Jurassic World

[anime52k8]

So those Raptors are his trained "pets?"

Sure. Who wouldn't want that? If I had genetically engineered dinosaurs, the first thing I would want to do with them is have them trained to do stuff.

:edit:

Real life Velociraptors would make good bets, BTW. they were covered in feathers and only came up to your knees, you could totally domesticate one.

Edited November 26, 2014 by anime52k8

[azrael]

Ya sure those dinosaurs don't have HIM trained? I know dogs and turtles that train owners to do exactly what they want, when they want. Or hell....cats, the pets that think THEY'RE the ones in charge of the house.

[Knight26]

Sure. Who wouldn't want that? If I had genetically engineered dinosaurs, the first thing I would want to do with them is have them trained to do stuff.

:edit:

Real life Velociraptors would make good bets, BTW. they were covered in feathers and only came up to your knees, you could totally domesticate one.

After 20 some odd years of course you would try and domesticate some of the dinos. The Raptors are a logical choice because of their wolf pack mentality. Imagine replacing military working dogs with Raptors, really see your enemies Shatting themselves.

[Dynaman]

It actually looks worse than the last one. I didn't think it possible.

[Kelsain]

I'm totally on board with trained, good raptors. Mix it up a little!

[Shadow]

So those Raptors are his trained "pets?"

Clever girl..

I'd like to see the Dilophasaurus make a return but in a more realistic size rather than being the poisonous turkey it was in the movie. The real one was about 20ft tall and a decent predator.

There is one type of raptor that resembles if not beats the movie going versions, I believe called Utahraptor. But that doesn't sound as cool as Velociraptor.

[GU-11]

I could never get over zombie Malcom.

The first book is pretty unambiguous. He's dead in the end, they are trying to get the government to let them bury his body.

Then the second book rolls around and he gets better somehow.

He dies in the book? It's been over 20 years since I last read the first book, and I'm only at page 40 right now. The only thing I remember is the Costa Rican air force razing the island with missiles.

I still don't understand why everyone hates the second movie so much. Yeah, it's not as good as the first, but I still love both movies. IMO the third one is the only one that I'm not super in love with, mostly because they kill of the main character in the first like 5 minutes on the island which is utter bullshit.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I found the second movie too :"kiddy" for some reason. Technically, it isn't any more or less kiddy than the first movie, but somehow it just feels that way. It's probably the part where T-Rex runs wild in LA. I also didn't like way they turned Eddie into some Green Peace terrorist in the movie; he's far more level-headed in the book.

BTW, who's this "main character" you're talking about? I know the mercs weren't supposed to be the stars of the show, and the kid's new dad was just a throwaway character. Did you mean T-Rex?

Ya sure those dinosaurs don't have HIM trained? I know dogs and turtles that train owners to do exactly what they want, when they want. Or hell....cats, the pets that think THEY'RE the ones in charge of the house.

You must be talking about my dog, All he has to do is sit in front of me with his food bowl between his jaws, and I'll immediately get up from the couch to fill said bowl with pet food.

[Kanedas Bike]

If Star Lord has trained Raptors for pets and/or use around the park then that alone would be the price of admission.

-b.

[anime52k8]

BTW, who's this "main character" you're talking about? Did you mean T-Rex?

Exactly, I get that they're trying to establish a new big bad dinosaur for the film, but having Spinosaurus take out Rex like that was total BS. the whole scene was just Jack Horner spewing his "T-Rex was a scavenger" slander all over the film where it wasn't needed.

They should have had a larger Female Rex show up at the end to frakk up the Spinosaurus during the boat scene.

[Kelsain]

Heh, yeah. Alan Grant was always supposed to be Horner, but the Bob Bakker character kinda pissed me off in JP2. I was working with him at the time it came out, and had a lot of youthful idol worship going. I lobbed a couple curses at the screen when he got chomped.

In retrospect, they got 2 things really wrong: 1 Bob would not have freaked out about the snake; 2 his ego wasn't quite big enough.

