Jurassic Park Dinosaurs: Book vs Film
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 06. 2024
- We are kicking off Jurassic June with a comparison of the Jurassic Park dinosaurs from the novel against the movie!
I'll be judging the dinosaurs on their accuracy, and comparing them to one another and their real life counterparts. From the Mighty Tyrannosaurus Rex to the vicious Velociraptor, you won't wanna miss this one!
I hope you all enjoy!
I do not own any art in this video. If art was not credited, it was because there was no artist associated when I found it. If you know any of the uncredited artists, please comment below so I can properly credit them.
People kinda forget that the book also lampshades the fact that what Ingen made aren't the real dinosaurs but chimeras of different species genetically sewn together to create what's essentially a new lifeform.
I think the real-world discoveries made since the novel and movie enhance that idea as well as add to the horror of the concept. Hammond and Wu are the modern Frankenstein and Moreau. The creatures they made were monsters, not animals.
Thank you. This always struck me as Crichton covering himself in the face of any new discoveries. I detest the movie for boiling T-Rex down to "its vision is based on movement" The encounter in the book always struck me more as the T-Rex being imperfect, hence the sensitive skin and the like. This is a big point of the book and even has Wu talking with Hammond about the dinosaurs not being real and wanting to change them. This could also explain things like hyper aggressions of the raptors or the poison of the Dilos, perhaps a mutation when they used cobra dna? It's such an important detail and one the movie completely ignores.
It makes sense after all they were made as something for entertainment
Facts, I kinda believed that the reason why the Roberta and Rexy had such poor eyesight was because Henry Wu intentionally made their eyesight poor so that way it’d be safer for the guests and for her;
cause think about it if Roberta and Rexy did have sharp eyesight, then they would scare tourists as they see the Rex brutally try to pry the fence open having her receive horrible burns and wouldn’t stop till it hunts for prey or the electric shocks horribly wound the girl, ultimately the poor girl would be traumatized or even die from having continuous electrical burns from the fence, and have all the tourists traumatized and ingen being filed a lawsuit for negligence, traumatization and endangerment
I already knew that and I am still on Hammond and Wu's side. If someone has the ability to bring dinosaurs back, whether it be full or hybrid, I'm gonna be Fry on this. "SHUT UP AND TAKE MY MONEY!!!"
The fact that the carnivores were more nightmarish in the novels still makes me want a live action horror adaptation to be made, maybe not as a movie, but as a series of episodes on Netflix.
The thing for me is I want them to keep their look in the book since they clearly monsters of genetic power.
Id like that too. Maybe a prequel type series with workers and workplace "incidents" covered up by ingen
@@ech78928😊
@@detectivewiththesharpteeth1163😅
YES! I had the same idea! I imagine a ~4 part series, each episode maybe an hour long. Rating: TV-MA. I don't know that I want a 1/1 adaptation of the novel, but I think it should be a rather close adaptation.
About the Rex blindness, Michael suggest in the novel that every genome has a flaw without known explanation.
I thought that was the case. I also saw it as the trex inability to see clearly in the dark while it rained and was lucky enough to hit Grant.
Pretty sure in the book they explain that T. rex has vision similar to amphibian became on the DNA they inserted. Similar to the sexuality
But he retconned it though, the rexes in lost world can see still humans perfectly fine and even attack them
That's what I don't get about the movie. Spielberg decided to have the T-Rex only being able to see movement as a known fact by Grant before he got to the island, which just makes absolutely no sense if you ask me. That trait being explained a genetic defect would work perfectly for the story and I'm not sure why Crichton didn't just retcon the T-rex having the amphibian DNA. Because think about it, what does most prey do when confronted? It's even a phrase, deer in headlights. They go still. What predator would evolve with a trait that cripples their ability to hunt and survive?
I just listened to Jurassic Park on Audible, and it did seem that he referenced the amphibian DNA as to the failure of the Rex to see. I was also under the impression that any anomalies should be interpreted as a result of the chimera effect of these "dinosaurs" being genetically spliced with at least one other animal.
Malcom himself at various points through the novel makes the statement that these are not real dinosaurs, though he seems more than content enough to concede the reality of the T-Rex when outside the enclosure.
It is also interesting that most of Malcom's criticisms of Jurassic Park are actually expressed in Jurassic World instead of the earlier movies.
I always liked Crichton's retcon in the Lost World, since it pokes fun not just at a character for being comically wrong, but himself for coming up with such a plot device in the first place.
I also like the tidbit Chrichton threw in about the T-Rex having just eaten an entire goat.
