You can support the Dinosaur Toy Forum by making dino-purchases through these links to Ebay and Amazon. Disclaimer: these and other links to Ebay.com and Amazon.com on the Dinosaur Toy Forum are often affiliate links, so when you make purchases through them we may make a commission.

avatar_Tyrannax

Jurassic World discussion (spoilers)

Started by Tyrannax, June 10, 2015, 02:17:58 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Sim

#160
Another inaccuracy is the Mosasaurus in Jurassic World not having a forked tongue.

Quote from: amargasaurus cazaui on June 17, 2015, 08:29:36 AM
Quote from: stargatedalek on June 17, 2015, 04:34:46 AM
Amargasaurus I hope you find this interesting,  recently conclusive prof that at least some pachycephalosaurs did butt heads has been published.  I wish I could remember the name of the paper, but in summary dents in the skull that could only have been made by another of the same species skull. I was really surprised to be honest,  I was always skeptical of head butting!
Shame you dont have a citation for that, I would love to see what the paper or article says....just when you thought it was safe to go back in the Pachy cage!!!
Is it by any chance one of the references under the Paleopathology section here?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pachycephalosaurus#Paleopathology

Quote from: amargasaurus cazaui on June 17, 2015, 08:53:38 AM
Quote from: Sim on June 16, 2015, 10:13:50 PM
Quote from: alexeratops on June 16, 2015, 04:14:46 PM
Well, the Triceratops doesn't have quills, which were probably on many ceretopsians.
The filaments you're thinking of are only known on Psittacosaurus.  There's nothing that suggests other ceratopsians had them, especially since evidence points towards Psittacosaurus not evolving into any of the other known ceratopsians.  So the Triceratops in Jurassic World not having filaments isn't an inaccuracy.
Thanks so much for getting this and pointing it out...I think it is fast becoming a pet peeve of my own.
I didn't know about it until you explained it.  It's interesting and good to know.  Thanks for having brought it up and explained it! :)


stargatedalek

Yes that does appear to be it! Thanks for finding it (or at least a direct citation of it).

Arul

Quote from: Dinomike on June 18, 2015, 10:41:33 PM
Quote from: Dobber on June 18, 2015, 10:33:20 PM
This was amusing...Zoo keepers posing as Chris Pratt in Jurassic World.
http://kottke.org/15/06/zookeepers-posing-like-chris-pratt-in-jurassic-world

Chris

Haha! Funny stuff!

Hahaha yes this is world trending topic right now. Many people doing that with other animal  :))

Balaur

Plus the mosasaur is blue whale sized. It's wwaaaaaaaaaaaaayy oversized.

Tallin

Was I the only one who thought the herbivores looked like stunted rubber versions of themselves? Only the ankylosaurs were interesting, the others looked like no effort had been put into them...I was so disappointed by the running animation of the stegs....argh...physics screamed there I think.

It was a shame as there were parts of the film that were really enjoyable and great...I just felt like there was no respect at all for herbivores and they were basically reduced to cattle...

amargasaurus cazaui

Quote from: Balaur on June 19, 2015, 07:38:57 PM
Plus the mosasaur is blue whale sized. It's wwaaaaaaaaaaaaayy oversized.
I have seen several points of view on this topic...and wondered if Dr Admin might have a take, being specialized in this particular area. Is the Mosasaurus in the movie extreme in size or is it plausible?
Authors with varying competence have suggested dinosaurs disappeared because of meteorites...God's will, raids by little green hunters in flying saucers, lack of standing room in Noah's Ark, and palaeoweltschmerz—Glenn Jepsen


Simon

I don't think its plausible based on what we have found so far.  While some truly humongous marine reptiles have been found in recent years (both pliosaurs and mosasaurs) I do not believe that even the largest fragmentary remains point to anything over, say 55-60 feet in length.

Which doesn't mean that there might not have been an occasional freak-sized animal approaching blue-whale size, just that it seems unlikely based on all that we have found - so far....

Amazon ad:

CityRaptor

Quote from: Tallin on June 19, 2015, 10:00:09 PM
It was a shame as there were parts of the film that were really enjoyable and great...I just felt like there was no respect at all for herbivores and they were basically reduced to cattle...

