Jurassic World T-Rex Blooper ....

mikid

Sr Member
RPF PREMIUM MEMBER
Ive purchased the dvd and have watched it over and over again....when the T-Rex is down and appears to be finished the next T-rex that comes and attacks doesn't have any blood or claw marks on it until it fights the the other andomenace rex...I was thinking that there might be a pair of T- rexs but there is not one laying in front of the brookstone building...have you noticed this and if so whats your take......
 
I don't think it's a blooper so much as just a trick of lighting combined with the differences in coloration in the dinos.

Here's a great 1080p video of the entire Rexy/Blue vs I-Rex fight.

The blood is easier to see on the I-Rex because the I-Rex has white coloration. You're looking at a darker shade on a white background.

Rexy's skin is more of a brown color, so it's harder to see the variances from clawmarks and blood in the dim nighttime lighting. However, if you slow the video down to 0.25x and watch when the glare of the lights hits Rexy's hide, you can see the clawmarks and blood better.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Out of curiosity, why did you guys not like it?

First, the general idea of letting out TRex to fight was a bit predictable.
Then - the girl with a flare outruns the Trex while wearing 1-2" heels
Then - the girl, being coordinate enough to outrun a trex - falls down while throwing the flare sideways.
she proceeds to stay there for two cuts of the scene on the street floor with her skirt hiked up like a 30's pin up girl while two giant dinosaurs are stomping around her. (it's like the giant dinosaurs weren't really there and she was acting in front of a green screen...oh wait...)
She, of course, tells everyone else to "RUN" when she didn't take her advice just a minute ago.

The CGI is horrible, I exploding Trex bones weren't believable at all. Looks like they just made that scene for the 3D effect

I'm sure someone else more qualified could come up with a lot more issues with the CGI
 
FTFY

Oh, the irony of that...
Meh. I had actually typed "spelling" at first, but I couldn't recall ever actually hearing anyone use the term "spelling nazi", so I didn't. In the same vein, does that actually fit the definition of "irony"?

OT: I actually found the film entertaining, although during this scene, I rolled my eyes a little at the notion that the T-Rex enclosure would have a single giant door that opened right up into the main park where guests would normally be roaming around...
 
First, the general idea of letting out TRex to fight was a bit predictable.

That I will grant you. The T-Rex was the star of the first movie. In fact, the first film originally didn't have Rexy saving the day at the end. The raptors were supposed to be killed or incapacitated by the falling dino skeletons, allowing the humans to escape. Spielberg realized that the Rex would be very popular because of how well it was done and the fact that the T-Rex is what many people think of when you say "dinosaur."

Then - the girl with a flare outruns the Trex while wearing 1-2" heels

Meh, semantics for the sake of plot. I found it more believable that she kept her shoes on instead of running around the jungle and later on concrete and cobblestones in bare feet.

Then - the girl, being coordinate enough to outrun a trex - falls down while throwing the flare sideways.

I saw it more as her diving out of the way than falling down, knowing that the Rex would be attracted by the flare and that a big showdown was about to happen.

she proceeds to stay there for two cuts of the scene on the street floor with her skirt hiked up like a 30's pin up girl while two giant dinosaurs are stomping around her.
(it's like the giant dinosaurs weren't really there and she was acting in front of a green screen...oh wait...)

Now you're just getting pedantic.

She, of course, tells everyone else to "RUN" when she didn't take her advice just a minute ago.

Well, there's a difference between seeing two dinos duking it out away from you and having them destroying the building someone is currently occupying.

The CGI is horrible, I exploding Trex bones weren't believable at all. Looks like they just made that scene for the 3D effect

While it wasn't the absolute greatest CGI ever done, I wouldn't classify it as horrible. BTW, that skeleton that the T-Rex crashed through was a Spinosaurus. They did that as a subtle nod to all the people who were pissed about the Spinosaurus basically one-shotting a bull T-Rex in JP3.

Meh. I had actually typed "spelling" at first, but I couldn't recall ever actually hearing anyone use the term "spelling nazi", so I didn't. In the same vein, does that actually fit the definition of "irony"?

You corrected someone's spelling and called it grammar. The irony is that by calling it grammar instead of spelling, you committed a grammatical mistake.

OT: I actually found the film entertaining, although during this scene, I rolled my eyes a little at the notion that the T-Rex enclosure would have a single giant door that opened right up into the main park where guests would normally be roaming around...

