Jurassic Park 4 [Jurassic World] (no spoilers)

[HD-man]

as for the pachycephalosaur theory, I have to confess I do subscribe to it myself, but I understand its merely a theory (whereas Horner seems to think hes proven it)

Not to get off topic, but it's a hypothesis, not a theory. BIG difference ( http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/howscienceworks_19 ).

[stargatedalek]

I was using the "everyday" meaning of theory, not the scientific definition of theory
my bad, sorry

[Saurian]

it would be no bad if they had used as a super predator real kind, for example, or mapusaurus karharadontosaurus, but that he behaved like a real animal could lead, albeit too clever even, but the mutants a bad idea for Jurassic Park.

[stargatedalek]

all the current species are mutants, so I honestly don't have a problem with it

[Saurian]

Well, they were real species, did inaccuracies, deynoynus made ​​without feathers, feathers was not open, although in the film says that predators are close to the birds of the Jurassic Park in 1993, returned to the life of animals, it is infected with an interest in dinosaurs as many people despite the fact that the reconstruction is not accurate or outdated . JW mutant that we see the actual kinds of difficult to classify.

[leidy]

as do the original JP raptors

Their accurate for their time. I'm tired of people going on about jp being "inaccurate" it gave us 90's dinosaurs. Stop nagging about bald raptors.

Where as this thing is a syfy monster.

relatively accurate for their time.  They were more than a few steps ahead of the dinosaurs of Carnosaur and Land before Time, but they weren't on the cutting edge of the science. 

Go back to Bob Bakker's 1986 book The Dinosaur Heresies and you'll find several illustrations of feathered dromeosaurs.

Look at Greg Paul's 1988 Predatory Dinosaurs of the World, and you'll find numerous illustrations covering a variety of different feathered dinosaurs.

Both were widely published and influential during the production of the first movie,  they even mentioned Bakker's book in the movie.  But the 'raptors' they ultimately went with had more in common with Bakker's deinonychus reconstruction from the 1960s.

   Now if you really wish to get to the bottom of where the movie took a downward direction, in my own opinion it would be in once more retaining Jack (lets create species) Horner. Suppose he uses the movie to try and underline his beliefs again...only this time his visuals are scenes that place the tyrannosaurus in a scavenger role. Or perhaps he proceeds to demonstrate that Triceratops/torosaurus are the same animal, or that all species of pachycephalosaurus are the same species at different ages. Couldnt happen? Go back and watch the other movies again .
     Maybe we will get to see him feed Bob Bakker to another tyrannosaurus rex though....that was perhaps the most amusing scene of the movies lol 

Shouldn't it be "Jack (lets get rid of species) Horner", since he's a lumper rather than a splitter?  He's not the guy naming every weirdly distorted incomplete fossil he comes across after Harry Potter books, the dinosaurs he's named tend to be well represented from multiple individuals across different age ranges.

I wouldn't worry about him advising on the movie.  Anything they really wanted to do they cheerfully ignored him on.  They're only going to use his theories if it fits their purposes.

[amargasaurus cazaui]

uh....@ Jack Horner and new species....Terra Nova ring any bells for anyone? As for using only bits and pieces of what he says, I can only hope. I know in the first movie they let him go way overboard, and in the second, a few of the scenes were on his personnal agenda card (feeding Bakker to the Rex) etc

[Manatee]

it would be no bad if they had used as a super predator real kind, for example, or mapusaurus karharadontosaurus, but that he behaved like a real animal could lead, albeit too clever even, but the mutants a bad idea for Jurassic Park.

I wish they had made a mutant Giganotosaurus... like someone previously stated, all the JP dinosaurs are mutants anyway, so a Giga could easily be made into a predator the strength and magnitude of the D-Rex.

[tyrantqueen]

Guess they wanted to go back to their roots with the Tyrannosaurus again.

[DinoToyForum]

uh....@ Jack Horner and new species....Terra Nova ring any bells for anyone? As for using only bits and pieces of what he says, I can only hope. I know in the first movie they let him go way overboard, and in the second, a few of the scenes were on his personnal agenda card (feeding Bakker to the Rex) etc

The most recent Jurassic Cast Podcast interviews Thomas Duffy who played Dr Burke. He talks about Bakker. Well worth a listen. http://www.jpforever.com/2014/07/episode-11-with-thomas-f-duffy-aka-dr.html

[Ultimatedinoking]

So, your saying that a completely made up dinosaur is more accurate than a real creature (even with it's few flaws?) does that mean unggoy http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130329133557/halo/images/d/d5/Char_grunt.jpg are more accurate than lobsters? Because they are made up, rather than often being shown to be red? 

