Forum Topic
Dinosaur.Fanatic
MemberCompsognathusApr-12-2013 7:23 PMAs more and more news comes out about Jurassic Park 4, the science world is hopping. It seems paleontologists are not too happy about Colin Trevorrow's decision about featherless dinosaurs. Darren Naish, a paleontologist from the university of Southampton, said that the decision is "a disregard for knowledge," adding, "It helps perpetuate the notion that dinosaurs were all scaly dragons, alien and unlike modern animals". Several other scientists are angered, claiming that the film's disregard of science will lead children astray and deprive them of knowledge about the true nature of dinosaurs.
On the other side of the spectrum, some people are skeptical about the very idea of another Jurassic Park sequel. Give this article by Sean O'Neal of A.V. Club a read:
"Jurassic Park 4 will resurrect another new dinosaur, clearly having never learned the lessons of Jurassic Park
By Sean O'Neal April 5, 2013
In the spirit of playing God that has defined the films, Jurassic Park 4 is set to revive an all-new dinosaur when the Colin Trevorrow-directed film hits, having failed to learn the lessons of the last three times they did this. Jack Horner, paleontologist and Jurassic Park dinosaur adviser—and a scientist so preoccupied with whether or not he could, he didn’t stop to think if he should—says the sequel will prominently feature the return of some other, previously extinct species that will be marveled at just before it tries to kill everyone. “I can't actually tell you who that will be,” Horner says—who actually can, but won’t—adding, “But you'll want to keep the lights on after you see this movie.” Ah, so it’s the fabled Blacklightosaurus, bane of the prehistoric stoner. Real cool, Jack Horner. "
Here's my question: first of all, how many young children will be watching Jurassic Park 4, and out of those that do, how many of them will care whether or not the dinosaurs have feathers? Is Jurassic Park 4 becoming a dinosaur documentary?
And also, what about this article? Why isn't Sean O'Neill enthusiastic about the changes that HAVE been made for the movie (aka new director and some crew)??
What are your thoughts on the science/feather debate and it's effect on children (really?) as well as the article?
"Either way, you probably won't get off this island alive."
--Alan Grant
17 Replies
x_paden_x
MemberCompsognathusApr-12-2013 9:22 PMthey're will always be skepticism no mater what decisions you make...
i think its good they didn't use feathers NO ONE WANTS TO BE CHASED BY A GIANT CHICKEN thats all im saying. when i first saw jurassic park i thought it was dead on (course i saw it when I was six so thats around the time every kid loves dinosaurs) it didn't bother me
, the fact of FULLY feather dinosaurs sounds stupid to me, im okay with some feathers (jp 3) but not fully feathered. jurassic park is somewhat a documentary not really but it gives us the best view of dinosaurs ever (what makes it not a documentary is the fact that humans didn't have anything to do with dinosaurs)
why sam isn't excited for the 4th jp baffles me if i had his position id love it
Life cannot be contained, it breaks walls, crashes through barriers sometimes painfully, but uh... Life uh, finds a way
Lord Vader
MemberTyrannosaurus RexApr-12-2013 9:54 PMAs far as skepticism/false information goes, of course there's going to be some (it's Jurassic Park, where they brought dinosaurs to life with blood found in ancient Mosquitos, and the holes in the DNA replaced with frog DNA). The whole concept on dinosaurs having feathers is kind of strange. Maybe on the raptors as a little crest, or on the juveniles, but not T.Rex. A little crest I could deal with, but not full body coverage (just imagine a T.Rex covered in feathers as it enters the screen, and all the other dinosaurs point and laugh at it because it looks like mega chicken). T.Rex should not have feathers, but it is nice that people are taking the new discoveries and adding them to shows, and possibly movies.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
x_paden_x
MemberCompsognathusApr-12-2013 10:10 PMyou see thats my standpoint mr happy
JUST LOOK AT THE COMPARISON
[img]http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/imagebuzz/web05/2010/11/10/7/how-t-rex-really-looked-like-24746-1289391497-24.jpg[/img]
[img]http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/files/2008/02/Photograph_of_a_chicken_from_PLOS_article_on_origin_of_chicken.jpg[/img]
you see thats the fans stand point of what the fourth would look like IF you used bloody feather dinosaurs
you see the infants/juveniles would have the feathers for warmth
[img]http://static.environmentalgraffiti.com/sites/default/files/images/Sleeping-baby-t-rex.img_assist_custom-600x401.jpg[/img]
Life cannot be contained, it breaks walls, crashes through barriers sometimes painfully, but uh... Life uh, finds a way
t-rex90
MemberCompsognathusApr-13-2013 12:05 AMThere will always be skepticism and criticism no matter what. I'm actually glad they decide not to use feathered dinosaurs for the 4th film because really, why call them dinosaurs which last I checked meant "Terrible Lizard" when you're just going to have them look like a bunch of overgrown chickens. Some feathers are ok, like the raptors having some on their heads in jurassic park 3 but full covered? no no that's just stupid to me. And as far as the Sean O' Neill article goes, just another neh saying critic, I don't care what he thinks, I'm excited for this film like many others on here.
