Seen it now! by
Huinesoron
on 2015-02-03 09:23:00 UTC
Reply
And other than 'eee so cool (if scientifically inaccurate)', I have two thoughts:
1/ Raptor trainers. Yesssss.
2/ So... what makes the New Dinosaur so much scarier than the old ones? That it keeps trying to kill you, just like T. rex and the now-inaccurate Spinosaurus? That it's apparently intelligent, just like the raptors deinonychosaurs Maniraptorans - heck, didn't the spinosaur track Grant and company across half an island, and the tyrannosaurs in II the same? That it's big, again like T. rex and Spinosaurus? That it's all three?
I'unno, maybe it, like, breathes fire, or is immune to electric fences, or something. But I honestly don't know why they (the filmmakers or the park) wanted a new dinosaur when there's no real... advantage.
(Of course, the scariest JP dinosaur has to be Carnotaurus from the Lost World novel. Ambush predator with the ability to camouflage itself against anything, up to and including a chain link fence? Yeah, I'd run from that.)
hS
You know, my brother has a theory about that. by
World-Jumper
on 2015-02-02 08:10:00 UTC
Reply
Why the dinosaurs are scientifically inaccurate. It is because the dino DNA was mixed with frog DNA. One side-effect was the ability for dinosaurs to change genders, but another was the loss of feathers. It was not obvious to the scientists at first, because at the time of the first Jurassic Park, they looked exactly as the scientists thought they should look. Only later, after the study of more fossils, did they realize that the dinosaurs were more then a little off. By that time, however, the frog process had been refined and perfected, so it was not worth the energy to try and mix something else, such as birds, to give them feathers.
But hey, that's just a theory. A Game Film Theory! Thanks for reading!
