If dinosaurs were acknowledged to be alive and just casually kept in captivity, it would cost about twice more than a normal zoo ticket. Although at debut and the first years it would definitely be something worth thousands of dollars just to see them
Zoos don't operate from ticket sales, it's all endowments, charitable donations or government/research grants. They typically make more from the gift shop than they do the box office.
Most zoos would shut down immediately if they had to operate from admission, and the prices would skyrocket to even try. Comparing something like JP to how zoos operate is moronic, zoo's have shit business models, InGen had a real business plan for the park.
One t-rex alone would be thousands of dollars a day just feeding it.
Jurassic Park tickets being $5k each is lowballing, considering how much morons pay for Disney Cruises, that are just normal cruises with some Disney decorations. Live dinosaurs? 10k, minimum. Sky is the limit. That's why Genarro had such a big erection, that place would have made them trillions in the first couple of years.
It wouldn't be thousands. It wouldn't be cheap, but not thousands. It would be cheaper overall to instead of just a park, beginning a dinosaur meat ranch. That way you have enough money and resources to keep carnivores and herbivores fed. You think anyone will pass up a t.rex burger? Hell no
It would be thousands, moron. Try to control your autism. It would only be cheap in your autistic fantasy where you go to see it and that blonde Hammond chick falls in love with your ugly ass.
My parents told me they were getting divorced while I was watching Jurassic Park 3 and the film disappointed me more than that conversation did.
Sick cover though
that was something dominion was lacking, actual battle wounds on the dino's when they where fighting.
rexy and giga bite each other, get slammed around walls or the ground.
and not a scratch on them.
even the first jurassic world showed blood and wounds.
the textures on the dinosaurs look outdated up close yet this scene still looks so realistic. the thing that really takes me out of it in the World films is how overly animated the dinosaurs usually are, and they look like they're glistening and popping out of the screen.
Do you prefer the book’s Jurassic Park that focused on the brutal violence and comeuppance of humans trying to control nature of the awe and wonder that Spielberg portrayed?
I love the movie, but the book feels very different to me. When they’re describing how the raptors move like birds, I could imagine them hoping back and forth, heads darting a bit, and considered how crabs feel around seagulls and it freaked me out. That’s one of the better things the book did, conveyed the humans still thinking they were in control until they realize they have minutes until they no longer have any control whatsoever.
No. The dinosaurs were WAY worse. They were not 90s dinosaurs, or 80s, or 70s, or even 60s. They were just the "they breathed fire and wrestled animals to death" dinosaurs but with bird features assigned to them.
So they were these big LIZARDS with forked tongues and poison slime and smelled terrible. And they kept applying EVERYTHING from EVERY relative to them. They move like birds, they swim like crocs, they reproduce like frogs, they look like lizards, they hoot like owls. Everything. The dinosaurs were the worst part of the book. Seriously. Best part of the movie, worst part of the book. The t.rex was constantly hunting them down even though it ate like 5 sauropods in 3 days, the raptors were OBSESSED with killing the humans, going so far as to literally chewing through like 5 STEEL bars just to get to them. The book was good in suspense and describing the land. He likes to really detail whatever science shit he's into, which is fine, I understand it. He sure fricking hates scientists, like a lot. He IS right about unearned knowledge being used wrong and he IS right about the earth being fine no matter what we do
Why wouldn’t the dinosaurs be like that?
In fact, what if they acted like that because they couldn’t actually get any dinosaur DNA and instead were just gene-splicing entirely new species?
This is the wrong kind of reply. Uninformed, assuming. Even if correct, you're wrong on principal. Do not stick your dick into this discussion if you haven't read the book.
Whenever you see something, but don't know anything about it, don't comment on it. Seriously, even if it turns out you're right, you're wrong by virtue of being a Black person.
there are 2 rexes in the book. an adult and a juvenile.
raptors where pure psycho's that even killed and ate their own babies
I know. They were chased by the big one and it tried to use it's lizard tongue to grab timmy
Crickton literally made things up for the book, like Diplos being venomous, and the size of compies. Nobody knows what any of them really looked like or moved, but we can conjecture. Crickton just made it up.
The movies are enjoyable, but if you scratch the surface it doesn't take long to find out how bullshit it really is. The actual scientists are still slap fighting over T-rex being apex predator or scavenger, ffs.
