|
Post by sepp on Mar 9, 2011 3:15:08 GMT
I view it as a " plot hole " since it wasn't directly referenced in the film. The only way the audience would know that's why they are there would be hear it from the actor's mouths, or have read the novel..which the film didn't really follow anyway. We're left to surmise somehow those three Raptors or the ones before somehow escaped and laid eggs then made it back in ? Do they ever say that they're raptor eggs? I know the footprints look like raptor prints, but maybe that was just a slip up and they're supposed to be something else, like Gallimimus perhaps. I think since the footprints by the eggs were two toed and looked like scale replicas of the adult prints coming out of the raptor pit, it was deliberate and they were intended to be from the raptors. Also I agree with Sid, they had to have mated and laid eggs before they were put into that pit. Muldoon mentioned the big female had the other two females kill all the other raptors in their pack, so there were more than just those three to begin with - plus, assuming their reproductive anatomy is internal, the park workers likely wouldn't have noticed anyhow..
|
|
|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Mar 9, 2011 7:15:04 GMT
Do they ever say that they're raptor eggs? I know the footprints look like raptor prints, but maybe that was just a slip up and they're supposed to be something else, like Gallimimus perhaps. I think since the footprints by the eggs were two toed and looked like scale replicas of the adult prints coming out of the raptor pit, it was deliberate and they were intended to be from the raptors. Also I agree with Sid, they had to have mated and laid eggs before they were put into that pit. Muldoon mentioned the big female had the other two females kill all the other raptors in their pack, so there were more than just those three to begin with - plus, assuming their reproductive anatomy is internal, the park workers likely wouldn't have noticed anyhow.. Aye, it is explainable to those of us with knowledge. I always assumed the " Big One " was actually a diff sex...either male and the other two female, or female and the other two male...the other that were killed were obviously the same sex as the Big One so it killed the competition. The problem still lies in that one omission..they never came out and said " we had problems introducing the raptors to the rest of the Park, so that's why they are here. " The would tell us they in some way could have laid those eggs...I just see it as a plot hole. You couldn't see into the Raptor Pit..so they're have been a nest there and the young escaped through holes too small fir the adults..grew to adult hood, bred and laid their own. Perfect explanation..but it's just a guess still.
|
|
|
Post by sepp on Mar 9, 2011 8:06:28 GMT
I don know, it doesn't seem like a huge pothole to me. I'm content without having every detail of a movie laid out for me - they definitely could have explained the whole raptor living situation, but it seems that would be unnecessary information to the rest of the movie and wouldn't really fit in well with the way the whole movie was told and played out. If Jurassic Park featured only the raptors as dinosaur villains it would fit, but since they're not its excessive unneeded info imo All we can do is make educated guesses and agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Mar 9, 2011 9:05:32 GMT
I guess I just expected to see the book in it's entirety made into a film...not reasonable but I didn't know that in 93' when I was 11.. lol not that I'm not happy with what we got you understand.
It's an odd point to argue, but the Raptors were probably the only real villains in the film...they portrayed as such whereas the Rex and Dilo were more " just animals ".
|
|
|
Post by sepp on Mar 9, 2011 10:20:51 GMT
By villainous dinosaurs I just meant carnivorous ones, ie the ones that were bad to come into contact with if you were edible on the island. I don't want to argue any ill or good intentions the dinosaurs had, you know what I meant.
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Mar 9, 2011 14:26:07 GMT
It's an odd point to argue, but the Raptors were probably the only real villains in the film...they portrayed as such whereas the Rex and Dilo were more " just animals ". This is probably due to the raptors seemingly hunting people for fun...although if that makes them evil, then so are cats ;D
|
|
|
Post by foxilized on Mar 9, 2011 17:32:04 GMT
I would say the footprints had to be raptor, yes. Two toes only.
But why Grant said "It's a dinosaur egg" instead of "It's a raptor egg"?? Probably Spielberg thought if said that it would have been a pretty scary suggestion. And the scene was supposed to be "marvelous" and "magic". You cannot bring raptors being free and nesting there, cause it would ruin the scene intention. Even though, it points to an alternate storyline where raptors are free and willing to migrate. Just like in the book. In the Megadrive videogame I remember the raptor intention was actually hide in a human boat and being taken to civilization. Dunno if that part was actually thought to be in an earlier Draft of the script but Crichton was the one who wrotte the very 1st draft in 1990 and maybe, just maybe, that storyline was included at that earlier point. Later it all was deleted but the raptor nest part. (And yes I agree with Blade it can totally be considered a plot-hole, and yes I also agree with Sepp on the movie still being totally enjoyable despite the plot-holes on it)
--------------
Yeah I agree the Raptors were portrayed as pure animals, just like cats. Besides, consider them being extremely furious for being closed in a so small jail. They surely had a high anxiety.
