| Speculative biology is simultaneously a science and form of art in which one speculates on the possibilities of life and evolution. What could the world look like if dinosaurs had never gone extinct? What could alien lifeforms look like? What kinds of plants and animals might exist in the far future? These questions and more are tackled by speculative biologists, and the Speculative Evolution welcomes all relevant ideas, inquiries, and world-building projects alike. With a member base comprising users from across the world, our community is the largest and longest-running place of gathering for speculative biologists on the web. While unregistered users are able to browse the forum on a basic level, registering an account provides additional forum access not visible to guests as well as the ability to join in discussions and contribute yourself! Registration is free and instantaneous. Join our community today! |
| Jurassic Park IV | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 3 2012, 08:20 PM (3,229 Views) | |
| miocenemadness | Jun 4 2012, 06:52 PM Post #31 |
![]()
Adolescent
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Though you do have a point, Canis, I am sure people would come for other similar dinosaur species; instead of T-Rex, get a Giganotosaurus, which was even bigger, or an Allosaurus, which was just as famous. Instead of Triceratops, get Styracosaurus or Torosaurus. Instead of Brachiosaurus/Apatosaurus, get Argentinosaurus, which was bigger, or Paraceratherium. Instead of Velociraptors, I am sure people would love Deinonychus (which the JP raptors basically are) or Utahraptors. Ankylosaurus, replace with Euplocephalus or maybe even Minmi for a small petting zoo. I'm sure that Kentrosaurus or Dacenturus would be great replacements for Stegosaurus. Basically, to me, there is a big five in the dinosaur world; T-Rex, Triceratops, Stegosaurus, Ankylosaurus, and Velociraptor. Then there is Brachiosaurus. All 6 species are over-used in dino-films. And then there are good creatures that don't replace any; these include Compsognathus, Deinosuchus, Dimetrodon, Liopleurodon, Basilosaurus, Gorgonops, Andrewsarchus, Embolotherium, Australopithecus, Ptilodus, Volaticotherium, the Dodo, etc.
Edited by miocenemadness, Jun 4 2012, 06:52 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Kamidio | Jun 4 2012, 07:03 PM Post #32 |
![]()
The Game Master of the SSU:NC
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I'm pretty sure Australopithicus would piss off the creationists. |
SSU:NC - Finding a new home. Quotes WAA
| |
![]() |
|
| Carlos | Jun 4 2012, 07:13 PM Post #33 |
|
Adveho in me Lucifero
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Agreed. I always wanted to have hominids in Jurassic Park. |
|
Lemuria: http://s1.zetaboards.com/Conceptual_Evolution/topic/5724950/ Terra Alternativa: http://s1.zetaboards.com/Conceptual_Evolution/forum/460637/ My Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/Carliro ![]() | |
![]() |
|
| Tartarus | Jun 4 2012, 07:18 PM Post #34 |
|
Prime Specimen
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
To be fair, Jurassic Park does have a justified reasons for at least some of its dinosaur inaccuracies. Namely, the time it was made. For instance, back when Crichton wrote the novels, and also later when Spielberg directed the movies, the whole concept of feathery dromaeosaurs was still an uncertain one. It was also actually thought by many at the time that they were smart, super-fast pack hunters, though we now know the truth was probably somewhat less impressive. As for the whole Spinosaurus killing T-rex nonsense in the third film, this could have something to do with the fact that they used Jack Horner as a consultant. You know as in Jack Horner, the palaeontologist with the irrational hatred of T-rex that made him do all he could to make it sound less impressive, including even claiming it was a scavenger (though Horner apparently later retracted this claim and admitted it was more likely an oppurtunist hunter). As for the inaccurately chewing Brachiosaurus (the jaws are supposed to move just up and down, but the first movie showed them moving side to side as well), the frill-necked venom-spitting Dilophosaurus and the monstrously inaccurate Pteranodon, these are somewhat harder to justify. Many modern fans, however, have noted that since the dinosaurs' genetic material was mixed with that of African clawed frogs, this could explain their differences to real dinosaurs and justify the inaccuracies. As for the idea of a fourth Jurassic Park, I'll say that while I quite enjoyed the first three films (if you look past biological inaccuracies, the stories themselves were rather interesting), making a fourth one seems like overdoing it. Though if, like miocenemadness has suggested, it uses less well known prehistoric species, this might make it an exciting watch (though granted they would still need a good plot as well, or it won't matter what creatures are used or how great they are). Another thing that would get me excited is if they have feathery raptors.
|
![]() |
|
| trex841 | Jun 4 2012, 07:21 PM Post #35 |
|
Entity
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
and there closer relation to us could make it a PR nightmare. |
|
F.I.N.D.R Field Incident Logs A comprehensive list of all organisms, artifacts, and alternative worlds encountered by the foundation team. At the present time, concepts within are inconsistent and ever shifting. (And this is just the spec related stuff) | |
![]() |
|
| Flishster | Jun 4 2012, 07:43 PM Post #36 |
|
Not Flisch
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The poster that came with JP3 actually states they are a JP made subspecies, probably spliced with Ramphy DNA. |
![]() |
|
| Russwallac | Jun 4 2012, 08:10 PM Post #37 |
![]()
"Ta-da!"
