Chronicle Collectibles Jurassic World Owen & Blue

[CityRaptor]

http://news.toyark.com/2016/12/12/chronicle-collectibles-jurassic-world-19-scale-owen-blue-raptor-statue-232975

Well, that does look nice. Not accurate to the real animal ( talking about Blue, Owen clearly looks like a human ) but accurate to the animal depicted in the movie. Also rather expensive.

[Nanuqsaurus]

The details on this one are superb, but I just can't look at that... thing and imagine it is supposed to represent a Velociraptor. Really hope that we'll see more feathered dinosaurs in the upcoming JW movie.

[Flaffy]

That's what Hasbro should and could have done.

[DinoLord]

To those of you who lament how Sideshow is overpriced, well here you go. 

[Faelrin]

I really like the Chronicle Collectibles Jurassic Park things, but they are way out of my price range. They are really good at getting their things as film accurate as possible (paint scheme, sculpt, etc), which is something I love. Granted it also helps that they make use of the original film maquette casts as well when possible, etc.

I still wish Hasbro's offerings of Blue and the other raptors were at least close to film accurate (which is what Kenner achieved in most cases for their TLW line), in color scheme, since that was in my price range, and what I was able to buy in regards to JW merchandise.  I suppose I could just try my hand at repainting one of these days to get this more film accurate look instead. Here's hoping Mattel can do a film accurate Blue, if they have her return in the next film, as Hasbro even had the chance to repaint the Basher and Biter of her for the Hybrid line's Owen set, and failed there.

Though I'm aware there was this concept art they could have used which could explain why the Blue toys (and the other raptor toys) were the way they were, but again they had a second chance and either overlooked it, or just didn't care: http://dinosaurstop.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/ARTDEPT_CC_JurassicW_001-e1457142429723.jpg http://vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net/jurassicpark/images/1/17/Raptor_Squad.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150314181358

I also know a dozen times it's inaccurate for a Velociraptor (or really a Deinonychus antirrhopus regarding Gregory S. Paul's Predatory Dinosaurs of the World book classification that Crichton referenced for his novel, which the creatures in the film were based off of), because of the pronated wrists and lack of feathers, being oversized, etc. These creatures have a special place in my heart as movie/genetically engineered theme park monsters though, since I grew up with them (same goes for the mutant frilled Dilophosaurus). However that hasn't stopped me from loving the evidence supporting that the real deal were feathered.

[stargatedalek]

Actually the book specifies that the animals in the park are mongoliensis, the animals Grant was digging up are antirrhopus.

[The Atroxious]

The details on this one are superb, but I just can't look at that... thing and imagine it is supposed to represent a Velociraptor. Really hope that we'll see more feathered dinosaurs in the upcoming JW movie.

Unpopular opinion here, but I actually prefer it that the JP franchise has kept their dinosaurs unfeathered for consistency reasons. It would take some serious retconning to explain why the JP dinosaurs are now feathered where they weren't in the 1993 movie, and I don't especially like retcons at the best of times, but to change something so obvious as how the dinosaurs look, and then tack on some weird excuse as to why they weren't feathered in the past would be incredibly cringeworthy in my opinion. It's not like the dinosaurs were supposed to be true to life in the original movie anyway. The whole plot of that movie was based on the idea that you get more than you bargained for when you mess with nature without knowing what you're doing: in this case splicing dinosaurs with amphibians. The inaccurate dinosaurs actually hold up well in my opinion considering that they were never supposed to be natural dinosaurs so much as GMO dinosaurs that could change their sex in the absence of mates.

Otherwise, I agree with you. It looks more like some kind of speculative basal non-dinosaur archosaur than a proper Velociraptor. Seeing this statue makes me reflect on the irony of how it was Jurassic park that initially sparked my interest in dinosaurs, yet now I look at their designs and think "that doesn't look enough like a dinosaur for me to want to buy it for my collection". I still love Jurassic Park as a movie, but I barely consider it a dinosaur movie these days.

[Shadowknight1]

I think they could've done feathers on the Velociraptors in the movie.  Old Rexy, no, but she's a 20 year old veteran of the park, she's allowed.

