Dinosaur Protection Group

It’s really stupid for them to suggest that Sorna is just abandoned. Really, we’re supposed to believe they just shipped every animal off the island? All of them??

At this point, I’m giving up hope of dinosaurs on Sorna being mentioned in the film. Hopefully nobody says the Nublar dinosaurs are the last ones.

I wouldn't be surprised if that does happen in the film though. They mention Sorna and many fans rejoice but then mention it to be completely dino-free and the fans go WTF.

Dr. Wu wrote:

I wouldn't be surprised if that does happen in the film though. They mention Sorna and many fans rejoice but then mention it to be completely dino-free and the fans go WTF.

Yeah I say that they could propose a re-wilding of sorna.

What gets me though is that Sorna was used by ingen btween TLW and jP3, for 9 months to clone the spino, etc. So the labs Grant and the kirbys found were only recently abandoned.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

What gets me though is that Sorna was used by ingen btween TLW and jP3, for 9 months to clone the spino, etc. So the labs Grant and the kirbys found were only recently abandoned.

Maybe some generator setups, and running on bare minimum equipment to do the cloning? It's obvious InGen wasn't going to stick around very long.

They didn't really need to restore the building, just had to get it functional.

As a side note, Suchomimus is mentioned on InGen's list, dated December 1996.

Suchomimus wasn't discovered until December 1997, and wasn't named until November 1998.

Interesting plot twist. Ingen makes the dinosaurs before scientists can discover them, like w/ the utahraptor.

Where exactly is it mentioned, that there are no dinosaurs on Sorna? I remember Masrani website before JW stating that InGen was protecting all of the islands dinosaurs from illegal smuggling. That would mean all of the islands had dinosaurs.

IllOrfanato wrote:

Where exactly is it mentioned, that there are no dinosaurs on Sorna?

Here's one quote from the new DPG article: "The surviving animals were reportedly moved to Nublar to be housed as future attractions at Jurassic World."

Also this: http://www.dinosaurprotectiongroup.com/images/nublar.png

Dr. Wu wrote:

IllOrfanato wrote:

Where exactly is it mentioned, that there are no dinosaurs on Sorna?

Here's one quote from the new DPG article: "The surviving animals were reportedly moved to Nublar to be housed as future attractions at Jurassic World."

Also this: http://www.dinosaurprotectiongroup.com/images/nublar.png

To be fair, 'the surviving animals' could also just refer to the new species made after 1997. But the point still stands. As of 2018, there are no dinosaurs on Sorna.

Also the article mentions there was an investigation into Wu, so I can say that he is a wanted man at this time.

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

To be fair, 'the surviving animals' could also just refer to the new species made after 1997. But the point still stands. As of 2018, there are no dinosaurs on Sorna.

If that is indeed the case (wouldn't it say that Sorna is unpopulated rather than abandoned?), it is disheartening to discover they ultimately never got to live in peace as Hammond wanted. (I mean, taking some of the dinosaurs off Sorna is one thing, but completely removing all of them?)

Hopefully any new updates shed some light on what exactly happened to them. Honestly, there are a lot of questions that need answering and clearing up.

It seems like the site is implying that all extinctions have happened between 2015-2018. (And it seems odd they would take ALL the Sorna dinosaurs. How would they know their exact populations, and Nublar itself is way too small to hold Sorna's population and Nublar's together.

I can understand trying to re-stock some of the dwindling populations, but is Zia really saying that Jurassic World housed 6 Tyrannosaurs (including Rexy)?

The fact that the statuses of specific Sorna dinosaurs (T. rex family, the raptor packs, and the TLW Pteranodons) are unknown, leaves me a bit concerned.

If they were euthanized or poached, wouldn't that be a huge upset for the fans, for Universal to just suddenly kill off the majority of Sorna's dinosaurs?

1morey wrote:

V.a.nublarensis wrote:

To be fair, 'the surviving animals' could also just refer to the new species made after 1997. But the point still stands. As of 2018, there are no dinosaurs on Sorna.

If that is indeed the case (wouldn't it say that Sorna is unpopulated rather than abandoned?), it is disheartening to discover they ultimately never got to live in peace as Hammond wanted. (I mean, taking some of the dinosaurs off Sorna is one thing, but completely removing all of them?)

Hopefully any new updates shed some light on what exactly happened to them. Honestly, there are a lot of questions that need answering and clearing up.

