Head Canons

Aegyptiacus3 wrote:

Billy stays dead

Best headcanon.

Ah Billy, such a memorable character. Who could forget his.... energetic persona and... witty... stuff. And you know he was friend of Alan. Or student or something. Co-worker? And he... umm...

Oh I know, he had a lucky bag! Just like Sarah Harding. That's something. Isn't it?

Why was he there again?

Oh and Grant can thank Billy for making it to the island, by that brat agreeing to meet Kirbys at the bar on Grant's behalf.

"Thanks a lot, idiot"


But I guess Grant really wanted that cash. That sweet sweet cash. And he didn't even get any. Only the hat Billy brought back. Thanks Billy and your stupid lucky bag.

I bet Billy started working as janitor in JW after Grant kicked his arse.

Now now, back to the topic

Technically that's headcanon you know, especially the janitor bit

Well, you got me there. A new headcanon I adopted, Lowery got a new job at this stupid dinosaur themed day-care, specifically the one in this mall. South Bay Galleria (My local mall)

Mistral wrote:

Oh and Grant can thank Billy for making it to the island, by that brat agreeing to meet Kirbys at the bar on Grant's behalf.

"Thanks a lot, idiot"


But I guess Grant really wanted that cash. That sweet sweet cash. And he didn't even get any. Only the hat Billy brought back. Thanks Billy and your stupid lucky bag.

I bet Billy started working as janitor in JW after Grant kicked his arse.

Perhaps we need a dedicated Billy thread as a companion to my Mark Degler thread.

Anyway, I think I'll adopt your headcanon as well. I can totally picture him, working at JW during the pteranodon attack, having this reaction:

smaugtheterrible wrote:

Mistral wrote:

Oh and Grant can thank Billy for making it to the island, by that brat agreeing to meet Kirbys at the bar on Grant's behalf.

"Thanks a lot, idiot"


But I guess Grant really wanted that cash. That sweet sweet cash. And he didn't even get any. Only the hat Billy brought back. Thanks Billy and your stupid lucky bag.

I bet Billy started working as janitor in JW after Grant kicked his arse.

Perhaps we need a dedicated Billy thread as a companion to my Mark Degler thread.

Anyway, I think I'll adopt your headcanon as well. I can totally picture him, working at JW during the pteranodon attack, having this reaction:

With Mark you can at least always ironically say "Hahaha, what a story Mark" when he finishes up his 2 or 3 lines of dialogue and is done for the film. With Billy, he's just there, always standing there.

I've started wondering. Is there actually dialogue line or visual reference anywhere in JW that specifically says that the T-Rex and some of the other animals are the same ones from JP? Or is that all just Trevorrow and gang saying that in interviews and marketing, you know to enforce the nostalgia/fanservice/reference spectrum? Because if that's the case (?), it's not really official in-film canon isn't it? Not to me anyway.

It'd be the same as if Spielberg was saying something like, IDK, "I'd like to think Matt Hooper had a thing with Chief Brody's wife just like in the book, it's just not filmed".

Mistral wrote:

I've started wondering. Is there actually dialogue line or visual reference anywhere in JW that specifically says that the T-Rex and some of the other animals are the same ones from JP? Or is that all just Trevorrow and gang saying that in interviews and marketing, you know to enforce the nostalgia/fanservice/reference spectrum? Because if that's the case (?), it's not really official in-film canon isn't it? Not to me anyway.

It'd be the same as if Spielberg was saying something like, IDK, "I'd like to think Matt Hooper had a thing with Chief Brody's wife just like in the book, it's just not filmed".

The scars from the raptor attack in JP on the Rex.

Oviraptor wrote:

Mistral wrote:

I've started wondering. Is there actually dialogue line or visual reference anywhere in JW that specifically says that the T-Rex and some of the other animals are the same ones from JP? Or is that all just Trevorrow and gang saying that in interviews and marketing, you know to enforce the nostalgia/fanservice/reference spectrum? Because if that's the case (?), it's not really official in-film canon isn't it? Not to me anyway.

It'd be the same as if Spielberg was saying something like, IDK, "I'd like to think Matt Hooper had a thing with Chief Brody's wife just like in the book, it's just not filmed".

