Man I loved that movie. But I love the book more, and that's the driving force behind this thread. The book was awesome. Without a doubt my favourite Michael Crichton novel (the sequel being my second favourite) and possibly my favourite work of science fiction ever. So why isn't the movie also a favourite?
OK, so it's asking a lot to expect a movie to live up to the standard set by the book. A few have done it, but most don't even come close, and while it's always entertaining to watch dinosaurs chase people around an island, Jurassic Park as a movie falls into the latter category. First off, it's showing its age. Nearly 20 years old, it really can't compare with CGI. Watching it now, close ups of the velociraptors are funny, not terrifying. It detracts from the movie, but it can't be helped I suppose, so lets not dwell on it any longer.
Setting age aside, the movie had a lot of other issues, particularly with mistakes. Errors in filmmaking are numerous. The worst offender to my mind being misspelling the names of stegosaurus and tyrannosaurus labels in the embryo freezer, but I'm sure you've got your own if you've watched it a few times. Basically, the proofreader (or whatever the filmmaking equivalent is) dropped the ball.
My biggest problem with the movie, though, was its deviation from the book. I hate it when movies do that. Sometimes it's unavoidable, and in time I will begrudgingly come to accept the alteration. A lot of the time it doesn't seem necessary at all, though, and it bugs me from the moment I notice it to...well right now. I'm still annoyed about it. I assume I'll still be annoyed later on, and after that, and so on, until it's either fixed or I'm dead and have other things to worry about.
Some of the changes, off the top of my head, that I really didn't like include: 1. Role reversal for Tim and Lex. Why? What was the reason for that? As far as I can tell it was simply gratuitous. 2. Romance between Sattler and Grant, and the flirting scene between Malcolm and Sattler. Just... why? The former wasn't played up enough to make it worthwhile including, and didn't exist at all in the book, and the latter was supposed to be Gennaro taking a minor interest in the shorts-wearing paleobotanist, and he didn't get any further than watching her help a sick stegosaurus. 3. Why is it a triceratops that's ill? It was a stegosaurus in the book, why change it? They're both highly recognizable dinosaurs, was there really a need to change it? 4. Why no Ed Regis? An additional character offers more opportunity for someone being killed by a dino. Surely that's a bonus? The list goes on.
Right. So far this has pretty much just been an opportunity for me to rant about one of my pet peeves, and if you've managed to read this far you're probably wondering if that's all this post is going to be. It's not. I have a point, an opportunity for you to get involved in the discussion. I'll get to it in a minute. I just wanted to insert this paragraph to thank you for reading this far.
Onto my point: Wouldn't it be great if they remade that movie? I'm not interested so much in whether it's likely or whether it would be profitable for those involved, but wouldn't it be great? Would you or would you not like to see a Jurassic Park made today, as a movie that kept to the book and took advantage of modern special effects etc.? Sure, we probably wouldn't get Jeff Goldblum or Sam Neill for their respective roles again, but we could have a movie that included the potential ecological disaster in Costa Rica, the perilous position InGen was in regarding investors, Ed Regis, the volatile and ruthless personality of John Hammond (why didn't he die at the end?), modern CGI dinosaurs that will put the puppets to shame (lets not get sentimental for the sake of it) and the benefit of decades of new dinosaur information*. I want to see Velociraptors and Tyrannosaurs with feathers that look terrifying. At the very least we could fix the errors.
I can't be the only person who'd like to see this. Have dinosaurs become too outdated for people to care? Am I just a living fossil from a time gone by (I couldn't resist ). Well, what you think?
*I don't care if it's inaccurate, the raptors need to be six foot tall. Make them Utahraptors if you need to, but two foot raptors are not scary. They're adorable.