It seems like the site is implying that all extinctions have happened between 2015-2018. (And it seems odd they would take ALL the Sorna dinosaurs. How would they know their exact populations, and Nublar itself is way too small to hold Sorna's population and Nublar's together.

I can understand trying to re-stock some of the dwindling populations, but is Zia really saying that Jurassic World housed 6 Tyrannosaurs (including Rexy)?

The fact that the statuses of specific Sorna dinosaurs (T. rex family, the raptor packs, and the TLW Pteranodons) are unknown, leaves me a bit concerned.

If they were euthanized or poached, wouldn't that be a huge upset for the fans, for Universal to just suddenly kill off the majority of Sorna's dinosaurs?

I just think all of this is a half-assed compromise. Here's why. Spielberg didn't like how TLW turned out at the time and JP3 is still hated by the fanbase and most of the GA. The problem is that TLW has got a better reputation as time has gone by and JP3 is still canon, for better or worse.

Because of this, I honestly think this is the real reason for this site. That they are making this as canon, but are doing this so lazy that they won't mind if fans won't consider this canon.

The problem is that either way, it just comes across as a middle finger to the fans of TLW and it comes across as Universal doing whatever they want with the canon because "LOL Reasons", which it kind of is.

Damn. We finally get some kind of backstory and everyone hates it haha. I reckon they could make a cool book or TV show based on this tbh.

Six-Foot Turkey wrote:

Damn. We finally get some kind of backstory and everyone hates it haha. I reckon they could make a cool book or TV show based on this tbh.

I quite like the new expanded backstory, but that might be partly because I found Isla Sorna to be an unnecessarily complicated and surprisingly forgettable addition to the film franchise.

Gondrasia wrote:

Six-Foot Turkey wrote:

Damn. We finally get some kind of backstory and everyone hates it haha. I reckon they could make a cool book or TV show based on this tbh.

I quite like the new expanded backstory, but that might be partly because I found Isla Sorna to be an unnecessarily complicated and surprisingly forgettable addition to the film franchise.

I like Sorna, but this new backstory doesn't ruin anything for me. I love it.

Sickle_Claw wrote:

Also the article mentions there was an investigation into Wu, so I can say that he is a wanted man at this time.

I bet Zia is going to write a special article about Dr. Wu, calling him a mad man and all.

I'll be ready to write an essay about how Zia Rodriguez is wrong.

There’s been a minor update to the “Dinosaurs are mortal. Cruelty is timeless” poster, Metriacanthosaurus is now highlighted in red (confirming that they are extinct species) and Sinoceratops has been added to the list.

Spoiler:

Gondrasia wrote:

There’s been a minor update to the “Dinosaurs are mortal. Cruelty is timeless” poster, Metriacanthosaurus is now highlighted in red (confirming that they are extinct species) and Sinoceratops has been added to the list.

Spoiler:

I have to ask. While Metriacanthosaurus DNA was in Jurassic Park, can we really consider the Metriacanthosaurus actually existing on any of the islands canon? We only saw it's DNA, not the actual dinosaur.

Rhedosaurus wrote:

I have to ask. While Metriacanthosaurus DNA was in Jurassic Park, can we really consider the Metriacanthosaurus actually existing on any of the islands canon? We only saw it's DNA, not the actual dinosaur.

The Jurassic World brochure pretty much confirmed Metriacanthosaurus to be on Isla Nublar, as a species that visitors can see “live and in person”.

Spoiler:

Keep in mind that when Grant and co. visited the park, Nublar didn't have all attractions ready to go and this ranged from dinosaurs on down to the "rides" for seeing them. The brochure with the animals simply means InGen had their extractions ongoing/planned or they were working the kinks out of their genes due to mutation. The same could be said for the cold storage units housing the embryos as well. All that is known is that they were potential inhabitants at some point. As for all of the attractions not being ready, Hammond states this in the luncheon scene especially with mentioning how additional things would come online after the initial opening.

Too many people are calling foul on this stuff mostly because of it infringing on their head canons or they aren't taking a step back and understanding the thematic elements of the franchise. I know for me (and a few others) that having the last two decades fans have had time to create your own continuations and even endings with the belief that JP4 would never happen ultimately is hard pill to swallow when it comes to dismissing all of that and allowing yourself to be open for the future of the franchise. You get convinced of what you would like to see that you end up building unrealistic specifications and expectations. Unfortunately, that doesn't leave open for the powers that be to get in their sandbox, that we are merely observers in, and get busy creating.

