Scrapped Concept Art from Jurassic Park 4

[Himmapaan]

Simply put, let us be thankful it never came to fruition.

[alexeratops]

Those things are ugly and scary! I'm not sure i'm gonna get any sleep tonight. *yuck*

[Takama]

Wow.....I lost all faith in Hollywood

If they were seriously thinking about making this at one point i would just let out my supper right here on my desk *yuck*

[tyrantqueen]

If that concept was ever utilised, I think we could safely say the series had "jumped the shark"

When you stop and consider everything that JP1 achieved- how it revolutionised computer graphics and overhauled the popular conception of what a dinosaur was- this is pretty pathetic.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I am unsure I agree so much ...I guess it is in how you like your science fiction served up. The first movie was also riddled with inaccuracy, misconceptions and scientific errors. The vision served up here for treatment four, is more science fiction than science error is all..neither is terribly ..appealing. At least in this context, you are dealing with things people can clearly realize are not factual, whereas the original movie left an entire generation with the misconceptions about dinosaurs it also created.
  I do agree those hybrids look rather hideous though. Obviously designed to market toys and figures , and sell merchandise it would seem, rather than the movie itself. Visions of pterodactyls with shoulder mounted cannons and stegosaurus with flame throwers ...yay Dinobots !!!

[CityRaptor]

Those guys look like something right out of a a Survival Horror Game.
I also think that Chaos Effect, aswell as DNA Fusion did a better job with creating Hybrid Dinosaurs.

Also Deinonychus = Miniature T.Rex? Seriously?

[TheAllosaur]

Pathetic, if they had used these, I would have NEVER watched it.  *yuck*
Pathetic...

[Yutyrannus]

Those SUCK! I can't believe they were even THINKING of making it!

[tyrantqueen]

I am unsure I agree so much ...I guess it is in how you like your science fiction served up. The first movie was also riddled with inaccuracy, misconceptions and scientific errors. The vision served up here for treatment four, is more science fiction than science error is all..neither is terribly ..appealing. At least in this context, you are dealing with things people can clearly realize are not factual, whereas the original movie left an entire generation with the misconceptions about dinosaurs it also created.
  I do agree those hybrids look rather hideous though. Obviously designed to market toys and figures , and sell merchandise it would seem, rather than the movie itself. Visions of pterodactyls with shoulder mounted cannons and stegosaurus with flame throwers ...yay Dinobots !!!

So what? It's a movie, it never claims to be anything else. The first movie was pretty accurate for the 1990's. The dinosaurs had their tails off the ground, and were fast-moving and quick-witted. Yeah, there were some stupid ideas (frilled-dilophosaurus and the mosquito amber thing) but again, this is a work of fiction.

Jurassic Park actually did a lot more good than bad. It overhauled the public's conception of what a dinosaur is (a warm-blooded ancestor of birds, rather than a cold-blooded, lethargic lizard type creature) It also helped to increase interest in the field of paleontology.

If you're going to criticise dinosaur movies for being inaccurate, why not criticise Valley of Gwangi, or One Million Years B.C?

It's also worth noting that several paleontologists were consulted in the making of JP- Jack Horner and Gregory S Paul for instance.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

I am unsure I agree so much ...I guess it is in how you like your science fiction served up. The first movie was also riddled with inaccuracy, misconceptions and scientific errors. The vision served up here for treatment four, is more science fiction than science error is all..neither is terribly ..appealing. At least in this context, you are dealing with things people can clearly realize are not factual, whereas the original movie left an entire generation with the misconceptions about dinosaurs it also created.
  I do agree those hybrids look rather hideous though. Obviously designed to market toys and figures , and sell merchandise it would seem, rather than the movie itself. Visions of pterodactyls with shoulder mounted cannons and stegosaurus with flame throwers ...yay Dinobots !!!

So what? It's a movie, it never claims to be anything else. The first movie was pretty accurate for the 1990's. The dinosaurs had their tails off the ground, and were fast-moving and quick-witted. Yeah, there were some stupid ideas (frilled-dilophosaurus and the mosquito amber thing) but again, this is a work of fiction.

Jurassic Park actually did a lot more good than bad. It overhauled the public's conception of what a dinosaur is (a warm-blooded ancestor of birds, rather than a cold-blooded, lethargic lizard type creature) It also helped to increase interest in the field of paleontology.

If you're going to criticise dinosaur movies for being inaccurate, why not criticise Valley of Gwangi, or One Million Years B.C?

It's also worth noting that several paleontologists were consulted in the making of JP- Jack Horner and Gregory S Paul for instance.