[Yutyrannus]

So, your saying that a completely made up dinosaur is more accurate than a real creature (even with it's few flaws?) does that mean unggoy http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130329133557/halo/images/d/d5/Char_grunt.jpg are more accurate than lobsters? Because they are made up, rather than often being shown to be red? 

No, I said it looks more like a real dinosaur than the other JP/JW "dinosaurs" (that is until I saw the its got three jaws).

[Ultimatedinoking]

So, your saying that a completely made up dinosaur is more accurate than a real creature (even with it's few flaws?) does that mean unggoy http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130329133557/halo/images/d/d5/Char_grunt.jpg are more accurate than lobsters? Because they are made up, rather than often being shown to be red? 

No, I said it looks more like a real dinosaur than the other JP/JW "dinosaurs" (that is until I saw the its got three jaws).

Hard to be real if your made up.

Three jaws? Like those dog things from borderlands?

[Yutyrannus]

So, your saying that a completely made up dinosaur is more accurate than a real creature (even with it's few flaws?) does that mean unggoy http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130329133557/halo/images/d/d5/Char_grunt.jpg are more accurate than lobsters? Because they are made up, rather than often being shown to be red? 

No, I said it looks more like a real dinosaur than the other JP/JW "dinosaurs" (that is until I saw the its got three jaws).

Hard to be real if your made up.

Three jaws? Like those dog things from borderlands?

Yeah, it's bizarre.

What's Borderlands?

[Ultimatedinoking]

So, your saying that a completely made up dinosaur is more accurate than a real creature (even with it's few flaws?) does that mean unggoy http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130329133557/halo/images/d/d5/Char_grunt.jpg are more accurate than lobsters? Because they are made up, rather than often being shown to be red? 

No, I said it looks more like a real dinosaur than the other JP/JW "dinosaurs" (that is until I saw the its got three jaws).

Hard to be real if your made up.

Three jaws? Like those dog things from borderlands?

Yeah, it's bizarre.

What's Borderlands?

I bet.

A fps (first person shooter) form a few years ago. My brother and his friends used to play it.

[Yutyrannus]

I bet.

A fps (first person shooter) form a few years ago. My brother and his friends used to play it.

Here it is:

[leidy]

uh....@ Jack Horner and new species....Terra Nova ring any bells for anyone? As for using only bits and pieces of what he says, I can only hope. I know in the first movie they let him go way overboard, and in the second, a few of the scenes were on his personnal agenda card (feeding Bakker to the Rex) etc

Well, Horner was an advisor on Terra Nova, and they used some fictional species, but I never heard anything about that being Horner's idea.  Far as I can tell, the writers cooked up a new dinosaur for their storyline, and they asked him if it was plausible that such an animal might have existed, and he said that it was.

Horner has said in the past that he wanted the dinosaurs to be more colourful and feathered but was overruled.

I don't know about any examples of him 'going overboard' on JP1, if that were the case I don't suppose the T.rex would've done so much killing. 

[Yutyrannus]

uh....@ Jack Horner and new species....Terra Nova ring any bells for anyone? As for using only bits and pieces of what he says, I can only hope. I know in the first movie they let him go way overboard, and in the second, a few of the scenes were on his personnal agenda card (feeding Bakker to the Rex) etc

How? I didn't notice anything that was "way overboard".

[Ultimatedinoking]

I bet.

A fps (first person shooter) form a few years ago. My brother and his friends used to play it.

Here it is:

Em aging that face, but shorter and deeper, that's what the dog things looked like, even having teeth between the head halves. It looks like some sort of genetic oddity.

[stargatedalek]

So, your saying that a completely made up dinosaur is more accurate than a real creature (even with it's few flaws?) does that mean unggoy http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130329133557/halo/images/d/d5/Char_grunt.jpg are more accurate than lobsters? Because they are made up, rather than often being shown to be red? 

yep, it means its more accurate (by technicality)
if something is fictional, than there's no way to make it inaccurate (or accurate)

a few species of crayfish can be red, but lobsters only turn red after being cooked (I won't go into that causes it) so when a live lobster is depicted as red its inaccurate, yet for example Gojira can look like anything, and be "accurate" no matter what (unless you want to compare it to a real animal which again not going into)

sorry if I only made it worse