JURASSIC WORLD: DOMINION

[GojiraGuy1954]

Looks like trash, but I knew that already.

And no, the Jurassic Park fandom is not bigger than the general palaeontology fandom.

Yeah nah calling BS on that

[Bread]

Something else I wanted to note, I definitely prefer the Nanmu design than the official JW design. I like the more sleek design to Nanmu's as opposed to JW's.

I am honestly convinced the fandom of general paleontology and JP/JW are split 50/50. There is a large crowd who have gotten into paleontology who have came from JP being introduced early on in their childhood or younger selves. Is there really anyway to solve this question? And no you can't rely on the amount of people who go to see the movie.

[GojiraGuy1954]

JP is a blockbuster movie franchise with a massive range. It's iconic.

Meanwhile Paleo is a pretty niche community where people can sometimes be driven out because they find people to be overbearing about scientific accuracy (particularly in media)

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

The visuals and the music (and lack thereof) were great! I wonder if the score will be more jungle drum-based like TLW. Of course I also think they should have kept to a specific time and place with the opening-- Tyrannosaurus rex lived with species that were comparable to everything here, and I'm sure a more accurate environment would have been more accessible than the remote island where it was filmed-- but I said enough about that already when the preview was announced. I also think it was a missed opportunity to not have the continents as they were in the Cretaceous on the Universal logo.

One thing I've been wondering, though, is what causes the projector to fail? It just kind of sparks and the film degrades without anything really touching it.

[Faelrin]

So if anyone wants a refresher on some of the Trevorrow interview articles, I went and dug them up. I might go back and look for more.

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/exclusive-colin-trevorrow-talks-jurassic-world-dominion-imax-preview

Spoiler

And then we have our first feathered dinosaur, the Oviraptor. I feel like that's going to be a bit of a headline for those who care about paleontological accuracy.

[close]

Spoiler

Except they forgot the wings, returned to breaking the wrists, and while this last bit is plausible, it's still a paleo-meme that's older then me (and I'm 30) to depict it eating eggs at this point. Though who knows, there may be folks happy about it having a dense coat of feathers at least.

[close]

https://www.slashfilm.com/581596/jurassic-world-dominion-director-interview/

There are dinosaurs with feathers, not just in the short but in the movie as well, and so we wanted to get it exactly right.

We also don't have the excuse of frog DNA being put into the genome that we have in all the movies to say, "Well no here's why they're not paleontology accurate." We had to get it right. And so we took the challenge and we ran with it.

Well except they didn't, at least for one of them so far, maybe others in the final film too. I'm really not getting my hopes up though.
Especially as far as the

Spoiler

pyroraptor goes.

[close]

This bit that I also quoted months ago, also explains the anachronism:

We chose the ones that seem cool, but it's a combination of also knowing that if we got to make more than one movie, that we wanted to keep certain species in the tank to really hold back for scientists and fans who follow this stuff.

[GojiraGuy1954]

it's still a paleo-meme that's older then me (and I'm 30) to depict it eating eggs at this point. Though who knows, there may be folks happy about it having a dense coat of feathers at least.[/spoiler]

Just because the Oviraptor holotype wasn't actually eating eggs doesn't mean that Oviraptor didn't eat eggs. The vast majority of carnivores alive today will not pass up an egg meal.

[Faelrin]

@GojiraGuy1954 Please don't cherry-pick my words. I did say it eating eggs was plausible. That still doesn't omit it from being a paleo-meme however.

Edit: Adding this here in case folks are interested, but it appears this sequence will not be in the film.

https://www.ign.com/articles/jurassic-world-dominion-prologue-breakdown-director-colin-trevorrow

Hopefully the audience won't like seeing the T-Rex die. I hate it, it's painful for me, it's a character that I love. I don't mind if you hate the giganotosaurus!!

This just comes across as distasteful to me. Like is he not aware there are folks that might like both (or perhaps even just Giganotosaurus instead)? It's just giving me the impression they are adding it to only throw it under the bus, which will in turn surely already add more JPIII tier drama (which has already occurred previously when this first came out with F9). I mean I guess that was sort of obvious anyways with the inevitable rematch they are setting up here, but it wasn't as blatant earlier on. Kind of reminds me of how they revealed the Carnotaurus in the FK trailer, only for it to be killed quickly after, which was another dinosaur I wanted to see in this franchise for many years (and did know about a year in advance, from what Dr. Horner revealed the Jurassic World Exhibition JW Outpost event in 2017).