>The actual scientists are still slap fighting over T-rex being apex predator or scavenger
This has never been true. One Black person suggested it and the news ran with it and now a lot of people think it's a scavenger. Every animal scavenges if they need to, but the t.rex is not and never was a scavenger. That much is certain. It is built to hunt, eyes pointing straight ahead with senses so good it could find pray miles away. They're literally built to counter trikes, trikes being built to counter rexes. The fact this relationship exists ALONE proves it's not a scavenger, and thankfully that's not all the evidence we have
it's only jack horner who keeps pushing the "t-rex was nothing more then a weak scavenger' theory
and he's the consultant for the jp movies.
his reasoning for spino winning in jp was "oh it's bigger, thats why it wins" while ignoring the not accurate design, and that spino had a weak jaw and bite force.
Everyone goes on and on about utahraptor. I prefer the dakotaraptor. Raptors are built for speed. They're sleek. That's why velociraptors are cool. The utahraptor is too different. It's built for power, which is cool, but the dakotaraptor keeps the sleek frame while still being big
Crickton literally made things up for the book, like Diplos being venomous, and the size of compies. Nobody knows what any of them really looked like or moved, but we can conjecture. Crickton just made it up.
The movies are enjoyable, but if you scratch the surface it doesn't take long to find out how bullshit it really is. The actual scientists are still slap fighting over T-rex being apex predator or scavenger, ffs.
velociraptors were a generic name for all those fast creatures, paleonotlogists just changed the name so they can do "akshually the movie is wrong"
For it being the first movie to ever portray realistic looking dinosaurs, Jurassic Park definitely took the right approach by focusing on the wonder of dinosaurs and rather than making it a horror movie.
As long as you're not selling it, you can do whatever you want to a car. Lots of people did that, never heard of anyone getting any attention from Universal.
Disney, they'd sue. Their lawyers work harder than the park peons.
you can make your car however you want as long as you own it. It's your private property.
If you used it as part of some business or were selling it at merchandise you could get in trouble. Or if you write inflammatory shit on it (could get arrested for public disturbances)
I highly doubt any company can do shit about what you decide to decorate your car with, it's yours. Government laws and regulations about what you can do with your car is a different story, but if I saw people driving it in public then I assume it's legal. Disney was troubling a family about a mickey mouse tombstone or something for their dead child, but that makes more sense legally because it's permanently set in place in a public area.
the guys at blu-ray.com said that it's an older, DNR'd master with wrong colors
Really? That sucks. In an age when Z-grade flicks are getting lavish restorations by boutique labels, you'd think the major studios could put some love into their restorations of big hits. Kinda pisses me off. Still, in all honesty I'll probably not be able to see a difference.
Most of the master reels are in bad shape, and the cost of restoration is way more than what they'd recoup in sales.
And don't even "But dey need to preseve muh kino" - Hollywood doesn't fricking care, if it doesn't make them money. At all. They'll let a classic movie rot in a warehouse if they can't sell more copies to cover the cost to get someone to schlep in there to find it.
>a rich jap paid her for a private bathing suit photo op >only 2 of the photo's where ever released public >she is a painter, and the majority of her paintings involve naked girls and women
>character aged up for movie >grant loves kids but doesn't in the movie specifically so Ellie can hook him up with her >Ellie watches smugly as hebe grabs grant and won't let go >he grabs her breasts and her nipples are hard >he grabs her ass
What was up with that
It's not bait. Scaled design evoke the idea that these are man made theme park monsters; giant frog chimeras with characteristics from modern day reptiles to make them feel more exotic but familiar.
There are also a ton of scales to be chosen from in design where feathers are limited.
No I'm ignoring you completely. You can't start with dumb as frick bait and then try to be rational and try to hide the fact you started with a shitpost.
I'm not taking your bait. We're not having this dumb argument. Go find another thread to get attention in
2 years ago
Anonymous
There's no bait and you aren't ignoring me at all.
You know I'm right.
You can still do plenty with feathers but I like the idea of the newer generations of Ingenosaurs showing more amphibian and lizard traits. Imagine Raptor toads that can stick to walls or Chameleon tongued dinosaurs picking off people from treelines.