I figure that this might be due to genetic manipulation.  The herbivores get pretty close to the tourists, thus they are designed to be easy to handle.
Jurassic Park is frightning in the dark
All the dinosaurs are running wild
Someone let T. Rex out of his pen
I'm afraid those things'll harm me
'Cause they sure don't act like Barney
And they think that I'm their dinner, not their friend
Oh no

Blade-of-the-Moon

Posted this elsewhere, but I'm still waiting for a proper Rex VS Trike battle or even to see one go Rhino all over a jeep.  That's one thing the TLW did, the Stegosaurs fought back to protect their offspring..if only other veggisaurs would cause as much trouble and the critters with fangs. ;)

The Mosasur is said to be 60' in the JW media. However it did grab the I-Rex and pull it under.  The I-Rex is still growing but how big is it now? Wu said when full grown she would be bigger than the Rex. It looked like they were similar in size to me to maybe around 40-45'?  I would guess the Mosa is actually around 100-120' long based on this pic :



There could actually be multiple Mosasaurs though we aren't given any reason to think so.

Gwangi

 I seem to remember them saying that the I. rex was currently 50' long. It looked larger than T. rex to me during the battle, but not by too much so 50' seems about right in my opinion.

Shadowknight1

Oh, another thing I was wondering about!  During the Pterosaur attack, when the Pteranodon drops that woman in the water, it dives in and swims after her.  Could a Pteranodon swim like that??

And I know it was said that Pterosaurs couldn't lift people like that, but they aren't holding them for very long, so is that impossible or what?
I'm excited for REBOR's Acro!  Can't ya tell?

stargatedalek

Pteranodon was very likely capable of diving, so that felt nice that they included that. They would not have even been able to reach their feet around someone to grab them, the muscles in the feet aren't strong enough. They could probably drag someone with their bill though.

Shadowknight1

Quote from: stargatedalek on June 20, 2015, 05:09:03 AM
Pteranodon was very likely capable of diving, so that felt nice that they included that. They would not have even been able to reach their feet around someone to grab them, the muscles in the feet aren't strong enough. They could probably drag someone with their bill though.
Really?!  I thought the Pteranodon swimming was more implausible than them grabbing people!  Fascinating!
I'm excited for REBOR's Acro!  Can't ya tell?


Yutyrannus

#173
Quote from: stargatedalek on June 20, 2015, 05:09:03 AM
Pteranodon was very likely capable of diving, so that felt nice that they included that. They would not have even been able to reach their feet around someone to grab them, the muscles in the feet aren't strong enough. They could probably drag someone with their bill though.
Honestly, considering how aggressive seabirds are, it wouldn't surprise me if Pteranodon did occasionally do such things (although obviously not with people).

"The world's still the same. There's just less in it."

triceratops83

#174
Just got around to seeing it today. Did anyone else notice the Stegoceratops on the computer screens in the lab? It was a real surprise to actually see that in the film.

EDIT - I read back a few pages and Fabricious caught it before me.
In the end it was not guns or bombs that defeated the aliens, but that humblest of all God's creatures... the Tyrannosaurus rex.

Sim

#175
Quote from: stargatedalek on June 19, 2015, 12:09:44 AM
Yes that does appear to be it! Thanks for finding it (or at least a direct citation of it).
You're welcome!

Quote from: stargatedalek on June 20, 2015, 05:09:03 AM
Pteranodon was very likely capable of diving, so that felt nice that they included that.
Yes, I agree.

Quote from: Shadowknight1 on June 20, 2015, 05:15:40 AM
Really?!  I thought the Pteranodon swimming was more implausible than them grabbing people!  Fascinating!
Pteranodon is a very interesting animal!  It's extremely well represented in the fossil record and quite a lot is known about it, including its sexual dimorphism, its very likely diving ability and ability to take off from the water.  It has a very distinctive appearance too.  It's frustrating and disappointing when I see it get misrepresented as a generic, naked, bird-beaked, sometimes toothed, pterosaur sometimes called a "pterodactyl".

Crackington

Just seen the film with my family, a father's day pressie! Excellent film, with a definite Spielbergian tenseness running through it - the roller-coaster ride you want to get off but keep going at the same time.

Not too concerned about the accuracy of the dinos, I think its pretty clear that they are mutants, with the Indomino a (twisted) logical progression from making the others. My girls found it very scary, but loved it too, reminds me of seeing Jaws for the first time all those years ago.

kreativtek

Stumbled upon this wonderful image posted by @JurassicWorld_ on Twitter. Don't know about you, but feathered raptors look very menacing to me.


Dinomike

That's a great pic! Wish they had gone that way!
Check out my new Spinosaurus figure: http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=5099.0

CityRaptor

So much for feathered Dinosaurs not looking scary.  >:D
Jurassic Park is frightning in the dark
All the dinosaurs are running wild
Someone let T. Rex out of his pen
I'm afraid those things'll harm me
'Cause they sure don't act like Barney
And they think that I'm their dinner, not their friend
Oh no

Disclaimer: links to Ebay and Amazon are affiliate links, so the DinoToyForum may make a commission if you click them.


Amazon ad: