JURASSIC WORLD: DOMINION

[Brocc21]

When Marty McFly plays "Jonny B. Goode" in Back to the Future on a Gibson ES-345, does anyone care that that guitar wouldn't have been released for another 3 years after that scene takes place? Guitar people might, but no one else does, and so it is the same thing with regards to the dinosaurs in the Jurassic Park/World franchise. I would prefer it if the right dinosaurs were interacting with each other in this flashback scene, but I understand why they aren't. They want to showcase specific dinosaurs for a wow factor, and those dinosaurs probably tie into the story too somehow.

Couldn't agree more. I think a lot of people in the Paleo community forget that our science doesn't really effect the broader scope of things in the real world. Spinosaurus had a tail fin, that's really interesting. But it doesn't help get the bills paid if you know what I mean. A lot of the people going to see the new Jurassic Park wont be dino nerds like us. Just people who wanna see a cool movie or some parents who want to give the kids something to do for 2 hours. And if some dinosaurs not being in the correct time zones in a made up film universe is a big deal for you, I think your just looking a little to into it.

Realistically how can you justify Moros and Tyrannosaurus coexisting at the same time from what this prologue sounds like when Moros or a close relative lead to the existence of Tyrannosaurus.

Movie magic

Spoiler

Also I think some of you are missing the fact that this whole sequence is a story telling element. We see a Giganotosaur kill a T.rex in the past. And then later in the film Rexy will fight Biosyns cloned Giga.It may not be accurate but it makes for an interesting plot.

[close]

[Gwangi]

I think the main thing to consider is, is any of this important? It might be annoying to dinosaur buffs like ourselves, but we're a miniscule fraction of the population that's going to go see this movie, have some perspective. Every movie has inaccuracies, does it influence your opinion of the movie or is it only important when it's something you're interested in? And if every inaccuracy in every movie bothers you then why do you even watch movies at all? Car movies have inaccuracies, but lets say you're not a car person, do you care about those inaccuracies or think they're important? Probably not. I like historical films and they often inspire me to learn the true stories behind them. If it turns out that a particular movie wasn't accurate should I stop enjoying it?

We can sit here and sling crap at these movies in good fun, bond over it, laugh at it, etc. but some of you take this all way too seriously. If time displaced dinosaurs is such an affront to your sensibilities then I implore you, DO NOT give these Hollywood heathens your money. Hit them where it hurts, vote with your wallet.

EDIT: Also, it's pretty clear from Trevorrow's comment that he was talking about the visual accuracy of the dinosaurs only. Would additional accuracy have been appreciated? Yeah, but c'est la vie, take what you can get. Why are any of you putting value in Trevorrow's word anyway? You probably didn't like the last two movies.

[Dynomikegojira]

When Marty McFly plays "Jonny B. Goode" in Back to the Future on a Gibson ES-345, does anyone care that that guitar wouldn't have been released for another 3 years after that scene takes place? Guitar people might, but no one else does, and so it is the same thing with regards to the dinosaurs in the Jurassic Park/World franchise. I would prefer it if the right dinosaurs were interacting with each other in this flashback scene, but I understand why they aren't. They want to showcase specific dinosaurs for a wow factor, and those dinosaurs probably tie into the story too somehow.

Couldn't agree more. I think a lot of people in the Paleo community forget that our science doesn't really effect the broader scope of things in the real world. Spinosaurus had a tail fin, that's really interesting. But it doesn't help get the bills paid if you know what I mean. A lot of the people going to see the new Jurassic Park wont be dino nerds like us. Just people who wanna see a cool movie or some parents who want to give the kids something to do for 2 hours. And if some dinosaurs not being in the correct time zones in a made up film universe is a big deal for you, I think your just looking a little to into it.

Realistically how can you justify Moros and Tyrannosaurus coexisting at the same time from what this prologue sounds like when Moros or a close relative lead to the existence of Tyrannosaurus.

Movie magic

Spoiler

Also I think some of you are missing the fact that this whole sequence is a story telling element. We see a Giganotosaur kill a T.rex in the past. And then later in the film Rexy will fight Biosyns cloned Giga.It may not be accurate but it makes for an interesting plot.

[close]

We acknowledge it's a story telling device but that doesn't mean it's a good idea. Colin Treverow is literally ignore the unique premise of Jurassic Park where multiple species coexist for the first time because of human technology.

[Dynomikegojira]

Time displaced dinosaurs is very different from changing events in history considering that you that you have to be true to fossil record and evolutionary history of these animals. For example let's assume Eoraptor is the ancestor off all dinosaurs and you have it coexisting with other dinosaurs like T.rex and Triceratops well then in that universe how did the other dinosaurs evolve. No matter how much the general audience doesn't care it doesn't give the the excuse to ignore these important details. Will I still see the movie, of course I've enjoyed all the Jurassic films and despite the prologue's glaring issues and inaccuracies I'm pretty sure I'm going to enjoy it but I still think it's a stupid idea

[Flaffy]

Given how the original movie placed such heavy emphasis on the dangers of temporal disparities between organisms within Jurassic Park (whether it be fauna or flora), it's certainly disheartening to see these core themes get chucked out the window in favour of convenient story telling.

I'm sure people would find it weird if mammoths and machairodonts were depicted to live alongside 21st century humans in the 21st century in the African savannah, and that's only a 10,000 year discrepancy. Yet here we see dinosaurs that are both temporally and geographically displaced by tens of millions of years.

[Appalachiosaurus]

EDIT: Also, it's pretty clear from Trevorrow's comment that he was talking about the visual accuracy of the dinosaurs only. Would additional accuracy have been appreciated? Yeah, but c'est la vie, take what you can get. Why are any of you putting value in Trevorrow's word anyway? You probably didn't like the last two movies.

C'mon man, why are you trying to pull the "if you don't blindly support every decision, you aren't a real fan" thing? I'm grumpy because I love these movies, but I feel insulted that the film makers keep lying and making such terrible decisions.

I don't want a flashback to the Mesozoic, even if the designs were Saurian levels of perfect I'd still be against it because I don't want the JP universe to have a "canon" look to the prehistoric Dinosaurs. I liked that the inaccuracies had in-universe explanations and there was a ton of room to speculate on their genetic make-up. Now you can't even do that, it's been shut down, any and all answers to the question "why does this Dinosaur look different from the fossil record" will now always be "because it's a movie, shut up and just watch." From "well these aren't real Dinosaurs, they have frog DNA" to "well these aren't real Dinosaurs, they're from a different universe." I don't like that! It makes the universe less interesting!

It's just salt in the wound that this news comes from the same interview were Colin was clearly, obviously talking about this movie being scientifically accurate. Reread that paragraph again, I'm not sure how you can misinterpret something as blatant as "if we're going to show the cretaceous period, that we're not going to get too many letters about our inaccuracy." Then you learn why they created this scene in the first place: to set up an ancient rivalries plot so Rexy can avenge her past life and fight Biosyn's new Giganotosaurus and it's just so... dumb. I love Blue, I really don't mind the Dinosaurs becoming characters, but Rexy doesn't need a super villian to fight against.

Plus, as far as I've seen, there's been no death threats or boycott campaigns over this. On the scale of Fandom overreactions, this is like a 2/10. Is the fact that people are complaining period the problem? In that case, who exactly are you defending here? Colin Trevarrow, the millionaire? Universal Studios, one of the largest movie studios ever? Comcast!? F-ckin' Comcast!? What's wrong with people who spend their whole lives studying Dinosaurs getting angry that the only mainstream Dinosaur movie about Dinosaurs is so hand waving and disrespectful to their Dinosaurs? Just because someone doesn't really care about anachronistic guitars doesn't mean they're a hypocrite for caring about anything at all.

[Gwangi]

Time displaced dinosaurs is very different from changing events in history considering that you that you have to be true to fossil record and evolutionary history of these animals. For example let's assume Eoraptor is the ancestor off all dinosaurs and you have it coexisting with other dinosaurs like T.rex and Triceratops well then in that universe how did the other dinosaurs evolve. No matter how much the general audience doesn't care it doesn't give the the excuse to ignore these important details. Will I still see the movie, of course I've enjoyed all the Jurassic films and despite the prologue's glaring issues and inaccuracies I'm pretty sure I'm going to enjoy it but I still think it's a stupid idea

That's some serious cognitive dissonance right there. It's not a very different topic, it's just one that's more important to you. A history buff, historian, or someone that actually lived through the event, would definitely disagree. But hey, I also think the time displaced dinosaurs is a stupid and disappointing idea, I'm just not surprised or outraged about it because it's par the course for the franchise.

