Page 277 of 278

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 3:52 pm
by SoggyNoodles2016
miguelnuva wrote:
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
Edit: the fact the JP3 variant is the basic one in Evolution (where every dinosaur has to have Universal confirmation to be what the franchise version should be and that all dinosaurs minus Indoraptor are female) says she's a girl


Spinosaurus was made illegally on Isla Sorna it wouldn't be in the all female list.


Cool. Missed my entire point, but cool.

To reiterate

Jurassic World Evolution (which Universal and Trevorrow has said is "soft canon" AKA basically canon) lets you only make female dinosaurs (minus Indoraptor for some reason). The Spinosaurs you make in that game and the one from Sorna (implied but basically said to be the JP3 one) look like the one from JP3. This means the JP3 Spino is female

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:02 pm
by Living Corpse
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:The problem with the "he doesn't look like it" argument is this is Jurassic Park. Every dinosaur is a genetic abomination made with 20% actual animal, 40% 80s-90s science, and 60% Hollywood/theme park "make it cooler" mentality so it was NEVER gonna look like an IRL Spinosaurus.

Besides that, it's totally a hybrid. Been confirmed as canon, even.

Edit: the fact the JP3 variant is the basic one in Evolution (where every dinosaur has to have Universal confirmation to be what the franchise version should be and that all dinosaurs minus Indoraptor are female) says she's a girl


Yeah I'm getting sick and tired of people saying "that's not what they looked/acted like" as if that is somehow a "sin", in a series that freely admits these are theme park test tube animals they made and not the genuine article. It's a creature flick for skreeonks sake. It's like pointing out Batman is nuts cause he's a vigilante who dresses up as a bat. No poop Sherlock, even Bruce and Alfred had enough self-awareness to point this out themselves in the films.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:22 pm
by 2004Zilla
The Jurassic Park 3 Spinosaurus was definitely designed to be a modern, accurate representation back in 2001. Considering that this is what it looked like in the franchise before then, there was absolutely an attempt to make the dinosaur scientifically accurate.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 4:29 pm
by Jeff-Goldblum2
And that toy representation was the believed appearance of Spinosaurus for half a century. Probably even during the release of the first Jurassic Park.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 5:36 pm
by miguelnuva
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
miguelnuva wrote:
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
Edit: the fact the JP3 variant is the basic one in Evolution (where every dinosaur has to have Universal confirmation to be what the franchise version should be and that all dinosaurs minus Indoraptor are female) says she's a girl


Spinosaurus was made illegally on Isla Sorna it wouldn't be in the all female list.


Cool. Missed my entire point, but cool.

To reiterate

Jurassic World Evolution (which Universal and Trevorrow has said is "soft canon" AKA basically canon) lets you only make female dinosaurs (minus Indoraptor for some reason). The Spinosaurs you make in that game and the one from Sorna (implied but basically said to be the JP3 one) look like the one from JP3. This means the JP3 Spino is female


They look alike because that's the only design we have seen for the Spinosaurus. We don't have an official canon answer if a Male or female Spino would look different. You can also change the apparance of dino's in evolution.

I knew for a fact the Spino was listed as Male before in the pre Jurassic world material and there has never been an official stance on the gender.

Spinosaurus does act like a Male though.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 6:32 pm
by SoggyNoodles2016
miguelnuva wrote:
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
miguelnuva wrote:
Spinosaurus was made illegally on Isla Sorna it wouldn't be in the all female list.


Cool. Missed my entire point, but cool.

To reiterate

Jurassic World Evolution (which Universal and Trevorrow has said is "soft canon" AKA basically canon) lets you only make female dinosaurs (minus Indoraptor for some reason). The Spinosaurs you make in that game and the one from Sorna (implied but basically said to be the JP3 one) look like the one from JP3. This means the JP3 Spino is female


They look alike because that's the only design we have seen for the Spinosaurus. We don't have an official canon answer if a Male or female Spino would look different.


This has nothing to do with this so cool.

You can also change the apparance of dino's in evolution.


Color. You can do nothing about appearance.


I knew for a fact the Spino was listed as Male before in the pre Jurassic world material and there has never been an official stance on the gender.


I have never seen it called male ONCE before. And I was there for the media hype of it.

Spinosaurus does act like a Male though.


…..

really?

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 10:09 pm
by miguelnuva
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
miguelnuva wrote:
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
Cool. Missed my entire point, but cool.