The scars from the raptor attack in JP on the Rex.

And Trevorrow himself confirmed it.

Oviraptor wrote:

Mistral wrote:

I've started wondering. Is there actually dialogue line or visual reference anywhere in JW that specifically says that the T-Rex and some of the other animals are the same ones from JP? Or is that all just Trevorrow and gang saying that in interviews and marketing, you know to enforce the nostalgia/fanservice/reference spectrum? Because if that's the case (?), it's not really official in-film canon isn't it? Not to me anyway.

It'd be the same as if Spielberg was saying something like, IDK, "I'd like to think Matt Hooper had a thing with Chief Brody's wife just like in the book, it's just not filmed".

The scars from the raptor attack in JP on the Rex.

Lol I can't even recognize any marks in that CGI mish mash, but I'm sure you're right. Is that indisputable though, that they're raptor claw marks, or scars that might happen to all big carnivores in their life time.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

And Trevorrow himself confirmed it

I meant inside the film, not outside it.

Mistral wrote:

Oviraptor wrote:

Mistral wrote:

I've started wondering. Is there actually dialogue line or visual reference anywhere in JW that specifically says that the T-Rex and some of the other animals are the same ones from JP? Or is that all just Trevorrow and gang saying that in interviews and marketing, you know to enforce the nostalgia/fanservice/reference spectrum? Because if that's the case (?), it's not really official in-film canon isn't it? Not to me anyway.

It'd be the same as if Spielberg was saying something like, IDK, "I'd like to think Matt Hooper had a thing with Chief Brody's wife just like in the book, it's just not filmed".

The scars from the raptor attack in JP on the Rex.

Lol I can't even recognize any marks in that CGI mish mash, but I'm sure you're right. Is that indisputable though, that they're raptor claw marks, or scars that might happen to all big carnivores in their life time.

Yes, it is indisputable since the only other predator on Nublar that was still alive since the original park debacle was the Dilophosaurus. And even a full grown one-20 ft long and 1,000 pounds, is no match for a 7 ton, 44 ft long alpha predator.

So because you couldnt tell if it was the same Rex as the first one "because of the CGI", even though the dinosaur looks malnourished as hell, it's not the same? Alright then.

Mistral wrote:

Oviraptor wrote:

Mistral wrote:

I've started wondering. Is there actually dialogue line or visual reference anywhere in JW that specifically says that the T-Rex and some of the other animals are the same ones from JP? Or is that all just Trevorrow and gang saying that in interviews and marketing, you know to enforce the nostalgia/fanservice/reference spectrum? Because if that's the case (?), it's not really official in-film canon isn't it? Not to me anyway.

It'd be the same as if Spielberg was saying something like, IDK, "I'd like to think Matt Hooper had a thing with Chief Brody's wife just like in the book, it's just not filmed".

The scars from the raptor attack in JP on the Rex.

Lol I can't even recognize any marks in that CGI mish mash, but I'm sure you're right. Is that indisputable though, that they're raptor claw marks, or scars that might happen to all big carnivores in their life time.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

And Trevorrow himself confirmed it

I meant inside the film, not outside it.

But the director stating it outwardly and explicitly that it's the original Rex is way different than just some viral marketing.

Colin wrote:

I mean, we took the original design and obviously, technology has changed. So, it’s going to move a little bit differently, but it’ll move differently because it’s older. And we’re giving her some scars and we’re tightening her skin. So, she has that feeling of, like, an older Burt Lancaster. And this movie is her Unforgiven

And the scars are in the same places. I wish they had said it during the film though. I hated the way they presented the Rex attraction.

Hey guys! My new headcanon is that the Spino skeleton on mainstreet isn't the one from JP3. 

Troyal1 wrote:

Hey guys! My new headcanon is that the Spino skeleton on mainstreet isn't the one from JP3. 

Well, there's really no real reason for it to be the same Spinosaurus, so I'm right there with you on that.

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Troyal1 wrote:

Hey guys! My new headcanon is that the Spino skeleton on mainstreet isn't the one from JP3. 

Well, there's really no real reason for it to be the same Spinosaurus, so I'm right there with you on that.

I was joking because of the new Twitter video. Did you see it?

