fax of a x-ray?) But the scenes on the fossil "dig" did me in.

    1) you don't clean fossils in the field. You get them out of the field and into the lab, where you have air scribes, microscopes, safe places to rest them, and far more tools than you can schlep on your back out to the field.

    2) "bits of bone flaked away as he dug." Then he's an incompetent idiot. You do everything to keep "bits" from flaking away. A bit IS the fossil. If this happens in the lab, you stop, stabilize, get a better prep person if you have a real star at it in your group, or you just quit. Plenty of fossils remain only partially exposed in museums trays because they are too friable to clean further. They're still useful. Just because it isn't on public display to wow the kiddies doesn't mean it isn't there. This Alan guy, he just keeps ruining the fossil. When real paleontologists flake a tiny little something away, they beat their breasts and curse and sometimes even cry.

    3) They have the only egg site in the world for this species, and they're using jackhammers on it. Seriously? Jackhammers? We didn't own one. We wouldn't have taken one if it were a gift. You preserve the data at all costs, including leaving it the heck alone, if need be. Jackhammers may be rarely used with huge, whole specimens, if your team can drag a generator that far, but not in this case--never ever would that happen.

    4) The broken bones get tossed aside and whirred up into fragments... No. Broken bones are also useful. Very useful. Broken bones get collected, cleaned, and curated. Museum collections are mostly of fossils that are partial. The only fossils I ever saw thrown away were some that got lost from their documentation and were therefore useless.

    5) ...from which DNA is extracted. Not even in a million-year-old fossil, much less a 190-million-year-old one. When you crunch up fossils into sandy bits, all you get is sand.

    6) rubber cement. Very big for stabilizing in 1903. Not so much when this book was written. A plastic resin dissolved in acetone is used, like polyvinyl butryal.

    ... and so on.

    You simply cannot make that many factual errors and I continue reading. My suspension of disbelief is gone long before the monsters come on stage.

    This is the third of his books I've tried, the second I've given up on before the end, and all three were just riddled with errors. And he was already famous--he could have interviewed anyone before writing. Why get it wrong when he could have, with a few hours of work, gotten it right? Maddening.

Best Free Books is in no way intended to support illegal activity. Use it at your risk. We uses Search API to find books/manuals but doesn´t host any files. All document files are the property of their respective owners. Please respect the publisher and the author for their copyrighted creations. If you find documents that should not be here please report them


©2018 Best Free Books - All rights reserved.