[GU-11]

Exactly, I get that they're trying to establish a new big bad dinosaur for the film, but having Spinosaurus take out Rex like that was total BS. the whole scene was just Jack Horner spewing his "T-Rex was a scavenger" slander all over the film where it wasn't needed.

They should have had a larger Female Rex show up at the end to frakk up the Spinosaurus during the boat scene.

I'm with you on that. Spinosaurus was a weak replacement for T-Rex--it was depicted in the movie as such a "bland" dinosaur.

BTW, I loved the sounds T-Rex and the raptors made in the original movie. While we'll never know what T-Rex really sounds like, its vocalizations in the JP movies are as iconic as the animal itself.

On a related note, I remember hating Dino Crisis 2 when they had a similar scene mid-game, having something called a "Gigantosaurus" kill off T-Rex. As much as I hated old Rex for giving me hell throughout the game, I was like, "FUUUUUUUUU!!!!!!" when Giganto-whatever snapped Rex's neck.

[JB0]

He dies in the book? It's been over 20 years since I last read the first book, and I'm only at page 40 right now. The only thing I remember is the Costa Rican air force razing the island with missiles.

Without the epilogue, it's ambiguous, but the epilogue makes it explicit.

There is one type of raptor that resembles if not beats the movie going versions, I believe called Utahraptor. But that doesn't sound as cool as Velociraptor.

Funny story, that. Spielberg upscaled the velociraptors beyond any then-extant species so they'd be intimidating.

The utahraptor was discovered while the film was in post-production, and through some insane coincidence almost perfectly matched the scale of Spielberg's raptors.

And while the movie didn't really make it obvious, Utahraptor in life would have had a similar mass to a friggin' polar bear.

Though utahraptor is not, and never has been, a member of the velociraptor genus

The velociraptors in the film were likely modelled after the deinonychus, which was classified as a member of the velociraptor genus at the time Jurassic Park was written, and velociraptor antirrhopus appears to be the actual species of 'raptor that Crichton was thinking of.

But deinonychus antirrhopus' head was only at about chest level on an adult human, so still too small.

It would be a fitting choice, though. Deinonychus was one of the major discoveries that made people question the long-held image of dinosaurs as slow, plodding, clumsy beasts, thereby paving the way for stories like Jurassic Park.

Incidentally, when I saw the movie as a kid, I was all "That's a deinonychus claw! What the heck is a velociraptor, anyways?" My, how times change.

Edited November 27, 2014 by JB0

[Dobber]

Exactly, I get that they're trying to establish a new big bad dinosaur for the film, but having Spinosaurus take out Rex like that was total BS. the whole scene was just Jack Horner spewing his "T-Rex was a scavenger" slander all over the film where it wasn't needed.

They should have had a larger Female Rex show up at the end to frakk up the Spinosaurus during the boat scene.

Totally agree. Plus if they wanted to even make it slightly more plausible they shouldn't have let the Rex close with spinosaurus and actually bite it on the neck! Rex had an incredible bit force that spino's thin neck would not have been able to just shrug off. Horner has some interesting ideas and theories that aren't bad, but he does seem to completely ignore established facts about Rex. Yeas it seems to have a large olfactory center in its brain (sence of smell) but it also had binocular vision. If it was just a lumbering scavenger that could smell a carcass from miles away, then why would it need to see so well? He also ignores that most predators, mamal, reptile, bird, ect, are both hunters and scavengers. That is what I believe Rex was.

Now the Giginatosaurus ( not Giganto) or Carcarodontosaurus had the size and strength to possibly defeat a Rex, BUT, they also had much smaller brains and no binocular vision. So Rex was smarter and had better vision than either of them too.

Chris

[Kelsain]

We'll, technically, velociraptor and deinonychus are 2 separate genera. They are in the same family, the dromaeosauridae, as is utahraptor.

