Why Is Jurassic Park Better Than The Book

I liked the movie better than the book. Reason being is because it was easier to feel the mood in the movie. It was harder to understand the mood in the book than it was in the

In my opinion there are a lot of comparisons between the film and the book, but there are also differences between them too, but also they have impacted the audience in both the film and the

I agree that the movie was better. However, I don 't agree that the novel wasn 't good. The novel would have no strikes against it if it weren 't for that thing with Hooper and Ellen Brody, in my honest opinion. I will say that I think the movie Patriot Games is much better than the novel because the movie has a much better ending and the line that comes from Jack Ryan, "I will ****ing destroy you. I will make it my mission in

The main conflict influences how the reader interprets what is happening in the story and why it corresponds with the life of the characters. In “Jurassic Park”, the main conflict is also the plot throughout all of the story which keeps the reader intrigued. The two main conflict of the story is that people that created Jurassic Park would not listen to the warnings from other people of using dinosaurs for an amusement park and also that the dinosaurs in the park eventually escape their cages and are trying to kill their captors. The first main conflict is man vs. world because it is John Hammond, the creator of Jurassic Park, verses all of the people that heard about the project that he created. When the two doctors arrived at the park, they

The movie is both funny and action packed but the book is more detailed. So I enjoyed the book more. The film forgot a lot of characters and changed many scenes and it really frustrated me. Also in the book you can see more character development. Even though the film was not exactly like the book the director did a great job, and this still is one of my favorite movies.

The whole book is imagined and pieced together by the author himself. My last difference is that the main plots of the story are almost polar opposites. Jurassic Park, after the introduction of characters and such things like that, quickly turns into purely a story of survival. The characters are stranded on the island, due to a storm, with a bunch of genetically produced giant lizards. Some of the dinosaurs are small, but even those can be deadly.

The book seemed to develop characters better than the book. Take Petra for example. She was so well developed in the book, but the movie didn't build up her character as much. The book states, “"Relax," she said. "I'm not an officer."

Firstly, in my opinion I think it has more details than the movie. The book has the same characters but in the book there is three sisters. The book had details that felt so real. It described everything, the setting and the mood.

Many people, if asked what they would prefer, would prefer to read the book instead of watching the movie. It could be because the movie will always leave some parts from the story out. It seems like directors of the movie always leave out parts from the book, only incorporating the important parts from the story. Some also say that they prefer to leave the descriptions of things in the book up to their imagination. Also, when you are reading the book, you get to read the main characters point of view on things.

There are details left out of the movie that were in the book, the movie doesn 't demonstrate the ongoing theme of hunger as well as the book does, and the the movie does a better job with

In the end I found the film to be easier to understand vs the book as it was an easier and more straight forward plot line whereas in the book it seemed to jump around leading to constant flipping between stories and pages to get a better

The movie was still interesting, just not as suspenseful as the story in my opinion. Many books with movie adaptations are still considered better than the movie. No director could possibly get everything right, though they should still make an effort to somewhat-accurately represent the book and give it justice. Both the story and the film of The Birds are good, the story was better and more interesting in my

I enjoyed the movie better than the book. It included just the right amount of action scenes, description words, and details from the story. The story was amazing but I like seeing things more than reading them. I usually like the movies better than the book.

Many times books have a movie to go with it, but many times the movie is better than the book. Regarding the romance novel To All The Boys I’ve Loved Before, written by Jenny Han, the movie is far superior. The conflicts that were faced and overcome in the movie were better because they were stronger and more romantic. The character representation was better in the movie because of their personalities and the tone they used. Lastly, the plot change in the movie was better because it kept it more interesting.

At this point in time, the Jurassic Park series is one of the most well-known and prosperous film franchises of all time, with four movies currently in its line-up (and a fifth film, Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom premiering in cinema this June), various toy lines, several video games, among other pieces of media and merchandise inspired by the series. Nevertheless, the only reason why the Jurassic Park franchise is as prevalent and successful as it is today is due to the virtuoso mind of Michael Crichton, who wrote the 1990 novel adaption, prior to the world-famous film version that we all know and cherish to this day. The novel version of Jurassic Park initially began as a screenplay “about cloning a pterodactyl from fossil DNA” (http://www.michaelcrichton.com/jurassic-park/),