Article about JP raptors would have had a forked tongue.

[Prehistory Resurrection]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.businessinsider.com/spielberg-jurassic-park-velociraptor-scene-science-2019-10&ved=2ahUKEwiGytfn1YflAhVFUhoKHUXfBLkQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw1H_dKeOAg9-OupPNS2AaAU&ampcf=1

This is an article that I have seen in which it is said that Mr. Spielberg would have wanted his famous JP 'raptors' with forked tongues like modern snakes. And then, paleontologist Jack Horner succeeds in convincing him not to make them as such. Honestly, it would not make a big difference because most of the dinosaurs in the JP franchise are inaccurate, take for example, the 'spitter' Dilophosaurus. Ironically, the Dilophosaurus has a forked tongue, and the raptors also would have one.
Read the article for more details. I hope this is interesting and have a good day.

[Faelrin]

Yeah I remember seeing Tippet's stop motion thing where they had the forked tongues a while back. Kind of glad they didn't in the end. While  Horner had his hand in some less then stellar direction for some of this franchise, I gotta give credit where credit is due on this one.

[Papi-Anon]

Eh, in the book Rexy had a long, prehensile tongue.

[Mirroraptor]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.businessinsider.com/spielberg-jurassic-park-velociraptor-scene-science-2019-10&ved=2ahUKEwiGytfn1YflAhVFUhoKHUXfBLkQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw1H_dKeOAg9-OupPNS2AaAU&ampcf=1

take for example, the 'spitter' Dilophosaurus. Ironically, the Dilophosaurus has a forked tongue, and the raptors also would have one.
Read the article for more details. I hope this is interesting and have a good day.

It must be pointed out that Dilophosaurus has a forked tongue is also an abandoned solution. In the props used in the actual movie, Dilophosaurus restored the normal tongue.

In fact, I don't think it's bad to add some fictional features to the paleontology in the movie, especially if these features don't actually conflict with the fossil material of the creature. In the original novel, the venom of Dilophosaurus is a feature not revealed by fossils. If the actual Dilophosaurus has venom that does not pass through fangs, we may not know exactly. In this case, the fictitious feature is added to prove the limitations of paleontology.

[Funk]

The problem wasn't really that the tongues were forked, but that they flickered in and out as in lizards and snakes.

As far as I can see, the tongues weren't even forked in the stop motion animatic:
https://youtu.be/qLceoQGfK-c

[Dinoguy2]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.businessinsider.com/spielberg-jurassic-park-velociraptor-scene-science-2019-10&ved=2ahUKEwiGytfn1YflAhVFUhoKHUXfBLkQFjAAegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw1H_dKeOAg9-OupPNS2AaAU&ampcf=1

take for example, the 'spitter' Dilophosaurus. Ironically, the Dilophosaurus has a forked tongue, and the raptors also would have one.
Read the article for more details. I hope this is interesting and have a good day.

It must be pointed out that Dilophosaurus has a forked tongue is also an abandoned solution. In the props used in the actual movie, Dilophosaurus restored the normal tongue.

In fact, I don't think it's bad to add some fictional features to the paleontology in the movie, especially if these features don't actually conflict with the fossil material of the creature. In the original novel, the venom of Dilophosaurus is a feature not revealed by fossils. If the actual Dilophosaurus has venom that does not pass through fangs, we may not know exactly. In this case, the fictitious feature is added to prove the limitations of paleontology.

Yeah I don't get why people complained about this. It's actually a good point and basically the same idea behind All Yesterdays. There are weird soft tissue features we will probably never know about.

Anyway, here's the stop motion test sequence showing the snake-tongue raptors.

https://youtu.be/qLceoQGfK-c

[brontosauruschuck]

It's interesting because Jack Horner has a reputation for being willing to sign off on scientific inaccuracies because 'It's just a movie.'

[Funk]

It's interesting because Jack Horner has a reputation for being willing to sign off on scientific inaccuracies because 'It's just a movie.'

I guess he just became more disillusioned/careless over time, as each movie introduced more far fetched scenarios.