Michael Crichton Novel Readers

[nicscifi]

Does anyone here read M.C's novels and would like to discuss them?

 

[Dave]

Yes I do. There are other threads here nic where we have been:

I've actually never read his books....

& Timeline (book)

Did you know 'Timeline' is going to be a film too?

Which book do you like best?

'Timeline' is my favourite. 'Jurassic Park' is second. I did like 'Eaters of the Dead' but it's quite different.

 

[nicscifi]

ive read timeline and is surtainly one of my favourites, also read JP and the lost world.
havn't heard of "eaters of the dead" what is it about?

 

[Dave]

It was made into the film "The 13th Warrior" and based on the old 'Beowulf' story of Vikings. I didn't known what it was about either until I read the other thread.

 

[Smee]

my fav is the lost world.

though i've read-
congo-really gory and a little bit scary
Jp-exs
the Lw-groovy but the prion bit is inaccurate(i did a project on them)
and airframe- i loved the twist at the end-brillant!!

he is one of my FAV authors

 

[Kanazaka]

Here are my favorite Crichton novels, followed by some short comments

1. Jurassic Park--extensive but not intrusive info on the dinosaurs' biology and biochemistry, great action scenes with thrilling violence, compelling characters, gripping plot

2. Sphere--great overall concept, haunting imagery at several points, compelling characters (again), fast-paced and exciting plot, many memorable moments

3. Timeline--very good attention to historical detail, engrossing plot--including twists and various characters' schemings, compelling character relationships (not so much the characters themselves this time around), neato technology, intriguing mystery surrounding the identity of the traitor

And overall, I like Crichton's writing style, though at times it can seem generic. But I'm always impressed by his imagination, which seems to know no bounds given that each of his novels (except for The Lost World) explores different subject matter, though he often revisits the same themes--dangerous technology, greedy humans, a race against time, destructive psychoses, etc.

 

[biodroid]

Has anyone read Airframe? Is it any good, not sure what to think of it.

 

[Fried Egg]

I liked Sphere but Timeline was so dull. Compelling characters and plot did someone say? They really need to read more...

 

[Spade]

I thought Timeline was good until I read Connie Willis's Doomsday Book, and it put Crichton to shame. Jurrasic Park is fantastic, and Prey is a great example of a book that starts off great and ends up collapsing in on itself.

I've seen the films The 13th Warrior and Sphere. Both terrible.

 

[Riselka]

I've read a few of Crichton's books, and found the science in them fascinating. But IMHO his ability to write characters leaves a lot to be desired. For instance, as far as I'm concerned the dinosaurs could have chowed-down on every last one of the people in both Jurassic Park, and The Lost World, and I wouldn't have been the least bit upset. I've just never been able to care a whit about the characters in his novels.

On the other hand, the books written by Douglas Preston and Lincoln Child are full of characters that a person can really get emotional about. Their science may not be quite as well researched as Crichton's, but their ability to write compelling characters leaves Crichton's work in the dust.

 

[Quokka]

For me The Andomedra Strain is still one of his best but Sphere and Congo were ok as well though I never seem to like his endings much. It's been ages since I read Congo but the final scenes of both The Andomedra Strain and Sphere were both let downs and after a good start Prey completely lost it for me.

 

[Durandal]

I'm fairly certain the only Crichton books I've read are Jurassic Park and Sphere. I enjoyed them both, but for some reason never bothered to read anything else of his.

I especially liked Sphere -- some great moments in that one.

 

[scalem X]

I read and reread Prey. I never had the sort of collapsing feeling to be honest. It does seem to transform from a book into a movie, but I never hesitated while reading.

 

[Bikewer]

I enjoyed Andromeda Strain, and they translated it very well to film. Jurassic Park was well-done too.
Crichton appears to do very good research, but also seems to be involved in rather odd beliefs and fringe science.
I thought Timeline was especially weak; just didn't grab me at all.

 

[kcs_hiker]

as a science teacher, I find Crichton's rather apparent anti-science bias to be wearing...

I enjoyed Andromeda Strain and Jurassic Park...

 

[Brigitte]

For Biodroid, yes, I've read Airframe. Kind of a disappointment, in my opinion.

As for other M.C. books, I read The Lost World, Sphere, and Timeline. Honestly, I liked those books more when I was a little kid. Now (and it's maybe because I've already read them), I find them kind of hoaky. Still, for a new reader to his books, I would recommend giving them a try. And, definitely don't watch the movie versions first (especially Timeline, ugh!).

 

[kythe]

I've read Jurassic Park, Andromeda Strain, and Sphere. I have really liked all three. I think Crichton tells very good stories that are based in science just enough to allow the reader to suspend disbelief. I haven't thought about these books for a while, though I see other people here didn't like Timeline. What other books does he have that are worth reading?

I haven't liked the movie versions of his books nearly as much, but I've never been much for movies based on books anyway.

 

[Werthead]

I hate Michael Crichton with a passion. He represents all that is bad about modern 'blockbuster' publishing: a high concept which he totally fails to explore in depth, poor editing, and character development thrown to one side to make room for more action. All of his books are written with movie adaptions in mind. He is an author motivated by money and little else.

A shame as some of his earlier novels showed promise, but his recent work is beyond redemption. The Lost World, Timeline and particularly the horrific and nasty Next (in which Crichton casts one of his real-life critics as a child rapist just because he said he had some dodgy science in State of Fear) are almost unreadably poor novels. His use of science is often highly questionable and motivated by a need to be 'controversial'. Saying that SETI is a religion, that global warming doesn't exist and that dinosaurs were not killed by a meteor impact merely shows that he's a bit of an idiot, not that he's the maverick scientific commentator he pretends to be.

Crichton ranks alongside L. Ron Hubbard and Terry Goodkind as one of the worst authors I have ever read.

 

[scalem X]

Lol, you dislike him that much and then read three of his books.

I have only read Prey and I must say I liked it. Although it does turn into a movie when the end is near.

I do not share his view on global warming and I do agree that he exhibits all that is despicable about the American point of view, but I don't think it makes him a bad writer.

 

[Werthead]

No, I think his one-dimensional characters, predictable storylines and massive plot holes are what makes him a bad writer, and the fact he took someone who merely disagreed with his scientific point-of-view and turned him into a paedophile in one of his books makes him a bad person. How the hell he didn't get his ass sued off I don't know.

I tried to read four of his books and the three I mentioned above I could not finish as they were so bad (and I'm so stubborn I completed L. Ron Hubbard's Mission Earth series). Interestingly, the only one I finished and found enjoyable was Eaters of the Dead (which the enjoyable movie The 13th Warrior was based on), one of his earliest books.