/pedant

[Dobber]

Without the epilogue, it's ambiguous, but the epilogue makes it explicit. Funny story, that. Spielberg upscaled the velociraptors beyond any then-extant species so they'd be intimidating.The utahraptor was discovered while the film was in post-production, and through some insane coincidence almost perfectly matched the scale of Spielberg's raptors.And while the movie didn't really make it obvious, Utahraptor in life would have had a similar mass to a friggin' polar bear.Though utahraptor is not, and never has been, a member of the velociraptor genusThe velociraptors in the film were likely modelled after the deinonychus, which was classified as a member of the velociraptor genus at the time Jurassic Park was written, and velociraptor antirrhopus appears to be the actual species of 'raptor that Crichton was thinking of.But deinonychus antirrhopus' head was only at about chest level on an adult human, so still too small.It would be a fitting choice, though. Deinonychus was one of the major discoveries that made people question the long-held image of dinosaurs as slow, plodding, clumsy beasts, thereby paving the way for stories like Jurassic Park.Incidentally, when I saw the movie as a kid, I was all "That's a deinonychus claw! What the heck is a velociraptor, anyways?" My, how times change.

Yeah, don't even get me started on JP's "Velocirators". Not only are they WAY too big, their skulls shape are completely wrong. Deinonychus is really what they should have been called. Utahraptor, though found around the time of filming, would be far to large for what was used in the movies. The largest specimen was 23ft longs!

This new movie seems to be doing the same with the Mesosaur too. That thing eating the shark was WAAAAY to big. Cool looking scene no doubt, but again....dinosaurs are cool enough, they don't need to be super-sized!

Chris

Edited November 27, 2014 by Dobber

[close313]

When Chris Pratt talks in the trailer I keep thinking of Burt Macklin.

[hutch]

It would be excellent if that was his character's name...

[Thom]

One thing to keep in mind, in that the movie-verse of the franchise, it is humans 'monkeying' with the dino-DNA. These are not exact replicas of the extint species, but hybridized creations (bastardizations) that will look similar to the original, but will not be the original. In that context I can overlook the problem of original size, whether being too big or too small. This is also all done at the behest of a company (INGEN) wanting monster profits. So it is believable that they would have 'chosen' the star of their show and named it what they wanted. The Velociraptor. And the bigger the monster, then the bigger the profits - hence the super huge dinoshark eating the little modern shark. Ancillary dinos, those being herbovores (leaf-eaters) would most likely be left alone, seeing as the meatosaurasus are the stars and need to be baddified to the extreme, and need innocent victims (leaf-eaters) to hunt and dine upon.

[Kelsain]

Aye, well put.

[F-ZeroOne]

So those Raptors are his trained "pets?"

Probably inspired by methods used to train birds to fly alongside microlights and the like so that documentary makers can get really close-up shots. Took me a second viewing of the trailer to realise something like that was going on and that one of Star Lords special skills isn't "invisibility to dinosaurs"...

[JB0]

We'll, technically, velociraptor and deinonychus are 2 separate genera. They are in the same family, the dromaeosauridae, as is utahraptor.

/pedant

For a while, they were the same genus. Deinonychus was split back out later. Apparently, the book made reference to the merger.

I'm not clear if they were split back after the book was written, or if Crichton had dated reference material(You'd think after 65 million years it didn't matter if you were off by one or two, right?).

I'm willing to give them a pass on that either way, though I DO wish deinonychus had made it in as himself, particularly as it's such an IMPORTANT species.

One thing to keep in mind, in that the movie-verse of the franchise, it is humans 'monkeying' with the dino-DNA. These are not exact replicas of the extint species, but hybridized creations (bastardizations) that will look similar to the original, but will not be the original. In that context I can overlook the problem of original size, whether being too big or too small. This is also all done at the behest of a company (INGEN) wanting monster profits. So it is believable that they would have 'chosen' the star of their show and named it what they wanted. The Velociraptor. And the bigger the monster, then the bigger the profits - hence the super huge dinoshark eating the little modern shark. Ancillary dinos, those being herbovores (leaf-eaters) would most likely be left alone, seeing as the meatosaurasus are the stars and need to be baddified to the extreme, and need innocent victims (leaf-eaters) to hunt and dine upon.

