Author Michael Crichton dies in Los Angeles

[tdvance]

I have no details--I only saw the headline.

I never realized he was anywhere close to death, didn't think he was that old--I have no idea what happened.

He wrote plenty of enjoyable technothrillers.

Todd

[PraedSt]

Just saw the headlines. Sad

[Fazor]

He wasn't that old. Stunning, really. I use to be a big fan--in high school, he's about the only author I'd read. Not that I was a big reader to begin with, but Congo, Terminal Man, Jurrassic Park 1 and 2, and Sphere were great. He had a tendancy to get overly technical, but I had a tendency to just skim those parts anyway.

It's sad that he died so (relatively) young (if I had to guess, I'd put him in his early to mid 50s); I do envy the fact that as an author, he'll live on long into the future.

[Doodler]

According to Micheal Crichton's website, he has passed, currently trying to load the note that was posted about it.

Will report more when I'm in.

[Doodler]

http://www.michaelcrichton.net/about...nmemoriam.html


excerpt:

Best-selling author Michael Crichton died unexpectedly in Los Angeles Tuesday, November 4, 2008 after a courageous and private battle against cancer.

[tdvance]

definitely private--I'd never heard about it!

[mahesh]

oh my....
RIP Mr Crichton!

The Andromeda Strain, first one of mine of my teens. Rivetting book, rivetting movie!

Thank you for ER, too!

Only sixty six...that's young!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Crichton

[Paul Beardsley]

He was, I believe, the tallest SF writer. Someone told me he was 6'11". So now that honour is probably held by Simon Clark (Night of the Triffids) followed by Ben Jeapes (His Majesty's Starship, Winged Chariot).

[Fazor]

Only sixty six...that's young!

Oops, I was a decade off. Still, as you said, young.

[PraedSt]

Thank you for ER, too!

Yes, thanks for ER and Jurassic Park. My ER period has good memories, and Jurassic Park was just classic.

[01101001]

I refuse to believe he is dead solely on the basis that there seems to be some apparent consensus about that supposed fact by his family and the media which I have no reason to trust.

Michael Crichton debunks the "consensus science" of Dr. Carl Sagan may be material that addresses the topic but I can't reach it right now to confirm (with my own eyes), maybe because it is swamped.

[Studioguy]

How sad. I have always enjoyed his books. Jurassic Park was the first I read, but I soon found myself seeking out his work. The last 2 books (State of Fear and Next) weren't great, but they were very good. They seemed to be written a little too much like a movie, but the stories were generally compelling even if the character development was shallow. He definitely had a way of making you think about the effects of technology on our lives.

Rest In Peace, Michael Crichton.

[Fazor]

I quit reading him halfway through "Airframe". Never picked up "State of Fear" and barely even knew about "Next." But that's not to say I lost respect for his works; I just moved on to other authors. After my Crichton phase came Bradbury and Verne, then onward and upwards.

[Abbadon_2008]

Just got the sad news. Oh well, we'll meet on the other side, I guess.

[geonuc]

Bummer. I attended a talk at DragonCon this past fall given by Dr. Kevin Grazier (JPL Cassini scientist and science advisor to some tv shows). The subject was the science of Michael Crichton.

[mugaliens]

And I just finished re-reading Timeline.

I guess it was simply his time to go.

Thank you for the many enjoyable stories. I liked "The Great Train Robbery" the best.

[Donnie B.]

For an author who based so much of his work on scientific ideas, it strikes me as odd that there often seemed to be a fairly strong anti-science undercurrent in his books.

That impression may not be entirely accurate; I'm pretty sure that element was exaggerated in the movie adaptations (viz the Jeff Goldblum role in Jurassic Park).

[Van Rijn]

For an author who based so much of his work on scientific ideas, it strikes me as odd that there often seemed to be a fairly strong anti-science undercurrent in his books.

That impression may not be entirely accurate; I'm pretty sure that element was exaggerated in the movie adaptations (viz the Jeff Goldblum role in Jurassic Park).

My recollection of the novel is that the movie underplayed the constant drum beating that chaos would reign. Frankly, I liked the movie much more that the book, partly because it was fun to watch, and partly because it was easier to take in smaller doses. I did like the original Andromeda Strain movie and the first Jurassic Park movie quite a lot, but I wasn't a fan of his writing.

From my fond memories of those movies, though, I will miss him.

