What do you think?
Rate this book
Jurassic Park and Congo
TWO breathtaking adventure novels in one bumper volume, including Jurassic Park - a Steven Spielberg film. Jurassic park
An island off Costa Rica is to become the world's most famous theme park - a dinosaur preserve. A biotechnology company has succeeded in cloning 15 species Of dinosaur, then a rival genetics firm tries to steal frozen dinosaur embryos, and the nightmare begins. A cataclysmic global emergency will result if the race for scientific Supremacy is not halted. Congo
A 20th-century adventure that will plunge you into the heart of Africa with three intrepid explorers, in a desperate bid to find the fabulous diamonds of the Lost City of Zinj. There are encounters with the Kigani cannibals, flaming volcanoes, ferocious gorillas...and Amy. Cuddly, fluent in sign language, and fun to be with; she's the smartest gorilla you're ever likely to meet....
An island off Costa Rica is to become the world's most famous theme park - a dinosaur preserve. A biotechnology company has succeeded in cloning 15 species Of dinosaur, then a rival genetics firm tries to steal frozen dinosaur embryos, and the nightmare begins. A cataclysmic global emergency will result if the race for scientific Supremacy is not halted. Congo
A 20th-century adventure that will plunge you into the heart of Africa with three intrepid explorers, in a desperate bid to find the fabulous diamonds of the Lost City of Zinj. There are encounters with the Kigani cannibals, flaming volcanoes, ferocious gorillas...and Amy. Cuddly, fluent in sign language, and fun to be with; she's the smartest gorilla you're ever likely to meet....
640 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1993
25 people are currently reading
1110 people want to read
About the author
Michael Crichton
216 books20.2k followersJohn Michael Crichton was an American author, screenwriter, and filmmaker whose prolific career left an indelible mark on popular culture and speculative fiction. Raised on Long Island, he displayed a precocious talent for writing, publishing an article in The New York Times at sixteen. Initially enrolling at Harvard as an English major, he switched to biological anthropology after discovering a preference for scientific study over literature. He graduated summa cum laude and received a fellowship to lecture in anthropology at Cambridge. Later attending Harvard Medical School, he earned his MD but chose not to practice, dedicating himself to writing instead. His medical background profoundly influenced his novels, providing authentic scientific and technical underpinnings that became a hallmark of his work. Crichton began writing under pseudonyms, producing suspenseful thrillers as John Lange, including Odds On, Scratch One, and Easy Go, and as Jeffrey Hudson with A Case of Need, earning him an Edgar Award. His first major success under his own name, The Andromeda Strain, established his signature blend of scientific authenticity, tension, and exploration of technological hazards, leading to its film adaptation. Over his career, he wrote 25 novels, including The Terminal Man, The Great Train Robbery, Congo, Sphere, Jurassic Park, Rising Sun, Disclosure, The Lost World, Airframe, Timeline, Prey, State of Fear, and Next, several adapted into major films, with four additional works published posthumously. Crichton also made significant contributions to film and television. He wrote and directed Westworld, pioneering the use of 2D computer-generated imagery, and later directed Coma, The First Great Train Robbery, Looker, and Runaway. He created the influential medical drama ER, which he executive produced and developed with Steven Spielberg, achieving critical and commercial success. Many of his novels, most famously Jurassic Park and its sequel The Lost World, became cultural phenomena, combining imaginative adventure with grounded scientific speculation, often exploring humanity’s overreach in genetics, biotechnology, and complex systems. His literary style was notable for integrating meticulous scientific detail, suspense, and moral cautionary themes. His works frequently addressed the failure of complex systems—biological, technological, or organizational—demonstrating the unpredictable consequences of human hubris. Employing techniques such as first-person narratives, false documents, fictionalized scientific reports, and assembling expert teams to tackle crises, Crichton created immersive stories appealing to both popular and scholarly audiences. His exploration of genetics, paleontology, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence revealed both fascination and caution about humanity’s technological ambitions, while his early non-fiction, such as Five Patients and Electronic Life, reflected his scientific insight and forward-thinking approach to computers and programming. Standing 6 feet 9 inches tall, Crichton experienced social isolation in adolescence and later pursued meditation and consultations with psychics, cultivating a lifelong interest in human consciousness and alternative experiences. A workaholic, he approached writing with disciplined ritualistic methodology, often retreating entirely to complete a novel in six or seven weeks. He was married five times, fathered two children, and maintained a wide-ranging collection of 20th-century American art. Crichton engaged in political and scientific discourse, particularly regarding global warming, where he was an outspoken skeptic and testified before the U.S. Senate. He contributed significantly to the discussion of intellectual property, technology, and environmental policy, coining concepts such as the Gell-Mann amnesia effect. Throughout his life, he received numerous awards, including Edgar Awards, a Peabody Award for ER, an Aca
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 133 reviews
Read
March 19, 2007I'm going to confess something really dorky and a bit embarassing about myself.
When I was in Jr. High I loved Michael Crichton and John Grisham. LOVED them. At the time, I had read almost all of their books.
Imagine me, twelve years old, huge coke-bottle glasses, puff-paint scrunchie, catholic school uniform, pulling The Andromeda Strain out of my desk during silent reading.
Are you kidding me?
I even did an oral book report in seventh grade on The Client. My teacher thought it was inappropriate, little girls should not be reading those kinds of books.
And why not?
She claimed those books are too violent, but I really think it's because I plead the fifth when asked about my involvment in a certain note passing incident.
She was not amused.
When I was in Jr. High I loved Michael Crichton and John Grisham. LOVED them. At the time, I had read almost all of their books.
