• floo@retrolemmy.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Jurassic Park. The original was a horror/thriller that would have had to be unrated if they made it literally from the book. Instead, we got a PG-13 family film that really did not live up to the book.

    In fact, it’s the first time that I read the book before seeing the movie, and I learned to never ever do that again.

    • EponymousBosh@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Honestly? Gotta disagree. It’s been a long time since I’ve read the book but I remember being disappointed by it after seeing the movie. Maybe I’ll give it a reread and see if my opinion’s changed. ETA: fuck all the movie sequels though, no one needed that shit.

      • floo@retrolemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 hour ago

        I have no idea what would’ve happened to me if I had done it in that order, but, unfortunately, for me, I read the book 1st, and based my expectations for the movie around that, rather than the other way around.

        So, I’m not trying to discount your experience, I just don’t think it’s the same thing because of the order. Who knows? If I’d’ve seen the movie first, I might agree with you.

    • Hadriscus@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      15 hours ago

      to 4yo me, JP was a horror film. I mean, the kitchen sequence alone. And the run underground in the dark in search of the fuses, only to find a severed arm.

      • floo@retrolemmy.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        I’d say that’s more thriller than horror.

        For example, in the book, that fuse search ends in something far more horrifying than just Arnold’s dismembered arm. If I remember correctly, they discover him in pieces. All of them, but all over the place. Not just his arm. I think one of the kids pukes.

        The whole book seems like Michael Creighton really tapped his imagination for how many ways wild dinosaurs could absolutely and utterly eviscerate a person.

          • floo@retrolemmy.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            Then you’ll enjoy the book more.

            I’m not sure I can say the same thing for the lost world, as that book was written specifically so it could be turned into a sequel for Jurassic Park the film. It’s still very good, but not nearly as good as the first book.

    • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      15 hours ago

      Funny thing though, Jurassic Park is STILL wildly successful, and if it had followed the book, most people would have never heard of it today.

        • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          10 hours ago

          From what I heard the book had a lot more deep science and chaos theory, but I never read it. If true, nobody’s taking their kids to that.

          • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 hours ago

            I read it 3 times. When I was like 12. Chaos theory and science were certainly aspects; aspects of an exciting, edge of your seat, smart, well-plotted thriller, with engaging and relatable characters. It wasn’t a kids book, and doesn’t need to be a kids movie. This may shock you, but movies don’t have to be for kids in order to be successful.

            • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 hours ago

              This may shock you, but movies don’t have to be for kids in order to be successful.

              I’m not shocked, because I never claimed this point at all, but I appreciate your attempt at insulting me for no reason.

              The formula that is Jurassic Park is complicated and has many variables. I’m sure the movie you would have preferred to get would have been great, but it wouldn’t be the universally recognized franchise it is today.

    • DominusOfMegadeus@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 hours ago

      The worst part of all these stupid spin off movies (besides how atrocious I’m assuming they are) is that they significantly reduce the likelihood we will ever get a movie that is faithful to the book.

      • bamboo@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        12 hours ago

        I think since the Jurassic World series started, all of the reboots have mostly been “remember this” from the first movie, and none could really be anything more than that. Every one has to include a scene that’s a homage to the original. Honestly feels like the franchise needs to have a genre switch up to force it to be something original.