A few things about the novel raptors was Muldoon mentioning how they had extreme pain tolerance, as they were able to be shocked by the electric fencing for quite a while before being forced to back off. Their bite force was comparable to a hyena, able to gnaw through even steel bars. And they were slow bleeders.
Don't forget the fact that he had to us a rocket launcher to take them down
And the fact that the Velociraptors aren't even velociraptors in the first place, they're Deinonychus, and I'm pretty sure that's even referenced as being the case in the first novel, that the Deinonychus looked cooler than real velociraptors, and "velociraptor" was a cooler name than Deinonychus
Fun fact: the reason the gallimimus showed up in the herd scene in the movie unlike the hadrosaurus in the book was because when test animations where being made the animators used a gallimimus as a placeholder assest. Spielberg liked it so much he put it in the film instead of the hadrosaurus.
I've always wondered!
How come nearly every fun fact on CZcams comments are never fun?
It was also a Maisaurus in the tree feeding, not a brachiosaurus. The tyrannosaurus appears they (herd) panic and the tyrannosaurus gets one. Stampede etc. the triceratops that was sick is also a standing stegosaurus that’s sick.
@@Johnny.5.Is.Alive. It really bugged me when I read the novel and learned about these changes. I was disappointed enough as it is that the actual movie only had like 7 dinosaurs where there were movies long before it that had a lot more.
I would have preferred they kept the hadrosaur stampede, the maiasaur at the tree, and the sick stegosaurus.
@@ravensthatflywiththenightm7319 I am currently sculpting the head and neck of a stegosaurus at about life size, so had to research them as much as I could.
There are scenes in the novel that are beautiful to imagine. Esp with the sauropods and hadrosaurs. Sometimes changes are made because it’s to technically hard to make those scenes translate from page to screen. Triceratops replaced Stegosaurus due to public popularity. Most dinosaurs in the movie are now incorrect and some were then.
Tyrannosaurus - too thin (shrink wrapped) and had no lips.
Velociraptors - too big and lacked feathers (they were really another species)
Stegosaurus - too big, tail spikes too big. Baby stegosaurus had numerous things wrong.
Dilophosaurus - too small, the frill/venom total fiction.
There is also a lack of continuity in the series as (an example) stegosaurus has a beak to begin with, then has lips later on then can be seen with a beak again and it’s colours change.
When I saw the first film for the first time I absolutely loved it and it was one of those films that made a huge noise for sometime. I did feel like you, I wanted to see more dinosaurs. The book was also more horrific in parts like when Harding and Satler find Nedrys decaying body in the jeep with little Compys jumping around.
I personally don’t like the ‘Monster of the week’ element in the Jurassic Park/World films. I wish there were more varied stories. I wish at times there was a little more mystery, not everything is revealed at once. I have all the films, so I’m a loyal fan, but the last 3 films were silly. A lot of the time the CGI wasn’t believable, they cuts costs by not having the live action puppets/animatronics made (which I really dislike) and they (CGI) just don’t move well. Most of it is unbelievable. I’m just there for the dinosaurs and the nostalgia when the occasional bit is good.
I would really like a more faithful adaptation of the novel to be made someday, maybe in a series rather than a movie, rated R, and featuring up to date dinosaur designs.
Like for all it's faults, both the novel and the first movie were instrumental for reintroducing dinosaur and sparking an interest on paleontology to a wide audience, with it's (relatively) accurate designs for the time.
Something similar to West World?
@@ExtremeMadnessXid like that.
I'm not huge on the up to date dinosaur aspect. I think them not looking close to how they should fits with the themes and issues with InGen.
Agreed. They should look like the 90's models to reflect that they're Frankensteinesque creations....
@@Triforce75 I mean, one of the scenes is Hammond saying he had real dinosaurs and opposing Wu's attempt to modify them, Chrichton's idea was clearly that Ingen had recreated real accurate dinosaurs. If he'd written his book a decade later, his dinosaurs would have had feathers, and Wu would have propposed to made them scaly to cater the public ^^
You forgot that the Dilos had a third appearance in the novel. There’s a scene where Grant and the kids witness them performing a mating dance. As for the size to age differences, it’s stated several times in the novels that they were modified for accelerated growth. Meaning that yes, unaltered dinos would be smaller at their age.
I was about to comment this
Still weird as to why dilophosaurus had the sex change, it wasnt listed as using frog DNA
@@holidaytheraptor6567Lesbian dilophosaurus.