Imagine me, twelve years old, huge coke-bottle glasses, puff-paint scrunchie, catholic school uniform, pulling The Andromeda Strain out of my desk during silent reading.
Are you kidding me?
I even did an oral book report in seventh grade on The Client. My teacher thought it was inappropriate, little girls should not be reading those kinds of books.
And why not?
She claimed those books are too violent, but I really think it's because I plead the fifth when asked about my involvment in a certain note passing incident.
She was not amused.
February 5, 2008
I read this book a kerzillion times when I was 12, not only because a plot that involves dinosaurs coming to life is tewtally OFF DA CHAIN, but also because it excited me to read all the curse words.
Great book - it is what it is, a straight-up thriller, and it definitely delivers. Suspense, gore, mad science, and characters that are well-drawn enough to make you care whether or not they make it out alive.
Also, I think this is the first book I ever read in which people get all out DEVOURED. Like Scott Smith's "The Ruins," this book doesn't spare details on human suffering, which is excellent for the dark souls out there who smile at the thought of a T-Rex causing some major carnage during rush hour traffic.
Garrrrr! Rooooarrrr!!! I highly recommend this book to socially-awkward middle schoolers, and anyone out there looking for a quick, fun, and blood-soaked read.
Great book - it is what it is, a straight-up thriller, and it definitely delivers. Suspense, gore, mad science, and characters that are well-drawn enough to make you care whether or not they make it out alive.
Also, I think this is the first book I ever read in which people get all out DEVOURED. Like Scott Smith's "The Ruins," this book doesn't spare details on human suffering, which is excellent for the dark souls out there who smile at the thought of a T-Rex causing some major carnage during rush hour traffic.
Garrrrr! Rooooarrrr!!! I highly recommend this book to socially-awkward middle schoolers, and anyone out there looking for a quick, fun, and blood-soaked read.
January 26, 2013
How does a book with a concept that seems to be perfectly matched for my taste fail to garner more than 3 stars? From the get-go, this book in particular was at a big disadvantage since I have seen the iconic movie that was made from it more than 20 times, so I invariably compare it to the movie. Sadly, this is one of the cases where the movie is superior to the book. The movie is exactly like this book, but Spielberg smartly cut out the fat that makes this pulp sci-fi not as appetizing as it should be.
Is it unfair of me to expect characters with at least a little depth from this book? The only slightly interesting character, Ian Malcolm, about half way through the book became an obvious avatar for Crichton himself, since whenever he talked from that point on it was to spew Crichton's anti-science propaganda. The basic concept of the book illustrates the dangers of unregulated science, why does he need to repeatedly have Malcolm tell me "science bad, science bad, SCIENCE BAD!"? I hate it when books are trying to indoctrinate me. Then there are the characters who are just plain annoying, like the 8 year old girl Lex. I teach 8 year old children, and I can tell you none of them are as stupid as her. Oh, her making noise attracted the T-rex and all of them almost died? Makes sense she refuses to listen to Dr. Grant when he tells her to be quiet later. I get the author wanted to use the children-in-danger trope, but when I read books I don't want annoying useless children in them. Hammond was a fairly annoying, stupid character as well, but since he wasn't featured nearly as much as Lex it didn't bother me.
I like that he borrows from so many great sources from the past, I really like the ideas of how InGen cloned the dinosaurs (even though upon close scrutiny they don't hold up, but fuck it, this is Jurassic Park!), and I like the thoughtfulness Crichton put into the layout of the park. This could have been a brilliant book, but sloppy writing and characters ruined it.
Is it unfair of me to expect characters with at least a little depth from this book? The only slightly interesting character, Ian Malcolm, about half way through the book became an obvious avatar for Crichton himself, since whenever he talked from that point on it was to spew Crichton's anti-science propaganda. The basic concept of the book illustrates the dangers of unregulated science, why does he need to repeatedly have Malcolm tell me "science bad, science bad, SCIENCE BAD!"? I hate it when books are trying to indoctrinate me. Then there are the characters who are just plain annoying, like the 8 year old girl Lex. I teach 8 year old children, and I can tell you none of them are as stupid as her. Oh, her making noise attracted the T-rex and all of them almost died? Makes sense she refuses to listen to Dr. Grant when he tells her to be quiet later. I get the author wanted to use the children-in-danger trope, but when I read books I don't want annoying useless children in them. Hammond was a fairly annoying, stupid character as well, but since he wasn't featured nearly as much as Lex it didn't bother me.
I like that he borrows from so many great sources from the past, I really like the ideas of how InGen cloned the dinosaurs (even though upon close scrutiny they don't hold up, but fuck it, this is Jurassic Park!), and I like the thoughtfulness Crichton put into the layout of the park. This could have been a brilliant book, but sloppy writing and characters ruined it.
February 9, 2017
Michael Crichton’s Jurassic Park is Actually Science Porn Disguised as Dinosaur Fiction and Oh. So. Good!
So. Much. Fun.
Saying that about a book where more than half the characters get eaten by prehistoric predators brought back to life through genetic engineering might seem weird. But then, I have never kept my love for dinosaurs a secret!
When I first received the book from Online Books Outlet, I wasn’t expecting much from it. However, a cursory glance later, I had spotted graphs in it. They intrigued the scientist in me and I knew that I wouldn’t be waiting too long to read it.
Wanting to know if the book had inspired the movie or if it was the other way round, I looked up the date of publication of the book to compare it with the movie release and found out they were both released in the same year. While searching, I came across 20 Things You Might Have Not Known About Jurassic Park on Mentalfloss. Inserting the text from that article below:
Spielberg found out about Jurassic Park while working on ER.