Troyal1 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Troyal1 wrote:

Hey guys! My new headcanon is that the Spino skeleton on mainstreet isn't the one from JP3. 

Well, there's really no real reason for it to be the same Spinosaurus, so I'm right there with you on that.

I was joking because of the new Twitter video. Did you see it?

No, I'm aware of it.

Still, there's no reason for that to be the case, so I'm knocking it out of my headcanon because the skeleton being the same Spino from JP3 is fucking stupid.

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Troyal1 wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Troyal1 wrote:

Hey guys! My new headcanon is that the Spino skeleton on mainstreet isn't the one from JP3. 

Well, there's really no real reason for it to be the same Spinosaurus, so I'm right there with you on that.

I was joking because of the new Twitter video. Did you see it?

No, I'm aware of it.

Still, there's no reason for that to be the case, so I'm knocking it out of my headcanon because the skeleton being the same Spino from JP3 is fucking stupid.

Oh okay. I was just making sure you were aware of it.

Because my original post was simply mocking that ridiculous video 

Between that and F&F8 making as much as it did so far, I'm really tempted to get myself drunk sometime this week. I really wish I was kidding, but I'm not.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Between that and F&F8 making as much as it did so far, I'm really tempted to get myself drunk sometime this week. I  really wish I was kidding, but I'm not.

Don't worry. We'll beat them back at the box office with "the last Jedi"!

I wish they said in JW that the Rex was the original, would have been perfect if an announcer said it just before the feeding scene. I think most people don't know it's the original Rex, only us fans & that annoys me!

Dead2009 wrote:

So because you couldnt tell if it was the same Rex as the first one "because of the CGI", even though the dinosaur looks malnourished as hell, it's not the same? Alright then.

Malnourished as hell? What has that to do with anything in the context we're talking about?

Also, what's the point in showing me a picture that happened after the I-Rex attack, after it surely would have had scars from that?

That's another thing by the way. So are we supposed to believe it has raptor scars from 22 years ago, but a day after almost dying to I-Rex in messy battle, it basically looks and moves fine? What a load of crap.

Malnourished means the dinosaur has dropped weight because it isnt eating properly....if you're on an island with the lack of a proper food distribution, you're not gonna look the same. Also, scars from an animal dont exactly "go away".

Dead2009 wrote:

Malnourished means the dinosaur has dropped weight because it isnt eating properly....if you're on an island with the lack of a proper food distribution, you're not gonna look the same. Also, scars from an animal dont exactly "go away".

Why would the Rex still look malnourished years and years after being in proper park setting? The park's been operational for 10 years or whatever right? And it's even shown to be eating the goats for entertainment?

Also, yes the scars don't all go away, but
A) can't those claw marks be classified as I-Rex claw marks
B) if not, where are the freaking I-Rex battle scars? Why does it supposedly have claw marks from 22 years ago, but not from the previous day where it almost died horribly to much bigger carnivore?

This is cartoon logic. I even buy the Spino vs T-Rex scene million times more.

Troyal1 wrote:

Hey guys! My new headcanon is that the Spino skeleton on mainstreet isn't the one from JP3. 

That'd be arguably the most stupid thing that ever happened in-universe, so I refuse to believe it as well.

You'd think it to be fake replica skeleton anyway given it would erode in rain, humidity and other outdoor elements. Plus there's no need for them to have authentic museum quality piece in front of Disney World crowds eating burgers and drinking beer.

Mistral wrote:

Dead2009 wrote:

Malnourished means the dinosaur has dropped weight because it isnt eating properly....if you're on an island with the lack of a proper food distribution, you're not gonna look the same. Also, scars from an animal dont exactly "go away".

Why would the Rex still look malnourished years and years after being in proper park setting? The park's been operational for 10 years or whatever right? And it's even shown to be eating the goats for entertainment?

Also, yes the scars don't all go away, but
A) can't those claw marks be classified as I-Rex claw marks
B) if not, where are the freaking I-Rex battle scars? Why does it supposedly have claw marks from 22 years ago, but not from the previous day where it almost died horribly to much bigger carnivore?

The recent battle scars are the one with her blood on them. I can see them clear as day.