How do you feel about them introducing new dinosaurs that were never mentioned in JW?

CT-1138 wrote:

Hesperornis wrote:

Honestly, I don't think there's any point in making a big deal about the new dinosaurs. It should be kept in mind that JP is not a franchise with a solid canon, unlike, say, Star Wars. I think we as a fandom have a tendency to overanalyze things. This even goes back to efforts to try and figure out which species were present in the park in the first movie. The evidence cited for various genera that didn't appear in the movie itself (e.g. Metriacanthosaurus, Herrerasaurus, etc.) being in the park were a couple props that likely didn't have much thought put into them in the first place. Similarly, the assumption that InGen had fifteen species on Isla Nublar is based primarily on a throwaway line from Dodgson, which was really just imported from the book. I think any attempt to extrapolate a canonical species list from this is flimsy at best. As for the Jurassic World website, it should be kept in mind that it was made primarily for marketing purposes, so I don't see why the makers would want to restrict themselves solely on that. In conclusion, the only dinosaurs we know for sure to be present are the ones that appear on screen, so just relax and enjoy the films.

Just because they slapped couple dinosaur names on a prop doesn't negate the fact that these animals were cloned by InGen and were planned for the Park. They're in the film, they're there.

Quoting CT-1138 for truth here. Uni should be held accountable on that front of maintaining a continuity here by the fandom. Crichton may have initiated the canon separation clause after TLW due to the differences, but Uni has basically become the story master now. I do have a lot of issues with how fans want to make theories and pull crap off the top of their head to fit with what they want to see. Some examples would be like the infant in TLW being the JP3 Rex or ways to explain the inconsistency of the deaths of the crew on the venture as Raptors. Both of those are building an expectation for something that simply just isn't there. Outside of that is unfortunately that's not holding Uni accountable in any sense to making a better story that is air tight, and merely once those theories and ideas pan out not being what people want, it's going to make those who created it or pandered to it disgruntled because it's not what they consider to be "Jurassic" in terms of theme. Take a look at how people feel about the prequels in SW. A lot of the issue is "That's not how I pictured Anakin becoming Vader!" because they've ramped up an expectation or idea for a story that was way different than what was produced.

Outside of that, it is basically giving Uni an excuse to altogether avoid it or slap stupid stuff together that really defies logic. So while JP doesn't have something as strict as SW in place, something is there - the foundation of it, and it is up to us as fans to point to it and remind Uni of that fact again and again that people DO care.

CT-1138 wrote:

Hesperornis wrote:

Honestly, I don't think there's any point in making a big deal about the new dinosaurs. It should be kept in mind that JP is not a franchise with a solid canon, unlike, say, Star Wars. I think we as a fandom have a tendency to overanalyze things. This even goes back to efforts to try and figure out which species were present in the park in the first movie. The evidence cited for various genera that didn't appear in the movie itself (e.g. Metriacanthosaurus, Herrerasaurus, etc.) being in the park were a couple props that likely didn't have much thought put into them in the first place. Similarly, the assumption that InGen had fifteen species on Isla Nublar is based primarily on a throwaway line from Dodgson, which was really just imported from the book. I think any attempt to extrapolate a canonical species list from this is flimsy at best. As for the Jurassic World website, it should be kept in mind that it was made primarily for marketing purposes, so I don't see why the makers would want to restrict themselves solely on that. In conclusion, the only dinosaurs we know for sure to be present are the ones that appear on screen, so just relax and enjoy the films.

Just because they slapped couple dinosaur names on a prop doesn't negate the fact that these animals were cloned by InGen and were planned for the Park. They're in the film, they're there.

Point taken. It does tie into what I said about only knowing for sure what appears on screen. Guess I contradicted myself a bit there. I am more cautious about inferring from what is planned but doesn't make it into the film, such as unused props or early script drafts.

As for the new species in JW:FK, there are at least some good potential explanations, such as dinosaurs planned for the park but not put on display by the time of the incident. But we'll just have to wait and see.

The website wasn't made by the filmmakers. It was made by the marketing team, which is probably why it was ignored. I doubt the filmmakers wanted to be restricted by a website they didn't even create.

Megatron wrote:

The website wasn't made by the filmmakers. It was made by the marketing team, which is probably why it was ignored. I doubt the filmmakers wanted to be restricted by a website they didn't even create.

Actually the site was developed in cooperation with the film makers. At least the Masrani site was byproduct of it between Jack Ewins and Trevorrow. They had many a meeting. As for the JW tour site, that would be a marketing team taking notes from Trevorrow as well. So the inconsistencies that do exist I think is mostly due to a limited understanding or knowledge in this case. Either way the marketing is more tied together to be canonical than something like the TLW InGen site back in the day which borrowed from JP: The Ride word for word and was only expanded upon to feature limited tie-ins. Unfortunately canon hounding is like a science and science has a lot of unknowns involved with and there's always a chance for contradictions that require further study and further information.

When it comes to new dinosaurs I do have two words:
"Restricted Area".
This is a place on Isla Nublar, that is not a Park, but backstage for the attractions. In Jurassic World it held:
- Raptor training ground (not a park attraction, but important project for InGen)
- Indominus Paddock (upcoming attraction)
- Owens trailer (this is where we heard Brachiosaurs as I remember)
We can assume, that Restricted Area contained some specimen, that were about to be presented in the future, but after JW collapsed, they are on the loose.

Examples:
- Allosaur (blue theropod) - it was on Holoscape screen in Innovation Center, so it could be present
- Baryonyx - actually a park attraction, so no issue here
- Brachiosaur - can be heard near Owen trailer, so in Restricted Area in Jurassic World, also it is displayed in Holoscape (Innovation Center) as "creatures of jurassic". Furthermore, please take a look at the official Masrani website:
http://www.masraniglobal.com/about/divisions/jurassicworld/index.html
"We have several new rides in the conceptual phase with Axis Boulder. Our most evolved, the 'Treetop Gazers', has an ETA sometime in 2018."
And here is the concept art also used:
https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/jurassicpark/images/b/ba/Treetopgazers.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20150601070959
So when it comes to Brachiosaur - it was already there officially planned
- Carnotaurus - his DNA was used to create Indominus, so I assume at least one living specimen must have been alive
- Compsognathus - we might assume, they were some sort of upcoming attraction
- Pachyrhinosaurus - we might assume, they were some sort of upcoming attraction
- Stygimoloch - we might assume, they were some sort of upcoming attraction