[stargatedalek]

it's still a paleo-meme that's older then me (and I'm 30) to depict it eating eggs at this point. Though who knows, there may be folks happy about it having a dense coat of feathers at least.[/spoiler]

Just because the Oviraptor holotype wasn't actually eating eggs doesn't mean that Oviraptor didn't eat eggs. The vast majority of carnivores alive today will not pass up an egg meal.

We don't even know for sure that Oviraptor was a carnivore.

[Reuben03]

Looks like trash, but I knew that already.

And no, the Jurassic Park fandom is not bigger than the general palaeontology fandom.

Yeah nah calling BS on that

if ur a massive JP fan, ur into dinosaurs.
if ur into JP but ur not paleontology, ur like
30 something and u grew up with the movies.
the franchise has been a thing for ages so that's the minority.
people that like JP hardcore, are into it mostly for the dinosaurs, and therefore LIKE DINOSAURS.

the paleo community is bigger then the JP fan community, because not everyone that likes Dinosaurs likes jurassic park, but everyone minus a few manchildren who miss 'raptors' opening doors (no offence guys LOL) and dont like actual non fictional extinct animals,

everyone who likes jurassic park is into ACTUAL dinosaurs.

[Reuben03]

Edit: Adding this here in case folks are interested, but it appears this sequence will not be in the film.

LETS GOOOOO

[Reuben03]

it's still a paleo-meme that's older then me (and I'm 30) to depict it eating eggs at this point. Though who knows, there may be folks happy about it having a dense coat of feathers at least.[/spoiler]

Just because the Oviraptor holotype wasn't actually eating eggs doesn't mean that Oviraptor didn't eat eggs. The vast majority of carnivores alive today will not pass up an egg meal.

We don't even know for sure that Oviraptor was a carnivore.

FOR ANYONE INTERESTED,
(this is a super interesting read btw)
the following is the history of our understanding of oviraptors diet, taken from wikipedia:

Spoiler

When first described in 1924 by Osborn, Oviraptor was originally presumed to have been ovivarous—an organism that has an egg-based diet—life-style, based on the association of the holotype with a nest thought to belong to Protoceratops. In 1977, Barsbold proposed a crushing jaw hypothesis. He argued that the strength of the robust lower jaws and likely rhamphotheca (horny beak) was strong enough to break the shells of mollusks such as clams, which are found in the same geological formation as Oviraptor. These bones form part of the main upper jaw bone or maxilla, which converge in the middle to form a pair of prongs. The rhamphotheca and lower jaws together with the extension of several bones from the palate, would have made a piercing tool. Barsbold also suggested that oviraptorids could have had a semiaquatic life-style based on the mollusk-based diet, the high location of nasal cavities, an augmented musculature of the tail, and the greater size of the first manual digit. In a 1990 conference abstract, David K. Smith presented an osteological reevaluation of Oviraptor where he rejected the statements made by Barsbold. He found no evidence indicating a forelimb specialized in aquatic locomotion, and the jaws, rather than preserve a crushing mechanism, preserve shearing surfaces. As the skull is toothless, lightly built and lacks several strong muscle insertion areas, Smith suggested that leaves may have been an important part in the diet of Oviraptor. However, in 1995, Norell and colleagues reported the fragmented remains of a lizard in the body cavity of the holotype specimen, suggesting that Oviraptor was partially carnivorous.


Comparison of the lower jaw of several oviraptorosaur genera
In 2008, Stig Olav K. Jansen compared the skull of several oviraptorid species to those of birds and turtles to investigate which properties can predict a rhamphotheca. He found the lower jaws of oviraptorids to be very similar to those of parrots, and the upper jaws to be more similar to those of turtles. Based on these observations, Jansen suggested that oviraptorids were omnivorous as the sharply-developed rhamphotheca together with the prominent forelimbs would have been adapted to catch and tear small prey. Moreover, the pointed projections of the palate would have contributed in holding prey. Jansen pointed out that a fully herbivorous diet in oviraptorids seems unlikely as they lacked flat and wide tomia (cutting edges of the mandibles) to chew, and were unable to move the lower jaws sideways. However, he considered the lower jaws strong enough to have at least crushed elements like eggs, nuts or other hard seeds.

