Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Jurassic World (may contain spoilers!)

12346»

Comments

  • #152
    Galvasean
    Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Hey, Tim and Lexx were awesome and you know it Kess!


  • #153
    Kess73
    Registered Users Posts: 25,560 ✭✭✭✭Kess73


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Hey, Tim and Lexx were awesome and you know it Kess!


    I know I wanted to see them eaten or stomped upon even before T Rex munched on the goat.

    Hell in the first book I was rooting for a dino to start munching or stmping early on as well.


    And don't get me started on the kids in the follow up films....:)


  • #154
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    The only good thing I can say about movie Tim and Lex is that they were nowhere near as obnoxious as their book counterparts. Poor old Nedry did not deserve what he got- the kids did not get what they deserved.


  • #155
    Kess73
    Registered Users Posts: 25,560 ✭✭✭✭Kess73


    Adam Khor wrote: »
    The only good thing I can say about movie Tim and Lex is that they were nowhere near as obnoxious as their book counterparts. Poor old Nedry did not deserve what he got- the kids did not get what they deserved.


    They were so annoying in the book. The manmade waterfall scene in the book was the perfect time to get rid of a kid or two. :)


  • #156
    Spoonman75
    Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭Spoonman75


    New poster is out. A raptor with no feathers. Does this mean they are taking a step back from the raptors of Part 3 and replacing them with the early 90's version?

    jurassic_world.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    Is it official/confirmed? D: Where did you find it?

    Trevorrow said from the very beginning that the raptors would be unfeathered for the sake of continuity (which is the best choice IMO). If this supossed leaked photo of an animatronic raptor is truly from Jurassic World, then yes, they're looking a lot like the original ones:

    jurassic-world.jpg


  • #158
    Spoonman75
    Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭Spoonman75


    Adam Khor wrote: »
    Is it official/confirmed? D: Where did you find it?

    Trevorrow said from the very beginning that the raptors would be unfeathered for the sake of continuity (which is the best choice IMO). If this supossed leaked photo of an animatronic raptor is truly from Jurassic World, then yes, they're looking a lot like the original ones:

    jurassic-world.jpg

    I checked google news on Jurassic world and the poster was the first link.

    I'm pretty sure it's legit. It's already been posted on the films forum here.

    Here's the link I took the pic from.

    http://ie.ign.com/articles/2014/07/22/sdcc-2014-first-jurassic-world-poster-is-gorgeous


  • #159
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    Awesome, thanks for sharing!

    Thus far it seems quite respectful of the original film :cool:


  • #160
    Spoonman75
    Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭Spoonman75


    Now for the sake of realism is this right? I jokingly said that unfeathered dinos were the right way to go. So this will follow the continuity of the original film 21 years ago. Great for the sake of continuity but not scientific accuracy.

    It's a shame that Spielberg didn't go for Deinonychus as the actual dino rather than settling on velociraptor in the original film. People will flock in their droves to see this film but they will see a velociraptor which in fact will look more like Deinonychus.

    I'm nearly 40 years old but I will never forget being about 10 years old and getting a kids book about dinosaurs and reading a chapter on Deinonychus. This guy blew me away.

    220px-Deinonychus-scale.png



    Science is constantly changing, updating and revising theories. It's a shame Hollywood can't apply the same logic.:mad:

    Anyway. It pains me to say this but dinos had feathers.:pac:


  • #161
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    Spoonman75 wrote: »

    I'm nearly 40 years old but I will never forget being about 10 years old and getting a kids book about dinosaurs and reading a chapter on Deinonychus. This guy blew me away.

    The movie did cause confusion in my case- for a while I thought Velociraptor and Deinonychus were the same thing, simply because the raptors in the movie where quite obviously Deinonychus...