To reiterate

Jurassic World Evolution (which Universal and Trevorrow has said is "soft canon" AKA basically canon) lets you only make female dinosaurs (minus Indoraptor for some reason). The Spinosaurs you make in that game and the one from Sorna (implied but basically said to be the JP3 one) look like the one from JP3. This means the JP3 Spino is female


They look alike because that's the only design we have seen for the Spinosaurus. We don't have an official canon answer if a Male or female Spino would look different.


This has nothing to do with this so cool.

You can also change the apparance of dino's in evolution.


Color. You can do nothing about appearance.


I knew for a fact the Spino was listed as Male before in the pre Jurassic world material and there has never been an official stance on the gender.


I have never seen it called male ONCE before. And I was there for the media hype of it.

Spinosaurus does act like a Male though.


…..

really?


Male animals would go around killing T-rexs to prove their dominance. A female would only kill for food or to protect their young. In the film Grant calls it with Male pronouns. You have anything saying it was female other than the first film saying all the dinos were female.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Sun Oct 06, 2019 11:04 pm
by JAGzilla
miguelnuva wrote:
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
miguelnuva wrote:
They look alike because that's the only design we have seen for the Spinosaurus. We don't have an official canon answer if a Male or female Spino would look different.


This has nothing to do with this so cool.

You can also change the apparance of dino's in evolution.


Color. You can do nothing about appearance.


I knew for a fact the Spino was listed as Male before in the pre Jurassic world material and there has never been an official stance on the gender.


I have never seen it called male ONCE before. And I was there for the media hype of it.

Spinosaurus does act like a Male though.


…..

really?


Male animals would go around killing T-rexs to prove their dominance. A female would only kill for food or to protect their young.


You don't own any female dogs, do you? :lol:

Also, while some male mammals might behave something like that, I've never heard of a male crocodile or eagle going around killing things to prove his dominance.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2019 12:43 am
by miguelnuva
JAGzilla wrote:
miguelnuva wrote:
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
This has nothing to do with this so cool.



Color. You can do nothing about appearance.




I have never seen it called male ONCE before. And I was there for the media hype of it.



…..

really?


Male animals would go around killing T-rexs to prove their dominance. A female would only kill for food or to protect their young.


You don't own any female dogs, do you? :lol:

Also, while some male mammals might behave something like that, I've never heard of a male crocodile or eagle going around killing things to prove his dominance.


I dont have any dogs no, I just know from what Inhave watched on animal shows males are more likely to pick fights to show dominance while females do so more for food and protecting their young.

Spino is not a real animal anyway however.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2019 4:32 am
by Rhedosaurus
Jeff-Goldblum2 wrote:It doesn't make any sense to criticize Spinosaurus for being inaccurate in a 2001 movie because that was the version they thought was accurate at the time.

Jack Horner was pushing his theory that Tyrannosaurus was a scavenger and Spinosaurus was a real super predator around then as well.



2004Zilla wrote:The Jurassic Park 3 Spinosaurus was definitely designed to be a modern, accurate representation back in 2001. Considering that this is what it looked like in the franchise before then, there was absolutely an attempt to make the dinosaur scientifically accurate.



Actually, considering how little of Spinosaurus we had and only 2 members of it's family were known relatively well-just one if you believe the Suchomimus=Larger African species of Baryonyx theory-the JP3 Spinosaurus was really just a big guess based on iffy science.

SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:Besides that, it's totally a hybrid. Been confirmed as canon, even.


Only by those sites that only some fans care about. Sorry, but you can't get away with making sites canon. Paramount tried that with Nero for the first Kelvin Trek movie and that didn't work out so well. Not only that, but sites are too fluid compared with movies and books, which are FAR more concrete.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2019 5:32 am
by SoggyNoodles2016
miguelnuva wrote:Male animals would go around killing T-rexs to prove their dominance. A female would only kill for food or to protect their young.


Indominus is female and slaughtered things.

also, no animal, male or otherwise, randomly kills species for dominance.

In the film Grant calls it with Male pronouns.


in the novel, they call Rexy male pronouns. Rexy is female. It's a murder lizard, they don't have time to pull up it's skirt to see what gender it is.

You have anything saying it was female other than the first film saying all the dinos were female.


Honestly, not really.

