PREHISTORIC PLANET

[Faelrin]

Paleo artist Gabriel Ugueto confirmed he contributed to Prehistoric Planet:

https://www.instagram.com/p/Cb7ju2QL_E7/?utm_medium=copy_link

As a fan of his work I am very glad to see that he was able to help in some way and work on this.

[Carnoking]

This looks like its going to be beautiful and if I can find a way to watch it, I will... but I agree with the above sentiment.

This opinion based solely on the T.Rex promo, but to me their movement feels exaggerated for the sake telling a narrative in the vein of "Dinotasia". And there's nothing wrong with that, I enjoyed Dinotasia and there's nothing wrong with injecting a little narrative, but on a completely nagging note I personally dislike the trope of a parent animal gently nudging a reluctant infant to be more confident.

Maybe it happens sometimes, maybe it happened all the time with dinosaurs, but any time I've ever seen a juvenile animal be overly clingy they get told off pretty quick by mom or dad. Granted my experience is mostly with domestic animals so maybe I'm being too critical here, but boy do filmmakers love this trope. Maybe showing dad snap at and tell off the youngster is too harsh for the target audience.

"Its just one scene in a larger series" I tell myself.

Funny how different people are. I can't tell you how many times I've watched the T. rex clip by now, but every time I see big daddy T. rex nuzzle the chick, it never fails to get me. I do agree with your sentiments, I recall seeing it plenty elsewhere, and it does seem to be a "trope" (although at present I can't really name a specific example), and I don't doubt there were plenty of moments where the parents would have snapped at their offspring (take the example in When Dinosaurs Roamed America where the youngsters get told off by Mom for playing too rough near her).

That being said, I think there's a method to the madness here. Seeing such massive predator do something "sweet" as opposed to just always be growling, roaring, biting, and/or fighting challenges ingrained concepts that such massive predators were always doing something violent even when not necessarily hunting. No matter how many times you play that idea for me, I'll always find it refreshing.

[Reuben03]

with the way the animals move coming nowhere near to the realistic level of WWD and without benjamin bartlett (sorry hans zimmer)
i would not call this the next WWD,


BUT DAMN IT LOOKS AMAZING AND I CAN'T WAIT. IT'S GONNA BE SO SO SO GOOD

This looks like its going to be beautiful and if I can find a way to watch it, I will... but I agree with the above sentiment.

This opinion based solely on the T.Rex promo, but to me their movement feels exaggerated for the sake telling a narrative in the vein of "Dinotasia". And there's nothing wrong with that, I enjoyed Dinotasia and there's nothing wrong with injecting a little narrative, but on a completely nagging note I personally dislike the trope of a parent animal gently nudging a reluctant infant to be more confident.

Maybe it happens sometimes, maybe it happened all the time with dinosaurs, but any time I've ever seen a juvenile animal be overly clingy they get told off pretty quick by mom or dad. Granted my experience is mostly with domestic animals so maybe I'm being too critical here, but boy do filmmakers love this trope. Maybe showing dad snap at and tell off the youngster is too harsh for the target audience.

"Its just one scene in a larger series" I tell myself.

this is exactly it. miss the muscle jiggles and realistic movements of the WWD animals but i am not gonna complain at all,
this new show looks AMAZING

[paintingdinos]

Funny how different people are. I can't tell you how many times I've watched the T. rex clip by now, but every time I see big daddy T. rex nuzzle the chick, it never fails to get me. I do agree with your sentiments, I recall seeing it plenty elsewhere, and it does seem to be a "trope" (although at present I can't really name a specific example), and I don't doubt there were plenty of moments where the parents would have snapped at their offspring (take the example in When Dinosaurs Roamed America where the youngsters get told off by Mom for playing too rough near her).

That being said, I think there's a method to the madness here. Seeing such massive predator do something "sweet" as opposed to just always be growling, roaring, biting, and/or fighting challenges ingrained concepts that such massive predators were always doing something violent even when not necessarily hunting. No matter how many times you play that idea for me, I'll always find it refreshing.