    I don´t think the harm is significant, tho. People with no interest on dinosaurs won´t even think about it afterwards; people with an interest will read and find out by themselves.
    According to a book I have, Crichton and Spielberg liked the name Velociraptor more, and I can see why, really; "Velociraptor" is much more descriptive/ominous even if you don´t know what it means.
    Spoonman75 wrote: »
    Science is constantly changing, updating and revising theories. It's a shame Hollywood can't apply the same logic.:mad:

    Anyway. It pains me to say this but dinos had feathers.:pac:

    Some of they did indeed, but the raptors in JP are sort of a classic now- and they already changed their appearance once in JP3 without explaining it, so making the raptors feathered in this movie would completely kill the continuity.
    I think we should remember that these dinosaurs are not "pure"- they're blended with DNA from modern day reptiles- even amphibians!- or like Dr. Grant said, they're "genetically engineered team-park monsters". The movies never intended for them to be 100% pure (neither did the books for that matter).

    There's also an interesting part of the first book in which Henry Wu tries to convince Hammond that the public will not accept dinosaurs as they truly are, and that modifications are needed so that they will meet the public's expectations.We will never know what dinosaurs truly looked like, unless someone invents a time machine- so this explanation should probably do in the meantime.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Spoonman75
    Closed Accounts Posts: 184 ✭✭Spoonman75


    Adam Khor wrote: »
    The movie did cause confusion in my case- for a while I thought Velociraptor and Deinonychus were the same thing, simply because the raptors in the movie where quite obviously Deinonychus...

    I don´t think the harm is significant, tho. People with no interest on dinosaurs won´t even think about it afterwards; people with an interest will read and find out by themselves.
    According to a book I have, Crichton and Spielberg liked the name I can see why, really; "Velociraptor" is much more descriptive/ominous even if you don´t know what it means.



    Some of they did indeed, but the raptors in JP are sort of a classic now- and they already changed their appearance once in JP3 without explaining it, so making the raptors feathered in this movie would completely kill the continuity.
    I think we should remember that these dinosaurs are not "pure"- they're blended with DNA from modern day reptiles- even amphibians!- or like Dr. Grant said, they're "genetically engineered team-park monsters". The movies never intended for them to be 100% pure (neither did the books for that matter).

    There's also an interesting part of the first book in which Henry Wu tries to convince Hammond that the public will not accept dinosaurs as they truly are, and that modifications are needed so that they will meet the public's expectations.We will never know what dinosaurs truly looked like, unless someone invents a time machine- so this explanation should probably do in the meanwhile.

    You made some good points especially about the continuity aspect. Yeah going from nonfeathered to feathered to non feathered would confuse people. I read the two Jurassic novels years ago but the genetic tampering of creating the dinos you mentioned to me makes sense to me now.

    Why create dinos that were when you can create dinos that people want to be. Changing their morphology to suit the publics belief adding frog DNA etc.

    I think I'm getting too caught up in reality to realise that this is just a Hollywood film.:D

    And yeah Deinonychus is kind of a mouthful.

    Veelocciraptorr is kinda sexy.:D


  • #163
    Kess73
    Registered Users Posts: 25,560 ✭✭✭✭Kess73


    Adam Khor wrote: »
    Is it official/confirmed? D: Where did you find it?

    Trevorrow said from the very beginning that the raptors would be unfeathered for the sake of continuity (which is the best choice IMO). If this supossed leaked photo of an animatronic raptor is truly from Jurassic World, then yes, they're looking a lot like the original ones:

    jurassic-world.jpg




    Damn that is a nice shot. When animatronics are done well, they are wonderfully lifelike. The eye in that still just looks so good.


  • #164
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,969 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    Kess73 wrote: »
    Damn that is a nice shot. When animatronics are done well, they are wonderfully lifelike. The eye in that still just looks so good.

    Could this be the last of the animatronic blockbusters?

    Regarding the feathers, while what is now known(or believed), about dinosaurs contradicts how the dinosaurs appear in JP 1,2 and 3, that can be explained in one line in the movie.

    Minor Charachter: "I saw a thing on discovery which said dinosaurs had feathers, why do none of these dinosaurs have feathers?"
    Ingen Representative/Scientist: "Well when these dinosaurs were engineered on Isla Nublar, we didn't know about the feathers and in some cases the specimens we were growing developed signs of feathers and we assumed it was some form of cross contamination, so we made the feathers go away, bio-engineerringly speaking. Turns out we were wrong to do so."


