Support NeoGAF

[Demoncarnotaur]

Obviously, some things and opinions are outdated in the OP. Jurassic World is a return to form, bringing the classic Jurassic Park designs back to Isla Nublar. However, I still think there is room for new species with plumage.

It wouldn't be that hard to have some of these:

running amongst these:

---
2013 THREAD:

Recently announced Jurassic Park 4 director Colin Trevorrow took to twitter to share his first words on the movie:

As such, many have not taken kindly to this approach, alienating the majority of the scientific community.

Brian Switek has spoken out: "A Velociraptor Without Feathers Isn’t a Velociraptor"

Jurassic Park is the greatest dinosaur movie of all time. Aside from being an exceptionally entertaining adventure, the film introduced audiences to dinosaurs that had never been seen before – hybrids of new science and bleeding-edge special effects techniques. The active, alert, and clever dinosaurs that paleontologists had recently pieced together were revived by way of exquisite puppetry and computer imagery, instantly replacing the old images of dinosaurs as swamp-dwelling dullards. Despite the various scientific nitpicks and some artistic license overreach – let’s not talk about the “Spitter” - Jurassic Park showed how science and cinema could collaborate to create something truly majestic. That’s why it’s so disappointing to hear the the next Jurassic Park sequel is going to turn its back on a critical aspect of dinosaur lives. In Jurassic Park 4, the film’s director has stated, there will be no feathery dinosaurs.

...

I have no idea what dinosaurs are due to appear in Jurassic Park 4. I wish that I did. But if Velociraptor and Tyrannosaurus are reprising their roles, these dinosaurs should certainly have some kind of plumage. That comes right from fossil evidence and evolutionary logic. But this is about more than just visuals. A blockbuster summer film has the opportunity to introduce audiences to dinosaurs as have never been seen before on the big screen while simultaneously throwing some much-needed support to evolution by visualizing one of the critical traits that connects avian and non-avian dinosaurs. And speaking as an unabashed dinosaur fan myself, a dinosaur bearing fuzz, feathers, or quills is so much stranger and more wonderful than yet another olive green, scaly monstrosity. Hollywood, let paleontologists help you push the boundaries of fantastic dinosaurs.

Franchise purists might point out that Trevorrow’s plan is in the spirit of the original Jurassic Park. Nobody loves a retcon. But the franchise has already changed its dinosaurs several times with no explanation. The first sequel introduced new color palettes for the dinosaurs, as did the third film. (Not to mention the fact that Jurassic Park III raises the mystery of why Site B contains species that InGen didn’t clone, and never actually resolves this point.) If the dinosaurs are changing from film to film to start with, why not take a jump and show audiences something they have never witnessed before?

....

We shouldn’t feel bound by what audiences are comfortable with. I’ve never seen a major feature create a truly well-done, scary feathered dinosaur, mostly because they have been afraid to commit to science that differs from our cherished childhood imagery of what dinosaurs were. But if the creators of the original Jurassic Park showed the same fealty to old dinosaurs – tail-dragging, lumbering idiots – then the film might not have had the major cultural impact that it did. It’s time to take a calculated risk and update Jurassic Park‘s dinosaurs.

....

Much more at the link: http://phenomena.nationalgeographic...iraptor-without-feathers-isnt-a-velociraptor/

Mark Witton has also spoken out: The 'no feathers' Jurassic Park tweet: statement of intent, or simply ruffling feathers?

No surprise about what this post will cover: the announcement by Jurassic Park IV director Colin Trevorrow that his new JP instalment will not feature feathered dinosaurs (unlike the new image, above, which features a fully feathered Dromaeosaurus raiding a giant azhdarchid nest). Like many folks in the palaeoblogsphere, my reaction to this hasn't been particularly positive. It reeks of an overlooked opportunity to bring the dinosaur-bird themes of the first movie full circle, jars with overwhelming evidence that some JP dinosaur stars were feathered, and misses an terrific chance to affirm modern concepts of dinosaur palaeobiology with a wide audience. The JP franchise would also probably benefit far more from featuring feathery species than it will from maintaining its flimsy creature design continuity (see Laelaps for more on this), it not really deviating from 'people being chased by dinosaurs' plots the one hour mark of the first film. As someone with an interest in science education, I find broader concepts to be upset about as well here. Feathering dinosaurs in JP IV would demonstrate the incremental processes through which science works, highlighting the way in which the dromaeosaurs of the series became progressively more feathered as the dinosaur bird link was cemented by mounting evidence*. There's obvious utility with this movie being a basis for teaching concepts of evolution, too. And yes yes yes, I know this movie isn't being made to educate people, but I genuinely think featuring feathered designs would be of advantage to many.