How do you think they got the Rex into the enclosure in the first place? Besides, the gate could only be opened from the control center or by someone on the inside of the paddock who had authorization to do so. It's not like a random guest could press a button and open the door...
 
How do you think they got the Rex into the enclosure in the first place? Besides, the gate could only be opened from the control center or by someone on the inside of the paddock who had authorization to do so. It's not like a random guest could press a button and open the door...
How did I think they got it in there? Umm, through a different door; some entrance to the enclosure that would not have been visible to the public (every theme park, especially ones involving potentially dangerous live animals, has ways into exhibits that are not in the main public walkway). Heck, at the very least, make the door she opened, a 2-door system with outer & inner doors, in case one set was opened by mistake.
 
I really liked the film and I'm not going to nitpick it...........but if I did, my main gripe would be the deal of turning raptors into bloodhounds. I mean, the raptor is basically a cross between an ostrich and an alligator, and I don't think you can really train either of those.......well, maybe the ostrich part a little bit, but not much I would imagine.
 
I really liked the film and I'm not going to nitpick it...........but if I did, my main gripe would be the deal of turning raptors into bloodhounds. I mean, the raptor is basically a cross between an ostrich and an alligator, and I don't think you can really train either of those.......well, maybe the ostrich part a little bit, but not much I would imagine.

But you're forgetting just how smart the raptors are supposed to be, remember, smart animals in movies are incredibly smart, much smarter than they should be.
 
Now that would be funny:

Dr. Grant: Do they show intelligence? With their brain cavity...
Muldoon: Nope. They're dumber than a box of rocks. It's a wonder the species survived as long as it did.
Dr. Grant: Well, that's rather disappointing. Still, it's probably for the best. Could you imagine how insane it'd be to keep them around if they were predatory AND smart?
Muldoon: I know, right?
 
I really liked the film and I'm not going to nitpick it...........but if I did, my main gripe would be the deal of turning raptors into bloodhounds. I mean, the raptor is basically a cross between an ostrich and an alligator, and I don't think you can really train either of those.......well, maybe the ostrich part a little bit, but not much I would imagine.
Agreed but could train the ostrich gator to eat and hunt but doubt it would follow anything but the sound of the dinner bell.
 
Agreed but could train the ostrich gator to eat and hunt but doubt it would follow anything but the sound of the dinner bell.

If you were talking about actual raptors, yes.

However, the Jurassic Park verse raptors are canonically extremely intelligent, supposedly on the same order of intelligence as higher mammals like dolphins, whales, and primates, perhaps even humans.
 
If you were talking about actual raptors, yes.

However, the Jurassic Park verse raptors are canonically extremely intelligent, supposedly on the same order of intelligence as higher mammals like dolphins, whales, and primates, perhaps even humans.

Definitely around human level because all intelligent animals in Hollywood have human level intelligence and somehow know things that no animal would know no matter how intelligent they were. Things like raptors knowing how to work door handles, and the I-Rex somehow knowing that its pen is monitored with thermal cameras or even knowing what a thermal camera is.
 
Definitely around human level because all intelligent animals in Hollywood have human level intelligence and somehow know things that no animal would know no matter how intelligent they were. Things like raptors knowing how to work door handles, and the I-Rex somehow knowing that its pen is monitored with thermal cameras or even knowing what a thermal camera is.

Well Dromaeosaurids (the family that raptors come from) are known to have an extremely high brain to body ratio, second only to Troodontids. However, it's believed that despite the overall size of the brain case, the dromaeosaurid brain wasn't particularly well developed, giving the raptor an approximate intelligence level of an ostrich. Remember, though, that an animal only needs to be as intelligent as it takes to survive, so the intelligence level of an ostrich was genius-level for the time, again only surpassed by the troodontids.

However, the higher intelligence (along with other traits such as general appearance, behavior, and markings) can be somewhat explained away by something that Wu said when talking to Masrani: "Nothing in Jurassic World is natural, we have always filled gaps in the genome with the DNA of other animals. And if the genetic code was pure, many of them would look quite different. But you didn't ask for reality, you asked for more teeth."

Basically, taking the shortcut of using modern DNA from tree frogs, cuttlefish, corvids, iguanas, etc, can explain many of the behaviors and appearances seen in the movies differ from what we now know, a prime example of which was the currently accepted notion that many raptors were probably feathered, a notion that has been borne out in the fossil record.