Implying it should snap or be aggressive was probably harsh on my part. Other equally likely scenarios could be simply not acknowledging them (animals are not constantly fawning over their offspring), gently inspecting them, or maybe even getting defensive over them. I don't know. It just feels extremely Bambiesque in way that slingshots perception all the way in the other direction... "these animals are hyper aggressive" becomes "these animals are characters in a Disney movie". Very much this is me personally disliking the tendency of educational media to anthropomorphize animals. Its emotionally satisfying, sure, but doesn't feel intellectually honest. Again, to me! Other people don't have to feel the same.

I loved the cut and dry approach of WWD and would really love to see that again someday. I never felt like I was being sold "characters", just animals doing things as animals do.

Its also entirely possible I'm hung up on a small snippet that isn't even indicative of the whole show. Only one way to find out!

[Carnoking]

Totally fair. I guess I sort of took the nuzzling as an "inspection" of sorts and once dad realizes the chick is fine he sort of shoves it along (still endearing enough).

I think my problem is that I'm too forgiving when it comes to the anthropomorphizing in order to elicit some form of emotional response/connection. If you look at something like Dead Sound's Dinosauria series, perhaps my favorite episode so far has been A More Ancient Spring, quite possibly the most stylized and heavily "humanized" story of the bunch. But darn if it doesn't get me in the feels.

Of course, there's a line, and I'm very interested to see where on the spectrum the rest of the series falls.

[Psittacoraptor]

Animals nurture and care for their young, even predatory theropods. We can see it in the ones still living today. Just watch some raptors with their chicks. There's a nuzzle here and there. So, I don't see those three seconds of footage as anthropomorphizing. Sure, big budget documentaries tend to do that with animals, but that's done to keep the interest of the regular viewer who wants to follow a narrative when watching something. If it makes a production of this scale possible, I'm fine with a little anthropomorphizing here and there. I certainly prefer it to "OMG badass vicious reptile monster hunts and eats everything, even people!1!" in pop culture (just see the trailer for the new JW movie, same old same old).

[Concavenator]

According to Paleofiguras, David Krentz has also confirmed he's been involved in the design of this series. Between Gabriel Ugueto and him, it's very easy to see why this series is looking this promising.

[paintingdinos]

Animals nurture and care for their young, even predatory theropods. We can see it in the ones still living today. Just watch some raptors with their chicks. There's a nuzzle here and there. So, I don't see those three seconds of footage as anthropomorphizing.

The nuzzle alone doesn't bother me, its the nudge forward as if a knowing father is trying to teach his child that the scary thing isn't scary, and that his nudge will teach the child to conquer its fear. That feels very narrative to me and very much is a trope (heck, even The Lost World did it).

Expecting an animal to have that level of understanding implies they are aware of:
-this thing that scared my offspring isn't scary (plausible)
-by nudging them forward I am teaching them the thing isn't scary (hmmm...)
-they will somehow trust and understand the nudge and learn that approaching the scary thing is ok (this is where I draw the line)

Excluding some very specific examples (chimps, elephants, maybe whales) this level of complex interaction isn't something most animals are capable of.

Generally, when you see animals "teaching" their offspring that something is nonthreatening, the primary response is either to ignore it (this may not even be conscious on the part of the animal; by simply not reacting they are conditioning their young to not fear the stimulus whether they realize it or not) or to approach and inspect it (this can be defensive, to inspect there is no danger, or possibly just curiosity on the part of some animals-- and again is likely not a conscious "teaching" moment for the parent animal).

Gotta restate, these are just my opinions. Its interesting to talk about these things, but I'm not trying to tell anyone how to think.