What I'm saying is that it's not a coincidence that females reach sexual maturity a decade sooner than males and that currently sexually mature males are restricted to females who have passed their expiration date and whos eggs have begun to degrade
They are everywhere now
Awe shots no longer make much sense
Maybe if they spot dinosaurs caring for each other or people or something else it would make sense.
I just wonder what the inevitable excuse to return to one of the parks will be
I find it weird how the World movies try to make a statement about corporatocracy and reboots but they never actually say anything and end up trying to have their cake as well. Everything's so ADD, I hate it.
>be lizard >want to fly >lizard too fricking stupid to fly >dinosaurs figured out flying before they were even dinosaurs, and then figured it out again with feathers >lizard try hard to fly over 200 million years >lizard finally fly 7 times, each time, wing was on legs
Why are lizards so fricking stupid guys? Seriously every time they figure out flight, their back legs have wings
Feathered dinos look so much better. And that Japanese animation also proves they can look much scarier. So why does Hollywood refuse to show feathers?
Wu said that in the BOOK from the 80s. It just took that long for the movies to reference it
Feathered dinos look so much better. And that Japanese animation also proves they can look much scarier. So why does Hollywood refuse to show feathers?
Don't start Black person. I know it's you shitposter just looking for another avenue into the fight between scales and feathers. I'm still not gonna fall for it. Go find attention somewhere else.
this has always been a gay argument. there were creative liberties when it comes to things like the dilophosaurus and calling the raptors velociraptors even though they're way too big, but the dinosaurs in the first film were still designed to look like what we believed the dinosaurs looked like at the time. it's not like the missing DNA made them look nothing like the dinosaurs they were supposed to be. you're basing it on entirely on the books, which don't even have pictures of the dinosaurs.
Everyone in that movie deserved to be punched. I thought The Lost World already went overboard with "these characters actually have negative IQ and act moronic but ignore that and look at the dinos" but this was nothing compared to JP3.
>turns 360 and walks away
I would have too knowing how bad things went there am I right?
But then you're just walking inside
He was on an island to begin with.
It's so silly it became kino
Severely underrated post.
the great debate
It was rude of him. But considering he gave them a tropical vacation and three years of funding, I guess a bottle of shampagan was worth it.
>shampagan
How much would Jurassic Park tickets cost in real life?
$5,000 per adult, $2,500 per child
that's Galaxy Edge money
That's a big over-sized merch cart.
10,000 a day, and people will pay it.
It should be something everybody can enjoy.
No, rich people pay more for useless shit.
We will have a coupon day
Doesn't matter, people would spare no expense
>shriviled old manlet entrepreneur hands typed this post
If dinosaurs were acknowledged to be alive and just casually kept in captivity, it would cost about twice more than a normal zoo ticket. Although at debut and the first years it would definitely be something worth thousands of dollars just to see them
Zoos don't operate from ticket sales, it's all endowments, charitable donations or government/research grants. They typically make more from the gift shop than they do the box office.
Most zoos would shut down immediately if they had to operate from admission, and the prices would skyrocket to even try. Comparing something like JP to how zoos operate is moronic, zoo's have shit business models, InGen had a real business plan for the park.
One t-rex alone would be thousands of dollars a day just feeding it.
Jurassic Park tickets being $5k each is lowballing, considering how much morons pay for Disney Cruises, that are just normal cruises with some Disney decorations. Live dinosaurs? 10k, minimum. Sky is the limit. That's why Genarro had such a big erection, that place would have made them trillions in the first couple of years.
It wouldn't be thousands. It wouldn't be cheap, but not thousands. It would be cheaper overall to instead of just a park, beginning a dinosaur meat ranch. That way you have enough money and resources to keep carnivores and herbivores fed. You think anyone will pass up a t.rex burger? Hell no
It would be thousands, moron. Try to control your autism. It would only be cheap in your autistic fantasy where you go to see it and that blonde Hammond chick falls in love with your ugly ass.
>EEEUUUURRRHAHHA HRAH HRAH
My parents told me they were getting divorced while I was watching Jurassic Park 3 and the film disappointed me more than that conversation did.
Sick cover though
>I have decided not to endorse your park
K I N O
I
N
O
remember when Spielberg knew how to make kino?
I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s been full on senilepilled since finishing Lincoln.