On JP3 we see they are not so "evil" since they are just defending territory and nest. They don't kill for pleasure, if they did no human would have come out alive. Yes I don't forget they were simultaneosly represented in a pretty unrealistic way -with the too high intelligence thing and so, things raptor probably were not- but still their behaviour was purely based on animal instict. No other "humanized" intentions...
Truth is the Raptors in JP1 were depicted having some "demonic" qualities but it was purely a matter of director's choice on how to film the scenes. When they are entering the kitchen, they are just like Gremlins or Devils, with the music, the photography, the camera angles... etc. But that's just the subjetive way the kids saw them cause they are being hunted. It's not Spielberg was truly saying they were actually demons. In truth they behave like animals too, hunting for sport like cats, and for anger for being imprisoned for so long. They are not sadistic, doesn't enjoy creating suffering on humans. They don't care for that. They just want to survive and enjoy their hunter's life.
The T-Rex had some demonic qualities too. The "horns" over the eyes, for example, was an intentious artistical choice to make him look even more dangerous. But again when they talked about the Rex explaining its behavious it was clear the guy (sorry, the lady) was not demonic but just an animal.
The shark in Jaws was threated as an animal too. Even though it was depicted in an unrealistic way -sharks don't do some things it did- the shark motivations was just eating what could be eaten and then defending himself. That's all. He wasn't thinking on make humans suffer. (Forget about subsequent grotesque sequels.... urgh...)
|
|
|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Mar 9, 2011 19:59:33 GMT
By villainous dinosaurs I just meant carnivorous ones, ie the ones that were bad to come into contact with if you were edible on the island. I don't want to argue any ill or good intentions the dinosaurs had, you know what I meant. Sorry, I had no intent to offend..it was just something to further discuss. I think the Raptors were intended to be a bit more " villainous " but that can be attributed to their having the intelligence to react more " human " I guess...the humans were a threat to their survival so taking them out made sense. If they were being portrayed as actual animals then more than likely upon escape, they would have fled into the jungle away from the people that harmed them. Don't confuse the JP3 Raptors with the JP1 and TLW Raptors...two diff species, with diff behaviors. The Rex despite it's appearance behaved like a curious animal in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by sepp on Mar 9, 2011 20:53:08 GMT
You didn't offend me Blade, I'm sorry if I sounded that way. I'm very tired, I should have put a smiley in there I think
|
|
|
Post by foxilized on Mar 9, 2011 23:33:40 GMT
If they were being portrayed as actual animals then more than likely upon escape, they would have fled into the jungle away from the people that harmed them. Yes. Absolutely. But that wouldn't make a cool movie. ;D The behaviour was sort of unrealistic in that sense you point, but still the motivations were purely animal. Like hunt, feed, defend yourself, stablish who is the ruler... etc. They wasn't thinking on "hmmm, let's see how can I make these humans suffer, mwahhaha"Don't confuse the JP3 Raptors with the JP1 and TLW Raptors...two diff species, with diff behaviors. Don't agree with a lot of JPlegacy theories, sorry. ;D I would say "two diff movies, two diff depictions". These are more peaceful and more intelligent cause they were bred on the wild, not genetically born in a laboratory. That was the excuse why the raptors on Nublar and Sorna were so agressive, cause they had no parents to teach them how to behave. That was explained in the book. The genetically born raptors had a huge stress and no limits on their "culture". Meanwhile the wild raptors were more calmed. As the ones born in the wild in the JP1 novel. The Rex despite it's appearance behaved like a curious animal in my opinion. Yes, like a gigantic baby with fangs who tastes everything with its mouth cause he thinks everything is a toy. Or a gigantic dog. Or a white shark (testing evrything with its mouth to see if it can be swallowed, just for curiosity. Not sadistic harming intention, they are not conscious of the pain they cause, they just bite).
|
|
|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Mar 10, 2011 1:18:50 GMT
You didn't offend me Blade, I'm sorry if I sounded that way. I'm very tired, I should have put a smiley in there I think No problem, just wanted to be on the safe side. I love to discuss things so if you'll forgive me again for causing more distress.