@@holidaytheraptor6567 It's either an oversight on Crichton's part or perhaps those dinosaurs were doing a kind of "mock dance" practice for when they find a male, or as Extreme Madness suggested, homosexuality. Yes, it does happen in wild animals. Who knows? The mystery of the dinosaurs is one of the major pillars of Jurassic Park.
@@chaoticiannunez2419There is also the fact that many reptiles and birds actually can reproduce without males, especially in monitor lizards, iguanas, and geckos. In birds, examples are condors. Some species of geckos don't have males anymore. Making all dinosaurs females should be the worst decision ever.
I like to think that he inaccuracies are due to the extra genes being spiced in. Including weird thinks like spitting venom.
Yes, I actually had a fan-theory I made to the design inaccuracies because of frogs and other creatures being used to fill in the gaps, which can cause visual changes, so I like to have found someone else who thinks the same
One day, I wish someone will do an animated movie of Jurassic Park thats faithful to the book. It'll be different, dark, scary and gory. I'd love to see it happen.
This. Also like stylised 3D animation would be great. Not quite comic book but using animation to its fullest effect. Yeah
I'd pay to watch that
@@masterpig5sspider verse style?
@@ventris425productions5THAT WOULD BE BRILLIANT
@@Shenanigans_333 yeah, hmm, but the concept animation for spider verse would probably fit a lil better
Re-reading the books I was pretty sure the idea of rexy not seeing a stationary object was misinterpreted because she was trying to get grant to run when the fence went down so she could hunt him. Didn’t work, she got pissed and smacked him.
Read again
The rex couldn’t see grant and was trying to scare him into moving and revealing location
I don't know if I imagined it but I think that in the novel Wu states that the scientists accelerated the growth of the Animals. This would explain why the T-Rex was massive.
2:40 I've seen a paleontologist talk about that scene where Brachiosaurus walks in water, according to him (who's ordinarily quite peeved by sauropodes represented in water ^^), it's a symbolism, Bracaurus is leaving the water because it's no longer the idea of a sauropode needing water to sustain its weight.
And given that all sauropodes in the two original Jurassic Park are on dry land and that Brachiosaurus can even stand on two legs, yeah, I don't think they implied that Brachiosaurus lived in water ^^
Ellie also makes a comment about how, "This thing doesn't live in a swamp"
Honestly I feel like Jurassic Park would’ve been great as a horror film.
Nah, it would be boring, movie wise, but still horror-y I guess. My personal taste would be to make it even tamer than OG JP, focusing more on the park and attractions instead of skipping to action and then surviving for the majority.
@@Arnechk nah, its cool and i think the majority of the audience wants to see large reptiles fighting each other for no reason
Velociraptor. I was terrified by them as a kid because of how smart and brutal they were. The novel makes them seem like calculated monsters. I wonder if the author did that on purpose.
They idea of DOZENS of smaller velociraptors made it hard for me to sleep. Especially after what happened to Dr. Wu. I was kinda relieved there were only three in the movie!
@@OllieByGolly yeah especially when he was eaten alive. "You are alive when they eat you.". Chills
Wu's death is dark. He wanted it to be over quick but as the novel says "They simply denied him that.". Guess that means they were sadistic?
Exactly. I had to stop reading and go look up how they looked and what they did.
Chriton had a lot of influence from the old views of dinosaurs being reptiles
Visually maybe but a huge point of Crichton's portrayal of dinosaurs was always supposed to be a subversion of the popular beliefs of dinosaurs back then, as slow sluggish dinosaurs, hell he even mentioned them as being warm blooded
The only "reptillian" features the animals retained in the books were the raptors eyes and their parenting style being much more brutalist and then having forked tounges, which I feel he went for because they were supposed to the "antagonists" in these books
dinosaurs are reptiles....
Like the other guy said outside of appearance with the forked tongue eh not too much. Also being technical dinosaurs still are reptiles, of the group archosaurs but a reptile still. The view of modern reptiles as all being close due to their appearance doesn’t hold any ground. Crocodiles are more genetically close to dinosaurs (birds included) than they are to lizards and snakes yet they’re one of the most stereotypically “reptile-y” of the reptiles.
One of Crichton's great influence was au contraire the booat pretty much started the dinosaur Renaissance, portraying agile dinosaurs. Yeah, they were still scaly because at that time the only skin impressions we had of non-avian dinosaurs were scales, but still.
The entire book is about how dinosaurs where more birds than reptiles
the T-Rex being to large for its age is kind of addressed tho not specifically for the T-Rex itself, but I’m sure I remember Dr. Woo saying they make the dinosaurs reach maturity faster.