[bmathison1972]

Looks neat! I just hope (eventually) there will be watch options for those of us that don't have Apple+ or any other Mac/Apple-related products

[Duna]

The nuzzle alone doesn't bother me, its the nudge forward as if a knowing father is trying to teach his child that the scary thing isn't scary, and that his nudge will teach the child to conquer its fear. That feels very narrative to me and very much is a trope (heck, even The Lost World did it).

Expecting an animal to have that level of understanding implies they are aware of:
-this thing that scared my offspring isn't scary (plausible)
-by nudging them forward I am teaching them the thing isn't scary (hmmm...)
-they will somehow trust and understand the nudge and learn that approaching the scary thing is ok (this is where I draw the line)

Excluding some very specific examples (chimps, elephants, maybe whales) this level of complex interaction isn't something most animals are capable of.

Generally, when you see animals "teaching" their offspring that something is nonthreatening, the primary response is either to ignore it (this may not even be conscious on the part of the animal; by simply not reacting they are conditioning their young to not fear the stimulus whether they realize it or not) or to approach and inspect it (this can be defensive, to inspect there is no danger, or possibly just curiosity on the part of some animals-- and again is likely not a conscious "teaching" moment for the parent animal).

Gotta restate, these are just my opinions. Its interesting to talk about these things, but I'm not trying to tell anyone how to think.

I understand your opinion. In fact, the first thing that came to my mind was precisely that "that nudge" is of intelligent animals (an animal has to be enough intelligent to associate that gesture pointing to the object and its meaning). It remind me of this video, precisely: https://youtube.com/shorts/Dl6i7pQBBDw
Even a scared chick will run to her mother to seek protection, her mother will nuzzle it but I'm quite sure the hen won't use then that nudge forward as to say "go on and do it by yourself" as a human would do. That it's exactly what was shown in The Lost World with the buck and the baby at the end. Too theatrical. That is the point. Not the first nuzzle, but THAT final gesture.

I hope there won't be any more anthopomorphic or funny turns in the documentary. I just loved Walking With Dinosaurs because it was simple description-narration (you can say it emotionally or not, as the death of the ornithocheirus) but the action is just what it happens, just like if you were filming it on the nature. I understand most of the times my husband dispises any documentary in which they give the animals names. Most of them end being too tale-y and less objective.

On the other hand, the quality of the CGI is the best ever seen in a dinosaur documentary or film and that's amazing.  I would have preferred any other period than the end of Cretaceous (I'm quite fed up with tyrannosaurus in all documentaries) but I understand that including tyrannnosaurus in the documentary was a yes-or-yes. But I'm happy because the adult looks very nice and - finally- bulky.

[SRF]

I'm really looking forward to the release of Prehistoric Planet. While I do use an iPhone I never used Apple TV before but I'll just subscribe to the app for one month when Prehistoric Planet gets released.

What's great however is that the Apple TV+ app is also available on some smart tv's which use Google Play/Android based apps. I just went to look it up on my own tv and I can actually download Apple TV+  from the Google Play Store onto my tv. So even for people who don't own any Apple products, there can still be the option to play this documentary on your television, if you own a smart tv of course.   

[Halichoeres]

The way I see it, I'd pay $15 to see this in a movie theater, so I'm fine paying $5 for Apple+ for a month to see it. I doubt I'll keep Apple+ beyond that, from what I hear the only other content it offers is looped footage of tumbleweeds blowing across a vacant lot in New Mexico.

[Gwangi]

The way I see it, I'd pay $15 to see this in a movie theater, so I'm fine paying $5 for Apple+ for a month to see it. I doubt I'll keep Apple+ beyond that, from what I hear the only other content it offers is looped footage of tumbleweeds blowing across a vacant lot in New Mexico.

I agree. It wouldn't be the first time I've subscribed and then canceled a streaming service just to watch one thing. I also encourage people not to illegally download it. Show your support for this project, vote with your wallet. That's the only way we'll continue to get quality content like this.

[ceratopsian]

Good point @Gwangi.