I thought this recent video from the DPG was pretty cool:

https://twitter.com/DinoProtectGrp/status/969626486972989440

While most of the movie news websites are acknowledging the website as clever viral marketing, some have taken it upon themselves to react more in more... asinine terms. Using the usual jargon of calling the dinosaurs monsters and abominations (again, have any of them even SEEN the first film, and if so how can they have such a one dimensional view on these animals??) and call it an indictment of the characters' lack of intelligence.

Take this from the UPPROX news page for the DPG news:

"The DPG is basically like Greenpeace for dinosaurs, saying that just because we brought dinosaurs back to life doesn't mean we control them or own them for experimentation. This seems to stand at odds with everything these films have been about since the beginning, but OK."

I'll just leave it here.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

While most of the movie news websites are acknowledging the website as clever viral marketing, some have taken it upon themselves to react more in more... asinine terms. Using the usual jargon of calling the dinosaurs monsters and abominations (again, have any of them even SEEN the first film, and if so how can they have such a one dimensional view on these animals??) and call it an indictment of the characters' lack of intelligence.

Take this from the UPPROX news page for the DPG news:

"The DPG is basically like Greenpeace for dinosaurs, saying that just because we brought dinosaurs back to life doesn't mean we control them or own them for experimentation. This seems to stand at odds with everything these films have been about since the beginning, but OK."

I'll just leave it here.

LMAO this is something the franchise always talked about, or they can't remember Malcolm's words? The diference is that Malcolm doesn't play the Greenpeace activist part, but he says pretty much the same.

At least Claire Dearing is doing something.

Spinosaur4.4 wrote:

LMAO this is something the franchise always talked about, or they can't remember Malcolm's words? The diference is that Malcolm doesn't play the Greenpeace activist part, but he says pretty much the same.

At least Claire Dearing is doing something.

Honestly, the movie news coverage regarding a lot of aspects of JW: Fallen Kingdom and the incredible levels of contempt, shallowness and lack of knowledge of the film they claim to love has been staggering.

BarrytheOnyx wrote:

While most of the movie news websites are acknowledging the website as clever viral marketing, some have taken it upon themselves to react more in more... asinine terms. Using the usual jargon of calling the dinosaurs monsters and abominations (again, have any of them even SEEN the first film, and if so how can they have such a one dimensional view on these animals??) and call it an indictment of the characters' lack of intelligence.

Take this from the UPPROX news page for the DPG news:

"The DPG is basically like Greenpeace for dinosaurs, saying that just because we brought dinosaurs back to life doesn't mean we control them or own them for experimentation. This seems to stand at odds with everything these films have been about since the beginning, but OK."

I'll just leave it here.

Yahoo News is even worse, barely acknowledging the changes that Claire Dearing goes through in Jurassic World, calling the idea of saving the dinosaurs as ‘monstrous’ and even going so far as to call the DPG, an astroturf organisation with Claire being ‘in on the deal’:

Yahoo News wrote:

A new video for Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, the fifth movie in the Jurassic Park series, introduces us to Dinosaur Protection Group and their mission to rescue and conserve the dinosaurs of Isla Nublar, former site of both the Jurassic World and Jurassic Park theme parks. The organization is run by Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), last seen running Jurassic World into the ground. But instead of the corporatist bureaucrat of the first movie, this new Dinosaur Protection Group video reveals Claire to be a passionate animal rights activist with an eccentric, idealistic mission. Did she really have a change of heart, as she writes on the Dinosaur Protection Group site? Or are shadowy funders using Dinosaur Protection Group for their own ends, with Dearing as their public face?

Not only is the version of Claire we see in this video completely different from her character in the first Jurassic World—from jaded, anti-social workaholic to idealistic, child-loving dreamer—but even her mission seems completely opposed to the themes of the first Jurassic World. In that movie, we learned the dinosaurs are not dinosaurs at all, but wholly manipulable genetic product, whose every biological parameter can be tinkered, adjusted and speciated to accommodate branding opportunities or military contractors.

The ostensible plot of Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom is the opposite, with dinosaur rights activists travelling to Isla Nublar to protect the animals from extinction, even knowing, as Dr. Henry Wu (B.D. Wong) told anyone who would listen, that you could just as easily print off a few dozen more. The Dinosaur Protection Group site even proposes sending veterinarians to the island to treat dinosaurs. Beyond just saving the dinosaurs from volcanic destruction, the Dinosaur Protection Group proposes to interfere in the ad hoc ecosystem taking place on the island, protecting prey species from predators and expending immense resources to protect genetically engineered clones.

