I think Jurassic Park is more science fiction. It introduced the revolutionary idea of bringing dinosaurs back to life, which was a huge sci-fi concept at the time. Jurassic World expanded on that but didn't introduce as radical new ideas.
One of the main themes is the danger of playing God. In the novel, humans' attempts to control and manipulate dinosaurs lead to chaos. Another theme is the power of nature. The dinosaurs, as products of nature, resist human control and reassert their dominance in their own way.
The main characters include Ian Malcolm. He's very critical of the whole dinosaur - resurrection idea. Then there's Sarah Harding. She's not afraid to get up close and personal with the dinosaurs. And there's also Kelly Curtis, a young girl who gets involved in the adventure on the lost world.
Yes, Jurassic World is typically classified as science fiction. It involves genetic engineering and the recreation of dinosaurs, which are common elements in sci-fi.
Jurassic World and Jurassic Park have some similarities and differences. Both feature dinosaurs and a theme of humans interacting with them. But Jurassic World has more advanced technology and larger-scale park operations.
It depends on the level of violence and complex themes in the novel. If it has a lot of intense dinosaur - on - dinosaur or dinosaur - on - human violence, it might not be suitable for very young readers.
The fictional island where Jurassic World Park was constructed is Isla Nublar. It's a remote and isolated location that provided the setting for the park's dinosaur attractions.
One main theme is the danger of playing God. In the novels, scientists create dinosaurs through genetic engineering, and this leads to chaos as the dinosaurs escape control. Another theme is the power of nature. Despite human attempts to manage the dinosaurs, nature often finds a way to assert itself.