When director Steven Spielberg and author Michael Crichton were working on a screenplay that would eventually become the television series ER, Spielberg asked the writer about the plans for his next book. Crichton told him about Jurassic Park, and Spielberg immediately tapped Universal to buy the film rights in May 1990—before the book was even published. He was so excited that he began storyboarding scenes from the book, even though there was no screenplay written yet.
Mystery solved, I started reading the book. There are quite a few differences between the book and the movie as this article, Jurassic Park: The Book and the Movie’s Differences, will tell you. Comparing the two made me realize that those changes had made for a more entertaining movie!
But the book wasn’t any less fun. Here are some quotes that I marked to share:
Dr. Ellie Sattler who was a paleobotanist and one of my favorite characters from the book. She was gutsy and didn’t take any shit from anybody.
From the cartoon that was never made
When Ellie shook hands, Gennaro said in surprise, “You’re a woman.”
“These things happen,” she said
A cuter version by Liara K. Crane
And I loved how passionate she was about plants. I’d still have loved a bit more detail regarding prehistoric flora. If I remember correctly, there was some bit about a protocarpus tree and the fern, Serenna veriformans.
People were so naïve about plants, Ellie thought. They just chose plants for appearance, as they would choose a picture for the wall. It never occurred to them that plants were actually living things, busily performing all the living functions of respiration, ingestion, excretion, reproduction—and defense.
Dr. Alan Grant, my other favorite from the book. Unlike the guy from the movie, this Grant liked kids. I still loved how natural it seemed to him to take it on himself to save the kids. They weren’t his responsibility, yet he didn’t think twice before saving their lives.
osd-vont‘s version
Grant liked kids—it was impossible not to like any group so openly enthusiastic about dinosaurs… Grant also suspected that was why even young children learned the names of dinosaurs. It never failed to amaze him when a three-year-old shrieked: “Stegosaurus!”
Dr. Ian Malcolm was much less fun in the book than in the movie. He was long winded and had a lot to say, which often got boring.
This is how he was described in the book:
And finally, as if to emphasize their emergence from academia into the world, they dressed and spoke with what one senior mathematician called “a deplorable excess of personality.” In fact, they often behaved like rock stars.
Tim was actually the older sibling in the book.
His love for dinosaurs is evident from this scene from the book:
His father had looked at a skeleton and said, “That’s a big one.”
Tim had said, “No, Dad, that’s a medium-size one, a camptosaurus.”
“Oh, I don’t know. Looks pretty big to me.”
“It’s not even full-grown, Dad.”
His father squinted at the skeleton. “What is it, Jurassic?”
“Jeez. No. Cretaceous.”
“Cretaceous? What’s the difference between Cretaceous and Jurassic?”
“Only about a hundred million years,” Tim said.
“Cretaceous is older?”
“No, Dad, Jurassic is older.”
“Well,” his father said, stepping back, “it looks pretty damn big to me.”
There were some sciency bits that I really loved. Here are some of my very favorite ones:
“Actually, dinosaur DNA is somewhat easier to extract by this process than mammalian DNA. The reason is that mammalian red cells have no nuclei, and thus no DNA in their red cells. To clone a mammal, you must find a white cell, which is much rarer than red cells. But dinosaurs had nucleated red cells, as do modern birds. It is one of the many indications we have that dinosaurs aren’t really reptiles at all. They are big leathery birds.”
“Reptile eggs contain large amounts of yolk but no water at all. The embryos must extract water from the surrounding environment.”
“Many birds and crocodiles swallowed small stones, which collected in a muscular pouch in the digestive tract, called the gizzard. Squeezed by the muscles of the gizzard, the stones helped crush tough plant food before it reached the stomach, and thus aided digestion. Some scientists thought dinosaurs also had gizzard stones.”
You can see the amount of research that the author has put into the book and I enjoyed it immensely!
Another thing that I loved about this book was how nature — and dinosaurs — found ways around Wu’s precautionary measures. This:
“We don’t want them to survive in the wild. So I’ve made them lysine dependent. I inserted a gene that makes a single faulty enzyme in protein metabolism. As a result, the animals cannot manufacture the amino acid lysine.”
was countered by escaped velociraptors feeding on lysine-rich sources i.e. agama beans soy, and chickens.
Then, there was:
“All the animals in Jurassic Park are female,” Wu said, with a pleased smile.”
Which the dinos took care of through gender transition. I mean, how smart are they?!
Okay then, I will stop sounding so surprised!
By the way, the kitchen scene was as scary in the book as it had been in the movie!
Just cuz:
I am going to end this review with a different version of Jurassic Park i.e. one that includes kittens!
So. Much. Fun.
Saying that about a book where more than half the characters get eaten by prehistoric predators brought back to life through genetic engineering might seem weird. But then, I have never kept my love for dinosaurs a secret!
When I first received the book from Online Books Outlet, I wasn’t expecting much from it. However, a cursory glance later, I had spotted graphs in it. They intrigued the scientist in me and I knew that I wouldn’t be waiting too long to read it.
Wanting to know if the book had inspired the movie or if it was the other way round, I looked up the date of publication of the book to compare it with the movie release and found out they were both released in the same year. While searching, I came across 20 Things You Might Have Not Known About Jurassic Park on Mentalfloss. Inserting the text from that article below:
Spielberg found out about Jurassic Park while working on ER.
