›

The Lost World (novel), worth it?

WoodsyblueWoodsyblue
edited November 2011 in Jurassic Park
Hi guys, spoilers if you haven't read the books I suppose.

I currently rereading Jurassic Park and loving it (I haven't read it in like twelve years) and I was wondering what people thought of The Lost World. I never actually got around to reading it. One of my cousins, who also loved the first book, told me she hated it and that it was very inconsistent with the first one (Ian Malcolm being declared alive, for example). I also remember it not being very well received by critics and I think I remember in an interview Michael Crichton said he only wrote it because of the films. (Correct me if any of this is wrong.)

What do people here think? Is it worth reading or should I just skip it?

Comments

  • IcedhopeIcedhope
    edited February 2011
    Woodsyblue wrote: »
    Hi guys, spoilers if you haven't read the books I suppose.

    I currently rereading Jurassic Park and loving it (I haven't read it in like twelve years) and I was wondering what people thought of The Lost World. I never actually got around to reading it. One of my cousins, who also loved the first book, told me she hated it and that it was very inconsistent with the first one (Ian Malcolm being declared alive, for example). I also remember it not being very well received by critics and I think I remember in an interview Michael Crichton said he only wrote it because of the films. (Correct me if any of this is wrong.)

    What do people here think? Is it worth reading or should I just skip it?


    I think it's worth reading, some of it feels rushed but it's a good novel to read.
  • IrishmileIrishmile
    edited February 2011
    I liked it.
  • waroftheworlds01waroftheworlds01
    edited February 2011
    It's a good read. It's also a lot different than the movie so you won't just be reading an extended version of the movie.
  • IcedhopeIcedhope
    edited February 2011
    waroftheworlds01 wrote: »
    It's a good read. It's also a lot different than the movie so you won't just be reading an extended version of the movie.

    I like the novel more than the movie just for the fact, it had a lot variety to it.
  • WoodsyblueWoodsyblue
    edited February 2011
    OK guys, you've convinced me, I've ordered it :) I'll let you know what I think when I finish reading it (which might not be for a while, the store doesn't have any copies in stock and it will take 3 – 5 weeks to ship).
  • TelekillTelekill
    edited February 2011
    The two Jurassic Park novels are a couple of my favorites. It was a sad day when Michael Crichton died. :(
  • waroftheworlds01waroftheworlds01
    edited February 2011
    I know you said you have the first Jurassic Park already but Barns and Nobal just released a reprint of both Jurassic Park and The Lost World in one book. It's really nice. The cover is cool and I'm a bigger fan of hardcover than paper back. 20 bucks.
  • WoodsyblueWoodsyblue
    edited February 2011
    I love hardbacks too and I have a heap of Michael Crichton hardbacks including Jurassic Park, Pirate Latitudes, Prey, Next and Airframe. (I picked up Prey, Next and Airframe at a used book store in Rancho Mirage, all first editions and in great condition, for just $4.50 all up. I could not believe my luck. The only problem was finding room in my suitcase to bring them back.)

    I just ordered The Lost World in hardback from Borders. It was cheaper than any other online store, plus they don't charge for shipping and I had a 20% off voucher for any fiction book. It came down to about $23, which is nothing for a hardback in Australia. The only downside is that they don't have it in stock so I have to wait 3 – 5 weeks for it to be shipped :(
  • waroftheworlds01waroftheworlds01
    edited February 2011
    Too bad about the wait but at least you'll get hardback. I only have his newest novels in hardback. Next, State of Fear, and Pirate Latitudes. I would love to get the others in hardback. They take up a lot of space (I understand why people are buying those electronic things that have books in them) but they're just so cool.

    And on a side off topic note: State of Fear totally needs to be made into a movie. I love that one. Prey too. Hell.... all of them that haven't been made into a movie yet need to be. lol And some could use some remakes. Congo could have been a bit better although I did like Ernie Hutson in it.
  • WoodsyblueWoodsyblue
    edited February 2011
    There are so many bad Michael Crichton film adaptations out there. I think his books are hard to transfer to the screen. A lot of his action, which works great on the page, usually looks a bit silly on the screen. That's one of the reasons I found Jurassic Park so impressive, they changed enough, while staying true to the core on the story and the characters (Gennaro and Hammond, and to a lesser extent Grant, being obvious exceptions) for it to work perfectly as a blockbuster film without betraying the original work. They got the balance just right.

    I really wish there were more good Michael Crichton screen adaptations out there. I hear Steven Spielberg is looking to make Pirate Latitudes into a film, which is somewhat exciting.
  • waroftheworlds01waroftheworlds01
    edited February 2011
    I would say that Jurassic Park is probably the best film adaptation of all time because even though it's missing A LOT of scenes from the book it stills remain a very enjoyable film. It's enjoyable to the point where you don't even ask "Well, why wasn't this scene in the movie?" untill much later.

    A Pirate Latitudes film directed by Steven Spielberg would be epic. I woudn't mind see Nolan tackle a Michael Crichton novel. I think his films have the same feel that the novels have.
  • evolution_rexevolution_rex
    edited February 2011
    I think someone needs to make a movie of Crichton's Next. That book was entertaining from the beginning to the end.

    back on topic, The Lost World was not as good as the first novel. It was a little boring and seemed shorter than JP. It seems like he was forced to write it (which he technically was, Steven Spielberg insisted for him to make the novel just so he make another movie). But, it was still one of the best books I've ever read.

