Jurassic Park db forum

More topics are welcome. heh

If only there were more things to discuss. Sadly, a lot of us that've been here for a while have gone over nearly every aspect of JP, so the subject matter is a little lacking to us.

Don't see anyone complaining when they change bond....

My point is, that it's not like the JP3 film makers decided to make a riddle in the jp continuity for the fans to figure out. Which is what everyone makes it out to be. It's just a design change, nothing more, which the film makers figured would lead people to the assumption that it's a pack of raptors that have never been seen before. But so many people think that it's some sort of evolution, or that it might have been mentioned in the books that the breeding procedure for one species will vary. But all they wanted you to think was that it was a different pack, nothing to do with mutations or evolution.

[QUOTE]Samfan Posted on 07.23.2004 19:15
QUOTE
Anyway, why are you all even arguing about what the film-makers did? Of course they changed the look of the raptors. That's fine. I only wanted to point out how it would have to explained from the standpoint of continuity, and I don't see why there's so much confusion over this.



No kidding-- it's not really confusion, just to who has the last say lol

Eh ... for me it's more that I'm bored, and I'll debate to kill time. Not only that, but almost all the other topics here haven't been posted on in a while.

pack raptor wrote:My point is, that it's not like the JP3 film makers decided to make a riddle in the jp continuity for the fans to figure out. Which is what everyone makes it out to be. It's just a design change, nothing more, which the film makers figured would lead people to the assumption that it's a pack of raptors that have never been seen before. But so many people think that it's some sort of evolution, or that it might have been mentioned in the books that the breeding procedure for one species will vary. But all they wanted you to think was that it was a different pack, nothing to do with mutations or evolution.

Then we were both aiming at the same course. /smile.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":)" border="0" alt="smile.gif" />

pack raptor, what you're saying defies continuity. There's no debate about the fact that the film-makers made this change for their own reasons to show off a previously unseen pack of raptors. At least, not from me. What you're trying to do is assert that the film-making explanation also has double over as the continuity explanation, and that defies logic.

Also, it's not that it "may have been" mentioned in the novel. It's within plain sight, if you pay attention to it, and I did not misread as I could not do so more than 20 times. It's perfectly resonable to believe the film-makers lifted parts of the chapter Version 4.4 to justify their placement of new raptors into the movie universe, and that's how the two seemingly separate concepts are linked and can coexist without conflict.

My point is this: you can't confuse the actual film-making with the continuity aspects of "suspension of disbelief". It's like trying to write a licensed novel about Star Wars and saying the characters think the second Death Star in Return of the Jedi is bigger because that's what ILM wanted. Of course ILM made a larger Death Star, but that doesn't reasonably explain it from the point of view of the characters in said universe. If you did that, it just wouldn't make sense.

Exactly.Thinking otherwise is just dumb.

QUOTE (AlphaChaosRaptor Posted on 07.24.2004 13:07 )

What you're trying to do is assert that the film-making explanation also has double over as the continuity explanation, and that defies logic.

(Sigh) No, that's just how you took it. What I'm trying to say is that there is no sure-fire undeniable explanation to their existence in the films' continuity.(There's just a logical  technical reason, the scientific evidence they based the designs on, which doesn't tie into the continuity of the films )In the film they don't even touch upon the subject, because they want the audience to assume that the JP3 velociraptors have been there for a while. Not only that, but I don't think it is something that needs much explaining in the first place, it's not like they look completely unrecognizable, you can clearly tell that they're velociraptors.[/quote](AlphaChaosRaptor)
Also, it's not that it "may have been" mentioned in the novel. It's within plain sight, if you pay attention to it, and I did not misread as I could not do so more than 20 times. It's perfectly resonable to believe the film-makers lifted parts of the chapter Version 4.4 to justify their placement of new raptors into the movie universe, and that's how the two seemingly separate concepts are linked and can coexist without conflict.

Well, it has been a while since I've read the novel, but I'm still a skeptic until I re-read Jurassic Park. I'm betting that what you're talking about is only a hinted explanation for the JP3 raptors, because I really doubt that the film makers would put in that much of an effort for it to fit seamlessly with the continuity of the novels.

[QUOTE](AlphaChaosRaptor)
My point is this: you can't confuse the actual film-making with the continuity aspects of "suspension of disbelief".
I haven't.

was there any difference among the t-rex in the jurassic park,lost world and jurassic park 3?

Jurassic Park's T.rex was brown, The Lost World's were grey, and JPIII's was green, I seem to recall. The Brachiosaurs changed colour, too.

Really, when you think about it, the only animals to actually remain consistent in appearance were the Compsognathus.