The way I see it, I'd pay $15 to see this in a movie theater, so I'm fine paying $5 for Apple+ for a month to see it. I doubt I'll keep Apple+ beyond that, from what I hear the only other content it offers is looped footage of tumbleweeds blowing across a vacant lot in New Mexico.

I agree. It wouldn't be the first time I've subscribed and then canceled a streaming service just to watch one thing. I also encourage people not to illegally download it. Show your support for this project, vote with your wallet. That's the only way we'll continue to get quality content like this.

[stargatedalek]

While that is a valid argument to be made, it's always worth remembering that big companies are not your friends, and you shouldn't give them money purely out of guilt. Support products and services if they are practical for your life and you're in a good position to do so, otherwise, that subscription fee is better off going to smaller companies or content creators. Apple isn't exactly operating this streaming service to put food on the table.

[Gwangi]

While that is a valid argument to be made, it's always worth remembering that big companies are not your friends, and you shouldn't give them money purely out of guilt. Support products and services if they are practical for your life and you're in a good position to do so, otherwise, that subscription fee is better off going to smaller companies or content creators. Apple isn't exactly operating this streaming service to put food on the table.

There. Stop. What I bolded is all that needs to be said. The production of this documentary provides jobs. Jobs to people I support. Darren Naish, Gabriel Ugueto, David Krentz, David Attenborough, and countless others. This isn't about lining Apple's pockets, it's about supporting the kind of work you want to see more of, it's about supporting the people involved in its creation in the hopes that we see more content like it with their involvement. Apple will make the largest profit, for sure, but they will also take notice if people are subscribing just to stream this documentary. And then other streaming services take notice, and it's a snowball effect that if it works can only mean good things for the likes of us. We've talked about the death of quality documentaries on this site for years and now we're finally getting what we've been longing for. I'm not going to steal it and I'm going to encourage others not to as well.

[SRF]

While that is a valid argument to be made, it's always worth remembering that big companies are not your friends, and you shouldn't give them money purely out of guilt. Support products and services if they are practical for your life and you're in a good position to do so, otherwise, that subscription fee is better off going to smaller companies or content creators. Apple isn't exactly operating this streaming service to put food on the table.

There. Stop. What I bolded is all that needs to be said. The production of this documentary provides jobs. Jobs to people I support. Darren Naish, Gabriel Ugueto, David Krentz, David Attenborough, and countless others. This isn't about lining Apple's pockets, it's about supporting the kind of work you want to see more of, it's about supporting the people involved in its creation in the hopes that we see more content like it with their involvement. Apple will make the largest profit, for sure, but they will also take notice if people are subscribing just to stream this documentary. And then other streaming services take notice, and it's a snowball effect that if it works can only mean good things for the likes of us. We've talked about the death of quality documentaries on this site for years and now we're finally getting what we've been longing for. I'm not going to steal it and I'm going to encourage others not to as well.

I fully agree with everything you say.

[Bokisaurus]

While that is a valid argument to be made, it's always worth remembering that big companies are not your friends, and you shouldn't give them money purely out of guilt. Support products and services if they are practical for your life and you're in a good position to do so, otherwise, that subscription fee is better off going to smaller companies or content creators. Apple isn't exactly operating this streaming service to put food on the table.

There. Stop. What I bolded is all that needs to be said. The production of this documentary provides jobs. Jobs to people I support. Darren Naish, Gabriel Ugueto, David Krentz, David Attenborough, and countless others. This isn't about lining Apple's pockets, it's about supporting the kind of work you want to see more of, it's about supporting the people involved in its creation in the hopes that we see more content like it with their involvement. Apple will make the largest profit, for sure, but they will also take notice if people are subscribing just to stream this documentary. And then other streaming services take notice, and it's a snowball effect that if it works can only mean good things for the likes of us. We've talked about the death of quality documentaries on this site for years and now we're finally getting what we've been longing for. I'm not going to steal it and I'm going to encourage others not to as well.

I fully agree with everything you say.