|
|
|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Mar 10, 2011 1:28:11 GMT
If they were being portrayed as actual animals then more than likely upon escape, they would have fled into the jungle away from the people that harmed them. Yes. Absolutely. But that wouldn't make a cool movie. ;D The behaviour was sort of unrealistic in that sense you point, but still the motivations were purely animal. Like hunt, feed, defend yourself, stablish who is the ruler... etc. They wasn't thinking on "hmmm, let's see how can I make these humans suffer, mwahhaha"Don't agree with a lot of JPlegacy theories, sorry. ;D I would say "two diff movies, two diff depictions". These are more peaceful and more intelligent cause they were bred on the wild, not genetically born in a laboratory. That was the excuse why the raptors on Nublar and Sorna were so agressive, cause they had no parents to teach them how to behave. That was explained in the book. The genetically born raptors had a huge stress and no limits on their "culture". Meanwhile the wild raptors were more calmed. As the ones born in the wild in the JP1 novel. The Rex despite it's appearance behaved like a curious animal in my opinion. Yes, like a gigantic baby with fangs who tastes everything with its mouth cause he thinks everything is a toy. Or a gigantic dog. Or a white shark (testing evrything with its mouth to see if it can be swallowed, just for curiosity. Not sadistic harming intention, they are not conscious of the pain they cause, they just bite). Well I didn't see any Raptors whipping people and putting them in chains..so I guess in that sense they weren't made to " suffer ".. lol Think of this for a moment, when a person performs the same actions they are branded as villainous and not natural..even though in doing those things they are being more natural than typing on a computor... I have to agree the JP3 Raptors are probably a diff species though...the looks a lot different form the JP1 and TLW variety...which given the film's time frame a lot of them would have been in the wild as by now as well on Sorna. It just doesn't add up that they are same species..and all three films have the same continuity.
|
|
|
Post by foxilized on Mar 10, 2011 19:07:38 GMT
Think of this for a moment, when a person performs the same actions they are branded as villainous and not natural..even though in doing those things they are being more natural than typing on a computor... Hm, not really... We humans have morality codes and a concience of "good/bad", so when we do something that is against that code we label that person as "villain" or "bad". But that morality code is purely for human use, that's why everything that is not human cannot be labelled under that perspective. If we do it we are considering it human too. If you see raptors are "villain" is because somehow you see them as human. A human can choose (to a certain point unless he/she is crazy) either assasinating or typing in a computer. We have a "good/bad" concious and morality. Animals don't. You cannot blame or judge a lion eating a man, but you can judge a person killing a person because there was a choice. (Again unless the killer was crazy, then he didn't have a choice). Of course this is quite roughly explained... I have to agree the JP3 Raptors are probably a diff species though...the looks a lot different form the JP1 and TLW variety...which given the film's time frame a lot of them would have been in the wild as by now as well on Sorna. It just doesn't add up that they are same species..and all three films have the same continuity. Yes them being diff species makes sense after a first look but my personal explanation is the third movie is quite a mess and doesn't give a good goddam about continuity. Of course this is something JPLegacy cannot accept ;D but to me is the obvious truth. Grant dreams with a feathered raptor. He must be dreaming with a JP1 raptor, so we must assume the continuity is broken for a aesthethical change. Dinos on Jp3 they all look new. Are they all new species? Weird, isn't it? Where are the other species? Is like the main characters landed in a part of the island where there are only new species? Hard to swallow...... Why aren't the old species besides the new ones? Another explanation is they are the old species but changed colour cause it's mating session. Hmmmmm excuse me but the design of the dinos is different. The Brachios doesn't look different only in colour, the have different design. Same as trikes, pteranodons... They have been totally remade. It's not the same animals with other colours. They look like new species, ok, but where are the old ones then? Another is they are males, and the old movies are females. Ok then what happened, the main characters landed in a place where only males live? Where are the females? Is this suddenly the Gay Sorna??? I also think the laboratory in ruins in JP3 is supposed to be the same one as in TLW. It looks slightly different if you compare pics from each movie, but I don't think the jp3 movie was made thinking fans would be comparing previous movies and so. So the raptors who are in the ruined laboratory in JP3 are supposedly the same ones as in TLW. Supposed. I know they look different but that's cause in jp3 they simply changed the look on things to make them look brand new for the audience. I think the simple explanation is JP3 movie-makers didn't care a bit about continuity on aesthethics. Maybe they thought nobody would care about that.... as we fans actually did.