When director Steven Spielberg and author Michael Crichton were working on a screenplay that would eventually become the television series ER, Spielberg asked the writer about the plans for his next book. Crichton told him about Jurassic Park, and Spielberg immediately tapped Universal to buy the film rights in May 1990—before the book was even published. He was so excited that he began storyboarding scenes from the book, even though there was no screenplay written yet.
Mystery solved, I started reading the book. There are quite a few differences between the book and the movie as this article, Jurassic Park: The Book and the Movie’s Differences, will tell you. Comparing the two made me realize that those changes had made for a more entertaining movie!
But the book wasn’t any less fun. Here are some quotes that I marked to share:
Dr. Ellie Sattler who was a paleobotanist and one of my favorite characters from the book. She was gutsy and didn’t take any shit from anybody.
From the cartoon that was never made
When Ellie shook hands, Gennaro said in surprise, “You’re a woman.”
“These things happen,” she said
A cuter version by Liara K. Crane
And I loved how passionate she was about plants. I’d still have loved a bit more detail regarding prehistoric flora. If I remember correctly, there was some bit about a protocarpus tree and the fern, Serenna veriformans.
People were so naïve about plants, Ellie thought. They just chose plants for appearance, as they would choose a picture for the wall. It never occurred to them that plants were actually living things, busily performing all the living functions of respiration, ingestion, excretion, reproduction—and defense.
Dr. Alan Grant, my other favorite from the book. Unlike the guy from the movie, this Grant liked kids. I still loved how natural it seemed to him to take it on himself to save the kids. They weren’t his responsibility, yet he didn’t think twice before saving their lives.
osd-vont‘s version
Grant liked kids—it was impossible not to like any group so openly enthusiastic about dinosaurs… Grant also suspected that was why even young children learned the names of dinosaurs. It never failed to amaze him when a three-year-old shrieked: “Stegosaurus!”
Dr. Ian Malcolm was much less fun in the book than in the movie. He was long winded and had a lot to say, which often got boring.
This is how he was described in the book:
And finally, as if to emphasize their emergence from academia into the world, they dressed and spoke with what one senior mathematician called “a deplorable excess of personality.” In fact, they often behaved like rock stars.
Tim was actually the older sibling in the book.
His love for dinosaurs is evident from this scene from the book:
His father had looked at a skeleton and said, “That’s a big one.”
Tim had said, “No, Dad, that’s a medium-size one, a camptosaurus.”
“Oh, I don’t know. Looks pretty big to me.”
“It’s not even full-grown, Dad.”
His father squinted at the skeleton. “What is it, Jurassic?”
“Jeez. No. Cretaceous.”
“Cretaceous? What’s the difference between Cretaceous and Jurassic?”
“Only about a hundred million years,” Tim said.
“Cretaceous is older?”
“No, Dad, Jurassic is older.”
“Well,” his father said, stepping back, “it looks pretty damn big to me.”
There were some sciency bits that I really loved. Here are some of my very favorite ones:
“Actually, dinosaur DNA is somewhat easier to extract by this process than mammalian DNA. The reason is that mammalian red cells have no nuclei, and thus no DNA in their red cells. To clone a mammal, you must find a white cell, which is much rarer than red cells. But dinosaurs had nucleated red cells, as do modern birds. It is one of the many indications we have that dinosaurs aren’t really reptiles at all. They are big leathery birds.”
“Reptile eggs contain large amounts of yolk but no water at all. The embryos must extract water from the surrounding environment.”
“Many birds and crocodiles swallowed small stones, which collected in a muscular pouch in the digestive tract, called the gizzard. Squeezed by the muscles of the gizzard, the stones helped crush tough plant food before it reached the stomach, and thus aided digestion. Some scientists thought dinosaurs also had gizzard stones.”
You can see the amount of research that the author has put into the book and I enjoyed it immensely!
Another thing that I loved about this book was how nature — and dinosaurs — found ways around Wu’s precautionary measures. This:
“We don’t want them to survive in the wild. So I’ve made them lysine dependent. I inserted a gene that makes a single faulty enzyme in protein metabolism. As a result, the animals cannot manufacture the amino acid lysine.”
was countered by escaped velociraptors feeding on lysine-rich sources i.e. agama beans soy, and chickens.
Then, there was:
“All the animals in Jurassic Park are female,” Wu said, with a pleased smile.”
Which the dinos took care of through gender transition. I mean, how smart are they?!
Okay then, I will stop sounding so surprised!
By the way, the kitchen scene was as scary in the book as it had been in the movie!
Just cuz:
I am going to end this review with a different version of Jurassic Park i.e. one that includes kittens!
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
June 26, 2023
Where imagination ends is where life…begins. No matter it’s ingenuity, life, always finds a way, no matter what is done to suppress it.
October 1, 2011
I enjoyed it, but not as much as the movie. The characters were very flat and there were no real arcs for them. Many were underutilized, like Ellie Sattler. It was almost as though she was there because there had to be a woman, but once everything started happening, she was sidelined. Lex, the little girl, was annoying and contributed nothing but constant whining and nay-saying; this may be realistic, but it doesn't make for fun reading. Ian Malcolm was similar; he didn't do much of anything, just kept talking about how he saw it coming. We're supposed to jeer Hammond, but after a while I found myself echoing his wish for Malcolm to just shut the hell up already. The book is much more of a horror story than the movie, which is more of an adventure (albeit with elements of horror). While I prefer the awe and majesty of the movie, it was interesting to see a more fearful take on the dinosaurs. Something I really appreciated was the way the science was explained; it was very easy for a layman (like myself) to understand without being dumbed down. The theme of big business corrupting science is a very interesting and important one, and one to which Crichton returned in Timeline (and possibly others, but these are the only two I've read). Overall, it's worth a read. The themes and the science are interesting, it's very breezy and it's never boring, but more care should've been given to the characters.
