Well, technically, if you think about it, the Velociraptors in the previous Jurassic Parks weren't even accurate even in size; they were the size of a utah raptor instead.

that was probably the only inaccuracy towards identifying a species, also back then we had little knowledge than we do now about dinosaurs. It was actually based around Deinonychus, but the height was changed a bit more towards Utahraptor Ostrommaysorum and having a 3ft Velociraptor coming at you isn't as terrifying as they thought, so they threw in a different dino and changed the name basically. I was upset about that when I knew the truth as a kid.

Most of jurrasic park was more leaned toward the artists freedom, because, well we know Dilophosaurus didn't have a frill. Dinosaurs were more open to interpretation back then than they are today.

But it's basically having the excuse of putting feathers on a dinosaur doesn't make them scary enough, is the stupidest reason. Also allowing your fans to sway you instead of staying with what's accurate. I mean, even Micheal Crichton knew what the paleontologists knew, in understanding they were bird like and cared for their young(still reading the book over again).

Yeah I think that, even if they don't change the dinos that were in previous films, they should at least introduce some new feathered ones. They only have tons to choose from, I mean, It cant be that difficult.

totally! and if they put triceratops in without the belly scutes or the gator like skin and quills on it's back, i'm gonna choke 'em.

I agree >:D

what the hell. really?? that is so disappointing... feathers are and can be scary, man.

it really is :c

Just saying this now, my father and uncle are paleontologists and have explained to me that the only reason scientist have been putting feathers on every two legged dinosaur is because their has not been a link found in the connecting the two. So because the link has not been found they decided if they put it on everything then everyone will believe it and not question the scientists.
''Hey we do not want people to talk about us not having a link of feathers to scales so we will put it on EVERY two legged dinosaur.''
The DNA evidence does not have enough information for definite proof, DNA actually deteriorates and people just filled in the blanks and say if those blanks are right then we are right.

Hell my uncle almost died laughing when he saw the 'Walking with' series on the part that said this equine evolves into this equine that evolves into this equine. Look evolution. Problem is that all of those three equines are found in the same sedimentary layer... evolution takes thousands of years yet they are connecting these three that lived at the same time.

Not saying they are birds, this is like the charles darwin miss interpretation. They evolved from a common ancestor, like humans and monkeys. We didn't evolve directly from monkeys, but that we all share a common ancestor with them. Velociraptor has evidence that it did in fact have feathers, if you look at the ulna there are feather quill knobs http://www.sciencedaily.com/release.....0920145402.htm they aren't sure how much of the dinosaur was covered in feathers, considering most of the fossils weren't as well preserved as archeopteryx or sinocalliopteryx where there are feather impressions. With all the new technology their able to figure out how these dinosaurs looked as well as with the hundreds of new fossils pouring in from asia. Heck we even had a Iguanadon mummy.

You can't deny that a whale is related to a hippo, but you there's proof they're not the same species, but that they evolved from a common ancestor. What you cannot deny is that there is evidence that Dinosaurs(may not have had wing feathers like the flying birds now) did not have feathers of some kind. Besides, there are different forms and or types of feathers on birds now that don't even looks feather like because they don't serve the purpose of flight, but are in fact still feathers.

Sorry I went on a rant. >,=,>;
^,=,^ Thanks for the link, will be used in the next fossil chat.
Although I did find it funny how the paragraph that starts with Alan Turner quote shows ''Hey if we had no proof and we stayed by it and not say theory. But it seems we could have proof now so I do not have to admit it being a theory.''

exactly! and no prob, i'm not mad or anything, just explaining things. I'm pretty used to people getting on my case about it till I show them i'm not just leaning towards what everyone else is saying(my brother is a major one in it and still battles me about it). I try to be correct before I draw things out. So it's alright man :3

besides, aren't most fossils just a guessing game? and most sciences based on hypothesis and theory's till the facts and evidence or experiments prove other wise?

I'm not saying your dad and uncle are wrong, hell i'd like to have a chat with them, would be interesting.
But i haven't really watched that show since the first run of it, most of it now is based 50/50 on facts and also the artist's interpretations as well. A lot of things on TV can be inaccurate, hell! even some people still believe T-Rex still drags it's tail along the ground.

