How does the film stack up to the novel?

Few works of fiction have implemented the existence of dinosaurs in a present-day setting as Michael Crichton’s 1990 novel “Jurassic Park” and Steven Spielberg’s 1993 film adaption have.

Both are highly influential and well-recognized works of fiction in their respective fields and have vastly different visions for the outcome of bringing dinosaurs into a present-day setting.

The Book

Novelist and screenwriter Michael Crichton wrote a novel of dinosaurs brought into existence through the use of genetic engineering at a time when genetic engineering was a new and controversial issue. His novel was a broad cautionary tale about the careless use of this power disguised as an action-adventure.

The novel begins with a certain scene that would never fly well in a Hollywood release. It featured a sleeping infant being devoured in bloody descriptions by a small group of scavenger dinosaurs known as Compsognathus.

With evidence of dinosaurs wreaking havoc upon coastal regions surrounding a privately-owned island, a wealthy entrepreneur, John Hammond, invites a paleontologist, paleobotanist, mathematician and lawyer as well as his two eager grandchildren to visit a theme park featuring live dinosaurs.

However, events go south when dinosaurs break out from their enclosures and wreak havoc upon the visitors, the park and most chilling of all, themselves.

Unlike its film counterpart, this novel takes a darker, more nihilistic look into dangers caused by the eager production of powers which would probably have been best undiscovered.

The events in the book are also much different from the film as its focus is more like that of a horror story than that of an adventure story. During the last third of the book, the reader follows characters who are relentlessly chased and hunted by genius predatory dinosaurs, and it takes like-minded human wit to survive by outsmarting the beasts.

Perhaps in one of the more shocking moments of the novel, the two children attempt to appease several hungry velociraptor parents who are chasing them by giving them their newly hatched offspring. Instead of becoming familial, the creatures proceed to devour their young before the children’s eyes.

Everything is left ambiguous especially when you think the characters may be safe.  Even in the story’s aftermath when it seems the heroes have triumphed, there is still an atmosphere of ambiguity and mystery.

The Film

Much of the film’s storyline is the same as that of the book. However, there are significant differences. If this film had been a true-to-form adaption of the book, there would have been no chance that it would have been rated a family-friendly PG-13.

The original book’s author, Michael Crichton, wrote the screenplay for this book and I must say that he sanitized it very well. Not only does the film avoid portraying gruesome scenes of carnage which were prevalent in the book, but it also narrows down its cast of characters, while sparing and disposing of most of them.

In the book, park creator John Hammond, park geneticist Henry Wu, and psychologist Ian Malcolm met grisly fates (though Crichton resurrected the literary, Malcolm, for his sequel “The Lost World” due to the unexpected popularity his film counterpart had amassed).

The film is different from the book mainly in forms of pacing, and this prevents it from having much of the thrilling action scenes that were in the book.

Another difference is the ending. Whereas the film ends with an optimistic tone of escape and a newfound appreciation for current life, the book takes a darker approach.

The book ends in a cliffhanger with some of the dinosaurs escaping the enclosure, while the surviving members being placed under arrest by the Costa Rican government.

The book is a thrilling adventure throughout, with philosophical looks in the moral issue of genetic cloning present in the background.

The film, on the other hand, is highly truncated as it brings up Crichton’s concerns on the risk of cloning throughout the first half but is a straightforward action-thriller throughout the second. In doing so, it feels rushed and somewhat dull in comparison with the novel.

The Victor

I personally prefer the book over the film, as it creates a much more complicated and intriguing world than any other visionary filmmaker ever could.

It is a far more visceral, frightening and adventurous work of fiction, taking its readers on a relentless roller-coaster ride of thrills and chills.