>when dinosaurs ruled the earth
Good movie.
do they?
It was a different time.
While I think it's cool as shit they got a monitor lizard & a baby alligator to fight, still poor lizards 🙁
>dinosaurs
>hot chicks in bikini
absolute kino
you just KNOW
that was something dominion was lacking, actual battle wounds on the dino's when they where fighting.
rexy and giga bite each other, get slammed around walls or the ground.
and not a scratch on them.
even the first jurassic world showed blood and wounds.
because they actually gave a shit back then
To be fair
Battle wounds can end up looking cartoony sometimes
indominus rex got fricked up and wounded with a piece of steel stuck on it's back after rexy body slammed him through a building.
Considering how old this movie is, the CGI aged pretty well. Modern Marvel movies would make this scene look exactly the same, probably even worse
still one of the coolest shots in any movie ever
the textures on the dinosaurs look outdated up close yet this scene still looks so realistic. the thing that really takes me out of it in the World films is how overly animated the dinosaurs usually are, and they look like they're glistening and popping out of the screen.
The cg looks good for the time, but not realistic. Don't get those 2 confused
They used stop-motion animation puppets to animate the computer dinosaur. Looked something like this. That's why the motion looks so good
>nail carnotaurus design in JW2
>frick up giganotosaurus one movie later
why?
No idea. Their design for Giga is so trash it beggars belief.
Do you prefer the book’s Jurassic Park that focused on the brutal violence and comeuppance of humans trying to control nature of the awe and wonder that Spielberg portrayed?
I love the movie, but the book feels very different to me. When they’re describing how the raptors move like birds, I could imagine them hoping back and forth, heads darting a bit, and considered how crabs feel around seagulls and it freaked me out. That’s one of the better things the book did, conveyed the humans still thinking they were in control until they realize they have minutes until they no longer have any control whatsoever.
No. The dinosaurs were WAY worse. They were not 90s dinosaurs, or 80s, or 70s, or even 60s. They were just the "they breathed fire and wrestled animals to death" dinosaurs but with bird features assigned to them.
So they were these big LIZARDS with forked tongues and poison slime and smelled terrible. And they kept applying EVERYTHING from EVERY relative to them. They move like birds, they swim like crocs, they reproduce like frogs, they look like lizards, they hoot like owls. Everything. The dinosaurs were the worst part of the book. Seriously. Best part of the movie, worst part of the book. The t.rex was constantly hunting them down even though it ate like 5 sauropods in 3 days, the raptors were OBSESSED with killing the humans, going so far as to literally chewing through like 5 STEEL bars just to get to them. The book was good in suspense and describing the land. He likes to really detail whatever science shit he's into, which is fine, I understand it. He sure fricking hates scientists, like a lot. He IS right about unearned knowledge being used wrong and he IS right about the earth being fine no matter what we do
Why wouldn’t the dinosaurs be like that?
In fact, what if they acted like that because they couldn’t actually get any dinosaur DNA and instead were just gene-splicing entirely new species?
This is the wrong kind of reply. Uninformed, assuming. Even if correct, you're wrong on principal. Do not stick your dick into this discussion if you haven't read the book.
Whenever you see something, but don't know anything about it, don't comment on it. Seriously, even if it turns out you're right, you're wrong by virtue of being a Black person.
I know. They were chased by the big one and it tried to use it's lizard tongue to grab timmy
they used the tongue bit in lost world
They did? I don't remember that
there are 2 rexes in the book. an adult and a juvenile.
raptors where pure psycho's that even killed and ate their own babies
Crickton literally made things up for the book, like Diplos being venomous, and the size of compies. Nobody knows what any of them really looked like or moved, but we can conjecture. Crickton just made it up.
The movies are enjoyable, but if you scratch the surface it doesn't take long to find out how bullshit it really is. The actual scientists are still slap fighting over T-rex being apex predator or scavenger, ffs.
>The actual scientists are still slap fighting over T-rex being apex predator or scavenger
This has never been true. One Black person suggested it and the news ran with it and now a lot of people think it's a scavenger. Every animal scavenges if they need to, but the t.rex is not and never was a scavenger. That much is certain. It is built to hunt, eyes pointing straight ahead with senses so good it could find pray miles away. They're literally built to counter trikes, trikes being built to counter rexes. The fact this relationship exists ALONE proves it's not a scavenger, and thankfully that's not all the evidence we have
it's only jack horner who keeps pushing the "t-rex was nothing more then a weak scavenger' theory
and he's the consultant for the jp movies.
his reasoning for spino winning in jp was "oh it's bigger, thats why it wins" while ignoring the not accurate design, and that spino had a weak jaw and bite force.
