Jurassic Park 2015

[kingkazma]

Jun 15, 2015 4:20:18 GMT 5 stomatopod said:

BTW I left when Indomitus talked the raptors into betraying.  











come again?

[Deathadder]

What's your question?

[Deleted]

I think there was so much wasted potential with the apatosaurs.

An apatosaur could have been the one to kill the Indominus, but no, they have to have them killed as if they were freaking defenseless CoTD sauropods when they could have used some of those hadrosaurs for the same effect. And they shouldn't have died from the shallow scratch wounds they had. Doesn't make any sense. Does a man die if he gets a few shallow cuts?

Apatosaurs killing Indominus would have made a much better ending than mosasaurs killing it. It would also help in banishing the erroneous image of weak defenseless sauropods from popular culture. And it would place the spotlight on a herbivorous taxon for the very first time. Why are they so freaking obsessed with carnivores?

Or even bring back the brachs from the previous JP movies and have one of them be the one to finish Indominus off. Really, give the herbivores a chance, they don't need to be depicted as freaking sheep again and again with no good reason.

At least the ankylosaur actually put up a fight before the Indominus figured out that flipping it over makes it practically defenseless, after attempting to bite it to no avail.

I think a good reason why they didn't show HOW the Indominus killed the apatosaurs is because that scene would have looked like a complete joke. Most likely it farted the apatosaurs to death. Or bent spoons with it's mind and the apatosaurs died of amazement.

It was actually rather great as a monster movie(not as a dinosaur movie though), but it could have been so much more.

[Deathadder]

Dude, the general public wants a giant carnivore, not a sauropod while that would be cool and rightful to see they just wouldn't do it. And the apatosaurus weren't torn to pieces because it would scare the younger viewers.

[Deleted]

Jun 16, 2015 19:53:28 GMT 5 Deathadder said:

Dude, the general public wants a giant carnivore, not a sauropod while that would be cool and rightful to see they just wouldn't do it. And the apatosaurus weren't torn to pieces because it would scare the younger viewers.

That's the fault of the way sauropods and other herbivorous taxa have been depicted for a long time.

The public wants carnivores because of the very erroneous view that herbivores are unrealistically gentle and placid as depicted by most media, thus being imagined by most as "boring" creatures in comparison to the carnivores as a result.

The media sticking to carnivores to appease the audience is the media's own fault for not recognizing how formidable and fearsome herbivores can be. Herbivores can be just as aggressive as carnivores and at times even more. The most aggressive modern megafauna are herbivores like hippos. Think about it, hippos are regarded as the most dangerous animals in Africa, not lions nor crocodiles.

The scene with the ankylosaurs was a step in the right direction but it was too small of a step. And as for scaring younger viewers, the movie certainly didn't hesitate to depict fresh blood, which is usually considered unsettling to young viewers, and I think even if the movie was rated 18+ for gore I don't see how the Indominus is physically capable of tearing an apatosaur apart without getting broken and killed trying. Indominus had trouble killing an ankylosaur before it figured out that flipping it helped things(for Indominus), and while apatosaurs may not be armored like ankylosaurs, they are far larger and much more powerful in terms of brute force.

Now you may say that Indominus was like a carnosaur and it's dentition wasn't really adapted for armored prey. But does that do away with how much an apatosaur is larger than an ankylosaur? Does it really nullify the apatosaur's size and strength advantages? I doubt it. It merely makes the predator more capable of performing the task, it doesn't mean that it suddenly becomes godly at it. Sure the apatosaur may get some wounds, but that would be better than what could be said for a dead and broken Indominus...

Not only does that scene with the dead apatosaurs remind me of bad memories of CoTD, it also goes beyond willing suspension of disbelief for anyone who doesn't believe in CoTD.

[Life]

You have a point, my friend.

JP film makers need better advisers for the matter of portrayal of dinosaurs. Jack Horner have proved that he isn't fit for consultation purpose, he is an idiot.

Also, I too find it ironic that every herbivore dinosaur is friendly to human.

- What if a Triceratops charged a human?

- What if an Anklyosaur wouldn't tolerate an object getting too close to it and hit it with its tail?

- What if a sauropod panicked by a large object getting too close to it and stomped it?

---

And I. Rex mauling several sauropods? Give me a break.

---

Jurassic World is a fantastic movie but it is unrealistic in portrayal of dinosaurs like most films.

[Deathadder]

don't get me wrong, its extremely annoying and it would be fitting to see the Apatosaurus kill the I-Rex but the general public would get all butt-hurt over it. but i do agree that that was bull crap and this movie will just give the public a bad view on sauropods and make them seem weak and pathetic. i hate it when people act like they are defenseless wimps. they have a large tail for swinging, they can rear up and crush an enemy and they hand possibly even shoulder check (body slam).

[spinodontosaurus]

I think it can easily be explained by the fact giant theropods in JP universe are as athletically capable as dromaeosaurs a tenth their size. Have you seen the way they fight? It doesn't surprise me in the slightest that the I. rex killed multiple Apatosaurus, the thing was gigantic and could have run circles around them with ease. Not to mention the fact that in a competition between a building, reinforced high security fence, a tree or a JP theropod, it's the theropod that comes out on top every time.

[Grey]

Horner has nothing to do with this, he advises but at the end the production choses, no matter who's the adviser.

Also, we already have seen herbivores being quite dangerous in TLW, and here we have an action scene involving Ankylosaurus (Colin Trevorrow's favorite). A scene showing Indominus attacking the sauropods would have been too gory and savage for the audience (and expensive).

And it is understandable that for dramatic purposes, the carnivorous species get most of the screen presence for attacks.

[Life]

I. rex may be the strongest theropod but taking on that many sauropods is unrealistic.

[Grey]

We can speculate the animals died by exsanguination or that all weren't full grown. That's rather a superficial issue to me.

[Deathadder]

I-rex is unrealistic. This is just so it looks good to the audience.

[Grey]

I. rex is not an authentic dinosaur, the final scene is full of symbolism toward this.

But I like this vicious creature.

[theropod]

Jun 16, 2015 22:39:38 GMT 5 Grey said:

We can speculate the animals died by exsanguination or that all weren't full grown. That's rather a superficial issue to me.

Of course they would most likely die of exsanguination, your point? That doesn’t mean the attacker didn’t have to work in order to kill them, it is simply one of the two major ways used for killing with mechanical damage.

It’s still very unrealistic. Most sauropods probably aren’t fully grown (including giant Apatosaurus specimens approaching 30m in length noted as being significantly below full size). We’d have to assume these to be juveniles or at least small subadults in order for JW to be realistic. I didn’t see it yet, but my guess is that this was not indended.

[Life]

I don't find I. rex unrealistic to be honest, it resembles Carcharodontosaurids.