General Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom News Thread V.4

Troyal1 wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

Bayona confirms the big opening prologue :

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/jurassic-world-fallen-kingdom-exclusive-new-image/

which is :

Spoiler:

As soon as read “James Bond” I squealed and said in my head “yep, rumors are now looking even more true than they already were”.

I won’t spoil it for people not “in the know”.... just know that it’s gonna be awesome and sounds like it’ll be atmosphere heavy, to say the least.

I still don't get why they would the remains of I. rex when they have that one hunk of flesh that I. rex clawed out in order to remove her tracking device. What did they do with it, just throw it in some other carnivore pen as a snack? Also, wouldn't Wu have I. rex DNA even without the hunk of I. rex flesh anyway?

By the time they got to the Indominus flesh, it was probably a hunk of baryonyx crap with a tracker in it.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Troyal1 wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

Bayona confirms the big opening prologue :

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/jurassic-world-fallen-kingdom-exclusive-new-image/

which is :

Spoiler:

As soon as read “James Bond” I squealed and said in my head “yep, rumors are now looking even more true than they already were”.

I won’t spoil it for people not “in the know”.... just know that it’s gonna be awesome and sounds like it’ll be atmosphere heavy, to say the least.

I still don't get why they would the remains of I. rex when they have that one hunk of flesh that I. rex clawed out in order to remove her tracking device. What did they do with it, just throw it in some other carnivore pen as a snack? Also, wouldn't Wu have I. rex DNA even without the hunk of I. rex flesh anyway?  

Probably lost it after the ACU were killed. Hamada picked it up right before he was grabbed by the Indominus.

BoulderFaceplant wrote:

By the time they got to the Indominus flesh, it was probably a hunk of baryonyx crap with a tracker in it.

Supposedly

Spoiler:

But even without the hunk of I. rex flesh, Wu would have had to have I. rex DNA in his lab, wouldn't you think?

Rhedosaurus wrote:

But even without the hunk of I. rex flesh, Wu would have had to have I. rex DNA in his lab, wouldn't you think?

You'd think. Especially after the fact they made a big deal about Wu collecting a bunch of DNA at the end.

Maybe that was DNA for other hybrids?

The scene doesn't make sense IMO because Wu would sure have left the I.rex DNA in his lab, and IF the prologue is set right after Jurassic World (like a day or so), we can imagine that the DNA storage still kept the DNA intact so WHY try to mess with a giant Mosasaur to get I.rex DNA if you can safely return to your lab and get the remains?


And how on Earth will they explain WHY Wu doesn't have his most precious DNA? How could he forget the I.rex DNA on the rush? Makes him look quite dumb and messy tbh.

On other hands, I'm VERY excited for this scene, specially because Wu is in. We only saw Wu in his safe lab, he never took his hands on the "dirt" and this scene will be very interesting to see his character develop and be a badass on his own. Can't wait to see his reaction when the Mosasaur shows up. Can you imagine Wu in a small submarine risking his life to get I.rex DNA? Awesome!

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

The scene doesn't make sense IMO because Wu would sure have left the I.rex DNA in his lab, and IF the prologue is set right after Jurassic World (like a day or so), we can imagine that the DNA storage still kept the DNA intact so WHY try to mess with a giant Mosasaur to get I.rex DNA if you can safely return to your lab and get the remains?


And how on Earth will they explain WHY Wu doesn't have his most precious DNA? How could he forget the I.rex DNA on the rush? Makes him look quite dumb and messy tbh.

On other hands, I'm VERY excited for this scene, specially because Wu is in. We only saw Wu in his safe lab, he never took his hands on the "dirt" and this scene will be very interesting to see his character develop and be a badass on his own. Can't wait to see his reaction when the Mosasaur shows up. Can you imagine Wu in a small submarine risking his life to get I.rex DNA? Awesome!

Maybe he needs fresh Indominus DNA to create the Indoraptor and what he has already is just the bits and pieces used to create the Indominus? I don't know how they're gonna explain this, but I hope it works.

Well the tracking implant probably got eaten by compies or something. As for the I. Rex DNA, it could be that out of paranoia, Wu never actually kept pure I. Rex DNA, and instead kept the ingredients separate. Getting pure DNA for the Indoraptor recipe would be much faster than whipping up another I. Rex formula.

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

mosasaurus wrote:

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

I hope it's not the Dilophosaurus, that's for sure. I think we can all guess what it is, though.

mosasaurus wrote:

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

Yeah Spino, thank god they went for it's distant cousin instead!

dance2nite wrote:

mosasaurus wrote:

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

Yeah Spino, thank god they went for it's distant cousin instead!

According to that leaker Uni is a pain in the ass and I'm worried for the mattel toyline

dance2nite wrote:

mosasaurus wrote:

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

Yeah Spino, thank god they went for it's distant cousin instead!

