Hey Scott, hope all's good on your side of the pond.

In my opinion Koepp threw out too much detail about the characters. I wrote about it here:

http://bit.ly/aPswxi

Sorry David! :)

Jared

Hey Jared

fancy meeting you here.

There is a really interesting piece in the appendix of Dramatica (the book is available as a free download) about Jurassic Park and the themes and character development and about how lacking it is as-written, and the author proposes some modifications which would make for a more satisfying conclusion.

Worth reading (though you might want to skip the preceding 750 pages).

@Jared: I updated the OP to include your link.

@terraling: Same thing for your comment and included link to Dramatica book download.

Don't disagree with the point from an aesthetic viewpoint. But here's a number: $914,691,118. That's the worldwide box office revenues generated by the original "Jurassic Park." Lack of character substance (compared to book) did not seem to impact negatively the movie's connection with audiences.

I remember seeing Jurassic Park in the theater. When the "This is Unix. I know this" scene came up I distinctly remember going "Oh, come on! That's bull$h!t."

I still enjoyed the film though.

I've got to disagree. It's been a long time since I've seen Jurassic Park, but whenever I see it on TV as I'm flipping channels, I don't stop on it to get involved in the charming characters. I'm waiting for the raptors to jump out or for that guy to get eaten off the toilet. And it's not that these scenes are without emotionally connection either. I don't think you need much character information to feel the emotional impact of the scene where the two children are being chased by the raptors in the kitchen.

All that to say that I think the film was effective in what it set out to do - entertain audiences. On the flip side, if you weren't entertained, then your analysis is completely valid. :)