Actually, in JP it was the quantum weather butterfly, was it not?
![Wink ;-)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
I'm sure that Ian Malcolm would agree that with the same start the venture could have gone off without a hitch (actually he probably wouldn't, but he'd be wrong not to).
The weather butterfly effect is found in chaos theory, not quantum mechanics. Despite being unpredictable, quantum mechanics is actually very predictable.
I disagree:
The driving force behind JP was not that science is bad. It used outlandish science as a premise to get a bunch of people running away from dinosaurs, which was actually the point of the movie. It was Conan Doyle's The Lost World retold for the 20th century.
Godsend takes a procedure that is very nearly comonplace now, and says out right that a clone is the exact same organism as the mother cell, and that there are direct metaphysical consequences.
That much is true. I'm extrapolating Jurassic Park's agenda based on the sequels. Godsend, if anything, is far more blatant about its agenda than Jurassic Park.
The difference between the movies as far as I'm concerned, is that JP doesn't appeal to a supernatural entity, (except in the opinions of the characters) whereas Godsend does.
Again, I didn't get that from the movies at all.
"This is what happens when you play God," pretty much solidified it for me.