[Gwangi]

C'mon man, why are you trying to pull the "if you don't blindly support every decision, you aren't a real fan" thing? I'm grumpy because I love these movies, but I feel insulted that the film makers keep lying and making such terrible decisions.

That's not what I'm doing, not even in the same ballpark. I don't support every decision the franchise makes and I understand the disappointment. I'm just amazed that people are still in shock about any of this and getting outraged about it. This franchise has grown progressively more absurd since the first film. Both Jurassic World movies especially. Whatever they're doing in the next film is a progression of that absurdity but it blows my mind that people are still expecting more from this franchise than they'll ever get or should expect. I actually liked both Jurassic World movies, but they're goofy as all get out and I'm fully aware of that so I don't get my expectations up. Set the bar low and you won't be disappointed.

but Rexy doesn't need a super villian to fight against.

You mean like the Indominus in JW? Or Blue and the Indoraptor in JW:FK?

Plus, as far as I've seen, there's been no death threats or boycott campaigns over this. On the scale of Fandom overreactions, this is like a 2/10. Is the fact that people are complaining period the problem? In that case, who exactly are you defending here? Colin Trevarrow, the millionaire? Universal Studios, one of the largest movie studios ever? Comcast!? F-ckin' Comcast!? What's wrong with people who spend their whole lives studying Dinosaurs getting angry that the only mainstream Dinosaur movie about Dinosaurs is so hand waving and disrespectful to their Dinosaurs? Just because someone doesn't really care about anachronistic guitars doesn't mean they're a hypocrite for caring about anything at all.

If it's such a problem then why aren't there boycotts? Maybe there should be. I said it before, vote with your wallet. If you don't approve of these films, don't give them your money. Money is the reason they make them. I'm not defending the director, Comcast, or Universal, or anyone else. I'm trying to put this entire debacle in perspective. Anachronistic dinosaurs are a non-issue, they're not worth so much outrage, it's not important in a franchise where cloned dinosaurs fight hybrid dinosaurs in a place called Jurassic World where most of the dinosaurs didn't even live in the Jurassic period.

[Dynomikegojira]

Time displaced dinosaurs is very different from changing events in history considering that you that you have to be true to fossil record and evolutionary history of these animals. For example let's assume Eoraptor is the ancestor off all dinosaurs and you have it coexisting with other dinosaurs like T.rex and Triceratops well then in that universe how did the other dinosaurs evolve. No matter how much the general audience doesn't care it doesn't give the the excuse to ignore these important details. Will I still see the movie, of course I've enjoyed all the Jurassic films and despite the prologue's glaring issues and inaccuracies I'm pretty sure I'm going to enjoy it but I still think it's a stupid idea

That's some serious cognitive dissonance right there. It's not a very different topic, it's just one that's more important to you. A history buff, historian, or someone that actually lived through the event, would definitely disagree. But hey, I also think the time displaced dinosaurs is a stupid and disappointing idea, I'm just not surprised or outraged about it because it's par the course for the franchise.

Well at least we both agree that it's a stupid idea. As a history buff myself I consider it to be a separate issue because changing an event in history is minor compared to changing the fossil record and ignoring evolutionary history because you practically destroy any sense of plausible tether to reality and that's a sin. I have my own issues towards changing events in human history which is why I don't watch many historical based movies

[Gwangi]

Well at least we both agree that it's a stupid idea. As a history buff myself I consider it to be a separate issue because changing an event in history is minor compared to changing the fossil record and ignoring evolutionary history because you practically destroy any sense of plausible tether to reality and that's a sin. I have my own issues towards changing events in human history which is why I don't watch many historical based movies

I think that by-and-large most people would think getting something wrong that happened during human history is a bigger issue than getting something from prehistory wrong. I don't necessarily agree with "most people" but I can't imagine having fought in WWII and then watching an inaccurate movie about the war you participated in, the war you lost friends in, the subject matter being treated so trivially. I can't imagine having fought in that war and then watching my grandchild play a WWII video game with delightful glee, fighting zombies and Nazi super soldiers, the war you participated in reduced to childish entertainment. Put in that perspective I think it's a bigger issue than misplacing an Eoraptor, something most people have never heard of.