    Micheal Crichton has and always will be my favorite author of all time.
  • waroftheworlds01waroftheworlds01
    edited February 2011
    Next was an interesting read but I felt that it jumped around a lot and there really wasn't a major story to follow. But I need to read it again cause I only read it once and can't remember too much from it.

    I'm reading TLW again right now. I think I like the two novels equally. I agree that he was forced to write it but at least he still gave it some TLC. I also like Michael Crichton because he didn't seem to be the one to just throw stuff out there to make money. I always felt that his novels always had a good bit of reseach put into them as well as a message that he wanted to get across to his readers. He always told cautionary tales
  • WoodsyblueWoodsyblue
    edited November 2011
    Wow, I completely forgot about this thread. I finished The Lost World ages ago and I totally meant to write my thoughts down. My bad :o Oh well, better really late than never.

    In answer to the question posed by the thread: While it wasn't as good as the first one it was definitely worth the read.

    A few quick thoughts on the book, spoilers ahead for those who haven't read it: For the first half of the book Malcolm didn't feel like Malcolm. He wasn't voicing his theories or being the yang to anyone's ying; he just seemed like a stock protagonist. I was wondering why Crichton bothered resurrecting him at all for a while there but during the second half he started sounding like Malcolm again and I could understand why he needed to bring him back.

    Also, I have to talk about the chameleonic Carnotaurus. The chapter where Malcolm and the others were hiding in the Carnotaurs territory and were piecing together everything about the predators was possibly the most tense and frighting moment from either book. However, it was short-lived and extremely anti-climatic. Nobody died and they quickly learned how to deal with the creatures, nullifying any possible threat. So unfortunately, a disappointing ending to a truly thrilling sequence.

    But yes, despite those nitpicks I'm definitely glad I read it and it was a real page-turner, just like its predecessor.
  • FPugFPug
    edited November 2011
    Both novels were great treats. But I feel as though The Lost World started out extremely slow. I had a hard tie picking it up at first...BUT it was totally worth it in the end! However I feel like we as the audience didn't get a whole lot of closure on everything. By the way, if you want another Crichton novel to read, pick up The Terminal Man. I just got done reading it and it is GOLD! Although it takes place in the seventies, it could easily be updated. I want a movie version.
  • CyberscribeCyberscribe
    edited November 2011
    waroftheworlds01 wrote: »
    I know you said you have the first Jurassic Park already but Barns and Nobal just released a reprint of both Jurassic Park and The Lost World in one book. It's really nice. The cover is cool and I'm a bigger fan of hardcover than paper back. 20 bucks.
    I Got that! I went to barnes and nobles in California for a school trip and the ironic thing is i brought along my Paperback of Jurassic Park with me on the trip but when i saw it I just had to have it it's only for collecting purposes though. :)

    But this book I felt wasn't as good as Jurassic Park but it's still one of my favorite books of all time. It's shocking how different it was to the film though. The kids in the books seem a little more annoying than their film counterparts, but the dinosaurs in the books are more diverse and frightening.

    Spoilers: Did anyone notice that they switched the Triceratops and Stegosaurs again? When they're driving on the game trail I think a whole herd of Triceratops come walking across their view and it seemed to make me think of the Stegos in the movie migrating in their herd.
  • waroftheworlds01waroftheworlds01
    edited November 2011
    A bit off topic but there's actually another Michael Crichton book coming out called Micro. He died writing it so it was finshed by another auther. But I'll be checking it out all the same.
  • NeelisNeelis
    edited November 2011
    Yes, it's worth it: very different from the film that was based off of it. Better storyline if you ask me, a smaller cast of characters and more interesting theories about the animals and INGEN.

    As for Malcolm living in this book, when he clearly died in the first: after Jurassic Park (the film) was released, it turned out Malcolm was quite a popular character. Crichton was asked to write a second novel, and decided to bring Malcolm back to life. The novel The Lost World is a bit of a hybrid sequel to both the first book and the first film.
  • Romeosierra616Romeosierra616
    edited November 2011
    The first Novel's definitely better, but I loved The Lost World as well. I think it was a very fitting sequel.
  • bloodkiller630bloodkiller630
    edited November 2011
    Woodsyblue wrote: »
    Hi guys, spoilers if you haven't read the books I suppose.

    I currently rereading Jurassic Park and loving it (I haven't read it in like twelve years) and I was wondering what people thought of The Lost World. I never actually got around to reading it. One of my cousins, who also loved the first book, told me she hated it and that it was very inconsistent with the first one (Ian Malcolm being declared alive, for example). I also remember it not being very well received by critics and I think I remember in an interview Michael Crichton said he only wrote it because of the films. (Correct me if any of this is wrong.)

    What do people here think? Is it worth reading or should I just skip it?

    is reading online for free illegal, because, that epud bud website, it lets you read any novel you want, right now i am reading jurassic park the first novel, the part with the compys that was in the first book, i dont know how stven speilberg put that at the beginning of the second movie, and though people wouldnt notice:)
Sign in to comment in this discussion.