June 22, 2023
Jurassic park - My favorite book from one of my favorite authors. Crichton pretty much coined the term "techno thriller" and Jurassic park is the prefect example of this kind of book. Everyone has seen the movie, and I'm here to tell you the book is every bit as good, if not better. The novel has more of a horror feel to it and just felt more suspenseful and creepy than the movies did. Everything about this book is perfect in every way and I will never stop recommending it to everyone who likes Michael Crichton, sci-fi thrillers, or anything to do with dinosaurs! Easy 5/5 stars!
Congo - One of my favorite Crichton novels! Right up there with Jurassic Park. Written during Crichton's "hot streak", this takes place in the jungles of Africa. Plenty of action and technology (similar to Jurassic Park) making this one of his most beloved "techno-thrillers". I loved the setting, the adventure feel to the novel, and everything to do with the talking gorilla Amy:) If you like Crichton or Sci-Fi adventure books, chances are this one will be right up your alley. 5/5 stars!
Congo - One of my favorite Crichton novels! Right up there with Jurassic Park. Written during Crichton's "hot streak", this takes place in the jungles of Africa. Plenty of action and technology (similar to Jurassic Park) making this one of his most beloved "techno-thrillers". I loved the setting, the adventure feel to the novel, and everything to do with the talking gorilla Amy:) If you like Crichton or Sci-Fi adventure books, chances are this one will be right up your alley. 5/5 stars!
March 25, 2008
When I read Jurassic Park, I was hooked within, I think, five pages. It is just an amazing book. I watched the movie afterwards and, by reading the book before, so many things became clear, even though I've seen the movie about 10 times. Things that were NOT in the book were that the girl Lex, was a complete coward, worse than J. Bruce Ismay; while in the movie she was smart and used the computers to reboot the park. In the book, Timmy did that, and he was amazing in the book. He was quite the little hero. Otherwise, the book is an amazing read, you can learn so much from that book about "new" sciences (though there is a good amount of pseudo-mathematics). Please read this book. It'll blow your mind like being shot in the head with a .50 cal HE sniper round.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
April 3, 2008
I actually read both of these books separately. Both are written by Michael Crichton. Both are pieces of science fiction and contain quite a lot of action. Jurassic Park was quite interesting and it talks about the chaos that accompanies the resurrection of the dinosaurs. Congo is about a band of explorers who have ventured into the Congo jungle. They are continuously attacked by a band of gorilla-like creatures that are very smart and very brutal.
August 11, 2010
Actually read this for the first time in high school, senior year, as a part of the Bio Honors course I was taking. I thought the movie was pretty lame, so was not looking forward to reading the book. To my astonishment, I absolutely fell in love with it, and Michael Crichton, and re-read it and The Lost World when I get the opportunity. Very good read even if, like me, you dont have much of an imagination.
April 8, 2022
This duo was everything I wanted and more. I’m pretty sure we all know the plot to Jurassic Park, growing up the films were an absolute favourite of mine.
I truly enjoyed Crichton’s writing and loved being introduced to Congo. I’ve actually never watched the film, for those that haven’t like me it’s an epic adventure into The Congo in search for the diamonds from The Lost City of Zinj. We are introduced to Amy a Gorilla who was rescued as a baby after her mother was killed and ended up in the care of a scientist who has used her for research. I loved Amy, she can understand English and can communicate in American Sign Language. I was really sad to learn she liked smoking cigarettes and was partial to some alcohol every now and again though.
I loved all the technical parts in both books, it really was a nerds paradise and I was in my element! Hooray for short chapters too, I lost track of how many times I said one more chapter. I certainly need to have words with myself, I should have read this years ago.
I truly enjoyed Crichton’s writing and loved being introduced to Congo. I’ve actually never watched the film, for those that haven’t like me it’s an epic adventure into The Congo in search for the diamonds from The Lost City of Zinj. We are introduced to Amy a Gorilla who was rescued as a baby after her mother was killed and ended up in the care of a scientist who has used her for research. I loved Amy, she can understand English and can communicate in American Sign Language. I was really sad to learn she liked smoking cigarettes and was partial to some alcohol every now and again though.
I loved all the technical parts in both books, it really was a nerds paradise and I was in my element! Hooray for short chapters too, I lost track of how many times I said one more chapter. I certainly need to have words with myself, I should have read this years ago.
August 10, 2025
In regards to Jurassic park : read it in my teenage years the first time, loved it. Then listened to the audiobook narrated by Scott brick over a couple long drives and that was amazing. Packed with action, suspense and horror truly an amazing read! The movie definitely deviates from the book in many ways!
In regards to Congo : have tried to start it on multiple occasions but it has unfortunately for whatever reason not grabbed me.. must be missing something
In regards to Congo : have tried to start it on multiple occasions but it has unfortunately for whatever reason not grabbed me.. must be missing something
November 19, 2022
The movie is a totally different creature in comparison to the book which is interesting. In reading you can see where they built their script which is quite fun in itself. The only thing keeping these books from being 5 stars is a few cringe descriptions of the women in both books which have little to no bearing on the story
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
February 8, 2018
Jurassic Park
rating : 3.5/5
terlalu banyak penjelasan ilmiah sampe bosen dan ku skip halaman yang bikin bosen.
Congo
rating : 4/5
ini menurutku lebih seru petualangannya. interaksi amy dan peter sangat menggemaskan. kota zinj yg hilang bikin penasaran. sip deh
rating : 3.5/5
terlalu banyak penjelasan ilmiah sampe bosen dan ku skip halaman yang bikin bosen.