That actually came up in the first book. Their lead geneticist proposed tweaking the DNA to make dinosaur 2.0: The dinosaurs people EXPECTED rather than the ones that actually were. Hammond was furious because they HAD real dinosaurs, you can't IMPROVE on perfection. Didn't appreciate counterarguments that they weren't real dinosaurs since they'd been gene-spliced to hell and back already.

[anime52k8]

The explanation I've read goes as fallows. Criton based his descriptions on a book by Gregory S. Paul, who believed that Deinonychus was actually of the same genus as Velociraptor referring to it as Velociraptor antirrhopus. Further, fossils of an animal matching the size of the raptors in the book/movie where claimed buy Paul to be another species in the velociraptor genus. But later (1999) turned out to be a completely different genus Achillobator giganticus.

Edited November 27, 2014 by anime52k8

[skullmilitia]

Here's my two issue with JPII and III.

JPII felt like a toy movie, a movie for selling toys. Nothing more, no heart, no soul, and just empty of a story that I could care about.

I couldn't care for anyone of the characters, and the premise that Ingen would hire a gang of Merc's and hunters to capture dino's on a island

to take back to San Diego was just.. weak.

JP III, Spinosaurus was the most annoying part of that movie. Apparently Spino-douche was dino security in the Cretaceous period..He finds the plane, and then continues to harass them the entire show. Like a some ancient school yard bully. The kid stealing the raptor eggs.. dumb. I feel like that whole movie was a waste of Sam Neil's talent.

I can get behind Trained Raptors, considering the premise is that these are all hybrid's, because the DNA sequence has to be repaired with DNA from an alternate species. I think the Hybrid in the movie, is two different DNA's from two different Dino's. Neither are far stretched, for what you would expect with a corporation like InGen.

[JB0]

The explanation I've read goes as fallows. Criton based his descriptions on a book by Gregory S. Paul, who believed that Deinonychus was actually of the same genus as Velociraptor referring to it as Velociraptor antirrhopus. Further, fossils of an animal matching the size of the raptors in the book/movie where claimed buy Paul to be another species in the velociraptor genus. But later (1999) turned out to be a completely different genus Achillobator giganticus.

It's not an unsound argument, really. They all have a lot in common.

Classifying dinosaur species and genus is far less clear than classifying living animal species and genus, since, you know... it's all bones, and not even complete sets usually. I do not envy the folks that have to figure out how a critter looked from a dozen bones, much less who it's cousins were.

[David Hingtgen]

Gregory Paul seems to be on a life-long quest to eliminate/consolidate as many species and genera as possible, until we're down to like 5 total species of dino. EVERYTHING is his books is listed as "synonymous with X" or "likely just a large specimen/female of Y".

According to him, there is no Triceratops nor Corythosaurus for example.

[areaseven]

[areaseven]

[Mommar]

Cool what the guy is capable of but I really don't like the song in that style.

[peter]

Awesome, lol!

[electric indigo]

Honey I pimped the T-Rex...

[Duke Togo]

Honey I pimped the T-Rex...

I believe the phrase you are looking for is "Honey, I nuked the fridge."

[JB0]

Honey, I gave billions to open a dinosaur theme park to the only company to ever let someone get ate by dinosaurs.

[areaseven]

"Clever girl..."

[Kanedas Bike]

I believe the phrase you are looking for is "Honey, I nuked the fridge."

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!

As far as I'm concerned Indy only had 3 movies, and unless this Jurassic Park is good then there is only one "Jurassic Park".

-b.

[JB0]

"Clever girl..."

Aww yeah!

Nothin' says fully-operational theme park like a pack of polar-bear-sized lizardwolves stalking humans through the grass.