Search
Finished by Richard Preston, this is the novel that Michael Crichton was working on at the time of his death in 2008.
I have to say that, of late, I have actually been disappointed by most of Crichton's more recent novels, with the possible exception of <i>Prey</i>. Unfortunately, I was also pretty disappointed by this: I felt that I was never really engaged with any of the characters, so their plight never really had any impact on me - without giving too much away, and in a pretty superficial sense, I think this novel could be pretty much described as <i>The Borrowers</i>, set in nature.
For me, <i>Jurassic Park</i> (by far) still remains Crichton's seminal work.
I have to say that, of late, I have actually been disappointed by most of Crichton's more recent novels, with the possible exception of <i>Prey</i>. Unfortunately, I was also pretty disappointed by this: I felt that I was never really engaged with any of the characters, so their plight never really had any impact on me - without giving too much away, and in a pretty superficial sense, I think this novel could be pretty much described as <i>The Borrowers</i>, set in nature.
For me, <i>Jurassic Park</i> (by far) still remains Crichton's seminal work.
David McK (3172 KP) rated Jurassic Park (Jurassic Park, #1) in Books
Jan 28, 2019 (Updated Oct 1, 2022)
The first of the late Michael Crichton books that I've read, and this is still the best.
While the film of the same name is very good, it's really only a watered down version of the story contained within here, with several of the characters (most notably Alan Grant and John Hammond) undergoing a personality/trait change between print and screen. Presumably for reasons of cost and running time, the film also leaves out some of the dinosaurs and events of the books (eg the Pterodactyl lodge, although that is later used in the film Jurassic Park III).
For me, this was further proof of what I've always found: that films based on books are never quite as good as the source material.
While the film of the same name is very good, it's really only a watered down version of the story contained within here, with several of the characters (most notably Alan Grant and John Hammond) undergoing a personality/trait change between print and screen. Presumably for reasons of cost and running time, the film also leaves out some of the dinosaurs and events of the books (eg the Pterodactyl lodge, although that is later used in the film Jurassic Park III).
For me, this was further proof of what I've always found: that films based on books are never quite as good as the source material.
Peter Pan and Other Plays: The Admirable Crichton; Peter Pan; When Wendy Grew Up; What Every Woman Knows; Mary Rose
J.M. Barrie and Peter Hollindale
Book
For some 20 years at the beginning of the century J M Barrie enjoyed enormous commercial success...
Erika Kehlet (21 KP) rated Micro in Books
Feb 21, 2018
I really wanted to like this book, but the dialog was so painful I almost didn't finish it. The descriptions and action scenes felt too choppy. There were more continuity issues and contradictions than I can count (for one, thing, if you are out of visual range of something, you can't look back in the next sentence and see what said something was doing!) and by the time we're 90% into the book I KNOW who Karen is and there is no reason to refer to her or any other character by their full names anymore, at least not so frequently.
The basic idea was good - and it had the potential to be an entertaining, if far-fetched, techno-thriller, but I couldn't recommend this even to die-hard Michael Crichton fans.
The basic idea was good - and it had the potential to be an entertaining, if far-fetched, techno-thriller, but I couldn't recommend this even to die-hard Michael Crichton fans.
Westworld - Season 2
7.4
Rate It
TV Season Watch
Westworld isn't your typical amusement park. Intended for rich vacationers, the futuristic park --...
Catch and Kill : Shadow Operatives Thriller 2
10.0
Rate It
Book
What happened to the girls? Overnight, hundreds of teenage girls disappear from the streets of...
Dragon Teeth
6.5
Rate It
Book
The year is 1876. Warring Indian tribes still populate Americas western territories even as lawless...
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Micro in Books
Jan 9, 2020
Review Just becasue
The book Micro by Michael Crichton and Richard Prestom was great. I may be a little biased because Michael Crichton is one of my favorite authors but at the same time I hold his work to a specific standard that he must meet or else I'm disappointed. Like most of his work Micro touches on some topics that as a society we should be aware of. It warns us of some disasters that new technology, being worked on or possibly already created, can cause. It id also an eye opener to the dangers of that our inventions pose.