Congo
rating : 4/5
ini menurutku lebih seru petualangannya. interaksi amy dan peter sangat menggemaskan. kota zinj yg hilang bikin penasaran. sip deh
March 25, 2020
So good, very accurate and a lot better than the movie- everything from how dna is transcribed etc a lot of research was clearly done before the book was written the film does not do it justice at all.
September 15, 2017
Great book,and lots of action,the perfect book for a person like me.I would recomend this book to people who are looking a book with lots of fantasy and really intense adventure.
April 25, 2018
Love Jurassic park.
January 13, 2020
Loved Jurassic Park having loved all of the films it was interesting to note the differences in the story. Congo was a little hard going at times, the main premise of the story was good though.
July 30, 2022
5⭐️ Jurassic Park
2⭐️ Congo
2⭐️ Congo
September 12, 2022
Insomma…non un libro che consiglierei a meno che non siate persone amanti dei classici, sci-fi e i dinosauri in generale. Carino ma nulla di più. :/
November 17, 2022
I absolutely loved Jurassic park, but I wasn’t into Congo.
January 7, 2024
Michael Crichton books are by far much better than the film version.
May 10, 2025
ABSOLUTE CINEMA
October 24, 2009
Unless you've been living under a rock for the last 20 or so years, you already know the premise of Jurassic Park. To quote one of my favorite lines from the movie: "God creates dinosaurs. God destroys dinosaurs. God creates man. Man destroys God. Man creates dinosaurs. Dinosaurs eat man. Woman inherits the earth." Well, there you have it in a nutshell: a wealthy eccentric named John Hammond buys an island in Costa Rica and turns it into Jurassic Park - a living biological preserve for genetically engineered dinosaurs.
The thing you need to know about the book is that it is quite different from the movie on a number of points. I will not spoil it for you here, but suffice it to say that I have seen the movie numerous times, and I never knew what was coming next in the book. It had me reading quickly to get to the end and see how the characters were going to get out of trouble. In my opinion, the book kicks the movie's a**.
Jurassic Park was captivating and completely engrossing from the very first chapter. Michael Crichton sure knew how to create tension and suspense in his novels! I was on the edge of my seat, racing toward the finish line and hoping none of my favorite characters ended up on the dino-diet. It was a fast-paced read and almost impossible for me to put down.
Jurassic Park is simply thrilling - and quite a bit darker than it's movie adaptation. Crichton manages to give the reader all of the scientific details without bogging down the story or giving up even an ounce of the creepy suspense that builds from the first pages. A phenomenal "techno-thriller," Jurassic Park and Michael Crichton deserve every bit of accolade they have received. I am deeply impressed, and will definitely be recommending this book to others.
Also recommended:
Check out my review of Robert T. Bakker's Raptor Red
The thing you need to know about the book is that it is quite different from the movie on a number of points. I will not spoil it for you here, but suffice it to say that I have seen the movie numerous times, and I never knew what was coming next in the book. It had me reading quickly to get to the end and see how the characters were going to get out of trouble. In my opinion, the book kicks the movie's a**.
Jurassic Park was captivating and completely engrossing from the very first chapter. Michael Crichton sure knew how to create tension and suspense in his novels! I was on the edge of my seat, racing toward the finish line and hoping none of my favorite characters ended up on the dino-diet. It was a fast-paced read and almost impossible for me to put down.
Jurassic Park is simply thrilling - and quite a bit darker than it's movie adaptation. Crichton manages to give the reader all of the scientific details without bogging down the story or giving up even an ounce of the creepy suspense that builds from the first pages. A phenomenal "techno-thriller," Jurassic Park and Michael Crichton deserve every bit of accolade they have received. I am deeply impressed, and will definitely be recommending this book to others.
Also recommended:
Check out my review of Robert T. Bakker's Raptor Red
December 16, 2007
Author : Michael Chricton
Genre : Sci - Fi, Action, adventure
Melihat dinosaurus adalah keinginan semua orang di masa kecil. Hidup bersama dinosaurus adalah impian semua orang di semua umur. Apa yang terjadi jika semua itu menjadi kenyataan ?
InGen Corp yang dipimpin John Hammond berhasil menemukan gen dinosaurus yang terdapat pada fosil nyamuk. Dengan kecanggihan teknologi yang dimiiiki perusahaan, mereka merekayasa gen tersebut hingga melahirkan kehidupan hewan yang telah punah jutaan tahun yang lalu. Ambisi John berikutnya adalah membuat kebun binatang dinosaurus sekaligus resort rekreasi di sebuah pulau bernama "Jurassic Park".
Untuk itu ia mengundang beberapa ahli dan pakar dari berbagai bidang seperti paleontologi, ahli matematika dan botani untuk menguji kelayakan taman tersebut.
Pada awal kedatangannya, semua berjalan lancar dan menakjubkan, namun masalah mulai terjadi seiring datang badai. Salah satu staf taman, Dennis Nedry berusaha mencuri sample gen dinosarus untuk kemudian dijual pada seorang penadah di kota. Ia mematikan seluruh listrik pagar pengaman kandang sehingga seluruh dinosaurus lepas, termasuk T-Rex dan Raptor, carnivora terbuas sepanjang sejarah. Satu per satu korban berjatuhan dan harapan untuk selamat semakin menipis. Bagaimana, para ahli tersebut keluar dari pulau ini?