[Swift]

For an author who based so much of his work on scientific ideas, it strikes me as odd that there often seemed to be a fairly strong anti-science undercurrent in his books.

That impression may not be entirely accurate; I'm pretty sure that element was exaggerated in the movie adaptations (viz the Jeff Goldblum role in Jurassic Park).

That's my impression too, maybe more in the movies than the books (but he wrote the movie scripts) and I think more and more over the years.

I hate to speak ill of the dead, but I was not much of a Crichton fan. The Andromeda Strain was an excellent book and movie, but I thought it was pretty downhill from there. I can't remember exactly which book it was after that (one of the medical ones I think), I got into it about 50 pages, gave up in disgust, and never read another one of his books.

And I really dislike the anti-science leaning of his work, the old Dr. Frankenstein / Mary Shelley "there are just some things that man shouldn't mess with" mindset. I think stuff like that does a disservice to science.

Frankly, I'm kind of surprised so many people on this board liked his stuff.

[Fazor]

Frankly, I'm kind of surprised so many people on this board liked his stuff.

Call me crazy, but I classify books (well, fiction) the same way I do television or movies; as entertainment. If you don't take the "science can go wrong! booga-booga-booga!" personally, you can see it's just a plot device to create suspense.

I'm not saying you're wrong for not liking his books. His writing style was ... dry, to say the least. And sadly, there are too many people out there that would read something like that and go, "Oooh! Science IS scarey and bad! Look what could happen!" even though it couldn't happen. That's why signs in bookstores that say "Fiction section" should have that in huge, billboard sized lettering ... and when those people buy a book, a big mallet needs to come out and pound their head while a PA voice repeates. "This is fiction! FICTION!" until they get it's just a book.

[apolloman]

A sad loss to the community. And a shock coming so suddenly...

I enjoyed the earlier works like Andromeda Strain and thoroughly enjoyed when he got technical but agree that some of the recent works weren't as good.

[schlaugh]

I had the impression that in his later books he was already writing the screenplay and scripts to save time for the transition to film. The books included lots of narrative which to me sounded like theatrical blocking or extensive scene description. Timeline was like that.

But I did like his earlier works - very forward thinking. And he wrote a few offbeat historical stories as well including the Great Train Robbery and Eaters of the Dead. Both became films although Eaters was renamed as The 13th Warrior and starred Antonio Banderas.

He was also an accomplished director.

Michael Crichton

[Donnie B.]

I did like The Great Train Robbery.

A friend of mine disliked Jurassic Park (the book, maybe the movie too) on different grounds. He felt it was cheap and manipulative to achieve suspense by putting children in danger.

[Click Ticker]

I thoroughly enjoy pretty much all of Crichtons work, and I'm not ashamed to admit it. I like the drawn out techno-babble and the quick pace. One of his most acclaimed works did leave me wanting, though. The andromeda strain just seemed to end on a, "Okay - I've got enough pages, time to wrap this thing up" note.

That being said, I'm really hoping he had a novel in the works or near completion that might be released. But that's a tad selfish of me given the circumstances. Condolences to the family.

[Swift]

And sadly, there are too many people out there that would read something like that and go, "Oooh! Science IS scarey and bad! Look what could happen!" even though it couldn't happen. That's why signs in bookstores that say "Fiction section" should have that in huge, billboard sized lettering ... and when those people buy a book, a big mallet needs to come out and pound their head while a PA voice repeates. "This is fiction! FICTION!" until they get it's just a book.

Which is exactly my problem. I can distinguish between fiction and non-, I'm not sure most people can. And more than the fictional details, it is the attitude towards science, as something scary and dangerous, that I find... well, scary and dangerous.

I love the idea about the big mallet though.

[Fazor]

I love the idea about the big mallet though.

I was thinking it could apply to tv and movies (and video games) too, but those people seem even more mis-guided. Maybe some sort of super mallet...

[gzhpcu]

Condolences to his family. I enjoyed reading his books, read practically all of them and found them entertaining.

[Nadme]

I'd like to see the original The Andromeda Strain film (1971). Was also surprised at news of his passing. He was 6 feet 9 inches tall!

Yes, it's a pity he died at 66.

[Swift]

I'd like to see the original The Andromeda Strain film (1971).

I have seen it every once in a while on the cable networks, like TCM or AMC. I think it still holds up pretty well.

[Nadme]

Thanks for that, Swift. I've read the movie studio plugged a lot of money (by early '70s standards) into the film, aiming for best quality.