  • #165
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    syklops wrote: »
    Could this be the last of the animatronic blockbusters?

    Regarding the feathers, while what is now known(or believed), about dinosaurs contradicts how the dinosaurs appear in JP 1,2 and 3, that can be explained in one line in the movie.

    Minor Charachter: "I saw a thing on discovery which said dinosaurs had feathers, why do none of these dinosaurs have feathers?"
    Ingen Representative/Scientist: "Well when these dinosaurs were engineered on Isla Nublar, we didn't know about the feathers and in some cases the specimens we were growing developed signs of feathers and we assumed it was some form of cross contamination, so we made the feathers go away, bio-engineerringly speaking. Turns out we were wrong to do so."

    Unfortunately that would again leave the question open of why they didn´t leave the feathers for the new park. The feathered dino thing has been known since the late 90s, so plenty of time for the scientists at Jurassic World to fix their past "mistakes" had that been their intention.


  • #166
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,969 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    Adam Khor wrote: »
    Unfortunately that would again leave the question open of why they didn´t leave the feathers for the new park. The feathered dino thing has been known since the late 90s, so plenty of time for the scientists at Jurassic World to fix their past "mistakes" had that been their intention.

    Well, I don't know the plot of Jurassic World. I assumed the dinos were the same ones engineered 20 years ago. Surely engineering new ones after all the deaths and carnage and, lets face it legal suits, would be a daft.


  • #167
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    syklops wrote: »
    Well, I don't know the plot of Jurassic World. I assumed the dinos were the same ones engineered 20 years ago. Surely engineering new ones after all the deaths and carnage and, lets face it legal suits, would be a daft.

    Well, it hasn´t been stated that the dinos are new but considering the species seen in the leaked brochure and the fact that apparently Henry Wu is involved, I wouldn´t be surprised if they were (already in JP3 Grant said Spinosaurus was nowhere to be found in the original InGen list).


  • #168
    Jurassic Cyclist 24
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34 ✭Jurassic Cyclist 24


    I saw a trailer not sure if it's real but showed a man hunting a velociraptor


  • #169
    Adam Khor
    Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 5,279 Mod ✭✭✭✭Adam Khor


    There are no legit trailers just yet


  • #170
    Thargor
    Registered Users Posts: 17,865 ✭✭✭✭Thargor


    rfjHVgv.jpg

    I think they might actually be going down the dino-buddy movie route!


  • #171
    dodderangler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,204 ✭✭✭dodderangler


    This is a legit trailer and looks like it'll be a real good film. Not sure about this dinosaur they've created and just hope it doesn't spoil the movie. Seems a lot is focused on the raptors aswell
    Anyway here's the trailer.
    http://youtu.be/RFinNxS5KN4


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,969 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    dodderangler wrote: »
    This is a legit trailer and looks like it'll be a real good film.
    http://youtu.be/RFinNxS5KN4

    A good looking trailer does not a good film make.


  • #173
    dodderangler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,204 ✭✭✭dodderangler


    syklops wrote: »
    A good looking trailer does not a good film make.

    True but looks exciting
    Apparently the dinosaur they've created has human intelligence.
    Hope it won't be too ridiculous like them films on sci fy channel


  • #174
    Scarinae
    Hosted Moderators Posts: 11,362 ✭✭✭✭Scarinae


    The official Jurrasic World website now has the dinosaurs that will be featured in the film, including some information on the Indominus rex (the dinosaur that they've made up)


  • #175
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,969 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    dodderangler wrote: »
    Apparently the dinosaur they've created has human intelligence.

    Ah why did you tell me that?


  • #176
    dodderangler
    Registered Users Posts: 9,204 ✭✭✭dodderangler


    syklops wrote: »
    Ah why did you tell me that?

    Did you not watch the trailer?
    I gathered all that from the trailer.
    I just hope they don't proper ruin it with ridiculous outcomes


Advertisement