Shortened Telomeres
I honestly think Rexy/Roberta’s vision issues isn’t because of amphibian DNA, but rather either due to an infection from an injury in both eyes or gained low and blurry vision as a birth defect. It could make sense why she has not so good vision compared to the other tyrannosaurs.
The compys in the novel did it for me. The movie really played down how vicious they were.
Concerning the Novel Dilophosaurus' coloration, while yes it's described as being like a leopard in the book, I wonder if Crichton actually / esoterically based it on the Samar Cobra of the Philippines, which has the same yellow-and-black scheme and can spit venom.
The thing about T. Rex's vision and the amphibian DNA was explained in the novel. Grant and the kids encountered a Maiasaura that seemed to have the same issue.
That wasn't because of the amphibian DNA, in The Lost World that theory it's mocked, because, obviously, is absurd that a predator could have movement based vision, so probably it's just a mutation of those animals. Or maybe in Sorna there was a newer version that solved that problem.
The only issue with that is that the raptors also used frog DNA but didn't have the same sight issues. You can probably chalk it up as just a holdover from the "dinosaurs were plodding reptiles" mindset that was still pretty ingrained in the collective mindset of the time.
@@Braint-lr6uf It's actually mocking the film, because it mentions it being a paleontological theory, which only makes sense with how Grant immediately treated the T-Rex in the film. In the book, Grant had no idea he wasn't going to die when he was frozen in terror. He puts 2 and 2 together only after the encounter with the Maiasaura. The first novel makes it pretty explicit there really is vision based movement, and that it's due to amphibian DNA (whether or not that's accurate to reality).
The problem here, though, is that The Lost World novel has several inconsistencies and retcons. For example, Chrichton retconned Dr. Malcolm's death, which in the original novel, he's *dead* dead. Not just "presumed". Grant is explicitly told, weeks after Malcolm's death, that he still hasn't been buried due to issues with the Costa Rican government. With that time frame, it's impossible for someone to be in a near-death coma with no life support, food, or water to survive. So even if he HAD been misdiagnosed, he'd have been dead mere days after, if not sooner thanks to the untreated injuries.
So using TLW novel to dispute facts from the first is sort of a moot point.
Yes in the novel Dr Grant did a cough test in the tree that he and the kids climbed up after running from the Trex with a maiasaura herd and when he coughed the individual animal that was grazing on the tree froze for a moment then went back to eating. It basically was looking at Grant and didn't even realize he was there until the kids started moving
It is plausible since some frogs and toads don't recognize things as food unless it moves in certain ways. There was a test where they had a stick standing straight up and moving it, the toad wouldn't try to eat it. If they put it horizontally, then they would try to eat it.
20:21 the music is so perfectly timed. When nedry gets spit at and then he hits his head on the top of the door and thats also perfectly timed.
Jurassic Park is my all time favorite movie, and I love the book, however I'm a fan of Paleontology in general as well, so thank you so much for sharing these facts to help set the record straight for the fans who don't really know much about actual dinosaurs while also give the film and novel their earned respect!!👍
One thing I point out to people is that when he wrote the novel, Crichton gave himself an out for any later discoveries that would invalidate the research he had done. The animals on the island were never dinosaurs; they were at best, marketed and engineered to appeal to a wide audience and to play on the imagination and perception of the world, all to rake in more and more money for Hammond and Ingen. At worst, they were modern day chimeras.
Wu even admits in the novel that they have no idea how accurate the creatures they're creating were and he worries that he may have even killed off healthy (and accurate) animals because they didn't fit in with the perceived image they were going after. "This raptor had feathers? Probably a mistake, scrap the batch and use amphibian DNA for the next batch."
At the end of the day Michael Crichton knew that the novel would probably be found to be inaccurate very quickly but still found a way to cover himself for that. Doesn't take away from the novel, its still brilliant and one I enjoy read once a year.
I don't remember the part where he "worries that he may have even killed off healthy (and accurate) animals".
The rest though, yeah I remember those.
@@ravensthatflywiththenightm7319 it's the dinner scene with Hammond and Wu, before the auxiliary power fails
@@madthing5738 Thank you. Really appreciate this. I'll check on that as soon as I can get my claws on my copy 🦖
I keep saying that for the time the dinosaur designs were rather accurate for that time. I also always mention that Crichton himself said that he changed the raptors name from Utahraptor (i think) to velociraptor just because it sounded cool, so it was never meant to be a "true" velociraptor. At the end of the day Jurassic Park has it's own designs which are affected because of the genetics being used which is explained many times by Dr.Wu in the book which a lot of people forget about. I never really understood why people constantly want accurate depictions from this series when that's not the point of them.