COME AT ME SPINOSAURUS AEGYPTIACUS MUAHAHAHAHAHAHA



Goddamnit I'm going to fire whoever cut it from the movie. I would finally see 2 Spinosaurids reunited.


About the Mattel toyline, I wouldn't worry too much Sickle. From the photos, we can clearly see it has quality, a lot more quality than cough- Hasbro.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

mosasaurus wrote:

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

Yeah Spino, thank god they went for it's distant cousin instead!

According to that leaker Uni is a pain in the ass and I'm worried for the mattel toyline

Can you PM me the link?

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Sickle_Claw wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

mosasaurus wrote:

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

Yeah Spino, thank god they went for it's distant cousin instead!

According to that leaker Uni is a pain in the ass and I'm worried for the mattel toyline

Can you PM me the link?

I will but the leaker does not inspire confidence in me with his description:

Quote :

## REMOVED DUE TO LEAK INFO##

Sickle_Claw wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Sickle_Claw wrote:

dance2nite wrote:

mosasaurus wrote:

So it’s been confirmed on 4Chan by a legitimate leaker (who had photos of toys) that a certain controversial dinosaur was set to return in this before being scrapped.

Yeah Spino, thank god they went for it's distant cousin instead!

According to that leaker Uni is a pain in the ass and I'm worried for the mattel toyline

Can you PM me the link?

I will but the leaker does not inspire confidence in me with his description:

Quote :

##REMOVED DUE TO SENSTIVE INFO###

So this does confirm what I have believed for some time: That Universal never had a clue what to do with the franchise after The Lost World. What I don't get is why the just don't replace Jack Horner by now, even more so considering how he was largely responsible for that infamous scene in JP3. I was surprised that he even came back for JW considering how both JP fans and dino-nerds (like me) don't like him. I wish they would bring back a paleontologist who actually likes the movies and would try to find a balance between new and old. I.E. Giving us new dinosaurs with feathers-Deinocheirus, Anzu,-while keeping the old ones as is.

I remember talking to Megaspino via about the new JW game coming out and he said that Universal doesn't know what to do with the JP Spino post JP3. First on the Masrani backdoor, they implied it was a hybrid (probably the first super hybrid), then on that tour they said that the JW Spino skeleton was that of the JP3 Spino, but they backtracked on the Dino Protection Site, that it wasn't the case and that the JW Spino skeleton was to represent what happened on the very first park back in 1993. It's become an albatross on their neck to them.

I really do hope that Universal don't get the rights back after JP6/JW3.

Spino isn't a hybrid just because it killed a T.rex.

If I was Bayona, I would made sure it returned. I wonder who wanted to cut it.

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Spino isn't a hybrid just because it killed a T.rex.

If I was Bayona, I would made sure it returned. I wonder who wanted to cut it.

Well, they would have to ret-con it as such, mainly because of how it looks so different then the new/modern version. Unlike most of the dinosaurs, which more or less have the basic design of their real-life counterparts, the JP3 Spino looks, behaves, and acts far different then what the real life version did. We still aren't quite sure how long the real one can sustain being a biped. While as the real one could take down medium sized dinosaurs, it was far from being a dominant predator since it was overspecialized for semi-aquatic life. The JP3 Spino was portrayed as a dominant predator based on Jack Horner's anti-Rex bias and very few actual remains. In a lot of ways, it was basically a made-up dinosaur like I. rex was.

TBH, it would be for the best if it was ret-conned as the original super hybrid, a T. rex/Spino hybrid, and that we finally see true Spinosaurus's on one of the other islands.

Why should they retcon it? All the other dinosaurs in JP franchise aren't like the real versions, so if we retcon Spino, retcon the others too.

JP Velociraptor looks nothing like the real one, it's even more innacurate than Spino.

"Far from being a dominant predator"

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. Spinosaurus was specialized for more aquatic habitat, yes, but it was just apex in it's territory, if it was semi-aquatic, I'm sure it was top in the food chain, preying on every aquatic animal, maybe expect from crocs.

I don't like to underestimate an animal that had 15 meters and think it only ate small fish, because it surelly didn't. The size of this thing is a huge give away of what could do.

So just because it wasn't a generalist doesn't mean it couldn't be apex or dominant in it's habitat. That doesn't mean, given the opportunity, that it wouldn't kill another prey.

Also, it's pratically proven it ate fish like Mawsonia, very small fish with only 3 tons and the size of a car.

Please don't diminish this magnific animal just because it had a more aquatic lifestyle. It couldn't be dominant on terrestrial habitat maybe, just like the Tyrannosaurus wasn't dominant in aquatic habitat.

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Why should they retcon it? All the other dinosaurs in JP franchise aren't like the real versions, so if we retcon Spino, retcon the others too.

