You say a lot how the movie doesn’t intend, to how the designs aren’t meant to be realistic.
You miss the one, big, important detail.
Most audiences don’t get that.
The majority of people just see dinosaurs and go “oh, that’s what dinosaurs are like”. Instead of the wonderful animals that populated the area, they just see monsters that eat everything, chase down glass balls and then hit by a meteor, and it’s non stop carnage.
I wouldn’t mind if they went in a good direction with it, like say the chameleon carnotaurus from the Lost World book? In fact, the entirety of Lost World the book would be a good direction to go in.
Such a big element of the book was that the animals were meant to be real, they weren’t rides you’d find at Disney Land. That’s why Hammond got into a fight with Wu, because Wu wanted to slow down the animals to make them fit more with the public’s view of the time. That’s why I find it ironic that Wu is the person who keeps the monsters of Jurassic World inaccurate. Jurassic Park was the movie to update dinosaurs for the public, it turned dinosaurs from the slow moving cold blooded reptiles to warm blooded fast animals that were to be respected. Now JW has come and gone and has relished in staying in the past instead of doing what it’s original did so well.
No in-movie canon excuse will ever convince me that sticking with outdated lizardsauruses that kill everything all the time is better than showing the animals as animals.
Several hundred years ago people thought the earth was flat.
50 years ago people thought dinosaurs looked like giant lizards.
Whose to say if what we think now is also incorrect.
In the end I don’t think it matters. It was a product of it’s time, just like almost any other movie out there. It’s like talking about how Back to the Future 2 was totally incorrect because hover boards never made it in 2015. People just guess with what they know at the time.
I’m not at all talking about the original Jurassic Park. They had an excuse, that’s what we knew (more or less) back then. Aside from things like the Raptors being a mix of other raptors, the Dilo, etc., it was fairy good in the dinosaur department (and was a freaking good movie).
Jurassic World (and Fallen Kingdom) have no excuse for me.
But it’s canon that the first movies exist. Trying to retcon all their prior dinosaur looks would be a bit hard to swallow. I’m not excusing it per say, but I don’t think it’s as easy as if they had just made brand new movies not related to another successful franchise.
Wouldn’t break continuity at all. They explicitly state that they know they are wrong yet keep making them like that because its what the people wanted. The park goers wanted those “dinosaurs” and not the real ones.
Besides a few liberties taken in the original it was based on the current understanding of dinosaurs at the time. With the knowledge of what we have now, its implied they could have made more accurate dinosaurs but they didn’t sell as well to the public.
There’s two solutions. One easy, one harder.
One “After looking through our methods, we decided we would use the pure genome instead of mixing other animals in with it. We have the technology now to breed animals without the help of other genomes.” It’s already using fake science, just say it is more advanced and they can do more pure animals.
Two: Reboot the franchise. I’d prefer a darker take, more like the book. There’s some parts of the book I’d love to see on the big screen.
Once again, I never said they did. Playing the devils advocate, there’s people who nitpick movies because they aren’t based in reality, like my great uncle. Any movie that has CGI is an automatic trash pit, and you have to take everything in life with a gain of salt. Yes, JP isn’t real nor based off reality, it’s based around reality and explored topics people didn’t understand, which was dinos. Otherwise I wanna hear what you have to say about how Star Wars isn’t based around the modern physics of deep-space travel and FTL speed.
You and @SirKeksalot are taking this movie franchise way too seriously, and you don’t need to do that. I get that it’s not real life, and you care a lot about this field of science and biology, but shitting on what I think is unnecessary.
People don’t understand things they don’t comprehend. It’s not just a JP problem, so there is no reason to get real anal about it.
Movies aren’t 100% text-to-image though. There are differences between every book and film. JW is no different.
Then that’s on you. I’m not idealizing Star Wars at the future of space travel. But at the end of the day, it’s entertainment. It’s not suppose to be a documentary. Otherwise I’m going to get a refund for seeing Thor Ragnarok, as it Showed the Hulk as a braindead idiot and not the Banner-Hulk hybrid where he could control when he turned into the Hulk, like the first Avengers.
It’s not that though, JP is a movie, a thing purely made for entertainment. Yes, JP certainly skewed what people thought of dinos, but nitpicking how it’s not like real life is redundant. I know the difference between the Movie and IRL. I enjoy JP, because it’s a movie, not because it’s real life. Why is it hard for people to understand?
Er…what? The frog thing was always canon, but its effects on the dinosaurs were never given beyond the part where they could change sex. The idea was that it would simply be used to complete the genome. JW didn’t touch on this at all; Dr. Wu simply explained that the dinosaurs were modified to look bigger and meaner. Frogs are not very good animals to do that for a dinosaur, but that’s not at all the point.