Great video! Been watching your shorts for some time now and they are very educational and interesting
I'm in the process of listening to an audio book version of Jurassic Park, and, it is quite different, but, I don't dislike it, I love the more horror aspects of the book, and that baby crib scene, oh boy, sent literal shivers down my spine
We need Segisaurus in either Jurassic World Evolution 2, Jurassic World The Game or Jurassic World Alive. That poor guy has been done really dirty as well as Proceratosaurus, Metriacanthosaurus and even Edmontosaurus
#JusticeForTheseDinos
#JusticeForSegisaurus
#JusticeForSegisaurus
#Justiceforsegisaurus
To be fair, segisaurus's depiction was very unclear back in 1993. The fragmentary remains only indicated it was potentially a generic (hence, scally by default) mid-size theropod with a beak, presumed to be a fish eater... maybe.
No matter what they would've made for the movie back then, it was doomed to be a miss.
The real crime was to not include it once we had a more accurate idea of what it looked like.
#JusticeForSegisaurus
So, Segisaurus has arrived to JWE2
So, Segisaurus has arrived to JWE2
Grant killing the raptors with the poison eggs is one of my favorite scenes and I'm actually able to visualize the scene which is rare for me
let's not forget that in the book, the T-Rex can swim whereas in other forms of media it is believed that it can't because of its arms.
My favorite will always be the Dilophosaurus. Before I read the novel, Stegosaurus was my favorite but it kind of bled out when it did not appear in the JP movie, and it was only later when I read the novel I found out Spielberg deliberately switched the stego with a Triceratops, which continues to bug me to this day.
Btw the Dilophosaurus did have just one more scene in the novel, during the Jungle River sequence. I really liked that scene. Although Crichton may have made a mistake not including them among the "breeding" species, as the scene involved the two Dilophosaurs performing a mating ritual.
Yes it was a sick standing stegosaurus that was changed to a sick lying triceratops
@@Johnny.5.Is.Alive. I suppose I should at least be grateful that they decided to keep the Dilophosaurus. I remember reading a book about the making of JP, where someone said they "originally" wanted to have the Velociraptors do the venom-spitting. But then decided to keep it faithful and have the Dilophosaurus do it.
But then they went and did an equally stupid thing by shrinking the dilo down because they were concerned that a 10 foot tall, V-crested, hooting, venom-spitting dinosaur would SOMEHOW be "confused" with the raptors. 🙄🙄🙄
Technically the second book: carnotaurs. The camouflage ability was amazing and terrifying. Also ine child me had not thought of and their reveal was absolutely terrifying.
Micheal Crichton wrote carnotaurs?
Lmao I'm gonna leave this here. I was thinking about carnosaurs. The novel that was really good and led to about 4 b movies.
Brilliant work
This is a nitpick for JP and not you but their designs for ceratopsids are notoriously offensive, especially the feet. They give them trunk-like hooves/fused tarsals when we know they walked on fingers/toes with no evidence of fusing or hooves
And thank you so much for mentioning that Utah raptor and achillobator were discovered after the film, I get tired of seeing people say "oh clearly it's Utah/achillobator" no bro it's a simple Google search come on, Chricton and Spielberg said they're Deinonychus but "velociraptor" just sounded cooler
I think the rex couldn't see was because it was a defect in it's cloneing process, something like a birth defect, where you develop some type of defect cussing you to be a bit different from your normal counterpart. A disability. If that makes sense, hence the rex having a limitation on its vision.
I love how he states the starting number for the species in the video and states the results at the end
All villains in the first Jurassic Park novel series,
Lewis Dodgson - main antagonist
Dennis Nedry - major antagonist
John Hammond - central antagonist
Ed Regis - supporting antagonist
thank you for mentioning that JP had state of the art dinos. it's sad that they haven't kept up with it, but the 1st movie doesn't deserve the bad rep that ppl tend to give it, saying that it was totally outdated from the start.
Agreed. JPIII's spinosaur was super well done and accurate to the science at the time.
In the book Raptor Red, the introduction says that that the director was told about the new discovery before it was public information, so they were aware of it. They were already designed though, so they were still called Velociraptor.