.....

More at the link: http://markwitton-com.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-no-feathers-jurassic-park-tweet.html


-----

Now, honestly, as much as I am for preserving canon in movies, Jurassic Park has never been too consistent. I would say the most consistent design would be that of the Tyrannosaurus, and I would be fine if she remains untouched.. As for the other returning dinosaurs, particularly Velociraptor? This rubs me the wrong way. (Read next line- I am ok with the Raptors now) Perhaps this movie will be a direct sequel to the first film, bringing the classic Velociraptor back to the screen.. I may be able to embrace that more than a new redesign that for baffling reasons excludes feathers. And what of the inevitable numerous newcomers to Jurassic Park? Why should they remain unfeathered? Embracing current science is a critical aspect of Jurassic Parks DNA- it is the foundation the series was built upon. Dinosaurs were feathered, we know this. To ignore it entirely you might as well not make a Jurassic Park film. Fine. Embrace the canon, I understand that. But bring the science in with new species.

To avoid rambling on and on Ill just link my blog entry on this: http://jurassichappenings.blogspot.com/2013/03/my-thoughts-on-jurassic-park-4-and-its.html

But basically, if you are a fan of science and dinosaurs, then you should embrace, support and want feathered dinosaurs in JP4. Dinosaurs in pop culture really define what many think and expect out of dinosaurs.. embracing modern science in big movies helps the public perception more than a museum could ever dream of. By doing so,it will bring more people to museums and keep our museums alive, and thus funding paleontologists. This is a great opportunity to bring modern dinosaur science mainstream, and possibly spark another dinosaur revolution of sorts.

 

[Count Dookkake]

Colin don't give a pluck.

 

[BertramCooper]

Tackling the big issues first, huh Colin?

This film will be a glorious disaster. I can't wait.

 

[Spider from Mars]

That really ruffled my feathers

 

[TUSR]

My feathers aren't ruffled over this.

 

[cdyhybrid]

I want feathers so I can drink the tears of anguish from people stuck in the past.

They had feathers, deal with it.

 

[pants]

lol, no thanks #teamfeathers, go watch the discovery channel. The series has already established featherless dinosaurs and I prefer them to stick to in universe canon #teamnaked

 

[ProfessorLobo]

That'd be cool but the CG would be hell.

 

[Hazanko]

I want some damn feathers on my dinosaurs.

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

Yeah no feathers is disappointing, but then I don't really have high hopes for this movie which will be hitting in just over 12 months and has yet to start rolling.

 

[shinobi602]

Chance of being good movie +1

 

[Poyunch]

I'm not down with this.

 

[sk3]

The way it is meant to be. Damn revisionist scientists! No feathers!

 

[Mindwipe]

No gun wielding, talking, raptor soldiers - no deal.

 

[3N16MA]

Good to hear. Keep those feathers away from my childhood.

 

[DJ_Lae]

Good.

I refuse to submit to the idea that dinosaurs had feathers.

 

[Real Hero]

I will never watch a Jurrasic park film that has feathered dinos in it

 

[robertsan21]

I find this stupid. why make a film about dino´s when they clearly are not doing them justice by not including feathers.

 

[WorriedCitizen]

 

[maquiladora]

Good. I don't want feathers on my fictional dinosaurs.

 

[Darklord]

"Aren't they meant to have feathers?"
"The DNA cloning process is complicated, not everything is 100%, these Dinosaurs are featherless. Bald if you will."

Done, feathers written out of JP forever.

 

[snacknuts]

Colin don't give a pluck.

You're better than this.

 

[Cow Mengde]

The series has already established featherless dinosaurs and I prefer them to stick to in universe canon

LOL, Jurassic Park canon. If one thing is consistent in the JP universe is that it's not consistent.

 

[jmdajr]

#FAIL

 

[King of the Potato People]

I just hope the film is good.

 

[ElectricBlue187]

Feathers are lame and not scary. Extinction to feathered dinosaurs!

 

[Beaulieu]

I'm boycotting that shit.
denying truth, esp in science, is such an anti-progress behavior.
Don't you want man and society at large to progress ? ffs

lol, no thanks #teamfeathers, go watch the discovery channel. The series has already established featherless dinosaurs and I prefer them to stick to in universe canon #teamnaked

congratz, you are fuckin stupid !

 

[gcubed]

the movie will be better off. Feathers are bullshit

 

[Demoncarnotaur]

lol, no thanks #teamfeathers, go watch the discovery channel. The series has already established featherless dinosaurs and I prefer them to stick to in universe canon #teamnaked

?