@Gwangi thank you and I fully agree with you.
This is exactly the kind of negative attitude that really turns me off. Does everything now have to have something negative?
No need to be judgmental and even shaming those who are excited about this film and support it. Seriously.

[HD-man]

This opinion based solely on the T.Rex promo, but to me their movement feels exaggerated for the sake telling a narrative in the vein of "Dinotasia".

Sorry, but I'm having trouble seeing what you mean by "exaggerated" movement, especially compared to how giant ground-running birds move in similar situations: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/QXD0ZAC8-2o

this is exactly it. miss the muscle jiggles and realistic movements of the WWD animals

I know that isn't meant to be a complaint, but it still seems weird given that we get both muscle jiggles in the adult T. rex & realistic movements in the chicks (again, especially compared to how giant ground-running birds move in similar situations)

The nuzzle alone doesn't bother me, its the nudge forward as if a knowing father is trying to teach his child that the scary thing isn't scary, and that his nudge will teach the child to conquer its fear. That feels very narrative to me and very much is a trope (heck, even The Lost World did it).

I understand your opinion. In fact, the first thing that came to my mind was precisely that "that nudge" is of intelligent animals (an animal has to be enough intelligent to associate that gesture pointing to the object and its meaning). It remind me of this video, precisely: https://youtube.com/shorts/Dl6i7pQBBDw
Even a scared chick will run to her mother to seek protection, her mother will nuzzle it but I'm quite sure the hen won't use then that nudge forward as to say "go on and do it by yourself" as a human would do. That it's exactly what was shown in The Lost World with the buck and the baby at the end. Too theatrical. That is the point. Not the first nuzzle, but THAT final gesture.

I had forgotten about that elephant video until Duna posted it here. While I can see how it's sorta similar to the T. rex video, I think you guys are projecting/reading into "THAT final gesture" in both videos WAY too much (E.g. "his nudge will teach the child to conquer its fear"/"go on and do it by yourself"/etc). If anything, the T. rex video reminds me of this plover video w/the T. rex nudge being more-or-less equivalent to when the "the roof is lifted off" by the "mother plover": https://www.shutterstock.com/video/clip-1232038-four-plover-chicks-hide-under-mother-before

[stargatedalek]

While that is a valid argument to be made, it's always worth remembering that big companies are not your friends, and you shouldn't give them money purely out of guilt. Support products and services if they are practical for your life and you're in a good position to do so, otherwise, that subscription fee is better off going to smaller companies or content creators. Apple isn't exactly operating this streaming service to put food on the table.

There. Stop. What I bolded is all that needs to be said. The production of this documentary provides jobs. Jobs to people I support. Darren Naish, Gabriel Ugueto, David Krentz, David Attenborough, and countless others. This isn't about lining Apple's pockets, it's about supporting the kind of work you want to see more of, it's about supporting the people involved in its creation in the hopes that we see more content like it with their involvement. Apple will make the largest profit, for sure, but they will also take notice if people are subscribing just to stream this documentary. And then other streaming services take notice, and it's a snowball effect that if it works can only mean good things for the likes of us. We've talked about the death of quality documentaries on this site for years and now we're finally getting what we've been longing for. I'm not going to steal it and I'm going to encourage others not to as well.

I fully agree with everything you say.

@Gwangi thank you and I fully agree with you.
This is exactly the kind of negative attitude that really turns me off. Does everything now have to have something negative?
No need to be judgmental and even shaming those who are excited about this film and support it. Seriously.

I don't see how anything I say was doing that?

I'm very excited, and this show looks incredibly promising. I just wanted to provide a counter point to the argument in favour of purchasing a service just to watch one program. Not everyone has the means for this to be a reasonable purchase, nor is everyone willing to put aside the fact that it's tied to yet another mega company streaming service that they may not want more of in their life. You would likely do more to support the production of future such programs by writing or recording reviews and sharing them, and you can donate to most of the artists involved directly or otherwise support their personal projects.