I think the Brachies moving to land is a metaphor of the Dinosaur Renaissance, when Ellie said "this thing doesn't live in a swamp" it's like the Brachies are following what she's saying like some sort of foreshadoeibg or whatever
But i thought that in the novel, when Grant is facing Rexy, the only reason he is not attacked is because Rexy did not want to hunt a stationary prey. The T rex tried a few times to scare Grant to make him run away like kicking the car door and roaring at him but he still didnt move, which is why Rexy let him live. (My POV)
the thing is everyone seems to forget that the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park are not real dinosaurs. These Dinosaurs have mixed DNAs from other Species that is why they look different. They were never accurate Dinosaurs.
The dilophosaurus also appears near the end, as two are seen on a riverbank doing a mating display before they have to defend themselves from the Rex
One thing that I really like about the film triceratops is that it's sort of unintentionally, retroactively accurate when you think about it. Given its relatively small size compared to adult specimens, it's likely that the sick individual we see was not yet full grown. This actually winds up working for how it's depicted, specifically the spikes around the rim of its frill. While such spikes, known as epoccipital bones, are common in many depictions of full grown triceratops, they would actually reabsorb back into the frill bone as the animal aged. So, between the presence of epoccipitals and the relatively small size, I like to think that the trike in the Jurassic Park film is a subadult.
Real quick about the raptor scene in the book, can we address that Gennaro fought the raptor off practically bare handed?! I love both the books and the movies but sweet jesus that lawyer was a badass
*if I remember correctly, its been a while since I read the book*
In the beginning of Robert T. Bakker's book Raptor Red he claimed that the Utah Raptor was the inspiration for the raptors of the movie and that he was an unofficial consultant for Jurassic Park. They were not yet public knowledge but some paleontologists knew of it.
It wasn’t so it’s confusing he would say that. It was discovered as the film was already being made.
You forgot the scene for the Dilos in the book where Grant and the Kids are on the river, and the Rex is trying to breach the trees, and they float between two Dilos in a mating ritual
True
I honestly love the anatomical inaccuracies in Jurassic Park. Someone in these comments said that it really adds to Hammond and Wu being modern Dr. Frankensteins and really highlights that InGen didn't make true dinosaurs, they made monstrous chimeras of dinosaur and modern species' DNA.
Thank you for also letting us know the metric system! It's so frustrating to watch videos like this where you end up uncertain about the size (and are too lazy to google it constantly) 😂
I have a theory for the raptors’ size.
As for what he said about Achillobator, it can be said that just because a dinosaur hasn’t been discovered doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Perhaps InGen discovered it, and thought it was a velociraptor. However, Achillibator is still wrong, because in the film, we see Grant discover a similarly-sized raptor in the Montana Badlands.
Personally, due to the location of the fossils, and because of the discovery-existence dilemma, I personally think that the “velociraptors” of Jurassic park are actually Dakotaraptors.
There actually _was_ a scene explaining the gizzard stones in the film, but it was cut for time. You can see Ellie holding a rock when thunder startles the group.
Can we appreciate chriton for completely retconning himself with the T. Rex vision.
I can kind of just imagine him saying
" Alright, I admit. That was pretty rediculous "
I haven't watched yet but I'm super excited about this. For one of my senior projects I did an essay on how accurate were the dinosaurs of the Jurassic Park movie. I haven't read the books but it will be cool to see how the two compare and which is more accurate.
26:03 apparently the t-rex was merciful in that
I really love the differences. This makes both so unique
Super enjoyed this video. I've known for a long time that the dilophosaurus isn't accurate but I can't help but love the visual design of it. I wish they would bring it back into the franchise at some point in time.
I think I speak for all of us when I say we NEED you to do book 2!!! Awesome video btw
Imagine if a book, movie or comic series comes out and a character just kicks a dilo in the neck and just has time to call it a disappointing inaccuracy because they have seen what an accurate dilo looks like before running with the rest of the main cast of the story
5 or 6 out of 10 for the Rexie? Most paleontologists I've seen evaluate Rexie says she's one of the best T. rex reconstructed ^^'
Apart from the vision issue that is yes probably just a plot device, there's really no big errors with her design....
As for the novel, I would think you'd take issue with the surrealistic scene where T. rex has a super huge tongue that seems to be able to grab Timmy and secretes a sort of substance that makes him sleepy and docile, that's the biggest grief I have with Crichton's T. rex, not the eyesight XD
I always interpreted him getting sleepy and docile as him just giving up to the inevitable, as there was no subsequent consequence. He was right as rain as soon as Rexy let go.
@@exodiusthefirst5862 If I was grabbed by a T. rex tongue, you can be sure I would be kicking, clawing and even biting that tongue, it's probably the most vulnerable part of his anatomy, apart from his eyes XD
@@krankarvolund7771 And deer should just move away from the oncoming traffic. But often as not they fail to do so.