According to Park Pedia, here's the genetic breakdown of a few of Jurassic World's dinosaurs, most of which were made using the standard method of splicing in DNA from existing species:

The Raptor Squad is primarily Velociraptor DNA, but with a few extras thrown in to fill in gaps:
Blue: Black-Throated Monitor
Charlie: Green Iguana
Delta: unspecified avian DNA
Echo: unpecified
It's also assumed that they have tree frog DNA to help them adjust to a tropical climate.

Rexy is a rather unique specimen. Although there's no information on what was used to fill in the gaps (though whatever it was dulled her sense of sight, as a T-Rex is estimated to have had keener vision than a hawk), she is extremely long-lived compared to estimates on carnivore lifespans. A study of "Sue," the tyrannosaur skeletal remains at the Field Museum in Chicago, estimate that she died at about age 28 or 29 and had reached full adulthood and stopped growing around age 20. She is also amongst the oldest specimens found.

According to Park Pedia, Rexy was born on Isla Sorna (like all of Jurassic Park's initial exhibits) in 1989 or 1990. That would have made her 3 years old at the time of the original incident at Jurassic Park in 1993. One can deduce that Rexy was also subjected to an artificial rapid growth rate like the Indominus, because a three year old Rex would still be considered tiny (the fossilized remains of a 2 year old tyrannosaur is estimated to have weighed about 70 pounds in life) compared to what we saw on the screen, which was a full grown adult. Given the average lifespan after adulthood was probably 5-10 years (based on fossil records), it's quite remarkable that has Rexy has survived and thrived for 22 years, 9-12 of which were spent roaming free (Jurassic World began construction in 2002 and opened in 2005, meaning Rexy was recaptured sometime in that time frame). Not only that, but it's not like she was a frail old lady either. She was still in her prime and fully capable of taking on the Indominus, a hybrid designed solely to be a living weapon. I don't know what they put in Rexy's DNA cocktail, but I'd like some, please.

Now the Indominus is a different story entirely. She was a true hybrid animal, mixing several types of predator DNA to make a living weapon, amongst them Tyrannosaurus, Velociraptor, Carnotaurus, Giganotosaurus, Majungasaurus, Rugops, and Therizinosaurus, as well as modern animals like cuttlefish and an unspecified species of tree frog. Although the rationale for creating her was to renew public interest in Jurassic World, in reality, she was created by Wu for Vic Hoskins and his idiotic dream of using dinosaurs to fight wars. That's why he was so eager to pit the raptors against the Indominus. It wasn't to stop its rampage and take it out (he knew that based on its DNA makeup, anything short of a direct artillery strike would just make it angry). His plan was to pit the two species against one another and test their mettle. Whichever one survived would become his new war toy. He just didn't count on them teaming up against his men.
 
Well Dromaeosaurids (the family that raptors come from) are known to have an extremely high brain to body ratio, second only to Troodontids. However, it's believed that despite the overall size of the brain case, the dromaeosaurid brain wasn't particularly well developed, giving the raptor an approximate intelligence level of an ostrich. Remember, though, that an animal only needs to be as intelligent as it takes to survive, so the intelligence level of an ostrich was genius-level for the time, again only surpassed by the troodontids.

My problem wasn't that they were smart, just that they were too smart. Intelligence does not equate knowledge which is the fundamental mistake that Hollywood always makes when portraying smart animals. Just because an animal, or even a human for that matter, is smart does not necessarily they know everything, it just means that they're capable of learning and understanding lots of things but if you raised a genius in isolation and never taught them anything they wouldn't know anything about even basic math, much less advanced trigonometry, quantum physics, etc. This is the problem that Hollywood has when portraying highly intelligent animals, they show them doing things that they should have no knowledge of, intelligent or not they can't know things they don't know about. A highly intelligent raptor would be able to figure out door knobs if they've observed people using them but unless they've done so they'd have no idea of what a door knob is and does, Likewise the I-Rex and its thermal camo, how did it know that there were thermal cams in its enclosure? I don't think that it ever saw itself on the thermal cams and even if it did, and even if it did, would it make the correlation or would it just see a strange image of itself in a rainbow of colors?
 
This thread is more than 8 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

  1. This thread hasn't been active in some time. A new post in this thread might not contribute constructively to this discussion after so long.
If you wish to reply despite these issues, check the box below before replying.
Be aware that malicious compliance may result in more severe penalties.
Back
Top