In Micro a group of young graduate students at a college or approached by the head of a company called Nanigen. The graduate students are invited out to the Nanigen lab in Hawaii to see for themselves the work being done there and to see if they want to work for the company. Out of curiosity all the approached graduate students agree to go but their trip to Hawaii becomes more than what they bargain for.
Nanigen is studying the micro world mainly looking for chemicals that micro animals are making that could be useful to humans in some way. Also like many scientific companies in the private sector Nanigen is doing top secret work for the government. Greed gets in the way for some of the scientist already working for the company and the trip becomes extremely dangerous and even deadly for the graduate students. Having to deal with micro-bots and new technology never heard of before the students must fight to survive a world very different from our own.
What I like most about the book was one of the same features that keeps me reading Michael Crichton's work. The author does his research very thoroughly. The book may be a work of science fiction but there is a bibliography in the back for the curious reader to be able to learn more about the fascinating topics brought up in the book. For being a work of fiction the animals, plants, chemicals, technology,and scientific concepts are not. What I liked least about the book was how similar to another one of his books it was and how predictable some parts felt to me. Again though, I am very familiar with Michael Crichton's work and that would probably explain why it felt so predictable. I cannot hold that against the book.
Overall I would rate this book a 4 out of 4 and would highly recommend it. It has a very strong story and is believable which is an important factor for science fiction. The target readers for this book would start around high school age if not older. I feel like high school students will get the basic concept of what book was talking about but they might be lost on some of the finer detail. It all just depends on if the book is being read for the story or if the reader is interested in science specifically microbiology and nanotechnology.
I feel like I need to note on here that Richard Preston finishing the book did not harm it in any way.
https://facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
In Micro a group of young graduate students at a college or approached by the head of a company called Nanigen. The graduate students are invited out to the Nanigen lab in Hawaii to see for themselves the work being done there and to see if they want to work for the company. Out of curiosity all the approached graduate students agree to go but their trip to Hawaii becomes more than what they bargain for.
Nanigen is studying the micro world mainly looking for chemicals that micro animals are making that could be useful to humans in some way. Also like many scientific companies in the private sector Nanigen is doing top secret work for the government. Greed gets in the way for some of the scientist already working for the company and the trip becomes extremely dangerous and even deadly for the graduate students. Having to deal with micro-bots and new technology never heard of before the students must fight to survive a world very different from our own.
What I like most about the book was one of the same features that keeps me reading Michael Crichton's work. The author does his research very thoroughly. The book may be a work of science fiction but there is a bibliography in the back for the curious reader to be able to learn more about the fascinating topics brought up in the book. For being a work of fiction the animals, plants, chemicals, technology,and scientific concepts are not. What I liked least about the book was how similar to another one of his books it was and how predictable some parts felt to me. Again though, I am very familiar with Michael Crichton's work and that would probably explain why it felt so predictable. I cannot hold that against the book.
Overall I would rate this book a 4 out of 4 and would highly recommend it. It has a very strong story and is believable which is an important factor for science fiction. The target readers for this book would start around high school age if not older. I feel like high school students will get the basic concept of what book was talking about but they might be lost on some of the finer detail. It all just depends on if the book is being read for the story or if the reader is interested in science specifically microbiology and nanotechnology.
I feel like I need to note on here that Richard Preston finishing the book did not harm it in any way.
https://facebook.com/nightreaderreviews
Night Reader Reviews (683 KP) rated Micro in Books
Jan 9, 2020
The book Micro by Michael Crichton and Richard Prestom was great. I may be a little biased because Michael Crichton is one of my favorite authors but at the same time I hold his work to a specific standard that he must meet or else I'm disappointed. Like most of his work Micro touches on some topics that as a society we should be aware of. It warns us of some disasters that new technology, being worked on or possibly already created, can cause. It id also an eye opener to the dangers of that our inventions pose.