Longrich and colleagues in 2010 also rejected a durophagous (animals that practise shell-crushing) hypothesis, given that such animals typically develop teeth with broad crushing surfaces. The pointed shape of the dentary bones in the lower jaws suggests that oviraptorids had a sharp-edged rhamphotheca used for shearing food instead. The symphyseal (bone union) region at the front of the dentary may have given some ability for crushing, but as this was a relatively small area, it was probably not the main function of the jaws. Another argument against them having been eaters of mollusks is the fact that most oviraptorids have been found in sediments that are interpreted to represent mostly arid or semi-arid environments, such as Oviraptor in the Djadokhta Formation. The team also found that oviraptorids and dicynodonts share cranial features such as short, deep, and toothless mandibles; elongated dentary symphyses; elongated mandibular openings; and a pointed palate. Modern animals with jaws that resemble those of oviraptorids include parrots and tortoises; the latter group also has tooth-like projections on the palatal region. Longrich and colleagues concluded that due to the similarities between oviraptorids and herbivorous animals, the bulk of their diet would most likely have been formed by plant material. The jaws of oviraptorids may have been specialised for processing food, such as xerophytic vegetation−a vegetation that is adapted for environments with little water—that would have grown in their arid environments, but this is not possible to demonstrate, as little is known about the paleoflora of the Gobi Desert.

In 2018 however, Funston and colleagues supported the crushing jaw hypothesis. They pointed out that the stocky rostrum and robust lower jaws of oviraptorids suggest, in fact, a strong and nipping bite, which is rather similar to those of parrots. Funston and colleagues considered these anatomical traits of oviraptorids to be consistent with a frugivorous diet that incorporated nuts and seeds.

[close]

[Pachyrhinosaurus]

Edit: Adding this here in case folks are interested, but it appears this sequence will not be in the film.

I'll be disappointed if the drive-in scene doesn't make it in. It's always great to see movies that feature drive-ins at a drive-in.

[Reuben03]

Edit: Adding this here in case folks are interested, but it appears this sequence will not be in the film.

I'll be disappointed if the drive-in scene doesn't make it in. It's always great to see movies that feature drive-ins at a drive-in.

yeah i love that scene! but they can find another way to fit it in just fine. if they remove it, it'll be a shame, but trust me, from what ive read?


this movie will NOT disappoint.

[Bread]

Edit: Adding this here in case folks are interested, but it appears this sequence will not be in the film.

I'll be disappointed if the drive-in scene doesn't make it in. It's always great to see movies that feature drive-ins at a drive-in.

Same. At first I was relieved but then I realized the drive-in scene would also be removed. Shame really, since that drive-in scene really has the original franchise feels to it.

[MLMjp]

I'm torned about watching the prologue or not, now that it is available.

On the one hand, I more or less know what happens in it because you are never safe on the internet. On the other, I rather wait for the trailers to show me the proper sneak peaks and watch the prologue when I watch the film.

[Reuben03]

I'm torned about watching the prologue or not, now that it is available.

On the one hand, I more or less know what happens in it because you are never safe on the internet. On the other, I rather wait for the trailers to show me the proper sneak peaks.

its crap dw just wait till feb for the trailer haha

[MLMjp]

Ok, seems like I missed something. So this prologue wont be in movie? If thats the case, I guess there is no issue in watching it.

[Faelrin]

@MLMjp The IGN article I posted up a bit a earlier goes into detail about the why it won't be in the final film.

So yeah it won't hurt to watch it, or not. Really up to you. Edit: Well it also obviously sets some stuff up for the film too.

[Reuben03]

Ok, seems like I missed something. So this prologue wont be in movie? If thats the case, I guess there is no issue in watching it.

yeah! im sooo happy it wont be. really made me feel so much better.

[Reuben03]

@MLMjp The IGN article I posted up a bit a earlier goes into detail about the why it won't be in the final film.

So yeah it won't hurt to watch it, or not. Really up to you.

would it be rude to ask you to explain why here? i wanna know what their reasoning was but, im not looking to read it all