|
|
[ Log In ] [ Register ]
 means the user is online now!
I AGREE with you mrprongs
At 12:27:10 PM on 4/10/2013, mrprongs said:
If they want feathered dinos, they need a plausible excuse for the sudden change. There's just no reason for the featherless JP dinos to magically grow feathers.
Plus, where does it all end? Evidence points to dinos have elephant trunks? Fine, let's put that in JP5. No reason for sudden trunk growth, but hey, it matches reality, right? But oh wait, now new evidence suggests dinos didn't have trunks after all. So, JP6 loses them. Well, nobody's going to blink at that. In-world continuity needs to be consistent. Not fantasy with reality.
Far easier to explain featherless dinos anway. Like Dr. Wu suggested in the books, make them look like people expect. So in the movies, they did listen to him.
At 4:59:33 PM on 4/9/2013, juniorx eternal said:
Im seeing everybody worried about this small detail...
YOU SHOULD ALL BE WORRIED ABOUT THE USE OF CGI
At 4:59:04 PM on 4/9/2013, juniorx eternal said:
Maester i almost died laughing with this:
"Here's my opinion and it is the correct opinion"
ANYWAY... i think you right indeed...
BUT if the raptors could have some feathers in JP4 showing their evolution it would be nice
At 4:05:59 PM on 4/9/2013, Maester said:
Here's my opinion and it is the correct opinion.
JP3 set into motion Dinosaurs showcasing some sort of feathery ornamentation, but not throughout their bodies. Now, depending on if you want to go on continuity, they should have some sort of feathery ornamentation, but only the Raptors.
That said, they don't have to have feathers, nor do that have to be just scaly-looking, or naked if you will. It's up to artistic interpretation. Each JP has showcased some manner of scientific progress, but even still they've kept artistic licenses from the novel, or film before it. Horner himself stated that it would be nice if they could be all accurate, but then it would be a documentary instead of a movie, and this, Jurassic Park, is a movie.
At 9:46:33 PM on 4/8/2013, SpinoMonkey said:
All a little silly in my opinion, sure it doesn't help the scientific community, but I feel the franchise as a whole hasn't pushed the fact that these aren't dinosaurs, but genetic monsters meant to look like dinosaurs. That in itself is an interesting plot point.
At 12:08:48 PM on 4/8/2013, Dilophosaurus said:
according to the book, henry wu was the one who was interested in changing the dinosaurs with each successive version to fit the public perception of dinosaurs. john hammond wanted them to be as real as possible. also, the dinosaurs were patched together with more than frog dna. there was dna being taken from other animals (not every species could reproduce) and, i'd even venture to guess, other dinosaurs that had the most likely missing pieces.
At 8:34:25 AM on 4/8/2013, distresspattern said:
they need to come off it...it was made a point that the "dinosaurs" in these movies were not true "dinosaurs", but "theme park monsters". they were genetically engineered. if the animals of the earlier films didn't have feathers, it's dumb to try and write them in like they did in jp3 (travesty of a movie anyway).
At 2:45:43 AM on 4/8/2013, Doni JP said:
Stupid thing those scientist!
JP4 need not be based 100% in science.
JP4 need not be a scientific report.
Simple, in the opening credits of JP4, the Universal put this words: "This film is not based entirely on real events".
JURASSIC PARK IV: PERFECT!
At 2:34:20 AM on 4/8/2013, Dilophosaurus said:
the novel is dated. the first film series is dated. crichton's stories always contain an element of science we know (the science fact) and science he hopes we will know (the science fiction). i'm sure, knowing what we now know about dinosaurs, crichton would be bothered that the science fact portion of his story is not kept current. if he wrote the story today, you'd be sure some of those dinos in his book would have been feathered. the only reason they aren't feathered in the original is because we didn't know any better when it was written. that's it. the series should be a reboot, set in the late 80s, and using today's science fact and crichton's science fiction.
At 10:45:24 PM on 4/7/2013, dieterstark said:
Those scientist need to read the fucking novel, and watch the movie more closely. The dinosaurs of Jurassic Park were NOT actual dinosaurs but cloned living replicas, close as Dr. Wu could get them. It took years, but inGen finally got the dinosaur DNA and other animal DNA to sync together to make the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park. And these dinosaurs, these twentieth century creations of man, the dinosaurs of Jurassic Park did not have feathers!
Maybe some species may have had, in REAL LIFE, feathers perhaps. But this isn't real life; this is Jurassic Park.
At 10:40:22 PM on 4/7/2013, raptor2000 said:
If he shows them with feathers, people will bitch about continuity. If he shows them without, then people will bitch about accuracy. There's literally no way he can make everybody happy on this, so he might as well just do what he feels is right.
So long as the movie is good, I don't care if the dinos are covered in scales, feathers, or shag carpeting.
At 10:22:09 PM on 4/7/2013, Oviraptor said:
NERDS!!!!
At 9:50:50 PM on 4/7/2013, Carnotaur3 said:
lol oh please
Sorry, you must be logged in to post a comment
|
|
Add DJP3P to your newsreader!
|