In Micro a group of young graduate students at a college or approached by the head of a company called Nanigen. The graduate students are invited out to the Nanigen lab in Hawaii to see for themselves the work being done there and to see if they want to work for the company. Out of curiosity all the approached graduate students agree to go but their trip to Hawaii becomes more than what they bargain for.
Nanigen is studying the micro world mainly looking for chemicals that micro animals are making that could be useful to humans in some way. Also like many scientific companies in the private sector Nanigen is doing top secret work for the government. Greed gets in the way for some of the scientist already working for the company and the trip becomes extremely dangerous and even deadly for the graduate students. Having to deal with micro-bots and new technology never heard of before the students must fight to survive a world very different from our own.
What I like most about the book was one of the same features that keeps me reading Michael Crichton's work. The author does his research very thoroughly. The book may be a work of science fiction but there is a bibliography in the back for the curious reader to be able to learn more about the fascinating topics brought up in the book. For being a work of fiction the animals, plants, chemicals, technology,and scientific concepts are not. What I liked least about the book was how similar to another one of his books it was and how predictable some parts felt to me. Again though, I am very familiar with Michael Crichton's work and that would probably explain why it felt so predictable. I cannot hold that against the book.
Overall I would rate this book a 4 out of 4 and would highly recommend it. It has a very strong story and is believable which is an important factor for science fiction. The target readers for this book would start around high school age if not older. I feel like high school students will get the basic concept of what book was talking about but they might be lost on some of the finer detail. It all just depends on if the book is being read for the story or if the reader is interested in science specifically microbiology and nanotechnology.
I feel like I need to note on here that Richard Preston finishing the book did not harm it in any way.
In Micro a group of young graduate students at a college or approached by the head of a company called Nanigen. The graduate students are invited out to the Nanigen lab in Hawaii to see for themselves the work being done there and to see if they want to work for the company. Out of curiosity all the approached graduate students agree to go but their trip to Hawaii becomes more than what they bargain for.
Nanigen is studying the micro world mainly looking for chemicals that micro animals are making that could be useful to humans in some way. Also like many scientific companies in the private sector Nanigen is doing top secret work for the government. Greed gets in the way for some of the scientist already working for the company and the trip becomes extremely dangerous and even deadly for the graduate students. Having to deal with micro-bots and new technology never heard of before the students must fight to survive a world very different from our own.
What I like most about the book was one of the same features that keeps me reading Michael Crichton's work. The author does his research very thoroughly. The book may be a work of science fiction but there is a bibliography in the back for the curious reader to be able to learn more about the fascinating topics brought up in the book. For being a work of fiction the animals, plants, chemicals, technology,and scientific concepts are not. What I liked least about the book was how similar to another one of his books it was and how predictable some parts felt to me. Again though, I am very familiar with Michael Crichton's work and that would probably explain why it felt so predictable. I cannot hold that against the book.
Overall I would rate this book a 4 out of 4 and would highly recommend it. It has a very strong story and is believable which is an important factor for science fiction. The target readers for this book would start around high school age if not older. I feel like high school students will get the basic concept of what book was talking about but they might be lost on some of the finer detail. It all just depends on if the book is being read for the story or if the reader is interested in science specifically microbiology and nanotechnology.
I feel like I need to note on here that Richard Preston finishing the book did not harm it in any way.
BankofMarquis (1832 KP) rated A Fish Called Wanda (1988) in Movies
Jul 2, 2020
A Jolly Good Time
A member of my family mentioned when discussing the 1988 John Cleese comedy A FISH CALLED WANDA that you can tell much about a person over what part of this film that you like the most. Do you like:
a). The John Cleese/Jamie Lee Curtis love story
b). The "caper"
c). The beleaguered, unsuccessful hit-man Ken
d). The old lady and her 3 dogs
e). Kevin Kline as Otto
For me, that's easy - ALL OF IT! I find that A FISH CALLED WANDA is a very funny, richly acted comedy/caper that brings forth 4 characters that are easy to spend 2 hours with. Starting with John Cleese as Barrister Archie Leach. Cleese conceived, wrote, starred-in and (at times) directed this film and his "British humor" (honed from years as a member of the MONTY PYTHON comedy troupe) is in full force here. He has a reserved appearance about him that covers a wild man underneath yearning to break free.