Movies are not the problem anyway, the problem goes much deeper than movies. The real problem is that people think they can get an education from movies, that they take everything at face value, from movies, to TV, to internet memes. You want to get upset over anachronistic dinosaurs in an action movie but people don't even have a firm grasp of how evolution works, no concept of deep time, or what a dinosaur even is. And I guess that's why this outrage over a movie annoys me, because it's small potatoes compared to the much bigger issue and ignores the root of the problem, the disconnect people have from nature and natural history, the glorification of ignorance, science denial, the lack of critical and rational thinking skills. All of that. This pandemic has shown us just how dangerous these things are, so thinking Giganotosaurus lived alongside T rex doesn't seem worth the outrage in a world where people think the Earth is flat, believe fairy tales are real, don't even accept their own evolutionary history, and exterminate extant animals and even their own species .

[Syndicate Bias]

I agree with @Gwangi here. That being said this is how I expect the whole ordeal to go down.

Spoiler

  https://youtu.be/E9I-X_5JtiY     

[close]

Fun poking aside I was a bit bothered by the misplaced you know who but at the same time I realise arguing about it won't change things and it has been put in there for story purposes in a franchise that has always had alot of innacuracies anyways.

Tag along for the ride and you'll enjoy it or sit and argue till the end of days about something that can't be changed.

[Dynomikegojira]

Fair point but I still wish they would've have done better but on the other hand I enjoy Primal so I'll suspend my disbelief for now.

[Faelrin]

CC S3 and Dominion prologue thing species spoilers:

Spoiler

I guess I want to try to think of the positives of all this for about a moment, which is really the Mattel Jurassic World line for me at least anyways, which I've mostly enjoyed these past four years, and heavily collected at this point. It may be safe to say that Mattel will be doing each of these for their main line at some point (although they technically have already done a lovely Quetzalcoatlus prior, complete with extensive pycnofibers. This is the second time this has happened with Mattel's line now, after the Monolophosaurus, which had featured in CC). The Moros, which was leaked last year, and the Iguanodon, which was rumored/leaked this year, is all but confirmed for next year's line at this point, along all the others. And while there will obviously be Giganotosaurus as well, can we hope to see Oviraptor, and some of the other updated designs (such as the new T. rex) in the line as well next year? It will be very interesting to see how they take on these new feathered animals. I think despite the slightly cartoony look, the Mononykus had some nice feather detail, and was a nice depiction of the one from the Lockwood Manor statue in FK, and this should hopefully mean we will get to see some more of that potential from here.

I also wonder if this opens the doors to other feathered animals like Microraptor, Archaeopteryx, and Yutyrannus, if not Deinocheirus either joining the series, or getting figures in the line as well, all of which have been at least semi-popular enough to keep getting toys of them made from other companies over the years, and featuring in other media like games such as ARK: Survival Evolved.

Edit: Looking back at this thread, Oviraptor and Iguanodon were on my wishlist for quite some time. http://dinotoyblog.com/forum/index.php?topic=8189.msg239303#msg239303

[close]

[Dynomikegojira]

CC S3 and Dominion prologue thing species spoilers:

Spoiler

I guess I want to try to think of the positives of all this for about a moment, which is really the Mattel Jurassic World line for me at least anyways, which I've mostly enjoyed these past four years, and heavily collected at this point. It may be safe to say that Mattel will be doing each of these for their main line at some point (although they technically have already done a lovely Quetzalcoatlus prior, complete with extensive pycnofibers. This is the second time this has happened with Mattel's line now, after the Monolophosaurus, which had featured in CC). The Moros, which was leaked last year, and the Iguanodon, which was rumored/leaked this year, is all but confirmed for next year's line at this point, along all the others. And while there will obviously be Giganotosaurus as well, can we hope to see Oviraptor, and some of the other updated designs (such as the new T. rex) in the line as well next year? It will be very interesting to see how they take on these new feathered animals. I think despite the slightly cartoony look, the Mononykus had some nice feather detail, and was a nice depiction of the one from the Lockwood Manor statue in FK, and this should hopefully mean we will get to see some more of that potential from here.