>names them velociraptor, while meaning Deinonychus.
>makes them far bigger
>utah raptor gets discovered after the first JP movie comes out
Everyone goes on and on about utahraptor. I prefer the dakotaraptor. Raptors are built for speed. They're sleek. That's why velociraptors are cool. The utahraptor is too different. It's built for power, which is cool, but the dakotaraptor keeps the sleek frame while still being big
i preffer microraptor
That's literally my mom's bird
velociraptors were a generic name for all those fast creatures, paleonotlogists just changed the name so they can do "akshually the movie is wrong"
For it being the first movie to ever portray realistic looking dinosaurs, Jurassic Park definitely took the right approach by focusing on the wonder of dinosaurs and rather than making it a horror movie.
John Hammond now has a scottish accent.
Mandela gays are always right.
I never cared for the Ford, I was always about the Jeep.
?t=540
If no expense was truly spared
I've seen these cars multiple times in person. Once in a costco parking lot, once on the road. Don't remember the rest.
is it legal to have them look like the jp cars? or does universal studio's simply allow it?
As long as you're not selling it, you can do whatever you want to a car. Lots of people did that, never heard of anyone getting any attention from Universal.
Disney, they'd sue. Their lawyers work harder than the park peons.
you can make your car however you want as long as you own it. It's your private property.
If you used it as part of some business or were selling it at merchandise you could get in trouble. Or if you write inflammatory shit on it (could get arrested for public disturbances)
I highly doubt any company can do shit about what you decide to decorate your car with, it's yours. Government laws and regulations about what you can do with your car is a different story, but if I saw people driving it in public then I assume it's legal. Disney was troubling a family about a mickey mouse tombstone or something for their dead child, but that makes more sense legally because it's permanently set in place in a public area.
Life finds a way?
Unnecessarily gendered things
Sex. Gender is fake.
So was it the mama or the dad that got sent back to San Diego? I forget
shut up, nerd ass homosexual
What was his problem?
>Latino
>israeli
>Lawyer
The guy never had a chance.
When you gotta go you gotta go
>tfw just bought the OG Jurassic Park on 4K
nice
thanks m8
Really? That sucks. In an age when Z-grade flicks are getting lavish restorations by boutique labels, you'd think the major studios could put some love into their restorations of big hits. Kinda pisses me off. Still, in all honesty I'll probably not be able to see a difference.
yeah, it sucks. terminator 2 is the worst offender
Most of the master reels are in bad shape, and the cost of restoration is way more than what they'd recoup in sales.
And don't even "But dey need to preseve muh kino" - Hollywood doesn't fricking care, if it doesn't make them money. At all. They'll let a classic movie rot in a warehouse if they can't sell more copies to cover the cost to get someone to schlep in there to find it.
the guys at blu-ray.com said that it's an older, DNR'd master with wrong colors
dicky
that's hebe, pal
Steven pls.
Steven pictured suffocating his competition
Now he has her all to himself
>a rich jap paid her for a private bathing suit photo op
>only 2 of the photo's where ever released public
>she is a painter, and the majority of her paintings involve naked girls and women
Dude.....That Jap must be a P.I.M.P.
She's lucky she only did a swimsuit. Actual uncensored nude girl gravure was common and legal in those times.
The practice continues just without nudity, but they do like to tease. Look for any U-12 models and their videos.
>character aged up for movie
>grant loves kids but doesn't in the movie specifically so Ellie can hook him up with her
>Ellie watches smugly as hebe grabs grant and won't let go
>he grabs her breasts and her nipples are hard
>he grabs her ass
What was up with that
I remember the ass grab, when does he touch her chest?
The rain
This is shit bait. Try harder
It's not bait. Scaled design evoke the idea that these are man made theme park monsters; giant frog chimeras with characteristics from modern day reptiles to make them feel more exotic but familiar.
There are also a ton of scales to be chosen from in design where feathers are limited.