My Comment
Jurassic Park adalah satu dari sedikit novel yang telah kubaca sampai habis. Penuturan cerita yang modern, dapat tergambar dengan jelas dalam pikiran meskipun adegan itu rumit. Yang kukagumi adalah unsur science-nya yang sangat kuat menambah wawasanku tentang paleontologi. Walaupun begitu, novel ini memiliki unsur kekerasan dan kesadisan yang mungkin akan mengganggu pembaca.
Tapi itulah yang kusuka ^_^
Genre : Sci - Fi, Action, adventure
Melihat dinosaurus adalah keinginan semua orang di masa kecil. Hidup bersama dinosaurus adalah impian semua orang di semua umur. Apa yang terjadi jika semua itu menjadi kenyataan ?
InGen Corp yang dipimpin John Hammond berhasil menemukan gen dinosaurus yang terdapat pada fosil nyamuk. Dengan kecanggihan teknologi yang dimiiiki perusahaan, mereka merekayasa gen tersebut hingga melahirkan kehidupan hewan yang telah punah jutaan tahun yang lalu. Ambisi John berikutnya adalah membuat kebun binatang dinosaurus sekaligus resort rekreasi di sebuah pulau bernama "Jurassic Park".
Untuk itu ia mengundang beberapa ahli dan pakar dari berbagai bidang seperti paleontologi, ahli matematika dan botani untuk menguji kelayakan taman tersebut.
Pada awal kedatangannya, semua berjalan lancar dan menakjubkan, namun masalah mulai terjadi seiring datang badai. Salah satu staf taman, Dennis Nedry berusaha mencuri sample gen dinosarus untuk kemudian dijual pada seorang penadah di kota. Ia mematikan seluruh listrik pagar pengaman kandang sehingga seluruh dinosaurus lepas, termasuk T-Rex dan Raptor, carnivora terbuas sepanjang sejarah. Satu per satu korban berjatuhan dan harapan untuk selamat semakin menipis. Bagaimana, para ahli tersebut keluar dari pulau ini?
My Comment
Jurassic Park adalah satu dari sedikit novel yang telah kubaca sampai habis. Penuturan cerita yang modern, dapat tergambar dengan jelas dalam pikiran meskipun adegan itu rumit. Yang kukagumi adalah unsur science-nya yang sangat kuat menambah wawasanku tentang paleontologi. Walaupun begitu, novel ini memiliki unsur kekerasan dan kesadisan yang mungkin akan mengganggu pembaca.
Tapi itulah yang kusuka ^_^
March 1, 2016
I had seen the movie many years ago, but I still remember it like if it was yesterday, I really loved it, and I was stunned to see how different the book is. I liked both a lot, but this is one of the rare cases where a movie wins the battle. In the movie I got the feeling that the dinosaurs weren't treated as the monsters they're treated in the book. I mean people are in danger, and obviously it’s a “to kill or be killed” situation, but I think they were more understanding towards the animal (in this case, dinosaur) condition. As of example, in the movie we see that they empathize with the dinosaurs – I can recall them worrying about a sick dinosaur -, while in the book even the dinosaur specialist, aside his amazement, doesn’t seem to show a bit of repentance towards the whole situation and the dinosaurs fate…
trad.: Vi o filme há muitos anos atrás, mas ainda me lembro dele como se fosse ontem, adorei-o mesmo, e fiquei espantado com quão diferente o livro é. Eu gostei mesmo de ambos, mas este é um dos raros casos em que o filme vence a batalha. No filme fico com a impressão que os dinossauros não são tratados como os monstros que são tratados no livro. Entendo que as pessoas estejam em perigo, e que seja uma situação óbvia de “matar ou ser morto”, mas eu penso que eram mais compreensíveis em relação à condição animal (neste caso, de dinossauro). Um exemplo, no filme vemos que sentem empatia pelos dinossauros – recordo-me perfeitamente de como ficaram preocupados por ver um dinossauro doente -, enquanto que no livro mesmo o especialista em dinossauros, aparte o seu espanto, não mostra um pouco de arrependimento perante toda a situação e o destino dos dinossauros…
trad.: Vi o filme há muitos anos atrás, mas ainda me lembro dele como se fosse ontem, adorei-o mesmo, e fiquei espantado com quão diferente o livro é. Eu gostei mesmo de ambos, mas este é um dos raros casos em que o filme vence a batalha. No filme fico com a impressão que os dinossauros não são tratados como os monstros que são tratados no livro. Entendo que as pessoas estejam em perigo, e que seja uma situação óbvia de “matar ou ser morto”, mas eu penso que eram mais compreensíveis em relação à condição animal (neste caso, de dinossauro). Um exemplo, no filme vemos que sentem empatia pelos dinossauros – recordo-me perfeitamente de como ficaram preocupados por ver um dinossauro doente -, enquanto que no livro mesmo o especialista em dinossauros, aparte o seu espanto, não mostra um pouco de arrependimento perante toda a situação e o destino dos dinossauros…
September 27, 2010
After reading this book I have come to the profound and well-thought-out conclusion that dinosaurs are cool.
Awesome book. It was fast-paced and the suspense was so tense that I almost keeled over a few times whilst reading this. Chrichton has the perfect balance of action, information and interesting characters. In my opinion, characters in an action/thriller type book should not overshadow the plot and so it is in this novel. The characters are likeable and they all had their distinct voices and personality, so I cared about what happened to them, but they were never in control of the plot so much as it was in control of them, illustrating how we might not be in control of our lives as much as we think we are... especially when dinos are on the rampage!
I've heard about Chrichton that his writing can get quite technical and involved when it comes to the science side of things, but I didn't find the information intrusive at all. (He doesn't info-dump anywhere near the extent that David Gibbins does in 'Atlantis'.) The one time it was slightly off-putting was when the list of computer read outs was written in.