Dinosaur.Fanatic
MemberCompsognathusApr-13-2013 11:12 AMHere are my thoughts:
First of all, I didn't really intend this to become another feather/non-feather discussion (no offense). I respect all your views regarding whether or not dinosaurs should or shouldn't have them, as well as which dinosaurs, and how many feathers, etc. My question is, if Jurassic Park is supposed to be a heart-stopping, thrilling, action-packed, fan-adored movie, WHY are scientists treating it like only a documentary? What's more important, that Jurassic Park 4 appeals to fans and turns out to be a great movie, or that it corresponds perfectly with scientific discovery? Would these children (who are apparently being led astray, according to scientists) really care about "being denied knowledge," or will fans be just as happy with their classic Jurassic Park dinosaurs?
My opinion: Jurassic Park 4 will not be the same without classic dinos, and I like the director's decision. Yes, I think some dinosaurs (the raptors) would look cool with a coat of feathers, but I'm not going to have blow a fuse because they don't have feathers. I don't understand why scientists can't see Jurassic Park 4 for what it will hopefully be, a stunning movie that reminds us of the original, but instead they have to rebuke it for not being up to date with science.
As for the article, I agree with Paden and T-rex90, why would someone be so un-enthusiastic about a sequel to one of the best movies ever made?
"Either way, you probably won't get off this island alive."
--Alan Grant
Primelord
MemberCompsognathusApr-13-2013 11:29 AMIf there are feathers at all there should be very minimal and one thing that I might not agree about x_paden_x is that remember in the lost world the t rex pup didn't have feathers. A crest on a velociraptor is fine but minimal feathers is what I say.[img]http://www.jurassicpark4-movie.com/media/jurassicpark_3_velociraptor.jpg[/img]
They show extreme intelligence; even problem solving intelligence. Especially the big one. We bred eight originally, but when she came in, she took over the pack and killed all but two of the others.
Lord Vader
MemberTyrannosaurus RexApr-13-2013 1:23 PMSorry if I made it a feather or not discussion, that was just the first issue I thought of and you mentioned it. I really don't care if it is factual or not, I know enough to pass it off as fake or legit, I just want it to be like the other movies (the first one mostly). It would be cool to have lots of dinosaur battles (T.Rex vs Charcharadontosaurs, Spino, Gigantosaurus, Mapusaurus, and any other predator you can think of in any fight), but that would be false information, which would make the movie scientifically inaccurate, but it would be cool. If I want to learn stuff and not watch an awesome movie, I will watch a documentary or do research, or go to a museum.
Jack of all trades. Master of none
Xenothinker
MemberCompsognathusApr-13-2013 3:04 PMthis is a stupid debate. scientists should look at the premise of these movies, and, oh I dunno, read the books. The dinos in the films and books can conceivably be nothing more than "theme park monsters". iNgen wanted to create a zoo of dinos, and they simply did not think the dinos would be believable as the feathered kind we now know exist. In fact, in the books, it is alluded to Wu moving dinos through various version numbers until they got to where they wanted the dinos to be, and even then, he wanted to push the science doctoring further.