You on the other hand, have no evidence it's male either and yet you're acting like you're right when you are 100% not.



Rhedosaurus wrote:Only by those sites that only some fans care about. Sorry, but you can't get away with making sites canon. Paramount tried that with Nero for the first Kelvin Trek movie and that didn't work out so well. Not only that, but sites are too fluid compared with movies and books, which are FAR more concrete.


Yeah, I hate using the tie in sites as canon as well, but giving this is Jurassic Park and we have poop canon, I'll take vague doesn't really fit canon over no canon any day.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2019 2:42 pm
by miguelnuva
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
miguelnuva wrote:Male animals would go around killing T-rexs to prove their dominance. A female would only kill for food or to protect their young.


Indominus is female and slaughtered things.

also, no animal, male or otherwise, randomly kills species for dominance.

In the film Grant calls it with Male pronouns.


in the novel, they call Rexy male pronouns. Rexy is female. It's a murder lizard, they don't have time to pull up it's skirt to see what gender it is.

You have anything saying it was female other than the first film saying all the dinos were female.


Honestly, not really.

You on the other hand, have no evidence it's male either and yet you're acting like you're right when you are 100% not.



[


Indominus did that because she didn't know where she fit in the food chain. This backs up the theory maybe Spino was a hybrid. As for fighting I brought that up because it's a trait more associated with Male animals then females, not that it's a rule.

The novel is also a different canon from the film. I'm not acting as if I'm right I'm merely saying my reasons for why I think Spino might be a Male Dinosaur.

Spino acts more like Indominus and the Indoraptor then the three previous Rex's so could be more evidence it's more of a hybrid.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2019 5:46 pm
by Tyrant_Lizard_King
Yeah the movie Rexes typically act like real animals for the most part. Spino was portrayed more like a slasher movie villain.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Tue Oct 08, 2019 6:07 am
by Rhedosaurus
SoggyNoodles2016 wrote:
Rhedosaurus wrote:Only by those sites that only some fans care about. Sorry, but you can't get away with making sites canon. Paramount tried that with Nero for the first Kelvin Trek movie and that didn't work out so well. Not only that, but sites are too fluid compared with movies and books, which are FAR more concrete.


Yeah, I hate using the tie in sites as canon as well, but giving this is Jurassic Park and we have poop canon, I'll take vague doesn't really fit canon over no canon any day.


I guess I'm just a bit more spoiled by how solid the continuality of the Heisei Godzilla movie series and the Thanos Era MCU movies were to be like that.



Tyrant_Lizard_King wrote:Yeah the movie Rexes typically act like real animals for the most part. Spino was portrayed more like a slasher movie villain.


Or another bad Godzilla knockoff...As if Universal forgot about the fact that we had one 3 years earlier.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2019 7:54 am
by G2000
The only thing I don't get is why Indoraptor is canonically male while pretty much every other cloned dinosaur is (at least originally) female, discounting breeding populations on Isla Sorna and evidently the continental US post-JW2 (which could be handwaved as that pesky frog DNA again). Was the idea that they were breeding for aggression and that males would be more aggressive, or what

It doesn't really matter at the end of the day, just curious

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2019 8:00 am
by tyrantgoji
G2000 wrote:The only thing I don't get is why Indoraptor is canonically male while pretty much every other cloned dinosaur is (at least originally) female, discounting breeding populations on Isla Sorna, and evidently the continental US post-JW2 (which could be handwaved as that pesky frog DNA again). Was the idea that they were breeding for aggression and that males would be more aggressive, or what

It doesn't really matter at the end of the day, just curious


I thought it was just a dumb way to differentiate it from the rest. Though it's a hybrid,it's different enough. :lol:

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Wed Oct 09, 2019 8:07 am
by miguelnuva
There was a theory early on Blue would have been Indo's mate and then turned on him to save Owen.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Mon Oct 14, 2019 8:08 pm
by The One and Only
Robertosaurus, a hybrid dinosaur that almost made it to the films.

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Fri Nov 08, 2019 3:41 pm
by Dino-Mario
Image

Feast your eyes on these... interesting covers of the original novel

Image

Re: The Jurassic Park Series (1-5)

Posted: Fri Nov 08, 2019 4:02 pm
by tyrantgoji
Dino-Mario wrote:Image

Feast your eyes on these... interesting covers of the original novel

Image


What the skreoonk is that one on the bottom?