Jurassic Park

It's perhaps an unfair comparison, as nostalgia and repeated viewings have the original film firmly entrenched in positive association and memory, and this is my first time encountering the book, but this is a case for me of ‘ the movie was better'. 
Certainly interesting to see what they changed/kept/left out - Grant's 180 on kids, the existence of Ed Regis and Ian Malcolm being more of a pill than a charismatic powerhouse (who can compete against Jeff Goldblum, I mean really). Speaking of which, huge props to the screenwriter for distilling Malcolm's  lectures (plural) down to that one speech over a meal.   
Further comparisons:
Weird to see there were only three years between book publication and film release, both firmly entrenched in the 90s, and yet the film manages to be not nearly as eye-roll inducing in its male gaze towards Sattler, and at least not as overt in its fatphobia toward Nedry. 
I appreciate that the film aged up the kids and made Lex a big sister thus reducing her function as an irritant as seen in the novel. 
The triceratops scenes are tied for me: while I was flabbergasted to find it was a stegosaurus not a triceratops in the book and there was no sense of wonder from any when encountering the sick dino, (Grant smiling while listening to the dino breath, professing his love for that type of dino - I have to assume it was a member of the film production with that passion, someone knew at least as much wonder as analytical assessment or fear for these creatures should be on display on screen).  I did appreciate actually getting an answer in the book as to why the animal was sick, and the Ralph the baby triceratops scene later in the book was so precious I feel a little cheated we didn't get that on film. 

⚠️child death, fatphobia, misogyny