2007-02-25 06:57:03 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Books & Authors
I wouldn't call his works "literature". They are, at times, interesting being as they involve strange concepts like time travel, reviving dinosaurs from DNA in amber. I'd say that he has an interesting mind but his writings are only so-so.
Generally if I've read the book then I don't care for the movie as it doesn't capture the richness of the book - in Crichton's case it's the opposite - film cleans up and enrichens what he started but couldn't provide enough impact to carry off.
2007-02-25 07:04:23 · answer #1 · answered by soaplady99ca 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I just finished reading his State of Fear which I enjoyed tremendously.
Sphere is also a great book , and Congo is excellent too.
Just with any writer, some of his books will appeal to the reader more than others. I don't really buy into the distinction between classic lit and popular lit. The story should appeal to the reader, that's all.
I've read many a classic novel that made my eyes glaze over. In particular, the use of language in novels from centuries ago is so outdated and hard to follow. Even for someone educated. What amazes me is that whole English literature degrees are structured around books that aren't generally read anymore, except by those unfortunate students who have to get a grade and a degree.
Plus, a writer never analyzes his/ her work. A writer just writes the book. It's the critics that analyze and then determine, on the basis of their "findings" that a book should be a classic.
2007-02-25 09:24:28 · answer #2 · answered by Nina 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
State of Fear is worth reading not because it's a great novel --it's only decent-- but because it is educational. The novel is fictional but the way the politicians and the media use distorted and incorrect scientific data to draw unsupportable conclusions to fit their agenda is a very good description of what's really happening in the global warming debate.
For example, they'll probably give Al Gore an Oscar for his film "An Inconvenient Truth". It's not a great film, just a politically correct film. It claims that the sea level will rise 20 feet this century -- almost no scientists believe that. The latest estimate of the U.N. is a few inches and even the U.N. is alarmist compared to the scientists.
2007-02-25 10:58:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
His early writings are quite good, but the last book he wrote was almost unreadable, in this reader's opinion. Sometimes authors who have early successes are pressured into writing more books under tight deadlines by publishing companies. His last book has the feel of a rough draft, and I think that's the reason his later works are lacking.
2007-02-25 07:49:13 · answer #4 · answered by msreiziger 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The books he writes are kind of fantasy/action. He wrote Jurassic Park (the book is MUCH better than the movie), he also wrote Sphere the movie was good but again, the book was much better. I love his books...I read Sphere 3 times and it is still good! :)
2007-02-25 07:01:21 · answer #5 · answered by speedy_me18 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'd call him the equivalent of a B movie maker, you don't read his books because they're instant classics, you read his books because he writes cheap stories that are good fun to read.
2007-02-25 22:15:08 · answer #6 · answered by Dan A 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I really like Sphere and Timeline. If you've seen the movies, don't judge him by those (those movies stunk!)
Lots of adventure in his books.
2007-02-25 07:16:50 · answer #7 · answered by Michelle 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
all of his writings are good half are very good and a few are great I highly suggest State of fear.
2007-02-25 10:45:26 · answer #8 · answered by Steven S 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