So once again to reiterate my main point... Dinosaurs are cool. When are InGen going to manufacture baby velociraptors for the paying public?
Awesome book. It was fast-paced and the suspense was so tense that I almost keeled over a few times whilst reading this. Chrichton has the perfect balance of action, information and interesting characters. In my opinion, characters in an action/thriller type book should not overshadow the plot and so it is in this novel. The characters are likeable and they all had their distinct voices and personality, so I cared about what happened to them, but they were never in control of the plot so much as it was in control of them, illustrating how we might not be in control of our lives as much as we think we are... especially when dinos are on the rampage!
I've heard about Chrichton that his writing can get quite technical and involved when it comes to the science side of things, but I didn't find the information intrusive at all. (He doesn't info-dump anywhere near the extent that David Gibbins does in 'Atlantis'.) The one time it was slightly off-putting was when the list of computer read outs was written in.
So once again to reiterate my main point... Dinosaurs are cool. When are InGen going to manufacture baby velociraptors for the paying public?
May 4, 2009
More like 3.5, there were some parts that felt drawn out but the combination of science, math and suspense was pretty awesome, I think I maybe a Crichton fan, I'm going to have to read one more book to test it.
Anyway, I obviously know the story line and the movie has always been one of a my favorites, but the book add a lot to it. Dr. Alan Grant is a better character in the book and I liked the fact that there was a romance going on. It was refreshing. Dr. Sattler is a young woman in her twenties and isn't romantically linked to Dr Grant in the book, Ian Malcomn (i knew I'm not spelling that right) isn't someone who thinks he is hot stuff, he just knows he is right. And in the book the supporting cast is alot more involved and Hammond is nearly as concerned for his grandkids as he should be. Those are the emotional turns that I really liked. oh and some people who die in the movie don't in the book and some people who live in the movie die in the book, very interesting and a little spooky. I didn't love it, but I did enjoy it.
Anyway, I obviously know the story line and the movie has always been one of a my favorites, but the book add a lot to it. Dr. Alan Grant is a better character in the book and I liked the fact that there was a romance going on. It was refreshing. Dr. Sattler is a young woman in her twenties and isn't romantically linked to Dr Grant in the book, Ian Malcomn (i knew I'm not spelling that right) isn't someone who thinks he is hot stuff, he just knows he is right. And in the book the supporting cast is alot more involved and Hammond is nearly as concerned for his grandkids as he should be. Those are the emotional turns that I really liked. oh and some people who die in the movie don't in the book and some people who live in the movie die in the book, very interesting and a little spooky. I didn't love it, but I did enjoy it.
February 5, 2016
I saw the film first, and it was scariest at the level of the thought that some rich guy from US would actually do this! The whole creating of the park, I mean.
When reading the original book however the interesting part was how the big sister - with intelligence and courage - was the one who knew and was the savvy one who saved the poarty at one point while the kid brother was little and natural kid; in the film they changed it to big brother saves and knows while little sister is silly.
A similar change was made in the two versions of Hitchcock's film "The Man Who Knew Too Much" - the original English version had a mother who is a champion at shooting and it is her courageous kidnapped daughter who walks the edge of a terrace when the expert marksman mother saves her by shooting the villain pursuing the daughter, calm and unerring. The father is not short of manhood - he fights villains with his mind and fists both. The later version lacked the tense and intelligent edge and made up with colour and hysterics and music.
When reading the original book however the interesting part was how the big sister - with intelligence and courage - was the one who knew and was the savvy one who saved the poarty at one point while the kid brother was little and natural kid; in the film they changed it to big brother saves and knows while little sister is silly.
A similar change was made in the two versions of Hitchcock's film "The Man Who Knew Too Much" - the original English version had a mother who is a champion at shooting and it is her courageous kidnapped daughter who walks the edge of a terrace when the expert marksman mother saves her by shooting the villain pursuing the daughter, calm and unerring. The father is not short of manhood - he fights villains with his mind and fists both. The later version lacked the tense and intelligent edge and made up with colour and hysterics and music.
July 7, 2012
Is Michael Crichton always this preachy?
This is the second Crichton thriller I have read and the second time I have come away noticing his anti-science rants and preachy tone. This time the anti-science diatribe was delivered by the character of Malcolm, who only seems to be in the book for his chapter long anti-science rant. I've heard he is even worse with this in State of Fear.
The book itself is a decent techno-thriller. It was enjoyable and moved along swiftly. One thing I did notice, though, was a tendency to weigh the story down with details. I didn't really need to know what lines of computer code came up on the screen unless it was relevant - it wasn't. I didn't really need to see the DNA sequence typed out.
So you can see that I was less than impressed with Crichton again. The book was entertaining, but from this scientist's point of view, Crichton should have spent more time writing and less time preaching.
This is the second Crichton thriller I have read and the second time I have come away noticing his anti-science rants and preachy tone. This time the anti-science diatribe was delivered by the character of Malcolm, who only seems to be in the book for his chapter long anti-science rant. I've heard he is even worse with this in State of Fear.
The book itself is a decent techno-thriller. It was enjoyable and moved along swiftly. One thing I did notice, though, was a tendency to weigh the story down with details. I didn't really need to know what lines of computer code came up on the screen unless it was relevant - it wasn't. I didn't really need to see the DNA sequence typed out.
So you can see that I was less than impressed with Crichton again. The book was entertaining, but from this scientist's point of view, Crichton should have spent more time writing and less time preaching.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 133 reviews