Nice to think one would be proactive in a situation like that but people freeze up when scared. Timmy was a kid (wasn't he like 12?), I doubt he had anything as stressful happen to him before, he almost died at least once in the preceding 24 hours, that is not counting the encounter in the lagoon/lake Rexy swam after them in.
And then once they finally thought they were getting into safety Rexy blocked the only accessible exit, and displayed a trait (extremely long and agile tongue, like you mentioned) noone expected. At that point I can believe he gave up.
@@exodiusthefirst5862 Being frozen in place is one thing, becoming sleepy and docile is very different, I should reread the scene but in my memories, it really was the weird saliva of the rex that did that ^^'
@@krankarvolund7771 To be fair it might not have been portrayed the best way, I reread Jurassic Park about once a year so it might be I simply assumed that myself. What doesn't help is the fact Rexy was tranqued herself, and was falling asleep while trying to pull Timmy out (with Muldoon noting they do not need to worry about it drowning while asleep, Rexy being the toughest thing to kill he ever seen).
Bloody hell, I want to reread the book now because of you😜.
Thank you for a civil interaction, it is surprisingly rare nowadays in the online spheres. Best wishes!
Oh my god. This is one heck of a horror episode. I loooooooooved this. This is truly an amazing piecd of content. Good job done!
I loved these videos.. I have both audio books it's amazing to relive it with your videos
This is the 3rd Comment I post since the 1st two are apparently erased. Is it not possible to put links anymore?
Good video. Just a slight correction, Roberta is the movie Tyrannosaurus while Rexy is the nickname she's given in the novel.
I would really like to see a faithful adaptation of both books done one day. I love the first 3 movies, but I think after so long and getting so far from the tone of the source material that it might be cool to see someone else go back to the books and adapt them again.
Same. 🦖
Wonderful! I loved it. I did have two questions though, one, what is the music from 10:45 to 19:17 ? It's creepy and I like it! second, will you do a Lost World book vs film next? Again, I loved this! I am a fan of the movies but especially the two books.
Update: I found the background music! It's called, 'Suspense, Horror, Piano, and music box'. Again, great vid Dinofax! Please consider The Lost World film and novel!
Hey. Just wanted to say great video
After watching your videos you got me into reading the book.
So far so good.
Hope you have a good day.👍
This was utterrly incredible, would totlaly watch again 👍
The inaccuracy of Rexy's vision of not seeing stationary objects is actually explained later on that due to a genetic defect only SHE can't see anything not moving but every other t rex we see can very much see any object whether it's moving or not
Loved your take on film/Novel Dinosaur cameo's. 🎉❤😂
This was an awesome video man, thank you. Makes me want to read the novel again, for like the 10th time haha.
I'm pretty sure the brachiosaurs coming out the water was meant to symbolise our change in the viewing of a sauropod's life style.
I always interpreted the raptor pack being killed by the big as them dying while checking the fence for weaknesses.
In my mind it made her more ruthless
The dinosaurs were altered to grow to adulthood much faster than they normally would.
It seems like the film made a few "jurassitcally" different changes from the book to make it more "mainstream" friendly. I have watched the film countless times, saw it on the big screen, but it has literally been like 10 or 15 years since. I just finished the novel and now anxious to go watch the film once again and do some comparisons. Thanks for the informative video!
Really cool video, you really did great job here! Oh and btw a pair of dilos also appear by the river in the novel, when Grant and the kids get chased by the t.rex. c:
Can't wait for the next skull island video. The last one was awesome.
finally got around to watching this, thanks for the entertainment my dude.
Excellent video! One small critique, lower the background music when editing, it clashes with your dialogue, making it harder to hear. Great job, subbed!
Dino fax is the goat
Goats get fed to T-Rexes 🦖
@@jamielee3743 ok than he’s the parasaurolophus
as a kid I thought this movie was the greatest thing I had ever seen. As an adult listening to the book and watching the movie a ton, and understanding GMO's, and fossil records. I suspended disbelief with watching or reading the book (yea they had feathers, or where bigger or small or mistaken for other the dinosaurs and their behaviors). I understander liberties were given, but i give slack to the movie and book for trying to recreate cool monsters from a million years ago that kinda looked like their counter parts in their time, but mixed with a fun story you got a fun time.
Playing devil's advocate, the dinosaurs in JP aren't perfect copies, though that is mostly something that might account for the lack of feathers. The raptors in the movie are also so big because in some scenes they are portrayed by people in suits.
