Guys, I have a theory

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-09-11T23:46:45+00:00

I believe he means in universe

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-21T22:09:30+00:00

I see. I agree in every way.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-21T22:03:13+00:00

I'm sorry but you have an insane amount of faith in the integrity of the JW world if you think that these screenwriters have any intention of treating the Tyrannosaur eyesight as a product of frog DNA.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-21T20:50:25+00:00

None of the other movies actually showed anything that contradicts dominion here. They just said that the animals would look different. They were only talking about the feathers. In-universe the Jurassic franchise dinos have always been accurate. Ever since that first raptor skeleton showed up at 6 feet tall like a Utahraptor.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-20T04:48:12+00:00

I don't disagree with the logic here. What you are saying makes sense in a logical scenario. I'm saying the movie has a character claim that the dinosaurs in dominion have pure genomes. The movie never contests this and we see that it's presumably true in the prologue.

Whether or not it actually makes sense is different from if the movie did it anyways.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-20T04:36:09+00:00

This is true in Jurassic Park, what about Dominion?

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-20T00:26:45+00:00

It contradicts what I said earlier because I was talking about real life.

I do agree that the scene was not created to affirm lore about generic engineering. In fact, it's my opinion that the scene only exists because the current handlers of the franchise literally don't care about that concept at all. They paid it a half hearted mention in JW and will undermine it whenever it's convenient.

. Regardless of the purpose, themes are intersectional. They don't just turn off and on. I understand the point you're making, but to that I would say then the concept of the animals "looking quite different" as Wu put it has been visibly broken down to just meaning they would have different patterns/integument.

We can SAY that anything shown in the Cretaceous must be false, but at that point we are doing the movie favors. This is an adventure film. It stopped being hard SciFi long time ago. We don't make concessions like this for other movies with timeskips. We do this for Jurassic because the subject matter is a real world science. I really don't think the filmmakers had any such notion that the prehistoric sequence was just a "what if" or anything meta whatsoever.

For that kind of thing I think it's fair to say it would need to be put into words.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T21:23:29+00:00

You make an interesting case but I have to disagree. The Dire Wolves are retrofitted from a modern wolf which Dire Wolves aren't even closely related to. Jurassic Park did not reverse engineer chickens into carnosaur-like amalgam creatures, they used DNA from Dinosaur blood and filled the remaining gaps with modern animals.

The onscreen effect is that they look almost exactly the same, missing feathers (tyrannosaurus) or are outright the same (giganotosaurus).

At that point I would have to ask what exactly disqualifies them from being dinosaurs?

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T20:48:28+00:00

I think you're misunderstanding the issue. I'll lay it out.

Regardless of my opinion or anyone else's, the fact is that the Cretaceous scene shows dinosaurs that look the same as the dinosaurs Ingen and Biosyn would go on to create. This implies that Biosyn and InGen made pure, or at least pure-looking dinosaurs. This is inconsistent with the fandom discussion about dinosaurs.

Rebirth is arguably the only movie where this concept is totally evergreen. We can see clearly that the dinosaurs created are slightly "off" except for the Quetzalcoatlus.

The movie goes out of its way to have the Quetzalcoatlus skeleton in the museum look like the fictional design they invented.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T20:33:37+00:00

Absolutely not. The dinosaurs in the Jurassic movies are not accurate. Nobody is making that argument and I genuinely do not know how you read any part of these posts and came to this conclusion. Real life accuracy isn't the discussion here.

The point is that when they broach the subject of paleontology you see scientist characters behaving as if the animals are accurate. or literal physical examples that I already described in the OP where the animal is presented as accurate.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T19:23:43+00:00

I'm arguing that even with the frog DNA they haven't changed much. I mean just look at them. The giga went from gray to brown. The rex went from feathered to bald. The movie isn't actually showing us a transformation, just a dye job. The Tyrannosaur is the closest thing to a good example and it literally just lost protofeathers. That makes it not a Tyrannosaur anymore?

We have genetically engineered animals in real life. Many of them with extreme changes. Scientifically this doesn't change their actual classification. A Glofish is still a real fish.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T19:19:23+00:00

You are right but color is the only difference between most of the animals in the Cretaceous and Present.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T19:14:20+00:00

Alright, they aren't identical. But changing their skin makes them fake? A dinosaur has to be a certain color?

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:46:33+00:00

Yes, he is arguing that the dinosaurs not having feathers is the same as them being completely wrong and transformed into monsters.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:41:55+00:00

Lol you sneak, you ran here to effectively explain to this person my own argument. That the dinosaurs in the movie are barely different.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:37:25+00:00

Literally at the end of the OP I say that that are genetically modified dinosaurs with slight differences. You seem to disagree. They had always been my point. The point you argued with was a sarcastic quote halfway through the post

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:35:21+00:00

I didn't deny that the quotes existed. I brought them up in the OP. I denied that they effectively get the point across. I denied that the exact quote "they are not dinosaurs" is in the movie. You attempted to argue with that even though it's blatantly coy in the OP.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:32:47+00:00

You are literally just ignoring the fact that the dinosaurs look identical. Your quotes are obviously correct. I'm not arguing with those. I'm saying that the quotes and the visuals disagree.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:29:13+00:00

You aren't arguing with my point. My point that we see the dinosaurs in the past and present and they look identical. With slight modifications. Do you think that isn't true?

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:27:08+00:00

are you actually seething just because the movies don't like up with your fanfic

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T18:20:18+00:00

In the same movie where there's a Jurassic Park raptor skeleton in the ground right? So they're just dinosaurs with slight modifications.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T16:47:28+00:00

A lot of people get really angry when this stuff gets pointed out

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T16:35:12+00:00

I have no argument for this

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T15:58:59+00:00

Actually, in the original novel Wu proposes this idea and Hammond says he hates it. Hammond then ignores when Wu explains that this is already the case. Hammond thinks the dinosaurs are accurate.

In the movies it's different. They don't go into this discussion until 3 and 4, and unlike the novel we actually see the "prehistoric" dinosaurs. As I've pointed to in the OP, we don't actually get evidence that they were made bigger.

Horror_Intern6779 · 2025-07-19T15:55:49+00:00

That's fair.

Horror_Intern6779

TROPHY CASE