I also wonder if this opens the doors to other feathered animals like Microraptor, Archaeopteryx, and Yutyrannus, if not Deinocheirus either joining the series, or getting figures in the line as well, all of which have been at least semi-popular enough to keep getting toys of them made from other companies over the years, and featuring in other media like games such as ARK: Survival Evolved.

[close]

Yeah I agreed love what Mattel has done.

Spoiler

  I'm mostly excited to see if they'll do more figures from JW the Game and both JWE games especially if they start to release more sauropods.

[close]

[Patrx]

The only potentially exciting thing about the continued existence of Jurassic as a franchise is that it's an avenue for people to spend literally millions of dollars to recreate dinosaurs—more resources than any educational outlet will ever be able to expend on such an endeavor. If they're gonna keep wasting that opportunity by creating whatever those Deinonychus are, man, I don't care to tune in.

[Gwangi]

I don't have much else to chime in, I've said enough already, but I do want to say that I'm really tired of the monopoly the Jurassic franchise has on dinosaur movies and dinosaurs in pop culture, even though I'm still a fan. And I've been tired of it for a long time. We really haven't gotten a competent dinosaur movie since the first Jurassic Park, maybe King Kong (2005) but that's debatable. I would love a decent dinosaur movie not set in the JPverse. For good dinosaur movies that aren't Jurassic Park I'm forced to re-watch old movies like King Kong (1933), Gwangi, and One Million Years B.C. Wanna discuss inaccuracies in film? It wasn't THAT long ago that in film, people lived alongside dinosaurs.

[Blade-of-the-Moon]

I don't have much else to chime in, I've said enough already, but I do want to say that I'm really tired of the monopoly the Jurassic franchise has on dinosaur movies and dinosaurs in pop culture, even though I'm still a fan. And I've been tired of it for a long time. We really haven't gotten a competent dinosaur movie since the first Jurassic Park, maybe King Kong (2005) but that's debatable. I would love a decent dinosaur movie not set in the JPverse. For good dinosaur movies that aren't Jurassic Park I'm forced to re-watch old movies like King Kong (1933), Gwangi, and One Million Years B.C. Wanna discuss inaccuracies in film? It wasn't THAT long ago that in film, people lived alongside dinosaurs.

I'd love for more dinosaur films to be made, when JP first came out it spawned a lot of similar movies, good and bad.  Now it's become "That" dinosaur film ( franchise) that no one wants to challenge.  The old tag line " If it's not Jurassic Park, it's Extinct! " has never been truer.

[Faelrin]

Yeah it would be really nice to see another quality dinosaur movie arise, but I'm skeptical that will happen. The last "big" one we got was the Pixar The Good Dinosaur that I can recall, and prior to Jurassic World, the WWD movie, and neither were particularly well received I think unfortunately. On that note it has also sadly been many years since there's been a real prehistoric documentary. The only upcoming one I'm aware of is Forgotten Bloodlines Agate, which I'm definitely excited about, but it's about a particular part of the Cenozoic, not Mesozoic.

[Gwangi]

I don't have much else to chime in, I've said enough already, but I do want to say that I'm really tired of the monopoly the Jurassic franchise has on dinosaur movies and dinosaurs in pop culture, even though I'm still a fan. And I've been tired of it for a long time. We really haven't gotten a competent dinosaur movie since the first Jurassic Park, maybe King Kong (2005) but that's debatable. I would love a decent dinosaur movie not set in the JPverse. For good dinosaur movies that aren't Jurassic Park I'm forced to re-watch old movies like King Kong (1933), Gwangi, and One Million Years B.C. Wanna discuss inaccuracies in film? It wasn't THAT long ago that in film, people lived alongside dinosaurs.

I'd love for more dinosaur films to be made, when JP first came out it spawned a lot of similar movies, good and bad.  Now it's become "That" dinosaur film ( franchise) that no one wants to challenge.  The old tag line " If it's not Jurassic Park, it's Extinct! " has never been truer.

Haha, good call!

The current state of dinosaur documentaries troubles me far more than the Jurassic movies. At least Youtube is picking up the slack a bit.

[Dynomikegojira]

I really want to see NHK do I WWD style documentary and agreed I don't want Jurassic to be our only dinosaur franchise.