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, after the movies came out a lot of the backstory explained why the dinos were so inaccurate. It mainly has to do with the fact that the geneticists involved knew nothing about dinosaurs and that the scientists who did were using 80's/90's-era knowledge. |
"We've started a cult about a guy's liver, of course we're going to demand that you give us an incredibly scientific zombie apocalypse." -Nanotyranus
| |
![]() |
|
| dialforthedevil | Jun 5 2012, 05:53 AM Post #38 |
![]()
Frumentarii Administrator
![]()
|
The dinosaurs in Jurassic Park are theme park monsters, they were created to look like what the public imagine them to look like. Hence why the raptors were big and featherless as its what the public would expect, giant scaly monsters. Also the geneticists were using their own imaginations on what the dinosaurs looked like. The dilophosaurus on the otherhand was like that because Spielberg was worried that audiences would get them muddled up with the raptors so the decision was made to scale it down. Blame the paleo-illiterate masses not Spielberg who is actually a huge dino fan Also I would not want Jurassic Park remade, have any of you seen the godawful The Thing remake? Where shitty CGI replaced all of the brilliant puppetry and animatronics. What made Jurassic Park so magnificent was the animatronics. If Jurassic Park was going to be redone just make it 3D, then that opening Brachiosaur sequence would be even more beautiful. Edited by dialforthedevil, Jun 5 2012, 05:54 AM.
|
|
Please come visit A Scientfic Fantasy http://s1.zetaboards.com/Conceptual_Evolution/topic/3433014/1/ ALSO!!! JOIN THE NEW RPG SITE!!! FOR ALL MEMBERS!!! IM GOING TO RUN MA GLOBAL SIMULATORS THERE!!! http://s4.zetaboards.com/jasonguppy/index/ Join the Campaign to save minotaurs from extinction!!! (include this in your signature to show your support!) | |
![]() |
|
| lamna | Jun 5 2012, 10:27 AM Post #39 |
![]() ![]()
|
Not only what the public expected, featherless raptors were perfectly acceptable in the 80's and still fairly well supported in the 90's. And it doesn't need a remake just because science has moved on a bit. It's not a documentary it's a entertainment. If you're going to complain, you might as well start with When Dinosaurs Ruled The Earth or One Million Years BC. One of the defining things that make Jurassic Park are the special effects. Replacing them would be like editing King Kong to remove the stop motion, or removing the guy in a suit from Godzilla. |
|
Living Fossils Fósseis Vibos: Reserva Natural 34 MYH, 4 tonne dinosaur. [flash=500,450] Video Magic! [/flash] | |
![]() |
|
| T.Neo | Jun 5 2012, 10:57 AM Post #40 |
![]()
Translunar injection: TLI
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Yeah, the special effects are very defining. But featherless dinosaurs are still awful. Seriously, I just don't know why people are so attached to them. Fluffy dinosaurs are more cuddly than featherless ones, after all. |
| A hard mathematical figure provides a sort of enlightenment to one's understanding of an idea that is never matched by mere guesswork. | |
![]() |
|
| Russwallac | Jun 5 2012, 11:23 AM Post #41 |
![]()
"Ta-da!"
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I think it's the fact that people think of dinosaurs as monsters, not animals. Monsters can't be cute and cuddly, can they? Although, I honestly think that feathers and quills make some dinosaurs look even more terrifying. Can you imagined a tyrannosaur abruptly raising its quills into a menacing spiky headress? It's freaky enough when birds do it, let alone 30-ft. dinosaurs. Edited by Russwallac, Jun 5 2012, 11:24 AM.
|
"We've started a cult about a guy's liver, of course we're going to demand that you give us an incredibly scientific zombie apocalypse." -Nanotyranus
| |
![]() |
|
| Canis Lupis | Jun 5 2012, 11:26 AM Post #42 |
![]()
Dinosaurs eat man, woman inherits the Earth.
![]()
|
Velociraptors and their kin might look cool with feathers and might look just as scary. However, any other dinosaur, even if it has been proven that they have feathers? I just don't think they would be all that scary. |
![]() |
|
| lamna | Jun 5 2012, 11:58 AM Post #43 |
![]() ![]()
|
No, they are monsters. Giving them feathers would be like editing Terminator so the T-800 has huge feet and walks in a slow measured way. They aren't dinosaurs, in universe or out. |
|
Living Fossils Fósseis Vibos: Reserva Natural 34 MYH, 4 tonne dinosaur. [flash=500,450] Video Magic! [/flash] | |
![]() |
|
| T.Neo | Jun 5 2012, 12:12 PM Post #44 |
![]()
Translunar injection: TLI
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, then they're awful. And the world deserves actual dinosaurs in movies. |
| A hard mathematical figure provides a sort of enlightenment to one's understanding of an idea that is never matched by mere guesswork. | |
![]() |
|
| lamna | Jun 5 2012, 12:48 PM Post #45 |
![]() ![]()
|
Then that's your opinion on a film, and it's wrong. The world deserves any dinosaurs in movies, it feels like years since we've had anything good. Edited by lamna, Jun 5 2012, 12:56 PM.
|
|
Living Fossils Fósseis Vibos: Reserva Natural 34 MYH, 4 tonne dinosaur. [flash=500,450] Video Magic! [/flash] | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |


















1:44 PM Jul 11