JP Velociraptor looks nothing like the real one, it's even more innacurate than Spino.

"Far from being a dominant predator"

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. Spinosaurus was specialized for more aquatic habitat, yes, but it was just apex in it's territory, if it was semi-aquatic, I'm sure it was top in the food chain, preying on every aquatic animal, maybe expect from crocs.

I don't like to underestimate an animal that had 15 meters and think it only ate small fish, because it surelly didn't. The size of this thing is a huge give away of what could do.


So just because it wasn't a generalist doesn't mean it couldn't be apex or dominant in it's habitat. That doesn't mean, given the opportunity, that it wouldn't kill another prey.

Also, it's pratically proven it ate fish like Mawsonia, very small fish with only 3 tons and the size of a car.

Again, all the other dinosaur more or less have the same body design of the real life counterparts. The JP Velociraptor was the exception because it's design was really based on Deinonychus, which was classified as a species of Velociraptor by Gregory S. Paul. And given how the JP raptors are so iconic in pop culture, doing so many major changes/ret-conning would turn off a lot of people. The JP3 Spino isn't nearly as iconic, so you can get away with ret-conning it as a T. rex/Spino hybrid and introducing real Spinosaurus's.

And when I say that the 'real' Spinosaurus wasn't a dominant predator, I was talking about not being able to take out dinosaurs larger then 20-30 ft long, which was the largest possible prey it could kill. That was what Charcarodontosaurus was able to do.

Well, with Wu's explanation in JW, all of the dinosaurs have basically been sort of retconned as hybrids anyways. Not dino/dino hybrids, but hybrids with other animals.

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Well, with Wu's explanation in JW, all of the dinosaurs have basically been sort of retconned as hybrids anyways. Not dino/dino hybrids, but hybrids with other animals.

Retconned? We've known them to be technically hybrids since JP via the frog DNA.

Dr. Wu wrote:

Tyrant Lizard wrote:

Well, with Wu's explanation in JW, all of the dinosaurs have basically been sort of retconned as hybrids anyways. Not dino/dino hybrids, but hybrids with other animals.

Retconned? We've known them to be technically hybrids since JP via the frog DNA.

You know what I mean. Retconned in the sense that the scientifically inaccurate designs were explained away via hybridization.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Why should they retcon it? All the other dinosaurs in JP franchise aren't like the real versions, so if we retcon Spino, retcon the others too.

JP Velociraptor looks nothing like the real one, it's even more innacurate than Spino.

"Far from being a dominant predator"

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. Spinosaurus was specialized for more aquatic habitat, yes, but it was just apex in it's territory, if it was semi-aquatic, I'm sure it was top in the food chain, preying on every aquatic animal, maybe expect from crocs.

I don't like to underestimate an animal that had 15 meters and think it only ate small fish, because it surelly didn't. The size of this thing is a huge give away of what could do.


So just because it wasn't a generalist doesn't mean it couldn't be apex or dominant in it's habitat. That doesn't mean, given the opportunity, that it wouldn't kill another prey.

Also, it's pratically proven it ate fish like Mawsonia, very small fish with only 3 tons and the size of a car.

Again, all the other dinosaur more or less have the same body design of the real life counterparts. The JP Velociraptor was the exception because it's design was really based on Deinonychus, which was classified as a species of Velociraptor by Gregory S. Paul. And given how the JP raptors are so iconic in pop culture, doing so many major changes/ret-conning would turn off a lot of people. The JP3 Spino isn't nearly as iconic, so you can get away with ret-conning it as a T. rex/Spino hybrid and introducing real Spinosaurus's.

And when I say that the 'real' Spinosaurus wasn't a dominant predator, I was talking about not being able to take out dinosaurs larger then 20-30 ft long, which was the largest possible prey it could kill. That was what Charcarodontosaurus was able to do.

Of course it couldn't take large dinosaurs on land, because Spinosaurus is semi-aquatic and more specialized to water prey. It's the same to compare Tyrannosaurus with water animals, by that I can say that it couldn't take out a crocodile or a fish, because obviously it wasn't specialized for it.

JP3 Spinosaurus has the design looking like it's real counterpart, specially if you take note that in 2001, paleontologists reconstructed Spinosaurus like this:



As you can see, no paleontologist in that time would think that Spino had smaller legs and the sail was different. The head is a bit skinner than the JP3 one too. You pulled the argument of Deinonychus being used in that time to be Velociraptor's design, I can use the same for Spino. So yeah, we can say that it looks like the real one. I don't consider the quadrupedal possibility, the new studies show that it's very unlikely to have happen. Paleontologists go with 2 possibilities now as I read: Or it had a strange bipedal pose, or it just didn't walk at all on land and stood close to water.