The series has established constantly changing designs and proto-feathers. The series was created to embrace modern paleoscience.

LOL, Jurassic Park canon. If one thing is consistent in the JP universe is that it's not consistent.

Yup, the only thing consistent has been the T-Rex.

 

[Hobbestetrician]

Why do people hate the fact that dinosaurs had feathers? Just hate having to change your thoughts on something? Care more about your childhood ideas than actual facts? Do you get riled up whenever someone says Santa Claus isn't real?

I think it makes them cooler.

 

[Az]

I ain't even mad.

 

[Kurita]

Some people are getting mad over stupid things.
I don't care if they have feathers or not.

 

[Grimsen]

No gun wielding, talking, raptor soldiers - no deal.

Why have guns when you can have feathers?

The plume is mightier than the sword.

 

[PjotrStroganov]

JP was one of the first movies that showed dinosaurs in a realistic and convincing way. It was quit groundbreaking in that respect. I would have liked this movie to be the same. Show those feathers in an awesome and believable way.

 

[Majine]

It would be cool if they somehow commented it in the movie, like "This is a special no feathers-breed of them. We didn't have the DNA sauce or some shit".

 

[TedNindo]

At this point I consider Jurassic Park enough its own universe. That and big chickens don't scare me as much...

 

[pants]

?

That dino was only excited.

Additional comments on how I feel about no feathers:

 

[SCULLIBUNDO]

"Aren't they meant to have feathers?"
"The DNA cloning process is complicated, not everything is 100%, these Dinosaurs are featherless. Bald if you will."

Done, feathers written out of JP forever.

Thanks, Damon.

 

[endresults]

They never had feathers in the movies, so why would they retcon that shit?

We've understood for decades the means of energy utilization in humans, but it doesn't stop the 100 zombie movies/shows a year from glossing over the fact that the zombies' muscles would lock up in minutes without a working metabolism to sustain them.

It's fiction, yo. Just roll with it.

 

[DirtyManos]

No feathers is fine with me.

A six foot turkey just isn't scary, cmon people!

 

[shinobi602]

Why do people hate the fact that dinosaurs had feathers? Just hate having to change your thoughts on something? Care more about your childhood ideas than actual facts? Do you get riled up whenever someone says Santa Claus isn't real?

I think it makes them cooler.

To be realistic I couldn't care less lol. I used to be obsessed with dinosaurs when I was young, wanted to be a paleontologist so bad.

Anyone got any links to studies about feathers on dinosaurs? I find it difficult to believe that you can tell a 65 million year old skeleton had feathers. Hell, I don't even know how you can tell a chicken had feathers just from its skeleton.

 

[LQX]

Wow, would have loved to see a new look.

 

[Everdred]

I wish feathers were in, just to expose people to the idea.

 

[Demoncarnotaur]

JP was one of the first movies that showed dinosaurs in a realistic and convincing way. It was quit groundbreaking in that respect. I would have liked this movie to be the same. Show those feathers in an awesome and believable way.

Bingo.

I want to see some real fucking dinosaurs that wow me the way the first JP did.


Hell, Im fine with them keeping the original designs bald, but embrace the fucking feathers and science somewhere in the movie. Ugh, this will set the public perception of dinosaurs back big time.

 

[chickdigger802]

even the newest power rangers (super sentai) has the t rex with feathers.

 

[Currygan]

quite surprised there's people who actually care about this

 

[Cow Mengde]

They never had feathers in the movies, so why would they retcon that shit?

We've understood for decades the means of energy utilization in humans, but it doesn't stop the 100 zombie movies/shows a year from glossing over the fact that the zombies' muscles would lock up in minutes without a working metabolism to sustain them.

It's fiction, yo. Just roll with it.

Jurassic Park isn't just fiction. It damaged science and knowledge. People "learn" by watching movies. It took JP to change the perception of dinosaurs to the public, while paleontologists as early as the late 60s have been changing their views.

 

[Hoo-doo]

This is like denying evolution.

0/10, will not watch.

 

[Goro Majima]

To be realistic I couldn't care less lol. I used to be obsessed with dinosaurs when I was young, wanted to be a paleontologist so bad.

Anyone got any links to studies about feathers on dinosaurs? I find it difficult to believe that you can tell a 65 million year old skeleton had feathers. Hell, I don't even know how you can tell a chicken had feathers just from its skeleton.

It's like we had the same childhood!

Yeah is the whole "dinosaurs have feathers" one of those things that can be reversed in the future? Or downgraded to "well, we don't know which ones had feathers or not"?

 

[Charles Foster Kane]

I would have liked feathers. They could have been pretty cool and look more beautiful (besides being a bit more accurate).