In closing, you can surmise the dinos we see on these islands are, n fact, not really dinos, but genetically altered dinos that were bred to fit the needs of a mega corporation.
x_paden_x
MemberCompsognathusApr-13-2013 3:47 PMwell prime lord it wouldn't of had feathers for one reason there for warmth on nublar/sorna it wouldve been too warm for feathers at all
my idea is that all these "feathered" dinos we keep finding in china is because its MUCH MUCH colder in china then it is in costa rica....
but i do respect your point prime lord all they need is crests... the raptors in the first movie didn't have them because they were all female, but in the third movie only the alpha white raptor was female
also the baby in TLW would've grown out of it feathers the feathers are for VERY young juveniles and hatchlings... sometimes in colder climates
my point is the ingen dinosaurs didn't have feathers (cept for the crests) because it was much too warm
Life cannot be contained, it breaks walls, crashes through barriers sometimes painfully, but uh... Life uh, finds a way
Primelord
MemberCompsognathusApr-13-2013 7:08 PMI understand I was just throwing it out there I completely respect you ideas. It works to have the feathered Dinos in the cold. But from a scientific standpoint, I believe in your post comparing a T. rex to a chicken. Either way as long as there aren't a load over of feathers I am completely fantastic with it. Let the park run wild!
They show extreme intelligence; even problem solving intelligence. Especially the big one. We bred eight originally, but when she came in, she took over the pack and killed all but two of the others.
Dinosaur.Fanatic
MemberCompsognathusApr-13-2013 7:53 PMXenothinker is spot on. Scientists don't know anything about the books and then they make conjectures about how the movie will affect science.
And MrHappy, exactly my point! If I want to learn about dinosaurs I'm not gonna go watch Jurassic Park where we have a Spinosaurus killing a T-rex and velociraptors twice as big as they should be! (why aren't scientists mad at those, by the way??) Thanks for your input! :)
"Either way, you probably won't get off this island alive."
--Alan Grant
x_paden_x
MemberCompsognathusApr-14-2013 3:46 PMdo you know when jurassic park was first released it was the most accurate movie about dinosaurs ever... i think they should still say thats so i mean theres millions of things for you to be doing scientists like solving disease stopping poverty but no your wasting your time on how accurate a BLOODY MOVIE IS
as far as people who dont care on latest scientifically finds it dosent matter
Life cannot be contained, it breaks walls, crashes through barriers sometimes painfully, but uh... Life uh, finds a way
shambs
MemberCompsognathusApr-14-2013 4:02 PMTerror bird! :p
[img]http://i1070.photobucket.com/albums/u498/protoxeno86/terrorbird_zps9126eddd.jpg[/img]
[img]http://i1070.photobucket.com/albums/u498/protoxeno86/Brontornis_zps1e404db3.jpg[/img]
Spino186
MemberCompsognathusApr-15-2013 2:15 PMThere really shouldn't be any bashing over the featherless idea. That's so ridiculous that I can't even believe it. I thought the raptors in the 3rd JP movie were cool looking. I do like that Trevorrow is staying true to the old time dino look. Listen, kids can always grow up and be taught about the dinosaurs actually be slightly feathered when they're older JUST LIKE I DID. I saw JP for the first time when I was 3 years old and became obsessed with it haha Yeah I know that a bit young but I begged my parents to watch it. Anyways, just because we are more educated about dinosaurs now, "feather-wise" does not mean we have to force it into the movie. It's not a big deal. So calm down all you nerdy scientists who get your feathers ruffled over something so crazy.. haha slight pun intended
x_paden_x
MemberCompsognathusApr-15-2013 10:35 PMbest pun in this discussion yet
point still stands no one cares for feathers or not
the raptors in jp 3 had them and it made them seem more real now a fully feathered rex would be silly
Life cannot be contained, it breaks walls, crashes through barriers sometimes painfully, but uh... Life uh, finds a way
t-rex90
MemberCompsognathusApr-16-2013 3:49 PMExactly, some feathers on certain dinos like the raptors is ok and I'll admit they actually do look cool with them but a full covered t-rex or any other super predator is just ridiculous.
Bombillazo
MemberCompsognathusMay-09-2013 2:46 PMIngen's dinosaurs aren't complete 100% clones of dinosaurs, their lack of feathers can be justified to the scientific community. I prefer them without feathers but I wouldn't mind some feathers like in JP3's dinosaurs.
Add A Reply