Hmm well my first comment would be your standard answer to most posts, It is my opinion and I have a right to state it...correct? and my second would be, again from your own arsenal,  why are you jumping down my throat for it?
   Nevertheless, to answer your questions. It is a movie, yes......what it claims to be or does not is irrelevent. I was responding to what YOU claimed it to be.
When you stop and consider everything that JP1 achieved- how it revolutionised computer graphics and overhauled the popular conception of what a dinosaur was- this is pretty pathetic.
Jurassic park did reinvent how most people view dinosaurs. They did offer some more updated insights into and more modern views of dinosaurs, I agree. BUT....and this is the issue most miss, they mixed in so many inaccuracies with the scientific that they created a whole generation of badly misinformed and misguided dinosaur-philes, that then have to be reducated to understand what they were given as impressions. I have had this debate once previously with another Jurassic park advocate, and I will only say this again about it. My issue with the movie is the mixture of idiocy with accuracy. Oversized Stegosaurs, undersized Compsognathus, raptors that could open doors, there is an endless list of the mistakes in science made for the movie, that can be readily reasearched online. And here is something most people have not given much thought but deserves mention. Suppose in twenty years it is determined dinosaurs were NOT warm blooded..and used some other form of heat regulation? Suppose even for an instant this becomes science fact.....the entire movie is built around that premise......brachiosaurs that catch colds, raptors that fog up kitchen windows, etc. Most of the visual little thrills thrown in to remind you dinosaurs were warm blooded might well be the next generations gag reels. I am not saying that dinosaurs were NOT warm blooded, but the evidence altogether is not there yet.
  Again, lets keep the comments accurate to my posting. I was not criticizing dinosaur movies in general. I was responding to your own post about Jurassic Park. "Valley of the Gwangi", pre dates" Jurassic Park by a good sum of years according to my video collection. Were you intending to hold it to the same scientific standards? ...same applies for the other title, yes? I was not out there gunning down dinosaur movies for effect, I was responding to your post regarding Jurassic Park.
    I have read much of Jack Horner's work and own his books. I read in the front of "Digging Dinosaurs" where he spent several pages explaining for all concerned the various things he was involved with in the making of the movie. One of the things he mentioned, which I am unsure you are aware of, is his diatribe about the scene where the Tyrannosaurs proceeds to chase the Jeep down the road. He then goes on to explain the scene was left in the movie despite his objections.....his objection was based on the fact Tyrannosaurs could not run and even if they did were carrion seekers and not active or aggressive hunters. Are you certain and very clear you wish to use Jack Horner as reinforcement for your points here?

[tyrantqueen]

I stand by my sentiments defending Jurassic Park. I do apologise for jumping down your throat  I'm very sorry, I just tend to get annoyed when people criticise things that I have a fondness for.

I don't want to start any more fights on here, that's not the reason I joined this forum.

Let's just drop the subject, ok?

[amargasaurus cazaui]

Sounds fair. I guess from my perspective, few of the topics I comment on are emotional issues for me. I can sit and discuss them till the end of time and not feel a twinge one way or another. They for me are discussion points, and nothing more, till someone tries to make it personnal. I dont get caught up in taking prisoners or keeping score, for me its exchanging ideas and views. Alot of it I see as science..I offer viewpoints, get shown I am wrong and modify my stand, which I felt was the reason for visiting the forum. I do not mind someone proving me wrong over and over, because you can count on me taking the things I learn from it the next discussion with great pride.
    I guess to be fair if you want to anger me or draw me out, insult the dinosaur spheres I have in my signature. They are each hand made from dinosaur bone, and I made them all myself. Then we will see how long I manage my calm cool, detached attitude. So if i say something bad about Jurassic park you can pick on my spheres k? That or my beloved Nim, the Psittacosaurus...those are two things I might consider getting defensive over.
  If it helps, as I have said before, i did like the third Jurassic Park installment at least....not sure why, except they used a different villain than just the Raptors and the T rex, I guess.

[Balaur]

If they put that in, I would have been so p*ssed off! 

[tanystropheus]

I was honestly trying my best to avoid all things JP4 related until they decide to officially finalize the movie in all its glory (w/official promo, etc.)....but I could not help but take a peek .....now I'm scarred for life *yuck* I didn't know that JP4 would eventually become a horror movie, wth....I was kinda hoping that they would surprise us by including feathered dinosaurs and marine reptiles....this surprise, however, is certainly more than expected...appreciated, lol.

[Himmapaan]

I was honestly trying my best to avoid all things JP4 related until they decide to officially finalize the movie in all its glory (w/official promo, etc.)....but I could not help but take a peek .....now I'm scarred for life *yuck* I didn't know that JP4 would eventually become a horror movie, wth....I was kinda hoping that they would surprise us by including feathered dinosaurs and marine reptiles....this surprise, however, is certainly more than expected...appreciated, lol.

Well, this is what they did without. Assuming JP4 is still going ahead (Heavens to Murgatroyd, why?  ), perhaps we may surmise that they at least came to enough reason to abolish this concept and think of something else.

[Brontozaurus]

It looks like what would happen if Michael Bay made a Dinosaucers movie.