The books and movies don’t take place in the same continuum. They’re different versions of the same narrative. Gene splicing is a theoretical scientific possibility; the issue is more or less how to get a live dinosaur from a complete genome, and acquiring a complete genome to start with. If you had enough of the mammoth genome, you could theoretically get something very close to a mammoth with elephant surrogates.
If you’re not even gonna try to make the dinosaurs look like actual dinosaurs, why bother using dinosaurs at all? Just use kaiju or whatever, or have the dinosaurs be radioactive mutants bred for war rather than science. That might as well be what they are. The whole draw of dinosaurs is that they were real. They were big, and bizarre, and even scary, but they were a real thing that existed on this planet. By deviating from the idea of dinosaurs as real animals, and by making them look and act nothing like they ever would, you diminish this factor. They were animals, not movie monsters. They should be treated as such or not utilized at all.
With the way you said it, that’s what it sounded like you were thinking.
There’s such a thing as suspension of disbelief. Science fiction is obligated to be based on science. Otherwise, it’s just fantasy with a labcoat and goggles. When something’s obviously impossible or unrealistic, like that “Iron Man” scene in The Martian where Mat Damon breaks absolutely every law of physics at once, the observant viewer or general nerd is taken out of the scene for a moment. You also need to keep in mind that JP has influenced what people think dinosaurs are. In the public eye, dinosaurs are glorified lizards that just want to kill things. This has even influenced documentaries, and it’s downright shitty. Instead of actually well-researched educational programs like WWD, we get Planet Dinosaur, which is a goddamn trainwreck.
Star Wars is fantasy, not true sci-fi. Its entire plot revolves around the supernatural.
We’re not “shitting on” anything. I love JP. It’s a well-written, deep, exciting movie that, for all its flaws, manages to be a damn good flick. But when its depictions of dinosaurs has harmed public science education and straight-up deluded people, that’s where I draw the line. We’re not nitpicking just because the inaccuracies bug us (although they do), we’re nitpicking because the inaccuracies very much impact real life.
But that’s exactly the problem. People don’t get it, so they don’t bother to do more research, and they get a false image of reality. That’s not good.
There have been multiple interpretations of the Hulk since the first Avengers comics. The movie is based on the more well-known ones. Hulk isn’t stupid, he’s out of control due to his own rage. That’s the whole point of the character–Bruce can’t fully control this power which puts his associates at risk. This example has nothing to do with what we’re talking about.
Difference is, Star Wars isn’t meant to represent anything. It’s the equivalent of Lord of the Rings in my eyes.
I never said anything about the quality of the movie (aside from this trailer, which in my opinion just looked very boring). I purely talked about the animals it uses, and that is is a sorry excuse they couldn’t at least put some fat on those dinosaur’s bodies.
Ahh, but JP is really the only medium that people see dinosaurs through. With space, there’s the fantasies like Star Wars and Trek, but then there’s things like the Martian, Interstellar, and Gravity which while not 100%, still base themselves in reality.
Didn’t say copy and paste, just talked about the direction it could go in. The movie and book only share a few things in common, mainly being Ian Malcom going to the 2nd island. After that, there’s not a real representation of the book’s content or message (instead a weird version of protect the animals I think?).
As a movie, Jurassic Park (just, Jurassic Park. Every other movie than the original and parts of JW is just so boring and/or bad) is great! I still pop it in from time to time. I just hate that it’s the only way for people to see dinosaurs in a widespread way.
If we had not just our Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, and Jurassic World’s, but also our Martian’s and Gravity’s equivelent for the dinosaur community, then this would not be as much of an issue.
Again, nobody is bashing the movie itself. We’re talking about the laziness and lack of research behind the depictions of the dinosaurs within, and how it defeats the whole point of using dinosaurs to start with. Semantics don’t have anything to do with this.
So real-life predators aren’t scary when they’re trying to eat you in general? The raptors wouldn’t be less scary if they were less bloodthirsty or more accurate; they’d still view humans as prey items, and they’d still be a very real threat to your survival. A T. rex starved of sufficient food would ultimately start hunting smaller animals, and humans would be very much in danger from that. Carnotaurus likely hunted smaller animals anyway, so they’d probably hunt humans by default. Dilophosaurus could retain its spitting abilities, it might just be explained as vomiting bile like a fulmar rather than non-existent venom. There’s no reason why the dinosaurs couldn’t be both scary and realistic.
Imagine Jaws not hurting the public image of sharks and, thus, shark conservation.
Wait, which movie? JP or Jaws? Because in JP’s case, context wouldn’t have to change. Dinosaurs are cloned, power goes out, carnivores get free and try to hunt humans.
My point was that not treating the shark in Jaws as an animal, but as a monster, had negative consequences in the real world. If you’re gonna make a monster movie, why bother with a real animal and not, you know, a monster?