Considering the wave of extinctions that have swept this planet over the past few centuries, due entirely to human involvement, it seems monstrous to prioritize overgrown lab experiments over literally any other environmental cause imaginable.

In the trailer for Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom, we witness a rescue operation at a grand scale, expending resources Greenpeace or the Rainforest Fund would never be provided. This raises an intriguing possibility: is the Dinosaur Protection Group an astroturf organization, designed to cover for an ulterior motive?

Astroturf is any organization pretending to have a popular mandate, act as if riding a wave of genuine, organic support, but are actually propagandizing on behalf of powerful interests with secret motives. It’s a common tactic for embattled industries, like “clean” coal or health insurance, who hide behind a phony social movement to push their preferred policies or provide a moderate alternative to a popular policy they fear.

Sure enough, like other astroturf organizations with mysterious backers, dark money and a dishonest pitch, the Dinosaur Protection Group doesn’t disclose its funders, a common accountability problem with political advocacy groups across the ideological spectrum. “All operations are 100% funded by the financial support of like-minded individuals,” their site reads, implying a groundswell of individual, small donors, but denying any independent review of the claim.

One character we haven’t seen in Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom trailers yet is Benjamin Lockwood (James Cromwell), John Hammond’s original partner in founding InGen, who steps out of the shadows after the death of Simon Masrani in the first Jurassic World. Could he be bankrolling the Dinosaur Protection Group in secret, perhaps to retrieve the dinosaur genetic material and whatever other assets he can from Isla Nublar?

Though ostensibly a friendly message and innocuous viral marketing campaign, the Dinosaur Protection Group outreach points to more in the Jurassic World: Fallen Kingdom plot than what’s been revealed in trailers. Beyond that, it’s an effective look at how innocent and populist a big-money astroturf campaign can appear. Underneath the “rescue dinosaurs from a volcano” adventure story lurks an astroturf conspiracy. Is Claire in on it, chasing credibility in the corporate ecosystem after her career-ending failures at Jurassic World? Or, perhaps, Claire and Owen (Chris Pratt) really are dumb enough to go back to the island for the world’s worst cause.

Oh yeah, the real hero of the franchise is not Claire Dearing, the one that changed her personality and is doing everything in her power to save the dinosaurs, but Owen Grady, the cool handsome bro who does nothing to save the animals except talking big about how they are animals.

Ugh, these people. I'm sure they are going to side with Lockwood.

Its not an astroturf foundation, that I am sure of. But Lockwood is playing the DPG for fools.

You know, I'd be interested to see people discussing about whether or not they'd save the dinosaurs if a scenario like this happens. These news sites aren't doing that at all.

I sometimes wish those news sites didn’t spoil themselves with Marvel Super heroes, because this is good info coming out regarding what’s happening leading up to Fallen Kingdom.

People seem to think that just because Dr. Wu (one character from the movie) claims the Dinosaurs are just monster/fake inaccurate animals and just because the Indominus was a corporate monster, that the whole film was getting at this idea that they aren't animals full stop. The film shows plenty of times that the Dinosaurs are just animals i.e. the apatosaurus scene. Why is this film being shat on so much? I really can't understand it. Unreal how people ignorantly try to ignore any actual sense or lack any kind of sympathy for living creatures online. They're beyond stupid, yet they claim the film to be stupid. Drives me mad. They're too high on shit like Ant-Man vs The Wasp to care about anything else hahaha

Six-Foot Turkey wrote:

People seem to think that just because Dr. Wu (one character from the movie) claims the Dinosaurs are just monster/fake inaccurate animals and just because the Indominus was a corporate monster, that the whole film was getting at this idea that they aren't animals full stop. The film shows plenty of times that the Dinosaurs are just animals i.e. the apatosaurus scene. Why is this film being shat on so much? I really can't understand it. Unreal how people ignorantly try to ignore any actual sense or lack any kind of sympathy for living creatures online. They're beyond stupid, yet they claim the film to be stupid. Drives me mad. They're too high on shit like Ant-Man vs The Wasp to care about anything else hahaha

It is really infuriating. Even though all the Dino’s are technically hybrids most of them are based on real animals...... so I take it these same websites are also against saving Lions, Tigers and Bears since they are also dangerous and “monsters”?

These people are clearly biased