Join us on Patreon! www.patreon.com/ManufacturingIntellect Donate Crypto! commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/868d67d2-1628-44a8-b8dc-8f9616d62259 Share this video!
The Lost World is a solid novel, and the movie is badly underrated. Never understood the hate it gets, it’s a fantastic film, by far the best of the Jurassic Park sequels.
I love The Lost World Jurassic Park movie when I was eight back in 2009. And after I read the novel of The Lost World 1995 during the pandemic, I absolutely love it even more, both movie and novel.
I seem to be one of those few people that likes the third movie way more than the second. But thats just the movies. The books are miles above every movie this franchise has (Not saying the first movie is bad just that the book is better)
Crichton is one of my favorite authors . The lost world novel is one lucky 1995 novel . I was just 3 months old in September of 1995 . Crichton said he never write a sequel but no no no he had one along . Crichton was right
He only wrote the sequel because he was pressured to by Spielberg and Universal. And after he finally published it, they didn't even use most of what was in the book for the movie.
Some reference from the book did happen in the film but not something that was important just yet and the second trilogy would be good if there's some reference from the 2 books and the story would be better. (if the locust was replace by the DX prions disease and the plot just like from the book)
As I recall this is somewhat debunked. He wrote the book of his own volition because he figured the movie would be made anyway and created sequences and set pieces specifically to be adapted to film. Michael was still ultimately disappointed in both the novel and Spielberg's version. And I tend to agree with Michael at least with the book. He never did sequels and you can see why that instinct was keen since it was a relatively lackluster novel. He did much better before and after with works that were inspired spontaneously.
The real answer to Rose's first question is that Spielberg encouraged Crighton to write a second book so that it could provide material for a sequel film.
Thomas Harris wanted to quit writing Hannibal Lector books and then the studio told him they were going to make a Hannibal prequel whether he wrote a prequel book or not, so he wrote a prequel book to be source material
@@nickthomas6827 Exactly Michael's motivation for The Lost World. No one could truly coerce him to do something, it had to be something he thought of or wanted to do for a reason.
As much as I enjoyed the book and Ian Malcolm's cynical commentary, I kind of wish he'd stayed dead. There's something tragic about the guy who constantly warned against the park and the activities of Hammond and his associates ultimately being killed by it.
![일상 속 기분 좋음 [Proto disco meme]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/DwmEIaZ7XGQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Join us on Patreon! www.patreon.com/ManufacturingIntellect
Donate Crypto! commerce.coinbase.com/checkout/868d67d2-1628-44a8-b8dc-8f9616d62259
Share this video!
The Lost World is a solid novel, and the movie is badly underrated. Never understood the hate it gets, it’s a fantastic film, by far the best of the Jurassic Park sequels.
I love The Lost World Jurassic Park movie when I was eight back in 2009. And after I read the novel of The Lost World 1995 during the pandemic, I absolutely love it even more, both movie and novel.
I choose The Lost World over Jurassic Park 3 ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!
It’s a terrible movie, it’s shocking the plot they chose for it. Book is way better but I need a re-read soon
Lol the movie is nowhere on par with the original.
I seem to be one of those few people that likes the third movie way more than the second. But thats just the movies. The books are miles above every movie this franchise has (Not saying the first movie is bad just that the book is better)
3:36 that “hmm” gets me every time. modest genuine guy who doesn’t credit himself… NO COME ON!!
Crichton is one of my favorite authors . The lost world novel is one lucky 1995 novel . I was just 3 months old in September of 1995 . Crichton said he never write a sequel but no no no he had one along . Crichton was right
These are very well upscaled and restored
Thank you! I'm working on reuploading these in 4K with even better restoration techniques.
@@ManufacturingIntellect please do this. Would love to see it in 4K
He only wrote the sequel because he was pressured to by Spielberg and Universal. And after he finally published it, they didn't even use most of what was in the book for the movie.
Some reference from the book did happen in the film but not something that was important just yet and the second trilogy would be good if there's some reference from the 2 books and the story would be better. (if the locust was replace by the DX prions disease and the plot just like from the book)
As I recall this is somewhat debunked. He wrote the book of his own volition because he figured the movie would be made anyway and created sequences and set pieces specifically to be adapted to film.
Michael was still ultimately disappointed in both the novel and Spielberg's version. And I tend to agree with Michael at least with the book. He never did sequels and you can see why that instinct was keen since it was a relatively lackluster novel. He did much better before and after with works that were inspired spontaneously.
Another good interview with Michael Crichton. Thanks David Vaipan.
The real answer to Rose's first question is that Spielberg encouraged Crighton to write a second book so that it could provide material for a sequel film.
And then hardly used any of the source material for the film 😆
Thomas Harris wanted to quit writing Hannibal Lector books and then the studio told him they were going to make a Hannibal prequel whether he wrote a prequel book or not, so he wrote a prequel book to be source material
Source?
@@nickthomas6827 Exactly Michael's motivation for The Lost World. No one could truly coerce him to do something, it had to be something he thought of or wanted to do for a reason.
I miss his genius.
As much as I enjoyed the book and Ian Malcolm's cynical commentary, I kind of wish he'd stayed dead. There's something tragic about the guy who constantly warned against the park and the activities of Hammond and his associates ultimately being killed by it.
Fascinating man
Doesn't write sequels, but wrote a long running TV show... i wonder how different that feels. 😅
He missed a trick not questioning the bosnia story.
1995 Bloor East is...
What do you mean?
Any more of the Crichton/Rose interviews?
Good Hackers Don't Tawdiq
And Then No One Works With Them
What a good comparison in intellectual power. Modern day Trump vs. CNN. How he lost will affect me in the afterlife.
a reckless thing to speak upon yourself