Jamie Lee Curtis is quite good as the center of the film, Wanda Gershwitz, a cunning conman who will stop at nothing - and step over everyone - to get what she wants. I find that Curtis is under-rated as an actress and a comedienne and this picture shows that she can hold her own against 3 comedy greats at the top of their game.
The 2nd member of the Monty Python troupe to appear in this film is the remarkable Michael Palin as hapless hit-man, Ken. He becomes increasingly frustrated and frantic -and increasingly funny - as he attempts to complete his assignment throughout the course of this film.
But...the real star of this film...and the actor/character that steals the film away from everyone else...is Kevin Kline's Oscar winning performance as Otto, Wanda's erstwhile love who has a very high opinion of himself. It is rare that a comedic performance wins an Oscar - Kline's win is the the last one to do so - but it is easy to see why the Academy decided to reward Kline for it is a committed performance that is wild, wacky and over-the-top, but not overtly so. Kline has been very good in many other pictures/performances before and after this film, but he never reached the height that he reached in this film.
The film has veteran director Charles Crichton listed as Director with Cleese listed as co-Director (though Cleese insisted that Crichton did all the work and he only put his name on it to assuage the fears of studio executives over Crichton's advanced age). Well...Crichton does a wonderful job of letting the lunacy explode on the scene while keeping a lid on it and moving the action along at a brisk pace.
Wanda is one of those films that people remember fondly, but do not revisit. I would highly recommend you do, it's a jolly good time.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)
a). The John Cleese/Jamie Lee Curtis love story
b). The "caper"
c). The beleaguered, unsuccessful hit-man Ken
d). The old lady and her 3 dogs
e). Kevin Kline as Otto
For me, that's easy - ALL OF IT! I find that A FISH CALLED WANDA is a very funny, richly acted comedy/caper that brings forth 4 characters that are easy to spend 2 hours with. Starting with John Cleese as Barrister Archie Leach. Cleese conceived, wrote, starred-in and (at times) directed this film and his "British humor" (honed from years as a member of the MONTY PYTHON comedy troupe) is in full force here. He has a reserved appearance about him that covers a wild man underneath yearning to break free.
Jamie Lee Curtis is quite good as the center of the film, Wanda Gershwitz, a cunning conman who will stop at nothing - and step over everyone - to get what she wants. I find that Curtis is under-rated as an actress and a comedienne and this picture shows that she can hold her own against 3 comedy greats at the top of their game.
The 2nd member of the Monty Python troupe to appear in this film is the remarkable Michael Palin as hapless hit-man, Ken. He becomes increasingly frustrated and frantic -and increasingly funny - as he attempts to complete his assignment throughout the course of this film.
But...the real star of this film...and the actor/character that steals the film away from everyone else...is Kevin Kline's Oscar winning performance as Otto, Wanda's erstwhile love who has a very high opinion of himself. It is rare that a comedic performance wins an Oscar - Kline's win is the the last one to do so - but it is easy to see why the Academy decided to reward Kline for it is a committed performance that is wild, wacky and over-the-top, but not overtly so. Kline has been very good in many other pictures/performances before and after this film, but he never reached the height that he reached in this film.
The film has veteran director Charles Crichton listed as Director with Cleese listed as co-Director (though Cleese insisted that Crichton did all the work and he only put his name on it to assuage the fears of studio executives over Crichton's advanced age). Well...Crichton does a wonderful job of letting the lunacy explode on the scene while keeping a lid on it and moving the action along at a brisk pace.
Wanda is one of those films that people remember fondly, but do not revisit. I would highly recommend you do, it's a jolly good time.
Letter Grade A-
8 stars (out of 10) and you can take that to the Bank(ofMarquis)