No I'm ignoring you completely. You can't start with dumb as frick bait and then try to be rational and try to hide the fact you started with a shitpost.
I'm not taking your bait. We're not having this dumb argument. Go find another thread to get attention in
There's no bait and you aren't ignoring me at all.
You know I'm right.
You can still do plenty with feathers but I like the idea of the newer generations of Ingenosaurs showing more amphibian and lizard traits. Imagine Raptor toads that can stick to walls or Chameleon tongued dinosaurs picking off people from treelines.
A trip down memory lane. The whole Western world watched and discussed this movie.
More like Jurassic fart lolololoool I’lll lol ok likkkokokokggjcddgdbn
>dinosaurs were... LE BIRDS
They were
They even state this in the original movie I'm pretty sure
Reminder that scaled designs allow for more creativity than feathers do. That's why they're better for Jurassic Park.
Cute girl and cute dinos
I would smash that so fricking hard
Kys scum
Would dicky Park work as a horror movie?
>H-haha oh no the electric fences are down, whatever shall we do?
It's only horror for adult women
Are you saying that the age of consent is a ploy by older women to remain viable since men would almost invariably choose young girls?
What I'm saying is that it's not a coincidence that females reach sexual maturity a decade sooner than males and that currently sexually mature males are restricted to females who have passed their expiration date and whos eggs have begun to degrade
Can't handle a real woman? Afraid you won't measure up?
It's funny you say that because theres no need to, measure, anything. Anything an adult can, fit, well, you know. Them too.
Dinos raping little girls the movie
rinoa heartilly
I wish the newer movie would have more of those carefully established shots like the old movies to maximize how awesome they are.
I don’t really like the new approach of World were Dinos are kind of lame.
They are everywhere now
Awe shots no longer make much sense
Maybe if they spot dinosaurs caring for each other or people or something else it would make sense.
I just wonder what the inevitable excuse to return to one of the parks will be
I find it weird how the World movies try to make a statement about corporatocracy and reboots but they never actually say anything and end up trying to have their cake as well. Everything's so ADD, I hate it.
All I do all day is play pic related. It's comfy af. I just want to make dino parks.
is it better and more fun then the first one?
i tried that one but refunded because off the fricking constraints that game had.
It's better
The sandbox mode lets you set off most restraints or annoying things. Also download the expanded maps/expanded terrain tools/free build mods
I can't play this without getting mad that the cars aren't accurate.
your autism even puts mine to shame
>be lizard
>want to fly
>lizard too fricking stupid to fly
>dinosaurs figured out flying before they were even dinosaurs, and then figured it out again with feathers
>lizard try hard to fly over 200 million years
>lizard finally fly 7 times, each time, wing was on legs
Why are lizards so fricking stupid guys? Seriously every time they figure out flight, their back legs have wings
Feathered dinos look so much better. And that Japanese animation also proves they can look much scarier. So why does Hollywood refuse to show feathers?
they had wong say it in jurassic world
THEY ARE NOT REAL DINOSAURS
Wu said that in the BOOK from the 80s. It just took that long for the movies to reference it
Don't start Black person. I know it's you shitposter just looking for another avenue into the fight between scales and feathers. I'm still not gonna fall for it. Go find attention somewhere else.
So what? Entertainment is escapism. Movies should be better than reality. They make it worse than reality.
No. Dont fricking start. Shut the frick up and ignore it
this has always been a gay argument. there were creative liberties when it comes to things like the dilophosaurus and calling the raptors velociraptors even though they're way too big, but the dinosaurs in the first film were still designed to look like what we believed the dinosaurs looked like at the time. it's not like the missing DNA made them look nothing like the dinosaurs they were supposed to be. you're basing it on entirely on the books, which don't even have pictures of the dinosaurs.
Are you trying to say that it's bad to bring that up for the movies because that was in the book?
Please, get acquainted with our attractions
I didn't know incels could huff inceldom so hard they're sexually attracted to lizards.
Huh.
Everyone in that movie deserved to be punched. I thought The Lost World already went overboard with "these characters actually have negative IQ and act moronic but ignore that and look at the dinos" but this was nothing compared to JP3.
>Welcome, to Billy and the Cloneasaurus
>Welcome, to Sneed's Feed and Seed