Blue looks great.  Owen...really, for $400, I'd expect a better Pratt likeness.

[Sim]

Unpopular opinion here, but I actually prefer it that the JP franchise has kept their dinosaurs unfeathered for consistency reasons. It would take some serious retconning to explain why the JP dinosaurs are now feathered where they weren't in the 1993 movie, and I don't especially like retcons at the best of times, but to change something so obvious as how the dinosaurs look, and then tack on some weird excuse as to why they weren't feathered in the past would be incredibly cringeworthy in my opinion. It's not like the dinosaurs were supposed to be true to life in the original movie anyway.

The explanation for why dinosaurs from JP movies are inaccurate has already happened.  It was in Jurassic World, when Henry Wu said this:

But we are doing what we have done from the beginning.  Nothing in Jurassic World is natural, we have always filled gaps in the genome with the DNA of other animals.  And if their genetic code was pure, many of them would look quite different, but you didn't ask for reality, you asked for more teeth.

Video of that scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n6X2q7oPZTQ

So it's already been acknowledged in the JP universe that some of the JP franchise dinosaurs would look quite different if reconstructed accurately.  I get the feeling what Henry Wu said was particularly in reference to the Velociraptor.  In any case, the Velociraptor have looked different in each of the four JP franchise films.  Particularly in Jurassic Park III where the head shape was changed, and the males even had single filament feathers on the head which I thought looked like an ugly mohawk, but it does mean feathers on Velociraptor has already been done in some form in a JP movie.

[Loon]

While it's not feathered, I must admit the sculpt spot on to the film. However, with pretty high quality Jurassic Park-Style raptors from Papo, Rebor, and maybe Itoy? I can't see much of a reason to get this, due to the price, and especially due to Owen's amazingly unlikable character. Also, if Chronicle wants to do the Pteranodon from JW, all they really need is some mud crudely sculpted in the shape of an old school "Pterodactyl," and slap the word "extreme" all over it, and they'll be set.
I mean, come on...
     

[Faelrin]

Yes, I'm aware of that bit. However, when it comes down to the film, there was some Deinonychus basis for the creatures going in the novel that helped serve to create the depiction of the creatures in the film. Aside from coloration differences from the novel and film's animals, they were also made larger to be "scarier" for the film.

That Wu scene in JW was good not only to clear things up about the fact the creatures are inaccurate to the real deal, but also helps to clear up why they were not consistent through the first JP film and TLW, JPIII, and to some degree, JW (aside from the minimal evidence for version numbering that was present in the film) with no prior in-universe explanation. In regards to the film's animals, I actually prefer the fan(?) names (V. nublarensis and V. sornaensis) to represent them instead, since they are far off from any of the real animals. Same goes for the Dilophosaurus (D. venenifer). There's also the generic "raptor" and "spitter" names as well.

On topic of Chronicle Collectibles, I wonder when the 1/6 figures of Owen and Grant will be available, and if I'll be able to afford those. At the same time those will probably be a tad too big to scale nicely with any of the JP toys. They would work well with the 1/6 BoTM "Raptor Series" figures though.

[Takama]

We can wish consistency for all of the future JP movies, but a single scene in a movie Is (Unfortunately) not enough to convince people in the general public that none of the animals in the film are made up to date.     I believe they must put a BIG disclaimer at the beginning and end of each movie to not take what they see on screen seriously.   

I say this because its not just your average Joe who takes these films for granted. But also high paid doctors in other field of Science (my own Psychiatrist thought the Spinosaurus in JP3 was a completely fictional species, and he thought Hollywood would keep there animals up to date with the times)     Hardcore Jp fans have no idea how much these films can influence the public, and make the jobs of Paleontologists a pain in the Arse, because they constantly have to correct people about the inaccuracy's.

[Loon]

We can wish consistency for all of the future JP movies, but a single scene in a movie Is (Unfortunately) not enough to convince people in the general public that none of the animals in the film are made up to date.     I believe they must put a BIG disclaimer at the beginning and end of each movie to not take what they see on screen seriously.   