Sorry my previous post came out a little incoherent at the end, my brain had a dumb.

Sic 'em Haz.

RAWR RAWR RAWR >:E

>:T Are you kidding me?! Even murderous things can be scary with feathers...it just means that "Hey, I could -also- be adorable...but I'mm eatchoo now k?"

I'm on your side for this one. This is why we can't have nice things, when science gets side-tracked like this

Saddest day when I learned there were gonna be no featheries TT_TT

I WOULD HAVE EVEN BEEN SATISFIED WITH DOWNY FUZZ BUT NO.

They had to pander to the ardent fanboys who know as much about dinosaurs as your average banana.

I have my eagle-and-owl-landing-on-screen gifs for these occasions >:C

I know! I still have people still thinking the raptor mix in the movies is in fact a velociraptor. I'm just like, wat 8|

Argh, It just upsets me that they tease us saying we're gonna feather them! and then tear it away the next second and go nope! Not scary enough!

I saw them! I was like YUS!

Oh well, better than the human dino hybrid idea they had at the beginning >8|

Yep :|

Hey, at least we can get feathered dinosaur murder in Primal Carnage.

I wish I had a system I could play it on :c it sounds so awesome everytime it comes up.

If they think they can't make a feathered dinosaur scary, then they do not have talented enough artists working on their teams. :/ Just because something is 'fluffier' doesn't automatically make it cuddly, and it sure doesn't remove the claws , strong jaws or sharp teeth. A tiger is covered in fur and I can bet that if you had one chasing after you with intent to eat your face you wouldn't think it was a cute cuddly kitty.

I find it exceptionally disappointing that they are taking a stance against this, I grew up loving (and still love) these movies and I want to see feathers. :/ So if they think they can't make them intimidating enough, they clearly are not having their concept artists doing it right.

that's what i'm thinking, it's still silly though if they use the "not scary" tactic as an excuse to having bad artists working on it. Then again the first concept for the movie was going to be Dinosaur Hybrid people and they threw that out the window...THANK GOD!

I just feel like their riding the coat tails of the franchise....I wonder how Michael Crichton feels about all this? Then again he probably doesn't care at this point, making dem monies.

Yes, thank god for that. XD It definitely wouldn't have been as successful of a franchise if they went that route.

And I agree... The industry seems to be running out of ideas, and when that happens they move into sequels. I'm sure he still cares at least enough to shake his head, money or no you can still be ashamed of a creative endeavor. I'm sure he's shaken his head over it at LEAST once. Maybe they will wise up and hire a ton of new creative minds who want to push the franchise to greater success and decide to incorporate all the new discoveries and we can all be surprised happy dino nerds. I don't see them actually doing it, but I can hope. XD

I bet he is, especially over any book to movie of his that just destroyed what he was going for. Thankfully the first JP did his name and book some good, the rest...well...we don't talk about them XD
One day! i'm really hoping that it comes soon, with all the amazing CGI now a days, i'm really hoping someone does the dinosaurs some justice and makes them look as closely as to the fossils as they were.
I do have a feeling this JP4 is just gonna run into the ground, just like all sequeled movies that weren't intended. This will be just another Land Before Time 365

I would love it if any movie came out portraying them as accurately as possible, and I'm sure it would get plenty of attention as well. Just gotta sit around and wait though I suppose. LOL on the bright side computers and CGI are only getting better! It'll never really end up as bad as Land Before Time... I hope. XD That is one series that people were kinda meh when it was LBT 4, and then just started ignoring it once they realized that they were going to keep slapping on sequels. Just like with the Air Bud series. IT NEVER ENDS. Eventually they will get the message and leave it be. Eventually. Sure fire way to kill a franchise? SEQUEL IT TO DEATH.

But at least it won't be human hybrid dinos. *nods*

Although this is three months old (the comment), Michael Crichton died back in '08.

i don't think it bothers me, as i wouldn't really have expected any different. but it really would have been a much more interesting approach for them to aim for realism and consider more recent theories.

eh to each his own. I'm more or less just upset about the whole "feathers not scary" and just shoving everything scientist have discovered aside. I'll be pretty annoyed when it comes out and I have to keep correcting people on the actual dinosaurs like I have to do with the raptors from the movie.

