In Stephen J. Gould's essay "Dinomania" he discusses the fact the differences between the movie Jurassic Park and the book. In previous essays that we have read by him, he disscussed how Hollywoo
d 'dumbs down' books into movies for their audience. This is a reoccuring theme in this essay. He talks about how Stephen Spielberg gives Ian Malcolm a small role in the movie, and he talks about the chaos theory only a few times throught the film because this Speilberg thought it to be too complex an idea for movie viewers. This dumbs down the movie and changes the plot and the explanation as to why the park failed the way it did. Also at the end of the book, Hammond and Malcolm died and the park was destroyed but in the movie they both lived and the park was left entact. In the book Hammond was a greedy man, who only cared about money and his death was meant to be ironic, being killed by his own creations and w
hat he fought for as being harmless as the scientists said otherwise. In the movie, Hammond made the park for the enjoyment of children and discovery and lived as a hero. In the book Malcolm was a trendy chaotician who gave long complex speeches about the chaos therory. In the movie, Malcolm was annoying and had few lines. A scene was also added where he places a water droplet on Dr. Sattlers hand, a dumbed down explanation of the chaos theory. Another topic that Gould disscussed is how he was thought of as strange as a kid because of an interest in dinosaurs, but now, dinosaurs are popular. I thought that this was an interesting point because I do not understand what brings along 'dinomania' at some periods in time but not others, or any trends for that matter.
d 'dumbs down' books into movies for their audience. This is a reoccuring theme in this essay. He talks about how Stephen Spielberg gives Ian Malcolm a small role in the movie, and he talks about the chaos theory only a few times throught the film because this Speilberg thought it to be too complex an idea for movie viewers. This dumbs down the movie and changes the plot and the explanation as to why the park failed the way it did. Also at the end of the book, Hammond and Malcolm died and the park was destroyed but in the movie they both lived and the park was left entact. In the book Hammond was a greedy man, who only cared about money and his death was meant to be ironic, being killed by his own creations and w
hat he fought for as being harmless as the scientists said otherwise. In the movie, Hammond made the park for the enjoyment of children and discovery and lived as a hero. In the book Malcolm was a trendy chaotician who gave long complex speeches about the chaos therory. In the movie, Malcolm was annoying and had few lines. A scene was also added where he places a water droplet on Dr. Sattlers hand, a dumbed down explanation of the chaos theory. Another topic that Gould disscussed is how he was thought of as strange as a kid because of an interest in dinosaurs, but now, dinosaurs are popular. I thought that this was an interesting point because I do not understand what brings along 'dinomania' at some periods in time but not others, or any trends for that matter.
No comments:
Post a Comment