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on Mar 10, 2011 23:06:17 GMT
;D Well if they are all males in JP 3, where did the nest and eggs come from?
|
|
|
Post by Griffin on Mar 11, 2011 1:35:44 GMT
In JP3 I'm almost positive there were both male and female velociraptors. The males had the little feathers things on their heads with the red eyes and gray lateral stripe. The females were more pale skinned with yellow eyes.
|
|
|
Post by Blade-of-the-Moon on Mar 11, 2011 3:13:47 GMT
But having a conscious or morality is only something quite new to people..our ancestors didn't have it. It's also something we can't prove other species don't have...in a sense it's just words used to describe some actions . I have to agree the JP3 Raptors are probably a diff species though...the looks a lot different form the JP1 and TLW variety...which given the film's time frame a lot of them would have been in the wild as by now as well on Sorna. It just doesn't add up that they are same species..and all three films have the same continuity. It shouldn't matter where the idea comes from, but how much sense it makes...and like it or not a lot of the ideas on JPL make sense. I'm Stan cared about his creations and prob had his own input. I think that's a flub, just an accident. Someone overlooked that minute detail. Unless Grant has some kind of premonition...lol Of course not, but they're are explanations. They could have landed in an area with a slightly different species..maybe mountain species instead of plain or jungle species. It could be the animals we saw are in fact all males. Some species males and females are separate..only coming together for mating season. The toothed Pteranodons are a diff species..they were a flawed product so confined to their Aviary til they died for study..but they bred instead. And Yes the Velociraptors " Sornies " were diff in appearence as per their sex. They did partially reuse the building for those scenes...so it could be the same building with a different route taken. Or just a diff building with a similar style. I think the simple explanation is JP3 movie-makers didn't care a bit about continuity on aesthethics. Maybe they thought nobody would care about that.... as we fans actually did. [/quote] I'm sure there is truth in that at least partly....but there are some that did care that worked on it.
|
|
|
Post by Horridus on Mar 11, 2011 3:20:12 GMT
Of course the truth is that JP3 was made with a gleeful disregard to continuity. "The raptors have head-quills and round pupils and super intelligence! Pteranodons have teeth! THIS CAN MAKE US MONEY!!11!ELEVENTY!"
Of course, fanon explanations for the movies' concessions to money-making popularity are always fun to read.
|
|
|
Post by Griffin on Mar 11, 2011 16:49:14 GMT
Yeah I really don't think the people behind the making of the movies put this much thought into morality and instinct and good and evil to be honest. that being said there is really no right or wrong answer when debating it.
|
|
|
Post by foxilized on Mar 12, 2011 8:05:42 GMT
I think the simple explanation is JP3 movie-makers didn't care a bit about continuity on aesthethics. Maybe they thought nobody would care about that.... as we fans actually did. ------------------------ I'm sure there is truth in that at least partly....but there are some that did care that worked on it. Besides the huge amount of work to make that site, wich I profoundly respect and admire, I do like some other things on JPL. Some of their inventions are quite good and make a lot of sense, but it's not good how they state them as being originally from the filmakers. That is essentially the thing I don't like about JPL. It's very hard to determine what is fan-fiction and what comes from the original source. They never quote sources. They don't separate it. They cover the plot-holes with fan-fiction and never mark "that's a hole covered", they mix all canon and their inventions as one. That's quite manipulative/desinformative, actually. One comes to believe they have the ultimate truth... but they are actually just doing a personal version of JP. It's not an objective site, it's a fan fiction site. A very good one though, at least it would be if they stopped claiming eveything they have is "canon" cause there's like 50% of their inventions there, all to not accept plot-holes and contradictions.
|
|
|
Post by brontozaurus on Mar 13, 2011 21:44:15 GMT
Of course the truth is that JP3 was made with a gleeful disregard to continuity. "The raptors have head-quills and round pupils and super intelligence! Pteranodons have teeth! THIS CAN MAKE US MONEY!!11!ELEVENTY!" Of course, fanon explanations for the movies' concessions to money-making popularity are always fun to read. One of the recent IDW comics tried to explain the Pteranodons-with-teeth as Ingen's 'mistakes', caused through the Pteranodons being genetic mishmashes approximating Pteranodons rather than being the actual animal. Extrapolating from this means that every inaccuracy in the movies can be explained via frog DNA. Rearing brachiosaurs? Frog DNA. Indestructible Spinosaurus? Frog DNA. Ninja skills T-rex? Frog DNA.
|
|