At this point, they should just call them monsters :/

i agree, they are more monsters at this point. i'd not really considered the misinformation that will stem from this sort of thing, but hopefully people will have the sense not to put too much stock in science from films anyway, as this sort of thing just seems par for the course really. perhaps like the initial film it will just spark a bit of dinosaur interest and people will be able to learn more about them afterwards. but yes, there are stlll plenty of people who think velociraptors look like they do in that first jurassic park film, and it's odd how difficult it can be to inform them otherwise. it would be nice if the film industry could give their audience a bit more credit by bothering to make things more informative and correct, but i don't see it happening any time soon. as it is they seem quite happen to disregard even basic physical laws - it's all about action and explosions.

exactly, seems like the audiences have lost interest in deeper meanings and going into depths on things and would rather have constant action and explosions rather than intelligent facts and interests. I will say I do hope it re-stems interests into dinosaurs again, and if it does, I hope those people will delve deeper into it themselves rather than take on the surface tension like those that still stay on the "Velociraptor" debate.

i don't know whether it's the audience genuinely not caring about the facts, or if it's down to too much emphasis being put on what typically sells rather than what may be more important for the story itself. perhaps a bad combination of the two as i suppose they are linked. whatever the cause, i guess i just gave up on expecting any different. i like dinosaurs, but there's not a chance i'll be going to see jurassic park 4, just as i never saw 2 or 3. on the positive side, so long as the film isn't complete garbage (which it just might be) it may still appeal to some, and a few genuine enthusiasts will probably spring up from it.

right, and I still may see it(might borrow it from a friend or something), but mainly to see the dinosaur turn out, as was said earlier, 2 and 3 turned out a bad story line. But I still enjoyed the artistic value of the dinosaurs, even if they were wrong. Still, I won't waste $8 on it.

yeah, the cgi might be nice to see atleast, but yes, shame it's not being put to better use.

I think the scaly one is about to piss himself having to tell the feathered one this.

not scary you say?

Poor naked dino. . . shivering in the cold.

I thought they made them a little feathered in the third one.. yknow with those hairstyles?

The past two films were pretty horrible, itd be very silly to be fooled a third time. Jissayin.

they did, added a crest and what not.

Yeah, at this point their just riding the name and franchise to make more money. They haven't released a script yet, but at this point after hearing what they said about the feathers, i'm just disappointed. Then again the first idea that was pitched at them was using Dinosaur human hybrids.....it was just awful.

I think your dino nerdiness is awesome. I am sad about the lack of feathers to come, but there's something to be said about the consistency with the previous films they released.

Anywho, dino art! Exxxxcellent. <3

i try ^^ I do understand the consistency, though I still don't know what the synopsis is. I can understand in keeping the consistency with the old films, but like I said above, we only had those dinos do to what little knowledge we had. Fuck the guys were thinking of doing hybrid human dinos and that was pretty ridic and glad they tossed that out.

why thank you ^^

ohgoodgawd---human hybrid dinos? Like... Land of the Lost status? *facepalms* I am glad they tossed that too. lol.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2012/hu.....4-concept-art/ take a look for yourself, they're kinda laughable XD

Laughable AND creepy in some of those shots. The maquette is especially eerie. Soooo glad the idea was scrapped. Gotta agree, interesting concept, but not for JP4

Its a matter of cultural mindset, feathered creatures CAAN be scary, but we have thought so long that dinosaurs looked a certain way, putting feathers on them now is too jarring for the average viewer.

i remember when Brontosaurus was wrong, and people were up in arms, and that dinosaurs didn't drag their tails on the ground. I find it fascinating how scientist find out about these things, and how much more sense it makes. But the average person just gets so flabbergasted that they can't believe what's going on, even though they themselves don't follow paleo interests closely.

Its BECAUSE they dont follow the science behind it that theyre so jarred. Since theyve grown their whole lives thinking that dinosaurs looked a certain way, and then out of the blue being told that they looked completely different, without seeing the research and progress behind the discovery, its like waking up one day and finding out red is actually purple.

As a dino lover myself, I dislike the JP series for a number of reasons.