I say this because its not just your average Joe who takes these films for granted. But also high paid doctors in other field of Science (my own Psychiatrist thought the Spinosaurus in JP3 was a completely fictional species, and he thought Hollywood would keep there animals up to date with the times)     Hardcore Jp fans have no idea how much these films can influence the public, and make the jobs of Paleontologists a pain in the Arse, because they constantly have to correct people about the inaccuracy's.

Couldn't agree more, whether one likes the film's or not, you have to accept that they are the most influential source of "paleo-art," ugh. Personally, I'm sick of the "they were mixed with toad DNA" or the "didn't you read that one part in the book, where they said they were making monsters" arguments. One scene in a movie, where the majority of people watching it only care about "EXTREME DINOSAURS!" doesn't make up for the lack of any care on the parts of the character designers to display the current science on the fauna shown in the feature. I guess that could be summed up as one of JW's major failings, it's sheer cynicism and aversion to change are ultimately it's downfall. I'm not going to go any further, because, I'm sure there are tons of rants on this film and it's impact on this forum.

[PumperKrickel]

deleted

[Takama]

I don´t mean to be disrespectful, but this discussion is just tiring at this point. The statue is clearly supposed to depict two characters from the movie and yet people still complain that it doesn´t look like the real thing. The Jurassic Park franchise doesn´t have the obligation to educate the general public on real dinosaurs. They have always been monster movies, not documentaries. Last time I checked, Jaws also doesn´t have a disclaimer that real sharks don´t behave like the one in the movie.
If it wasn´t for the JP movies, this forum would be a lot emptier. They made dinosaurs cool in the mainstream, which got some of us hooked. We wanted to know more, so we picked up books, watched documentaries and visited museums. If Jurassic World has a similar effect in the long run, that can be only to the benefit of all of us.
All I´m saying is: Can we please stop expecting licensed Jurassic Park products not to look like something from the Jurassic Park movies?

Anyway, the statue is nice enough, even though I don´t think the pricetag is justified. Especially when compared to Sideshow or Hot Toys products.

The thing about Jaws is that its based on a Living animal. JW are extinct animals.   I have no problem with the way the dinosaurs acted,(or the Shark in Jaws for that matter) but the fact is, People are going to assume everything in a Dinosaur film is UP TO DATE WITH THE TIMES. And thus be brainwashed to an extant.   Im not talking about the statue right now as its nothing but JW Merchandise. But like i said, The public takes these movies a little more seriously then most JP fans want to admit, and i expireaced this FIRST HAND with a person with a higher Education then mine whos supposedly is a Registered Psychiatrist

[PumperKrickel]

deleted

[Doug Watson]

Hardcore Jp fans have no idea how much these films can influence the public, and make the jobs of Paleontologists a pain in the Arse, because they constantly have to correct people about the inaccuracy's.

They should see it as a teaching opportunity. When JP came out our local news media contacted Robert Holmes and Michael Caldwell at CMN and asked their opinions. For them that could have been their first opportunity in a while to talk to the press and discuss current thinking about dinosaurs so it raised their profiles in the public for a short time anyway. Usually the only time they get any press is when there is a major discovery so it doesn't hurt to have them comment on movies from time to time. Robert told me he enjoyed the film, even with the mistakes.

[stargatedalek]

Only jumping in because a particular comment was bothering me heavily. I like dinosaurs, more than sharks even, but Jurassic Park/World did not inspire droves of people to go out and spend the next four decades slaughtering dinosaurs by the hundreds out of fear and paranoia. The author of the original Jaws novel even became a shark advocate when he saw what his story had done to people. Shark populations, white sharks in particular, are only in the past few years even beginning to resemble what they used to on North American coasts (and many are still in decline even in regards to local populations).

[PumperKrickel]

deleted

[stargatedalek]

I only mentioned Jaws, because it was the first movie that came to mind. There are thousands of "animal horror movies", like Piranha, Anaconda, The Grey, Moby Dick... None of these were treated like anything but pure entertainment by the makers. No intent to educate whatsoever, so I just don´t see why JP would have a higher obligation to do so. Especially since the ignorance does very little harm in this case, compared to the impact Jaws had on the species.

Apologies, I was replying mostly to Takama, but also to the general complaint of Jurassic not serving public education (hence why I didn't quote Takama specifically).