I personally think it was bipedal, it just didn't walk like the JP3 one. So if it was bipedal, it wasn't THAT different at all.

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Rhedosaurus wrote:

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Why should they retcon it? All the other dinosaurs in JP franchise aren't like the real versions, so if we retcon Spino, retcon the others too.

JP Velociraptor looks nothing like the real one, it's even more innacurate than Spino.

"Far from being a dominant predator"

I'm sorry, but this is wrong. Spinosaurus was specialized for more aquatic habitat, yes, but it was just apex in it's territory, if it was semi-aquatic, I'm sure it was top in the food chain, preying on every aquatic animal, maybe expect from crocs.

I don't like to underestimate an animal that had 15 meters and think it only ate small fish, because it surelly didn't. The size of this thing is a huge give away of what could do.


So just because it wasn't a generalist doesn't mean it couldn't be apex or dominant in it's habitat. That doesn't mean, given the opportunity, that it wouldn't kill another prey.

Also, it's pratically proven it ate fish like Mawsonia, very small fish with only 3 tons and the size of a car.

Again, all the other dinosaur more or less have the same body design of the real life counterparts. The JP Velociraptor was the exception because it's design was really based on Deinonychus, which was classified as a species of Velociraptor by Gregory S. Paul. And given how the JP raptors are so iconic in pop culture, doing so many major changes/ret-conning would turn off a lot of people. The JP3 Spino isn't nearly as iconic, so you can get away with ret-conning it as a T. rex/Spino hybrid and introducing real Spinosaurus's.

And when I say that the 'real' Spinosaurus wasn't a dominant predator, I was talking about not being able to take out dinosaurs larger then 20-30 ft long, which was the largest possible prey it could kill. That was what Charcarodontosaurus was able to do.

Of course it couldn't take large dinosaurs on land, because Spinosaurus is semi-aquatic and more specialized to water prey. It's the same to compare Tyrannosaurus with water animals, by that I can say that it couldn't take out a crocodile or a fish, because obviously it wasn't specialized for it.

JP3 Spinosaurus has the design looking like it's real counterpart, specially if you take note that in 2001, paleontologists reconstructed Spinosaurus like this:



As you can see, no paleontologist in that time would think that Spino had smaller legs and the sail was different. The head is a bit skinner than the JP3 one too. You pulled the argument of Deinonychus being used in that time to be Velociraptor's design, I can use the same for Spino.  So yeah, we can say that it looks like the real one. I don't consider the quadrupedal possibility, the new studies show that it's very unlikely to have happen. Paleontologists go with 2 possibilities now as I read: Or it had a strange bipedal pose, or it just didn't walk at all on land and stood close to water.

I personally think it was bipedal, it just didn't walk like the JP3 one. So if it was bipedal, it wasn't THAT different at all.

Except that the dinosaurs that were used to fill in the gap, Baryonyx and Suchomimus, were also partial specimens. Not only that, but as you said, the real one had shorter legs. And as I also said, the JP3 Spino isn't as famous as the JP raptors. Therefore, ret-conning the JP3 Spino is easier to do then with the JP Raptors.

Ibrahim used remains of Baryonyx and Suchomimus to propose that Spino was quadrupedal too. He  just guessed based on relatives.
If they do it, I'll hate it, and I'm sure there are JP fans who will hate too. Spinosaurus is very iconic to me, so I don't like the idea of a retcon and I'm sure other fans won't too. Because if other dinosaurs can be innacurate and monster looking, so can Spinosaurus. I don't get why change it's design, unless because of that shitty fight that happened.

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

Ibrahim used remains of Baryonyx and Suchomimus to propose that Spino was quadrupedal too. He  just guessed based on relatives.
If they do it, I'll hate it, and I'm sure there are JP fans who will hate too. Spinosaurus is very iconic to me, so I don't like the idea of a retcon and I'm sure other fans won't too. Because if other dinosaurs can be innacurate and monster looking, so can Spinosaurus. I don't get why change it's design, unless because of that shitty fight that happened.

Personally, I'd absolutely love to see a more scientifically accurate version of the animal appear in a future JP film (I just think it's more more interesting animal, and think it would bring a new and fresh element to the franchise without stepping on any toes)

Retconning the JP3 version as a hybrid would open the door for a more scientifically accurate version down the line.

However, I understand why it might bother some people as well. Any talk of significant retcons is going to be met with a fair bit of trepidation, and it shouldn't be done just for the sake of doing so. People get attached to different aspects of the lore, and you always run the risk of driving people away when you threaten to retcon part of the lore that people are attached to.

If they could figure out a way of bringing in a more accurate version of the animal without a heavy retcon, I think that would be preferable to anything.

I would rather they just not re-introduce the Spinosaurus than come up with some over-the-top explanation for its inaccurate appearance.