For starters, due to its popularity, the masses are walking away taking this dino stuff as anatomically accurate. Even after 15 years of feathered raptors taking over the general consensus, so few people are aware of this. Easily seen by just looking up velociraptor jokes or references in media and around the internet - they're always the JP style, which is wrong in so many ways. *facepalm*

And just the plot itself is beyond stupid. You'd think if you wanted to have a public zoo, then, perhaps it may have been wiser to raise the dinosaurs around people in an attempt to tame them so that it would become more viable for the public to observe them up close. Of course, that's just me destroying the storyline for the movie :D

Though, I can at least say one thin in JP's defense: they don't call them dinosaurs. They call them genetically modified mutants, as they are not 100% dino DNA. Thereby, they don't technically need to be accurate.

This.

The raptors in JP have more common with movie monsters than they have with their real-life animals.
I always tried to convince myself that all the scientific mistakes in JP are due to the fact that they used frog DNA to engineer these dinosaurs.
That doesn't change the fact that most people nowadays still take these mutants as facts. More often it's tedious as hell trying to convince them how they really looked.
But that's just me.

your right on that one fellow dino. the raptors are all wrong altogether, they missing out on the feathers they have frog DNA which i find odd. and they are way to big and the snout is not the right shape. the list can go on and some of the other dinosaurs the dilophosaurus, the frilled neck and spiting poison at your victims i find a fun idea but not correct. i do love jurassic park, its just i wish they make the dinos more accurate.

JUST WANNA SAY i learned a shit ton reading all these comments and not being a dino nerd i actually didnt know a thing about dino's when the movies came out so it doesnt bug me (like if you read a book before you watch the movie you point out all the flaws so fortunately for me I didnt "read the book" for JP lol)

But I think its kind of shitty that they wont add feathers because its not scary enough. To be honest if you drew them how they were back in the day you know to an accurate point I think the technology that we have today can make anything look scary. I mean fuck have you seen the effects in movies now?!Just Jeebus!

Those are themepark monsters and not dinosaurs.

i must admit that they really should put feathers on the new dinos, sure i like the looks of the old raptors. but it can be just as scary as the original raptors if they have feathers. you will think that there all cute and harmless when you walk up to a feathered raptor then next min it you know it your being pounced and chewed up by it. what about the film (The Birds) they all had feathers. and it was the was the top selling film that day.

Love JP and i bet they will still make it look awesome ^^

yeah and JP 4 is in the gutter

Boooo feathers!

I used to think long ago that the velociraptor in JP was awesome. When I tried looking it up for references, and discovered it was only the size of a chicken (more or less) I was very dissapointed. XD My new favorite raptor is the UtahRaptor. But these New Feathered ones.. I havent heard of this until now. XD look so Cool. XD

Really. You know, its nice to be scientifically accurate and all but JP is, you know - a FICTION novel and a FICTION film. Now if it claimed to be a documentary on dinosaurs then I would complain. But since it isn't, it makes you guys look like Star Wars fans getting butthurt over the new lightsaber design(Which I actually quite like, they finally gave it a guard.)

but when you really think about it, when most people base, art and toys and such off of just those movies....as well as influence the looks and things of what these rl animals look, that's what we're mostly complaining about. It's fine that they have their own idea from what they look like, but when other people look at it for reference and it still influences a lot of people's ideas on how dinosaurs looked and it's frustrating when scientists are trying to explain to people that velociraptor had feathers and trex had feathers, they usually turn to the JP films as their basis for some reason....and people get the fiction and reality mixed.

It has to do with how well-known JP is, nothing more. And besides, the same thing is happening with the idea of feathered dinosaurs, so its not like they aren't getting any recognition. Hell, I'm partial to both the JP dinos and the feathered dinos, I just don't like people complaining about dinos not having feathers like its the end of the word, because frankly, its a bit pathetic. I would agree if they didn't even try to make them accurate though(Like some people adapting Greek Myth love to do.)

UH. . .

Seriously?!!

Cassowaries are VERY Scary; they KILL People IRL!!

and People call THOSE Monsters Living Dinosaurs, FOR GOOD REASON; They're just as Dangerous;

The Feathers don't make THOSE Fowl ANY LESS Scary or Threatening. . .

Ergo; "Feathers aren't scary" is a FACILE ARGUMENT