The bgm for the carnivores really fits in to make them feel terrifying like they actually are
I always figurd that Rex could very well see stationary objects, but because they weren't fleeing it didnt recognize them as a source of food, rather a static object like a tree
@TheDinoFax Love your videos dude also I think they should reboot Jurassic Park as a tv show but it should more to the book 📕 more than the movie 🍿. This can show everyone that didn’t read the book 📕 or didn’t know it to show how different it was to the movie 🍿 especially the characters.
I absolutely loved this video, as it compares the novel and book dino's quite well. However, 1 point of critique: your background music is way too loud, so it requires a LOT of energy to focus on what you are saying, making it hard to comprehend what you're hearing fast enough to keep focus. Keep up the great work though!
This is honestly one of my favorite videos you've ever done, The Jurassic park Novel is my favorite dinosaur horror story, and has given me innumerous idea's for me to write my own dinosaur horror stories as I'm currently doing. I intend to read the second book as soon as I'm done reading primitive war. I always thought the Novel's dinosaurs were a lot scarier and at times slightly more scientifically accurate then the films version, although being a book the novel has the leniency to were I can use my imagination to see the dinosaurs in the book with their more scientifically accurate forms while ignoring most of the inaccuracies. (for most of them anyway) It was nice nonetheless though to see a comparison between the books and the films on how they interpreted each of the animals and how accurate each was. A lot paleo artists today use speculation, or depict fleshy tissues, structures and organs like what Crition did with the Dilphosaurus venom's glands and frill except in a way more in line with the scientific data, overall though I think Crition had the right idea with some of the speculative features of the dinosaurs just didn't come out great in execution leaving all the criticisms scientists have with the book and movie's dinosaurs today. But overall loved this video. I hope one day if you could do a series on the accuracy of more obscure dinosaur media, like Dino crisis, Dinotopia or something like primitive war I would love to see that.
I always took the brachiosaurus’s in the water meaning they chilled out there like many larger animals do to cool off, or that they were crossing through the deep water with minimal issue, keeping their heads up the way elephants hold their trunks up. I forgot about the whole “sauropods need water to stand” crap😂
I’m watching this while playing Jurassic World evolution 2
This was awesome! Loved this video and the music you chose!
What's the name of the theme that played with the Dilo's intro? That was awesome!
2:30 "I'm unsure if Jurassic Park meant to imply that sauropods spent more time in the water because of this scene in Jurassic Park."
Remember when Ellie said "This thing doesn't live in a swamp!" during its introduction?
Who would win if these was a war between novel vs film who would win?
Movie Rexy vs novel rexy
Movie Velociraptor vs novel Velociraptors
Movie Dilophasaurus vs novel Dilophasaurus
Movie carno vs novel carno
Movie spino vs novel spino
Movie ankylosaurus vs novel ankylosaurus
Movie Triceratops vs novel Triceratops
Movie brachisaurus vs novel brachisaurus
Movie alen grent vs novel alen grent
Movie john hammond vs novel John hammond
Movie indominus rex vs novel indominus rex
iirc it wouldn't be a major inaccuracy for a "herbivore" to occasionally eat meat, especially if it's a carcass just lying around. Giraffes will sometimes scavenge a carcass.
My favorite 1 in the book is ALWAYS gonna be Maiasaura. Though I go back & forth between her, Hadrosaurus & Styracosaurus. Simply because Styracosaurus is my favorite ceratopsian & Hadrosaurus was supposed to be in the movie but it got replaced by Gallimimus
Can you make the lost world dinosaurs, movie Vs book?
I was massively disappointed that the book didn't have the "Dodgson! We've got Dodgson here!" Part.
Very awesome video! I ought to read that book some day.
The velociraptor has always been a favorite of mine since I first saw the original movie as a kid
This is why I love Jurassic Park both movie and book versions
Bro i watched all your videos and Your tiktoks your awesome man
I can appreciate a person or people’s Creative Imagination on what Dinosaurs looked like.
Some say Dinosaurs had Feathers others claimed that Dinosaurs had Scales and quils
and the In Between claimed Dinosaurs had both Feathers and scales.
Bro this guy is the best
Concerning the Styracosaurus and Euoplocephalus, sometimes I wonder - being a writer on my journey to getting published - if perhaps Crichton wrote scenes with those dinosaurs, but during the editing and "Kill your Darlings" phase of the writing, he had to cut them out entirely.
25:08 its Rexy also. Roberta is the name of one of the characters in the prologue of the novel