NOT the book

Rating: 4/10 (25 July 2018)

The moment I finished the first book, I asked myself the question how they were able to do a movie of 1h 55min out of it?
Answer: the movie is NOT the book. It's standalone. It took three keywords, 2 landscapes and a biologist. There is nothing, not even remotely, seriously implemented from the book in this movie.
Special effects aren't bad. The plot of the movie (not the book): interesting, but very bad developped. The characters (not actors)? Terrible.
I gave 4 out of 10 for the special effect, the 'idea' and for the good intention of trying.
Boy. Boy. Boy.